The most interesting aspect of Matthew’s and Mark’s recordings is that the phonetics of Jesus’ words and their meaning are so nearly alike – with one syllable, “li” as recorded by Matthew, and “loi” as recorded by Mark being the only difference. It appears that each had his own memory (as referred to by those in the field of aptitude studies as “Tonal Memory”) of the sounds of the syllable, suggesting independent recording of the phonetics by each of them. However, their interpretations of the meaning of Jesus’ words are precisely the same, suggesting that they conferred with each other, comparing their interpretations, and arriving at a mutually agreed upon interpretation of what Jesus meant by what he spoke loudly. Certainly neither of them compared their memories with Luke or John. It appears that we must honor Matthew’s and Mark’s accuracy in recording the sounds of the words Jesus spoke. It’s plausible, since Jesus spoke loudly.

Fourth: We have no secondary source of the words Jesus spoke; we only have secondary sources through Matthew, Mark, and John, who tell us about the crowd at the scene and their reaction to what they thought Jesus said. Some in the crowd said, “Hey, he’s calling Elias! Maybe he’ll come and get him down off the cross!” – As if it were a big joke. Some others said, “He says he’s thirsty! Someone give him a drink!” So someone ran to a bowl of vinegar, put a sponge on a reed, soaked it in the vinegar and held it to Jesus’ lips.

41

Of course, John added his bit by writing “Jesus ……………………… said, I thirst.”

It is obvious that there was a great amount of confusion resulting from Jesus’ words, with three known interpretations of those words. Isn’t it interesting and provocative that those three versions differed from each other to the extent that there is absolutely no comparison between them?

Fifth: It is a fact that Jesus’ words did not exist in any known language at that time, including Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. “Eli” expressly was not a part of the Hebrew tongue; it was entered into that language since then to mean “My God”. It seems strange that those who fostered and shouted for his crucifixion would be the ones to adopt one of the words Jesus spoke on the cross into their language.

Sixth: We must take into consideration Jesus’ physical condition at the time he spoke those strange words.

Contra to one of the popular myths, Jesus was not nailed to the cross through his hands and spaces through his bones in his lower feet leading to his toes. It was a common form of execution in that time, and always, the nails were driven through a space in the wrist bones as, if driven through the hands, the crucified could pull his hands off of the nails easily while on the cross. Plus,

42

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109