Monday 28 September 2015

Questions regarding “The Challenge”‎

Dear Ali Sina, In regrads to your challenge on faithfreedom.org

Because some of your views are very akin to my own, I thought I would share with you where I am in my quest for the truth. I am trying to ponder and make sure what i am doing is truly what I believe. Although it would be easy for me to become a moral atheist, something inside me denies me from becoming that. The world has its ills, yes, but it is too ordered and structured not to have a controlling force behind it. There is no question the Quran and hadith have many problems but maybe the “uncorrupted” state we were taught was never true. Or it all has to do with interpretation of the original arabic. This seems quite likely to me. You question Muhammad’s prophethood by some of his actions, but like you said youself, Joshua did far worse in the bible. However please answer me these regarding his character:

1) He was offered wealth, status as king, women and many other worldly items by the Meccan leadership in exchange to stop his preaching. Why did he refuse?
2) He fought alongside his own men in battles and was himself injured. Why did he do that if he was egocentric? You will never see a modern day leader in charge of an army put himself in harms way.
3) Was he not illiterate by all accurate unbiased accounts? Why did he wait till age 40 to start such a hard and difficult task of change the entire views of a pagan society?
4) If he liked beuatiful young woman, why were most of his wives old and divorced? If he was a pedophile as you claim because of Ayesha’s age, I never heard of a pedophile only being with one child. Why didnt he marry and surround himself with several?
5) Why does he validate Moses and Jesus so much. He continued to do this even after problems with the Jewish tribes and Christians. The story of Moses and pharoah is the most repeated in the Quran? At the end of time, he said Jesus would return, not him. He stated all prophets wer on equal footing to himself. He states that every prophet including himself was “touched” by Satan except Jesus. Why wouldnt he say this about himself if he was a fake narcissist as you claim?
6)He forbade pictures and glorifying of himself. He wanted people to worship only God and not him. Does this sound like a self-absorbed egotist?
7) When he was victorious and return to take over Mecca, he declared general amnesty for all who had previously fought him. Is this the merciless maurader you are talking about?
8 ) Even after accumulating wealth, he slept on a mattress of palm fibers on the floor of his small house and chose a life of poverty. Anything hypocritical here?
9) He constantly helped his wives with household chores. His final speech makes mention to treat the womanfolk well and that the best man is the one who is best to his wife. I know you are well versed in these hadiths. Is this the chauvinist you are talking about?

Now, I am not saying this proves his prophethood to you. But if I was sitting in a jury box, in modern day america, it adds enough reasonable doubt that I cannot deny that he could have been.

So maybe I dont get the $50,000 reward, but if you cannot explain away these questions with logic, you’ll have to send me a check for at least $25 grand.
Be well and take care, SS AKA “the challenge winner”

Dear SS the self adjudicated challenge winner,
Yes indeed the universe has its order. That is why Einstein said, God does not play dice. Of course Einstein was talking about God in an allegorical way. What he meant was that universe is governed by laws. This is agreed by all scientists. However, what is not agreed by everyone is whether there is a lawmaker.
We can envision that natural laws can exist on their own, but it when we talk about a law maker, the question that arises is who made this lawmaker.
However, this is not my argument and in no ways I want to convince people in becoming atheists. I have said it time and again that atheism does not make humans better. Atheists also have committed horrendous crimes and have shown they can be evil.
What can elevate people is consciousness not beliefs.
Consciousness comes with maturity and it has nothing to do with beliefs. So if you wish to believe in a creator, I will respect your choice. Believers or unbelievers are the same to me. I have no preference. I pick my friends from among those who have evolved enough to know not to harm others. This is often the question of psychological health and not religion.
Yes I said Joshua committed heinous crimes. But did I say that I believe he was a prophet of God? I actually believe that Moses, Joshua and many ancient personages of the Old Testament were myths. Jews made up these stories in captivity to make their youths feel better and endure the tyranny of their captors. This is not just a mere opinion. There is plenty of evidence that prove this claim.
Assuming Joshua was real, he would have been a war criminal no better than Genghis Khan. By the same token Muhammad was also a criminal. It makes no sense to follow one criminal because another group holds another criminal as a prophet.
Furthermore, Jews do not follow Joshua. He is a historic figure, like Omar or Abu Bakr and not someone to foll
ow. Muslims follow Muhammad to the tee. There lies the problem.

Now let me answer your questions.
1) He was offered wealth, status as king, women and many other worldly items by the Meccan leadership in exchange to stop his preaching. Why did he refuse?
Who said Muhammad was offered any of these things? This claim was made only by him and he was a pathological liar.
People of Mecca laughed at him and thought he is a mad man. Why would they want to lavish a mad man with so much gifts? Has it ever happened anywhere that someone claims to be a prophet and people who think he is crazy offer him wealth and women? Come on please. Why is it so hard for Muslims to be rational? No one offered Muhammad any wealth. He lied, just as he lied about being persecuted and the Meccans plotting to kill him. Please read my book and see how I have debunked all these claims.

2)
He fought alongside his own men in battles and was himself injured. Why did he do that if he was egocentric? You will never see a modern day leader in charge of an army put himself in harms way.
Obviously you have not read Muhammad’s biographies. Please read the books of Tabari, Ibn Sa’d and al Moghazi of Waqidi. Muhammad never fought personally in any battle. He ordered 74 or 78 raids (depending which historian you believe) in 27 of those raids he himself participated, but he stood behind his men, wearing two coats of mail that made him so heavy that he could not walk. All he did was gather dust from the ground and throw it in the direction of his enemies while cursing them. In Ohod he did not have enough men, so he sent everyone to the front leaving no one to protect him. Someone came and found him hiding between two rocks. He hit him with his sword but his heavy armors protected him. He shouted for help and his men arrived and the Quraishi escaped. There he lost a tooth. Courage is not a quality that distinguished Muhammad at no moment in his life. Even in the war of Sacrilege, when he was twenty years old, all he did was collect the arrows during the cease fires and hand them to his uncles. That coward never put his life in danger. Not even once. But he gave fiery speeches promises his followers all sorts of rewards if they die in the battle field.

3)
Was he not illiterate by all accurate unbiased accounts? Why did he wait till age 40 to start such a hard and difficult task of change the entire views of a pagan society?
Muhammad had a hallucination at the age forty. He thought he was demon possessed. His co-depended wife convinced him that he had become a prophet. I have explained the psychological state of Muhammad and what let him to believe in his hallucinations in my book. Countless people write to challenge me. I ask them to read my book first. Those of them who agree and read it either don’t write back or write to say they have left Islam.

4)
If he liked beuatiful young woman, why were most of his wives old and divorced? If he was a pedophile as you claim because of Ayesha’s age, I never heard of a pedophile only being with one child. Why didnt he marry and surround himself with several?
Muhammad’s wives were all teenagers or in their early twenties. The oldest one was Sauda. No mention of her age is made. But Ibn Sa’d in Tabaqat V.8 says she died during the rule of Muaviyah in the year 54 Hijra. We know that Muhammad married Sauda about 40 days after the death of Khadijah, i.e. three years before Hijra. So Sauda died 57 years after she married Muhammad.
What is the normal age of a person? Sauda was a big fat woman. Often overweigh people don’t live long. But let us say she died at the age of eighty. 80-57=23 So Sauda was 23 years old when she married Muhammad who was 50 years old at that time. If Sauda died at the age of 90, which is unlikely, she must have been 33 years old when she married the 50 year old Muhammad.
Now let me quote a hadith reported by Ibn Sa’d to debunk the claim that Muhammad married old women for their protection.
Barra narrated that the prophet sent message to Sauda that I have divorced you.  When Sauda heard the news, she went and sat in the way of the Prophet to Aisha’s house. When she saw the prophet she told him. I swear thee by the one who has sent you the Quran and has exalted you over all the creation to tell my why did you divorce me. Have I done something wrong that has offended you? The Prophet said no! Sauda said, I then beg you for the sake of the same God to not divorce me. I am getting old I don’t need to be with a man. You can use my turn to stay with Aisha, but I wish that in the day of resurrection to be counted amongst your wives. The Prophet agreed and Sauda said that since then the Prophet spent the nights there were her turn with his favorite wife Aisha.” [Tabaqat V. 8 p. 53-54 Persian translation]

Sauda was not old for Muhammad. She was half his age. However, she was much older than his other wives who were 40 to 44 years younger than him.
Sauda was a big woman and not very attractive. So Muhammad wanted to get rid of her to spend more time with his petite younger wives.
How could Sauda survive on her own in that society? She thought that as long as she remains nominally a wife of Muhammad her material needs will be taken care of – and in fact they were. The same historian tells us that the share of Sauda from the loot of the Khaibar was 80 camel load of dates and 20 camel loads of barley or wheat.
From every loot the wives of Muhammad received their share of goods and slaves. Omar, during his caliphate Sauda a sack filled with Dirhams (Probably the proceeds of the loot from Persia or Egypt). Sauda asked, what is this? They said it is Dirhams. She said Subhanallah, they send me money in a sack of dates?”
[Tabaqat V. 8 p. 55]
I can write a book about the sexual life of Muhammad.
This man had no respect for women. He used them like an object and disposed of them when they no longer satisfied his animalistic needs. Muslims are so ignorant of the truth about their prophet that is appalling.

5)
Why did he validate Moses and Jesus so much? He continued to do this even after problems with the Jewish tribes and Christians. The story of Moses and pharoah is the most repeated in the Quran? At the end of time, he said Jesus would return, not him. He stated all prophets were on equal footing to himself. He states that every prophet including himself was “touched” by Satan except Jesus. Why wouldn’t he say this about himself if he was a fake narcissist as you claim?
Muhammad started his prophetic career in the footsteps of biblical prophets. He thought this would attract the Christians and the Jews. Once his dream was dashed he turned against the Jews, banished some and massacred others. However, he could not change his so called revelation of 13 years and start beating a different drum. He had to stick with Jesus and Moses. After he came to Medina and faced the rejection of the people of the Book, there is very little talk about Jesus and Moses in the Quran. Instead there is an unbounded vitriol against their followers.
Muhammad changed his qibla and started prying towards temple filled with idols. He called the Jews and Christians all sorts of names, but it was too late for him to change his story about being another prophet in the same line of biblical prophets.

6)
He forbade pictures and glorifying of himself. He wanted people to worship only God and not him. Does this sound like a self-absorbed egotist?
You must definitely read my book. All your questions are answered there. Muhammad suffered from Acromegaly. This disease deforms the bones and cartilages. In the later years of his life he looked like a monster. Muhammad was a narcissist and his image meant a lot to him. He did not want people to draw his picture when he was so ugly and deformed. The prohibition of drawing his picture is not out of modesty but out of his fear of leaving an ugly image of himself for the posterity.

7)
When he was victorious and returned to take over Mecca, he declared general amnesty for all who had previously fought him. Is this the merciless maurader  you are talking about?
This was part of the deal for the Meccans to surrender with no fight. Abu Sufian accepted the deal to avoid bloodshed. Muhammad also knew that the Arab tribes that had accompanied him would not stay long if the fight gets bloody.
Despite his promises to not to kill anyone he sought ten Meccans who had mocked him many years ago, among them two dancing girls and killed them.

8) Even after accumulating wealth, he slept on a mattress of palm fibers on the floor of his small house and chose a life of poverty. Anything hypocritical here?
These are myths that have held Muslims hoodwinked. I have demystified the mystique of Muhammad in my book. Once you read it you’ll have answer to all these questions. Muhammad was a narcissist. Narcissists are master manipulators and when they put a show of piety or humility they do it in exaggeration. Please refer to my book for detailed explanation of Muhammad’s show of humility and his psychological make up.

9)
He constantly helped his wives with household chores. His final speech makes mention to treat the womanfolk well and that the best man is the one who is best to his wife. I know you are well versed in these hadiths. Is this the chauvinist you are talking about?
Muhammad’s words and deeds were different. The narcissist has all the good advices for others but they consider themselves about those advices. Muhammad was not good to his wives. He beat even Aisha who was the youngest and most favorite of his wives. He divorced anyone who was not satisfying his sexual needs and threatened to divorce all of them when they were upset of him for sleeping with a maid, Maryah.
What they feed you as the history of Muhammad is all lies.
You need to read the original books of history of Islam or read my book that is based on those stories to get the facts. So you don’t get $50,000, not $25,000 and not even one dollar. But if you ask for it, I will send you my book for free. After you read it and leave Islam, you may want to finance its translation to any language spoken by Muslims. It will only cost a few hundreds, but you’d be saving millions.

Cheers
Ali Sina

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/wordpress/?p=8816

IHS

Friday 11 September 2015

The Muslim Misuse of Hebrews 5:7‎

Does this verse teach that Jesus never died?      

Keith Thompson

Around 30 A.D. Jesus Christ was crucified on the cross. He died for our sin appeasing the wrath of God and taking it upon himself. He lived a perfect sinless life of obedience to the Father; a life that we could not live. Because of that as well as the fact that Jesus is God in the flesh; Jesus’ crucifixion was of infinite value or worth. God has infinite value and worth. Since Jesus is God, Jesus’ crucifixion is of infinite value and worth and thus his atoning death as a sacrifice is sufficient to pay for the sins of humanity. This is the good news (gospel) that has come down from heaven for humanity. This is what the first-century scriptures teach. This is the earliest view of Christians. There are early secular sources outside of the Bible that speak about the crucifixion of Christ as a historical event which gives validity to Christian belief.1

However, 600 years after Jesus died on the cross for our sins a false prophet named Muhammad started receiving revelations or messages from a being that he believed to be the angel Gabriel. Many theologians recognize that this was a demonic encounter, perhaps even Satan himself appearing as an angel to Muhammad to deceive him so that he will create a false religion which denies the real truth about Jesus and Christianity – including Jesus’ death on the cross for our sins.
Muhammad received a message about Jesus’ crucifixion which was put into the Islamic (un) holy book – the Quran. It states:

because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain (Quran 4:157, Pickthall Translation)

It is because of this one verse in the Quran that was written 600 years after Jesus was alive, in another language and culture that Muslims deny that Jesus died for the sins of the world. Contrary to the testimony of first-century scriptures, early first-century extra-biblical Christian testimony from Polycarp, 1 Clement, and Ignatius,2 as well as the early non-biblical secular attestation, we are led to believe that this one verse in the Quran is enough to overthrow this evidence. To the outsider looking at this from a purely historical perspective it’s clear that the Muslim proposition is obviously absurd. Even critical atheist, agnostic and liberal scholars agree that Jesus’ death on the cross is a historical fact.3

Because of this dilemma Muslims will try to prove that the Bible doesn’t actually teach that Jesus died on the cross for our sins but instead was raised up by God prior to the event and that someone else (Judas?) was put in his place to go on the cross and made to look like Jesus. Therefore according to Islam there is no atonement for our sin on the cross at all because Jesus never died for us. The Muslim apologist will isolate certain biblical texts that, when removed of their immediate context, may appear give the impression that Jesus didn’t actually die. One such abused text is Hebrews 5:7 and this is what we will be examining to see if it teaches that Jesus never died for our sin, as various Muslims contend, or if these Muslims are guilty of misusing this text. Hebrews 5:7 states:

In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. (Hebrews 5:7, ESV)

When Muslims look at this verse many of them incorrectly understand the words “him who was able to save him from death” as affirming the Islamic position that Jesus was raised into heaven before the crucifixion could take place and that someone else was put on the cross to look like Jesus. One can find hundreds of Muslim articles on the web that appeal to this verse as evidence that Jesus was not crucified. But is this what the author of the book of Hebrews is telling us? This verse can be understood in two ways. 1.) Jesus was saved from dying – thus he never died at all. 2.) Jesus did die and was saved from death by being raised from the dead – the resurrection from the dead. When one reads the book of Hebrews cover to cover they will see that this author held the position of interpretation 2. If we can demonstrate that the context of the book of Hebrews is that Jesus died for our sins as a sacrifice then we have to understand Hebrews 5:7 as Jesus dying and then being saved from death by rising from the dead – the way Christians have always believed.

So does the book of Hebrews teach that Jesus died for our sins?
All throughout this book it either indicates crucifixion for the propitiation of sin or explicitly makes reference to Jesus’ death on the cross. For example, right in the first chapter we read:

After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high … (Hebrews 1:3)

Christians hold that Jesus made purification for sins by dying on the cross as a sacrifice so that whoever believes in Jesus will be regenerated by God and will be saved. Moving further, we read in Hebrews 2:

But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.” “Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. (Hebrews 2:9-10, 14-17)

Then, in Hebrews 6 we receive a warning passage about those who learn the truth but live in sin with no fruit:

For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.
(Hebrews 6:4-6, ESV)

Notice the phrase “they are crucifying once again the Son of God.” This necessitates Jesus already having died for our sin the past. The only way he can be crucified again is if he was already crucified once. This proves that the author believed that Jesus died on the cross. In Hebrews chapter 7 Jesus’ priestly role is discussed as being final and absolute in that his own sacrifice perfectly atones for our sin as opposed to the previous priestly sacrifices to God for the sins of the people of Israel being temporary sacrifices. It was always the high priest who first offered a sacrifice for his own sin and then one for the people so as to pay for their sin. However, Jesus is the high priest for all of humanity as well as the sacrifice itself. This sacrifice would atone for all sin forever.

For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. (Hebrews 7:26-27, ESV)

Notice this verse affirms that he offered himself up as a sacrifice for our sin. How did he achieve this? He achieved this by being crucified on our behalf. In Hebrews chapter 9 we see more passages which support the crucifixion of Jesus:

But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves butby means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant … But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him. (Hebrews 9:11-15, 25-28, ESV)

In the next chapter we read:

And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God … Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water …For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:10-12, 19-22, 26-29, ESV)

In chapter 12 we read:

looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:2, ESV)

And finally the last chapter of Hebrews states:

So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood. (Hebrews 13:12, ESV)

Notice in the next verse it states that the Father brought Jesus from the dead:

Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in us that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. (Hebrews 13:20-21, ESV)

The book of Hebrews clearly teaches that Jesus died on the cross for our sins. We see this before and after Hebrews 5:7, the verse in question. We also see in Hebrews 13:20 that God brought Jesus from the dead. Therefore when deciding between interpretation 1 (that Jesus was saved from dying and thus didn’t die), and interpretation 2 (that Jesus was saved from death after dying by resurrecting from the dead), we must go with interpretation 2. In light of the context of the book of Hebrews we should understand the words “Him who was able to save him from death” in Hebrews 5:7 as a reference to the Father raising Jesus from the dead after he was crucified on our behalf as the worthy and willing substitute.

Christ has risen, He is Lord, Amen.

Footnotes
1 Early non-Christian non-biblical sources for Jesus’ crucifixion include Stoic philosopher Mara Bar-Serapion who wrote: “What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished.” (Mara Bar-Serapion, cited from F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1981], p. 114). In his historical work Annals XV.44 written around 117 A.D. the early second-century Roman historian Tacitus wrote: “Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.” The second-century satirist Lucian of Samosata wrote: “The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day — the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account … You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine, 11–13 inThe Works of Lucian of Samosata, translated by H. W. Fowler (Oxford: Clarendon, 1949) vol. 4). The Babylonian Talmud reports: “It is taught: On the eve of Passover they hung Yeshu and the crier went forth for forty days beforehand declaring that "[Yeshu] is going to be stoned for practicing witchcraft, for enticing and leading Israel astray. Anyone who knows something to clear him should come forth and exonerate him." But no one had anything exonerating for him and they hung him on the eve of Passover.” (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 43a. 70-200 A.D.).
2 Early non-biblical Christian testimony of the crucifixion includes 1 Clement: “On account of the love He bore us, Jesus Christ our Lord gave His blood for us by the will of God; His flesh for our flesh, and His soul for our souls.” (1 Clement, Letter to the Corinthians, Ch. 49, 95-97 A.D.) Ignatius of Antioch in his epistle to Smyrna states: “I glorify Jesus Christ as God, who has made you so wise. For I have observed that you are perfected in an immoveable faith, just as if you were nailed on the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ, both in the flesh and in the spirit, and are established in love in the blood of Christ, being fully persuaded unto our Lord that he was truly from the seed of David according to the flesh, son of God according to the will and power, truly born from a virgin, baptized by John in order that all justice might be fulfilled by him.” (Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans 1.1, 107 A.D.). Student of the Apostle John, Polycarp of Smyrna wrote: “For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is antichrist; and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross, is of the devil …” (Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, Ch. 7, 110-135 A.D.)
3 Atheist, Agnostic and liberal scholars who affirm that Jesus died on the cross include Gert Lüdemann who stated: “The fact of the death of Jesus as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable, despite hypotheses of a pseudo-death or a deception which are sometimes put forward.” (Gert Lüdemann, What Really Happened to Jesus: A Historical Approach to the Resurrection, p. 17). Agnostic scholar Bart Ehrman states: “In any event, Tacitus's report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate.”
(Bart Ehrman, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, Oxford University Press, 2000], p. 197). Liberal scholar John Dominic Crossan states: “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.” (John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, p. 145).

Source: http://answering-islam.org/authors/thompson/hebrews5_7.html

IHS