30 verses of Bible say " Jesus did not die on the Cross".

[Thomas]

There it is....... Rome.

OK, these are big decisions, and Pilate has to work within the framework, as it were, but he does have leeway, else his superior is micromanaging. There's quite an extensive article on him on wiki.

When I'm told what scholars have written, said, filmed assumed or anything else, then I can only hope that they might come to this place and speak for themselves.

Unlikely, really, this is far from a scholarly forum! But I usually cite references, unless I'm speaking generally. If you want the references, again the article is quite good.

I know ... that's what the authors of G-John needed to place down as well, there was a lot about Jesus that the authors of John needed to play down.

And a lot they played up? I'd be interested in what you think they played down.

Yes, the Great Temple was vast....massive. Any of the three Great Feasts could attract about 400 - 500 thousand worshippers. I can show this to be fact if you need me to.

I don't dispute it. They say the site covered some 40 acres? My point being, one man turning over tables in a place that can accommodate the numbers you're talking about is not going to make much of an impression.

So you think it was just a scuffle, or something like that?

In terms of it size compared to the numbers, yes. Jesus didn't start a riot, nor, I think, did he eject every money-changer, etc. The priests got to hear about it because those he assaulted complained, but they also knew that the people generally had complaints about these sharp practices, and Jesus would have been seen to act on popular opinion.

It was only a small affair. Best let it blow over ...

 

[Thomas]

As I said, evidence of Pilate's sympathies were recorded in the gospels. I snatched these entries from just two gospels:-

I could read that as sharp political footwork on Pilate's part.

I'm not saying he was antisemitic, and he was in office for ten years, so that speaks for something, but then again, Rome is not known for 'the delicate touch' in managing affairs. Generally Josephus, Philo, etc. have a very low opinion of him, but then again, that's not to say he was a sinner among saints. Look around today at men in high office ...

He was prefect, and when his boss was replaced, he fell very soon after ... that might well be a case of 'new brooms', etc. But the complaint of his brutality towards the Samaritans seems to have clinched it.

 

[badger]

Then you should actually visit one, imo, because whatever causes you to think that is diametrically wrong and false.

I've been to visit monasteries during my lifetime, and I have often had the impression of a removed presence, a forsaking of the materials of this world, and of a hardened life within contemplation and thought. True........ but these folks have welcomed anybody in to hospitality regardless of creed. I see these ones as having left everything behind, including the trappings and dogmas of any religion.

And then I've seen others, and heard of others, watched films about others.. quite dreadful.
Example : The film 'Philomena'

 

[badger]

Why don't you just watch the video and then talk about it? It's very informative about Pilate

Prof Erhman should come here and write down his messages in bite sized chunks for our scrutiny.

 

[Thomas]

When I think of the Immerser I think of a self-subsisting person, at one with Nature and all around, but when I think of Monasteries I think of monks driving mercedes cars, wealth and plenty. I accept that some welcome hardships but Jesus never did advocate people to shut themselves up. In my opinion...

A straw-man one, really. LOL, not all monks drive Mercedes, although my aunt was a nun, and did want to be a rally driver ...

Family story: Aunty Agnes/Sister Gabriel drove the convent Hillman Imp through London, and got lost, went steaming down the Mall, round that big statue on the roundabout at the bottom, and through big open gates, to find herself in front of some huge building – Buckingham Palace.

Policemen and men in army uniform watching in stark amazement! She did a quick U-turn, and drove out again.

Palace security was a bit lax in those days ...

So you think it was just a scuffle, or something like that?

Possibly. Whatever, there seems to have been no great counter-reaction. Again, I think the act was more symbolic.

I like the Gospel of John..... there are so many pieces of information not to be found elsewhere, but I don't think that the authors of G-John were witnesses...

I think John had a hand in it. He set the tone, if you will. A Johannine theology.

Nor did they know where to place all the reports that they held in to an accurate timeline, so they jumbled things up, somewhat. Nor did they recognise many of the healings and castings of Jesus....maybe too lowly for their Christ?

Not sure ... he's often more accurate on geography than the Synoptics, he has 'eye witness' asides, and his chronology makes the most sense ... But more importantly, John saw the implication of Christ's doings, John uses the word 'sign' rather than the common 'miracle'... that's why it very quickly became known as the Spiritual Gospel.

I think Jesus revitalised the Law, showed a heart where the people were confronted with fundamentalist legalisms. He loved the Law because He loved its Source, and tried always to show the Source as a loving father rather than a domestic tyrant.

 

[badger]

How do you explain that he was constantly being criticized by the religious authorities for not following the letter of the law -- for breaking the sabbath, eating with tax collectors, and so on? Did Jesus not mean that he was there to renew the spirit of the eternal divine law?

So you don't know that much about the laws, I'm thinking.
Please show me where poor people cannot find food to eat on the Sabbath.
Please show me where people are banned from eating with publicans.

And which as always is achieved by selectively interpreting whatever bits that fit the thesis, and dismissing anything that do not?

Did you dismiss Matthew 5:17-20?
Which would you have preferred to 'selectively interpret'?

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.
John 18:36-37

I do love it when the authors of G-John tell us what Jesus said to the Prefect.

However, I expect that Jesus did say something like that. 'This world' was a heap of corruption, Jesus denied being a king, he explained his mission, to 'bear witness to the truth'....... Love it.

Parable of Lazarus and the rich man

There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: and there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; and in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
(Luke 16:19-31) Read full chapter

Well then! Theose children needed to 'Hear Moses'........ and ALL his laws.

 

[badger]

OK, these are big decisions, and Pilate has to work within the framework, as it were, but he does have leeway, else his superior is micromanaging. There's quite an extensive article on him on wiki.

Yep....... agree to all. Pilate was a prefect under a higher authority.

Unlikely, really, this is far from a scholarly forum! But I usually cite references, unless I'm speaking generally. If you want the references, again the article is quite good.

Any scholar who would not set foot in your forum is either a bigot or an impost, imo.
Let them all come here and argue with each other ad infinitum.

And a lot they played up? I'd be interested in what you think they played down.

Oh...wow..... that's a huge thread, all on its own. I can't keep up here, even.

I don't dispute it. They say the site covered some 40 acres? My point being, one man turning over tables in a place that can accommodate the numbers you're talking about is not going to make much of an impression.

One man? You think Jesus picketed the Temple Courts all on his own?
After he and his had reduced the money-changing bazaar and the sacrificial seller's area he picketed the Temple Courts.

That's just basic evidence, right there.
Have you read up about Anna's Bazaar? That's what it was called, after the previous Head Priest.

In terms of it size compared to the numbers, yes. Jesus didn't start a riot, nor, I think, did he eject every money-changer, etc. The priests got to hear about it because those he assaulted complained, but they also knew that the people generally had complaints about these sharp practices, and Jesus would have been seen to act on popular opinion.

It was only a small affair. Best let it blow over ...

Mark {11:15} And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; {11:16} And would not suffer that any man should carry [any] vessel through the temple.

....just a small affair??

 

[RJM]

see these ones as having left everything behind, including the trappings and dogmas of any religion.

You are quite wrong. The term 'the religious' in Catholicism refers to those who take religious vows. There's no-one more religious than a monk: they pray their 'divine office' six times a day, for hours, and then there's daily mass. They are the most religious people of all. The monks have always been the very keepers of the prayers and rituals of the church. They read and listen to scripture all day. The Bible is read while they eat. The monks are the shell of the nut and the keepers of the flame -- for any religion, actually

(responding to your claim that you have never met a Christian who was not a materialist)

 

[badger]

I could read that as sharp political footwork on Pilate's part.

I'm not saying he was antisemitic, and he was in office for ten years, so that speaks for something, but then again, Rome is not known for 'the delicate touch' in managing affairs. Generally Josephus, Philo, etc. have a very low opinion of him, but then again, that's not to say he was a sinner among saints. Look around today at men in high office ...

He was prefect, and when his boss was replaced, he fell very soon after ... that might well be a case of 'new brooms', etc. But the complaint of his brutality towards the Samaritans seems to have clinched it.

I don't expect that any Roman leader had much humanity within, not for outsiders, anyway.
But those quotes report what he did/said........

I must get up and walk the little hounds...... you get me writing and writing.......... you debate so well, yet with humility and manners, so I'm learning from you in several areas, not just the gospels and surrounding history.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Mark {11:15} And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; {11:16} And would not suffer that any man should carry [any] vessel through the temple.

....just a small affair??

If it was a "small affair", I doubt whether it would be included in the Gospel.
It is clear to me, that the Sanhedrin wanted rid of Jesus because he was challenging their authority.
I do not believe that Jesus claimed to be G-d. He claimed to be the "the Christ" [ Jewish Messiah ],
and that is what the Sanhedrin didn't like.
It is highly unlikely that the Jews who believed in Jesus' sincerity would believe a person to be G-d.
Only Gentiles would think along such lines.

 

[RJM]

... you debate so well, yet with humility and manners ...

I fully agree

Welcome back @Thomas and over to you from here. I've already explained the futility of myself trying to engage with someone able to argue seriously that passages like the parable of Lazarus and the rich man are purely temporal political speeches, lol

It's la-la-land imo ...

 

[RJM]

removed

 

[badger]

If it was a "small affair", I doubt whether it would be included in the Gospel.
It is clear to me, that the Sanhedrin wanted rid of Jesus because he was challenging their authority.
I do not believe that Jesus claimed to be G-d. He claimed to be the "the Christ" [ Jewish Messiah ],
and that is what the Sanhedrin didn't like.
It is highly unlikely that the Jews who believed in Jesus' sincerity would believe a person to be G-d.
Only Gentiles would think along such lines.

This.. ∆∆∆∆

 

[badger]

A straw-man one, really. LOL, not all monks drive Mercedes, although my aunt was a nun, and did want to be a rally driver ...

Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant.
Indeed, I was having fun with the mercs.

Family story: Aunty Agnes/Sister Gabriel drove the convent Hillman Imp through London, and got lost, went steaming down the Mall, round that big statue on the roundabout at the bottom, and through big open gates, to find herself in front of some huge building – Buckingham Palace.

Policemen and men in army uniform watching in stark amazement! She did a quick U-turn, and drove out again.

Oh....what a wonderful account.
And yes, they did go steaming down the Mall, because Imps had ally motors which warped and chucked all their cooling out.
And you are a Brit?

I live in Herne Bay, Kent, which county are you in? What denomination, creed or church are you in? We receive Christians when they visit around here and they are both most loyal to their faith but other than they I don't really know any others.

I think John had a hand in it. He set the tone, if you will. A Johannine theology.

I think that The authors of John set most of the foundation for the church and Paul did most of the brickwork, but they didn't know about disciple John's greatest experiences ...= strange.

Not sure ... he's often more accurate on geography than the Synoptics, he has 'eye witness' asides, and his chronology makes the most sense ... But more importantly, John saw the implication of Christ's doings, John uses the word 'sign' rather than the common 'miracle'... that's why it very quickly became known as the Spiritual Gospel.

I agree that G-JOHN is the spirit gospel, almost every word of our schools weekly service was built from G-JOHN. I loved the last sentences of the High Church Service.

Please can you give me an example of G-JOHNs geographic accuracy?

I think Jesus revitalised the Law, showed a heart where the people were confronted with fundamentalist legalisms. He loved the Law because He loved its Source, and tried always to show the Source as a loving father rather than a domestic tyrant.

I absolutely do love reading the OT laws, all brilliant for their time.

As I read them I can laugh out loud as they mirror our bye laws and legislation.

 

[Ella S.]

I fully agree

Welcome back @Thomas and over to you from here. I've already explained the futility of myself trying to engage with someone able to argue seriously that passages like the parable of Lazarus and the rich man are purely temporal political speeches, lol

It's la-la-land imo ...

By my mileage, the Rich Man and Lazarus is one of (if not the) most depressing stories in the entire Bible. Yes, I read Job.

On one hand, you have someone who is eternally punished for finite sins. On the other hand, you have someone who had to suffer a lifetime of traumatic misery and abuse before God did anything for him.

And then, even if I could accept this passage as promising me personal redemption in death as long as I'm doing my best to be good, regardless of the fact that I don't have the resources to do more for the world, then that also saddens me because I don't believe in an afterlife so the notion seems like wishful thinking to me.

I mean, saddens might be the wrong word here. I just think the implications of the story are really unfortunate.

 

[RJM]

By my mileage, the Rich Man and Lazarus is one of (if not the) most depressing stories in the entire Bible. Yes, I read Job.

On one hand, you have someone who is eternally punished for finite sins. On the other hand, you have someone who had to suffer a lifetime of traumatic misery and abuse before God did anything for him.

And then, even if I could accept this passage as promising me personal redemption in death as long as I'm doing my best to be good, regardless of the fact that I don't have the resources to do more for the world, then that also saddens me because I don't believe in an afterlife so the notion seems like wishful thinking to me.

I mean, saddens might be the wrong word here. I just think the implications of the story are really unfortunate.

All good. It is a parable with many levels, imo -- the worthlessness of material attachments. But the point is Jesus was clearly speaking about an afterlife, in the role of spiritual teacher?

 

[RJM]

New runover thread created
The Gospel of John
https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/20177/
Some recent posts from this thread have been moved to that new one
The thread name can be changed

I hope that is acceptable to everyone?
This thread was going too far off topic

 

[RJM]

We receive Christians when they visit around here and they are both most loyal to their faith but other than they I don't really know any others.

@badger
You only know two Christians, and only slightly?

 

[RJM]

It's fine, it's not required. But it seems a flimsy platform from which to launch a crusade against the Christian beliefs and values of a-third of the population of the planet, based upon just your own study of 'their' scriptures?

I would not pursue this, except that the crusade appears to continue?

 

[badger]

@badger
You only know two Christians, and only slightly?

Slightly? You read somewhere that I know two Christians 'slightly'?