Amaleq13

I don't know about guards specifically for the moneychangers but Josephus describes an entire cohort (600 men?) being used to guard the Temple apparently only because of the crowds during Passover (Ant. 20.5.3; JW 2.12.1). Both tell the story of the infamous "mooning" incident that resulted in a riot and a stampede that squished some thirty thousand people.

Vinnie

Gospel of Thomas # 71.

Vinnie

Steven Carr

Which leaves the obvious conclusion that if scripture said Jesus must have done something, then the Gospellers would have known that Jesus must have done it.

After all, it was prophesied in scripture, so it must have come true, so they felt entititled to write about it.

Steven Carr

Which Temple incident? There were two. John goes so far as to date his Temple incident - the only real date he gives in his book.

or were there two?

What is your methodology for deciding which one of the two did not happen, or whether both happened?

Steven Carr

Have you read Matthew's account of it? (Rgetorical question, obviously)

Jesus stayed in the Temple healing the blind and crippled, and he was praised by children.

According to Matthew, this was in accordance with Psalm 8.

Now you claim we cannot rule something out just because Gospellers tied it in to the Old Testament.

So did Jesus stay in the Temple after he drove out the money-changers, and stay on to heal the blind and crippled? Did the children praise Jesus , in the way Matthew connected it with Psalm 8?

If that bit is 'redaction', why are we wrong to rule things out if they tie up with the OT?

If that bit is 'redaction', what is our methodology for saying that not all of the Temple incident is redaction?

Steven Carr

Of course, it is absurd to believe that thirty thousand people could crush themselves to death.

Vorkosigan

I'd be happy to stick to "Was there a Temple incident?"

This still begs the question: why should we imagine this or a similar event ever occurred?

Not only were the guards stationed nearby (as someone else kindly pointed out), but it is impossible to imagine that the moneychangers themselves came and went alone. I've changed money all over the undeveloped world, in banks, moneychangers, jewelry stores, and in black markets, and almost always there are guards and other servants around. Large sums of cash demand strong men to guard them.

I have already "tendered the arguments against," noting (again below) that each aspect of the story, from key elements to overall structure, appears to be fictional. There's no reliance on default here.

• ...it appears that Jesus endeavoured to disrupt the carriage of certain objects through the Temple, though identification of the prohibited items has occasioned considerable debate. NRSV translates skeuoj as ‘anything’ (thus, ‘he wouldn’t allow anything to be carried’), but the word is more properly rendered ‘vessel’.39 Noting the proximity to Jesus’ repudiation of trade, commentators often refer to Zechariah 14.21, which states that ‘every vessel in Jerusalem and Judah shall be sacred to the LORD of hosts "And there shall no longer be traders in the house of the LORD of hosts in that day".40 The allusion makes good sense.

• The vivid and physical action of Nehemiah is mirrored in the gospel accounts. Mark’s representation of Jesus has him ‘overturning’ ( katestreyen) the furniture of the sellers and the money-changers. In this case, the furniture is identified specifically as tables ( trapeza) and seats ( kaqedra), which are also potentially ‘household’ goods.

Not merely has the OT served as the skeleton of the story, it also supplies the key saying -- " 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations'[3] ? But you have made it 'a den of robbers.'[4] " -- which combines Isaiah and Jeremiah.

So both the structure of the story and some of its key elements appear to be drawn from a previous story. Furthermore, we know that this story as it is written is highly improbable for reasons already mentioned (the presence of Roman guards specifically there to stop trouble, the likely presence of local toughs, and the low probability of Jesus making any impression on the crowd there).

Looking at the overall structure of the Passion Story, the dependence of its elements on Scripture is already well-known. Mark 11, in which this pericope resides, offers us Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a colt, followed by the blasting of the fig tree, the Temple Cleansing, and the return to the Fig Tree. The Entrance into Jerusalem is another fiction based on the OT, and the Fig Tree is automatically fictional based on the fact that it is supernatural. In other words, the Temple Ruckus is intercalated between a fictional supernatural incident and preceded by a fictional passage based on the OT. Even in its higher structural features, it is simply a (probable) fiction embedded in other fictions.

In other words, no matter from what angle we squint at it from or from what level we examine it, it doesn't look historical. It looks like fiction-construction based on the OT.

Vorkosigan

Vorkosigan

http://www.gospelthomas.com/gospelthomas71.html

Vorkosigan

BTW, Steve, I know you enjoy them, so here's another one of the NIV translations to eliminate a problem passage. Someone on the translation team obviously spotted the relationship between this and Nehemiah and moved to change verse 16 so it didn't resemble the quote from the OT.

NIV
15On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, 16and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts.

YLT
15 And they come to Jerusalem, and Jesus having gone into the temple, began to cast forth those selling and buying in the temple, and the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those selling the doves, he overthrew,
16 and he did not suffer that any might bear a vessel through the temple,

Vorkosigan

offa

Part of the lore of the Essenes is about events happening over and
again. An event that is newsworthy is written in the same manner as
an account from a previous history.

One of the things that struck me when I went to the task of reading
King James (and Jubilees) was the similarity of the stories. For
instance, Cain slaying Abel, Jacob killing Esau, Abraham killing
Haran, Moses slaying the Egyptian, and David slaying Uriah. Then
there are a several "raping a virgin" stories, or just plain stories
about virgins conceiving.

Locations is another problem. Josephus even tells us that names of
locales are changeable. And, if a location is called "Tyre", for
instance, then the leader at Tyre will be called "Hiram". There would
be more than one sect amongst the Jews of the first century. Each of
these sects will have a "chief" priest and each priest will have a
"temple". All of these temples may be called "Jerusalem".

Jesus would not be allowed to wander about in the city where
Caiaphas abode. He would not have a "Last Supper" there. The sense of
urgency of Caiaphas having to return to his temple was because there
was a yearly (Easter like) celebration on Saturday. Jesus was
crucified on Friday. Pilate would have to be in Caiaphas' Jerusalem
because his troops were probably stationed there, and, because it was
about collecting tax money. Caiaphas, as high priest, was going to
collect his tithes and a portion would go to Pilate.


ISBN 0-06-067782-1 p.401

March AD 33

All parties met together at Qumran for their seasonal
council. The zealots were in danger only if someone broke
ranks and informed Pilate of their whereabouts.
The meetings began early in March, and at the time when
some members expected a fulfillment of prophecy. Jesus was
given a mock coronation, riding on an ass (the equivalent of
King Solomon's mule) from the queen's house, the Manger, up
the chasm to Qumran. When there was no fulfillment, he
attacked the financial movement, overturning the tables of
the moneychangers.



offa