Amaleq13

I don't think you are imagining this. As I recall, there is a rabbinic tradition that Titus shredded the Temple veil to symbolize the complete destruction of Jerusalem c.70CE.

Toto

The life and times of Jesus the Messiah By Alfred Edersheim is on google books:

at p 608

Zenaphobe

Paul says, "For the king knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak freely: for I am persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner.

Paul makes an argument based on an appeal to common knowledge. If the king should have been aware of what went down, I would think the historians of the time would have as well.

I wonder at what point silence becomes deafening?

Mormons could say all the lack of historical and physical evidence for the BOM is all based on an argument from silence.

Doug Shaver

No, they weren't.

Christians believe that because it makes them feel superior to everyone else, but there is no evidence for it aside from Christians' say-so.

renassault

A Temple veil ripping must be recorded by everyone? How would anyone connect this with Christ's death? If anything it is remarkable that Matthew has it.

Paul doesn't mean every minute detail would be known to all. In that sense, the king knew of "the Way" and the message Christ preached was known to all. In Mormons' case we don't have evidence where there should be some, and there is evidence against them (i.e. genetics).

It may be that the outer veil was ripped, or it may be that the centurion and the others responded to the earthquake and everything else (Matthew 27.51-54).

As Josephus notes, major earthquakes were frequent, one every 25 years or so. Most wouldn't go home and write about the darkness/earthquake; they'd spread it around by word. The connection between Jesus' death and the earthquake would have been made by very few.

You can't really add up the lack of historical reports about every minute thing.

Actually they were, as Paul himself writes of doing so in the first couple of years after Christ's death (Galatians 1).

Zenaphobe

I didn't say I expected it to be recorded by everyone, just seems weird no mention at all by anyone outside the writers of the gospels.

I did not say it needed to be connected to Jesus death, only that an event of that nature would seem worthy to find a place among Jewish writings of this time.

Here the veil to the Holy of Holies, the most sacred place in the temple, splits for no obvious physical reason and there is no commotion in the Jewish populace?

Do you think the priests would just shrug and think to themselves, "Oy, they just don't make 'em like they used to."


How in the world can you possibly know exactly what Paul meant?

Funny that you would cite a lack of evidence for Mormon claims where we would expect to find them as weighing against them, and yet, this is what skeptics are saying about the claims of the gospel writers and you dismiss it.

Darkness over the land, earthquakes, dead rising from graves and visiting people, kings slaying all children under 2, stars that lead magi, and so on with no outside sources confirming these things and you don't find it suspicious?

renassault

It would indeed be weird, but Mark obviously omits much more interesting material for reasons unknown to us (e.g. Mark 1.13, so it's not much to say he omitted the Temple renting). Who knows what sources Luke used, he certainly didn't do it on purpose. Perhaps only Matthew connected it, who knows. It's not weird not to be mentioned outside the Gospel writers. They wouldn't have written about it, they would have talked about it. Josephus omits many details in his first account of the Jewish war that he talks about later. Apparently though, the legend did grow, so that in itself can be used to support the temple renting.


From the context he said it in.

Which claims? Certainly not this one at any rate.

No I don't find it suspicious, especially seeing how Josephus and other historians would have seen these as legends too embarassing to mention as if historical. Especially in the case of the magi, no one would know about that, who would Herod tell? And even so, no one would believe it, especially not Josephus who wrote about 100 years afterwards. Earthquakes were a common occurance, a major one happening once every 25 years, and Josephus talks about one killing 10,000 Jews around 30 BC. The temple renting he may have considered a legend or may not have known enough about it, or simply may have omitted it for some reason.

The stories may not have reached Josephus at all.

Doug Shaver

Paul said nothing more specific than that he "persecuted" Christians. That is not confirmation of "executing and torturing." Religions with a persecution complex, which Christianity seems to have had from Day One, will claim you're persecuting them if you just look at them cross-eyed.

yalla

Thanks Toto and Amaleq13 for noting that there are some sources that associate Titus and the 'torn/rent/pierced/whatever' veil and that there was at least something vaguely solid to my memory.

So what do we have?
Recorded Jewish legends that associate Titus and the veil.
Based on what and written when?
Historical fact however accounted for?
Legend deriving, or not, from association with Christianity a la " Matthew"?
The reverse, "Matthew' utilising a torn veil from historical fact or embryonic Jewish legend?

Too muddy for me at this stage to attempt to draw any conclusions or even make idle speculation.

bacht

Kind of a book-end to Pompey's entry into the sanctuary (63 bce?)