outhouse

rediculous


a personality doesnt or cannot shine in a sea of people during passover.

jesus was unknown to all at passover until he made a stink and managed to escape into the crowd which is even suspicious as money changing tables would have had guards as well as the bank teler would have wrestled him to the ground.

its my guess it was so crowded, he was able to escape in the sea of people.


the temple was so crowded that year he could have yelled a speech and it would have went unoticed, that and there was literally thousands of preachers there

TedM

Excellent comments outhouse. I hadn't ever thought about the huge payday issue..

outhouse

first the events in the temple are said to have led to his public execution.

tax evasion and sedition, starting a riot in the temple, or even a minor disturbance would have had you killed quickly, as Pilate and Caiaphas knew the crowd was uneasy and ready to rebel, it was a powder keg with that many people there.

the trick was to keep the money flowing, a full blown riot would have blew the whole show.

jesus and his death was all about the green. as a oppressed peasant taxed hard to the point of starvation, jews had it very very rough, and the roman infection in the temple had the common jews pissed off as the Saducees were getting rich holding hands with romans. Even the Pharisees were raping the the common man for tithes.

all of the common people looked at the jewish governement as corrupt and infected by the roman's in gods house which was also the treasury.


one man decided to step up and protest this infection with roughly up to 400,000 witnesses and he was quickly put to death on a cross and remembered for it. in a culture of illiterate peasants, oral tradion grew, legends grew as tales of this jew traveled they gained mythology like the ressurection to make him that much more important. he became a rock star. from a event simular to a rock show.


we had a event like todays modern rock concerts, why would the jews have a star?

Toto

The events at the Temple are historically improbable, if not impossible. If Jesus has tried to start a riot, he would have been summarily executed. If he were a peasant nobody, it would not have been worth the effort to crucify him.

The gospel story is highly symbolic and metaphorical. You do violence to the text by trying to make it into ordinary history.

aa5874

What??? You cannot be serious!!! Any person who has read the NT know that the Pauline writer claimed the Resurrection is the Fundamental basis of the Christian Faith---the "SILLY SUPERSTITION".

1 Cor. 15.17 YOUR PREMISE is that JESUS was actually crucified and that he ACTUALLY died.

Please, if you PRESUME Jesus did exist then it was NT Jesus that STARTED the idea of the Resurrection

Mark 9:31 KJVThe " Silly Superstition" would have been the Resurrection of Jesus even after he was DEAD.

Please, this so basic.

You seem NOT to even understand what you stated in your own thread.

Now, if Jesus was DEAD and Buried AFTER being EXECUTED by the Romans then Acts of the Apostles and the PAULINE Writings makes NO SENSE.

In the Gospels, the resurrection appearances of Jesus are ONLY to a select few. Jesus Secretly appears to his disciples and QUICKLY Vanishes.

However, in Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings the VERY Disciples are in Jerusalem and "ALL OVER" the Roman Empire PUBLICLY DECLARING the MISCHIEVOUS SUPERSTITION that Jesus was resurrected--the very same thing Jesus TAUGHT his disciples.

Jesus TAUGHT his disciples that he would RESURRECT--See Mark 8, Mark 9 and Mark 10.

If Jesus was ACTUALLY Crucified after Teaching the Superstition that he would Resurrect then the NT contradicts itself when it is claimed the Disciples and Paul PUBLICLY PREACHED the same Superstition for DECADES in Jerusalem and "all over" the Roman Empire" when Jesus himself was KILLED for the teaching the MISCHIEVOUS EVIL Superstition.

TedM

aa you didn't seem agree with me about the superstition until I told you. I guess I misunderstood where you were coming from with your various questions. Since we both agree that the 'silly superstition' was one of resurrection of Jesus, now we can address the issue: Would the Romans have cared about a group that claims Jesus had been resurrected? I have said no. You have said yes. What EVIDENCE do you have for that?



This makes no sense. First of all, my premise doesn't require that Jesus taught anything about resurrection, so this is an unnecessary distraction. Secondly, even if Jesus had taught his disciples that he would resurrect there is no contradiction: You are ASSUMING something odd: You assume the reason Jesus was killed was for teaching resurrection. Where do you get such a notion? He certainly could have taught resurrection but been crucified for some other reason, no?

I implore you to relax and do something more fun that this, aa. Life it too short.

TedM

These are bizarre comments to me, so I'll ask a couple of questions.

I don't think anybody knows enough to say the events in the temple are improbable. Who can say what the temple was like during passover with any certainty?

Then you say he would have been executed instead of crucified had he tried to start a riot, since he was a peasant. How do you know this? Does not having a large following change the landscape? Especially if the Jewish leaders had a desire to make an example of him?

I'm not saying the passover events are all historically accurate, but the motives for being crucified seem pretty realistic from a human nature standpoint, at least.

In any case, it is off-topic. I'm interested in what would have motivated the followers to believe in resurrection. I've given you my reasons and you have scoffed at them, though I cannot see why. A crucified preacher with a following would have been a very good candidate for the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53.

Toto

There's archaeological evidence of the size of the Temple, which makes it unlikely that one man with a whip could clear the place.

Paula Fredriksen, a standard academic historicist, has decided that the evidence is against the historicity of this story. Link

It was Sanders, in Jesus and Judaism, who did most to dissolve this earlier reading.17 He did so by pointing out that it made no historical sense. The function of the Temple — as indeed, of any ancient temple — was to serve as a place to offer sacrifices. Money changing and the provision of suitable offerings were part of the support services offered at the Temple to accommodate pilgrims. Did Jesus then mean to repudiate Temple sacrifice itself? That would have made him virtually unique among his contemporaries, whether Jewish or pagan: in antiquity, worship involved offerings. It also would have been tantamount to rejecting the better part of the five books of Torah, wherein God had revealed the protocols and purposes of these sacrifices to Israel. If Jesus targeted not the sacrifices but the support services facilitating them, his gesture would have lacked practical significance. If he were targeting not the support services
but some sort of priestly malfeasance that might have stood behind them, no trace of this protest remains either in the gospels (nothing of the sort figures in the accusations against Jesus brought at his “trials”) or in later Christian tradition (Paul, for instance, says nothing of the sort). And finally, on either reconstruction, Jesus would have failed utterly to communicate his message to his earliest followers, who after his death continued, on the evidence, to live in Jerusalem, to worship at the Temple, and to revere the Temple and its cult as a unique privilege granted by God to Israel.18

Where do the Jewish leaders come in? They didn't have the legal or practical power to crucify anyone.

Your position is very vague and slippery. If you are going to make an argument, you need a bit more in the way of supporting detail. Was anyone else ever crucified for being annoying in some unspecified way?

Those are the standard reasons - an emotional reaction of some sort on the part of the disciples. It's an ad hoc explanation for something that you can't even show happened.

GenesisNemesis

When you have superstitious people, they're going to believe superstitious things either out of conformity, obedience, etc. That's really the simplest explanation. Given that Christianity is a religion which claims that there will be an infinite reward if you believe in it and follow its laws, I still don't see why your question is relevant because of the number of people obviously willing to believe in the religion, and that Jesus was resurrected. It doesn't matter whether or not it is true that Jesus was resurrected- people are going to believe things anyway for irrational reasons. Because they're people.

andrewcriddle

John the Baptist was executed by a Jewish client King. Jewish rulers tended to avoid execution by crucifixion for religious reasons.

Andrew Criddle