Layman

Toto, why not just admit you made a lame statement? Really. Your post-hoc "I mean this or thats" are getting tiresome.

Toto

I see we are not communicating, Layman. Just forget it.

RED DAVE

From CJD:

he issue, I must say I too am intimately familiar with losing others (plural) under some pretty horrific circumstances.

Those responsible in my case were also loosely associated with the Christian church, that is, socially, everyone was "in." The situation was no different during the Holocaust. (The underground confessional German church unfortunately did too little, too late.) Now, I don't blame Christian doctrine for the murders of my relatives, and if I went around blaming those persons whose only connection to the murderers was the worldwide church to which they belonged, then I would also expect to be told to "piss off."[/QUOTE]

Mr., with regard to the Holocaust, you have no right to tell anyone to to piss off. You demonstrate your insensitivity, hence your antisemitism, quite blatantly here. You don't blame xtain doctrine for the murders of your relatives. I do blame it for the murder of mine. I haven't yet seen, 60 years after the Holocaust ended, the kind of repentence that would lead me, or anyone else, to see that xtians have learned much.

What we have here is a variety of apologetics heard over and over again: the original xtianity was good and pure, but it's been perverted for 2000 years, and now, only now, are we, are few true believers, seeking to recover the true meaning of the words of ...

As a socialist, burdened with the legacy of Communism, I can only sympathize on one hand. However, I know from personal experience what that takes: constant struggle against the remnants of Stalinism and a constant, careful effort to stake out the territory as our own. I see no such effort in your work CJD. To me, Patristic studies is kind of like studying Stalin to get the good essence of the man in order to purify him.

Once again, I hear that slight whine, which I first heard in some of the writings of Dorothy Sayers, which xtians adopt when their efforts on their own behalf are met with less than enthusiasm by Jews, atheists, etc. I see no signs whatsoever in your work or the work of any latter-day apologists, including Mel Gibson, of any repentence that means anything to anyone but yourself.

I sincerely hope that younger people think like me. And I do take people on a case-by-case basis. I nailed you, CJD, precisely because of your defense of xtianity.

To me, George Bush is the perfect modern xtian.

RED DAVE

Toto

Some interesting comments noted on the Christianity Today weblog:

Doctor X

Hmmmm. . . .

I wonder if it will get condemned because of that disclaimer.

--J.D.

Mathetes

I have never understood what the deal is with that sentence ("His blood be on us and on our children!").

Even if that was said that night, and a sentence like that had any kind of "legal binding", why could the blame be assigned to ALL the Jews? It would only apply to the guys that were that night in Pilato's yard, right? That is probably 0.00001 % of the Jewish population of Palestine at that time.

Toto

The New Yorker article has been posted on freerepublic:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/980753/posts

Quite informative.

Doctor X

"If you read all four of those, they mesh. Because if they didn't, you wouldn't have so many people hooked into this."

A medieval view of the texts, indeed!

--J.D.

Toto

A response to Gibson's statements in the New Yorker:

The Greatest Story Ever Sold

JoeWallack

JW:
Mel Gibson is promoting his upcoming movie "Passion" as historically accurate and exactly as it happened but I see the following "difficulties" with trying to conflate the Gospellers into a coherent cohert's account:


#126

Matthew 26: (KJV)

64 “Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”

False prophecy.


#127

Matthew 26: (KJV)

64 “Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. 65 Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.”

The entire “trial” scene is bizarre. According to the Talmud the Sanhedrin was prohibited from convening at night or on the eve of holidays. The “conspirators” initially plan on avoiding dealing with Jesus on Passover and end up dealing with Jesus on Passover. “Matthew” can’t think of any reason why Judas would betray Jesus. In a time of severely limited means of communication and transportation the entire Sanhedrin assembles in a few hours except for the Pharisees, who are suddenly no where to be found, even though they were the primary enemies of Jesus before the “trial”. The Priests, who will have their busiest time of the year during Passover, make the trial no problem. The perfectly legitimate charge against Jesus that he created a disturbance in the Temple is never made while a charge of blasphemy against God is made even though Jesus never used the word “God”.


#128

Matthew 27: (KJV)

9 “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; 10 And gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed me.”

No such direct quote from Jeremiah and you couldn’t even piece the above together by sifting through all of Jeremiah.


#129

Matthew 27: (KJV)

15 “Now at that feast the governor was wont to release unto the people a prisoner, whom they would.”

There is no evidence outside the Christian Bible that at the time being described there was any annual tradition of releasing a prisoner at Passover.


#130

Matthew 27: (KJV)

25 “Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.”

God damn liar. How could “all” the people make any single coherent statement? None of Jesus’ disciples or supporters were present among “all” the people? Christian commentators try to argue that the statement is believable as there are examples of entire households being held accountable for the actions of an individual in the Tanakh but the Christians are unable to find a single example outside of the Christian Bible where a group of Jews accepted blood responsibility and used the phrase “and on our children” which implies a blanket responsibility for all descendents.


#131

Matthew 27: (KJV)

27 “Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall, and gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers.”

The Greek word that has been translated above as “common hall” should be translated as
“praetorium”, which was the official residence of a Roman governor. Every other major translation uses “praetorium”. KJV has deceptively mistranslated to try and hide the error that there was no praetorium in Jerusalem. Everyone agrees that the official residence of Pilate was in Caesarea and no known author outside of the Christian Bible, such as Josephus or Philo, ever refers to a praetorium in Jerusalem for this time period.


#132

Matthew 27: (KJV)

37 “And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

There is no evidence whatsoever outside of the Christian Bible that the charge against the crucified person was placed on the stake above them.


#133

Matthew 27: (KJV)

38 “Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.”

Stealing was not a capital offense under Roman law. Also, according to the rules of the Sanhedrin only one person could be judged per session. As Shaggy would say, “Yikes!”.


#134

Matthew 27: (KJV)

45 “Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.”

We have records from astronomers of the first century and none of them report any three hour period of darkness in Israel or the entire world. The boy prophet Bruce Springsteen did report a darkness on the edge of town but that was two thousand years later.


#135

Matthew 27: (KJV)

49 “The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him. 50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.”

After verse 49 the earliest extant manuscripts have: “And another took a spear and pierced his side, and out came water and blood”. Besides being the oldest evidence it also fits the context of Matthew as it would explain why Jesus cries out in verse 50. The problem it creates is that according to the Gospel of “John” Jesus’ side was pierced after he was dead.


#136

Matthew 27: (KJV)

52 “And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.”

No non-Christian writer of the first century reports this. A related question is what happened to these saints?


#137

Matthew 27: (KJV)

57 “When the even was come, there came a rich man of Arimathaea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus' disciple:”

But Matthew 6:24 has Jesus saying:

“No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”

So regarding the possibility of being rich and a disciple of Jesus, as Luke Skywalker said (after finding out that Darth Vader was his real father), “That’s impossible!”.


#138

Matthew 27: (KJV)

62 “Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,”

There is no evidence outside of the Christian Bible that Jewish leaders of this time ever conducted official or any other kind of business on the Sabbath.


#243

Mark 14: (KJV)

58 “We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.59 But neither so did their witness agree together.”

Compare to Matthew 26: (KJV)

60 But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses, 61 And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days. 62 And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?

Strangely, “Mark” gives a quote which is attributed to two witnesses and then concludes that these witnesses did not agree. “Matthew” realized this so he drops Mark’s conclusion that they did not agree. Ironically, the Christian Bible using the same required standard of agreement between witnesses, gives the same type of “false” testimony because of the lack of agreement between the Gospel witnesses that the witnesses gave against Jesus at the trial.


#244

Mark 14: (KJV)

60 “And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? 61But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.63 Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?64 Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.”

The entire “trial” scene is bizarre. According to the Talmud the Sanhedrin was prohibited from convening at night or on the eve of holidays. The “conspirators” initially plan on avoiding dealing with Jesus on Passover and end up dealing with Jesus on Passover. “Mark” can’t think of any good reason why Judas would betray Jesus. In a time of severely limited means of communication and transportation the entire Sanhedrin assembles in a few hours except for the Pharisees, who are suddenly no where to be found, even though they were the primary enemies of Jesus before the “trial”. The Priests, who will have their busiest time of the year during Passover, make the trial no problem. The perfectly legitimate charge against Jesus that he created a disturbance in the Temple is never made while a charge of blasphemy against God is made even though Jesus never used the word “God”. So “the Jews” whose biggest crime according to the Christian Bible is that they are legalistic don’t do anything legalistic during the most important legalistic event of the Christian Bible.


#245

Mark 14: (KJV)

62 “And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”

False prophecy.


#246

Mark 14: (KJV)

69 “And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them.”

Compare to Matthew 26: (KJV)

71 “And when he was gone out into the porch, another maid saw him, and said unto them that were there, This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth.”

Mark’s “a maid” above should be “the maid” as the Greek has the definite article and there is a “again” after “began to say to them” in the Greek. Most modern translations correctly translate here. Obviously KJV is trying to avoid the contradiction that according to “Mark” the same maid saw Peter twice while Matthew has predictably multiplied one maid into two.


#247

Mark 14: (KJV)

68 “But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.”

The earliest extant manuscripts lack “and the cock crew” which is needed here to support the statement in 14:72 that the cock crewed a second time. The textual variation here is likely caused by “Mark” apparently anticipating that “Matthew” would have two cock crows for Mark’s one and then Matthew faking Mark out by only having one.


#248

Mark 14: (KJV)

72 “And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.”

Compare to Matthew 26: (KJV)

75 “And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly.”

According to “Mark” the cock was supposed to crow twice before Peter’s three denials and according to “Matthew” the cock was supposed to crow once before Peter’s three denials. Interestingly, the textual evidence indicates that Mark only described the cock crowing once. Maybe the other time was when the young man who was following Jesus lost his linen cloth?


#249

Mark 15: (KJV)

6 “Now at that feast he released unto them one prisoner, whomsoever they desired.”

There is no evidence outside the Christian Bible that at the time being described there was any annual tradition of releasing a prisoner at Passover.


#250

Mark 15: (KJV)

7 “And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.”

There’s no evidence outside the Christian Bible that the Romans ever released insurrectionist murderers.


#251

Mark 15: (KJV)

8 “And the multitude crying aloud began to desire him to do as he had ever done unto them.”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

17 “Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ?”

The Greek of Mark above is almost incomprehensible which may indicate that the idea of a prisoner release was his own invention and having no oral tradition to copy he had to compose himself revealing his grammatical ineptitude. You can assume from the context that he is describing a request from the crowd that Pilate release a prisoner. According to Matthew Pilate offered to release a prisoner without any request from the crowd. This is consistent with Matthew’s exaggeration of Mark where “the crowd” gets worse press and Pilate gets better.


#252

Mark 15: (KJV)

10 “For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy.”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

18 “For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.”

In Mark the chief priests delivered Jesus. In Matthew it was “the crowd”. Guilt in “Matthew” has received manuscript destiny.


#253

Mark 15: (KJV)

15 “And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

20 “When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.”

According to Mark Pilate’s motivation to release Barabbas was to make the crowd happy. According to Matthew Pilate’s motivation to release Barabbas was to avoid a possible riot if he didn’t (“tumult was made” should be “a disturbance was beginning” above).


#254

Mark 15: (KJV)

16 “And the soldiers led him away into the hall, called Praetorium; and they call together the whole band.”

Everyone agrees that the official residence of Pilate was in Caesarea and no known author outside of the Christian Bible, such as Josephus or Philo, ever refers to a praetorium in Jerusalem for this time period.


#255

Mark 15: (KJV)

17 “And they clothed him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head,”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

28 “And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe.”

Joseph’s coat of many colors?


#256

Mark 15: (KJV)

21 “And they compel one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his cross.”

The underlying Greek word for “cross” above is “stake”. The Greek Christian Bible never uses the Greek word for “cross”, only the Greek word for “stake”, “stauros”. Virtually every Christian English translation uses “cross” which is an anachronistic mistranslation.


#257

Mark 15: (KJV)

22 “And they bring him unto the place Golgotha, which is, being interpreted, The place of a skull.”

Close. “Golgotha” means “skull” not “place of the skull”. Speaking of the place of the skull, in Irenaeus’ time Christianity’s main competition was other Christian denominations who had different interpretations of the Scriptures. Irenaeus tried to argue that his brand of Christianity had a direct line through Bishops and Apostles to Jesus. None of this line of supposed witnesses was able to tell Irenaeus though (or any subsequent person) WHERE exactly the most important event in the history of Christianity occurred (the location of “Golgotha”). Coincidentally, “The Shroud” of Turin, considered by most Christians to be the authentic burial shroud of Jesus, mysteriously shows up near Irenaeus’ power base 1,200 years later. Guess that’s why they call it the place of “Lyons”.


#258

Mark 15: (KJV)

24 “And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

34 “They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall”

Perhaps the waiter mixed up the drink orders.


#259

Mark 15: (KJV)

24 “And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not.”

Compare to Matthew 24: (KJV)

34 “They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.”

“Mark” says he tasted the drink while “Matthew” says he didn’t.


#260

Mark 15: (KJV)

26 “And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

The underlying Greek gives no indication of WHERE this inscription was (KJV has added “over”). A majority of modern Christian translations either explicitly or strongly implicitly indicate that the inscription was placed over the crucified Jesus obviously mistranslating to make “Mark” agree with the other Gospellers here.


#261

Mark 15: (KJV)

26 “And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

37 “And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

Apparently Herod complained about the first sign.


#262

Mark 15: (KJV)

27 “And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.”

According to the rules of the Sanhedrin there could only be one defendant per session. Also, stealing was not a capital offense under Roman law.


#263

Mark 15: (KJV)

32 “Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross”

As previously noted, “cross” is a mistranslation.


#264

Mark 15: (KJV)

33 “And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.”

We have records from astronomers of the first century and none of them report any three hour period of darkness in Israel or the entire world. The boy prophet Bruce Springsteen did report a darkness on the edge of town but that was two thousand years later. It was a common literary technique of the time for biographers to report such a supernatural darkness at the demise of people they considered great.


#265

Mark 15: (KJV)

34 “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

46 “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?”

The authors are trying to transliterate in Greek a supposed Aramaic statement by Jesus. The statements are more different in the Greek. Perhaps Jesus was repeating the same statement in different dialects so everyone would understand what he was saying.


#266

Mark 15: (KJV)

39 “And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

54 “Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.”

The witnesses seem to be multiplying.


#267

Mark 15: (KJV)

39 “And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.”

There is no “the” in the Greek of “the Son of God” above. Most modern Christian translations add “the”. Apologists ignore that when the definite article is not intended it is never used and they argue, using arguable examples, that when the Greek “the” is not used it can be implied by the context, so they argue that “Mark’s” context implies it. Having a description of Jesus by a Roman soldier as just another son of God hero in a time of many son of God heroes is within Mark’s context. Also, Mark’s verse 39 makes no sense as the soldier proclaims that Jesus was a son of God because Jesus cried out and died. Also note that “Mark” uses the past tense to describe Jesus, “was” a son of God. Did the author intend to communicate that Jesus’ career ended on the cross? Maybe.


# 442

Luke 22: (KJV)

47 “And while he yet spake, behold a multitude, and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them, and drew near unto Jesus to kiss him.
48 But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?”

Compare to Mark 14: (KJV)

45 “And as soon as he was come, he goeth straightway to him, and saith, Master, master; and kissed him.”

Luke’s Jesus and Judas don’t kiss. For Mark’s Jesus and Judas though it was kissee boy time.


# 443

Luke 22: (KJV)

52 “Then Jesus said unto the chief priests, and captains of the temple, and the elders, which were come to him, Be ye come out, as against a thief, with swords and staves?
53 When I was daily with you in the temple, ye stretched forth no hands against me: but this is your hour, and the power of darkness.
54 Then took they him, and led him, and brought him into the high priest's house. And Peter followed afar off.
55 And when they had kindled a fire in the midst of the hall, and were set down together, Peter sat down among them.
56 But a certain maid beheld him as he sat by the fire, and earnestly looked upon him, and said, This man was also with him.
57 And he denied him, saying, Woman, I know him not.
58 And after a little while another saw him, and said, Thou art also of them. And Peter said, Man, I am not.
59 And about the space of one hour after another confidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this fellow also was with him: for he is a Galilaean.
60 And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew.”

According to the Talmud the Sanhedrin was prohibited from convening at night or on the eve of holidays.


# 444

Luke 22: (KJV)

67 “Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe:
68 And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go.
69 Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God.
70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.”

Compare to Mark 14: (KJV)

61 “But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”

Luke’s Jesus won’t tell if he is the christ/sonofman/sonofgod while Mark’s Jesus says he is. No wonder “The Jews” were confused.


# 445

Luke 22: (KJV)

66 “And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying,
67 Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe:
68 And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go.
69 Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God.
70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.
71 And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth.”

Compare to Mark 14: (KJV)

53 “And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes.
54 And Peter followed him afar off, even into the palace of the high priest: and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire.
55 And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none.
56 For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together.
57 And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,
58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.
59 But neither so did their witness agree together.
60 And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?
61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
63 Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
64 Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.
65 And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the servants did strike him with the palms of their hands.
66 And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest:
67 And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth.
68 But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.”

Luke’s Jesus and the Sanhedrin play 20 questions during the day while Mark’s Jesus and the Sanhedrin play it during the night so the difference in the accounts is night and day.


# 446

Luke 22: (KJV)

66 “And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying,
67 Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe:
68 And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go.
69 Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God.
70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.
71 And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth.”

“The Jews” of the time had no conception (pun intended) that anyone was literally the “son of god” and the term “son of god” to them indicated either an unusually righteous person or a title for the Messiah. When Luke’s Jews ask Jesus if he is the Messiah he gives an indefinite answer. Then “the Jews” ask if Jesus is “the son of god” with the implication by Luke that this meant something other than “the Messiah” to the Jews. “Son of god” would have only meant something different to the Christians of “Luke’s” time and not the Jews of Jesus’ supposed time. Jesus then gives another indefinite answer and Luke’s Jews take this as a yes and evidence of guilt. But to the Jews of that time claiming that one was the son of God and therefore either very righteous or the Messiah would not have been a violation of the Law.


# 447

Luke 22: (KJV)

66 “And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying,
67 Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe:
68 And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go.
69 Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God.
70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.
71 And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth.”

Compare to Mark 14: (KJV)

55 “And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none.
56 For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together.
57 And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,
58 We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.
59 But neither so did their witness agree together.
60 And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?
61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
63 Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?”

“Mark” has witnesses testify against Jesus while “Luke” has removed the witnesses to protect the guilty. Mark’s use of witnesses here is one of the funnier parts of the Christian Bible. The Jews, who have no problem manipulating Pilate like a puppet are also easily able to manufacture false witnesses but are unable to provide these false witnesses with the required testimony to convict Jesus even though they could by just telling the truth about how Jesus caused a disturbance in the Temple. Then, when Mark’s witnesses give a false testimony (that’s really true) and by Mark’s words agree, Mark says they don’t agree. Apparently I’m not the only one who found Mark’s account amusing.


# 448

Luke 22: (KJV)

6 “When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the man were a Galilaean.
7 And as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time.
8 And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him.
9 Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing.
10 And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused him.
11 And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate.”

Mark and Matthew don’t report this very critical information.


# 449

Luke 23: (KJV)

12 “I will therefore chastise him, and release him.”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

9 “But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews?”

Luke’s Pilate decides on his own to release Jesus while Mark’s Pilate asks “the Jews” if they want Pilate to release Jesus.


# 450

Luke 23: (KJV)

22 “And he released unto them him that for sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom they had desired; but he delivered Jesus to their will.”

There is no evidence outside of Christian writings that the Romans ever released murderous insurrectionists. Unfortunately the Gospels don’t record Pilate’s answer to Ceasar’s question, “You did what?!”.


# 451

Luke 23: (KJV)

25 “And he released unto them him that for sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom they had desired; but he delivered Jesus to their will.
26 And as they led him away, they laid hold upon one Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country, and on him they laid the cross, that he might bear it after Jesus.”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

15 “And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.
16 And the soldiers led him away into the hall, called Praetorium; and they call together the whole band.
17 And they clothed him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head,
18 And began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews!
19 And they smote him on the head with a reed, and did spit upon him, and bowing their knees worshipped him.
20 And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple from him, and put his own clothes on him, and led him out to crucify him.
21 And they compel one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his cross.”

Luke’s Jesus is not mocked by the Roman soldiers like Mark’s Jesus is (Luke’s Jesus was previously mocked by “the Jews”). Apparently the author of “Luke” wanted to relieve the Romans of responsibility for Jesus’ demise and put it on “the Jews”. Successfully, I think.


# 452

Luke 23: (KJV)

26 “And as they led him away, they laid hold upon one Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country, and on him they laid the cross, that he might bear it after Jesus.”

The underlying Greek word for “cross” above is “stake”. The Greek Christian Bible never uses the Greek word for “cross”, only the Greek word for “stake”, “stauros”. Virtually every Christian English translation uses “cross” which is an anachronistic mistranslation.


# 453

Luke 23: (KJV)

32 “And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death”

The underlying Greek of the earliest extant manuscripts has “two other criminals”. Later manuscripts have many variations which is normally a good sign that the original was changed. I’m not aware of any English translation with the proper translation. I guess the Christian translators didn’t like anyone other than a Jew describing Jesus as a criminal.


# 454

Luke 23: (KJV)

33 “And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

33 “And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull,
34 They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.
35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.
36 And sitting down they watched him there;
37 And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
38 Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.”

Luke’s implication is that the other criminals were crucified at the same time Jesus was while Matthew explicitly states that the other criminals were crucified after Jesus was.


# 455

Luke 23: (KJV)

38 “And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

26 “And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

Maybe the Inscription originally said “THE KING OF THE JEWS” and Luke added “THIS IS” to it.


# 456

Luke 23: (KJV)

39 “And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

32 “Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.”

One of Luke’s co-condemned reviles Jesus while both of Mark’s co-condemned reviles Jesus.


# 457

Luke 23: (KJV)

43 “And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.”

False prophecy.


# 458

Luke 23: (KJV)

44 “And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.”

We have records from astronomers of the first century and none of them report any three hour period of darkness in Israel or the entire world. The boy prophet Bruce Springsteen did report a darkness on the edge of town but that was two thousand years later. It was a common literary technique of the time for biographers to report such a supernatural darkness at the demise of people they considered great.


# 459

Luke 23: (KJV)

45 “And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

37 “And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
38 And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.”

Luke’s veil breaks before Jesus dies while Mark’s veil breaks after Jesus dies. Personally, I hate it when they keep making curtain calls after the show is over.


# 460

Luke 23: (KJV)

46 “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

34 “And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
35 And some of them that stood by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calleth Elias.
36 And one ran and filled a spunge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Let alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down.
37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.”

Luke and Mark’s Jesuses have different final words.


# 609

John 18: (KJV)

4 “Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?”

Compare to Mark 14: (KJV)

43 “And immediately, while he yet spake, cometh Judas, one of the twelve, and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders.
44 And he that betrayed him had given them a token, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he; take him, and lead him away safely.
45 And as soon as he was come, he goeth straightway to him, and saith, Master, master; and kissed him.
46 And they laid their hands on him, and took him.”

John’s Jesus is identified via conversation while Mark’s Jesus is identified via a kiss. John’s Jesus was more of a talker while Mark’s Jesus was more of a doer.


# 610

John 18: (KJV)

6 “As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.”

Compare to Mark 14: (KJV)

45 “And as soon as he was come, he goeth straightway to him, and saith, Master, master; and kissed him.
46 And they laid their hands on him, and took him.”

After John’s Jesus is identified there is a delay in his capture. After Mark’s Jesus is identified there is no delay.


# 611

John 18: (KJV)

9 “That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none.”

Compare to John 17: (KJV)

12 “While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.”

“John” tries to show prophecy fulfillment in 18:9 moving beyond the Tanakh to what Jesus said, “which he spake”, but in Jesus’ first such attempt has Jesus misquote what he supposedly said himself a chapter earlier as he spaked that the son of perdition (Judas) would be lost to fulfill prophecy of the Tanakh. So the first time John’s Jesus claims prophecy fulfillment of something he said himself he gives a false prophecy which ironically does fulfill a prophecy in the Tanakh, the one about false prophets.


# 612

John 18: (KJV)

13 “And led him away to Annas first; for he was father in law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year.”

Compare to Matthew 26: (KJV)

57 “And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled.”

John’s Jesus is first taken to Annas while Matthew’s Jesus is first taken to Caiaphas.


# 613

John 18: (KJV)

20 “Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.”

Compare to Mark 4: (KJV)

10 “And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.
11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.”

John’s Jesus claims under oath that he never taught in secret but Mark’s Jesus testifies that secret teaching was Jesus’ Mosus operandi. John’s Jesus, being omnipotent, knew that Mark’s Jesus would testify against him and that’s why John’s Jesus earlier said, “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid”. Is it just a coincidence that Jesus’ testimony against himself is #613? Let’s give Jesus a Sabbatical here and you be the Judge.


# 614

John 18: (KJV)

28 “Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.”

The underlying Greek for “hall of judgment” is the Greek word for “praetorium” which had a meaning of the official residence of the Roman governor. Everyone agrees that the official residence of Pilate was in Caesarea and no known author outside of the Christian Bible, such as Josephus or Philo, ever refers to a praetorium in Jerusalem for this time period.


# 615

John 18: (KJV)

28 “Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.”

Compare to Mark 14: (KJV)

16 “And his disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover.
17 And in the evening he cometh with the twelve.
18 And as they sat and did eat, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One of you which eateth with me shall betray me.”

“John” says that the most important day in the history of the world was the day before Passover while “Mark” says it was Passover. Doesn’t sound like something disciples would disagree about.


# 616

John 18: (KJV)

33 “Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?
34 Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me?
35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?
36 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.”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

11 “And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.
12 And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.
13 Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee?
14 And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly.”

“John’s” Jesus defends himself with a speech. “Matthew’s” Jesus defends himself with two non-responsive words.


# 617

John 18: (KJV)

39 “But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?”

No evidence outside of the Christian Bible that there was such a custom.


# 618

John 19: (KJV)

7 “The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.”

No “the” before “son of god” in the Greek which a majority of moderns use.


# 619

John 19: (KJV)

11 “Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.”

The logic of this sentence is backwards. The first part indicates there is a greater power than Pilate that gave Pilate his power. The second part indicates that a lesser power brought Jesus to Pilate, a greater power, yet the lesser power has more responsibility for the sin. Backwards. The greater power should have more responsibility. Seems the soul purpose of this backwards sentence is to blame “The Jews”.


# 620

John 19: (KJV)

17 “And he bearing his cross”

“Cross” is an anachronistic mistranslation and should be “stake” which is the primary meaning of the underlying Greek word. There does not appear to be a single known Greek author of the time who ever explicitly identifies the underlying Greek word “stauros” as being two intersecting stakes in the shape of what is now considered a cross.


# 621

John 19: (KJV)

17 “And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha:”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

21 “And they compel one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his cross.”

“John’s” Jesus carried his own stake. “Mark’s” Jesus had a Simon carry Jesus’ cross. Next to John 19:17 there should be a Warning Sign that says, “Danger, Men Theologizing”.


# 622

John 19: (KJV)

19 “And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

Compare to Luke 23: (KJV)

38 “And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

Two different Jesuses?


# 623

John 19: (KJV)

25 “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.”

“Cross” is an anachronistic mistranslation.


# 624

John 19: (KJV)

25 “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.”

Compare to Matthew 27: (KJV)

50 “Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.
55 And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him:
56 Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedees children.”

According to “John” whose witness testimony says he was not a witness to the crucifixion assorted women witnesses who unlike him were witnesses to the crucifixion even though the subsequent Christianity decided not to preserve the testimony of theses women witnesses who were witnesses according to a “John” and decided to preserve the witness testimony of “John” who testified that he was not a witness to the crucifixion these witness/non-witnesses were witnessing/non-witnessing next to the stake(s). According to “Matthew”, whose own Gospel indicates that he was probably really “Levi” and not “Matthew” and therefore can’t even reliably testify about his own identity, whose witness testimony says he was not a witness to the crucifixion assorted women witnesses who unlike him were witnesses to the crucifixion even though the subsequent Christianity decided not to preserve the testimony of theses women witnesses who were witnesses according to a “Matthew” and decided to preserve the witness testimony of “Matthew” who testified that he was not a witness to the crucifixion these witness/non-witnesses were witnessing/non-witnessing not next to the stake(s). The only agreement here between “John” and “Matthew” is that both agree that the other was not a witness. The world renowned Hyperpologist, JP Holding, has harmonized the location of the witness/non-witnesses women according to “John” and “Matthew” by speculating that during the crucifixion the women entertained themselves by playing pin the tail on Jesus’ donkey which accounts for the change in their location during the crucifixion and the related bonus apology that the necessary blindfolds for the game prevented them for providing testimony.


# 625

John 19: (KJV)

25 “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

40 “There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome;”

So many women, so little agreement. “John” and “Mark”, who indicate they were not witnesses to the crucifixion but women were and have subsequent Christianity treat them like they were witnesses to the crucifixion and treat the women like they weren’t, whose only agreement here is that neither said the other was a witness, disagree about who the women witnesses were that subsequent Christianity decided not to believe (surprise).

But seriously folktales, here you have all the Gospel authors indicating that the witnesses to the most important event in the history of Christianity were women yet subsequent Christianity decided not to preserve any testimony written by these women. This is the type of result you are left with when a story is about an event which was not historical. Authorship can not then be based on real memories.


# 626

John 19: (KJV)

26 “When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!”

John’s Jesus teaches that the natural family relationships are secondary in importance to the supernatural relationships and violates the commandment from the Tanakh to honor your parents. But “Matthew’s” Jesus said he would not violate any law of the Tanakh. Interestingly, the Synoptics show this anti family behavior as being taught during Jesus’ career while John shows it as brought about by Jesus’ death. The Synoptics, written earlier, show more emphasis on Jesus’ career and teachings while “John”, written later, glosses over Jesus’ teachings having instead a long running advertisement for Jesus’ teachings without really explaining what Jesus’ teachings are and emphasizes Jesus’ death. This also illustrates the hypocrisy of modern fundamentalism, having a position of emphasizing natural family relationships when the Christian Bible clearly shows Jesus as deemphasizing natural family relationships.


# 627

John 19: (KJV)

29 “Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth.
30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

23 “And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not.”

John’s “Jesus” was drinking while Mark’s “Jesus” was not. When the police officer in Mel Gibson’s “Passion” asks Jesus if he’d been drinking “Gibson’s” Jesus says “Yes and no”.


# 628

John 19: (KJV)

30 “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

Compare to Luke 23: (KJV)

46 “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.”

“John’s” Jesus and “Luke’s” Jesus have different last words.


# 629

John 19: (KJV)

31 “The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.”

The underlying Greek for “their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away” is “might be broken their legs and taken away”. Grammatically, the verb “taken away”, refers to the subject “legs”. All modern translations add “bodies” or “they” to avoid this awkward grammar. Advice to modern Christian translators, just translate what it says and don’t add words to avoid awkward grammar putzes.


# 630

John 19: (KJV)

30 “When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.
33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

37 “And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
38 And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.
39 And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.”

“John’s” soldiers didn’t know Jesus was dead until they went to brake his legs. “Mark’s” soldier knew Jesus was dead right after he cried out.


# 631

John 19: (KJV)

34 “But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.”

For some reason modern Christian translations are using “pierced” to death. The underlying Greek word means “stabbed at” or “picked at”. The context is that a soldier is checking to see if Jesus is dead or not. Would you kill someone in order to find out if they were still alive?


# 632

John 19: (KJV)

36 “For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.”

Where? Ironically “John’s” Jesus does maintain a sort of perfection here, not fulfilling a single Messianic prophecy from the Tanakh. My Auntie has also fulfilled all of the Messianic prophecies except for the ones she hasn’t fulfilled yet.


# 633

John 19: (KJV)

37 “And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.”

This appears to try and refer to Zechariah 12: (JPS)

9 “And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
10
And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they shall look unto Me because they have thrust him through; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born.”

“John” appears to have outdone himself here as there isn’t a single match between any element of his claimed prophecy fulfillment and the relevant Scripture. “They” in John’s narrative are the Romans but no there is no reference to Romans in Zechariah. In John’s narrative the Romans look at him whom they wounded while in Zechariah God is looked to and a different subject was pierced. “John’s” fulfillment claim of “pierced” doesn’t even agree to his own narrative since he wrote “stabbed” or “picked” and it was translators who mistranslated “pierced”. Zechariah also has an apocalyptic context that John’s narrative lacks.


# 634

John 19: (KJV)

38 “And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus.
39 And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight.
40 Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.”

Compare to Mark 15: (KJV)

45 “And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph.
46 And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre.”
“John’s” Jesus is wrapped by Joseph and Nicodemus while “Mark’s” Jesus is only wrapped by Joseph. Other oddities of “John’s” account are that Joseph and Nicodemus have just made themselves ritually impure for the upcoming Passover by touching a dead body and Jesus is not buried by his own family (the change from Joseph the earthly father to Joseph the disciple father is probably not a coincidence).


# 635

John 19: (KJV)

40 “Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.”

The underlying Greek word for “linen clothes” should be “linen strips” which a majority of moderns avoid. The combination of winding in linen strips with 100 pounds of spices makes an interesting parallel to mummification.


Joseph

FAITH, n.
Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Errors...yguid=68161660

http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/abdulreis/myhomepage/