Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Is there a cure for homophobia? Introducing Lovelace......

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

    Convenience store? Maybe more like a large church today? Just because services aren't being performed doesn't mean it would have to be locked up like Fort Knox. There could be areas left open for worshipers to offer prayers at any time of the day.
    As far as I know, the Temple was an open structure and could not be practically locked up at night. Not that Temple services were being offered around the clock, but there wasn't anything to prevent someone from entering it at night.

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    Am I correct in thinking some here hold the view that the Temple operated 24 hours a day like some kind of modern convenience store? If so, what evidence is there for such a contention?
    I don't recall anyone claiming that business was being conducted in the temple 24 hours per day.

    Furthermore why are the current English days of the week [which are primarily German in origin - apart from Saturday] being proffered as corresponding with the period in question? There was no Thursday or Sunday in first century Jerusalem.
    Geh? I was writing in contemporary English, not first century Hebrew. It would have made no more sense to use the Hebrew names than it would to call "Wednesday" "mid-week," or "Water-day." Using the actual Hebrew words would not have any meaning for someone who was not familiar with Hebrew: no more than using German or Japanese would have meaning for someone who can't read German or Japanese had I written Mittwoch or Suiyoubi.
    Last edited by tabibito; 08-09-2021, 07:11 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    Am I correct in thinking some here hold the view that the Temple operated 24 hours a day like some kind of modern convenience store? If so, what evidence is there for such a contention?

    Furthermore why are the current English days of the week [which are primarily German in origin - apart from Saturday] being proffered as corresponding with the period in question? There was no Thursday or Sunday in first century Jerusalem.
    Convenience store? Maybe more like a large church today? Just because services aren't being performed doesn't mean it would have to be locked up like Fort Knox. There could be areas left open for worshipers to offer prayers at any time of the day.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Am I correct in thinking some here hold the view that the Temple operated 24 hours a day like some kind of modern convenience store? If so, what evidence is there for such a contention?

    Furthermore why are the current English days of the week [which are primarily German in origin - apart from Saturday] being proffered as corresponding with the period in question? There was no Thursday or Sunday in first century Jerusalem.

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    [QUOTE=eider;n1290793]
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post
    I'm just determined to teach you about what happened during the first three days of that last week, since Apostle John clearly didn't have a clue about what they did.
    So far you do repeat the first day's activities accurately, but the second needs sorting and the third we have not touched yet.
    You'll need something better than bare assertion and mockery to convince me that you even might know what you're talking about.

    Leave a comment:


  • eider
    replied
    [QUOTE=tabibito;n1290578]
    Originally posted by eider View Post
    I'm sure you could find a way to declare me wrong, regardless of any answer I might provide.

    Not that shopping at the supermarket would be a logical application for the scenario in question, but yes. The local Coles supermarket is open for business at midnight and I, along with a number of others, frequently do the shopping around opening time - often enough, there is quite a long queue just before midnight. So when the shop opens, the queue would have been waiting since yesterday.

    Again - why would anyone explain common, ordinary, every-day occurrences? (unless they were writing some kind of tour guide, or anthropological study etc) It certainly would be off topic for the New Testament authors.

    The question was whether you could exercise logic in assessing the words "the next day." Quite clearly, your hostile reading of my comment prevented you from exercising logic.

    Under a three quarter moon? Even a half moon provides ample light for ordinary foot travel. Not that I would trust it for "off the beaten path" wandering.
    I'm just determined to teach you about what happened during the first three days of that last week, since Apostle John clearly didn't have a clue about what they did.
    So far you do repeat the first day's activities accurately, but the second needs sorting and the third we have not touched yet.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    True enough. It is also true that the break of day occurs at sunset, when the first three stars become visible in the evening sky. Where I live, there is an appreciable time between then and nightfall. Jerusalem is about 3 degrees closer to the equator so, altitude for altitude, that time would be marginally reduced. But Jerusalem is elevated (roughly half a mile - here is only 160') which would increase the duration of dusk - precise detail of the interplay is unknown to me.

    Jesus and the disciples looking around the temple may not have been sightseeing alone; it could have been something of an inspection tour on Jesus' part.

    When I thought about it, the question arose, "Why just look around the temple though? If trading itself had been so offensive, the response should have been immediate." That's when I noticed the "next day" bit, so I started to do some digging. Not that anything I have found is really solid, but some comments here and there indicate that the temple gates were supposed to be shut between sunset and sunrise. When I found those comments, things fell into place. All of which adds up to, it wasn't even necessarily at night (though it probably was.)
    Yeah, I just don't see Jesus as simply taking in the sites and picking up tunics with "My brother went to Jerusalem and all I got was this lousy tunic" emblazoned across the front for the family back home.

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Apparently the concept of "torchbearer" was something that never crossed his mind either. It's like he thinks that it wasn't until after the advent of the electric light that people ever moved around at night.
    True enough. It is also true that the break of day occurs at sunset, when the first three stars become visible in the evening sky. Where I live, there is an appreciable time between then and nightfall. Jerusalem is about 3 degrees closer to the equator so, altitude for altitude, that time would be marginally reduced. But Jerusalem is elevated (roughly half a mile - here is only 160') which would increase the duration of dusk - precise detail of the interplay is unknown to me.

    Jesus and the disciples looking around the temple may not have been sightseeing alone; it could have been something of an inspection tour on Jesus' part.

    When I thought about it, the question arose, "Why just look around the temple though? If trading itself had been so offensive, the response should have been immediate." That's when I noticed the "next day" bit, so I started to do some digging. Not that anything I have found is really solid, but some comments here and there indicate that the temple gates were supposed to be shut between sunset and sunrise. When I found those comments, things fell into place. All of which adds up to, it wasn't even necessarily at night (though it probably was.)

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post
    Under a three quarter moon? Even a half moon provides ample light for ordinary foot travel. Not that I would trust it for "off the beaten path" wandering.
    Apparently the concept of "torchbearer" was something that never crossed his mind either. It's like he thinks that it wasn't until after the advent of the electric light that people ever moved around at night.

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    [QUOTE=eider;n1290574]
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post
    I don't think that you know what Jesus did on the third day, yet.
    I'm sure you could find a way to declare me wrong, regardless of any answer I might provide.

    Of course it is! A calendar day started at sunset/dusk, according to how clear or cloudy the sky was. Our day starts at midnight. So?
    Do you assume that a person who went shopping 'today' went out at midnight?
    Not that shopping at the supermarket would be a logical application for the scenario in question, but yes. The local Coles supermarket is open for business at midnight and I, along with a number of others, frequently do the shopping around opening time - often enough, there is quite a long queue just before midnight. So when the shop opens, the queue would have been waiting since yesterday.


    Chapter and verse beats your guesses 'hands down'.
    Again - why would anyone explain common, ordinary, every-day occurrences? (unless they were writing some kind of tour guide, or anthropological study etc) It certainly would be off topic for the New Testament authors.

    So you cannot show chapter and verse for your crazy guess that the Temple was open in the night on that second day? Didn't think so. So you wander off to 'after the execution'.
    The question was whether you could exercise logic in assessing the words "the next day." Quite clearly, your hostile reading of my comment prevented you from exercising logic.


    Waffling on about days after the execution won't help you with your crazy idea that Jesus and the disciples went off to the Temple in the darkness of the second day.!
    Under a three quarter moon? Even a half moon provides ample light for ordinary foot travel. Not that I would trust it for "off the beaten path" wandering.


    Leave a comment:


  • eider
    replied
    [QUOTE=tabibito;n1290522]
    Originally posted by eider View Post
    Relevance. The point of the exercise was to demonstrate a particular facet of the sequence: that of a count of days. As to the issue of the third day, its start point is obvious; the division between the third and fourth days is not self evident.
    I don't think that you know what Jesus did on the third day, yet.

    It is not surprising that people don't notice the distinction between "next day" and "next morning" in the Hebrew calendar: it is not intuitive.
    Of course it is! A calendar day started at sunset/dusk, according to how clear or cloudy the sky was. Our day starts at midnight. So?
    Do you assume that a person who went shopping 'today' went out at midnight?

    Chapter and verse? Why would that distinction be written of? But perhaps you can bring a little logic to the subject.
    Chapter and verse beats your guesses 'hands down'.

    When Mark says that members of the Sanhedrin approached Pilate to ask that a guard be posted at the tomb "on the next day" - does it make sense to read "next day" as "the following morning"?
    So you cannot show chapter and verse for your crazy guess that the Temple was open in the night on that second day? Didn't think so. So you wander off to 'after the execution'.

    Would those people, so worried about the possibility of Jesus' body being removed from the tomb, really be willing to leave the tomb unguarded for a whole night before they did something about it? Perhaps seldom used in English, but by no means impossibly - "the next day X happened, and in the morning, Y" would show that X occurred between midnight and dawn. In the Hebrew calendar, "the next day" indicates sometime after 6pm.
    Waffling on about days after the execution won't help you with your crazy idea that Jesus and the disciples went off to the Temple in the darkness of the second day.!

    Yes, in point of fact, I am conscious of the risks associated with sympathetic readings. You, it seems, are not conscious of the risks associated with hostile readings.
    Just quote from the Gospels and we'll take it from there. Why not try that?

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post

    It does take a lot of getting used to. What is known is not always assimilated in the person's thinking. A person will often declare that the Jewish day begins at 6pm, and immediately thereafter, speak of the following morning as though it is a different day.
    Because it is... for us.

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    How the Jews divide days compared to how we do has led to much confusion over the centuries
    It does take a lot of getting used to. What is known is not always assimilated in the person's thinking. A person will often declare that the Jewish day begins at 6pm, and immediately thereafter, speak of the following morning as though it is a different day.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post
    Relevance. The point of the exercise was to demonstrate a particular facet of the sequence: that of a count of days. As to the issue of the third day, its start point is obvious; the division between the third and fourth days is not self evident.



    It is not surprising that people don't notice the distinction between "next day" and "next morning" in the Hebrew calendar: it is not intuitive. Chapter and verse? Why would that distinction be written of? But perhaps you can bring a little logic to the subject. When Mark says that members of the Sanhedrin approached Pilate to ask that a guard be posted at the tomb "on the next day" - does it make sense to read "next day" as "the following morning"? Would those people, so worried about the possibility of Jesus' body being removed from the tomb, really be willing to leave the tomb unguarded for a whole night before they did something about it? Perhaps seldom used in English, but by no means impossibly - "the next day X happened, and in the morning, Y" would show that X occurred between midnight and dawn. In the Hebrew calendar, "the next day" indicates sometime after 6pm.

    Yes, in point of fact, I am conscious of the risks associated with sympathetic readings. You, it seems, are not conscious of the risks associated with hostile readings.
    How the Jews divide days compared to how we do has led to much confusion over the centuries

    Leave a comment:


  • tabibito
    replied
    [QUOTE=eider;n1290517]

    You didn't answer my question: How could you possibly miss out what Jesus and disciples did on the third day of that week? It's written down for you, just like their actions during the first and second days were. But at least you do know what they did on the first now.
    Relevance. The point of the exercise was to demonstrate a particular facet of the sequence: that of a count of days. As to the issue of the third day, its start point is obvious; the division between the third and fourth days is not self evident.

    Your decision that 'they' went in to the Temple and attached the bazaar etc during the night-time is laughable, unless you can show chapter and verse about that. Chapter and verse!
    It is not surprising that people don't notice the distinction between "next day" and "next morning" in the Hebrew calendar: it is not intuitive. Chapter and verse? Why would that distinction be written of? But perhaps you can bring a little logic to the subject. When Mark says that members of the Sanhedrin approached Pilate to ask that a guard be posted at the tomb "on the next day" - does it make sense to read "next day" as "the following morning"? Would those people, so worried about the possibility of Jesus' body being removed from the tomb, really be willing to leave the tomb unguarded for a whole night before they did something about it? Perhaps seldom used in English, but by no means impossibly - "the next day X happened, and in the morning, Y" would show that X occurred between midnight and dawn. In the Hebrew calendar, "the next day" indicates sometime after 6pm.

    Yes, in point of fact, I am conscious of the risks associated with sympathetic readings. You, it seems, are not conscious of the risks associated with hostile readings.
    Last edited by tabibito; 08-08-2021, 03:53 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
16 responses
132 views
0 likes
Last Post One Bad Pig  
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
53 responses
351 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
25 responses
112 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
33 responses
197 views
0 likes
Last Post Roy
by Roy
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
84 responses
361 views
0 likes
Last Post JimL
by JimL
 
Working...
X