Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Thoughts about John BarZebedee

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Faber View Post
    That there were two separate incidents of the cleansing of the temple is not surprising. Those were the Bazaars of Annas, and were there every year, up until the Jewish War. They were referred to as the Bazaars of Annas. They were usually set up in the provinces on the 15th day of Adar (about a month before Passover), and in the court of the gentiles in the temple mount on 25 Adar. It was a money-making scam by Annas and his family. Not only could they declare peoples' sacrificial lambs blemished, requiring them to buy another lamb, but they demanded that the normal shekel be exchanged for the Tyrian shekel. which had a purer silver content.

    As for the trial of Jesus, it is unfortunate that many scholars are ignorant of the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, which set standards for trials, especially in capital cases. It was mandatory that they take place in two days, the sentence being declared on the second day so that decisions were not made in the heat of passion. And passing Jesus from Pilate to Herod, than back to Pialate, no doubt took at least a whole day. The time from the arrest of Jesus to His execution could have been three full days, pushing the Last Supper as far back as the Tuesday after sunset, prior to the official Friday night Passover seder of AD 30. Which would not be surprising. Even the Essenes celebrated the Passover seder on Tuesday night every year, judging by the Jubilee calendar, which they appeared to have been following. It wouldn't be surprising that, due to the huge number of people that came to Jerusalem at the time, that people would hold their seders on other days, sidestepping the requirements of the priests.

    One other thing: John was probably aware of the other Gospels, at least Mark's. There was no need of him to repeat what they had already reported (except the feeding of the five thousand, and the unfortunate events that followed that), and probably wanted to add a few details that they missed.
    Thank you for your post.
    Good points all but I will need a computer to reply, tomorrow morning . I'm on a mobile just now.

    Comment


    • #17
      I see no reason to make a difference. There seems to be a close connection between the disciples Peter and John in the synoptic Gospels, and the two apostles in the early chapters of the Acts of the Apostles. I think John, author of the Gospel clearly avoided referring to himself by name. And the user of symbolism in the Gospel, Epistles and Revelation also suggest the same person. Could they be different? Maybe, but I don't think so.

      I look at the wording of John 21:24, ("This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who has written them down. And we know that his testimony is true.") and wonder if maybe there was a collaboration with John, possibly Irenaeus and Polycarp.
      When I Survey....

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by eider View Post
        Thoughts about John BarZebedee

        Recently I have been thinking about and writing about the disciple John. I recently had a strong discussion about him which left his name in mind, and then yesterday whilst seeking info about the Baptist ....
        I'm curious about that part --- "the Baptist" --- why would you be seeking information on him when your thread is about John the disciple?
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

          I'm curious about that part --- "the Baptist" --- why would you be seeking information on him when your thread is about John the disciple?
          Coincidence.
          Whilst trawling for any new info on the Baptist I opened a wiki article on the disciple.
          And before I canceled it there was the picture of the disciple with a box of info under.

          Get it? These things happen. That reminded me of the a previous discussion and redirected my course. I'll get back to trawling for Baptist info another time.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by eider View Post

            Coincidence.
            Whilst trawling for any new info on the Baptist I opened a wiki article on the disciple.
            And before I canceled it there was the picture of the disciple with a box of info under.

            Get it? These things happen. That reminded me of the a previous discussion and redirected my course. I'll get back to trawling for Baptist info another time.
            Absolutely - no problem. I was curious, so I asked.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • #21

              Originally posted by Faber View Post
              That there were two separate incidents of the cleansing of the temple is not surprising. Those were the Bazaars of Annas, and were there every year, up until the Jewish War. They were referred to as the Bazaars of Annas. They were usually set up in the provinces on the 15th day of Adar (about a month before Passover), and in the court of the gentiles in the temple mount on 25 Adar.
              Indeed. Annas, although retired, probably still ran these sales and exchange centres for the (then present) Head Priest Caiaphas. These bazaars were controlled by the Syrian Legate who had the power to hire or fire the Temple (and Court) Head Priest.
              These very corrupted bazaars were not 'set up' before Passover so much as 'Increased' greatly. They were needed all through the year for smaller feasts but for the feasts of Passover, Tabernacles and Weeks they really had to prepare for the hundreds of thousands of Jews who would attend.

              It was a money-making scam by Annas and his family. Not only could they declare peoples' sacrificial lambs blemished, requiring them to buy another lamb, but they demanded that the normal shekel be exchanged for the Tyrian shekel. which had a purer silver content.
              The exchange bazaars would take drachmas, denariil, sestertii, assarions, quadrons and the tiny Greek Greek lepta in exchange for 1/2 and full shekels. Rome required exact weight and silver content because it took a cut from all takings. Rome actually controlled the Temple in various ways. The shekel was struck weith the head of Melgarth Heracles (Baal to the Jews), graven images and the Inscription in Greek for Caesar. ........ a total insult to every Jew who had to touch one.
              And yes, absolutely! A poor peasant could carry his own lamb down from, say, Gaulanitus in order to save on the crushing expense of a 'Temple Lamb' and all the attending priest had to do was to find an imperfection.
              The sales profits on sacrificial birds/animals was vast, the exchange rates were horrific and the Jewish peasantry (most of Palestine) was being ripped off. They also got ripped off for bed and board by the Jerusalem local people. Thast's why the Baptist and Jesus offered free cleansing and redemption in my opinion. Occam's razor....?

              As for the trial of Jesus, it is unfortunate that many scholars are ignorant of the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, which set standards for trials, especially in capital cases. It was mandatory that they take place in two days, the sentence being declared on the second day so that decisions were not made in the heat of passion. And passing Jesus from Pilate to Herod, than back to Pialate, no doubt took at least a whole day.
              Not in the case of Jesus, imo. The quick hearing was at Caiaphas's home, a beating and then straight over to Pilate for a fast sentence, then to Antipas and very quickly back to a reluctant Pilate. All that and a late execution in the one day, I reckon. The Priesthood wanted Jesus dead before sundown.... literally.

              The time from the arrest of Jesus to His execution could have been three full days, pushing the Last Supper as far back as the Tuesday after sunset, prior to the official Friday night Passover seder of AD 30. Which would not be surprising. Even the Essenes celebrated the Passover seder on Tuesday night every year, judging by the Jubilee calendar, which they appeared to have been following. It wouldn't be surprising that, due to the huge number of people that came to Jerusalem at the time, that people would hold their seders on other days, sidestepping the requirements of the priests.
              The Last upper could not have been that early in the week. In today;'s terminolgy on day 1 Jesus and all went in to Jerusalem/Temple to look around (G-Mark). On Day 2 they trashed the sales and exchange centres and then picketed the Temple Courts (G-Mark). On day 3 (G-Mark)they may have repeated actions of day2 but the definitely picketed the Temple Courts. (One of the Temple officials asked ,'Why do you do these things? (G-Mark). Day 4-Last Supper and Day 5 trial and execution. That's how it reads to me.

              One other thing: John was probably aware of the other Gospels, at least Mark's. There was no need of him to repeat what they had already reported (except the feeding of the five thousand, and the unfortunate events that followed that), and probably wanted to add a few details that they missed.
              That would surprise me. John was right there with brother and Cephas at the Transfiguration on the mountain (Horeb?) the experience of his lifetime, and never mentioned in G-John. He didn't mention anything that they did apart from the feeding, and never mentioned a single incident in the last week save for the last supper and last day.
              I guess it's all down to each person's perception and beliefs.
              I acknowledge Christian's faiths absolutely, all Churches and Creeds.

              I see no reason to make a difference. There seems to be a close connection between the disciples Peter and John in the synoptic Gospels, and the two apostles in the early chapters of the Acts of the Apostles. I think John, author of the Gospel clearly avoided referring to himself by name. And the user of symbolism in the Gospel, Epistles and Revelation also suggest the same person. Could they be different? Maybe, but I don't think so.
              Those references to the 'loved disciple' never mentioned the amazing incidents that disciple John experienced. I just find that strange.

              I look at the wording of John 21:24, ("This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who has written them down. And we know that his testimony is true.") and wonder if maybe there was a collaboration with John, possibly Irenaeus and Polycarp.
              ...And we know..... I wonder who 'We' were, and how 'they' knew.
              I think that Irenaeus wrote that he was proud to have known John. Polycarp lived in the later 1st to early 2nd century and his 'student' (?) Irenaeus lived in the mid-late 2nd as far as I can tell. Wiki gives Irenaeus dates as born c. ... 120, /140, died c. 200, /203. This puts John's possible age as up to 100yrs. I can't discover what the average age expectancy of early 1st century Palestinian (Galillean) peasants was beut I'd be surprised if they that age reached over 50 years. That means that a 70 year old was amazingly ancient.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Machinist View Post
                The awkward double ending of the Gospel of John comes to mind here.
                Meh. Such statements about statements are not uncommon in John (1:7; 2:11; 4:54; 12:37-41). Think of it this way -- how often have you written something where there are points in the body of the text that could have been a natural ending but didn't end it there? It really isn't all that uncommon. Also John is full of what are called disjointed texts where the sequence flow is anything but smooth. While such things appear in the other Gospels they abound in the Fourth Gospel.

                And an important thing to consider is that unlike the additional ending of Mark, there are no texts of John that don't contain chapter 21. None end at chapter 20. Moreover, the chapter is in the same style and uses much of the same language (although some critics debate the last point) as the rest of the book.

                All told there really isn't sufficient justification to conclude that it is an interpolation or additional ending added onto the text.

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                  Meh. Such statements about statements are not uncommon in John (1:7; 2:11; 4:54; 12:37-41). Think of it this way -- how often have you written something where there are points in the body of the text that could have been a natural ending but didn't end it there? It really isn't all that uncommon. Also John is full of what are called disjointed texts where the sequence flow is anything but smooth. While such things appear in the other Gospels they abound in the Fourth Gospel.

                  And an important thing to consider is that unlike the additional ending of Mark, there are no texts of John that don't contain chapter 21. None end at chapter 20. Moreover, the chapter is in the same style and uses much of the same language (although some critics debate the last point) as the rest of the book.

                  All told there really isn't sufficient justification to conclude that it is an interpolation or additional ending added onto the text.
                  I have heard the apologetic you offered before. It has a certain aesthetic explanation that seems to appeal to many minds, however, I have a slightly different taste. The double ending is just a little too awkward for me to say unequivocally, that it wasn't a later addition.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Machinist View Post

                    I have heard the apologetic you offered before. It has a certain aesthetic explanation that seems to appeal to many minds, however, I have a slightly different taste. The double ending is just a little too awkward for me to say unequivocally, that it wasn't a later addition.
                    If it was then it is one where someone who expertly used the same style of writing, mastered the type of language he used, skillfully located and expounded upon the questions left unresolved -- and did so without leaving a trace of any manuscript without it. Keep in mind this had to be done at the outset so this person wouldn't have the advantage of having it around for years to study and follow the lead of scholars who had also studied it.

                    Given this and the fact that the Gospel is full of such disjointed thoughts and there is no copy without chapter 21, the simplest, most logical solution is that it has always been a part of the text.

                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                      If it was then it is one where someone who expertly used the same style of writing, mastered the type of language he used, skillfully located and expounded upon the questions left unresolved -- and did so without leaving a trace of any manuscript without it. Keep in mind this had to be done at the outset so this person wouldn't have the advantage of having it around for years to study and follow the lead of scholars who had also studied it.

                      Given this and the fact that the Gospel is full of such disjointed thoughts and there is no copy without chapter 21, the simplest, most logical solution is that it has always been a part of the text.
                      If you have time, give me your best example of the same style of writing here, or the example that you feel is the most convincing. To mimic someone's style doesn't take an expert.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        If it was then it is one where someone who expertly used the same style of writing, mastered the type of language he used, skillfully located and expounded upon the questions left unresolved -- and did so without leaving a trace of any manuscript without it. Keep in mind this had to be done at the outset so this person wouldn't have the advantage of having it around for years to study and follow the lead of scholars who had also studied it.

                        Given this and the fact that the Gospel is full of such disjointed thoughts and there is no copy without chapter 21, the simplest, most logical solution is that it has always been a part of the text.
                        {20:31} But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.


                        {21:25} And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I
                        suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

                        Hi..... I haven't got an issue one way or t'other, but the 'flow' of the translator's language does seem to be from a similar mind. Both 'sign offs' do look like those from the same author.

                        Back then the gospel must have been written a few times before the final one was completed, and that could have taken years imo. The chances that the author had thought of, remembered or discovered new input to add at the end of an earlier manuscript seems quite possible to me.

                        The problem is in the mistiness caused by the translators.

                        Fitzgeralds 1st 'Rubuyat' compared with his 2nd attempt shows just how differently a mindset can change!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Machinist View Post

                          If you have time, give me your best example of the same style of writing here, or the example that you feel is the most convincing. To mimic someone's style doesn't take an expert.
                          All that specialists can examine are copies of translations. A hopeless mission now, I reckon. The only way that an addition can be shown would be through the discovery of an earlier gospel which lacked chapter 21.

                          'Style' is all in the translation now, surely? A fragmented 3rd century (?) manuscript offers little help.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Machinist View Post

                            If you have time, give me your best example of the same style of writing here, or the example that you feel is the most convincing. To mimic someone's style doesn't take an expert.
                            I'm not proficient in koine which would be required to give a truly valid technical response for this. At this point I'm asserting my opinion based on what I've read (I have several commentaries of John including Brown's 2 volume work where the footnotes alone on the first 14 verses of chapter 21 take up 11 pages and he can go on for quite awhile distinguishing between terms like appendix, supplement and epilogue)

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                              I'm not proficient in koine which would be required to give a truly valid technical response for this. At this point I'm asserting my opinion based on what I've read (I have several commentaries of John including Brown's 2 volume work where the footnotes alone on the first 14 verses of chapter 21 take up 11 pages and he can go on for quite awhile distinguishing between terms like appendix, supplement and epilogue)
                              Yeah it gets quite complex I know. Within that vast and intricate complexity, we have to make patterns the best we can and then represent these patterns to ourselves to be viewed through the lens of a foregone conclusion. It seems that this is the way it works. And if so, what is the source? What makes me choose to see things this way or that? Especially when it comes to things like ancient documents.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Machinist View Post

                                Yeah it gets quite complex I know. Within that vast and intricate complexity, we have to make patterns the best we can and then represent these patterns to ourselves to be viewed through the lens of a foregone conclusion. It seems that this is the way it works. And if so, what is the source? What makes me choose to see things this way or that? Especially when it comes to things like ancient documents.
                                Originally my foregone conclusion was that it was an addition but I've come to conclude that there isn't sufficient evidence to warrant that belief.

                                I'm always still in trouble again

                                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                189 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                428 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                305 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,518 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X