|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 30, 2017 13:52:38 GMT
I would suppose that Jesus made the whip specifically for driving out the animals. The text never mentions him whipping anybody, so we don't really know if he whipped the humans or even threatened them with it. All we have to go on is that he made a whip for some reason. My interpretation is that it was for driving out the animals, as the text is ambiguous on this point. I don't even think it's ambiguous in either of the times he did it.
John 2 Matthew 21
12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. 13 “It is written,” he said to them, “‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’[e] but you are making it ‘a den of robbers.’[f]” To me one would have to slant it to the notion of Jesus beating up people with a whip before assuming it was a herding action, but there's no reason to have an actual debate on it I guess except for fun and giggles.
It has nothing to do with me having a problem with Jesus doing a smackdown. He certainly had the ability to do it (I personally think he did it every time people tried to kill him before it was time), although there isn't a reason in this case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2017 23:31:42 GMT
I would suppose that Jesus made the whip specifically for driving out the animals. The text never mentions him whipping anybody, so we don't really know if he whipped the humans or even threatened them with it. All we have to go on is that he made a whip for some reason. My interpretation is that it was for driving out the animals, as the text is ambiguous on this point. I don't even think it's ambiguous in either of the times he did it.
John 2 Matthew 21
12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. 13 “It is written,” he said to them, “‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’[e] but you are making it ‘a den of robbers.’[f]” To me one would have to slant it to the notion of Jesus beating up people with a whip before assuming it was a herding action, but there's no reason to have an actual debate on it I guess except for fun and giggles.
It has nothing to do with me having a problem with Jesus doing a smackdown. He certainly had the ability to do it (I personally think he did it every time people tried to kill him before it was time), although there isn't a reason in this case.
You seem to know a lot about the Bible, buddy!
What are your favorite stories if you don't mind me asking?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 31, 2017 11:32:14 GMT
@senseoffender
I like a lot of them
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 31, 2017 12:45:00 GMT
I would suppose that Jesus made the whip specifically for driving out the animals. The text never mentions him whipping anybody, so we don't really know if he whipped the humans or even threatened them with it. All we have to go on is that he made a whip for some reason. My interpretation is that it was for driving out the animals, as the text is ambiguous on this point. I don't even think it's ambiguous in either of the times he did it.
John 2 Matthew 21
12 Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. 13 “It is written,” he said to them, “‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’[e] but you are making it ‘a den of robbers.’[f]” To me one would have to slant it to the notion of Jesus beating up people with a whip before assuming it was a herding action, but there's no reason to have an actual debate on it I guess except for fun and giggles.
It has nothing to do with me having a problem with Jesus doing a smackdown. He certainly had the ability to do it (I personally think he did it every time people tried to kill him before it was time), although there isn't a reason in this case.
Not too much to add to this except to make the obvious point that other versions of the relevant passage in John exist, which make things not so clear cut (i.e. as to what use JC's ready-made scourge was put) EG: "And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. And he told those who sold the pigeons, "Take these things away; do not make my Father's house a house of trade" where we see human and animals treated the same. The observation can be made too, though that there is no mention of the whip, or scourge in Matthew at all, while the credentials for John's purported historicity, the latest gospel in order of composition, have always been problematic for many scholars. This is still not to assert of course for sure that Christ was whipping people, but there was certainly a confrontation, people and animals were being driven forth, tables overturned, coins scattered, etc - certainly not being persuaded through a quiet sit-down with a coffee. It may also be noted that the more violent and dramatic interpretation of events, at least by some classic artists, is of JC thrashing humans - some examples of which can helpfully be found at the base of the relevant Wiki page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleansing_of_the_Temple , while the site itself acknowledges both emphases: No doubt the idea of JC whipping someone makes for a more dramatic composition than just upsetting tables, loosing pigeons, or driving cattle and sheep through a hall. Being an atheist I don't have an investment in any particular interpretation as the most accurate, I just note that the peaceable, 'non-scourging' version has not been the only one held or drawn and, once again, remind people that JC clearly brought a weapon to a confrontation, and was someone known to have had tantrums before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 13:01:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 31, 2017 13:46:54 GMT
I didn't say it was. I merely said that Jesus had had clear tantrums before - and in fact some Christian sites are pleased to argue that JC is not the meek and mild Prince of Peace person popularly ascribed to him viz:
scottjhiggins.com/jesus_not_so_meek/
or this, from another hot bed of heretical thought:
episcopaldigitalnetwork.com/stw/2012/02/17/3-lent-b-march-11-2012/
At the very least it is hard to argue that Jesus' turning over tables and driving out of men and beasts, whether related as being with or without scourge, and by Matthew or John, was the mark of an even-tempered Saviour on the day. I can't see why followers of Christ can't admit to His obvious human side as well as (some) insisting so resolutely on His purported divinity. The plain fact is that your Christ, according to one gospel at least, brought a whip to an angry altercation. That the implication is not liked is unfortunate - but it can't be ignored.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 13:49:21 GMT
No one said he was "mild mannered." It was an aggressive act, without question. But it doesn't mean he was HURTING either people or animals. And that's clearly outlined in the article I posted (as well as in the text itself). It was a calculated event. It wasn't a temper tantrum.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 31, 2017 13:54:52 GMT
No one said he was "mild mannered." It was an aggressive act, without question. But it doesn't mean he was HURTING either people or animals. And that's clearly outlined in the article I posted (as well as in the text itself). Unless the scourge was for show (or we discount John's sometimes questionable gospel for adding a striking detail, just to add emphasis to the strength of Jesus' anger on the day, say) then if it was used, it would have hurt. Can you use a whip on any living creature and not hurt it? Thanks for the article, but as is usual with religion in general and exegesis in general, I have shown other interpretations can easily be found from among the faithful. This is still not saying I am right and you are wrong of course.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 13:58:55 GMT
Whips are used to herd animals. You herd without physically striking. And I don't know of ANY translation that states that Jesus was physically striking anyone.
Again, no one is saying that this was a "peace and love" hippy moment for Jesus. But to say that he was HARMING anyone goes beyond the text. You have to apply your agenda at that point.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Mar 31, 2017 14:07:57 GMT
I always assumed it was one of the main events that resulted in the crowd not supporting Him when He was on trial.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2017 14:10:50 GMT
I always assumed it was one of the main events that resulted in the crowd not supporting Him when He was on trial. It was one of the reasons why he got arrested later on. But everyone knew of the corruption at the temple. People often treat this event as a spontaneous temper tantrum, as if Jesus was just finding out what was going on there. He already knew, and so did everyone else. And he was "making a scene" to force the authorities' hands. But if he had actually been HARMING anyone there, he would have been arrested on the spot. And that's not what happened.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Mar 31, 2017 14:11:35 GMT
Neither do I, and this is not what I have ever said. (And whips are not only used on animals)
All I can do is repeat that the 'Prince of Peace' took a whip to a fractious occasion and that, rightly or wrongly other believers, and artists, have seen the context and drawn their conclusions. (I doubt whether the illustration at the top of this thread, showing Christ specifically threatening humans with the scourge came from anywhere but a Xian comic, for instance) And you admit yourself now that your Christ was, at the least 'aggressive'. That the implications apparently exercise one so much does not mean it can be discarded as impossible, especially when the scripture is unclear either way.
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Apr 5, 2017 10:54:18 GMT
When I picture Jesus whipping people he's always wearing a loincloth. Those clothes look too fancy for Jesus IMO. He wasn't some kind of fancy lord. OSV you poor old thing, it's not a homo-erotic pulp novel.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 5, 2017 10:58:31 GMT
When I picture Jesus whipping people he's always wearing a loincloth. Those clothes look too fancy for Jesus IMO. He wasn't some kind of fancy lord. OSV you poor old thing, it's not a homo-erotic pulp novel. No, any homo-erotic implications are best left to some representations of Jesus on the cross ...
|
|
|
Post by awhina on Apr 5, 2017 11:01:26 GMT
No one said he was "mild mannered." It was an aggressive act, without question. But it doesn't mean he was HURTING either people or animals. And that's clearly outlined in the article I posted (as well as in the text itself). It was a calculated event. It wasn't a temper tantrum. Well said but you are arguing with a troll, who will ignore everythingyou say
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Apr 5, 2017 11:03:43 GMT
When I picture Jesus whipping people he's always wearing a loincloth. Those clothes look too fancy for Jesus IMO. He wasn't some kind of fancy lord. OSV you poor old thing, it's not a homo-erotic pulp novel. awhina you poor thing. Couldn't even stop yourself from being banned on a website where people are allowed to swear.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 5, 2017 11:13:03 GMT
No one said he was "mild mannered." It was an aggressive act, without question. But it doesn't mean he was HURTING either people or animals. And that's clearly outlined in the article I posted (as well as in the text itself). It was a calculated event. It wasn't a temper tantrum. Well said but you are arguing with a troll, who will ignore everythingyou say Some things are harder to ignore than others, lol
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Apr 5, 2017 11:13:53 GMT
Wow, this is still a thing!
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 5, 2017 11:17:40 GMT
Maybe we can just pay people to stop? I'm sure that Jesus would want a whip round.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Apr 5, 2017 11:20:00 GMT
No, by all means keep going!
|
|