When Jesus "overturned the tables of the moneychangers"...
crunch
> On Oct 6, 6:42 pm, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 6, 6:14 pm, Dom <DR...@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 6, 2:45 pm, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:> The Gospel of Peterhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/5550
>
> > > > Extract -
> > > > The next item slipped in is that Jesus took poison at the last minute
> > > > on the cross.
>
> > > [snip]
>
> > > A more fanciful argument could be made that Jesus intended to commit
> > > "suicide by police," to use the jargon of law enforcement officers in
> > > the U.S.
>
> > Dom -
>
> > Would you be more explicit as to why you propose this?
>
> One could argue that Jesus had a death wish: the casting out of the
> money changers from the temple precincts--thereby disrupting the
> normal conduct of business there--was highly likely to lead to his
> execution.
Death wish will not work because -
The Copper Scroll treasure
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/4369
"When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
moneychangers' he was objecting to the
whole system of charging money for initiation
and for annual promotion. Salvation and
forgiveness of sins were not to be sold for
money. His action was part of the schism
between his Christian party and the original
ascetics who had begun the taxation system
under Herod the Great."
Further, Jesus, strictly speaking, had the authority
to overturn the tables because of his office
among the Qumran monastics.
David Christainsen
duke
>"When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>whole system of charging money for initiation
>and for annual promotion.
No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't have been
desecrating his Father's house of worship.
After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice of animals.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Matt Giwer
> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT), crunch <pchris...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> "When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>> moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>> whole system of charging money for initiation
>> and for annual promotion.
> No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't have been
> desecrating his Father's house of worship.
> After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice of animals.
You appear to be as whacked out as crunchy.
Don't like it?
Lets get this straight. A clown goes postal in a place where there is lots of
cash and therefore lots of guards to protect the money. And then this nutcase
starts wailing away on the employers of these guards and he escapes unscathed
instead of in a body sackcloth.
Are you really saying you are dumb enough to believe that story?
--
The boundary between the sciences and the humanities is unbreechable. Any
scientist can obtain a degree in any of the fine arts if he is interested.
The opposite is not possible.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4182
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo/ a8
Thu Oct 8 07:29:01 EDT 2009
Archaeotype
=====================================================
Sci.Archaeology, established in May 1991, is an
unmoderated Usenet newsgroup dedicated to the
discussion of archaeology in its many aspects.
=====================================================
*Charter Sci.Archaeology*
=====================================================
1. To exchange information on various concerns
in archaeology, including method and theory, pot
hunting, egyptology, typology, dating, and other
related topics.
2. To facilitate ongoing debates and comments on
ideas or research that may not necessarily be in
a publishable form.
3. To query other interested archaeologists about
resources which could be made generally available.
(e.g. programs, images, data, references, but not
exact site locations).
4. To keep each other informed on upcoming events
of interest to social science researchers and
computing in the field of archaeology.
=====================================================
*End of charter*
=====================================================
=====================================================
*What is Archaeology*?
=====================================================
"*{Archaeology is] a subdiscipline of anthropology.
Anthropology is the study of humankind.
* Archaeology is the study of the human past
through material remains.
- Material remains are collectively referred to
as the archaeological record. This includes
artifacts (e.g., stone tools, ceramic vessels);
features(e.g., housepits, hearths); and ecofacts
(e.g., animal bones, plant remains).
* Archaeologists have three main goals:
1. Reconstruct Culture History: understand the
distribution of archaeological remains through
time and space.
2. Reconstruct Past Lifeways: determine past behavior
through material remains.
3. Explain the Process of Culture Change: understand
how and why cultures change through time.
*Forms of Archaeological Data*
* Artifacts: portable objects whose form has been
created or modified by human activity (e.g.,
projectile points, pottery vessels). Artifacts
retain their appearance after the archaeologist
takes them from the ground.
* Features: non-portable artifacts that cannot be
removed from the ground without altering or
destroying their original form (e.g., housepits,
burials, hearths).
* Ecofacts: non-artifactual material remains that are
not directly created or modified by human activity
but have cultural relevance and provide information
about past human behavior (e.g., animal bones,
sediment, pollen).
* Sites: spatial clusters of artifacts, features, and
ecofacts. Sites identify where humans have occupied
the landscape
(e.g., Birch Creek, Stonehenge).
* Regions: the largest definable spatial clusters of
archaeological data. Regions can be a geographical,
ecological, or cultural concept. Definition of a
region allows the archaeologist to investigate a
wider range of past activities that extend beyond
a single site (e.g., Great Basin, Columbia Plateau,
Southwest)."
Archaeological Field Methods: Principles of Excavation
http://www.indiana.edu/~arch/saa/matrix/afm/afm_princexc.htm
=====================================================
"Archaeology is usually defined as the study of the
human past through material culture, although
archaeologists are increasingly arguing that a better
definition would be the study of human behaviour
through material culture, making it a much broader
discipline and one of relevance to the contemporary
world. The most important aspect of the discipline is
that archaeologists study the physical changes human
beings have made to their world. Archaeology looks at
the artefacts (the tools, ornaments and other
objects), the structures (buildings, tombs and other
enclosed spaces) and landscapes (field systems,
settlements, communication routes and so on) that
people have been creating for the seven million or so
years we have been creatures distinct from the other
great apes."
http://www.kmatthews.org.uk/cult_archaeology/index.html
=====================================================
"Archaeology is concerned with cultural development
and variation through time. It involves the
reconstruction of past human behaviour through the
study of material remains recovered by field survey
and excavation. Archaeology encompasses a wide variety
of analytical and experimental methods and techniques
which draw on both the natural and social sciences."
http://www.arts.auckland.ac.nz/departments/index.cfm?P=9142
=====================================================
"Archaeology is the study of past cultural behaviour,
from the beginnings of the human species to events
that happened yesterday, through the material remains,
or artefacts, that people leave behind. By carefully
applying scientific techniques in excavation and
analysis of their findings, archaeologists attempt to
reconstruct past lifeways and understand why different
customs developed and evolved.
Archaeology is a part of anthropology, because it
studies individuals and their different cultures, even
if limited to the past. This is the most interesting
aspect of archaeology: it is a way to understand
humanity and ourselves. Archaeology is also a part of
history, but it is more reliable sometimes because
while history uses essentially written documents,
archaeology uses material evidence. A description of
facts can be very precious, but if we have only one
description, or descriptions from only one point of
view, we can not be sure to know a true part of the
past. Individuals in fact can lie or simply see things
in a convenient way."
"History is an interpretation of the past based on
ancient/old writings. Archaeology is different from
history especially for the methods used. It can help
and complement history by offering studies on
materials to be compared with documents to have a
clearer idea of how the interpretation was done. But
also archaeology, when beginning from an evidence
arrives to an inference, interprets data; for this
reason archaeologists must be careful trying to
explain the background culture in the present they
have and which part of the evidence they focused: an
objective interpretation is impossible. History uses
archaeology also for the periods when written
documents were not available, particularly prehistory,
but more extensively for any period for which there
are no documents available."
Andrea Vianello
http://www.geocities.com/andreavi/1.htm
Università Ca' Foscari ,Venezia. Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia
<http://lettere.unive.it/materiale_didattico/archeologia_egea/1.htm>
=====================================================
*Three Basic Principles of Archaeological Research*
by Garrett Fagan
<http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?name=Articles&file=article&sid=5>
=====================================================
crunch
> duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> 08/10/2009 13:21 wrote:
Quiz question for Usenet Village Idiot Archaeotype -
At which archaeological site did the Historical
Jesus overturn the tables of the moneychangers?
Answer - Qumran.
Thus, your post is grossly inappropriate.
David Christainsen
roj
news:4fadb0e1-8c8e-44b2...@p9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 8, 8:09 am, Archaeotype <k...@of.invalid> wrote:
> duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> 08/10/2009 13:21 wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Quiz question for Usenet Village Idiot Archaeotype -
> At which archaeological site did the Historical
> Jesus overturn the tables of the moneychangers?
> Answer - Qumran.
> Thus, your post is grossly inappropriate.
> David Christainsen
Thirty five years ago, my daughter (then 5, now 40)
enquired the reason for the nail in the centre of Broad St
in Oxford, marking the spot of Bishop Cranmer's Immolation
some 400+ years earlier. A local lady, passing by, scathingly
remarked that I should have known it was the place of
martyrdom of Cranmer. My daughter turned to me and
- quite innocently - asked "Oh, was she there then?"
Likewise for Qumran - "Oh, were You there then?"
An innocent enquiry, merely seeking validation.
roj,
who regularly drinks draught Village Idiot Ale,
brewed by the Vale of the White Horse Brewery
at the Royal Blenheim, Oxford.
Martin Edwards
> duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT), crunch
>> <pchris...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> "When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>>> moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>>> whole system of charging money for initiation
>>> and for annual promotion.
>
>> No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't
>> have been
>> desecrating his Father's house of worship.
>> After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice
>> of animals.
>
> You appear to be as whacked out as crunchy.
>
> Don't like it?
>
> Lets get this straight. A clown goes postal in a place where there
> is lots of cash and therefore lots of guards to protect the money. And
> then this nutcase starts wailing away on the employers of these guards
> and he escapes unscathed instead of in a body sackcloth.
>
> Are you really saying you are dumb enough to believe that story?
>
and is only treed several years later, while in the "synoptics" it is
his only visit and he pulls this stunt and several others before being
crucified at the very time of year when an execution was most likely to
cause a riot. Pilate was stupid, but not that stupid.
--
As through this world I've rambled, I've met plenty of funny men,
Some rob you with a sixgun, some with a fountain pen.
Woody Guthrie
Archaeotype
*Archaeology is the study of the human past through material remains*
crunch
> "crunch" <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Please plug "moneychangers" into Search Facility
Pages 103,318
So, Dr. Thiering claims Qumran as the place
where Jesus overturned tables of the moneychangers.
---
Symbolism of places
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/786
"Many observations confirm that the plural form means Qumran, the
singular the literal Jerusalem."
David Christainsen
Tom McDonald
Where are the specific physical remains that support your specific
conclusion? Not just that there are some ruins that might be your
hypothesized substitute sanctuary, but the physical, archaeological
evidence that a historical Jesus, spending some time in Qumran, used
some of that time to physically interfere with temple money changers?
If you cannot understand the question, ask your daughter to explain it
to you.
Do not reply with some waffle that does not directly support the event
you assert happened. Nearly all recorded events have left zero
physical evidence that can be ascribed to them without question. Your
job is a big one.
Or, of course, you can just use your usual avoidance tactics. My money
is on that.
crunch
>
> - Show quoted text -
http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index_Photo.html
"Photo BBB. Outside the east door of the sanctuary. Quarter circle of
stones for the prince to meet pilgrims.
The papers are on the remaining support of the steps, which were
removed by the archeologists. The round well in the foreground."
-----
Figure 1. The Qumran buildings - Loc 111
http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index_Figure.html
-----
Despite your misframing in your questions, I say only the
intricacies of Thiering Pesher establish that TEMPLE
and TREASURY are identical in the gospels and are
tied to Loc 111 - Qumran. Further, she has Jerusalem
in the NT text (plural form) identified as Qumran.
Still further, as you already know, there are only 2
pieces of archaeological evidence that show that
Jesus was a historical figure.
So, the physical archaeological evidence you ask
for is just not there.
Bottom line -
Only a deep academic scholarly understanding of
DSS/NT text can demonstrate the meat and potatoes
for INTERESTING aspects of Christian Origins. The
archaeology (physical evidence) cannot cut the mustard.
Perhaps, though, it can show show that the Essenes
were in love with ritual...
David Christainsen
Tom McDonald
>
> > > Thus, your post is grossly inappropriate.
>
> > Where are the specific physical remains that support your specific
> > conclusion? Not just that there are some ruins that might be your
> > hypothesized substitute sanctuary, but the physical, archaeological
> > evidence that a historical Jesus, spending some time in Qumran, used
> > some of that time to physically interfere with temple money changers?
>
> > If you cannot understand the question, ask your daughter to explain it
> > to you.
>
> > Do not reply with some waffle that does not directly support the event
> > you assert happened. Nearly all recorded events have left zero
> > physical evidence that can be ascribed to them without question. Your
> > job is a big one.
>
> > Or, of course, you can just use your usual avoidance tactics. My money
> > is on that.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index_Photo.html
>
> "Photo BBB. Outside the east door of the sanctuary. Quarter circle of
> stones for the prince to meet pilgrims.
> The papers are on the remaining support of the steps, which were
> removed by the archeologists. The round well in the foreground."
>
> -----
>
>
> -----
>
> Despite your misframing in your questions, I say only the
> intricacies of Thiering Pesher establish that TEMPLE
> and TREASURY are identical in the gospels and are
> tied to Loc 111 - Qumran. Further, she has Jerusalem
> in the NT text (plural form) identified as Qumran.
>
> Still further, as you already know, there are only 2
> pieces of archaeological evidence that show that
> Jesus was a historical figure.
>
> So, the physical archaeological evidence you ask
> for is just not there.
>
> Bottom line -
>
> Only a deep academic scholarly understanding of
> DSS/NT text can demonstrate the meat and potatoes
> for INTERESTING aspects of Christian Origins. The
> archaeology (physical evidence) cannot cut the mustard.
> Perhaps, though, it can show show that the Essenes
> were in love with ritual...
So, this thread has no archaeological relevance, and you were entirely
wrong when you asserted about Archaeotype's post, "Thus, your post is
grossly inappropriate." Good to know.
The rest of your post was predictable waffle, and therefore off-topic.
Like this whole thread is on s.a. I'm sure you agree now.
Peter Alaca
> So, the physical archaeological evidence you ask
> for is just not there.
>
> Bottom line -
Fuck off.
crunch
>
> - Show quoted text -
Excuse me - you are overlooking the outstanding
photo of the Qumran courtyard (loc 111) and De Vaux's
Qumran diagram that I gave because you have always been
entirely too polemical (although talented) on usenet. Pity!
David Christainsen
crunch
I thought you were dead. <grin>
Tom McDonald
How does that image prove that Jesus messed with money changers
there?
You admitted that your archaeological evidence did not support your
archaeological claim; and in fact could not do so.
You lose again. But you are totally unable to admit being in the
wrong, or admitting any sort of failure in yourself. So I expect more
waffle from you.
Speaking of which -- haven't had waffles in a while. Sounds tasty!
I'mAWhosoeverToo
> At which archaeological site did the Historical
> Jesus overturn the tables of the moneychangers?
>
> Answer - Qumran.
Oh? The Temple moved to Qumran?
<chortle>
> Thus, your post is grossly inappropriate.
Thus, your post is grossly inaccurate and only further proves one
thing: you are a complete idiot.
I'mAWhosoeverToo
> Despite your misframing in your questions, I say only the
> intricacies of Thiering Pesher establish that TEMPLE
> and TREASURY are identical in the gospels and are
> tied to Loc 111 - Qumran.
No doubt she does. Another one of the reasons why no one in
archaeology or theology takes her seriously.
> Further, she has Jerusalem
> in the NT text (plural form) identified as Qumran.
Of course she does - she has to in order to make her wild theories
work.
crunch
The image is on-topic for sci.arch <grin>
> You admitted that your archaeological evidence did not support your
> archaeological claim; and in fact could not do so.
Correct. Yet, I made no archaeological claim!
> You lose again. But you are totally unable to admit being in the
> wrong, or admitting any sort of failure in yourself. So I expect more
> waffle from you.
On the contrary no waffle.
> Speaking of which -- haven't had waffles in a while. Sounds tasty!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
BTW try -
By David Stacey
Field Archaeologist (1975-1987), Jericho Excavations
http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Stacey_Qumran_Light_of_Recent_Publications.shtml
David Christainsen
George
wrote:
They're about 40 km apart. Any mention of the marathon he ran to get
there :-)
Matt Giwer
No matter which way the story is told it never happened. The security guards
would have beaten the crap out of him as soon as he started. People with large
sums of money have guards. Guards earn their keep. Likely they would not
killed him until off of the temple grounds for religious reasons. Guards are
not chosen to be moral thinkers.
One might as well tell of a modern day Jesus who shuts down the New York
Stock Exchange and then goes to dinner unmolested as though nothing had
happened. Both are equally credible stories.
The story was never credible. One has to ask how out of touch with reality
people had to be before they started believing this one.
--
Government is a necessary evil. Religion is an unnecessary evil.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4187
http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/GAZA-pics/ a13
Fri Oct 9 01:47:37 EDT 2009
Martin Edwards
the street outside which was not holy. They were performing a necessary
function because the *Tyrian* shekel and only that currency was accepted
for sacrificial animals.
Matt Giwer
Who? That story from last year was total bullshit. That fact is a non-shekel
weight coin minted in Tyre was found. ALL the rest was fanciful storytelling
masquerading as archaeology.
--
Religion puts food on the tables of priests. This
is the sole purpose of religion.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4186
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo/nizgas3.html a4
Fri Oct 9 04:57:07 EDT 2009
duke
>duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT), crunch <pchris...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> "When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>>> moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>>> whole system of charging money for initiation
>>> and for annual promotion.
>> No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't have been
>> desecrating his Father's house of worship.
>> After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice of animals.
> You appear to be as whacked out as crunchy.
> Don't like it?
I just go by the written word.
> Lets get this straight. A clown goes postal in a place where there is lots of
>cash and therefore lots of guards to protect the money.
No clown. No guards.
> And then this nutcase
>starts wailing away on the employers of these guards and he escapes unscathed
>instead of in a body sackcloth.
It was his Father's house.
>
> Are you really saying you are dumb enough to believe that story?
The Dukester, American-American
duke
wrote:
The Dukester, American-American
duke
Who told you it never happened? It's historical.
duke
wrote:
>Also the money tables were not in the temple precincts at all, but in
>the street outside which was not holy.
If they were outside, they would not have been accused of desecrating his
Father's house.
> They were performing a necessary
>function because the *Tyrian* shekel and only that currency was accepted
>for sacrificial animals.
There mistake was doing it inside.
crunch
>
> - Show quoted text -
A word to the wise -
Historically, Essenes had given up sacrifice
of animals, considering a reverent mind sufficient.
David Christainsen
Peter Alaca
Fuck off!
I'mAWhosoeverToo
Not to mention that Jerusalem is far uphill (in the mountains at
about 2723 ft) and Qumran is in the desert near the level of the Dead
Sea - the lowest point on earth. I've heard of people taking part in
ski to sea races, but I seriously doubt Jesus was into that sort of
thing.
I'mAWhosoeverToo
> A word to the wise -
>
> Historically, Essenes had given up sacrifice
> of animals, considering a reverent mind sufficient.
A word to the village idiot-type who needs every thread to revolve
around him (namely you, Soggy) ... no one here cares.
crunch
>
> - Show quoted text -
I thought you were dead. <grin>
David Christainsen
crunch
wrote:
It is your chronic falsehood which betrays your
stunning lack of character.
Among serious people you are considered unreliable.
So, with a change of geography NT interpretation
undergoes a dramatic change of context a la Thiering.
And, the scene shifts from the city of Jerusalem
to Qumran.
The Qumran monastics including Essenes are well
worth the time of the serious student of Christian Origins.
David Christainsen
I'mAWhosoeverToo
> It is your chronic falsehood which betrays your
> stunning lack of character.
I have enough character to point out that the Empress (BT) has no
clothes on while you (her Soggy Court Jester) stands at the parade and
applauds and verbally lauds her choice of raiment.
> Among serious people you are considered unreliable.
Oh...*I'm* "unreliable"? That's pretty funny considering your Empress
BT said the exact same thing about you - methinks you are merely
projecting again, Soggy.
> So, with a change of geography NT interpretation
> undergoes a dramatic change of context a la Thiering.
There's more to your claim than "geography", Soggy.
> And, the scene shifts from the city of Jerusalem
> to Qumran.
No, it doesn't.
> The Qumran monastics including Essenes are well
> worth the time of the serious student of Christian Origins.
Question: Was the Temple in Qumran or Jerusalem?
Answer: Jerusalem
Question: Where did Jesus overturn the tables of the moneychangers?
Answer: At the Temple in Jerusalem
Your premise is false to begin with and has no merit.
Matt Giwer
No one cares.
--
There are only two kinds of Jews. Those who
love Israel and those who hate themselves.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4179
http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/bombings.phtml a5
Sat Oct 10 02:51:34 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
Your evidence of this historical event beyond the gospels which at no point
make any claim to being history is what?
Why did not the guards protect their employers?
--
The boundary between the sciences and the humanities is unbreechable. Any
scientist can obtain a degree in any of the fine arts if he is interested.
The opposite is not possible.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4182
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo/ a8
Sat Oct 10 02:53:04 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 07:32:57 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> duke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT), crunch <pchris...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> "When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>>>> moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>>>> whole system of charging money for initiation
>>>> and for annual promotion.
>>> No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't have been
>>> desecrating his Father's house of worship.
>>> After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice of animals.
>> You appear to be as whacked out as crunchy.
>> Don't like it?
> I just go by the written word.
That is not an excuse for stupidity.
>> Lets get this straight. A clown goes postal in a place where there is lots of
>> cash and therefore lots of guards to protect the money.
> No clown. No guards.
Why would people carrying a lot of money not have guards? Please explain. In
your own words of course.
>> And then this nutcase
>> starts wailing away on the employers of these guards and he escapes unscathed
>> instead of in a body sackcloth.
> It was his Father's house.
What does that have to do with getting the shit kicked out of him? In your
own words of course.
>> Are you really saying you are dumb enough to believe that story?
> The Dukester, American-American
Obviously you are.
--
Atheism dignifies theism. There is no special name for
those who do not believe in faeries.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4190
http://www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml a16
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. a16
Sat Oct 10 02:57:04 EDT 2009
Martin Edwards
Martin Edwards
Either that or the story is simply made up, which is the point I was making.
Tom P
Tom P
Giwer?
Tom P
> On Oct 8, 2:44 pm, Tom McDonald <kilt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 8, 9:10 am, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 8, 8:09 am, Archaeotype <k...@of.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT), crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>>>>>> moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>>>>>> whole system of charging money for initiation
>>>>>> and for annual promotion.
>>>>> No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't have been
>>>>> desecrating his Father's house of worship.
>>>>> After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice of animals.
>>>>> *****
>>>>> "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
>>>>> Pope Paul VI
>>>>> *****
>>> Thus, your post is grossly inappropriate.
>> Where are the specific physical remains that support your specific
>> conclusion? Not just that there are some ruins that might be your
>> hypothesized substitute sanctuary, but the physical, archaeological
>> evidence that a historical Jesus, spending some time in Qumran, used
>> some of that time to physically interfere with temple money changers?
>>
>> If you cannot understand the question, ask your daughter to explain it
>> to you.
>>
>> Do not reply with some waffle that does not directly support the event
>> you assert happened. Nearly all recorded events have left zero
>> physical evidence that can be ascribed to them without question. Your
>> job is a big one.
>>
>> Or, of course, you can just use your usual avoidance tactics. My money
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
> "Photo BBB. Outside the east door of the sanctuary. Quarter circle of
> stones for the prince to meet pilgrims.
> The papers are on the remaining support of the steps, which were
> removed by the archeologists. The round well in the foreground."
>
> -----
>
> Figure 1. The Qumran buildings - Loc 111
> http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index_Figure.html
>
> -----
>
> intricacies of Thiering Pesher establish that TEMPLE
> and TREASURY are identical in the gospels and are
> in the NT text (plural form) identified as Qumran.
>
> pieces of archaeological evidence that show that
> Jesus was a historical figure.
>
> So, the physical archaeological evidence you ask
> for is just not there.
>
> Bottom line -
>
> Only a deep academic scholarly understanding of
> DSS/NT text can demonstrate the meat and potatoes
> for INTERESTING aspects of Christian Origins. The
> archaeology (physical evidence) cannot cut the mustard.
> Perhaps, though, it can show show that the Essenes
> were in love with ritual...
>
>
And all your words are reduced to the fact that there is no direct
manuscript or archaeological evidence to support Thiering.
No, the mere existence of pesharim and other artifacts does not prove
Thiering's theories are the only or even best explanation of the
evidence.
crunch
Huh? I do not believe you have really
followed her arguments in close detail.
Of course, the signal to noise ratio on
usenet and in the professional literature
is quite small.
> No, the mere existence of pesharim and other artifacts does not prove
> Thiering's theories are the only or even best explanation of the
> evidence.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I concede that for people other than myself
there will or would always be at least a shred
of doubt over Dr. Barbara Thiering (my old mentor).
So, IMHO what is really important?
Answer -
Love
Atonement
Glory of God
Not the collection of more facts...
David Christainsen
deowll
"Martin Edwards" <big_m...@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:I6Bzm.5678$CZ1....@newsfe06.ams2...
They were cheating the people and maybe the Temple rather than just changing
money from one form to another.
Of course the money changers were also almost certainly paying the Priests
for the right to change money at that location.
As long as the body's were down before the Passover Jesus was just another
dead Jewish would be messiah. It wasn't like he was the only person
executed at the time.
Matt Giwer
You still do not appear to grasp the obvious. On the side of you believers
there is nothing but religious tradition. Religious tradition is worthless. It
has shown itself to be worthless. Even believers are highly selective about
what they dare to claim is true in public.
Anything is at least equal to religious tradition.
Anything which has a connection to the real world, such as guards where there
are large amounts of money, has more value than worthless religious tradition.
--
The boundary between the sciences and the humanities is unbreechable. Any
scientist can obtain a degree in any of the fine arts if he is interested.
The opposite is not possible.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4182
http://www.haaretz.com What is Israel really like? http://www.jpost.com a7
Sat Oct 10 23:16:04 EDT 2009
Martin Edwards
Bible? I thought not. Also Jesus's supposed words were specifically
directed against sacrilege, which at the time would only have meant
transgression of ritual purity laws.
Matt Giwer
> They were cheating the people and maybe the Temple rather than just
> changing money from one form to another.
Where is cheating recited? Please be specific in your citation. All I read is
a necessary function to satisfy the laws created by the priests so that they
could ...
> Of course the money changers were also almost certainly paying the
> Priests for the right to change money at that location.
... charge people for making it possible to satisfy the arbitrary rules they
created.
> As long as the body's were down before the Passover Jesus was just
> another dead Jewish would be messiah. It wasn't like he was the only
> person executed at the time.
Such a flight of fancy to make as stupid story sound credible.
IF he existed he was just another Galilean not Judean so at the time he was
not a "jew" as that name for Judean did not exist at the time.
--
Hodie quinto Idus Novembres MMIX est
-- The Ferric Webcaesar
http://www.giwersworld.org a1
Sun Oct 11 03:25:19 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
...
> What physical evidence can you offer to support your conclusions here,
> Giwer?
You should get used to being one of the fish in this barrel. As long as all
you have is religious tradition you have nothing different from Noah's flood
or Red Sea pedestrians. No matter what I say it can be no worse than the crap
you are pushing.
Specifically here you are dumb enough to take the entire money-changer story
seriously and expect me, who is simply ridiculing it, to show there were was a
need to guard money.
Grow up.
--
If computers had a sense of irony they would be genies.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4192
http://www.giwersworld.org a1
Sun Oct 11 03:33:49 EDT 2009
duke
wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 07:54:35 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Also the money tables were not in the temple precincts at all, but in
>>> the street outside which was not holy.
>>
>> If they were outside, they would not have been accused of desecrating his
>> Father's house.
>>
>>> They were performing a necessary
>>> function because the *Tyrian* shekel and only that currency was accepted
>>> for sacrificial animals.
>> There mistake was doing it inside.
>Either that or the story is simply made up, which is the point I was making.
But you made no point. The sacrifice of the unblemished animal for sacrifice at
the passover is the sign of the old covenant. It was specifically mandated by
God.
Even if the robber barons had taken over the trade, the sacrifice was still
required. Simply taking advantage of the poor, a trade since the beginnings of
time, was not the issue. But doing it in God's house was.
duke
The Gospels and other writings themselves. The NT bible was not exactly written
recently. The 4 gospels actual reflect the words, actions, and religious
habits of the new Christians over the 30-60 years since the crucifixion. And
the Epistles record the travels of the Apostles in revealing the arrival of the
Messiah and to assist the new expanding Church and keep it on the proper path.
Then there is a continuous stream of writings by early Church Fathers before and
after the canonization of the written word.
duke
The book of books called the bible, and the writing of the early Chruch Fathers.
http://www.ccel.org/fathers.html
duke
>duke wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 07:32:57 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT), crunch <pchris...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> "When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>>>>> moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>>>>> whole system of charging money for initiation
>>>>> and for annual promotion.
>>>> No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't have been
>>>> desecrating his Father's house of worship.
>>>> After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice of animals.
>>> You appear to be as whacked out as crunchy.
>>> Don't like it?
>
>> I just go by the written word.
>
> That is not an excuse for stupidity.
Then work harder at it.
>>> Lets get this straight. A clown goes postal in a place where there is lots of
>>> cash and therefore lots of guards to protect the money.
>> No clown. No guards.
> Why would people carrying a lot of money not have guards? Please explain. In
>your own words of course.
Who said these very poor people had a lot of money.
>>> And then this nutcase
>>> starts wailing away on the employers of these guards and he escapes unscathed
>>> instead of in a body sackcloth.
>
>> It was his Father's house.
> What does that have to do with getting the shit kicked out of him? In your
>own words of course.
He didn't.
Michael Kuettner
"Peter Alaca" <p.a...@invallid.invalid> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:4acf5c08$0$83234$dbd4...@news.wanadoo.nl...<shit snipped>
> Fuck off!
Good point. But could you please trim the text (as shown above) and
set the follow-ups ?
I've killfiled the wanker and don't need to see his crap second-hand.
I also don't want a discussion with believers; facts and beliefs don't mix
well.
So do them a courtesy and trim the headers; they have their chartas, too.
Cheers,
Michael Kuettner
Matt Giwer
Then you have nothing of interest to those not possessed with minds immature
enough to accept such stories.
--
There have to be many gods. Only a committee
could have created this world.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4180
http://www.giwersworld.org/palestine/answers.phtml a9
Mon Oct 12 00:01:17 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 03:02:10 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> duke wrote:
>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 07:32:57 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT), crunch <pchris...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>>>>>> moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>>>>>> whole system of charging money for initiation
>>>>>> and for annual promotion.
>>>>> No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't have been
>>>>> desecrating his Father's house of worship.
>>>>> After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice of animals.
>>>> You appear to be as whacked out as crunchy.
>>>> Don't like it?
>>> I just go by the written word.
>> That is not an excuse for stupidity.
>
> Then work harder at it.
You appear to accomplish it effortlessly.
>>>> Lets get this straight. A clown goes postal in a place where there is lots of
>>>> cash and therefore lots of guards to protect the money.
>>> No clown. No guards.
>
>> Why would people carrying a lot of money not have guards? Please explain. In
>> your own words of course.
>
> Who said these very poor people had a lot of money.
Money changers by definition have a lot of money with them. And it is told as
plural changerS. That means a lot of money by many people.
Why no guards?
>>>> And then this nutcase
>>>> starts wailing away on the employers of these guards and he escapes unscathed
>>>> instead of in a body sackcloth.
>>> It was his Father's house.
>> What does that have to do with getting the shit kicked out of him? In your
>> own words of course.
> He didn't.
Which is why the story is nonsense.
--
Religion puts food on the tables of priests. This
is the sole purpose of religion.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4186
http://www.giwersworld.org/bible/sewer-bible.phtml a15
Mon Oct 12 00:04:23 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:10:56 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> duke wrote:
>>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 07:54:35 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Also the money tables were not in the temple precincts at all, but in
>>>> the street outside which was not holy.
>>> If they were outside, they would not have been accused of desecrating his
>>> Father's house.
>>>> They were performing a necessary
>>>> function because the *Tyrian* shekel and only that currency was accepted
>>>> for sacrificial animals.
>>> There mistake was doing it inside.
>> Either that or the story is simply made up, which is the point I was making.
> But you made no point. The sacrifice of the unblemished animal for sacrifice at
> the passover is the sign of the old covenant. It was specifically mandated by
> God.
The story has it the covenant was made with Abraham not Moses.
> Even if the robber barons had taken over the trade, the sacrifice was still
> required. Simply taking advantage of the poor, a trade since the beginnings of
> time, was not the issue. But doing it in God's house was.
The priests invented to law to profit from it. Grow up. That is the way it
always is.
--
If computers had a sense of irony they would be genies.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4192
http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/bombings.phtml a5
Mon Oct 12 00:07:26 EDT 2009
duke
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:10:56 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 07:54:35 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Also the money tables were not in the temple precincts at all, but in
>>>>> the street outside which was not holy.
>>>> If they were outside, they would not have been accused of desecrating his
>>>> Father's house.
>>>>> They were performing a necessary
>>>>> function because the *Tyrian* shekel and only that currency was accepted
>>>>> for sacrificial animals.
>>>> There mistake was doing it inside.
>>> Either that or the story is simply made up, which is the point I was making.
>
>> But you made no point. The sacrifice of the unblemished animal for sacrifice at
>> the passover is the sign of the old covenant. It was specifically mandated by
>> God.
>
> The story has it the covenant was made with Abraham not Moses.
You mean that the bible states that the covenant was made with Abraham. I
concur.
>> Even if the robber barons had taken over the trade, the sacrifice was still
>> required. Simply taking advantage of the poor, a trade since the beginnings of
>> time, was not the issue. But doing it in God's house was.
> The priests invented to law to profit from it. Grow up. That is the way it
>always is.
What law?
duke
Well, our goal is eternal rest with the Lord in Heaven. And the acts, words and
religious practices of the new Christian people at the time of, and who knew
Christ personally, definitely spoke up for him.
You go ahead and commit spiritual suicide. I'll stick with God
duke
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 03:02:10 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 07:32:57 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT), crunch <pchris...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> "When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>>>>>>> moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>>>>>>> whole system of charging money for initiation
>>>>>>> and for annual promotion.
>>>>>> No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't have been
>>>>>> desecrating his Father's house of worship.
>>>>>> After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice of animals.
>>>>> You appear to be as whacked out as crunchy.
>>>>> Don't like it?
>>>> I just go by the written word.
>>> That is not an excuse for stupidity.
>>
>> Then work harder at it.
>
> You appear to accomplish it effortlessly.
Ah, I'm getting to you.
>> Who said these very poor people had a lot of money.
> Money changers by definition have a lot of money with them. And it is told as
>plural changerS. That means a lot of money by many people.
But the others using the services were very poor.
Martin Edwards
>
>>> Who told you it never happened? It's historical.
>
>> Your evidence of this historical event beyond the gospels which at no point
>> make any claim to being history is what?
>
> The Gospels and other writings themselves. The NT bible was not exactly written
> recently. The 4 gospels actual reflect the words, actions, and religious
> habits of the new Christians over the 30-60 years since the crucifixion. And
> the Epistles record the travels of the Apostles in revealing the arrival of the
> Messiah and to assist the new expanding Church and keep it on the proper path.
Such as 1John, which does not mention any travelling and clearly stems
from a controversy between those who believed that Jesus was human and
those who believed he was purely a deity.
> Then there is a continuous stream of writings by early Church Fathers before and
> after the canonization of the written word.
>
Do you have a linke for these?
>
> The Dukester, American-American
That says it all really.
> *****
> "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
> Pope Paul VI
> *****
Whatever gets you through the night.
Martin Edwards
So you won't actually do anything during that very long period.
Martin Edwards
in the street outside.
Tom P
is not an historical source for events from Classical Antiquity. The
manuscripts from Classical Antiquity from which the modern bible was
constructed are historical sources.
The difference is significant for cogent reasons.
Perhaps you could name the oldest manuscript sources detailing in and
outside of the Christian scriptural canon which reported this incident.
The "writing of the early Chruch Fathers" is also a bit vague, thus
vacuous. Care to name specific manuscripts which contain the "writing
of the early Chruch Fathers" that specifically address the incident of
the so-called "money changers at the temple."
Can you be more specific, please?
Perhaps you could name the oldest manuscripts by the Apostolic Fathers
reporting and commenting on the incident of Jesus and the money changers
which your readers should consult. Thank you.
Cardinal Carlo M. Martini did some rather outstanding work identifying
and classifying these sources during his lifetime. Perhaps you should
consult Cardinal Martini's corpus because the answers are there. Surely
as a devout Catholic you are familiar with the work of the preeminent
Roman Catholic scholar concerning "the book of books called the bible"
during the second half of the 20th century. Aren't you?
Tom P
Instead you write more Giwerian gobbledygook. Giwerian gobbledygook, as
has been exhaustively proved, is nothing but the ramblings of a
conspiracy theorist obsessed with hatred but ignorant of what is truly
contained in the known physical evidence.
I have not yet mentioned religious tradition. I have stuck to physical
evidence. Where is your physical evidence, Giwer?
Tom P
> Tom P wrote:
> ...
>> What physical evidence can you offer to support your conclusions here,
>> Giwer?
>
> You should get used to being one of the fish in this barrel. As long
> as all you have is religious tradition you have nothing different from
> Noah's flood or Red Sea pedestrians. No matter what I say it can be no
> worse than the crap you are pushing.
>
> Specifically here you are dumb enough to take the entire
> money-changer story seriously and expect me, who is simply ridiculing
> it, to show there were was a need to guard money.
>
> Grow up.
>
Instead you maunder on in Giwerian gobbledygook and propound more of
your bogus kook conspiracy theory.
Neither of those are physical evidence, Giwer.
Matt Giwer
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:10:28 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> duke wrote:
>>> On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:10:56 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 07:54:35 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Also the money tables were not in the temple precincts at all, but in
>>>>>> the street outside which was not holy.
>>>>> If they were outside, they would not have been accused of desecrating his
>>>>> Father's house.
>>>>>> They were performing a necessary
>>>>>> function because the *Tyrian* shekel and only that currency was accepted
>>>>>> for sacrificial animals.
>>>>> There mistake was doing it inside.
>>>> Either that or the story is simply made up, which is the point I was making.
>>> But you made no point. The sacrifice of the unblemished animal for sacrifice at
>>> the passover is the sign of the old covenant. It was specifically mandated by
>>> God.
>> The story has it the covenant was made with Abraham not Moses.
> You mean that the bible states that the covenant was made with Abraham. I
> concur.
You said otherwise.
>>> Even if the robber barons had taken over the trade, the sacrifice was still
>>> required. Simply taking advantage of the poor, a trade since the beginnings of
>>> time, was not the issue. But doing it in God's house was.
>> The priests invented to law to profit from it. Grow up. That is the way it
>> always is.
> What law?
All of it.
--
If a gay kills a gay is it a love crime?
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4178
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo2/ a11
Tue Oct 13 00:47:14 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
>> Then you have nothing of interest to those not possessed with minds immature
>> enough to accept such stories.
> Well, our goal is eternal rest with the Lord in Heaven. And the acts, words and
> religious practices of the new Christian people at the time of, and who knew
> Christ personally, definitely spoke up for him.
And everything beyond that which they said is an invention by the authorities
for their personal profit. Paul is not among those who knew him. That means
just about everything is an invention of those who do not fit your "knew
personally" criteria.
> You go ahead and commit spiritual suicide. I'll stick with God
Passing off belief as fact without evidence for it being a fact falls into
the category of lying.
--
The professional religious class has more committed atheists
than all the secular humanists combined.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4183
http://www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml a16
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. a16
Tue Oct 13 00:49:44 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
Nor would they be the ones hiring the guards. The many rich moneychangers
would hire the guards. They would beat the crap out of Jesus if he had done
it. That did not. Therefore the story is fiction.
--
There have to be many gods. Only a committee
could have created this world.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4180
http://www.giwersworld.org a1
Tue Oct 13 00:58:44 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
...
> You neglected to produce physical evidence yet again, Giwer.
By inspection you post nothing but religious tradition. That in itself is
the evidence.
--
Holocaust denial is not as bad as the Goldstone Report on Gaza.
Michael Oren, Israeli Ambassador to the US, September 2009
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4195
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo/ a8
Tue Oct 13 02:51:19 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
...
> You neglected to produce physical evidence again.
What evidence do you need to show you are doing nothing but arguing
religious tradition?
--
If computers had a sense of irony they would be genies.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4192
http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/bombings.phtml a5
Tue Oct 13 02:49:49 EDT 2009
duke
Where? Not that it matters per this discussion. We agree.
>>>> Even if the robber barons had taken over the trade, the sacrifice was still
>>>> required. Simply taking advantage of the poor, a trade since the beginnings of
>>>> time, was not the issue. But doing it in God's house was.
>>> The priests invented to law to profit from it. Grow up. That is the way it
>>> always is.
>> What law?
> All of it.
Not in evidence.
duke
wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:10:56 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2009 07:54:35 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also the money tables were not in the temple precincts at all, but in
>>>>> the street outside which was not holy.
>>>> If they were outside, they would not have been accused of desecrating his
>>>> Father's house.
>>>>
>>>>> They were performing a necessary
>>>>> function because the *Tyrian* shekel and only that currency was accepted
>>>>> for sacrificial animals.
>>
>>>> There mistake was doing it inside.
>>
>>> Either that or the story is simply made up, which is the point I was making.
>>
>> But you made no point. The sacrifice of the unblemished animal for sacrifice at
>> the passover is the sign of the old covenant. It was specifically mandated by
>> God.
>>
>> Even if the robber barons had taken over the trade, the sacrifice was still
>> required. Simply taking advantage of the poor, a trade since the beginnings of
>> time, was not the issue. But doing it in God's house was.
>>
>As I already pointed out, it was not done in the temple precinsts, but
>in the street outside.
Where ever it was truly done, Jesus called it desecration of a place of prayer.
That says they were in the wrong spot.
duke
wrote:
>duke wrote:
I can't say specifically what will happen during that period in heaven. However,
we do know the only alternative is the same eternity in the fires of hell.
It's your choice, and one you must make while you are still breathing.
duke
>duke wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:03:25 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>...
>>> Then you have nothing of interest to those not possessed with minds immature
>>> enough to accept such stories.
>
>> Well, our goal is eternal rest with the Lord in Heaven. And the acts, words and
>> religious practices of the new Christian people at the time of, and who knew
>> Christ personally, definitely spoke up for him.
> And everything beyond that which they said is an invention by the authorities
>for their personal profit. Paul is not among those who knew him.
Of course Paul met Jesus - on the road to Damascus.
>> You go ahead and commit spiritual suicide. I'll stick with God
> Passing off belief as fact without evidence for it being a fact falls into
>the category of lying.
I'm trying to help you avoid the eternal fires of hell. I can drag you to the
water, but I can't make you drink.
duke
wrote:
>duke wrote:
>>
>>>> Who told you it never happened? It's historical.
>>
>>> Your evidence of this historical event beyond the gospels which at no point
>>> make any claim to being history is what?
>>
>> The Gospels and other writings themselves. The NT bible was not exactly written
>> recently. The 4 gospels actual reflect the words, actions, and religious
>> habits of the new Christians over the 30-60 years since the crucifixion. And
>> the Epistles record the travels of the Apostles in revealing the arrival of the
>> Messiah and to assist the new expanding Church and keep it on the proper path.
>Such as 1John, which does not mention any travelling and clearly stems
>from a controversy between those who believed that Jesus was human and
>those who believed he was purely a deity.
That's exactly a good example of brings that Church in line with proper belief.
These people were already believers but in need of reminders about key beliefs
of Christian faith and it's warnings about others.
Traveling is extensively revealed in Acts.
>> Then there is a continuous stream of writings by early Church Fathers before and
>> after the canonization of the written word.
>Do you have a linke for these?
http://www.ccel.org/fathers.html
The Dukester, American-American
duke
It doesn't matter. Books were written during the time, and copied and copied
and copied. The Church was formed by the Apostles and propagated from 12 men to
2.2 billion people alive and well today.
>The "writing of the early Chruch Fathers" is also a bit vague, thus
>vacuous. Care to name specific manuscripts which contain the "writing
>of the early Chruch Fathers" that specifically address the incident of
>the so-called "money changers at the temple."
>Can you be more specific, please?
You have what I have. Even the bible itself says that not everything Jesus
said and did and was written down.
>Perhaps you could name the oldest manuscripts by the Apostolic Fathers
>reporting and commenting on the incident of Jesus and the money changers
>which your readers should consult. Thank you.
The scripture verses says that the money changers were violating a house of
prayer. That's good enough for me.
>Cardinal Carlo M. Martini did some rather outstanding work identifying
>and classifying these sources during his lifetime. Perhaps you should
>consult Cardinal Martini's corpus because the answers are there. Surely
>as a devout Catholic you are familiar with the work of the preeminent
>Roman Catholic scholar concerning "the book of books called the bible"
>during the second half of the 20th century. Aren't you?
Why do you care if the money changers were inside the door sill or on the
outside of the door sill? Jesus said they were desecrating his Father's house.
That's clear enough for me to understand that God's house is to be used for
God's work, and not private work.
duke
Therefore there were no guards to speak of as he had easy access and overturned
the vendors tables very easily.
Or the people who were there to offer sacrifice were everywhere and helped
Jesus.
Therefore the historical reference is truth.
Tom P
which just happened to overlook the Jerusalem Temple, Giwer?
Tom P
> duke wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:03:25 -0400, Matt Giwer
>> <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> ...
>>> Then you have nothing of interest to those not possessed with
>>> minds immature enough to accept such stories.
>
>> Well, our goal is eternal rest with the Lord in Heaven. And the acts,
>> words and
>> religious practices of the new Christian people at the time of, and
>> who knew
>> Christ personally, definitely spoke up for him.
>
> And everything beyond that which they said is an invention by the
> authorities for their personal profit. Paul is not among those who knew
> him. That means just about everything is an invention of those who do
> not fit your "knew personally" criteria.
>
>> You go ahead and commit spiritual suicide. I'll stick with God
>
> Passing off belief as fact without evidence for it being a fact
> falls into the category of lying.
>
withdrawn your kook bogus assertion that Hebrew was not invented in
Alexandria after 331 BCE because you recognize the existence of hundreds
of ostraca containing Hebrew inscriptions dated from the 4th through the
8th centuries BCE?
And may we presume you have withdrawn your bogus kook theory that that
the oldest manuscript of the Jewish scriptures is in Greek because you
acknowledge that the twice radiocarbon dated Hebrew manuscript is older
than every Greek manuscript and fragment known to exist?
JTEM
Tom P <th_om_a...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have not yet mentioned religious tradition. I have stuck
> to physical evidence.
Yet there was not a single iota of "Physical Evidence" in
anything you quoted. So, what is this "Physical Evidence"
supporting the story of Christ cleansing the Temple?
> Where is your physical evidence, Giwer?
You're asking him to prove a negative.
JTEM
Tom P <th_om_a...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So you have withdrawn your kook bogus assertion that
> Hebrew was not invented in Alexandria after 331 BCE
You might want to re-think that.
> because you recognize the existence of hundreds of
> ostraca containing Hebrew inscriptions dated from the
> 4th through the 8th centuries BCE?
Map this out for us. The people who spoke this so-called
"Hebrew" arrived from.... they got there around.... they
believed... all the physical evidence for this can be seen
here....
If "Hebrew" appears in 800 BC, that means these Hebrew
people also appeared at that time. So tell us where they
came from already, and what happened to the people who
were there before them.
Map it out for us.
Matt Giwer
The Torah is the whole of the law.
--
It is an open secret that priests are atheists.
They know they are lying.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4188
http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/GAZA-pics/ a13
Tue Oct 13 21:39:31 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
As it is only your childish belief which thinks this backwoods preacher
really lived why would you expect he to behave as other than a backwoods
preacher? What would make his opinion correct?
--
The Holocaust is no worse then Iran having an atom bomb.
Israel says so.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4191
http://www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml a16
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. a16
Tue Oct 13 21:41:01 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:11:03 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> So you won't actually do anything during that very long period.
> I can't say specifically what will happen during that period in heaven. However,
> we do know the only alternative is the same eternity in the fires of hell.
Where is it written there is only one alternative? Please be specific.
> It's your choice, and one you must make while you are still breathing.
Where is that written? Again there are additional points for specificity.
--
There are only two kinds of Jews. Those who
love Israel and those who hate themselves.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4179
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo/ a8
Tue Oct 13 21:45:31 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:54:54 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> duke wrote:
>>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:03:25 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>> ...
>>>> Then you have nothing of interest to those not possessed with minds immature
>>>> enough to accept such stories.
>>> Well, our goal is eternal rest with the Lord in Heaven. And the acts, words and
>>> religious practices of the new Christian people at the time of, and who knew
>>> Christ personally, definitely spoke up for him.
>> And everything beyond that which they said is an invention by the authorities
>> for their personal profit. Paul is not among those who knew him.
> Of course Paul met Jesus - on the road to Damascus.
Meeting is not knowing BECAUSE he claims to has spent a lot of time in
Jerusalem talking to all the Apostles to LEARN about Jesus. The meeting
imparted no knowledge about him as none is recorded in Acts.
>>> You go ahead and commit spiritual suicide. I'll stick with God
>> Passing off belief as fact without evidence for it being a fact falls into
>> the category of lying.
> I'm trying to help you avoid the eternal fires of hell. I can drag you to the
> water, but I can't make you drink.
What you are doing is telling me things unknown people invented for unknown
reasons at unknown times.
--
Holocaust denial is not as bad as the Goldstone Report on Gaza.
Michael Oren, Israeli Ambassador to the US, September 2009
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4195
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo/ a8
Tue Oct 13 21:53:32 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
Give is a rest, boy. You believers have yet to show it differed in any manner
greater than a local dialect from *contemporary* Phoenician in which script it
is written. Punic would of course have diverged.
> And may we presume you have withdrawn your bogus kook theory that that
> the oldest manuscript of the Jewish scriptures is in Greek
To remind you, I said it first appears in history in Greek. You have yet to
show an older historical mention of a version written in Aramaic script.
> because you
> acknowledge that the twice radiocarbon dated Hebrew manuscript is older
> than every Greek manuscript and fragment known to exist?
As most everyone has pointed out, you are the only person who can find C14
dating as old as you claim.
--
Holocaust denial is not as bad as the Goldstone Report on Gaza.
Michael Oren, Israeli Ambassador to the US, September 2009
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4195
http://www.giwersworld.org/holo3/ a12
Tue Oct 13 22:04:02 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
That there were no guards is incredible given the amounts of money ripe for
stealing.
> Or the people who were there to offer sacrifice were everywhere and helped
> Jesus.
No such thing is reported.
> Therefore the historical reference is truth.
Therefore you believe anything in the gospels even when they are ridiculous.
Do you believe the things that are mutually exclusive also?
--
It is an open secret that priests are atheists.
They know they are lying.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4188
http://www.giwersworld.org/antisem/GAZA-pics/ a13
Tue Oct 13 22:21:34 EDT 2009
Matt Giwer
I have no idea what their orders were. Where did you find a copy of their
orders? I doubt they would have been involved at all unless paid by the temple
-- sort of an old version of a rent-a-cop.
The temple was in the lower city according to Josephus.
--
If computers had a sense of irony they would be genies.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4192
http://www.giwersworld.org a1
Tue Oct 13 22:23:35 EDT 2009
duke
>>>>> The priests invented to law to profit from it. Grow up. That is the way it
>>>>> always is.
>>>> What law?
>>> All of it.
>> Not in evidence.
> The Torah is the whole of the law.
Oh, you mean the Jewish manmade law?
duke
There's no doubt that he lived. It's historical.
duke
>duke wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:11:03 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>...
>>> So you won't actually do anything during that very long period.
>
>> I can't say specifically what will happen during that period in heaven. However,
>> we do know the only alternative is the same eternity in the fires of hell.
>
> Where is it written there is only one alternative? Please be specific.
The bible.
>> It's your choice, and one you must make while you are still breathing.
> Where is that written? Again there are additional points for specificity.
I don't get my points from you.
duke
>duke wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:54:54 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:03:25 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>> Then you have nothing of interest to those not possessed with minds immature
>>>>> enough to accept such stories.
>>>> Well, our goal is eternal rest with the Lord in Heaven. And the acts, words and
>>>> religious practices of the new Christian people at the time of, and who knew
>>>> Christ personally, definitely spoke up for him.
>>> And everything beyond that which they said is an invention by the authorities
>>> for their personal profit. Paul is not among those who knew him.
>
>> Of course Paul met Jesus - on the road to Damascus.
> Meeting is not knowing BECAUSE he claims to has spent a lot of time in
>Jerusalem talking to all the Apostles to LEARN about Jesus. The meeting
>imparted no knowledge about him as none is recorded in Acts.
But Paul met the risen Lord. You should know what that means - after his
resurrection.
>>>> You go ahead and commit spiritual suicide. I'll stick with God
>>> Passing off belief as fact without evidence for it being a fact falls into
>>> the category of lying.
>> I'm trying to help you avoid the eternal fires of hell. I can drag you to the
>> water, but I can't make you drink.
> What you are doing is telling me things unknown people invented for unknown
>reasons at unknown times.
Well, that's true for 100% of all history.
duke
>>>>> Money changers by definition have a lot of money with them. And it is told as
>>>>> plural changerS. That means a lot of money by many people.
>>
>>>> But the others using the services were very poor.
>>> Nor would they be the ones hiring the guards. The many rich moneychangers
>>> would hire the guards. They would beat the crap out of Jesus if he had done
>>> it. That did not. Therefore the story is fiction.
>> Therefore there were no guards to speak of as he had easy access and overturned
>> the vendors tables very easily.
> That there were no guards is incredible given the amounts of money ripe for
>stealing.
You're assuming your position. If these money changers had all "these guards"
around them, how did Jesus get so close, and in particular, to the 2nd and more
tables after he overturned the first?
>> Or the people who were there to offer sacrifice were everywhere and helped
>> Jesus.
> No such thing is reported.
No guards either.
>> Therefore the historical reference is truth.
> Therefore you believe anything in the gospels even when they are ridiculous.
I believe the lesson shown: that Jesus angered because the robber barons were
desecrating his Father's house.
>Do you believe the things that are mutually exclusive also?
I draw the line with you and intelligence.
I'mAWhosoeverToo
> I draw the line with you and intelligence.
That's pretty much how everyone in Usenet feels about you, Earl.
Tom P
Try answering the question that was asked for once, Giwer. What was the
function of the Roman soldiers manning the Antonia Fortress which just
happened to overlook the Jerusalem Temple, Giwer?
Why would any civil or military authority go to the expense of
constructing and manning defensive fortifications overlooking a location
considered sacred by a prickly subject people, Giwer?
You, in your typical Giwerian Gobbledygook, deride Josephus as an
outright liar when it suits your purpose. And then on other occasions
you, Giwer, rely upon Josephus exclusively as you do here.
I have asked this question of you many times before, Giwer. And the
only response was Giwerian Gobbledygook. Nevertheless, I will try again.
Are the works of Flavius Josephus reliable historical sources or not?
By the way, Giwer, are you prepared yet to admit that the Greek word you
mistransliterated as "Ionaton" is not translated into English as "kinship"?
Martin Edwards
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:40:10 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> The priests invented to law to profit from it. Grow up. That is the way it
>>>>>> always is.
>
>>>>> What law?
>
>>>> All of it.
>
>>> Not in evidence.
>
>> The Torah is the whole of the law.
>
> Oh, you mean the Jewish manmade law?
>
--
As through this world I've rambled, I've met plenty of funny men,
Some rob you with a sixgun, some with a fountain pen.
Woody Guthrie
Martin Edwards
Brian".
Brian: Now listen you lot! This just won't do. You know perfectly well
you are supposed to do that in the street. How is anyone supposed to
kneel and pray with these counting tables all over the place? Now get
them outside before I take that piece of rope and knock them over. Then
let's see you crawling about on your hands and knees, eh!
A Banker: Yah, he hasn't got the nerve! The Romans have nailed people
up for less.
Brian: Right, you've asked for it.
He takes a knotted rope and knocks some tables over, sending coins
rolling everywhere.
Marcus: (till now trying to chat up a Judean maiden) What are these
loons up to now?
Quintus: Buggered if I know, better call the supervisor.
Marcus: It might take a while to get hold of him, mobiles (cells)
haven't been invented yet.
Martin Edwards
Martin Edwards
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:11:03 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> duke wrote:
>>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 00:03:25 -0400, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>>>> Martin Edwards wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Matt Giwer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 08:08:27 -0700 (PDT), crunch
>>>>>>>>>>> <pchris...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> "When Jesus 'overturned the tables of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> moneychangers' he was objecting to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> whole system of charging money for initiation
>>>>>>>>>>>> and for annual promotion.
>>>>>>>>>>> No, he wasn't. If the money changers had been outside, they wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>> have been
>>>>>>>>>>> desecrating his Father's house of worship.
>>>>>>>>>>> After all, the money changers were enabling the called-for sacrifice
>>>>>>>>>>> of animals.
>>>>>>>>>> You appear to be as whacked out as crunchy.
>>>>>>>>>> Don't like it?
>>>>>>>>>> is lots of cash and therefore lots of guards to protect the money. And
>>>>>>>>>> then this nutcase starts wailing away on the employers of these guards
>>>>>>>>>> and he escapes unscathed instead of in a body sackcloth.
>>>>>>>>>> Are you really saying you are dumb enough to believe that story?
>>>>>>>>> Furthermore in GJ he does this on the first of many visits to Jerusalem,
>>>>>>>>> and is only treed several years later, while in the "synoptics" it is
>>>>>>>>> his only visit and he pulls this stunt and several others before being
>>>>>>>>> crucified at the very time of year when an execution was most likely to
>>>>>>>>> cause a riot. Pilate was stupid, but not that stupid.
>>>>>>>> No matter which way the story is told it never happened.
>>>>>>> Who told you it never happened? It's historical.
>>>>>> make any claim to being history is what?
>>>>> The Gospels and other writings themselves.
>>>> enough to accept such stories.
>>> Well, our goal is eternal rest with the Lord in Heaven.
>
> I can't say specifically what will happen during that period in heaven. However,
> we do know the only alternative is the same eternity in the fires of hell.
>
>
even..........no perhaps not.
Martin Edwards
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:09:21 +0100, Martin Edwards <big_m...@Yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> duke wrote:
>>>>> Who told you it never happened? It's historical.
>>>> Your evidence of this historical event beyond the gospels which at no point
>>>> make any claim to being history is what?
>>> The Gospels and other writings themselves. The NT bible was not exactly written
>>> recently. The 4 gospels actual reflect the words, actions, and religious
>>> habits of the new Christians over the 30-60 years since the crucifixion. And
>>> the Epistles record the travels of the Apostles in revealing the arrival of the
>>> Messiah and to assist the new expanding Church and keep it on the proper path.
>
>> Such as 1John, which does not mention any travelling and clearly stems
>>from a controversy between those who believed that Jesus was human and
>> those who believed he was purely a deity.
>
> That's exactly a good example of brings that Church in line with proper belief.
This is not a sentence.
> These people were already believers but in need of reminders about key beliefs
> of Christian faith and it's warnings about others.
>
This is, but is theology and not history. This is a history newsgroup.