Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You know maam, I didn't know that, matter of fact I found out most if not all of the days of the week are from pagan gods or goddesses.
You honestly did not know this? We learned it as children in school, but I am likely somewhat older than you are, so maybe it isn't taught anymore. Still, with the focus on "Easter", you'd think that would be something the Watchtower would cover.
By the way, Quakers rejected the common day names and refer to the days as First Day, Second Day, etc., with First Day being what we call Sunday, and their children's religious teachings known as First Day School.
Quote:
Originally Posted by highway54
You are 100% right, we Christians do not give a second thought to easter nor her followers, other than to bring them the good news of God's Kingdom.
Do you have any evidence that there's anyone left who still worships Eostre (the goddess from whose name Easter is derived)? Serious question. I don't know that anyone does, although there could be some neo-Pagan group out there who has revived veneration of this goddess.
Say that about the Mormons and see what response you get from Mighty Queen. But since you said it about the JW, who appear to be official forum whipping boys, you may defame with impunity.
Here, from Scientific American no less, is an article discussing the Easter/Ishtar meme and possible connections between eggs, bunnies and Easter: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...ggs-at-easter/. On the other hand, an entirely secular source quoted at a JW site does tie Easter to pagan fertility rites more or less as highway54 suggests:
From Celebrations Around the World, a Multicultural Handbook, by C. S. Angell, Fulcrum Publishing, Golden, Co., 1996, p.33, we read: "Christians celebrate Easter Sunday as the day of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, but the roots of this holiday, like so many other celebrations, can be traced back to pagan celebrations. Indeed the name Easter comes from Eostara, the German goddess of rebirth. In early times the Feast of Eostara was the celebration of the resurrection and rebirth of Earth. Easter eggs and the Easter Bunny are both fertility symbols, holdovers from the feast of Eostara. Other parallels include the pagan joy in the rising sun of spring, which coincides with Christians' joy in the rising Son of God, and the lighting of candles in churches which corresponds to the pagan bonfires.
I don't know how many Christians are thinking about the pagan angle at Easter, but I do share the JW perspective to the extent of finding the whole Easter Bunny, colored egg thing a bizarre distraction. You won't find this distraction at an Orthodox Easter, which is celebrated on a different date in accordance with the Julian calendar.
Before I knew much of anything about the JW, I'd reached a position on a number of doctrines that I was later surprised to discover meshed with the JW position. I've now read a great amount of JW material, including all of their publications from their founding in the late 1800s. (The very earliest editions of The Watchtower are available in Kindle format from Amazon, if any cares.)
Sure, the JW have some very oddball doctrines and a checkered history - certainly not as oddball or checkered as the Mormons - but not nearly as oddball as they are often portrayed. More to the point, in my experiences with and observations of JW, they embody Christian values to a degree that equals or exceeds any other Christian denomination in my experience. They truly live their faith. I welcome them into my home and enjoy our sessions, even though they know I'm not a candidate.
Jehovah's Witnesses endured intense persecution under the Nazi regime. Actions against the religious group and its individual members spanned the Nazi years 1933 to 1945. Unlike Jews and Sinti and Roma ("Gypsies"), persecuted and killed by virtue of their birth, Jehovah's Witnesses had the opportunity to escape persecution and personal harm by renouncing their religious beliefs. The courage the vast majority displayed in refusing to do so, in the face of torture, maltreatment in concentration camps, and sometimes execution, won them the respect of many contemporaries.
And yet, JWs do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God. That seems to be at odds with your statement above.
As regards your snarky remark toward me in the first paragraph, no, I do not have the same reaction to Mormons as I do to JWs on this forum. I've worked with JWs who were very nice people, except that one always had to make a point of letting us know with a glowering stare that she didn't observe the common Christian holidays or coworkers' birthdays, lol, and the two or three times in my life that JWs have actually knocked on my door, they've been very nice and we've had pleasant conversations. Contrary to other people's experiences, I've never had a Mormon come knocking on my door, but I've known a few Mormons through work.
On this forum, however, some pointed unpleasantness has flowed with regularity out of the fingertips of the influx of JWs that have made their way here since the pandemic began. It's as if being behind a computer screen rather than face-to-face has brought something to the surface that isn't visible when they are grinning up at you from the other side of the screen door. Frankly, I did not expect that to be the case and was a bit taken aback when it began to manifest itself.
No. But as I said, the Romans wanted to keep the peace and so it was prudent on their part to allow Jesus' body to be taken down and buried before sunset so as not to risk a riot on the part of unhappy Jews because their law had been violated by leaving a body unburied thus defiling the land.
I've already explained that the disciples had no reason to pretend that Jesus had resurrected when they themselves did not believe that Jesus would resurrect. If you are going to use the text to say that (the disciples . . .Joseph of Arimathea) already had the body, the text also says that Jesus was placed in the tomb and that Mary of Magdalene was the first to see him. Ignoring that part of the text mounts to cherry picking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
I've already explained that the disciples had no reason to pretend that Jesus had resurrected when they themselves did not believe that Jesus would resurrect.
If one is going to conclude that the Gospels and Acts contain some modicum of actual historical fact, then it's incumbent on them to pay close attention to what the Gospels and Acts actually say.
Matthew27:
[60] And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.
[61] And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.
[62] Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,
[63] Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
[64] Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.
[65] Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can.
[66] So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.
Matthew 27 makes it clear that the Jewish priests had reason to believe that a plot existed to relocate the body of Jesus so that the disciples could claim that Jesus had "arisen" from the dead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
If you are going to use the text to say that (the disciples . . .Joseph of Arimathea) already had the body, the text also says that Jesus was placed in the tomb...
According to Gospel Matthew, the entrance to the tomb was blocked off by a large and heavy stone. When the Jewish priest proceeded out to Joseph's tomb "the next day," they found the entrance closed. Was the body of Jesus actually inside? They had no way of verifying that the body was actually inside because it was a high holy day (Passover AND the Sabbath). So they did the obvious thing. They placed seals on the tomb and left a guard to insure that whatever the the condition of the tomb when they went out to secure it, in would remain secured.
The tomb proved to be empty the next morning. Some six weeks later the disciples began spreading the rumor that Jesus had risen from the dead. Who saw the "risen" Jesus?
His disciples and ONLY his disciples.
And where was the risen man NOW? He bodily flew up into the sky and disappeared into the sky. Who saw the resurrected corpse of Jesus fly up into the sky and disappear into the clouds?
His disciples and ONLY his disciples.
So we are presented with two apparent possibilities.
!. The disciples, who were already in possession of the body of Jesus, relocated the body elsewhere.
Or:
2. The corpse of Jesus returned to life and subsequently flew away.
With a nod to the version Christians prefer, the question becomes, which conclusion is MORE REALISTIC!
We are presented with the FACT that exactly what he Jewish priests were afraid would transpire, is exactly what transpired. The body of Jesus disappeared, and the disciples spread the rumor that Jesus had risen from the dead. A story just as unrealistic 2,000 years ago as it is today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
and that Mary of Magdalene was the first to see him. Ignoring that part of the text mounts to cherry picking.
Mark.16
[1] And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
[2] And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
[3] And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
[4] And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
Gospel Mark informs us that the various Marys went out to the tomb at first light based on the vain notion that perhaps there might be some men who just happen to be hanging around a graveyard at night who might be prevailed upon to move the large stone for them. Or perhaps they thought that they could prevail upon the guard, who had been placed at the tomb for the purpose of preventing anyone from having access to the tomb, to disobey their orders, break the seals, and allow the women to have access to the tomb.
Next to the story of the flying reanimated corpse of Jesus this ALMOST sounds reasonable.
Now, allow me to say that I am most certainly not attempting to convert you or anyone else to the cause of non belief. You will choose believe whatever appeals to you to believe. I am merely pointing out that the conclusions, CLAIMS, traditionally promoted by Christians are at odds, not only with the facts at hand (such as they are), but with all common sense!
If one is going to conclude that the Gospels and Acts contain some modicum of actual historical fact, then it's incumbent on them to pay close attention to what the Gospels and Acts actually say.
Matthew27:
[60] And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.
[61] And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.
[62] Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,
[63] Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
[64] Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.
[65] Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can.
[66] So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.
Matthew 27 makes it clear that the Jewish priests had reason to believe that a plot existed to relocate the body of Jesus so that the disciples could claim that Jesus had "arisen" from the dead.
According to Gospel Matthew, the entrance to the tomb was blocked off by a large and heavy stone. When the Jewish priest proceeded out to Joseph's tomb "the next day," they found the entrance closed. Was the body of Jesus actually inside? They had no way of verifying that the body was actually inside because it was a high holy day (Passover AND the Sabbath). So they did the obvious thing. They placed seals on the tomb and left a guard to insure that whatever the the condition of the tomb when they went out to secure it, in would remain secured.
The tomb proved to be empty the next morning. Some six weeks later the disciples began spreading the rumor that Jesus had risen from the dead. Who saw the "risen" Jesus?
His disciples and ONLY his disciples.
And where was the risen man NOW? He bodily flew up into the sky and disappeared into the sky. Who saw the resurrected corpse of Jesus fly up into the sky and disappear into the clouds?
His disciples and ONLY his disciples.
So we are presented with two apparent possibilities.
!. The disciples, who were already in possession of the body of Jesus, relocated the body elsewhere.
Or:
2. The corpse of Jesus returned to life and subsequently flew away.
With a nod to the version Christians prefer, the question becomes, which conclusion is MORE REALISTIC!
We are presented with the FACT that exactly what he Jewish priests were afraid would transpire, is exactly what transpired. The body of Jesus disappeared, and the disciples spread the rumor that Jesus had risen from the dead. A story just as unrealistic 2,000 years ago as it is today.
Mark.16
[1] And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
[2] And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
[3] And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
[4] And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
Gospel Mark informs us that the various Marys went out to the tomb at first light based on the vain notion that perhaps there might be some men who just happen to be hanging around a graveyard at night who might be prevailed upon to move the large stone for them. Or perhaps they thought that they could prevail upon the guard, who had been placed at the tomb for the purpose of preventing anyone from having access to the tomb, to disobey their orders, break the seals, and allow the women to have access to the tomb.
Next to the story of the flying reanimated corpse of Jesus this ALMOST sounds reasonable.
Now, allow me to say that I am most certainly not attempting to convert you or anyone else to the cause of non belief. You will choose believe whatever appeals to you to believe. I am merely pointing out that the conclusions, CLAIMS, traditionally promoted by Christians are at odds, not only with the facts at hand (such as they are), but with all common sense!
As I said, the disciples had no reason to conspire to claim that Jesus had been resurrected since they themselves did not believe that anyone would be resurrected before the end of history. Nor would they be willing to die for something they knew not to be true. James the brother of John was the first to die.
The Gospels all agree on the basic facts. Jesus was crucified, he was placed in a tomb, the tomb was found empty. Variations such as the number of women at the tomb do not affect the basic facts of the Gospel accounts. And very few scholars, if any, give any credence to the conspiracy theory.
Also, James, the brother of Jesus was not a disciple of Jesus until after Jesus appeared to him. The same with Paul who would not have believed a false claim by the disciples that Jesus had risen. Paul believed because he himself saw the risen Jesus.
Now, allow me to say that I am most certainly not attempting to convert you or anyone else to the cause of non belief. You will choose believe whatever appeals to you to believe. I am merely pointing out that the conclusions, CLAIMS, traditionally promoted by Christians are at odds, not only with the facts at hand (such as they are), but with all common sense!
Now, allow me to say that I am most certainly not attempting to convert you or anyone else to the cause of non belief. You will choose believe whatever appeals to you to believe. I am merely pointing out that the conclusions, CLAIMS, traditionally promoted by Christians are at odds, not only with the facts at hand (such as they are), but with all common sense!
Good Points.
One must factor in Style of allegorical writing, literary devises, and socio-cultural influences of the time in order to get an understanding of the writer's intent. And the Bible is NOT history (or science) , it is Theology.
SO to the OP Well, it is Possible. Normally, Criminals assigned to death by the Roman Authorities were executed and left out to rot as an example to others. But, Roman Magistrates were well known for accepting bribes. This included many instances of Bribes being offered for proper burial and for families to reclaim bodies of the deceased. So yes, someone could have offered a few silver coins to the authority and taken the body away.
BUT The "Someone " in question is sort of an enigma. St Joseph of Arimathea may not have been a real person. The reason I say this is because of his tie in to other mythic stories, the Holy Grail, the Glastonbury mission, etc I have doubts as to if this individual was real, or a fabrication to conveniently allow the writer to put the body of Jesus into the right setting at the right time
IF Joseph of Arimathea was a member of the council, and a secret follower of Jesus, then why was the council even meeting during Passover? This was a Holiday, members of the Council would not have convened until after the Holiday was completed. it would not have been plausible to have the members rounded up, convened and then voted on what to do with someone who the entire populace had welcomed into the town with great excitement during a Holy feast time.
Then there is the issue of the trial, one which Pilate would not have wasted time giving, he did not give fair trials to Jews, he did not often give fair trials to Roman citizens either !
So the trial and execution during a Holy Feast time is very improbable. (not to mention the Barabbas story, which is grounded in absolutely no known fact whatsoever)
Which leads to the final point. St Joseph of Arimathea, if he were real, as a Jew, could not have collected the corpse during Passover. It was Forbidden for Jews to handle a Corpse during that celebration. Which makes me think that the narrative is more fiction than fact. And possibly Joseph of Arimathea was a convenient character, created by the writer decades later to again, put Jesus in a certain place at a certain time.
The Gospel of Mark, written in Greek, can show that Arimathea was not a place, probably did not exist, but that Arimathea can mean "The best follower" The Best because he went out of his way to break with Jewish Law to retrieve a corpse and place it in a tomb. Unlikely that a member of the Council, if he was one, would do that.
Someone could have easily bribed a Roman magistrate to retrieve the body but not likely someone who was in the process of celebrating the Passover.
So, the problem I have, is that the events just do not add up as an actual event. They do add up as theology, as allegory and as a literary reference to old testament prophecy, even paralleling old testament stories in may ways. And as I have noted here on this forum, many years before at Easter, I have pointed out discrepancies in the resurrections as a bodily event (as in, the Corpse got up, walked away, then flew away)
It was an influence of Paul, who did not believe in a bodily resurrections but a Spiritual one, who influenced the gospels, written not my eyewitnesses but after the fact.
SO while it is Possible it is not probable. But again, that is the way I see it, and my opinions speak for my beliefs, not historical fact.
As I said, the disciples had no reason to conspire to claim that Jesus had been resurrected since they themselves did not believe that anyone would be resurrected before the end of history. Nor would they be willing to die for something they knew not to be true. James the brother of John was the first to die.
The Gospels all agree on the basic facts. Jesus was crucified, he was placed in a tomb, the tomb was found empty. Variations such as the number of women at the tomb do not affect the basic facts of the Gospel accounts. And very few scholars, if any, give any credence to the conspiracy theory.
Also, James, the brother of Jesus was not a disciple of Jesus until after Jesus appeared to him. The same with Paul who would not have believed a false claim by the disciples that Jesus had risen. Paul believed because he himself saw the risen Jesus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
As I said, the disciples had no reason to conspire to claim that Jesus had been resurrected since they themselves did not believe that anyone would be resurrected before the end of history.
The Jewish priests, it seems, who were actually present at the time, disagree with you. Disagreed strongly enough, if one is to give credibility to the version contained in Gospel Matthew, to venture into a place as inherently unclean as a graveyard on a high holy day. A charge that is scandalous (and nigh unbelievable) enough all on it's own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
Nor would they be willing to die for something they knew not to be true. James the brother of John was the first to die.
Gospel Matthew (Matt.27:5) indicates that the apostle Judas hung himself. Acts of the Apostles (Acts 12:2) indicates that the apostle James, the brother of John, was killed by Herod Agrippa. Acts 12 also details that the apostle Peter was Jailed, escaped, and then deemed it prudent at that point to depart for "another place" (Acts 12:17). As do, apparently, the other remaining nine apostles. Because none of them are mentioned again. Peter subsequently returns to the account contained in Acts. But not the remaining nine other apostles.
Other than the single account of the death of James the brother of John, scripture gives no account of the deaths of ANY of the remaining apostles, whether it be dying for their claims, or otherwise. History has allowed the blanks to be filled in by successive generations of devoted Christians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
The Gospels all agree on the basic facts. Jesus was crucified,
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
he was placed in a tomb,
Agreed. Joseph of Arimethea's personal newly finished tomb. Why?
Because it was late in the day of preparation, and "the sepulchre was nigh at hand" (John 19:42) to the place where Jesus was executed. Joseph's new tomb was the perfect choice to wash and prepare the body. And prepare it well they did.
John 19:
[39] And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight.
Combining myrrh and aloe produces a paste. So the body was wrapped in cloth and coated with a paste made of sweet smelling myrrh and aloes. One hundred pounds of the stuff. Given the state of preservation technology 2,000 years ago, which was rudimentary at best, the body of Jesus could hardly have been better prepared than if the intention was to transport it elsewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
the tomb was found empty. Variations such as the number of women at the tomb do not affect the basic facts of the Gospel accounts. And very few scholars, if any, give any credence to the conspiracy theory.
Agreed.
Very few Christian scholars give any credence to the conspiracy theory. Of course until comparatively recent times "scholars" who attempted to propose conclusions that questioned the official Christian position could expect to meet with very unpleasant consequences.
But those days are behind us. It is now possible to consider what scripture has to tell us openly and honestly.
Based on the details of the accounts at hand, there was in fact no great feat of slight of hand involved. The Jewish priests were convinced that a plot existed among the followers of Jesus to relocate the corpse of Jesus for the purpose of spreading the rumor that Jesus had arisen from the dead. And that is exactly what occurred.
The disciples did not have to "steal away" the body of Jesus. The body of Jesus was already in the possession of individuals who were the followers of Jesus, given to them legally by the Roman governor to bury where ever they deemed fitting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
Also, James, the brother of Jesus was not a disciple of Jesus until after Jesus appeared to him.
Bibleinfo:
12 disciples list:
Peter James
John
Andrew
Bartholomew or Nathanael
James, the Lesser or Younger
Judas
Jude or Thaddeus
Matthew or Levi
Philip
Simon the Zealot
Thomas https://www.bibleinfo.com/en/questio...elve-disciples
The apostles, brothers James and John, were known as "the sons of thunder" (Mark 3:17).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
The same with Paul who would not have believed a false claim by the disciples that Jesus had risen. Paul believed because he himself saw the risen Jesus.
Paul did indeed come to believe that he had an encounter with the risen Jesus, some few years after the execution of Jesus. Paul's "encounter" occurred at a time when he was deathly ill and delirious from the effects of dehydration (Acts 9:9), and being cared for, and prayed over, by a Christian man. As a result Paul became a firm Christian. But this does not serve to make the story of the flying reanimated corpse of Jesus any less unrealistic.
If the story is untrue of course, than billions of genuinely devoted Christian faithful have been cruelly deceived over the course of the centuries. Which of course is unthinkable. Although not, apparently, as unthinkable as the billions of genuinely devoted Muslim followers, or Hindu followers, or Buddhist followers, who have simply been cruelly deceived over the course of the centuries.
As a mainstream Christian - yes, I am a bit of an authority - I see nothing laughable in highway54's posts. The point I understand him to be making is that the holiday we call Easter is an unfortunate blending of a celebration of the Resurrection with certain pagan origins and practices that in many instances overshadow the Christian aspect.
The bold is completely preposterous. No one is capable of blending any pagan meanings of worship or anything pagan without deliberately intending to do so. It is simply ridiculous to assume that celebrating Easter is remotely focused on any pagan origins, period.
One must factor in Style of allegorical writing, literary devises, and socio-cultural influences of the time in order to get an understanding of the writer's intent. And the Bible is NOT history (or science) , it is Theology.
SO to the OP Well, it is Possible. Normally, Criminals assigned to death by the Roman Authorities were executed and left out to rot as an example to others. But, Roman Magistrates were well known for accepting bribes. This included many instances of Bribes being offered for proper burial and for families to reclaim bodies of the deceased. So yes, someone could have offered a few silver coins to the authority and taken the body away.
BUT The "Someone " in question is sort of an enigma. St Joseph of Arimathea may not have been a real person. The reason I say this is because of his tie in to other mythic stories, the Holy Grail, the Glastonbury mission, etc I have doubts as to if this individual was real, or a fabrication to conveniently allow the writer to put the body of Jesus into the right setting at the right time
IF Joseph of Arimathea was a member of the council, and a secret follower of Jesus, then why was the council even meeting during Passover? This was a Holiday, members of the Council would not have convened until after the Holiday was completed. it would not have been plausible to have the members rounded up, convened and then voted on what to do with someone who the entire populace had welcomed into the town with great excitement during a Holy feast time.
Then there is the issue of the trial, one which Pilate would not have wasted time giving, he did not give fair trials to Jews, he did not often give fair trials to Roman citizens either !
So the trial and execution during a Holy Feast time is very improbable. (not to mention the Barabbas story, which is grounded in absolutely no known fact whatsoever)
Which leads to the final point. St Joseph of Arimathea, if he were real, as a Jew, could not have collected the corpse during Passover. It was Forbidden for Jews to handle a Corpse during that celebration. Which makes me think that the narrative is more fiction than fact. And possibly Joseph of Arimathea was a convenient character, created by the writer decades later to again, put Jesus in a certain place at a certain time.
The Gospel of Mark, written in Greek, can show that Arimathea was not a place, probably did not exist, but that Arimathea can mean "The best follower" The Best because he went out of his way to break with Jewish Law to retrieve a corpse and place it in a tomb. Unlikely that a member of the Council, if he was one, would do that.
Someone could have easily bribed a Roman magistrate to retrieve the body but not likely someone who was in the process of celebrating the Passover.
So, the problem I have, is that the events just do not add up as an actual event. They do add up as theology, as allegory and as a literary reference to old testament prophecy, even paralleling old testament stories in may ways. And as I have noted here on this forum, many years before at Easter, I have pointed out discrepancies in the resurrections as a bodily event (as in, the Corpse got up, walked away, then flew away)
It was an influence of Paul, who did not believe in a bodily resurrections but a Spiritual one, who influenced the gospels, written not my eyewitnesses but after the fact.
SO while it is Possible it is not probable. But again, that is the way I see it, and my opinions speak for my beliefs, not historical fact.
BTW I like the Easter Bunnies pic too
Quote:
Originally Posted by LargeKingCat
Which leads to the final point. St Joseph of Arimathea, if he were real, as a Jew, could not have collected the corpse during Passover. It was Forbidden for Jews to handle a Corpse during that celebration. Which makes me think that the narrative is more fiction than fact. And possibly Joseph of Arimathea was a convenient character, created by the writer decades later to again, put Jesus in a certain place at a certain time.
This is true. Joseph would have had to hire non Jews, or used non Jewish servants, to handle or transport the body of Jesus on a high holy day. Non Jewish workers accomplishing tasks forbidden to Jews are known as shabbos goys.
I do not choose to take a position on whether or not Joseph of Arimethea is a a fictional contrivance. He is mentioned in all four Gospels. Without the intervention of Joseph, the body of Jesus would have been consigned to a common grave.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
