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.
John 11. 45 Therefore many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did, believed in him. 46 But some of them went to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. 47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.
“What are we accomplishing?” they asked. “Here is this man performing many signs. 48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our temple and our nation.”
49 Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.”
51 He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52 and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one. 53 So from that day on they plotted to take his life.
54 Therefore Jesus no longer moved about publicly among the people of Judea. Instead he withdrew to a region near the wilderness, to a village called Ephraim, where he stayed with his disciples.
Ti,me was when I was discussing about how John knew all of this and whether some eavesdropping slave converted to Christianity and related all that he had heard. But now I see no need. Some of those witnessing the raising of Lazarus went to tell the Pharisees and they (dropping their traditional enmity with the Sadducees as quickly as a Fundamentalist makes cause with a non -believer to do some atheist -bashing) convene the Sanhedrin, Ruling Sadducees and the Pharisees (including Joseph of Arimathea and his pal Nicodemus, as we shall see) discuss this miracle, but without anyone saying Gamaliel -like 'look, just suppose this fellow is the messiah, raising the dead and all, wouldn't it be a good idea to talk to him?' But no, the 'Jews' (apart from those who wait for the Kingdom of God, even those failing to speak up for Jesus)are all the baddies and can do nothing but plot to kill Jesus.
Just as we see in Luke again, but they don't dare because of the support for Jesus even though that will magically evaporate as seen as he gets arrested. They they will bawl for his death like the blanket mob of 'Jews' that they are whenever the gospel -writers need it.
But the point here is that, after the amazingly prescient Sanhedrin see that the result of the remarkably pro -Gentiie Jesus becoming the Authority in Judea would be that the Romans will " come and take away both our temple and our nation", almost as though they could see into the future.
But Caiphas can do even better. He suddenly is given the gift of prophecy, though not the gift of knowing that Jesus was the messiah and telling them 'We were wrong. He is son of God and Christ and we should join with him for all our sakes."
But then of course they wouldn't do God's work and see Jesus nailed up to save us all. Oddly he tells the council that they know nothing when they were clearly on the right lines. Jesus has to die for the sake of the people. But what I like is that Caiaphas is unwittingly prophesying the rise of the church through the death of Jesus. How great is the god who can have the supreme baddie of the Sanhedrin reciting a prophecy he doesn't even know he is making.
Of course, what is going on here is John writing what is in his own head and putting it into the mouth of the High priest, no matter how improbable it seems. But then, clever fellow, he'd know it would pass for 2,000 years of Erudite Bible study without mention before that blasted amateur Transponder came along. And who the hell is ever going to listen to him?
Not exactly sure of your purpose here, but coming from the atheist view, i would say you are picturing Christ as a coward.
Jesus had a ministry to fulfill for mankind, nothing could stop Him until He finished that ministry.
If Jesus had continued steadfast in the sight of the Sanhedrin, God would have had to destroy them for the scripture to be fulfilled.
They were bound and determined to kill him, but God said not until He is finished.
This is a picture of God sparing life that His Word be fulfilled.
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.
Matthew 4, no bacon, get circumcised.
Hebrews, Jesus was sacrificed only once, in heaven.
Not exactly sure of your purpose here, but coming from the atheist view, i would say you are picturing Christ as a coward.
Jesus had a ministry to fulfill for mankind, nothing could stop Him until He finished that ministry.
If Jesus had continued steadfast in the sight of the Sanhedrin, God would have had to destroy them for the scripture to be fulfilled.
They were bound and determined to kill him, but God said not until He is finished.
This is a picture of God sparing life that His Word be fulfilled.
You're reaching into space and I doubt that you know how to come from an atheist point of view. The only 'cowardice' shown by Jesus is praying in the garden to be let off, if possible. That is a hoot as Jesus would know it was not possible otherwise God's plan to make a loophole in the Law of sin - death he made himself would not work.
The other is Jesus hiding himself and slipping out of the Temple ( John 8 39).
However, I want to add the Problem of Ephraim.
After raising Lazarus Jesus skipped because of the 'Jews' wantomg to kill him (presumably even badder than they wanted to when he left Peraea to come to Jerusalem to raise Lazarus) and so he went to 'Ephraim'.
Now, that didn't exist anymore but was somewhat coincident with the territory of Samaria and may be John's way of having Jesus again leave Jerusalem for the 'baptising area' so as to return to Bethany. Two pieces of padding out the gap between Tabernacles and Passover instead of just one.
But this return definitely links up with the Synoptic Gospels and this arrival is followed by the donkey procession to the Temple where he does...virtually nothing.
You're reaching into space and I doubt that you know how to come from an atheist point of view. The only 'cowardice' shown by Jesus is praying in the garden to be let off, if possible. That is a hoot as Jesus would know it was not possible otherwise God's plan to make a loophole in the Law of sin - death he made himself would not work.
The other is Jesus hiding himself and slipping out of the Temple ( John 8 39).
However, I want to add the Problem of Ephraim.
After raising Lazarus Jesus skipped because of the 'Jews' wantomg to kill him (presumably even badder than they wanted to when he left Peraea to come to Jerusalem to raise Lazarus) and so he went to 'Ephraim'.
Now, that didn't exist anymore but was somewhat coincident with the territory of Samaria and may be John's way of having Jesus again leave Jerusalem for the 'baptising area' so as to return to Bethany. Two pieces of padding out the gap between Tabernacles and Passover instead of just one.
But this return definitely links up with the Synoptic Gospels and this arrival is followed by the donkey procession to the Temple where he does...virtually nothing.
I would expect such babblings from the discerned of scripture.
Ok. Now we really get linked up with the Synoptic story. After what may be a link to the synoptic hints about a plot by the 'Chief Priests and Pharisees' to have someone rat on his arrival, Jesus arrives at Bethany, where Lazarus and his sisters (Martha and Mary) live, or dwell.
Now, according the the synoptics, Jesus arrives about noon or the afternoon. He immediately has the disciples collect a donkey which he knows is there and moreover, if the owner wants to know why they are taking it, they will merely say 'The Lord needs it' and he will meekly let them take it. That is a really good bit of prescience. I recall that it is just Luke that actually has the owner asking...hang on.. It's Mark as well. Matthew doesn't have that That's very interesting. That's the 2nd example of Mark and Luke sharing material that Matthew has omitted. Which shouldn't really be the case.
But really you need it. It's like a film where the boss tell the boys to go into the bank and ask for the money and if the cashier objects 'say this, and if he wants to press the button, cut This wire first, and if there are guards eliminate them like That and if he says it's all in the vault, get him to...' and they walk in and he hands over the dosh and none of that happens. You don't set up a prediction and it doesn't happen (unless you are setting up a laugh) ....let me check something.
Luke 19. 28 After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. 29 As he approached Bethphage and Bethany at the hill called the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, 30 “Go to the village ahead of you, and as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 31 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it.’”
32 Those who were sent ahead went and found it just as he had told them. 33 As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, “Why are you untying the colt?”
34 They replied, “The Lord needs it.”
35 They brought it to Jesus, threw their cloaks on the colt and put Jesus on it.
Mark 11. 1 As they approached Jerusalem and came to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two of his disciples, 2 saying to them, “Go to the village ahead of you, and just as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 3 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you doing this?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly.’”
4 They went and found a colt outside in the street, tied at a doorway. As they untied it, 5 some people standing there asked, “What are you doing, untying that colt?” 6 They answered as Jesus had told them to, and the people let them go. 7 When they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their cloaks over it, he sat on it
Ah..now...I shall have to redact this.
Mark As they approached Jerusalem and came to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives
Luke After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. 29 As he approached Bethphage and Bethany at the hill called the Mount of Olives. Really the same with Luke tarting it up a bit.
Mark. Jesus sent two of his disciples, 2 saying to them, “Go to the village ahead of you, and just as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden.
Luke. he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, 30 “Go to the village ahead of you, and as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Pretty much identical.
Mark. Untie it and bring it here. 3 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you doing this?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly.’
Luke. Untie it and bring it here. 31 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it.’” Identical apart from a Mark 'improvement' (like Zebedee not being left in the lurch but he has hired help with his fishing. Mark 1.20) with Jesus saying he isn't going to keep the animal but will return it. Like the detail of Pilate's surprise, Mark does 'Improve' the story with edits, here and there.
Mark. They went and found a colt outside in the street, tied at a doorway. As they untied it, 5 some people standing there asked, “What are you doing, untying that colt?” 6 They answered as Jesus had told them to, and the people let them go.
Luke. Those who were sent ahead went and found it just as he had told them. 33 As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, “Why are you untying the colt?” 34 They replied, “The Lord needs it.”
It's not quite the same but contains the same elements. But it is reasonable to suggest that Mark and Luke separately saw as I did that you don't set up a prediction and it doesn't happen. They had the events pan out but didn't write them the same way. Matthew simply didn't add anything to the original.
The thing is that John's account shows how the problem arose. In John they arrive in the later afternoon and have supper, and no doubt crash down for the night. It is the next morning that the disciples are sent to collect the ass or colt and thus there is no miracle. It's been put there all ready and the owner knows who will send for it.
It's hard to avoid the suspicion that John has it as it surely was as who would take a miracle or prophecy and rewrite it to make it a mundane arrangement? But the synoptic version would be quite happy with having it occur the same day and thus the arrangement becomes a miracle. Except that you have the password made a prediction that doesn't come off so Mark and Luke both rewrite it so it does.
That way it should not be in John. Let's see.
John 12. 14 And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written,
Well damn' that's bald. You have the 'king' prophecy. Jesus needs an Ass to sit on so he finds one.
So I can imagine that the synoptic version needed to explain this grabbing of someone's Ass - Jesus knows where it will be and sends for it and the owner will be fine with it. Reading that back into John, with the overnight, it looks like it was all set up beforehand.
But, like Lazarus, analyse it and it looks more like this plot has appeared, unlooked for, because the basic bald story has been elaborated separately and 'reconciled' looks like a plot that none of the writers imagined would Emerge from the components of the story. It's a bit odd that Matthew didn't do the same. After all, he is quite capable of making stuff up, like the magi and Star and the tomb -guard. But then, in some ways, he isn't as sharp as Luke. That clumsy plot construction of the magi and star and the tomb -guard might well be the work of someone who saw Matthew 21 and no problem to be corrected.
Let those with ears to hear, hear, and those with eyes to see, see. The rest of you may go back to your grovelling and Biblequote -mining.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 01-11-2021 at 06:42 AM..
Ok. Now we really get linked up with the Synoptic story. After what may be a link to the synoptic hints about a plot by the 'Chief Priests and Pharisees' to have someone rat on his arrival, Jesus arrives at Bethany, where Lazarus and his sisters (Martha and Mary) live, or dwell.
Now, according the the synoptics, Jesus arrives about noon or the afternoon. But immediately has the disciples collect a donkey which he knows in there and moreover if the owner wants to know why they are taking it, they will merely say 'The Lord needs it' and he will meekly let them take it. That is a really good bit of prescience. I recall that it is just Luke that actually has the owner asking...hang on.. It's Mark as well. Matthew doesn't have that That's very interesting. That's the 2nd example of Mark and Luke sharing material that Matthew has omitted. Which shouldn't really be the case.
But really you need it. It's like a film where the boss tell the boys to go into the bank and ask for the money and if the cashier objects 'say this, and if he wants to press the button, cut This wire first, and if there are guards eliminate them like That and if he says it's all in the vault, get him to...' and they walk in and he hands over the dosh and none of that happens. You don't set up a prediction and it doesn't happen (unless you are setting up a laugh) ....let me check something.
Luke 19. 28 After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. 29 As he approached Bethphage and Bethany at the hill called the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, 30 “Go to the village ahead of you, and as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 31 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it.’”
32 Those who were sent ahead went and found it just as he had told them. 33 As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, “Why are you untying the colt?”
34 They replied, “The Lord needs it.”
35 They brought it to Jesus, threw their cloaks on the colt and put Jesus on it.
Mark 11. 1 As they approached Jerusalem and came to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two of his disciples, 2 saying to them, “Go to the village ahead of you, and just as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Untie it and bring it here. 3 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you doing this?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly.’”
4 They went and found a colt outside in the street, tied at a doorway. As they untied it, 5 some people standing there asked, “What are you doing, untying that colt?” 6 They answered as Jesus had told them to, and the people let them go. 7 When they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their cloaks over it, he sat on it
Ah..now...I shall have to redact this.
Mark As they approached Jerusalem and came to Bethphage and Bethany at the Mount of Olives
Luke After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. 29 As he approached Bethphage and Bethany at the hill called the Mount of Olives. Really the same with Luke tarting it up a bit.
Mark. Jesus sent two of his disciples, 2 saying to them, “Go to the village ahead of you, and just as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden.
Luke. he sent two of his disciples, saying to them, 30 “Go to the village ahead of you, and as you enter it, you will find a colt tied there, which no one has ever ridden. Pretty much identical.
Mark. Untie it and bring it here. 3 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you doing this?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it and will send it back here shortly.’
Luke. Untie it and bring it here. 31 If anyone asks you, ‘Why are you untying it?’ say, ‘The Lord needs it.’” Identical apart from a Mark 'improvement' (like Zebedee not being left in the lurch but he has hired help with his fishing. Mark 1.20) with Jesus saying he isn't going to keep the animal but will return it. Like the detail of Pilate's surprise, Mark does 'Improve' the story with edits, here and there.
Mark. They went and found a colt outside in the street, tied at a doorway. As they untied it, 5 some people standing there asked, “What are you doing, untying that colt?” 6 They answered as Jesus had told them to, and the people let them go.
Luke. Those who were sent ahead went and found it just as he had told them. 33 As they were untying the colt, its owners asked them, “Why are you untying the colt?” 34 They replied, “The Lord needs it.”
It's not quite the same but contains the same elements. But it is reasonable to suggest that Mark and Luke separately saw as I did that you don't set up a prediction and it doesn't happen. They had the events pan out but didn't write them the same way. Matthew simply didn't add anything to the original.
The thing is that John's account shows how the problem arose. In John they arrive in the later afternoon and have supper, and no doubt crash down for the night. It is the next morning that the disciples are sent to collect the ass or colt and thus there is no miracle. It's been put there all ready and the owner knows who will send for it.
It's hard to avoid the suspicion that John has it as it surely was as who would take a miracle or prophecy and rewrite it to make it a mundane arrangement? But the synoptic version would be quite happy with having it occur the same day and thus the arrangement becomes a miracle. Except that you have the password made a prediction that doesn't come off so Mark and Luke both rewrite it so it does.
That way it should not be in John. Let's see.
John 12. 14 And Jesus, when he had found a young ass, sat thereon; as it is written,
Well damn' that's bald. You have the 'king' prophecy. Jesus needs an Ass to sit on so he finds one.
So I can imagine that the synoptic version needed to explain this grabbing of someone's Ass - Jesus knows where it will be and sends for it and the owner will be fine with it. Reading that back into John, with the overnight, it looks like it was all set up beforehand.
But, like Lazarus, analyse it and it looks more like this plot has appeared, unlooked for, because the basic bald story has been elaborated separately and 'reconciled' looks like a plot that none of the writers imagined would Emerge from the components of the story.
Let those with ears to hear, hear, and those with eyes to see, see. The rest of you may go back to you grovelling and Biblequote -mining.
I have already told you why the authors put this in and and left that out!
You are not seeing this though, you are looking from the point of man, not that of the Holy Spirit.
The scripture is meant to be read in faith, not to reason it from mans perspective to find fault.
Nothing and I say again, nothing you have shown contradicts itself, it's merely an example of what's written in scripture, "it's impossible for the natural man to understand scripture, they are spiritually discerned."
Of course will still not understand even this though I show it to you.
I have already told you why the authors put this in and and left that out!
You are not seeing this though, you are looking from the point of man, not that of the Holy Spirit.
The scripture is meant to be read in faith, not to reason it from mans perspective to find fault.
Nothing and I say again, nothing you have shown contradicts itself, it's merely an example of what's written in scripture, "it's impossible for the natural man to understand scripture, they are spiritually discerned."
Of course will still not understand even this though I show it to you.
Sorry? Which post was that? I'll check back (1) . For my part I say that Faith is foolishness if you ignore the facts that first tell you what you are being expected to have Faith in. What will you say of people who have Faith that everything was made in 6 days when the evidence shows that isn't the case?
If you are going to insist on Faith instead of Fact (which is what I'm dealing with, even if I get it wrong) then you can't expect Reasonable people who care about what's true to listen to you.
And, as I have said before, those who dismiss science as mere opinion, and logic as some rules made up by humans, and are therefore invalid, then they can never appeal to science or logic as support for their argument. Not that I expect you to, but just blocking that move anyway.
(1) I read back and couldn't see anything that even looked like an explanation. It was either appeals to reading with uncritical Faith or just referring to the text and saying there is no problem.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 01-11-2021 at 07:37 AM..
Sorry? Which post was that? I'll check back. For my part I say that Faith is foolishness if you ignore the facts that first tell you what you are being expected to have Faith in. What will you say of people who have Faith that everything was made in 6 days when the evidence shows that isn't the case?
If you are going to insist on Faith instead of Fact (which is what I'm dealing with, even if I get it wrong) then you can't expect Reasonable people who care about what's true to listen to you.
And, as I have said before, those who dismiss science as mere opinion, and logic as some rules made up by humans, and are therefore invalid, then they can never appeal to science or logic as support for their argument. Not that I expect you to, but just blocking that move anyway.
I could have sworn it was you who I gave the reason why the authors put this in and left this out? Hmmmmm!
I guess it was someone else in a similar conversation that I said that. Mystery!
The reason is that the Holy Spirit is the author of scripture, He inspired the authors to write what they wrote, not what they wanted to write.
Some authors record this and others record that according to the will of the Holy Spirit, what is written is not exclusive to one author.
I have already told you why the authors put this in and and left that out!
You are not seeing this though, you are looking from the point of man, not that of the Holy Spirit.
The scripture is meant to be read in faith, not to reason it from mans perspective to find fault.
Nothing and I say again, nothing you have shown contradicts itself, it's merely an example of what's written in scripture, "it's impossible for the natural man to understand scripture, they are spiritually discerned."
Of course will still not understand even this though I show it to you.
I have shown you contradictory scripture, you have simply ignored it.
I think there isn't a problem with john any more than there is a problem with any story.
The problem with john is more of a problem with how people present john. John's story is john's story, the great fire left people with very little scrolls from that time period. It like going back to the earliest video's know to man.
The problem is when the bible is tried to be taught as literal. It just doesn't work anymore than sandals from the time period are "literally the best shoes ever". They just simply are not. .
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.
I have other things to do.
