• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What Day was Jesus Crucified?

S

smokydot

Well-Known Member
angellous_evangellous said:
You've been throwing around that word [ignorant] so much and at the wrong people.... it's losing its meaning [at least, coming from you].
Even if I didn't have three degrees in biblical interpretation, 12 years experience in the ministry, learned four languages so I could better read the bible and its interpreters, I would at least have the courtesy of listening to what someone like that has to say.
And calling Brown ignorant? Then me (who is far below him), and everyone else who thinks differently than you, it really makes you look bad. You are embarrassing yourself.
Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them ignorant.
Click to expand...
True statement. . .with absolutely no relevance or bearing here.

Anyone who claims that the Scriptures simply do not say what they say--as in the day Jesus rose--is ignorant, because it is right there printed on the page.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
smokydot said:
True statement. . .with absolutely no relevance or bearing here.

Anyone who claims that the Scriptures simply do not say what they say--as in the day Jesus rose--is ignorant, because it is right there printed on the page.
Click to expand...

Think before you speak [write].

Someday it might do some good.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
smokydot said:
True statement. . .with absolutely no relevance or bearing here.

Anyone who claims that the Scriptures simply do not say what they say--as in the day Jesus rose--is ignorant, because it is right there printed on the page.
Click to expand...

Smoky,

That's exactly what you are doing.

There's one example of "type."

You ADD to what the Scriptures say, forcing them to say what you want. That's just as bad - for you - as not reading literally.
 
S

smokydot

Well-Known Member
angellous_evangellous said:
For my BA in religion, we talked about typology for about three minutes. It was on the exam. Now that's once in 36 hours of course work.
For my MA, nothing... unless someone was presenting a paper on a church father or medieval writer. That's another 36 hours of course work.
In my Ph.D., which was 48 hours of coursework and tons of reading and hearing research from my fellows.... nothing. Nada. Zilch.
Click to expand...
That explains your ignorance of them. . .
Typology is not hard to understand. Other than the one reference in the NT, it's comic book stuff...
Click to expand...
And you're clueless about the only one you know how to find. . .when the NT writers present many of them.
I guess it's like the Left Behind series. It's fun for people to read, but it's not thoughtful and responsible biblical interpretation.
Click to expand...
"Left Behind" is a good description of your grasp of typology in the NT.

I'll tell you now like I told you before at http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2290408-post950.html --"tell it to John, Paul and the author of Hebrews" who present just a few of them there.

We've come full circle here. . .been there. . .done that. . .got the T shirt at http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2296994-post1013.html. . .not doin' it again. . .
 
Last edited:
fallingblood

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
smokydot said:
True statement. . .with absolutely no relevance or bearing here.

Anyone who claims that the Scriptures simply do not say what they say--as in the day Jesus rose--is ignorant, because it is right there printed on the page.
Click to expand...
Okay, point to the verse that states on what day Jesus rose.
 
S

smokydot

Well-Known Member
fallingblood said:
Seriously? You are judging what Brown believes because you read one statement from him? That is just incredibly ignorant. Maybe before you make such foolish statements, you may want to actually read what he has to say. Because he does in fact believe in the virgin birth.
It is clear you have no want to become informed, instead, you will just ignorantly dismiss all of the sources that show you to be wrong.
Click to expand...
Assumes facts not in evidence. . .
 
fallingblood

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
smokydot said:
Raymond E. Brown is a lousy student of Scripture.

Matthew's account locates the time of Jesus' resurrection:

Mt 28:1 -- at dawn on the first day of the week, the Mary's went to the tomb

Mt 28:2 -- now there had been a violent earthquake, an angel of the Lord came down, rolled back the stone and sat on it

Mt 28:4 -- the guards were so afraid they shook and became like dead men

Mt 28:11 -- while the women were on their way at dawn, the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that happened.

Matthew locates the resurrection at dawn on Sunday.

There is no reason to think that the guards would have waited hours to rush into town with their report of the remarkable events, rather than hurrying immediately
in their shock and fear to report what they had witnessed.

Raymond Brown also says (TIME, 4/4/94, "Why was Jesus Crucified?") that the Jews were not guilty of, as distinguished from repsonsible for, Jesus' death.

And Jesus disagreed.

Jn 8:38-47 -- He declared them guilty when he said they were not children of God, nor of Abraham, but children of the devil. . .because they sought to kill him.
(Jn 8:38-47)

Mt 23:29-36 -- He also declared them guilty, and condemned them to hell (v.33), when he declared that the blood of all the righteous from Abel to Zechariah
was on their heads, because in seeking to murder him, the prophet who was to come (Dt 18:17-19; Jn 1:21, 6:14), and subsequently to murder his apostles (vv.33-34),
they were endorsing all such murders committed by their forefathers (vv.30-32), and would suffer the penalty for all those murders.

Which is why the apostles say the same: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2273397-post386.html

Raymond Brown is a lousy student of Scripture, neither knowing (shown above) nor understanding (Mt 27:24-25) what it says.
Click to expand...
I have to now conclude you are simply a liar. I checked out the issue that you quoted Brown from. Here is the article: Why Was Christ Crucified? - TIME

If you read the article, Brown never stated that the Jews were completely innocent. Here is a direct quote from the article ""You can't just say there was no Jewish involvement in the death of Jesus," says Father Raymond E. Brown, author of The Death of the Messiah." You might actually want to read his book in order to understand what he believes instead of making false accusations (this being the second one pointed out). Brown is stating that the Jews had some guilt in the actual death of Jesus.

Brown admits that the Jews had some responsibility in the death of Jesus (the leader of the Jews specifically) and so he is not contradicting the Bible.

More so though, you misrepresent scripture. Neither one of the verses you quote disagree with what Brown is saying as neither one even deals with the same matter. Brown is talking about the execution of Jesus by the Romans. Jesus is not speaking of the same event. He debating with other Jewish sects, before his death sentence, before his arrest. It has nothing to do with his death.

You assertion is completely baseless and based on dishonesty and simple lies. At some point, you need to grow a conscience, and learn right from wrong, because you certainly aren't showing that here. You are showing very little ethics, and I hope that isn't how you truly are.
 
S

smokydot

Well-Known Member
smokydot said:
Raymond E. Brown is a lousy student of Scripture.

Matthew's account locates the time of Jesus' resurrection:

Mt 28:1 -- at dawn on the first day of the week, the Mary's went to the tomb

Mt 28:2 -- now there had been a violent earthquake, an angel of the Lord came down, rolled back the stone and sat on it

Mt 28:4 -- the guards were so afraid they shook and became like dead men

Mt 28:11 -- while the women were on their way at dawn, the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that happened.

Matthew locates the resurrection at dawn on Sunday.

There is no reason to think that the guards would have waited hours to rush into town with their report of the remarkable events, rather than hurrying immediately
in their shock and fear to report what they had witnessed.

Raymond Brown also says (TIME, 4/4/94, "Why was Jesus Crucified?") that the Jews were not guilty of, as distinguished from repsonsible for, Jesus' death.

And Jesus disagreed.

Jn 8:38-47 -- He declared them guilty when he said they were not children of God, nor of Abraham, but children of the devil. . .because they sought to kill him.
(Jn 8:38-47)

Mt 23:29-36 -- He also declared them guilty, and condemned them to hell (v.33), when he declared that the blood of all the righteous from Abel to Zechariah
was on their heads, because in seeking to murder him, the prophet who was to come (Dt 18:17-19; Jn 1:21, 6:14), and subsequently to murder his apostles (vv.33-34),
they were endorsing all such murders committed by their forefathers (vv.30-32), and would suffer the penalty for all those murders.

Which is why the apostles say the same: http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2273397-post386.html

Raymond Brown is a lousy student of Scripture, neither knowing (shown above) nor understanding (Mt 27:24-25) what it says.
Click to expand...

Back to drama. . .did you read the part in red above in my post?

So now. . .you "have to conclude that I am simply a liar". . .looks to me like you get most of your exercise jumping to conclusions.
I'm a liar because I said Brown denied the Jews were guilty of the death of Jesus?

Since what I actually said was Brown denied their guilt, but not their responsibility for the death of Jesus, does that not make you a liar?

And since you said I couldn't show Brown's error, and it was dishonest of me not to say so. . .and then low and behold! . .there above is the error of Brown which you said I didn't show. . .does that make you a liar, or dishonest?

What's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. . .
 
Last edited:
S

smokydot

Well-Known Member
fallingblood said:
:facepalm: So you can't. Just state that instead of being dishonest. It is a lot easier.
Click to expand...
Always into drama. . .

Are you going to admit that the requested place in Scripture which shows the day Jesus rose was presented in that post?

I didn't think so. . .so does your saying that I can't produce it, when it was actually presented in the post, not make you a liar?

Quit the dramatic shootin' from the hip, and pay attention to the target.
 
Last edited:
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
smokydot said:
Since what I actually said was Brown denied their guilt, but not their responsibility for the murder of Jesus, does that not make you a liar?
Click to expand...

That's not in dispute.

What is in dispute here - and fallingblood makes it abundantly clear - is Brown's application of what it means to be "responsible" as compared to your objections.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top