Re: [spam] Re: News of the "Passion"
- Jeffrey said :
> I am now -- and officially -- asking List Members toAnd Yahoo repeated :
> refrain from further discussion of news of what
> Mel Gibson has or has not with the latest version
> of his as yet unreleased film.
>------------------------------------------------------------------------would it be understood ? Not sure.
>Yahoo! Groups SpamGuard has detected that the attached message to the
>group crosstalk2 is likely to be spam.
- --- Jan Sammer wrote:
>> ... "all the people" at 27:25 cannot be understood otherwise thanBy supporters I simply meant those who supported the high priests and the
>> "everyone present." The author cannot have intended it to refer to
>> all Jewry and all future generations as it has unfortunately been
>> interpreted in the past.
>> He speaks only of the particular group gathered in front of
>> Pilate's residence, consisting of the priests, the elders and
>> their supporters, the Temple establishment one might call them.
>I'm not sure what counts as a "supporter", but in any case there's
>no indication in the text that this crowd consisted solely or
>primarily of such folks.
elders in their effort to get Jesus condemned to death. The high priests and
the elders had brought Jesus to Pilate and were still standing in front of
his residence waiting for the verdict. At 27:15 a crowd is said to be
gathering, which could mean that the priests and the elders were joined by
some bystanders, who then demonstrate their support of the high priests and
the elders by their shouts.
> Furthermore, the extent of Matthew'sHere we have a wholly different situation; Jesus is said to be giving a
>broadly condemnatory attitude is revealed by another kind of
>argument at 23:29-36, where he's addressing scribes and Pharisees
>(if these also are Temple "supporters" in your view, then I guess
>that word would include almost all Judaeans - thus making your
>interpretation of the sentencing scene unfalsifiable because
>uninterestingly tautological). There, he argues that _anyone_ who
>persecutes Christians is calling down upon themselves "the guilt of
>all the righteous blood shed on earth". So I don't think that the
>author's condemnation was restricted to the Temple establishment,
>much as your exclusive focus on one factor would have it so.
harangue against some Jewish groups who seem to follow the letter of the law
but not its spirit. I would not read this harangue as addressed to the
Temple establishment, but in the more general context of the paramout issue
of the time in which the gospels were written, which was Paul's trial in my
opinion. I would suggest that it's again a defense of Paul, who is a
Pharisee, but who is being persecuted (and prosecuted) by other Pharisees.
BTW, Mt. 23:16-22 would seem pointless if the Temple were not still standing
at the time of the writing of these words.