Devotions
Confessions
Quiz: Signs Week 6
Reading quiz
--
Review all 5 weeks, looking for SIGNature help
Week1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Signature:
- 2 big rules
- Evidence from text
- Philemon help
THIS SIGNS QUIZ REPLACES TERMS QUIZ WEEK 5 (IF YOU CHOOSE) If you missed week 2, be sure to ask someone who was in class the secret to this quiz:
-
Due: 3 days following this moduleTASKThe signature assignment (final paper) for Biblical Perspectives is designated as a significant 5-7 page paper that is designed addresses the meaning of a biblical text. Using the skills gained in the course, develop a paper that combines an understanding of the historical, literary and contemporary worlds of the text. (Don’t resign the class until you are done. Resignation often comes too soon).PURPOSEThe paper is meant to demonstrate the student’s own analysis and ability to work with a biblical text and as such need not utilize other resources as in a traditional research paper.This is a NOT a research paper; it is a SEARCH paper, where you search out what you think is the meaning/message of Philemon.However, it could be hugely helpful (and improve your grade) to draw in one (or perhaps more) lessons from class to build your thesis.FORMThesis: The paper should include a clear thesis statement in the form of “the book of Philemon is about…” or “the story in 2 Kings 5:1-19a is about…” Note: by “about,” we mean not just “about” in the sense of storyline and characters—though you definitely include that somewhere in your paper, as well. We mean what the book is ultimately “about”—life lesson, message, moral, sermon point or Contemporary World “app.” Make it general; do not include characters from the story in your statement. Be as specific and concise as possible.Body: The body of the paper should demonstrate a recognizable structure that articulates why the thesis is viable. The body of the paper may take the form of a verse by verse analysis, follow the categories of historical/literary/contemporary worlds, or use any thematic analysis that is most useful.Conclusion: The conclusion should restate the thesis and the support in summary fashion. The conclusion is also a place for reflection on the implications of Philemon or 2 Kings 5:1-19a for your life and work.SIGB: Throughout this course we have been using one guiding sign for each night, corresponding to the theme of the evening. Based on your study of the book of Philemon or 2 Kings 5:1-19a, develop your own symbol that you feel adequately conveys the message of the book and explain it in a paragraph. Papers will not be accepted without the sign and explanation. (The sign is something you draw or create, not anything you find online or elsewhere)Be sure to also include: Evidence from the text re: whether the slavery (of Onesimus) and brotherhood of Philemon and Onesimus are literal, metaphorical, or both. Evidence from the text re: whether Onesimus ran away.
GRADINGGrading is based upon how well the thesis is stated and supported, by the clarity of the structure, by the depth of thought and by the quality of mechanics (spelling, grammar).If there are red marks in every paragraph for grammar/spelling/mechanics, the paper will not pass. Big rules: no “you”/”your” words/language or contractionsAll papers must be submitted to turnitin.com (instructions on next page).From FPU HANDBOOK:
A=Superior. The student has demonstrated a quality of work and accomplishment far beyond the formal requirements and shown originality of thought and mastery of material.B=Above Average.The student’s achievement exceeds the usual accomplishment, showing a clearindication of initiative and grasp of subject.C=Average. The student has met the formal requirements and has demonstrated good comprehension of the subject and reasonable ability to handle ideas.D=Below Average. The student’s accomplishment leaves much to be desired. Minimum requirements have been met but were inadequate.
Tim Gombis
Temple Tantrum
Drops Like Stars
----------------------------
can Wright be wrong? Philemon and Onesimus as (half) bothers AND slave/master
When looking at "alternative" readings of Philemon, it is amazing how few even deal with the reality that the most obvious way to read vv 15-16-- "a dearly loved brother, both in the flesh and in the Lord" --asboth a literal and spiritual brother.
Tim Gombis is so right:
My main contention in these posts is that commentators must take Paul’s reference to Philemon and Onesimus as adelphoi en sarki with greater seriousness. It is highly unlikely that Paul regards the two as sharing in a common humanity. It is far more likely that they are actual brothers. This may demand a re-consideration of the scenario that eventuates in Paul’s letter, even though any modification to the consensus view need not be as dramatic as the view advanced by Callahan. link
Even N.T. Wright, who specializes in Philemon; even making it the key to his new magnum opus on Paul,
acknowledges the "literal brother" interpretation, but does not even consider it or discuss it (in 1700 pages) other than to say:
"one writer [Callahan] has even suggested that Philemon and Onesimus were not master and slave, but actual brothers who have fallen out, but, this too, has not found support." (p. 8)
Just because Callahan may have gone too far, must we throw interpretations out with bathwater?
Is Wright (surely!) aware that they could be master/slave and literal brothers, as Gombid develops (here) and suggests "this is the most natural reading." Wright's work is indeed brilliant and seminal, but perhaps Moo has a point about him being too sure of his interpretations...to the degree that, though he is the nicest guy, he can seem dismissive:
I won’t list other instances, but Paul and the Faithfulness of Godcontains too many of these kinds of rhetorically effective but exaggerated or overly generalized claims. A related problem is Wright’s tendency to set himself against the world—and then wonder why the world is so blind as to fail to see what he sees. A key thread, for instance, is Wright’s insistence that the basic story Paul’s working with has to do with God’s fulfillment of his covenant promises to Abraham—a vital focus that “almost all exegetes miss” and that has been “screened out from the official traditions of the church from at least the time of the great creeds” (494). This problem is sometimes compounded by a caricature of the tradition with which he disagrees Moo, full review
Don't get me wrong, I'm still getting the T-shirt...just saying (:
Another post from Gombis:
Several years ago I was teaching Bible study methods to undergrads and we were doing an exercise with the text of Paul’s letter to Philemon. A student raised his hand and noted that according to the text it appeared that Onesimus was the brother of Philemon.
This sounded outrageous and obviously wrong, so I asked how he could possibly have arrived at that notion. He directed my attention to vv. 15-16. We were looking at the NASB:
For perhaps he was for this reason separated from you for a while, that you would have him back forever, no longer as a slave, but more than a slave, a beloved brother, especially to me, but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord.
I hadn’t studied this letter all that closely previously, so I assumed that Paul’s indication that they were brothers “both in the flesh and in the Lord” must mean something else. Other translations make this very assumption:
Perhaps the reason he was separated from you for a little while was that you might have him back forever—no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a fellow man and as a brother in the Lord (NIV).
Maybe this is the reason that Onesimus was separated from you for a while so that you might have him back forever— 16 no longer as a slave but more than a slave—that is, as a dearly loved brother. He is especially a dearly loved brother to me. How much more can he become a brother to you, personally and spiritually in the Lord (CEB)!
I told him that I’d need to look at that a bit more closely and get back to him at a later point (one of those unfortunate classroom moments when you don’t have a ready answer–ugh!).
As I dipped into commentaries over the subsequent weeks and months, I was increasingly disappointed by how commentators treated Paul’s expression. The NIV’s and CEB’s renderings represent how nearly every major commentary I’ve looked at handles Paul’s expression...link
I have had similar experiences in college classes. Often in a class of fifteen, where most are reading the text for the first time, I ask "How many of you assumed Onesimus was a slave?" Often, no hands go up.
I need to ask : "How many of you assumed Onesimus was a Philemon's literal brother?"
Interesting that a far more popular (in the sense of "speaking to laypeople" and not in the academic journal world) writer than Wright, assumes the literal brother view, without even acknowledging the "traditional" view (emphases mine):
Philemon is a marvelous example of the strongest force in the universe to affect control over someone -- grace. It takes up one of the most difficult problems we ever encounter, that of resolving quarrels between family members. We can ignore something a stranger does to hurt us, but it is very hard to forgive a member of our own family or someone close to us.
The key to this little letter is in the 16th verse. Paul says to Philemon that he is sending back Onesimus:
...no longer as a slave but more than a slave, as a beloved brother, especially to me but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord. (Philemon 1:16 RSV)
The background of this story is very interesting. This letter was written when the Apostle Paul was a prisoner in the city of Rome for the first time. It was sent to Philemon, a friend Paul had won to Christ, who lived in Colossae. Evidently Philemon had a young brother whose name was Onesimus.
Some way or another, we do not know how, Onesimus got into trouble -- maybe he was a gambling man -- and became the slave of his own brother, Philemon. In those days, if a man got into trouble, he could get somebody to redeem him by selling himself to that person as a slave. Perhaps Onesimus got into debt, and went to his brother, Philemon, and said, "Philemon, would you mind going to bat here for me? I'm in trouble and I need some money."
Philemon would say, "Well, Onesimus, what can you give me for security?"
Onesimus would say, "I haven't got a thing but myself, but I'll become your slave if you'll pay off this debt." Now that may or may not have been how it occurred, but the picture we get from this little letter is that Philemon is the brother of Onesimus, and his slave as well. -Ray Stedman, link
In-class Instruction:
If Paul was in prison, and Onesimus came to him, where do you think he was?
Rome is 1,200 miles away , and would be a grueling journey on foot and by sea ( 1,200 miles on land, plus daring sea voyages which would themselves take 5-6 days)
Ephesus is about 100 miles away, a common walk in ancient world (3-4 days) .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TempleTantrum
Week 6 class summary HERE
Online Instruction: Short! (One forum).. Focus on SIGNature paper.
Signature turned into TURNITIN.com by 3 days after last class (11:59 pm, SUN.
Can't be late.
Login info below:
Online Moodle Instruction (Due 3 days after Week 6 class)
Online Instruction (1 hour during the week after the face-to-face session):
Note: only one hour of online Moodle work this week, so you can focus on finishing signature paper.
TEMPLE TANTRUM
In Matthew 21, Jesus angrily came into the temple and overturned the tables of the moneychangers. Most people assume he was angry at their overcharging, but your moodle forum this week will make the case that reading this text in context as an apple, and through the Three Worlds, will suggest his anger was for a different reason. Usually I have another class interrupt class unannounced, yell angrily and overturn a table to illustrate how surprising and subversive this act was. Here is a video we watched in class of one of these events that you may not be able to rewatch on facebook due to privacy serttings:https://www.facebook.com/juan.rivera.39794/videos/3324559124320/#
It would as surprising as going to the drive-thru and finding David Letterman working there. We watched the Taco Bell video in class, but not the McDonald's one, which is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tEfMxj4syw
It would as surprising as going to the drive-thru and finding David Letterman working there. We watched the Taco Bell video in class, but not the McDonald's one, which is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tEfMxj4syw
NT Wright on the temple:
Jesus as New Temple:
Three thought experiments.
- -Think if I offered you a drivers license, claiming i had authority to issue it
- -Think if someone destroyed all bank records and evidence of any debt you have owe
- -Think what would happen if you pointed at something, hoping your dog would look at it.
--
If I talk to your name sign, it's not really you.
What do you remember about signs and signposts?
What do you remember about signs and signposts?
--
-INTERCALATION/SANDWICHING
-DOUBLE PASTE
-HEMISTICHE
INTERCALATION is a "sandwiching" technique. where a story/theme is told/repeated at the beginning and ened of a section, suggesting that if a different story appears in between, it too is related thematically. We looked at this outline of Mark 11:
CURSING OF FIG FREE
CLEANSING OF THE TEMPLE
CURSING OF THE FIG TREE
This theme becomes even more clear when we note that Jesus statement was a quote from Isaiah 56:68, and the context there (of course) is against prejudice in the temple.
double paste: Often, two Scriptures/texts are combined into a new one. Ex. : Jesus says “My house shall be a house of prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of thieves.” The first clause (before the comma) is from Isaiah 56:6-8, and the second is from Jeremiah 7:11
hemistiche/ellipsis: when the last section of a well-known phrase is omitted foremphasis: Matthew says "My house shall be a house of prayer......," intentionally
leaving out
the "...for all nations" clause.
”
==
class discussion on Matthew 21 (
Three Acted Parables about Nationalism)
especially focusing on the temple tantrum..Note, the chapter started with "Palm Sunday":
--
next week we will watchthe "Lamb of God" video (below, or click this
if you prefer a Moodle link media
player)
and discussed how it was actually a nationalistic misunderstanding. If Jesus showed up personally in your church Sunday, would you wave the American flag at him, and ask him to run for president?
Post your answer in the comments section below...at bottom of this postVideo: click the white title to play
a)Van Der Laan:
Jesus on his way to Jerusalem
On the Sunday before Passover, Jesus came out of the wilderness on the eastern side of the Mount of Olives (just as the prophecy said the Messiah would come).
People spread cloaks and branches on the road before him. Then the disciples ?began, joyfully, to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen? (Luke 19:37). The crowd began shouting, ?Hosanna,? a slogan of the ultra-nationalistic Zealots, which meant, ?Please save us! Give us freedom! We?re sick of these Romans!?
The Palm Branches
The people also waved palm branches, a symbol that had once been placed on Jewish coins when the Jewish nation was free. Thus the palm branches were not a symbol of peace and love, as Christians usually assume; they were a symbol of Jewish nationalism, an expression of the people?s desire for political freedom __LINK to full article
b)FPU prof Tim Geddert:
Palm Sunday is a day of pomp and pageantry. Many church sanctuaries are decorated with palm fronds. I’ve even been in a church that literally sent a donkey down the aisle with a Jesus-figure on it. We cheer with the crowds—shout our hosannas—praising God exuberantly as Jesus the king enters the royal city.
But if Matthew, the gospel writer, attended one of our Palm Sunday services, I fear he would respond in dismay, “Don’t you get it?” We call Jesus’ ride into Jerusalem “The Triumphal Entry,” and just like the Jerusalem crowds, we fail to notice that Jesus is holding back tears.
Jesus did not intend for this to be a victory march into Jerusalem, a political rally to muster popular support or a publicity stunt for some worthy project. Jesus was staging a protest—a protest against the empire-building ways of the world.
LINK: full article :Parade Or Protest March
c)From Table Dallas:
Eugene Cho wrote a blog post back in 2009 about the irony of Palm Sunday:-Link
The image of Palm Sunday is one of the greatest ironies. Jesus Christ – the Lord of Lords, King of Kings, the Morning Star, the Savior of all Humanity, and we can list descriptives after descriptives – rides into a procession of “Hosanna, Hosanna…Hosanna in the Highest” - on a donkey – aka - an ass.He goes on to say it’s like his friend Shane Claiborne once said, “that a modern equivalent of such an incredulous image is of the most powerful person in our modern world, the United States President, riding into a procession…on a unicycle.”
-
Article By Dave Wainscott
“Temple Tantrums For All Nations"
Salt Fresno Magazine, Jan 2011:
 |
| Some revolutionaries from all nations overlooking the Temple Mount, on our 2004 trip |
I have actually heard people say they fear holding a bake sale anywhere on church property…they think a divine lightning bolt might drop.
Some go as far as to question the propriety of youth group fundraisers (even in the lobby), or flinch at setting up a table anywhere in a church building (especially the “sanctuary”) where a visiting speaker or singer sells books or CDs. “I don’t want to get zapped!”
All trace their well-meaning concerns to the “obvious” Scripture:
"Remember when Jesus cast out the moneychangers and dovesellers?"
It is astounding how rare it is to hear someone comment on the classic "temple tantrum" Scripture without turning it into a mere moralism:
"Better not sell stuff in church!”
Any serious study of the passage concludes that the most obvious reason Jesus was angry was not commercialism, but:
racism.
I heard that head-scratching.
The tables the Lord was intent on overturning were those of prejudice.
I heard that “Huh?”
A brief study of the passage…in context…will reorient us:
Again, most contemporary Americans assume that Jesus’ anger was due to his being upset about the buying and selling. But note that Jesus didn't say "Quit buying and selling!” His outburst was, "My house shall be a house of prayer for all nations" (Mark 11:17, emphasis mine). He was not merely saying what he felt, but directly quoting Isaiah (56:6-8), whose context is clearly not about commercialism, but adamantly about letting foreigners and outcasts have a place in the “house of prayer for all nations”; for all nations, not just the Jewish nation. Christ was likely upset not that moneychangers were doing business, but that they were making it their business to do so disruptfully and disrespectfully in the "outer court;” in the “Court of the Gentiles” (“Gentiles” means “all other nations but Jews”). This was
the only place where "foreigners" could have a “pew” to attend the international prayer meeting that was temple worship. Merchants were making the temple "a den of thieves" not (just) by overcharging for doves and money, but by (more insidiously) robbing precious people of “all nations” a place to pray, and the God-given right to "access access" to God.
Money-changing and doveselling were not inherently the problem. In fact they were required; t proper currency and “worship materials” were part of the procedure and protocol. It’s true that the merchants may have been overcharging and noisy, but it is where and how they are doing so that incites Jesus to righteous anger.
The problem is never tables. It’s what must be tabled:
marginalization of people of a different tribe or tongue who are only wanting to worship with the rest of us.
In the biblical era, it went without saying that when someone quoted a Scripture, they were assuming and importing the context. So we often miss that Jesus is quoting a Scripture in his temple encounter, let alone which Scripture and context. Everyone back then immediately got the reference: “Oh, I get it, he’s preaching Isaiah, he must really love foreigners!”:
Gary Molander, faithful Fresnan and cofounder of Floodgate Productions, has articulated it succinctly:
“The classic interpretation suggests that people were buying and selling stuff in God’s house, and that’s not okay. So for churches that have a coffee bar, Jesus might toss the latte machine out the window.
I wonder if something else is going on here, and I wonder if the Old Testament passage Jesus quotes informs our understanding?…Here’s the point:
Those who are considered marginalized and not worthy of love, but who love God and are pursuing Him, are not out. They’re in..
Those who are considered nationally unclean, but who love God and are pursuing Him, are not out. They’re in.
God’s heart is for Christ’s Church to become a light to the world, not an exclusive club. And when well-meaning people block that invitation, God gets really, really ticked.”
(Gary Molander, http://www.garymo.com/2010/03/who-cant-attend-your-church/)
Still reeling? Hang on, one more test:
How often have you heard the Scripture about “speak to the mountain and it will be gone” invoked , with the “obvious” meaning being “the mountain of your circumstances” or “the mountain of obstacles”? Sounds good, and that will preach. But again, a quick glance at the context of that saying of Jesus reveals nary a mention of metaphorical obstacles. In fact, we find it (Mark 11:21-22) directly after the “temple tantrum.” And consider where Jesus and the disciples are: still near the temple, and still stunned by the “object lesson” Jesus had just given there about prejudice. And know that everyone back then knew what most today don’t: that one way to talk about the temple was to call it “the mountain” (Isaiah 2:1, for example: “the mountain of the Lord’s temple”) .
Which is why most scholars would agree with Joel Green and John Carroll:
“Indeed, read in its immediate context, Jesus’ subsequent instruction to the disciples, ‘Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain..’ can refer only to the mountain on which the temple is built!... For him, the time of the temple is no more.” (“The Death of Jesus in Early Christianity,” p. 32, emphasis mine).In Jesus’ time, the temple system of worship had become far too embedded with prejudice. So Jesus suggests that his followers actually pray such a system, such a mountain, be gone.
Soon it literally was.
In our day, the temple is us: the church.
And the church-temple is called to pray a moving, mountain-moving, prayer:
“What keeps us from being a house of prayer for all nations?”
Or as Gary Molander summarizes:
“Who can’t attend your church?” -Dave Wainscott, Salt Fresno Magazine
--
--------------------
the money changers were in the Gentile courts of the temple..Jesus' action opened up the plazaso that Gentiles could pray." -Kraybill, Upside Down Kingdom, p. 151.
-----
--
FOR ALL THE NATIONS: BY RAY VANDER LAAN:
Through the prophet Isaiah, God spoke of the Temple as ?a house of prayer for all the nations? (Isa. 56:7). The Temple represented his presence among his people, and he wanted all believers to have access to him.Even during the Old Testament era, God spoke specifically about allowing non-Jewish people to his Temple: ?And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord ? these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer? (Isa. 56:7).
Unfortunately, the Temple authorities of Jesus? day forgot God?s desire for all people to worship freely at the Temple. Moneychangers had settled into the Gentile court, along with those who sold sacrificial animals and other religious merchandise. Their activities probably disrupted the Gentiles trying to worship there.
When Jesus entered the Temple area, he cleared the court of these moneychangers and vendors. Today, we often attribute his anger to the fact that they turned the temple area into a business enterprise. But Jesus was probably angry for another reason as well.
As he drove out the vendors, Jesus quoted the passage from Isaiah, ?Is it not written: ?My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations??? The vendors had been inconsiderate of Gentile believers. Their willingness to disrupt Gentile worship and prayers reflected a callous attitude of indifference toward the spiritual needs of Gentiles.
Through his anger and actions, Jesus reminded everyone nearby that God cared for Jew and Gentile alike. He showed his followers that God?s Temple was to be a holy place of prayer and worship for all believers. - Van Der Laan
---
--
Excerpts from a good Andreana Reale article in which she sheds light on Palm Sunday and theTemple Tantrum:
,, Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem actually echoes a custom that would have been familiar to people living in the Greco-Roman world, when the gospels were written.
Simon Maccabeus was a Jewish general who was part of the Maccabean Revolt that occurred two centuries before Christ, which liberated the Jewish people from Greek rule. Maccabeus entered Jerusalem with praise and palm leaves—making a beeline to the Temple to have it ritually cleansed from all the idol worship that was taking place. With the Jewish people now bearing the brunt of yet another foreign ruler (this time the Romans), Jesus’ parade into Jerusalem—complete with praise and palm leaves—was a strong claim that He was the leader who would liberate the people.
Except that in this case, Jesus isn’t riding a military horse, but a humble donkey. How triumphant is Jesus’ “triumphant entry”—on a donkey He doesn’t own, surrounded by peasants from the countryside, approaching a bunch of Jews who want to kill Him?
And so He enters the Temple. In the Greco-Roman world, the classic “triumphant entry” was usually followed by some sort of ritual—making a sacrifice at the Temple, for example, as was the legendary case of Alexander the Great. Jesus’ “ritual” was to attempt to drive out those making a profit in the Temple.
The chaotic commerce taking place—entrepreneurs selling birds and animals as well as wine, oil and salt for use in Temple sacrifices—epitomized much more than general disrespect. It also symbolised a whole system that was founded on oppression and injustice.
In Matthew, Mark and John, for example, Jesus chose specifically to overturn the tables of the pigeon sellers, since these were the staple commodities that marginalised people like women and lepers used to be made ritually clean by the system. Perhaps it was this system that Jesus was referring to when He accused the people of making the Temple “a den of robbers” (Mt 21.13; Mk 11.17; Lk 19.46).
Andreana Reale
--
So Jesus is intertexting and ddouble pasting two Scriptures and making a new one.
-----
Much of what Jesus said was intended to clue people in to the fact that the religous system of the day would be overthrown, but we miss much if it because we Americanize it, making it say what we want it to say, We turn the parables into fables or moral stories instead of living prophecies that pertain as much to us as to the audience that first heard them."
-Steve Gray, "When The KIngdom Comes," p..31
“Indeed, read in its immediate context, Jesus’ subsequent instruction to the disciples, ‘Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain..’ can refer only to the mountain on which the temple is built!... For him, the time of the temple is no more.”
"The word about the mountain being cast into the sea.....spoken in Jerusalem, would naturallly refer to the Temple mount. The saying is not simply a miscellaneous comment on how prayer and faith can do such things as curse fig trees. It is a very specific word of judgement: the Temple mountain is, figuratively speaking, to be taken up and cast into the sea."
-N,T. Wright, "Jesus and the Victory of God," p.422
see also:
By intercalating the story of the cursing of the fig tree within that of Jesus' obstruction of the normal activity of the temple, Mark interprets Jesus' action in the temple not merely as its cleansing but its cursing. For him, the time of the temple is no more, for it has lost its fecundity. Indeed , read in its immediate context, Jesus' subsequent instruction to the disciples, "Truly I tell you, if you say to this mountain, 'Be taken up and thrown into the sea'" can refer only to the mountain on which the temple is built!
What is Jesus' concern with the temple? Why does he regard it as extraneous to God's purpose?
Hints may be found in the mixed citation of Mark 11:17, part of which derives from Isaiah 56:7, the other from 11:7. Intended as a house of prayer for all the nations, the temple has been transformed by the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem into a den of brigands. That is, the temple has been perverted in favor of both socioreligious aims (the exclusion of Gentiles as potential recipients of divine reconciliation) and politico-economic purposes (legitimizing and
consolidating the power of the chief priests, whose teaching might be realized even in the plundering of even a poor widow's livelihood-cf 12:41-44)....
...In 12:10-11, Jesus uses temple imagery from Psalm 118 to refer to his own rejection and vindication, and in the process, documents his expectation of a new temple, inclusive of 'others' (12:9, Gentiles?) This is the community of his disciples.
-John T, Carroll and Joel B. Green, "The Death of Jesus in Early Christianity," p. 32-33
FIG TREE: FOLLOW SCRIPTURES WHERE IT IS A SYMBOL OF NATIONIAL ISRAEL/jERUSALEM/GOD'S BOUNDED SET:
Fig Tree:
s to the significance of this passage and what it means, the answer to that is again found in the chronological setting and in understanding how a fig tree is often used symbolically to represent Israel in the Scriptures. First of all, chronologically, Jesus had just arrived at Jerusalem amid great fanfare and great expectations, but then proceeds to cleanse the Temple and curse the barren fig tree. Both had significance as to the spiritual condition of Israel. With His cleansing of the Temple and His criticism of the worship that was going on there (Matthew 21:13; Mark 11:17), Jesus was effectively denouncing Israel’s worship of God. With the cursing of the fig tree, He was symbolically denouncing Israel as a nation and, in a sense, even denouncing unfruitful “Christians” (that is, people who profess to be Christian but have no evidence of a relationship with Christ).
The presence of a fruitful fig tree was considered to be a symbol of blessing and prosperity for the nation of Israel. Likewise, the absence or death of a fig tree would symbolize judgment and rejection. Symbolically, the fig tree represented the spiritual deadness of Israel, who while very religious outwardly with all the sacrifices and ceremonies, were spiritually barren because of their sins. By cleansing the Temple and cursing the fig tree, causing it to whither and die, Jesus was pronouncing His coming judgment of Israel and demonstrating His power to carry it out. It also teaches the principle that religious profession and observance are not enough to guarantee salvation, unless there is the fruit of genuine salvation evidenced in the life of the person. James would later echo this truth when he wrote that “faith without works is deadt also teaches the principle that religious profession and observance are not enough to guarantee salvation, unless there is the fruit of genuine salvation evidenced in the life of the person. James would later echo this truth when he wrote that “faith without works is dead” (James 2:26). The lesson of the fig tree is that we should bear spiritual fruit (Galatians 5:22-23), not just give an appearance of religiosity. God judges fruitlessness, and expects that those who have a relationship with Him will “bear much fruit” ( LINK
it's a sign
As Ted Baxter used to to say, "It all started
at a 5, 000 watt radio station in Fresno, Californiua..."
Well, what you are about to see all started with a slideshow of 50 or so funny signs
(typos, bad translations, double entendres, non-sequiturs, headscratchers etc) from around the world; to accompany my teaching for church, and at camp on the Seven Signs of Jesus in John's Gospel.
It has now become multiple photo albums on Facebook.
Ted Baxter would be proud; Many were taken right here in Fresno, California
Enjoy, and keep 'em coming!
Links below, here you go:
- See more at: http://davewainscott.blogspot.com/2012/04/its-sign.html#sthash.QKec2TTh.dpuf
Well, what you are about to see all started with a slideshow of 50 or so funny signs
(typos, bad translations, double entendres, non-sequiturs, headscratchers etc) from around the world; to accompany my teaching for church, and at camp on the Seven Signs of Jesus in John's Gospel.
It has now become multiple photo albums on Facebook.
Ted Baxter would be proud; Many were taken right here in Fresno, California
Enjoy, and keep 'em coming!
Links below, here you go:
Temple Warning Inscription
What did Jesus think when he saw this stone?
An inscription was discovered on a Greek tablet, attached to the Soreg, forbidding Gentiles to pass beyond that point. [Israel Department of Antiquities and Museums]
Josephus the Jewish historian of the first century A.D. wrote about the warning signs in Greek and Latin that were placed on the barrier wall that separated the court of the gentiles from the other courts in the Temple. Not until 1871 did archaeologists actually discover one written in Greek. Its seven line inscription reads as follows:
NO FOREIGNER
IS TO GO BEYOND THE BALUSTRADE
AND THE PLAZA OF THE TEMPLE ZONE
WHOEVER IS CAUGHT DOING SO
WILL HAVE HIMSELF TO BLAME
FOR HIS DEATH
WHICH WILL FOLLOW
IS TO GO BEYOND THE BALUSTRADE
AND THE PLAZA OF THE TEMPLE ZONE
WHOEVER IS CAUGHT DOING SO
WILL HAVE HIMSELF TO BLAME
FOR HIS DEATH
WHICH WILL FOLLOW
The Temple Warning Inscription is important in the study of Biblical Archaeology and confirms events outlined in Scripture. When Jesus saw this inscription he knew that his own life would be the cost for the gentiles to go past this barrier.
Ephesians 2:13-14 "But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us"
Matthew 23:13 "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because youshut off the kingdom of heaven from people; for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in."
Isaiah 56:7 "These I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations."
Mark 11:17-18 "And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves. And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine."
Related Pages:
Warning Inscription - Warning Inscription. Warning to Trespassers In the Temple. The Court of the
Gentiles was the only part of the sacred precincts of the Temple in Jerusalem into ...
Timeline of Significant Archaeological Expeditions and Discoveries - 1871 - The Jerusalem Temple Warning Inscription Stone Was Discovered by Ganneau.
Herod's Temple - Archaeology - The Western (Wailing) Wall is all that remains of the Jerusalem Temple where ... B.C. and was inscribed with a letter addressed to Eliashib and mentions "the ...Josephus the Jewish historian wrote about the warning signs that were on the ...
Overview - Court of the Women - Jerusalem Temple - If you were to approach the Temple in Jerusalem in the first century A.D. you ...
distances (the Soreg) with inscriptions in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, warning all ...
Soreg Inscription - Soreg Inscription. warning_inscription2.gif. Greek tablet, attached to the Soreg, forbidding Gentiles to pass beyond that point. Israel Department of Antiquities ...
First Century Jerusalem - Royal Porticoes - A portion of the temple which according to Josephus (B. J. 5:5, section 1; Ant. 20:
9, section 7) remained ... Josephus the Jewish historian wrote about the warning
signs that were on the barrier that ... Its seven line inscription read as follows: ...LINK
