Muffled
Jesus in me
I don't believe there is evidence of a connection of common knowledge being connected to the first hand knowledge of the writers.
-
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!
Resurrection of Christ - What's the evidence for and against a literal resurrection
- Thread starter Dawnofhope
- Start date
I don't believe there is evidence of a connection of common knowledge being connected to the first hand knowledge of the writers.
If by writers you mean those who in the final stage penned the Gospels, they did not write from first hand knowledge, but they did take into account tradition that was handed on to them.
That is great. Thanks
If you are after clarification and wish to consider more evidence, then this is worth reading - Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán
It offers many thought you may not yet considered.
Regards Tony
We've been talking to each other about the resurrection for over one year now.
The following words of Baha'u'llah came to mind.
The most burning fire is to question the signs of God, to dispute idly that which He hath revealed, to deny Him and carry one’s self proudly before Him.
Bahá'í Reference Library - Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh Revealed After the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, Pages 155-157
The reason the story of Adam remains is the same reason many other stories in the bible remain.
Why say that Jesus was resurrected?
Why tell a story of creation coming into being in six days?
Why say the Jesus was the son of God and born to a virgin?
Why tell the story of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden?
Why tell the story of Noah and the great flood?
The answer is that through these stories God Educates us. It is that simple.
One who disbelieves in the signs of God, won't really listen to what the Baha'is or the Christians say, will find fault with both religions, and even try to play one religion off against the other.
Last edited:
I am the author of the OP, not another.
The purpose was to invite an honest and open discussion about a core belief of the Christian religion. There is no disrepsect to Christians and certainly no provocation.
Clearly Baha'is, while believing in the same God, bible, and Jesus, have a differing POV, in that we see the resurrection narrative as allegorical and not an historic fact.
Christians and Baha'is have many beliefs in common but clearly have differences that many evangelical Christians would see as being irreconcilable to the truth as they see it. I accept that, and in starting this thread, its not my intent to cause conflict and contention. It is simply to examine the evidence for and against differing perspectives of the resurrection of Christ.
While you and another Baha'i (@Trailblazer ) are discussing prophecy amongst other issues, and are free to do so, it is completely off topic IMHO.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Again I'll ask... Is the Book of Mormon a true story? If "yes" then is Joseph Smith a prophet of God? If not then people make up religious myth to teach others about religion. That's what I think is happening.
There are stories to justify sacrificing people to the gods. So I believe religious people can and do make up stories to legitimize their religious beliefs. Are they all from God? No. Are they all in a progression? No. Are some beliefs of some ancient religions false? I believe so. How about you?
Baha'is play with religions to make them all fit into the Baha'i explanation. Christians use their beliefs to prove they are the only truth. So are they "signs" of God? No. You don't believe in the greatest sign any religion has ever given, the Resurrection. You make me doubt Christianity. And they make me doubt the Baha'is.
The Baha'i explanation of the resurrection as symbolic is plain dumb... Along with the three "Woes" from Revelation being Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah, dumb. It makes question the validity of all the Baha'i claims of being the truth. So don't give this stuff about "one who disbelieves" in the signs of God.
You don't believe in all the major teachings of Christianity. You deny all the "signs" they give you and reinterpret them by making them all symbolic. Are you right? Should I trust you? Should I trust Christians? What's wrong with questioning both?
Why assume physical clouds?
Could it not be the Clouds of doubt and unbelief, anything that prevents us from seeing the Spiritual Jesus risen, which is the Christ? These same clouds are what Christ will return on.
Regards Tony
The Trust you need to find is in the Scriptures themselves. Trust they are telling us what we need to know.
What are your views on the risen Christ, what makes more sense to you?
Regards Tony
The story of Jesus as recorded in the gospels has some historic value but conveys hidden spiritual truths for those with ears to hear and eyes to see. If you take it all as literally true then of course you have the resurrection and the ascension, heaven above, hell below, along with Satan and his demons. The gospel writers never intended their audience to take it all literally, just as Jesus never intended his parables to be taken literally.
A central narrative to Christianity is that of personal responsibility and what God requires of us to attain the kingdom of heaven. You can claim the gospel writers were either gullible or deliberately misleading their audience who were gullible. Other than missing the entire point of the gospels, such a view ignores the profound and positive effect the gospels have had on billions over the last two thousand years.
I don't see how introducing the book of Mormon is relevant.
No. Baha'is don't play with anything. We attempt, however inadequately to make sense of the major religions in the light of Baha'u'llah's revelation.
The signs of God are the Great Educators of humanity and in particular the Manifestations of God and the Revelation from God they bring. These are the signs of God. Not man made doctrines and dogmas.
Many Christians are good and decent people concerned with fairness, justice, and truth. They rightly look towards the gospels and the life and Teachings of Jesus as inspiration and guidance.
To say all Christians believe they have the monopoly on truth is disrespectful.
To say the Baha'is don't believe in the resurrection is another misrepresentation.
Thanks for clarifying your thoughts. Of course you view the Baha'i perspective as 'dumb' but I know you also see the Christian view as being 'dumb' too. It must feel good not to be enmeshed in all this religious nonsense.
You should trust neither of us, but investigate the truth for yourself, so you see with your own eyes and not through the eyes of others. However Baha'u'llah's standard as to how you approach one of the most important tasks in your life, is high.
No man shall attain the shores of the ocean of true understanding except he be detached from all that is in heaven and on earth. Sanctify your souls, O ye peoples of the world, that haply ye may attain that station which God hath destined for you and enter thus the tabernacle which, according to the dispensations of Providence, hath been raised in the firmament of the Bayán.
The essence of these words is this: they that tread the path of faith, they that thirst for the wine of certitude, must cleanse themselves of all that is earthly—their ears from idle talk, their minds from vain imaginings, their hearts from worldly affections, their eyes from that which perisheth. They should put their trust in God, and, holding fast unto Him, follow in His way. Then will they be made worthy of the effulgent glories of the sun of divine knowledge and understanding, and become the recipients of a grace that is infinite and unseen, inasmuch as man can never hope to attain unto the knowledge of the All-Glorious, can never quaff from the stream of divine knowledge 4 and wisdom, can never enter the abode of immortality, nor partake of the cup of divine nearness and favour, unless and until he ceases to regard the words and deeds of mortal men as a standard for the true understanding and recognition of God and His Prophets.
Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 3-41
Regardless, you should adhere to the outcome of that search, whatever the outcome.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I do not see how that is twisting/adulterating anything in the Bible because I am not contradicting/changing anything that is IN the Bible or saying it is not true.
Why would the genealogy of Baha’u’llah be in the Bible? But the fact that it is not does not mean that Baha’u’llah was not descended from David.
I am not assuming anything. For the record I am not a traditional believer but neither do I criticize those who are. My interest is in what the various writers wanted their readers to understand.
As I have written elsewhere, it seems to me that the author of Acts ('Luke') was employing imagery to connect to Daniel 7:13-14 as well as the several Olivet Discourse references to Daniel, including in Luke's own Gospel. For those who took the idea of heaven in the sky literally, they were free to do so in the Ascension passage in Acts 1:6-11. For those of a less literal bent, the mental connection with the other passages was enough for Luke's purpose. Which in this case was to say that Jesus is coming back alright but not next Tuesday so don’t hold your breath waiting. In the meantime, there is a church to build.
But I do not see Luke as employing any explicit symbolism or metaphor in the sense of 'this means that'. Luke's Gospel incorporates the empty tomb theme, as do all the Gospels, which points clearly to a bodily resurrection. Luke 24:36-43 very plainly has the risen Jesus be in a bodily form. Luke is definitely in the physical resurrection camp.
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
We do not have any clergy who teach anybody anything... Baha’is teach themselves.... The way they do that is to read the Writings of Baha’u’llah, Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi, as well as other books about the Baha’i Faith.
The beliefs of other religions have nothing to do with the Baha’i Faith except that their spiritual truths are the same. However, those are separate religions even though they are all from the same God.
The Baha’i Faith does not need the beliefs of other religions because it is a standalone religion with its own Prophet who received His Own Revelation from God.
Progressive Revelation means exactly what it says on Wikipedia:
Progressive revelation is a core teaching in the Bahá'í Faith that suggests that religious truth is revealed by God progressively and cyclically over time through a series of divine Messengers, and that the teachings are tailored to suit the needs of the time and place of their appearance.[1][2] Thus, the Bahá'í teachings recognize the divine origin of several world religions as different stages in the history of one religion, while believing that the revelation of Bahá'u'lláh is the most recent (though not the last—that there will never be a last), and therefore the most relevant to modern society.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_revelation_Baha'i
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
How do you think that anyone can know the true meaning of Christianity, by the doctrines of the Church that were voted upon at the Council of Nicaea? How does that make anything true? I guess you do not see the problem here? Christians that are reading the SAME Bible you are reading to not believe all of what was decided upon by the Councils of the church.
If all Christians agreed on the meaning of all verses in the Bible there would only be one Christian church instead of hundreds of sects.
“truly adheres to the Bible” – what does that mean? All Christians SAY that they truly adhere to the Bible, so which ones truly adhere to the Bible?
So who is to say which interpretations of the Bible is right and which one is wrong?
I think I already said that I do not care if Jesus rose from the grave. Nobody can prove it one way or another and some Baha’is have said they believe it is possible. That does not change one thing though because that won’t make Jesus into the Messiah who was going to rule on the throne of David, since all evidence in the OT and NT is to the contrary.
So big deal, even if God raised Jesus up. That does not mean that the physical bodies of other humans are going to be raised up when Jesus returns because (a) Jesus is not returning and (b) physical bodies do not rise from graves, and (c) that belief was derived from a misinterpretation of 1 Corinthians 15. There is no reason to believe that Paul even believed that Jesus rose bodily from the grave (see my next post) so what is written in 1 Cor 15 is not a promise of bodies that will rise; it has a completely different interpretation (I will post if you want to see it).
So there you have it, an entire belief about your eternal life that is based upon misinterpretations of these verses.
Nothing got mixed up with anything except by Christians. Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha simply clarified what certain words and certain verses really mean. Baha’u’llah could do that because He was a Manifestation of God and He had all knowledge and was infallible. You can’t because you do not have all knowledge and you are fallible. This is logic 101 stuff.
Jesus is not here to interpret the Bible. If Jesus was here then we would consider His interpretation just as accurate as the interpretations of Baha’u’llah. But the church fathers? C’mon, give me a break. They got the most important things wrong from the very beginning; namely that there was actually a Garden of Eden where Adam and Eve sinned, and then there was original sin that we needed to be absolved of... then Jesus rose from the grave after three days which means that physical bodies of other humans will also rise from their graves... then Jesus ascended into the sky above where there is no atmosphere and now the same man Jesus is going to come down on a cloud from heaven...
Jesus never promised to return and Christians believe that, so how are Baha’is twisting the Bible? Seems to be that it is the Christians who are twisting the Bible because they want to believe that Jesus is the Messiah of the latter days... Funny thing, the Jews do not believe that and they are reading the same Bible... It does not matter if the Jews believe in the NT because they are reading the same verses as Christians are reading in the OT, the ones that prophesize the Messiah.
Jesus made it perfectly clear that He had finished the work God gave Him to do and that the world would see Him no more, so that means He is not going to return to earth in the same body. That is not twisting the Bible; it is just reading the Bible. Twisting it is what Christians do in order to say these verses mean something other than the obvious meaning. In the context of the chapters it is even clearer what these verses mean. Moreover, the reason the same Jesus in the same body has not returned, even though all the prophecies have been fulfilled, is because Jesus never planned to return.
John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
So, in the next chapter Jesus follows up by saying:
John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
Yet Christians believe that the same man Jesus is going to return and establish His kingdom in this world.... There is absolutely nothing in the Bible that supports this belief and everything contradicts it.
And Baha’is are twisting the Bible?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
@Neb
Alternative beliefs by some liberal & mainline Christians, secularists, etc.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/resur_lt.htm
Resurrection views- Religious tolerance
What many liberal theologians believe about Jesus' death:
Many liberal and some mainline Christian leaders believe that Jesus died during the crucifixion, did not resurrect himself, and was not bodily resurrected by God. At his death, his mind ceased to function and his body started the decomposition process. Returning to life a day and a half later would have been quite impossible. The story of having been wrapped in linen and anointed with myrrh seems to have been copied from the story of the death of Osiris -- the Egyptian God of the earth, vegetation and grain. The legend that he visited the underworld between his death and resurrection was simply copied from common Pagan themes of surrounding cultures. One example again was Osiris. "With his original association to agriculture, his death and resurrection were seen as symbolic of the annual death and re-growth of the crops and the yearly flooding of the Nile." 1
They also believe that Paul regarded the resurrection to be an act of God in which Jesus was a passive recipient of God's power. Paul did not mention the empty tomb, the visit by a woman or women, the stone, the angel/angels/man/men at the tomb, and reunion of Jesus with his followers in his resuscitated body. Rather, he believed that Jesus was taken up into heaven in a spirit body. It was only later, from about 70 to 110 CE when the four canonic Gospels were written, that the Christians believed that Jesus rose from the grave in his original body, and by his own power.
Later, perhaps after Paul's death, there was great disappointment within the Christian communities because Jesus had not returned as expected. They diverted their focus of attention away from Jesus' second coming. They studied his life and death more intensely. Legends without a historical basis were created by the early church; these included the empty tomb and described Jesus returning in his original body to eat and talk with his followers.
In previous centuries, almost all Christians believed in miracles as described in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). These included creation, the story of Adam and Eve, a talking serpent, the great flood of Noah, the drying up of the Red/Reed sea, a prophet riding on a talking ***, the sun stopping in the sky, etc. From the Christian Scriptures (New Testament), they believed in the virgin birth, the Christmas star, angels appearing to the shepherds, Jesus healing the sick, etc. Many, perhaps most, liberal Christians now believe that these stories are not to be interpreted literally as real events. Their faith has not been damaged by losing faith in the reality of these events. A growing number of liberals are now taking the final step by interpreting the stories of Jesus' resurrection and his appearances to his followers and to Paul as other than real events. Retired bishop John Shelby Spong commented:
"I do admit that for Christians to enter this subject honestly is to invite great anxiety. It is to walk the razor's edge, to run the risk of cutting the final cord still binding many to the faith of their mothers and fathers. But the price for refusing to enter this consideration is for me even higher. The inability to question reveals that one has no confidence that one's belief system will survive such an inquiry. That is a tacit recognition that on unconscious levels, one's faith has already died. If one seeks to protect God from truth or new insights, then God has surely already died." 3
Alternative beliefs by some liberal & mainline Christians, secularists, etc.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/resur_lt.htm
Resurrection views- Religious tolerance
What many liberal theologians believe about Jesus' death:
Many liberal and some mainline Christian leaders believe that Jesus died during the crucifixion, did not resurrect himself, and was not bodily resurrected by God. At his death, his mind ceased to function and his body started the decomposition process. Returning to life a day and a half later would have been quite impossible. The story of having been wrapped in linen and anointed with myrrh seems to have been copied from the story of the death of Osiris -- the Egyptian God of the earth, vegetation and grain. The legend that he visited the underworld between his death and resurrection was simply copied from common Pagan themes of surrounding cultures. One example again was Osiris. "With his original association to agriculture, his death and resurrection were seen as symbolic of the annual death and re-growth of the crops and the yearly flooding of the Nile." 1
They also believe that Paul regarded the resurrection to be an act of God in which Jesus was a passive recipient of God's power. Paul did not mention the empty tomb, the visit by a woman or women, the stone, the angel/angels/man/men at the tomb, and reunion of Jesus with his followers in his resuscitated body. Rather, he believed that Jesus was taken up into heaven in a spirit body. It was only later, from about 70 to 110 CE when the four canonic Gospels were written, that the Christians believed that Jesus rose from the grave in his original body, and by his own power.
Later, perhaps after Paul's death, there was great disappointment within the Christian communities because Jesus had not returned as expected. They diverted their focus of attention away from Jesus' second coming. They studied his life and death more intensely. Legends without a historical basis were created by the early church; these included the empty tomb and described Jesus returning in his original body to eat and talk with his followers.
In previous centuries, almost all Christians believed in miracles as described in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). These included creation, the story of Adam and Eve, a talking serpent, the great flood of Noah, the drying up of the Red/Reed sea, a prophet riding on a talking ***, the sun stopping in the sky, etc. From the Christian Scriptures (New Testament), they believed in the virgin birth, the Christmas star, angels appearing to the shepherds, Jesus healing the sick, etc. Many, perhaps most, liberal Christians now believe that these stories are not to be interpreted literally as real events. Their faith has not been damaged by losing faith in the reality of these events. A growing number of liberals are now taking the final step by interpreting the stories of Jesus' resurrection and his appearances to his followers and to Paul as other than real events. Retired bishop John Shelby Spong commented:
"I do admit that for Christians to enter this subject honestly is to invite great anxiety. It is to walk the razor's edge, to run the risk of cutting the final cord still binding many to the faith of their mothers and fathers. But the price for refusing to enter this consideration is for me even higher. The inability to question reveals that one has no confidence that one's belief system will survive such an inquiry. That is a tacit recognition that on unconscious levels, one's faith has already died. If one seeks to protect God from truth or new insights, then God has surely already died." 3
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
If God is the owner and you do not own God then you do not own the Bible. Nobody owns God so that means anyone is FREE to interpret the Bible however they want to. Yet Christians claim that only they can interpret the Bible correctly. There is no reason to believe that, especially because they cannot even agree amongst themselves what it means.
That is a meaningless statement unless you have examples, since it could mean anything. Out of the context of what?
So what? That does not prove anything. Why would it be in the Bible? There are a lot of things that are true that are not in the Bible.
Just because Jesus was a descendant of David does not mean Jesus was the Messiah... NOT IN BIBLE.
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
As I said in a previous post, I am not challenging that so don’t include me in that. I am just an innocent bystander.
All of those verses were true during Jesus’ dispensation. That is what you do not understand or refuse to acknowledge. We now know that no NAME is above any other name:
"Beware, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make any distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, or to discriminate against the signs that have accompanied and proclaimed their Revelation. This indeed is the true meaning of Divine Unity, if ye be of them that apprehend and believe this truth. Be ye assured, moreover, that the works and acts of each and every one of these Manifestations of God, nay whatever pertaineth unto them, and whatsoever they may manifest in the future, are all ordained by God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Whoso maketh the slightest possible difference between their persons, their words, their messages, their acts and manners, hath indeed disbelieved in God, hath repudiated His signs, and betrayed the Cause of His Messengers.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 59-60
And of course what is rather obvious us that those verses are subject to many different interpretations; they mean one thing to you and something else to others.
Sorry, but that was time/date stamped. For this day and age, His Manifestation, meaning God’s Manifestation is Baha’u’llah. It is too bad you do not like that but that is what God has said:
“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination. Thou dost witness how most of the commentaries and interpretations of the words of God, now current amongst men, are devoid of truth. Their falsity hath, in some cases, been exposed when the intervening veils were rent asunder. They themselves have acknowledged their failure in apprehending the meaning of any of the words of God.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 171-172
So what? Jesus suffered for three days. Baha’u’llah suffered at the hands of His enemies in prison and exile for 30 years.
“Thou hast known how grievously the Prophets of God, His Messengers and Chosen Ones, have been afflicted. Meditate a while on the motive and reason which have been responsible for such a persecution. At no time, in no Dispensation, have the Prophets of God escaped the blasphemy of their enemies, the cruelty of their oppressors, the denunciation of the learned of their age, who appeared in the guise of uprightness and piety. Day and night they passed through such agonies as none can ever measure, except the knowledge of the one true God, exalted be His glory.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 56-59
So what, even if Jesus did resurrect, that does not make Him any better than any other Manifestation of God.
Oh, but you are wrong about that. Jesus and Baha’u’llah and all the other Manifestations of God are at the Right Hand of God. That does not need to be in the Bible. It is in the Writings of Baha’u’llah, good as gold.
“Therefore, know thou of a certainty that these Luminaries of heavenly majesty, though their dwelling be in the dust, yet their true habitation is the seat of glory in the realms above. Though bereft of all earthly possessions, yet they soar in the realms of immeasurable riches. And whilst sore tried in the grip of the enemy, they are seated on the right hand of power and celestial dominion. Amidst the darkness of their abasement there shineth upon them the light of unfading glory, and upon their helplessness are showered the tokens of an invincible sovereignty.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán
There is even a special passage that refers to Jesus:
“Similarly, call thou to mind the day when the Jews, who had surrounded Jesus, Son of Mary, were pressing Him to confess His claim of being the Messiah and Prophet of God, so that they might declare Him an infidel and sentence Him to death. Then they led Him away, He Who was the Daystar of the heaven of divine Revelation, unto Pilate and Caiaphas, who was the leading divine of that age. The chief priests were all assembled in the palace, also a multitude of people who had gathered to witness His sufferings, to deride and injure Him. Though they repeatedly questioned Him, hoping that He would confess His claim, yet Jesus held His peace and spake not. Finally, an accursed of God arose and, approaching Jesus, adjured Him saying: “Didst thou not claim to be the Divine Messiah? Didst thou not say, ‘I am the King of Kings, My word is the Word of God, and I am the breaker of the Sabbath day’?” Thereupon Jesus lifted up His head and said: “Beholdest thou not the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power and might?” These were His words, and yet consider how to outward seeming He was devoid of all power except that inner power which was of God and which had encompassed all that is in heaven and on earth. How can I relate all that befell Him after He spoke these words? How shall I describe their heinous behavior towards Him? They at last heaped on His blessed Person such woes that He took His flight unto the fourth Heaven.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Did Jesus believe them? How can we know?
Jesus did not actually write anything Himself.
As I recall the Bible writers wrote what they recalled that Jesus said... Did John, Luke, Mark and Matthew even write those gospels? From what someone on another forum told me they were not written by them but “according to” them.
Apologetics: How Do We Know Who Wrote the Gospels?
This is a far cry from Jesus writing it with His Own Pen as Baha’u’llah did.
From the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh:
The Four Gospels were written after Him [Christ]. John, Luke, Mark and Matthew - these four wrote after Christ what they remembered of His utterances.
(From a previously untranslated Tablet)
The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
*chuckles*
I don't auto-accept everything that reads as 'down to Earth'
I told you scores of pages ago that G-Mark is the most valuable gospel for the HJ student.
Thankyou for introducing me to G-Mark. I never knew that it provided so much HJ material. Excuse the sarcasm but I have been aware of that for many years now.
Amazing. Quite totally mind-numbing.
Do you know what a demonstration is? It can be anything from a group of protesters chanting to folks pulling down a statue, or DEMONSTRATING. What do you think Yeshua was doing when he :...........
Mark {11:15} And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went
into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and
bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the
moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves;
Do you know what a picket is? It is a physical detering of others from entering or leaving an area, or building or place. What do you think that Yeshua was doing when he :...........
Mark {11:16} And would not suffer that any man should carry
[any] vessel through the temple.
All the above happened on Yeshua's second visit to the Temple (out of three visits) during that fateful week.
You write pages and pages of .......... writing ............ and yet it appears that you don't see anything, don't understand what happened.