Christians and Their Exaggerations

The cleansing of the Temple narrative tells of Jesus expelling the merchants and the money changers from the Temple, and occurs in all four New Testament gospels.

To my mind this illustration
is a fair representation of the four verses; Jesus attacking a few merchants and money changers. Something one might concede is entirely possible. However, throughout history this



View attachment 23855
is how the incident has been portrayed: Jesus overpowering a whole crowd of cowering merchants and money changers. Not one of them having the presences of mind to strike back or grapple with Jesus, much less having the brains to work together to stop him.

This isn't to say the incident didn't happen as related in the Bible, but only that Christians have no compunctions about exaggerating the event to a ridiculous extreme----I'm not implying all Christians are guilty of the exaggeration, only those who commissioned and created the works, and those who unquestioningly buy into it. One only has to ask himself, "Assuming Jesus didn't posses the power to cloud men's minds like the Shadow or posses the strength of Superman, how reasonable are the depictions above?" Personally, I find the paintings absurd and have to ask why Christians repeatedly find it necessary to exaggerate the event?


Anyone?

.

The Luke gospel version is a very different scene from the others, Jesus does not display any physical violence, he casts them out by saying things to them. In fact if I recall, and we can check this, I think he is invited back to speak again and he does, making the priests jealous, and they plot against him.

OK, I checked, he comes back every day to teach, and so on, a different lead up to his eventual arrest.

I take it that you don't like exaggeration of all kinds or is it just Christian's use of dramatic rendering to make a point that bothers you?

If it's the former, you are consistent. If the later, than it's a statement about how much you dislike Christianity.

I think this movie portrays accurately what we read in the Gospels. I don't think it's an exaggerated portrayal at all. (2:24)



But back to the topic...yes, u're right, some of those paintings crossed the line.

Your first illustration appears to be Jesus pulling the seat out from under a pigeon seller, the others appear to be illustrations of the Gospel of John scene where he makes a whip, and shows them all that he's not afraid to use it.

Skwim said:

is how the incident has been portrayed: Jesus overpowering a whole crowd of cowering merchants and money changers. Not one of them having the presences of mind to strike back or grapple with Jesus, much less having the brains to work together to stop him.

Click to expand...

This message represented in the bible is overly transparent and does not require this redundant liturgical. This event has nothing to do with historical accuracy or superman skills at all. Jesus explains the spiritual and the physical are separate from one another proclaiming the holy church as the symbol of gods kingdom. This is pure symbolism at its biblical finest. Jesus proves it with this single passage.

(Matthew 22:15-22; Luke 20:19-26)

13Later, they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to catch Jesus in His words. 14“Teacher,” they said, “we know that You are honest and are swayed by no one. Indeed, You are impartial and teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Now then, is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not? Should we pay them or not?”

15But Jesus saw through their hypocrisy and said, “Why are you testing Me? Bring Me a denariusb to inspect.”16So they brought it, and He asked them, “Whose likeness is this? And whose inscription?”

“Caesar’s,” they answered.

17Then Jesus told them, (7)“Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”

And they marveled at Him.


So what Jesus is affirming here is the identity of Gods symbol(church) on earth in physical form. And hes clearly pissed that man was defiling it. (7)Humans(material) things belong with human things and gods(spiritual) with gods.

Estro Felino said:

I think this movie portrays accurately what we read in the Gospels. I don't think it's an exaggerated portrayal at all. (2:24)

Click to expand...

Yes, this must be the historical Jesus rendering of events.

Skwim said:

Personally, I find the paintings absurd and have to ask why Christians repeatedly find it necessary to exaggerate the event?

Click to expand...

Why didn't historical artists operate under a paradigm of modern, scholarly critical-historical objectivity over aesthetics when creating historical artworks?




In other news, elephants also don't have tubas for heads...

lukethethird said:

Your first illustration appears to be Jesus pulling the seat out from under a pigeon seller, the others appear to be illustrations of the Gospel of John scene where he makes a whip, and shows them all that he's not afraid to use it.

Click to expand...

In the first illustration Jesus is tipping over the table of a money changer with his fingers.

.

Art and exaggeration go hand in hand. Unless you rely on, say, Hollywood for your understanding of world affairs, it doesn’t seem to logically follow that some paintings by some artists represent a tendency of “exaggeration” by all members of a belief system.

Next time a carpenter who carried big pieces of wood and therefore with big muscles comes at you with a whip, let me know if you can stop him (no guns at that time and probably no one allowed with swords in the Temple)

Skwim said:

The cleansing of the Temple narrative tells of Jesus expelling the merchants and the money changers from the Temple, and occurs in all four New Testament gospels.

Matthew 21:12–13
12 And Jesus entered the temple[a] and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. 13 He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.”

Mark 11:15–16
15 And they came to Jerusalem. And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold and those who bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. 16 And he would not allow anyone to carry anything through the temple.

Luke 19:45–46
45 And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold, 46 saying to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a den of robbers.”

John 2:13–15
13 The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers sitting there. 15 And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables.
​

To my mind this illustration

View attachment 23854
​

is a fair representation of the four verses; Jesus attacking a few merchants and money changers. Something one might concede is entirely possible. However, throughout history this

View attachment 23855
is how the incident has been portrayed: Jesus overpowering a whole crowd of cowering merchants and money changers. Not one of them having the presences of mind to strike back or grapple with Jesus, much less having the brains to work together to stop him.

This isn't to say the incident didn't happen as related in the Bible, but only that Christians have no compunctions about exaggerating the event to a ridiculous extreme----I'm not implying all Christians are guilty of the exaggeration, only those who commissioned and created the works, and those who unquestioningly buy into it. One only has to ask himself, "Assuming Jesus didn't posses the power to cloud men's minds like the Shadow or posses the strength of Superman, how reasonable are the depictions above?" Personally, I find the paintings absurd and have to ask why Christians repeatedly find it necessary to exaggerate the event?


Anyone?

.

Click to expand...

Western Christians starting around the 1200's began to take a more emotional and expressive approach to church art, veering away from the iconographic tradition which had up to this point been universal Christian practice, and instead choosing to revive Classical-style paintings and sculpture. The icons before this had all been relatively still images with not much movement or expression, suited for contemplation and meditation. But the new Western manner of religious art chose to place emphasis on emotions and movement to make more "interesting" pieces for the sake of decoration and to show off the skills of the artist.

Compare this to Eastern Christian (Byzantine) iconography of the same event:


^That's the difference between the new Western art tradition and the much older Byzantine tradition of iconography.

Socratic Berean said:

Art and exaggeration go hand in hand.

Click to expand...

In some case, yes, but not to the degree and extent of this subject.

Unless you rely on, say, Hollywood for your understanding of world affairs, it doesn’t seem to logically follow that some paintings by some artists represent a tendency of “exaggeration” by all members of a belief system.

Click to expand...

Which is why I said "I'm not implying all Christians are guilty of the exaggeration."

KenS said:

Next time a carpenter who carried big pieces of wood and therefore with big muscles comes at you with a whip, let me know if you can stop him (no guns at that time and probably no one allowed with swords in the Temple)

Click to expand...

I just love how you create images in your mind and then let them meld into reality for you.

Shiranui117 said:

Western Christians starting around the 1200's began to take a more emotional and expressive approach to church art, veering away from the iconographic tradition which had up to this point been universal Christian practice, and instead choosing to revive Classical-style paintings and sculpture. The icons before this had all been relatively still images with not much movement or expression, suited for contemplation and meditation. But the new Western manner of religious art chose to place emphasis on emotions and movement to make more "interesting" pieces for the sake of decoration and to show off the skills of the artist.

Compare this to Eastern Christian (Byzantine) iconography of the same event:

Click to expand...

Shiranui117 said:

^That's the difference between the new Western art tradition and the much older Byzantine tradition of iconography.

Click to expand...

Yes, but irrelevant to the continual and gross exaggeration we see here.

.

Skwim said:

I just love how you create images in your mind and then let them meld into reality for you.

Click to expand...

LOL... It is what it is.

The question is whose mind is creating an image.

C'mon people, we can't over exaggerate this scene enough, it's the big action shot of the story, it leads up to Jesus' arrest for cryin' out loud. A lot of tables and chairs got busted over people when Shane went down to the local saloon to straighten things out there too, same diff, it's that time in the story when good confronts evil, what are we to expect was going to happen? But then again, there is the Luke version wherein words prevail.

Frog said:

This message represented in the bible is overly transparent and does not require this redundant liturgical. This event has nothing to do with historical accuracy or superman skills at all. Jesus explains the spiritual and the physical are separate from one another proclaiming the holy church as the symbol of gods kingdom. This is pure symbolism at its biblical finest. Jesus proves it with this single passage.

(Matthew 22:15-22; Luke 20:19-26)

13Later, they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to catch Jesus in His words. 14“Teacher,” they said, “we know that You are honest and are swayed by no one. Indeed, You are impartial and teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Now then, is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not? Should we pay them or not?”

15But Jesus saw through their hypocrisy and said, “Why are you testing Me? Bring Me a denariusb to inspect.”16So they brought it, and He asked them, “Whose likeness is this? And whose inscription?”

“Caesar’s,” they answered.

17Then Jesus told them, (7)“Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”

And they marveled at Him.

Click to expand...

Somehow I suspect the Herodians and the Pharisees we're not that gullible and dense as to marvel at Jesus over something like that.

Frog said:

This message represented in the bible is overly transparent and does not require this redundant liturgical. This event has nothing to do with historical accuracy or superman skills at all. Jesus explains the spiritual and the physical are separate from one another proclaiming the holy church as the symbol of gods kingdom. This is pure symbolism at its biblical finest. Jesus proves it with this single passage.

Click to expand...

So, do I get to use a whip when churches have bookstores or gift shops and stuff?

KenS said:

Next time a carpenter who carried big pieces of wood and therefore with big muscles comes at you with a whip, let me know if you can stop him (no guns at that time and probably no one allowed with swords in the Temple)

Click to expand...

Historically there were guards, armed guards, at the Temple. They could've shut it down by shooting arrows from above.

Kelly of the Phoenix said:

Historically there were guards, armed guards, at the Temple. They could've shut it down by shooting arrows from above.

Click to expand...

Which probably means they knew he was right

Skwim said:

The cleansing of the Temple narrative tells of Jesus expelling the merchants and the money changers from the Temple, and occurs in all four New Testament gospels.

Matthew 21:12–13
12 And Jesus entered the temple[a] and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. 13 He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.”

Mark 11:15–16
15 And they came to Jerusalem. And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold and those who bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. 16 And he would not allow anyone to carry anything through the temple.

Luke 19:45–46
45 And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold, 46 saying to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a den of robbers.”

John 2:13–15
13 The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers sitting there. 15 And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables.

Click to expand...

You will notice that John is the only one who mentions the whip. If Jesus had resorted to violence in whipping the humans, I imagine that it would have been recorded by all the gospel writers....but since it is only mentioned in passing by one of the apostles, it might just have been something he used to coax the animals out of there. His mission was clear and his anger justified....he could not bear to see his Father's house used for commercial purposes. Not only that, but in calling it a "den of robbers", Jesus was indicating that these money changers and merchants were extorting money for which they were not entitled.

Sacrifices in the Temple were mandatory but visitors who came from far away could not always bring a sacrificial animal with them, so being able to buy one at the Temple must have seemed convenient. In the time of Jesus’ earthly ministry the annual temple tax was two drachmas (a didrachma). (Matthew 17:24) As Jews from widely scattered lands came to Jerusalem for the celebration of the Passover and paid this tax then, the services of money changers may have been needed to exchange foreign currency for money that would be acceptable for payment of the temple tax, if not also the purchase of sacrificial animals and other items. There was a fee for their services. The profiteering is what Jesus highlighted....and using God's house for commercial purposes was clearly wrong.

Skwim said:

To my mind this illustration

is a fair representation of the four verses; Jesus attacking a few merchants and money changers. Something one might concede is entirely possible.

Click to expand...

That actually looks like one of ours.

Nowhere Man said:

Somehow I suspect the Herodians and the Pharisees we're not that gullible and dense as to marvel at Jesus over something like that.

Click to expand...

Wasn't the first or the last time in the gospels that they marveled at Jesus,