lukethethird
unknown member
Which probably means they knew he was right
Yeah, they had it comin'.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Which probably means they knew he was right
I'm not so sure how pointing out the origin of exaggerated depictions like the ones you posted and the rationale behind such artistic choices is "irrelevant". Perhaps you can explain?Yes, but irrelevant to the continual and gross exaggeration we see here. .
Because the lack of movement and expression in previous religious art has no bearing on the very atypical exaggeration in later art as shown in the Temple scene. While later artists did tend to exaggerate their depictions of Christian events somewhat, I can think of no other event in Christianity that's been characterized with such gross exaggeration.I'm not so sure how pointing out the origin of exaggerated depictions like the ones you posted and the rationale behind such artistic choices is "irrelevant". Perhaps you can explain?
The mythic loves hyperbole.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 21:12–13To my mind this illustration
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.
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?
.
As the painters would have it, they either stood there cowering, or they fled, and in great numbers no less.It was probably even more dramatic than any of those depictions.. I don't think he went alone, and I don't think the merchants just stood there watching.
As the painters would have it, they either stood there cowering, or they fled, and in great numbers no less.
Take a look at the following, which I assume you read in my OP.I can imagine some of that happening.
In a crowd of hundreds of people, a gang of men going through overturning tables full of valuables, and throwing money on the ground, should've caused a riot.
Take a look at the following, which I assume you read in my OP.
Matthew 21:12–13See any mention of "gang"? Heck, do you see any mention of "they"? NOPE! All you see is "he." Moreover, none of the paintings depict your "gang." Sorry, but your wishful thinking has gotten the best of you.
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.
.
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.