• 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!

Mark 15:38, Mark 15:39, what makes the centurion convert?

sooda

Veteran Member
And that matches the Roman seige? Don't think so.

In other words, different inferences there, that's why I mentioned it.

The Temple was modeled after the temples at Byblos and Baalbeck.

Why do you think it was made of wood?

The Roman Siege included catapults with big stones and firebombs.


Solomon spared no expense for the building's creation. He ordered vast quantities of cedar wood from King Hiram of Tyre (I Kings 5:2025), had huge blocks of the choicest stone quarried, and commanded that the building's foundation be laid with hewn stone.

To complete the massive project, he imposed forced labor on all his subjects, drafting people for work shifts that sometimes lasted a month at a time.

Some 3,300 officials were appointed to oversee the Temple's erection (5:2730).

Solomon assumed such heavy debts in building the Temple that he is forced to pay off King Hiram by handing over twenty towns in the Galilee (I Kings 9:11).

The First Temple - Solomon's Temple
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Mark 15:38
Mark 15:39

Mark 15

•••
Something the centurion, notices here, at the crucifixion, makes him say that Jesus is the lord.

Most interpretations, have the 'veil tearing in two' as meaning an veil, which, the centurion, wouldn't "notice". The centurion would notice, however, the structure itself, tearing in two, (at the veil area, in other words, which is why he 'suddenly converts'.

So, the Temple itself was basically destroyed, not a veil, which the centurion, at a distance away, would neither notice, nor, make him convert instantly to a new religion.

•••
The centurion does not convert and merely exclaims and worries that he has erred in crucifying this man. He is convinced by three things: darkness, Jesus last words followed by an earthquake. The other gospels say that there is an earthquake and darkness upon Jesus death and that this is what causes the centurion to exclaim that Jesus must have been a righteous man. The centurion doesn't convert at this point, or it would say so. The point is that the centurion tells us the meaning of the darkness and the earthquake -- omens for a superstitious Roman that he has erred in crucifying someone who ought not to have been crucified. The main thing the author is conveying: Jesus is innocent and has been killed wrongfully.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
The Temple was modeled after the temples at Byblos and Baalbeck.

Why do you think it was made of wood?

The Roman Siege included catapults with big stones and firebombs.


Solomon spared no expense for the building's creation. He ordered vast quantities of cedar wood from King Hiram of Tyre (I Kings 5:2025), had huge blocks of the choicest stone quarried, and commanded that the building's foundation be laid with hewn stone.

To complete the massive project, he imposed forced labor on all his subjects, drafting people for work shifts that sometimes lasted a month at a time.

Some 3,300 officials were appointed to oversee the Temple's erection (5:2730).

Solomon assumed such heavy debts in building the Temple that he is forced to pay off King Hiram by handing over twenty towns in the Galilee (I Kings 9:11).

The First Temple - Solomon's Temple

Tossing a burning stick against a stone wall, doesn't do anything. Hence , it doesn't match the reference to the Roman seige.

You are talking in context of not only another Temple, you are presuming that by the time the Romans 'destroyed' the Temple, it was the same Temple, which, again, doesn't make sense to the Roman seige.

Why you are trying to 'explain something' here, that doesn't make sense, is the question. It's just alot of presumption.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Tossing a burning stick against a stone wall, doesn't do anything. Hence , it doesn't match the reference to the Roman seige.

You are talking in context of not only another Temple, you are presuming that by the time the Romans 'destroyed' the Temple, it was the same Temple, which, again, doesn't make sense to the Roman seige.

Why you are trying to 'explain something' here, that doesn't make sense, is the question. It's just alot of presumption.

Read Josephus.. What Temple do you think it was?
 

sooda

Veteran Member
That's the question. I am going to check Josephus.

If the Temple, Herods additions etc. Were destroyed, or not rebuilt, after being destroyed, by the time of the Roman destruction, it could be a structure that was built there, just not with the stones.


The buildings on the Temple Mount were built of smaller stones. Stones from these structures were thrown down into the street below when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Most of them were later scavenged for other construction. But a few were found in the excavations.

These weighed between two and three tons. Stones of this size would have posed no problem for the skilled builders of Herod’s Temple Mount.

The Stones of Herod’s Temple Reveal Temple Mount History
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
So, the idea is, it seems, the Romans were able to get past the guards, so forth. Other than that, it seems pretty general.

So, as to the discussion premise, there are a few variables.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
The buildings on the Temple Mount were built of smaller stones. Stones from these structures were thrown down into the street below when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Most of them were later scavenged for other construction. But a few were found in the excavations.

These weighed between two and three tons. Stones of this size would have posed no problem for the skilled builders of Herod’s Temple Mount.

The Stones of Herod’s Temple Reveal Temple Mount History
The Jews accused Jesua of threatening to destroy the Temple.

You might be presenting the idea, that the Romans spent considerable effort in destroying the hewn rocks, or perhaps moving them elsewhere.

It is a dark foreshadowing, however, that the Jews had accused Jesua of threatening this type of annihilation.

'No stone left standing', as Jesua told the disciples.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
The Jews accused Jesua of threatening to destroy the Temple.

You might be presenting the idea, that the Romans spent considerable effort in destroying the hewn rocks, or perhaps moving them elsewhere.

It is a dark foreshadowing, however, that the Jews had accused Jesua of threatening this type of annihilation.

'No stone left standing', as Jesua told the disciples.

Only the foundation stones were huge.

Remember there was a third temple.. Emperor Julian tried to build it in 363 AD..

Evidently it was destroyed by fire and earthquake.

Excerpt:

Till then the foundations and some ruins of the walls of the temple subsisted, as appears from St. Cyril: and Eusebius says, the inhabitants still carried away the stones for their private buildings. These ruins the Jews first demolished with their own hands, thus concurring to the accomplishment of our Saviour's prediction.

Then they began to dig the new foundation, in which work many thousands were employed. But what they had thrown up in the day was, by repeated earthquakes, the night following cast back again into the trench. "And when Alypius the next day earnestly pressed on the work, with the assistance of the governor of the province, there issued," says Ammianus, "'such horrible balls of fire out of the earth near the foundations,' which rendered the place, from time to time, inaccessible to the scorched and blasted workmen. And the victorious element continuing in this manner obstinately and resolutely bent as it were to drive them to a distance, Alypius thought proper to give over the enterprise."

This is also recorded by the Christian authors, who, besides the earthquake and fiery eruption, mention storms, tempests, and whirlwinds, lightning, crosses impressed on the bodies and garments of the assistants, and a flaming cross in the heavens, surrounded with a luminous circle. The order whereof seems to have been as follows.

This judgment of the Almighty was ushered in by storms and whirlwinds, by which prodigious heaps of lime and sand and other loose materials were carried away.

After these followed lightning, the usual consequence of collision of clouds in tempests. Its effects were, first the destroying the more solid materials, and melting down the iron instruments; and secondly, the impressing shining crosses on the bodies and garments of the assistants without distinction, in which there was something that in art and elegance exceeded all painting or embroidery; which when the infidels perceived, they endeavored, but in vain, to wash them out.

In the third place came the earthquake which cast out the stones of the old foundations, and shook the earth into the trench or cavity dug for the new; besides overthrowing the adjoining buildings and porticoes wherein were lodged great numbers of Jews designed for the work, who were all either crushed to death, or at least maimed or wounded.

The number of the killed or hurt was increased by the fiery eruption in the fourth place, attended both with storms and tempests above, and with an earthquake below.

From this eruption, many fled to a neighboring church for shelter, but could not obtain entrance; whether on account of its being closed by a secret invisible hand, as the fathers state the case, or at least by a special providence, through the entrance into the oratory being choked up by a freighted crowd, all pressing to be foremost.
Rebuilding the Jewish Temple, in 363 A.D.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
So, the idea is, it seems, the Romans were able to get past the guards, so forth. Other than that, it seems pretty general.

So, as to the discussion premise, there are a few variables.
The veil, or curtain, was inside the temple. I think the account is dramatic license.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
Can you explain why the centurion suddenly converts?

Mark 15:38
Mark 15:39

The centurion wouldn't notice a veil, as the Temple is at a distance away. He would, however, notice the Temple itself, tearing, in two.

I think Bible has quite clear answer to that:

Behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from the top to the bottom. The earth quaked and the rocks were split. The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection, they entered into the holy city and appeared to many. Now the centurion, and those who were with him watching Jesus, when they saw the earthquake, and the things that were done, feared exceedingly, saying, "Truly this was the Son of God."
Matt. 27:51-54
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Mark 15:38
Mark 15:39

Mark 15

•••
Something the centurion, notices here, at the crucifixion, makes him say that Jesus is the lord.

Most interpretations, have the 'veil tearing in two' as meaning an veil, which, the centurion, wouldn't "notice". The centurion would notice, however, the structure itself, tearing in two, (at the veil area, in other words, which is why he 'suddenly converts'.

So, the Temple itself was basically destroyed, not a veil, which the centurion, at a distance away, would neither notice, nor, make him convert instantly to a new religion.

•••

Was that centurion waiting for Jesus to resurrect at the third day from His tomb?

Ciao

- viole
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I think Bible has quite clear answer to that:

Behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from the top to the bottom. The earth quaked and the rocks were split. The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection, they entered into the holy city and appeared to many. Now the centurion, and those who were with him watching Jesus, when they saw the earthquake, and the things that were done, feared exceedingly, saying, "Truly this was the Son of God."
Matt. 27:51-54
How did the centurion notice the veil being torn in two?

It doesn't say, 'they noticed these things except for the veil occurence', if you read it literally, they notice, including the centurion, everything noted.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I think Bible has quite clear answer to that:

Behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from the top to the bottom. The earth quaked and the rocks were split. The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection, they entered into the holy city and appeared to many. Now the centurion, and those who were with him watching Jesus, when they saw the earthquake, and the things that were done, feared exceedingly, saying, "Truly this was the Son of God."
Matt. 27:51-54
I'm not going to not read this literally, because of your whimsical interpretation, that makes no sense.

What they would have noticed, was the Temple breaking apart, [the stone wall outside walls, in other words, in the middle part.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
The only way that they would notice these things, is if the Temple outer[stone walls, broke apart, in the middle part, in other words.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
The only way that they would notice these things, is if the Temple outer[stone walls, broke apart, in the middle part, in other words.

It didn't happen that way.. All these earthquakes and fireballs and whirlwinds didn't happen.. Its dramatic license for effect. The veil that tore in half would be a curtain (fabric) inside the Temple.. No one could have seen it from Golgotha.

And the sky didn't turn dark.

There's a lot of that kind of writing in scripture, but its just dramatic language.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
It didn't happen that way.. All these earthquakes and fireballs and whirlwinds didn't happen.. Its dramatic license for effect. The veil that tore in half would be a curtain (fabric) inside the Temple.. No one could have seen it from Golgotha.

And the sky didn't turn dark.

There's a lot of that kind of writing in scripture, but its just dramatic language.
THe Bible is a collection of books. The verses in the book of Mark, differ from those in the book of Matthew, so forth. In this context, one is reading the verses to their meaning, then can speculate as to what is fiction, so forth. Some books are more poetic, so forth. So they differ.
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
Mark 15:38
Mark 15:39

Mark 15

•••
Something the centurion, notices here, at the crucifixion, makes him say that Jesus is the lord.

Most interpretations, have the 'veil tearing in two' as meaning an veil, which, the centurion, wouldn't "notice". The centurion would notice, however, the structure itself, tearing in two, (at the veil area, in other words, which is why he 'suddenly converts'.

So, the Temple itself was basically destroyed, not a veil, which the centurion, at a distance away, would neither notice, nor, make him convert instantly to a new religion.

•••


Ultimately, God opened his heart... 'no man comes to me unless the Father draws him" John 6
 

1213

Well-Known Member
How did the centurion notice the veil being torn in two?

It doesn't say, 'they noticed these things except for the veil occurence', if you read it literally, they notice, including the centurion, everything noted.

By what the scripture tells, it is possible he didn’t even notice it, he noticed the other things, which became the reason for him.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
By what the scripture tells, it is possible he didn’t even notice it, he noticed the other things, which became the reason for him.
True, however that isn't necessarily the case. It seems to make more sense, if everything was noticed, because it's more contextual, and there is no delineation there.
 
Top