What did Jesus do whilst in Jerusalem and Temple on Sunday?........ or Monday?...... or Tuesday?

[oldbadger]

Many of us on Debating Christianity have read the gospels, maybe referring to them quite often.

Some time ago, whilst debating the life of Jesus with a Christian, I discovered that he didn't know what Jesus did in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday nor any of the first days of that last week. I didn't think much of it until it happened again, and then again, and again.

More recently, if Christians mentioned their knowledge of the gospels I would ask them what they thought that Jesus had done on Sunday, or Monday, etc. I never received a reply! Some might tell me how Jesus got to Jerusalem, or how he entered that city and all in splendid detail, but after that....... nothing.

And so, please would folks tell me what 'they think' Jesus did in Jerusalem and Temple during any of those days?

Me? My offering? My opinion and using modern speech, is that Jesus went sightseeing on Palm Sunday... that's what I think, and for those who wonder why I even bother to reason about that, my reply is that as a student of Historical Jesus that is most important.

OK? Over to you....... please...

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #1]
Interesting. Lets make an analoge to another religion founder; What did Joseph Smith do in the months between losing the First 117 Tages of his Book of Mormon and his beginning to write todays Book of Mormon.

He was absolutely ravaged. He tried to think and plan how his loss could be handled. Than he Made a decision: No longer would he plan to write an adventure book and stell that for money, but a religions book that would HELP him founding bis own sect.

Of course Mormons dont want to know that.

So perhaps Jesus in that Gospel-unaccounted first days in Jerusalem did something Christians should not know.

[oldbadger]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #1]
Interesting. Lets make an analoge to another religion founder; What did Joseph Smith do in the months between losing the First 117 Tages of his Book of Mormon and his beginning to write todays Book of Mormon.

He was absolutely ravaged. He tried to think and plan how his loss could be handled. Than he Made a decision: No longer would he plan to write an adventure book and stell that for money, but a religions book that would HELP him founding bis own sect.

Of course Mormons dont want to know that.

So perhaps Jesus in that Gospel-unaccounted first days in Jerusalem did something Christians should not know.

0/10 for you, NC....
I love asking that question because it's just so easy to look up the answer and write it down.
But thank you for your answer.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #3]
Of course I do not naturally suspect a question for debate to be Made to Mislead into Mayhem !

[oldbadger]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #3]
Of course I do not naturally suspect a question for debate to be Made to Mislead into Mayhem !

Please let me explain....

I don't think that Christianity in general takes much notice of details like the thread's title. There are other details about what Jesus said or did that seem to be overlooked as well, and I just wonder why Christianity (in general) makes much of 'this' whilst overlooking 'that'. Is that fairly clear to you?

Often, if I'm conversing with folks who quote scholarship or experts all the time, or gospel verse, I ask questions like the above, and they just disappear. or answer incorrectly. As you can see from this thread, not too many folks feel that they can look up a simple answer and post it.

Other questions? a few, but for now I'll just stick with this one.

[TRANSPONDER]

Without wishing to derail the topic or peddle my own pet theories, one aspect of critical analysis of the gospels is the timing and order of events. Just recently we had a debate about the timing of Passover On the Thursday (Last supper) or the Saturday? When was the anointing at Bethany? How soon after Jesus arrived from Jericho did the Temple cleansing happen? Does it matter?

I think it does. Because in seeing the discrepancies, we can see (If we care to) what has been changed and guess why. Famously or notoriously (except that nobody seems to be aware of it) Jesus arriving at Bethany, miraculously predicting a donkey tied up that he can use to ride straight to the Temple, is the synoptic version. But in John, he arrives, has supper at Bethany, a good nights' sleep, shower and breakfast and then sends his disciples to pick up the donkey with a message , should the owner want to check that the people taking it are the ones supposed to.

So the timing and Chronology can make quite a difference and tell us something about the story, if not the actual events,.

[oldbadger]

Without wishing to derail the topic or peddle my own pet theories, one aspect of critical analysis of the gospels is the timing and order of events.

Hello Transponder and thanks for not giving away the answer...we've discussed all this before this thread was posted.

Just recently we had a debate about the timing of Passover On the Thursday (Last supper) or the Saturday? When was the anointing at Bethany? How soon after Jesus arrived from Jericho did the Temple cleansing happen? Does it matter?

The 'last supper' could have been a last meal. I'm not much interested in it because it's the presentation of the communion to future Christians.
The anointing? I think that happened on the Wednesday or possibly the Tuesday evening but I haven't got time to check.

I think it does. Because in seeing the discrepancies, we can see (If we care to) what has been changed and guess why. Famously or notoriously (except that nobody seems to be aware of it) Jesus arriving at Bethany, miraculously predicting a donkey tied up that he can use to ride straight to the Temple, is the synoptic version.

Yeah, the donkey. Anything that attempts to fulfil a prophecy is auto-binned by me. Christianity clings to Jesus on a donkey but cannot figure out what Jesus did after arriving......on that donkey. What it clings to and what it overlooks is most interesting to me.

But in John, he arrives, has supper at Bethany, a good nights' sleep, shower and breakfast and then sends his disciples to pick up the donkey with a message , should the owner want to check that the people taking it are the ones supposed to.

Arriving at Bethany is ok...... all the rest is for my shredder.

So the timing and Chronology can make quite a difference and tell us something about the story, if not the actual events,.

Absolutely.

[TRANSPONDER]

There's a lot of fiddling and padding. What Jesus supposedly does when he gets into the temple is fudged. Mark had him look around like a tourist, as though he'd never seen the place before. This is one of Mark's editorial additions (showing it is not the unchanged original) and the purpose is to separate the ride to the Temple and the overturning of the tables. He fails. We see elsewhere that one happens right after the other. John disguises it by taking it away altogether and shifting it to the start of the mission, before even the arrest of John. Instead he stuffs the gap with 'Greeks' asking to see Jesus and one of those theological rants.

Without looking, I believe that the Temple action is a string of wrangles with the Sadducees. To this, Matthew adds material shared with Luke (Q material) but with Luke, it is placed on the Journey to Jerusalem and is thus treated like the 'sermon' material, also not in Mark (or so I'd predict) and thus 'Q' document material (i may be wrong and have to think up some excuse or have a rethink). As I recall, the anointing is also 'disguised' which makes it rather significant. You don't disguise something unless it needs a covering up. Luke particularly disguises it as he removes it entirely and has it in Galilee. Mark (I just checked) has it Chapter 14 long after the Temple business and the talk on the Mount of Olives. The same with Matthew. John 12 suggests something different. Given that he mixes it all up with Jesus arriving in Jesus for 'Tabernacles' going to Peraea (which in the synoptics is where Jesus arrives before going to Jerusalem) and then arrives in Bethany with the supper and anointing and the donkey ride to the temple next morning, taking John's clarification, it looks to me as though all these events go together and have been spread out in various ways so they don't look like this:

Jesus arrives in Peraea from Galilee. Goes to Bethany (perhaps via Jericho where bar - Timaeus hails him as son of David) arrives at Bethany (perhaps healing Lazarus with his followers all watching another miracle) supper with anointing on the head, not the feet, and by 'Mary' not by an anonymous woman.

Morning and the donkey ride to the Temple, and upsetting the tables right after. With the gospel changes resolved it looks as planned an event as hell. And we can guess why the order of events was changed so it looked anything but.

[oldbadger]

There's a lot of fiddling and padding. What Jesus supposedly does when he gets into the temple is fudged. Mark had him look around like a tourist, as though he'd never seen the place before. This is one of Mark's editorial additions (showing it is not the unchanged original) and the purpose is to separate the ride to the Temple and the overturning of the tables. He fails. We see elsewhere that one happens right after the other. John disguises it by taking it away altogether and shifting it to the start of the mission, before even the arrest of John. Instead he stuffs the gap with 'Greeks' asking to see Jesus and one of those theological rants.

Without looking, I believe that the Temple action is a string of wrangles with the Sadducees. To this, Matthew adds material shared with Luke (Q material) but with Luke, it is placed on the Journey to Jerusalem and is thus treated like the 'sermon' material, also not in Mark (or so I'd predict) and thus 'Q' document material (i may be wrong and have to think up some excuse or have a rethink). As I recall, the anointing is also 'disguised' which makes it rather significant. You don't disguise something unless it needs a covering up. Luke particularly disguises it as he removes it entirely and has it in Galilee. Mark (I just checked) has it Chapter 14 long after the Temple business and the talk on the Mount of Olives. The same with Matthew. John 12 suggests something different. Given that he mixes it all up with Jesus arriving in Jesus for 'Tabernacles' going to Peraea (which in the synoptics is where Jesus arrives before going to Jerusalem) and then arrives in Bethany with the supper and anointing and the donkey ride to the temple next morning, taking John's clarification, it looks to me as though all these events go together and have been spread out in various ways so they don't look like this:

Jesus arrives in Peraea from Galilee. Goes to Bethany (perhaps via Jericho where bar - Timaeus hails him as son of David) arrives at Bethany (perhaps healing Lazarus with his followers all watching another miracle) supper with anointing on the head, not the feet, and by 'Mary' not by an anonymous woman.

Morning and the donkey ride to the Temple, and upsetting the tables right after. With the gospel changes resolved it looks as planned an event as hell. And we can guess why the order of events was changed so it looked anything but.

Thank you! You know your gospels even if you don't believe much about them.

Question:- Your last paragraph showed:- 'Morning and the donkey ride to the Temple, and upsetting the tables right after.'
I thought the donkey ride was on Sunday, and the Temple mayhem on Monday?

[TRANSPONDER]

Thanks for your interest. I suppose that I should (and perhaps could) do what the topic asks and work out Holy Week, but I feel it is futile because:

I'm not sure any of it happened
The mixing up of timings means that I don't trust the 'Week'
people will point to me making wrong choices. For example if I opt for Luke and the temple cleansing as soon as he leaps from his donkey, someone will say "No, Mark says Jesus went home and only did the Temple cleansing next day'.
Let's try anyway...

Monday arrival at Bethany, (John) healing of Lazarus . Supper and anointing.
Tuesday Donkey ride in the morning, Temple cleansing, wrangles with Sadducees, talk on the mount of Olives
Wednesday day of preparation for Passover (Synoptics) Judas plots with the Sanhedrin to turn Jesus over.
Thursday last supper and arrest
Friday trial and crucifixion
Saturday Sabbath
Sunday resurrection.

I can already hear the screams of protest as the raising of Lazarus happened long before during Tabernacles, but the synoptics have none of that- Jesus goes direct from Galilee to Peraea where he awaits the note the go to Bethany and 'raise' Lazarus, which he does, stopping in Jericho and healing bar -Timaeus. The raising of Lazarus has to fit in there and we can see from the 'Hoshanah' procession of the donkey ride that it's at Sukkhot anyway, not at Passover (which was all imposed by Christianity taking Jesus as a Sin -sacrifice, not a failed liberating messiah). And I'm in two minds whether any of it is true or not, and if so, how much.

Somebody commented that they bin prophecy. So do I, but IF (and I'm half persuaded) the Gospels are a garbled record of a failed Messianic effort, the Donkey ride is a deliberate attempt to fulfil prophecy. In which case John ifs working with a reliable source (including even Lazarus) and he 'corrects' the Synoptics. But an equal case can be made that he simply makes all the incidental detail up. I'm half torn between a mostly mythical Jesus and a real Jesus who is very different from the Christian one, but whatever it is, the Gospel Jesus ain't real.

And nobody else does this. There was the You tuber who spotted that Jesus and Barrabbas were the same, the 'Jesus plot' author and the 'Jesus scroll' theory which spotted some valid points despite a lot of speculation. And the writer (Crossan?) who saw that the crucifixion had to be on the Mount of Olives, whether you believe the trevelated Longinus and the temple veil - stuff.

So it's why I see that a shoehorn of the action into 7 days seems redundant, though it isn't hard to do.