Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Eric
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 9:42 am

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by Eric »

toejam wrote:Yep. This is one of the most disgusting verses in the New Testament. An obvious outright lie IMO.
If in "most disgusting"? I am assuming you are referring to the blaming of the Jews for Jesus Crucifixion. But I do not see it that way.
Now the chief priests and elders persuaded the crowds Matthew 27:20
The Governor again said to them .... And they said, "Barabbas."
...Then the people as a whole answered, “His blood be on us and on our children!”Matthew 27:25

There is no mention of who was in the crowd. To assume that there were only Jews and no Gentiles in the crowd is extremely assumptive. And as far as the chief priest and elders who wanted Christ crucified, IMO, are political religious leaders who pursue position and power over God and truth.
To become fully human is divine.
User avatar
lpetrich
Posts: 331
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 6:20 am

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by lpetrich »

That argument fails miserably. Are you claiming that that mob was mostly of Jerusalem's non-Jewish inhabitants? That seems unlikely, since it is evident from other sources that Jerusalem had a large Jewish population. It also seems unlikely that non-Jews would have been very interested in a purported Jewish messiah unless they felt under threat from him or whatever. Remember that a few chapters earlier, Jesus Christ had gotten a hero's welcome in Jerusalem.

This seems like a typical Christian-apologist argument. If one can construct a scenario that supports one's position, no matter how implausible it might be, then one has won. Even if there are much more plausible scenarios for other possibilities.
User avatar
lpetrich
Posts: 331
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 6:20 am

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by lpetrich »

Blood wrote:It's a myth. We don't need to examine it rationally vis-a-vis the sociology of lynch mobs. It never happened.
I would not want to dismiss it out of hand. Do you have any reason for supposing that to be the case?

In any case, I think that the sociology of lynch mobs makes for some interesting comparisons.
Stephan Huller
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by Stephan Huller »

Still the difficulty remains. If the story is just made up and the author had all the freedom to create whatever narrative he wanted, why doesn't Jesus appear as the expected messiah of the Jews? Why is he so un-David-like?
Stephan Huller
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by Stephan Huller »

And if we take it one step further, if the author was making up a 'myth' why not claim that Jesus WAS the king of the Jews in 30 CE or whatever year people imagine the story to be set? Why not pretend that the king of the Jews was really named Jesus? If the answer is that the author was still trying to keep the story within 'accepted reality' then is it really a myth or a lie?
User avatar
Eric
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 9:42 am

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by Eric »

This seems like a typical Christian-apologist argument. If one can construct a scenario that supports one's position, no matter how implausible it might be, then one has won. Even if there are much more plausible scenarios for other possibilities.
A Christian apologist? Absolutely not. It's simply understanding that in antiquity, to paraphrase a quote, "you have islands of information with a sea full of speculations/opinions based on what the individual wants to believe."
To become fully human is divine.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by neilgodfrey »

Stephan Huller wrote: The myth-maker isn't even trying to make a plausible case for Jesus being 'like David.' Jesus is nothing like David.
Psalms of David -- even Psalm 22 -- the penitent crying out to God to save him from the grave.

Rejected or looked down upon by his own family.

Like David, had to sometimes hide from enemies; at one time was thought mad.

With followers in tow, seeks refuge at the Mount of Olives to pray for deliverance.

David's shedding of blood was reversed -- Jesus was the one whose blood was shed and by the means of shed blood conquered the evil powers.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by neilgodfrey »

neilgodfrey wrote: David's shedding of blood was reversed -- Jesus was the one whose blood was shed and by the means of shed blood conquered the evil powers.
I should add that this is not a case of taking any evidence, positive or negative, and making it fit -- so that I can't fail to find similarities. It is identifying a very common feature of intertextuality -- of classical mimesis -- in the literature of the day. Virgil reversed Homer in similar ways, among many examples.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Stephan Huller
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by Stephan Huller »

But you're missing the original point. Even with a blank canvas the original author doesn't present "a messiah" - perhaps I should have said THE Messiah. The bits you mention Neil aren't parts of the portrait of Jesus "the man" (for lack of a better term). Why if Jesus is supposed to be "the Messiah" is that explicitly denied by Jesus (and the earliest exegetes? Jesus was not portrayed as the Messiah and thus this was not part of the original "myth"
Stephan Huller
Posts: 3009
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Matthew 27:25: a self-blaming lynch mob?

Post by Stephan Huller »

And for the record, the Crucified One's death was nothing like David's

1 Kings 2 New International Version (NIV)David’s Charge to Solomon

2 When the time drew near for David to die, he gave a charge to Solomon his son.

2 “I am about to go the way of all the earth,” he said. “So be strong, act like a man, 3 and observe what the Lord your God requires: Walk in obedience to him, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and regulations, as written in the Law of Moses. Do this so that you may prosper in all you do and wherever you go4 and that the Lord may keep his promiseto me: ‘If your descendants watch how they live, and if they walk faithfully before me with all their heart and soul, you will never fail to have a successor on the throne of Israel.’

5 “Now you yourself know what Joab son of Zeruiah did to me—what he did to the two commanders of Israel’s armies, Abner son of Ner and Amasa son of Jether. He killed them, shedding their blood in peacetime as if in battle, and with that blood he stained the belt around his waist and the sandals on his feet. 6 Deal with him according to your wisdom, but do not let his gray head go down to the grave in peace.

7 “But show kindness to the sons of Barzillai of Gilead and let them be among those who eat at your table. They stood by me when I fled from your brother Absalom.

8 “And remember, you have with you Shimei son of Gera, the Benjamite from Bahurim, who called down bitter curses on me the day I went to Mahanaim. When he came down to meet me at the Jordan, I swore to him by the Lord: ‘I will not put you to death by the sword.’ 9 But now, do not consider him innocent. You are a man of wisdom; you will know what to do to him. Bring his gray head down to the grave in blood.”

10 Then David rested with his ancestors and was buried in the City of David. 11 He had reigned forty years over Israel—seven years in Hebron and thirty-three in Jerusalem. 12 So Solomon sat on the throne of his father David, and his rule was firmly established
Post Reply