"About Jesus' Clothes..."

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Charles Wilson
Posts: 1689
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

"About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by Charles Wilson »

I wish to register another Minority Report.
Peter Kirby wrote: Fri Apr 23, 2021 12:33 pmRomans would crucify people naked, for humiliation, reflected in Mark 15:24:
And they crucified Him. They also divided His garments by casting lots to decide what each of them would take.
I don't disagree with PK here. That's always a Bad Idea. There is, however, John and this is where it gets interesting. On the view that John "corrects" the Synoptics, one could argue that nowhere does John offer correction more than here:

John 19: 23 (RSV):

[23] When the soldiers had crucified Jesus they took his garments and made four parts, one for each soldier; also his tunic. But the tunic was without seam, woven from top to bottom

We have what appears to be a Puzzle. There are four soldiers and 4 garments, PLUS a tunic. The tunic is without seam.
[The obvious question appears to be: How to divide 5 garments between 4 soldiers, especially a "Tunic without seam". Wrong Question!!!]

Is there a name for such a tunic? There is. It is known as a CUIRASS. This is not the Puzzle. Rather, what would that mean in John?

Image

The Puzzle is not how you divide 5 garments among 4 ROMAN soldiers. The Puzzle is: "Are there examples of the Roman Cuirass found in the Historical Records?" Of course there are!!!:

Suetonius, 12 Caesars, "Galba":

"As he was offering sacrifice on the morning before he was killed, a soothsayer warned him again and again to look out for danger, since assassins were not far off.

Not long after this he learned that Otho held possession of the Camp,​ and when several advised him to proceed thither as soon as possible — for they said that he could win the day by his presence and prestige — he decided to do no more than hold his present position and strengthen it by getting together a guard of the legionaries, who were encamped in many different quarters of the city. He did however put on a linen cuirass, though he openly declared that it would afford little protection against so many swords..."

Tacitus (Histories, Book 1) reports the use of a Cuirass but not a linen one:

"No one knew anything, yet all were confident in assertion, till at length Galba in the dearth of all true intelligence, and overborne by the universal delusion, assumed his cuirass, and as, from age and bodily weakness, he could not stand up against the crowd that was still rushing in, he was elevated on a chair..."

It is in Tacitus, however, that the real Template is given:

Tacitus, Histories, Book 4:

"The troops who, having been disbanded by Vitellius, had flocked to support Vespasian, asked leave to serve again in the Praetorian Guard, and the soldiers who had been selected from the legions with the same prospect now clamoured for their promised pay. Even the Vitellianists could not be got rid of without much bloodshed. But the money required for retaining in the service so vast a body of men was immensely large. Mucianus entered the camp to examine more accurately the individual claims. The victorious army, wearing their proper decorations and arms, he drew up with moderate intervals of space between the divisions; then the Vitellianists, whose capitulation at Bovillae I have already related, and the other troops of the party, who had been collected from the capital and its neighbourhood, were brought forth almost naked. Mucianus ordered these men to be drawn up apart, making the British, the German, and any other troops that there were belonging to other armies, take up separate positions. The very first view of their situation paralyzed them. They saw opposed to them what seemed a hostile array, threatening them with javelin and sword. They saw themselves hemmed in, without arms, filthy and squalid. And when they began to be separated, some to be marched to one spot, and some to another, a thrill of terror ran through them all. Among the troops from Germany the panic was particularly great; for they believed that this separation marked them out for slaughter. They embraced their fellow soldiers, clung to their necks, begged for parting kisses, and entreated that they might not be deserted, or doomed in a common cause to suffer a different lot. They invoked now Mucianus, now the absent Emperor, and, as a last resource, heaven and the Gods, till Mucianus came forward, and calling them "soldiers bound by the same oath and servants of the same Emperor," stopped the groundless panic..."

How many groups are there? It is ambiguous, especially with some marching to one spot and some to another. Quick, you scholars of Uniplurals: How many groups?

I note in passing that the Germans, "...embraced their fellow soldiers, clung to their necks, begged for parting kisses, and entreated that they might not be deserted, or doomed in a common cause to suffer a different lot. They invoked now Mucianus, now the absent Emperor, and, as a last resource, heaven and the Gods..."

Sounds sorta' like:

Mark 15: 35 - 36 (RSV):

[35] And some of the bystanders hearing it said, "Behold, he is calling Eli'jah."
[36] And one ran and, filling a sponge full of vinegar, put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink, saying, "Wait, let us see whether Eli'jah will come to take him down."

Verse 36 lets you know that Mark knows things but is giving the Incomplete Story. This is about Vitellius, who had homosexual relations with Asiaticus. Otho and the Po River Episode explains the blood and water coming from "Jesus'" side.

The Cuirass is the fifth garment but it is not to be divided between the soldiers: "...till Mucianus came forward, and calling them "soldiers bound by the same oath and servants of the same Emperor," stopped the groundless panic..."

The Cuirass will protect all of the soldiers and the Empire as well [The number of groups is less important than the result.]. No sword will be able to penetrate the Body at the seams.

CW
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 739
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by mlinssen »


John 19:23 Οἱ οὖν στρατιῶται, ὅτε ἐσταύρωσαν τὸν Ἰησοῦν, ἔλαβον τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐποίησαν τέσσαρα μέρη, ἑκάστῳ στρατιώτῃ μέρος, καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα. ἦν δὲ ὁ χιτὼν ἄραφος, ἐκ τῶν ἄνωθεν ὑφαντὸς δι’ ὅλου.

Was however the inner-garment seamless, out-of from above woven through whole

John 3:3 Ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ “Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν,a οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ.”

Un less (sic) this born-from above

One piece, woven from above "through whole". John the mesmerising poet has extremely solid reasons to allow himself this poetic liberty, which has nothing to do with garments of course. There are so many places that he seems to be cooperating with "the movement", yet upon closer inspection he plainly sabotages it all, giving his deeply spiritual version of something else entirely
davidmartin
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: "About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by davidmartin »

mlinssen wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 7:08 am
John 19:23 Οἱ οὖν στρατιῶται, ὅτε ἐσταύρωσαν τὸν Ἰησοῦν, ἔλαβον τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐποίησαν τέσσαρα μέρη, ἑκάστῳ στρατιώτῃ μέρος, καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα. ἦν δὲ ὁ χιτὼν ἄραφος, ἐκ τῶν ἄνωθεν ὑφαντὸς δι’ ὅλου.

Was however the inner-garment seamless, out-of from above woven through whole

John 3:3 Ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ “Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν,a οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ.”

Un less (sic) this born-from above

One piece, woven from above "through whole". John the mesmerising poet has extremely solid reasons to allow himself this poetic liberty, which has nothing to do with garments of course. There are so many places that he seems to be cooperating with "the movement", yet upon closer inspection he plainly sabotages it all, giving his deeply spiritual version of something else entirely
what you're really saying then, isn't it that John is telling of the 'timeless spirituality' which is itself the source of all religions?
if John is demonstrating an awareness of that then it suggests a layer earlier than found in the synoptics and Paul that Thomas would be at home in
Charles Wilson
Posts: 1689
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: "About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by Charles Wilson »

John 3: 3 - 4 (RSV):

[3] Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God."
[4] Nicode'mus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?"

I can get into hot water fairly easily with this but I assert that this Passage in John is not related to the Cuirass material.
This is a Semitic Passage through-and-through. The Roman Cuirass Passage is not Semitic.
It goes back 1000 years prior to this moment and the word is "Amargi" which means "Return to Mother".
Nicodemus understands the words but not the Intent - a classic Idiom. "Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?"

Samuel Noah Kramer states that it is the first mention of the idea of "Freedom".

So Nicodemus, "...a ruler of the Jews" doesn't understand an Idiom that is telling him that he cannot see the Kingdom of God unless he frees himself.
The Cuirass Passage is a reflection of Galba's death, Otho's death and especially Vitellius' death - Curiass, sword in the side and Vitellius with Asiaticus, who is found selling Posca in a Bazaar in Puteoli.

Don't get caught up in the Metaphysics. The 2 Passages are deep but not the way most think of today.

CW
Last edited by Charles Wilson on Sat May 01, 2021 12:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 739
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by mlinssen »

davidmartin wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 3:06 pm
mlinssen wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 7:08 am
John 19:23 Οἱ οὖν στρατιῶται, ὅτε ἐσταύρωσαν τὸν Ἰησοῦν, ἔλαβον τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐποίησαν τέσσαρα μέρη, ἑκάστῳ στρατιώτῃ μέρος, καὶ τὸν χιτῶνα. ἦν δὲ ὁ χιτὼν ἄραφος, ἐκ τῶν ἄνωθεν ὑφαντὸς δι’ ὅλου.

Was however the inner-garment seamless, out-of from above woven through whole

John 3:3 Ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ “Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν,a οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ.”

Un less (sic) this born-from above

One piece, woven from above "through whole". John the mesmerising poet has extremely solid reasons to allow himself this poetic liberty, which has nothing to do with garments of course. There are so many places that he seems to be cooperating with "the movement", yet upon closer inspection he plainly sabotages it all, giving his deeply spiritual version of something else entirely
what you're really saying then, isn't it that John is telling of the 'timeless spirituality' which is itself the source of all religions?
if John is demonstrating an awareness of that then it suggests a layer earlier than found in the synoptics and Paul that Thomas would be at home in
I think the choice of words by John is rather remarkable - really extraordinarily remarkable. Then again the "two tunics" is used as well and topics here have been discussing it - fruitless as usual, of course

The mistake made on this forum and many others is that the texts are read figuratively and then taken literally, and this thread is a perfect example. Is the word even looked at, let alone in Greek? No, the first available translation is used, upon which the usual game of free association is unleashed

Read the text literally, and take it figuratively (where the latter applies). And doing so, one would notice the odd use of the Latin loanword modius in Luke 8:16 and Matthew 5:15, for example. Or the word census in the scene with Caesar and the coin.
Forget the translations, they are all rubbish. Toss Nestle Aland, they only harmonise everything even further

John is a poet and not interested in Churchianity, as is Luke (to a much lesser extent). Of course Thomas preceded them all but its clear that Mark and Paul take Thomas in an entirely different direction, an opposite one, and establish a religion on top of it. But John? He is on both sides
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 739
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by mlinssen »

Charles Wilson wrote: Fri Apr 30, 2021 3:41 pm John 3: 3 - 4 (RSV):

[3] Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God."
[4] Nicode'mus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?"

I can get into hot water fairly easily with this but I assert that this Passage in John is not related to the Cuirass material.
This is a Semitic Passage through-and-through. The Roman Cuirass Passage is not Semitic.
It goes back 1000 years prior to this moment and the word is "Amargi" which means "Return to Mother".
Nicodemus understands the words but not the Intent - a classic Idiom. "Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?"

Stanley Kramer states that it is the first mention of the idea of "Freedom".

So Nicodemus, "...a ruler of the Jews" doesn't understand an Idiom that is telling him that he cannot see the Kingdom of God unless he frees himself.
The Cuirass Passage is a reflection of Galba's death, Otho's death and especially Vitellius' death - Curiass, sword in the side and Vitellius with Asiaticus, who is found selling Posca in a Bazaar in Puteoli.

Don't get caught up in the Metaphysics. The 2 Passages are deep but not the way most think of today.

CW
Oh I like that!
Nicodemus is perhaps nothing more than a stage prop so the Jesus of John didn't have to mumble to himself, or it is a nice on the side, dunno

Free from what?

And the mother is in Thomas as well, only once - used in the exact same sense, whereas the Father is everywhere
Charles Wilson
Posts: 1689
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: "About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by Charles Wilson »

Thank you, mlinssen --

1. Error! The name is "Samuel Noah Kramer" and I've made the mistake of typing "Stanley" before. Apologies.

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ama-gi

One of the Themes in the Original Story I see is "Seeing the Kingdom of God" or "Seeing the Realm of Heaven" (As stated in parts of Matthew). The Beginning of the End for the Judean Country is when Pompey is invited to settle a dispute between Hyrcanus and younger brother Aristobulus. After seeing the Holy of Holies, Pompey backs out and orders the cleansing of the Site that only the High Priests should have seen.

Matthew 5: 20 (RSV):

[20] For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Here again, only certain people (Those of the Priesthood!) may enter the Realm of Heaven. I say it over and over: The "Realm of Heaven" is real.

So, Nic-o-d'mus (A name suggests itself here...) is a Ruler of the Jews and he is told that he must be Free/Free himself/Throw off his Bonds (The Akkadian may suggest itself here). From what? I would suggest "Loyalty to (the Slavery of) ROME".

I could be wrong but it doesn't seem to be much of a Reach. This all gets Transvalued again but in the various Fragments found in the NT, this view seems to be consistent. The Original is from the Priesthood and the question "What must I do to be Holy?" is answered by "If you would be Holy then you may obtain Membership in the Priesthood". This was given by David and approved by God. Then you may "Return to Mother" (Be Truly Free) and be given the Gift of seeing the Realm of Heaven.

CW
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 739
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by mlinssen »

Charles Wilson wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 12:41 am Thank you, mlinssen --

1. Error! The name is "Samuel Noah Kramer" and I've made the mistake of typing "Stanley" before. Apologies.

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ama-gi

One of the Themes in the Original Story I see is "Seeing the Kingdom of God" or "Seeing the Realm of Heaven" (As stated in parts of Matthew). The Beginning of the End for the Judean Country is when Pompey is invited to settle a dispute between Hyrcanus and younger brother Aristobulus. After seeing the Holy of Holies, Pompey backs out and orders the cleansing of the Site that only the High Priests should have seen.

Matthew 5: 20 (RSV):

[20] For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Here again, only certain people (Those of the Priesthood!) may enter the Realm of Heaven. I say it over and over: The "Realm of Heaven" is real.

So, Nic-o-d'mus (A name suggests itself here...) is a Ruler of the Jews and he is told that he must be Free/Free himself/Throw off his Bonds (The Akkadian may suggest itself here). From what? I would suggest "Loyalty to (the Slavery of) ROME".

I could be wrong but it doesn't seem to be much of a Reach. This all gets Transvalued again but in the various Fragments found in the NT, this view seems to be consistent. The Original is from the Priesthood and the question "What must I do to be Holy?" is answered by "If you would be Holy then you may obtain Membership in the Priesthood". This was given by David and approved by God. Then you may "Return to Mother" (Be Truly Free) and be given the Gift of seeing the Realm of Heaven.

CW
May I point you to one of the more useful posts of this forum, it is rather an entire series: "All of the NT", search.php?keywords=All+of+the+nt&terms ... mit=Search

Very specifically, viewtopic.php?p=118422#p118422 is of interest here: there is no Realm of Heaven whatsoever in Matthew, there only is a "kingdom of the heavens", exactly like in Thomas

You are citing Josephus here, that's risky. I consider all of Josephus to be a fabrication, the entire goal of it all being to establish a background against which the NT fables could become true. That's quite a claim, and I have nothing to back it up, but I find it most remarkable that such a ton of paper got spent on such an unknown and unremarkable country.
Yet without Josephus, none of the NT would have any written record backing it up

Anyway. You are citing an alleged historical fact from 63 BCE to answer something that allegedly took place a full century later.
Not only that, but John of all people would be telling Nicodemus to rebel against Rome in order to enter the Kingdom?

Have you missed the fact that the Synoptics are products of Romans or at least intended for a Roman audience, given the use of their Roman loanwords and for instance the translation of the very little Hebrew in it, such as the alleged words that the alleged Jesus allegedly speaks when he allegedly dies on the Stake?

(I'll stop the "alleged" now, it's getting tiring LOL)

It is very unhelpful when my question about John gets answered by a theme from Matthew and a scene from Josephus - I like to engage in textual source criticism, not hotchpotch story gobbling
Charles Wilson
Posts: 1689
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: "About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by Charles Wilson »

Moffatt Translation: https://archive.org/details/newtestamen ... +of+heaven
Search Term: "Realm of Heaven":

Matthew:
5: 3
5: 10
5: 19 Twice
7: 21
8: 11
10: 7
11: 11 - 12
11: 25
13: 11
13: 24
13: 31
13: 33
13: 45
13: 47
13: 52
16:19
18: 1
18: 3
18: 4
18: 23
18: 12
19:14
19: 24, Twice
20: 1
22: 2
23:13
25: 1

I have stated many times that I find "Realm of Heaven" to be pleasing in tone to me. I thank Moffatt for Translating the Matthean Term in that manner. It is the Term I wish to use and I will use it. It also points to a Room that exists, probably in Antonia.
mlinssen wrote:Have you missed the fact that the Synoptics are products of Romans or at least intended for a Roman audience...
Have you read anything else I have ever written? Ever? NOTE TO PETER: See how nice I am here? Cool? Calm?
It may be time for me to move on. I have to finish the Intro to Understanding Mucianus as Paul but I dunno. Diminishing returns.
User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 739
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "About Jesus' Clothes..."

Post by mlinssen »

Charles Wilson wrote: Sat May 01, 2021 10:12 am Moffatt Translation: https://archive.org/details/newtestamen ... +of+heaven
Search Term: "Realm of Heaven":

Matthew:
5: 3
5: 10
5: 19 Twice
7: 21
8: 11
10: 7
11: 11 - 12
11: 25
13: 11
13: 24
13: 31
13: 33
13: 45
13: 47
13: 52
16:19
18: 1
18: 3
18: 4
18: 23
18: 12
19:14
19: 24, Twice
20: 1
22: 2
23:13
25: 1

I have stated many times that I find "Realm of Heaven" to be pleasing in tone to me. I thank Moffatt for Translating the Matthean Term in that manner. It is the Term I wish to use and I will use it. It also points to a Room that exists, probably in Antonia.
mlinssen wrote:Have you missed the fact that the Synoptics are products of Romans or at least intended for a Roman audience...
Have you read anything else I have ever written? Ever? NOTE TO PETER: See how nice I am here? Cool? Calm?
It may be time for me to move on. I have to finish the Intro to Understanding Mucianus as Paul but I dunno. Diminishing returns.
How about me serving up an alleged translation of Matthew, translating the Greek that unmistakably says "kingdom of the heavens" with e.g. Cave of the Gummibears?

I have no idea who you are Charles, nor have I read anything else of what you have written or I would have avoided your wishful thinking scribblings like the plague.
If I detest anything more than religiots distorting the content of the Bible it is fanciful fools flogging any ancient text into their fraudulous Fata Morganas, as for instance Miss April does with Thomas

Go on then, move on, I won't stop you
Post Reply