Giuseppe wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:45 am
Because I think that the case of Theudas is very similar to the case of the Samaritan false prophet slain by Pilate.
Someone (see Georges Ory) had arrived even to suspect/argue that the two episodes were one and the same.
His hearers, viewing this tale as plausible, appeared in arms.
...and since I think that the Theudas's case is very similar to the case of the Samaritan false prophet slain by Pilate,
...then I conclude that the followers of Theudas also reached him "in arms".
But Josephus doesn't say that Theudas and his followers were armed, only that he was a magician and claimed to be a prophet and persuaded people with his words, like Jesus.
Since Theudas wasn't armed and claimed to be a prophet and only used words but the Romans saw him as a threat, I think it's plausible that he was expecting divine assistance, like Jesus in Mt. 26:50-53:
Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus, and arrested him. At this, one of Jesus’ companions drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.
“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him. “For all who draw the sword will die by the sword. Are you not aware that I can call on my Father, and He will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?”
I already mentioned that Ben said the Greek word for "effects" in the Theudas passage does not imply weapons, only personal belongings.
When compared (rather easily) the "effects" of the followers of Theudas with the "arms" of the followers of the Samaritan false prophet, the evidence of a presumed pacifism of Theudas vanishes entirely.
Hence, if Jesus existed, he was probably a violent.
Really, his connection with violence would be even more probable than Theudas's case, since the accusation was: "king of the Jews".
And the place of the final clash was Jerusalem and the Temple, not a marginal place of Judea: even more reasons to have swords with him.
John2 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 12:01 pm
Since Theudas wasn't armed and claimed to be a prophet and only used words but the Romans saw him as a threat, I think it's plausible that he was expecting divine assistance, like Jesus in Mt. 26:50-53:
Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus, and arrested him. At this, one of Jesus’ companions drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.
“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him. “For all who draw the sword will die by the sword. Are you not aware that I can call on my Father, and He will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?”
If "all who draw the sword die by the sword", then why did Jesus instruct his disciples to trade their cloaks for swords? (Lk 22:36)
John2 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 12:01 pm
Since Theudas wasn't armed and claimed to be a prophet and only used words but the Romans saw him as a threat, I think it's plausible that he was expecting divine assistance, like Jesus in Mt. 26:50-53:
Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus, and arrested him. At this, one of Jesus’ companions drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.
“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him. “For all who draw the sword will die by the sword. Are you not aware that I can call on my Father, and He will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?”
If "all who draw the sword die by the sword", then why did Jesus instruct his disciples to trade their cloaks for swords? (Lk 22:36)
Having swords and using them for sedition are two different things. In both passages his followers have swords, and in Matthew he says to "put your sword back in its place," not to get rid of it.
In Luke, having swords was only to symbolically "fulfill" the OT verse, "He was numbered among the transgressors," with two being enough (22:38).
But I am arguing that Jesus (and Theudas) was both seditious and pacifistic, so any overlap like this seems fitting to me.
Last edited by John2 on Wed Feb 16, 2022 12:25 pm, edited 3 times in total.
I'm not familiar with Greek enough to find the word for "effects" in the Theudas passage yet, but this link shows the Greek for Ant. 20.97 and also has a translation that supports the meaning of personal belongings rather than weapons.
... Theudas persuaded a great part of the people to take their belongings with them ...
And for what it's worth, Acts 5:36 (which I think is based on Josephus) doesn't say that Theudas or his followers were armed either, only that Theudas had "claimed to be somebody" (as per Josephus saying that Theudas had "claimed to be a prophet").
Some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men joined him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing.
John2 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 12:20 pmHaving swords and using them for sedition are two different things. In both passages his followers have swords, and in Matthew he says to "put your sword back in its place," not to get rid of it.
In Luke, having swords was only to symbolically "fulfill" the OT verse, "He was numbered among the transgressors," with two being enough (22:38).
But I am arguing that Jesus (and Theudas) was both seditious and pacifistic, so any overlap like this seems fitting to me.
I agree that the historical Jesus was seditious - I'm less sold on his pacificism. The gospels attempted to fulfill the "he was numbered among the transgressors" prophecy by crucifying him next to a couple of bandits (or they attempted to excuse an embarrassing fact by claiming it was in fulfillment of prophecy). Having his disciples carrying around sheathed swords doesn't seem to me a necessary way of fulfilling this prophecy.
