3-Year Ministry Timeline of Jesus

[outhouse]

"They began to accuse him, saying, "We found this man perverting the nation, forbidding paying taxes to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king." - Luke 23:2

"What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings on the earth collect tolls or tributes? From their own subjects, or from foreigners?" When he said, "From foreigners," Jesus said to him, "In that case, the subjects are exempt." -Matthew 17:25-27 (ISV)

Jesus said tax foreigners, because "the subjects are exempt." Jesus taught, "kings on the earth" should only tax "foreigners".

[outhouse]

What do you mean by that?

Cordially, Bernard

It means scholars are forced to view Josephus work knowing they have to understand it was written with a Hellenistic Roman lens.

It is a Roman biased retelling of previous events.

where do you see Zealotry during John & Jesus' public lives?

You mean you expect a 1 to 3 year window to be filled with anti Roman political views, by a group of people who were divorcing the dirty rebellious Jews and writing to a Roman audience, praying not to be identified as a rebellious Jew?????????????????????????????

And yet there are many clues used as evidence.

During Jesus childhood Sepphoris fell, its possible the trip to Egypt was pseudo history for a Galilean exodus to keep villagers from being mowed down under Roman swords. I would not have stayed in Nazareth watching Galileans burn and murdered and taken into slavery, all in eyesight of Sepphoris.

Shortly after his death the temple fell.


The Sicarii were active in his lifetime.


AND YOU magically think the period in between Sepphoris and the temple burning, the bitterly oppressed Aramaic Jews in Galilee had open arms smooching on Antipas ??

So Jesus could have witnessed his own family members burned and taken into slavery, poor uncle Isac being butchered by Romans and they drug his guts all the way to Rome. Aramaic Galileans had more then enough reason to hate Antipas and Rome since he was Romes client king

[Bernard Muller]

to outhouse,

It only takes a spark to start a forest fire, and Pilates and Caiaphas life were on the line to keep the temple spark free. If there was so much as a hiccup in the money flow to Rome that temple was doomed. Galileans knew this. They wanted to stop the money flow to Rome, you know the required silver currency with a damned pagan god Melqarts face on them in gods own house!
When the eagle was removed 40 peasants were burned alive at the stake, I'm sure no Jew really cared gods house was only being used to raise money for Rome !

Josephus never said those forty young men were peasants: they were pious Jews, not zealots, trying to cleanse the temple, as Jesus tried to do a generation later. The incident of the removal of the golden eagle above one of the temple gate happened during the last year of Herod the Great, well before the zealot movement started with that Judas of Gamala:
http://biblehub.com/library/josephus/th ... _eagle.htm
For the rest of your comment, you are imagining things again with no supporting evidence.
And how do you know the temple was only used in order to raise money for Rome?

Cordially, Bernard

[outhouse]

Jesus own followers were called Zealots Zealots existed without question in Jesus time.

To be a religious political party, does not require full blown war.

"Jewish Freedom Movement", does that ring any bells knowing these were oppressed people?????????

they were pious Jews,


Cordially, Bernard

Jeez what exactly do you think the definition of a Zealot was?

the zealot movement started with that Judas of Gamala:

Sorry

It is obvious you have not done any homework here.

Following Josephus ("B. J." ii. 8, § 1; "Ant." xviii. 1, §§ 1, 6), most writers consider that the Zealots were a so-called fourth party founded by Judas the Galilean (see Grätz, "Gesch." iii. 252, 259; Schürer, "Gesch." 1st ed., i. 3, 486). This view is contradicted, however, by the fact that Hezekiah, the father of Judas the Galilean, had an organized band of so-called "robbers" which made war against the Idumean Herod ("B. J." i. 10, § 5; "Ant." xiv. 9, § 2), and also during the reign of Herod, if not long before by the fact that the system of religious and political murders practised by the Zealots was in existence during the reign of Herod, if not long before.

And how do you know the temple was only used in order to raise money for Rome?

please wake up.


Herod’s death in 4 B.C.E. caused the release of built up frustrations of the people who were suppressed by his brutality. Many people were impoverished because of Herod’s high taxes and spendings. When he died, his building projects that once allowed for job opportunities were stopped, and many people lost their jobs. This built up frustrations that ultimately contributed to the causes of the First Jewish-Roman War.[12]



You don't have a clue what Pilates job was during this period of unrest? Why was pilate at Pasover.

2 reasons. keep peace and to personally take the money back to Rome


The procurators' and prefects' primary functions were military, but as representatives of the empire they were responsible for the collection of imperial taxes,

During the Passover, a festival of deep national as well as religious significance for the Jews, Pilate, as governor or prefect, would have been expected to be in Jerusalem to keep order

[Adam]

Who put that interpolation with all the citations in the above post presumably by outhouse? Would anyone but Peter have access to the software to do that? Fess up, Peter!

[outhouse]

Who put that interpolation with all the citations in the above post presumably by outhouse? Would anyone but Peter have access to the software to do that? Fess up, Peter!

Sad thing is I can literally cite everything I post on. I don't because I feel I have nothing to prove here. Much is common knowledge, the same way YOU earlier posted scholars that also explain exactly what I stated, which was almost verbatim from other scholars.


I would agree with Bernard the eagles removal may not be classified by Zealots.

But in the same token my point was in WHO is doing said classification.


Zealots was not a term they probably used themselves. It is a Hellenistic Koine term used to vaguely describe Aramaic Galilean trouble makers.


My point is also that Aramaic Galilean Jews zealous for a more traditional flavor of Judaism, opposed Hellenistic oppression and influence.

[Bernard Muller]

to outhouse,

Down to the creek or river, for your ritual emersion.

So ritual immersion were available only to poor Jews. What follows?

By your methodology if it was so simple, he should have been baptized a long time ago with this simple wiping away of ones sins. No need to EVEN mention John.

The reason John was so popular with his baptism for atonement of all previous sins (after sincere repentance of sins or not) is that the Jews then believed the Kingdom was near, and to be in it and avoid God's wrath, you would need to be sinless.
So the baptism by John was not like any other ritual immersions, but an urgent need due to the sudden hope the Kingdom was near.

"They began to accuse him, saying, "We found this man perverting the nation, forbidding paying taxes to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a king." - Luke 23:2

This is an alleged accusation only. And a false one at that, because in Lk 20:22-25, "Luke" had Jesus very publicly approving paying tax to the Romans.

"What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings on the earth collect tolls or tributes? From their own subjects, or from foreigners?" When he said, "From foreigners," Jesus said to him, "In that case, the subjects are exempt." -Matthew 17:25-27 (ISV)

A more accurate translation would be: "He said, "Yes." And when he came home, Jesus spoke to him first, saying, "What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tribute? From their sons or from others?"
And when he said, "From others," Jesus said to him, "Then the sons are free.""

Jesus said tax foreigners, because "the subjects are exempt." Jesus taught, "kings on the earth" should only tax "foreigners".

Jesus said the kings do not tax their sons, only the others (than the sons), that is their subjects. If these kings were taxing only foreigners, that would not get them much tax money.
The tax here is for the temple and only collected from Jews by Jews. " Matthew" had Jesus & Peter think they are "sons" of God, therefore free not to pay that particular tax. But they do eventually with some "miracle" money.
And once again, "Matthew" had Jesus very publicly approving paying tax to the Romans (Mt 22:17-21)

So I do not see here any attempt by the gospels authors to have Jesus speaking about not paying tax to whoever face is printed on the coins (the emperor or Antipas). On the contrary, they have Jesus approving the payment of tax to Caesar or client kings.

It means scholars are forced to view Josephus work knowing they have to understand it was written with a Hellenistic Roman lens.

It is a Roman biased retelling of previous events.

Maybe, partly true. But that does not allow anyone to invent all kind of things which are not in Josephus' works.

You mean you expect a 1 to 3 year window to be filled with anti Roman political views, by a group of people who were divorcing the dirty rebellious Jews and writing to a Roman audience, praying not to be identified as a rebellious Jew?????????????????????????????

Josephus reported on Sicarii and Zealots at length, but never for during Pilate's rule.
Once again, your suspicion of a cover-up is not evidence of Zealots activities during that period.
The three events reported during Pilate by Josephus did not involved Sicarii or Zealots.
The first event was very peaceful, the second had Pilate retaliating brutally because some insulting him could not be tolerated, the third one involved Samaritans only.

And yet there are many clues used as evidence.
During Jesus childhood Sepphoris fell, its possible the trip to Egypt was pseudo history for a Galilean exodus to keep villagers from being mowed down under Roman swords. I would not have stayed in Nazareth watching Galileans burn and murdered and taken into slavery, all in eyesight of Sepphoris.

Very irrelevant and imaginative. Or maybe you used a time machine. And you call that clues!
Sepphoris fell when Jesus was about zero years old.

Shortly after his death the temple fell.

About forty years after. That's not "shortly".

The Sicarii were active in his lifetime.

According to your imagination, not Josephus.

AND YOU magically think the period in between Sepphoris and the temple burning, the bitterly oppressed Aramaic Jews in Galilee had open arms smooching on Antipas ??

No, but if they fear Antipas, that was enough to keep them in line. And all evidence points they stayed in line during his rule. Do you think despots in these days were loved? Most likely not. Only fear, demonstration of authority, propaganda would keep their subjects in peace.

So Jesus could have witnessed his own family members burned and taken into slavery, poor uncle Isac being butchered by Romans and they drug his guts all the way to Rome. Aramaic Galileans had more then enough reason to hate Antipas and Rome since he was Romes client king

Your imagination is running wild.

Cordially, Bernard

[Bernard Muller]

to outhouse,

Jesus own followers were called Zealots Zealots existed without question in Jesus time.

No evidence for that, whatsoever.

Zealots existed without question in Jesus time.

And there is no evidence that Zealots were active during John & Jesus' times.

Jeez what exactly do you think the definition of a Zealot was?

So for you "pious Jews" are synonymous of "Zealots". And all these pious Jews were political & "heated".

Herod’s death in 4 B.C.E. caused the release of built up frustrations of the people who were suppressed by his brutality. Many people were impoverished because of Herod’s high taxes and spendings. When he died, his building projects that once allowed for job opportunities were stopped, and many people lost their jobs. This built up frustrations that ultimately contributed to the causes of the First Jewish-Roman War.[12]

Well, that's your thinking. But where is the evidence? Actually, work in the temple continued up to a few years before its destruction.

You don't have a clue what Pilates job was during this period of unrest? Why was pilate at Pasover.

2 reasons. keep peace and to personally take the money back to Rome

Keep peace, yes. But "personally take the money back to Rome" (collected in Jerusalem) is pure unfounded speculation.

The procurators' and prefects' primary functions were military, but as representatives of the empire they were responsible for the collection of imperial taxes,

During the Passover, a festival of deep national as well as religious significance for the Jews, Pilate, as governor or prefect, would have been expected to be in Jerusalem to keep order

The people were being taxed all over the empire and the Passover in Jerusalem was a very sensitive event, prone to unrest. But that's no reason to get into your wild speculations, which probably came from one of the latest books you read.

Cordially, Bernard

[outhouse]

So ritual immersion were available only to poor Jews. What follows?


Cordially, Bernard

You think a village like Nazareth had mikvas ? So the Aramaic village jews were not supposed to experience this, while Hellenistic Jews in Sepphoris had indoor pools?

[outhouse]

And there is no evidence that Zealots were active during John & Jesus' times.


Cordially, Bernard

Then you are guilty of not reading the text

They flat state Jesus had Zealot followers, that means they were politically active. There were no wars by stabbings were taking place.


If the movement was dead as you imagine, Jesus would not have a Zealot follower.


Maybe you think these oppressed starve and disease infested Aramaic people liked being oppressed