Bible Quiz of Indeterminate Difficulty

[Rocks_91]

As compensation for Steve’s highly-impregnable questions, here’s a dreadfully easy chestnut.

How many magoi visited Jesus in Bethlehem?

A.) Two
B.) Three
C.) Four
D.) Seven
E.) Twelve
F.) We don’t know

I think traditionally they are supposed to be three, but I’m not sure if the Bible says the exact number. Ok, I’ll go with B) Three.

 

[steve53]

Come on folks, don’t turn tail and abandon this thread!

That’s a rather hard question, but since there’s nobody left to answer I’ll take a wild guess: Ishmael ben Fabus, perhaps?

Correct as usual, Patrick.

Here’s another one right up your alley:

What was the exact phase of the moon when Jesus was crucified?

 

[Darran]

Correct as usual, Patrick.

Here’s another one right up your alley:

What was the exact phase of the moon when Jesus was crucified?

As soon as reaching the summit of her arc. Or do you mean, full moon, half moon?

 

[You]

As compensation for Steve’s highly-impregnable questions, here’s a dreadfully easy chestnut.

How many magoi visited Jesus in Bethlehem?

A.) Two
B.) Three
C.) Four
D.) Seven
E.) Twelve
F.) We don’t know

My little brain says we don’t know; there came wise men from the east, or something like that. F. (I hope thats not my grade, Patrick, I do offer bribes you know; in all major currencies and commodities, gold etc.)

 

[SanAgustin]

Hey who is this a Biblical question!?!?!

Correct as usual, Patrick.

Here’s another one right up your alley:

What was the exact phase of the moon when Jesus was crucified?

A: We don’t really know because we don’t know the exact date when Jesus was crucified.

 

[Darran]

A: We don’t really know because we don’t know the exact date when Jesus was crucified.

You can work it back pretty well with a little bit of astronomy and some hectic calculations, but we do know The Last Supper was on the 14th of Nisan as the Jewish calendar is still the same as it was, and he was captured that Passover night, or rather, very early morning the next day (I don’t know how they operated in days).

To clarify, He was captured as soon as the moon had reached the summit of her arc. Come 3 O’clock the day after when our Lord breathed His last a darkness had already fell on the world, which is often thought of to have been a solar eclipse. Is that perhaps your trick question?

 

[patrick457]

Correct as usual, Patrick.

Here’s another one right up your alley:

What was the exact phase of the moon when Jesus was crucified?

Before I reveal the answer to my question:

Since Jesus died somewhere during the Passover season, it would have been a full moon.

Darran: it has been common to interpret the darkness at the Crucifixion as a solar eclipse, but barring divine intervention, a solar eclipse during full moon would have been impossible. In fact this is the objection raised by the 3rd century Christian historian Sextus Julius Africanus against Thallus the 1st century chronicler, who is supposed to have written about an eclipse during the time of the Crucifixion.

 

[SanAgustin]

So did we get the answer right for the Wise Men?

 

[patrick457]

And the answer is: F. Despite that popular carol, we don’t know whether there were three of them or more or less, and it is rather likely that they aren’t actually kings. The Greek word magoi is usually translated as “wise men” or transliterated as “magi” in this instance.

Based on their usages, we can infer four meanings for the Greek term magos. The first is the original, while the others are deritative and secondary:

1) A member of the Persian (Zoroastrian) priestly caste; by extension, to learned men and priests who specialized in astrology and dream interpretation.
2) Possessors of supernatural knowledge/power.
3) Magicians/sorcerers. The other instances of magos in the NT are used in this sense: for example, Simon Magus and Elymas aka Bar-Jesus in Acts. The term is also used in the Septuagint and Theodotion version of Daniel to describe the court ‘magicians’ of Babylon.
4) In some instances in Classical Greek literature, deceivers or charlatans, who use sleight of hand to give the appearance of achieving supernatural effects.

Commonly today Matthew’s magoi is identified as being around the first category. The later identification with ‘kings’ (which is not originally implied by the word) is more to tie up the OT and the NT spritually (Psalm 68:29, 72:10; Isaiah 60:3). If anything, historical magoi were servants of kings.

For the record, in the ancient world, there was an overlap between what we now call “science” and what we now think of as “superstition”. In one example, ancient medicinal practices were a mix of remedies which may actually work with quack ones and magical incantations or some other voodoo. In fact, it was only in the 17th century - during the ‘Enlightenment’ - that astrology and astronomy were finally considered to be two distinct disciplines.

And while we’re at it, no, we don’t know whether they rode camels either. And that they apparently did not follow a star to Jerusalem or Bethlehem: instead they saw the star before their journey; they saw it again just as they approached Bethlehem, which was the time when the star actually guided them.

 

[SanAgustin]

In Spanish we call them the “3 reyes magos”, the “3 magician kings”.

 

[Darran]

Darran: it has been common to interpret the darkness at the Crucifixion as a solar eclipse, but barring divine intervention, a solar eclipse during full moon would have been impossible

Ah! Is that right? I never really believed it myself, it did last for hours afterall.

 

[patrick457]

Ah! Is that right? I never really believed it myself, it did last for hours afterall.

I quote from the almighty Wikipedia:

As seen from the Earth, a solar eclipse occurs when the Moon passes between the Sun and the Earth, and the Moon fully or partially covers the Sun as viewed from a location on Earth. This can happen only during a new moon, when the Sun and Moon are in conjunction as seen from Earth.

Time for another question. This time, it’s going to be difficult, so you’d all best better brace yourselves.

In New Testament textual criticism, the Alexandrian text-type is generally characterized to have shorter readings, and are commonly regarded as having a lower tendency to expand or paraphrase. The Western text, meanwhile, has a tendency to enlarge and paraphrase at places. The Byzantine textual tradition, which usually shows a greater tendency toward smooth and well-formed Greek and display fewer instances of textual variation and difficult readings, is a combination of the two. Nevertheless, the Western text is in certain places shorter than the Alexandrian, or even those of other textual traditions. F. J. A. Hort dubbed these readings the western non-interpolations. One such non-interpolation occurs in the Matthean Passion narrative (more specifically, chapter 27). The question is: what exactly is this non-interpolation?

Hey, it’s supposed to be St. Matthew’s feastday today/yesterday after all.

 

[patrick457]

…Wow. No one came to answer that? I guess it must be ultimately difficult then.

The correct answer is:

But the rest said, “Let be; let us see if Elias comes to save Him.” Now another, taking a spear, pierced His side, and there came out water and blood. But Jesus, crying out again a great voice, gave up the spirit.

• Matthew 27:49-50

More info later.

 

[steve53]

Working with Josephus on the Passover and the NT on the specific dates, the day of preparation on which Jesus was crucified was Nisan 16. That would be one day after the full moon, as the Jewish month of Nisan, and every month of the Jewish Calendar, began on a new moon. In other words, the month began when the moon began to wax.

 

[patrick457]

…Wow. No one came to answer that? I guess it must be ultimately difficult then.

The correct answer is:

But the rest said, “Let be; let us see if Elias comes to save Him.” Now another, taking a spear, pierced His side, and there came out water and blood. But Jesus, crying out again a great voice, gave up the spirit.

• Matthew 27:49-50

More info later.

This variant is found in Codex Sinaiticus (c. 330-360), Vaticanus (c. 325–350), Ephraemi Rescriptus (c. 450), Regius (8th c.), Nanianus (9th c.), Tischendorfianus IV (9th-10th c.), Minuscules 1010, 1293, Palestinian Syriac, Ethiopian, some Vetus Latina (such as Usserianus II*) and Vulgate manuscripts. It is omitted by all other manuscripts and even in late witness of the Alexandrian text-type (Minuscule 892).

The placement of this sentence makes it appear that the spear thrust was the direct cause of Jesus’ death, rather than being a precautionary measure done post-mortem as in John. There is some disagreement as always about this variant: those who think it as genuinely Matthean think that this was removed in order to smoothen out apparent internal (while the bystanders were apparently waiting for Elijah to rescue Jesus, someone, in complete opposition to the preceding thought, steps in and kills Him) and external discrepancies between Matthew and John. Detractors propose that because this comment finds such a strong parallel in John 19:34, it was probably just taken from John’s account by early scribes and inserted into this verse, since if it was originally from Matthew, it is rather hard to explain why the vast majority of other manuscripts would omit it. It is thought that this sentence was specifically inserted to combat Docetism.

 

[E_Thrower_II]

Okay, here’s the next question:

3.) Who was it whose staff turned into a serpent and ate the staves of the magicians of Egypt, turned water into blood, summoned the frogs by stretching out his hand, and struck the dust with his staff, thereby causing gnats to swarm the Egyptians?

A.) Moses
B.) Miriam
***C.) Aaron
***D.) Dathan
E.) Joshua
F.) Zipporah

I’m going to warn everyone in advance that this another trick question, so y’all gotta crack open your Bibles and read very carefully.

Aaron’s rod

 

[E_Thrower_II]

…Wow. No one came to answer that? I guess it must be ultimately difficult then.

The correct answer is:

But the rest said, “Let be; let us see if Elias comes to save Him.” Now another, taking a spear, pierced His side, and there came out water and blood. But Jesus, crying out again a great voice, gave up the spirit.

• Matthew 27:49-50

More info later.

The book of Matthew in the KJV makes no mention of his pierced side. The only gospel that does make mention of his pierced side is the book of John who was the only disciple who stayed with him when he was crucified. I had not noticed John’s book was the only gospel to record his pierced side bringing forth the blood and water until I read your post

I wonder how that fits in with Matthew’s book being the symbol of the Lion (Kingship), Mark’s being the Ox (Servitude), Luke’s being the Man (Humanity), and John’s being the Eagle (Deity)?

Ref. Ezekiel Ch.1:4-12
Isaiah 40:2 & 42:1
Zechariah 6:12 & 9:9

MATTHEW - Genealogy by succession, Christ “born King of the Jews,” refers to Jesus as a “Governor,” only gospel Jesus says “kingdom of heaven” (all other gospels refer to it as the “kingdom of God.”

MARK - No genealogy. Who care about the genealogy of a servant/slave?

LUKE - Genealogy by nature from Mary to Adam showing Christ was apart of the human race. Only gospel Jesus says he was in temptation (Lk 22:28). Not of evil but to prove him (Heb 5:8). More instances of Jesus teaching how to deal with temptation.

JOHN - Introduces Jesus as the Word, as God, and the Light (Trinity). Only gospel Jesus says, “I and my Father are one.” Only gospel mentioning the pierced side that brought forth blood and water.

Now it does not mean that the things one gospel mentions and the others do not, did not occur. But I believe they were inspired to write as the spirit moved them to depict Christ in each role. Matthew as King (lion), Mark as a Servant (ox), Luke as a Man(man), and John as the Trinity(eagle).

But my question is, what connection do you see between the blood and water and Holy Trinity?

 

[patrick457]

The book of Matthew in the KJV makes no mention of his pierced side. The only gospel that does make mention of his pierced side is the book of John who was the only disciple who stayed with him when he was crucified. I had not noticed John’s book was the only gospel to record his pierced side bringing forth the blood and water until I read your post

Come to think of it, most Bible translations in existence do not have this non-interpolation or even talk about it. It’s one of those textual issues that is roundly ignored, but then again the sentence in question is a purely Alexandrian variant. Given that it might cause confusion though, I think that’s probably a wise idea.

I wonder how that fits in with Matthew’s book being the symbol of the Lion (Kingship), Mark’s being the Ox (Servitude), Luke’s being the Man (Humanity), and John’s being the Eagle (Deity)?

I really note your identification with interest. Admittedly the association of Matthew with the Man, Mark with the Lion, Luke with the Ox, and John with the Eagle (as per St. Jerome) is traditionally more widespread, at least in Catholic circles. The first to make the connection between the Evangelists and the Four Living Beings, St. Irenaeus in the 2nd century, associated Matthew with the Man, John with the Lion, Luke with the Ox, and Mark with the Eagle. St. Augustine had Mark-Matthew-Luke-John as Man-Lion-Ox-Eagle, while Pseudo-Athanasius had Matthew-Luke-Mark-John.

 

[E_Thrower_II]

I really note your identification with interest. Admittedly the association of Matthew with the Man, Mark with the Lion, Luke with the Ox, and John with the Eagle (as per St. Jerome) is traditionally more widespread, at least in Catholic circles. The first to make the connection between the Evangelists and the Four Living Beings, St. Irenaeus in the 2nd century, associated Matthew with the Man, John with the Lion, Luke with the Ox, and Mark with the Eagle. St. Augustine had Mark-Matthew-Luke-John as Man-Lion-Ox-Eagle, while Pseudo-Athanasius had Matthew-Luke-Mark-John.

That is interesting. I really enjoy this stuff, even when people don’t see it the way I do. Are you aware of how they drew their conclusions? I can follow along as long as we have similar Bibles. I use the 1611 KJV with Strongs Concordance. I don’t have any other literature.

 

[patrick457]

Woe to this thread!

A bumper question:

Which prophet was ordered to take a harlot as a wife?

1.) Hosea
2.) Habbakuk
3.) Ezekiel
4.) Jeremiah​