What Did Jesus Write in the Sand?

[jcrichton]

Ok now I’m going to have to reread it in that light because that cracked me up. It seems to fit the rythm of the story too. commotion, crowd , Jesus sitting there not looking at them, writing…they’re trying to coax a quick rash decision…oh man that’s good .

I hate to say it but that changes the meaning of the act of writing and the relationships of the main people in the story for me. It really gives meaning to Jesus’ not paying attention to them till he stands up and with a breath " let the first among you…" and they are toast. edit …it’s interesting that Jesus classifies them in terms first and last the author classifies them in terms of age.

Thanks jcrich.

Exactly!

…I envision it this way: Jesus, ignores them; then, after their impetuous insistance, He gets up, looks at the main instigators, the teachers of the Law and the Pharisees, in the eye… and POW!

I think that the author is speaking from the prevailing cutom where the elders were granted respect due to their age and the wisdom that is associated with their long years of experience (specially the masters of the Law and the Pharisees); I think that there is also a revelation of human nature… the young are quick to join others and are the least willing to admit error. I compare Jesus’ determination (those without sin) to that passage where Jesus tells His disciples that they will sit with Him on twelve thrones to judge Israel (hence, those without sin will be able to Judge).

What I also found powerful was the woman’s decision to await Jesus’ Judgment; she could have slithered away after the last of her accusers left, but she may have understood the importance of that moment in her life and humbly submitted herself to Christ’s decision… what a great experience that must have been… though she was at death’s grip, Life was Merciful and she was granted a new birth!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Very good quotes but only one problem here and I bet you can guess what it is?

The Tora was not approved and went through several revisions for 300 or more years after Christ. The Old Testament that the Catholic Church uses which is not what you quote came from the Tora before the Jewish Tora was approved. The Jewish authorities or religious refused to approve till afther the Catholic publish what was there in order to refute the Messish.

The modern Jewish canon was not rigidly fixed until the third century A.D.

Hi!

…I wanted to remind of that but I’m only somewhat familiar with the info… as I understand it there were two sources of text one in Greek which is sead to be the one used by Jesus and His disciples and the Hebrew text which was the one which the Jewish council determined to use as thier Canon (coincidentally, it does not contain the books left out by the Protestant Bibles, since they too, going against the grain I suppose, decided to use the Hebrew text as their source when they determined to have a different canon).

Are you familiar with these two sources (Greeek and Hebrew) and is there a way to tell if the original Hebrew also contained the books missing in the Protestant Bibles?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[NotWorthy]

Hi!

Are you familiar with these two sources (Greeek and Hebrew) and is there a way to tell if the original Hebrew also contained the books missing in the Protestant Bibles?

Maran atha!

Angel

Even though St. Jerome questioned that they were ever written in Hebrew, the Dead Sea Scrolls have shown that several of the Deutero’s were, in fact, written in Hebrew.

 

[jcrichton]

Even though St. Jerome questioned that they were ever written in Hebrew, the Dead Sea Scrolls have shown that several of the Deutero’s were, in fact, written in Hebrew.

Thanks NotWorthy!

…but I was wondering if they were the same titles/books as the Greek; I have a non-Catholic Bible which has the “imprimatur” (which suggests that it has been approved by the Catholic Bishops) which contain Deuterocanonicals and Apocrypha… several of these are additions to the 73 books of the Catholic Canon… that is why I would like to compare both the Greek and Hebrew texts (at least the index) in order to quench my curiosity…

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[NotWorthy]

Thanks NotWorthy!

…but I was wondering if they were the same titles/books as the Greek; I have a non-Catholic Bible which has the “imprimatur” (which suggests that it has been approved by the Catholic Bishops) which contain Deuterocanonicals and Apocrypha… several of these are additions to the 73 books of the Catholic Canon… that is why I would like to compare both the Greek and Hebrew texts (at least the index) in order to quench my curiosity…

Maran atha!

Angel

Some of the names have been changed. For instance, the Septuagint has 4 Esdras. Catholics adopted 2 of the Esdras, what we call Ezra and Nehemiah. I think our Greek brothers kept 3rd and 4th Ezra.

ItsJustDave88 has provided some good information on all this. You may want to PM him for more (if no one answers you here).

 

[Elizabeth502]

Ben Masada,

I’ve read, or at least skimmed through, most of this thread. I did not read all of your replies thoroughly, but enough of them to observe your repudiation of a faith-based Christianity. Does it occur to you that all religions are faith-based, including Judaism? Do you believe in at least some of the “unprovable” tenets of Judaism? Because if you do, count yourself among those relying on faith to at least some degree.

I studied Judaism for many years, including Torah (some of which I read in Hebrew), took classes in Midrash, learned from rabbis. While I don’t consider myself an “expert,” nor as acquainted as you are, I do know that a huge amount of Judaism is based on typology, mythology, and even numerology (in more Orthodox and Chasidic quarters). And, like Christianity, a lot of what is handed down is what we can refer to as “tradition.”

Is symbolism/symbology, anachronism, scriptural inaccuracy, redaction, etc., O.K. for Judaism but not for Christianity? Just because something is written poetically, and liberties/license are taken by one or more authors does not mean there’s no truth in it, or that it does not have profound spiritual application. What is non-factual can nevertheless be true.

Also, I don’t know why you believe that it is a Christian doctrine that Jesus’ crucifixion was unusual or unique, and that such fabricated uniqueness is pertinent to what we believe is his divinity. Neither children nor adults are taught that. We know that it was a Roman form of humiliation, and was particularly applied to those they suspected of political insurrection (or potential insurrection by a critical mass of loyal followers). It was designed as a deterrence so that people would think twice about defying the gov’t.

 

[kimmielittle]

I wonder if that girl, when she answered, “…none, LORD”, knew He was indeed… LORD? Or, a Lord of Law. Or, of her civilian status. To me, it addresses all three.

BTW: Thank you. I have been allowed to learn so much from you all.

 

[NotWorthy]

I wonder if that girl, when she answered, “…none, LORD”, knew He was indeed… LORD? Or, a Lord of Law. Or, of her civilian status. To me, it addresses all three.

BTW: Thank you. I have been allowed to learn so much from you all.

I would think she simply meant “master”. If she was doing what she was accused of doing, she probably wasn’t paying attention to what this Holy Man from Galilee was teaching.

 

[Just_Returned]

Very good quotes but only one problem here and I bet you can guess what it is?

The Tora was not approved and went through several revisions for 300 or more years after Christ. The Old Testament that the Catholic Church uses which is not what you quote came from the Tora before the Jewish Tora was approved. The Jewish authorities or religious refused to approve till afther the Catholic publish what was there in order to refute the Messish.

The modern Jewish canon was not rigidly fixed until the third century A.D.

I never knew this. WOW!!! Where can I find out more info on when and How the Jews canonized the Tora?

 

[Just_Returned]

Originally Posted by twb1621
You are right in that it is left to each person to fill in the blanks for his or her self. But it is never damaging to reflect on what He may have written independently and raising the possibilities may help others to recall things in themselves

As long as one does not speculate from a position of authority, declaring all other opinions “hogwash”.

In the Bishop Sheen’s book “Life of Christ”, Sheen speculates, for instance, on the whole conversasion and meaning of the Greeks coming to talk with our Lord. He speculates how witnessess to the Crucifixion expected Jesus to act as he was being crucified on the Cross, as opposed to forgiving his executioners. Sheen has many insightful speculations that add to the historical background and the culture of the 1st century man. These give the reader an Idea of everything going on around Our Lords life and his mission.
So both of the points above are valid.
I might add, that we treat the scriptures with revernce and dignity, too.
There have been many interesting and insightful answers to this thread that far out weighed the tired, old, rehashed “Holy Ghost, Holy Grail” De-Bunked, “Davinci Code” type nonsense perpetuated by Mr. Masada; which he tried to pass off as truth, reason, and, insight.

 

[Just_Returned]

Ben Masada,

I’ve read, or at least skimmed through, most of this thread. I did not read all of your replies thoroughly, but enough of them to observe your repudiation of a faith-based Christianity. Does it occur to you that all religions are faith-based, including Judaism? Do you believe in at least some of the “unprovable” tenets of Judaism? Because if you do, count yourself among those relying on faith to at least some degree.

I studied Judaism for many years, including Torah (some of which I read in Hebrew), took classes in Midrash, learned from rabbis. While I don’t consider myself an “expert,” nor as acquainted as you are, I do know that a huge amount of Judaism is based on typology, mythology, and even numerology (in more Orthodox and Chasidic quarters). And, like Christianity, a lot of what is handed down is what we can refer to as “tradition.”

Is symbolism/symbology, anachronism, scriptural inaccuracy, redaction, etc., O.K. for Judaism but not for Christianity? Just because something is written poetically, and liberties/license are taken by one or more authors does not mean there’s no truth in it, or that it does not have profound spiritual application. What is non-factual can nevertheless be true.

Also, I don’t know why you believe that it is a Christian doctrine that Jesus’ crucifixion was unusual or unique, and that such fabricated uniqueness is pertinent to what we believe is his divinity. Neither children nor adults are taught that. We know that it was a Roman form of humiliation, and was particularly applied to those they suspected of political insurrection (or potential insurrection by a critical mass of loyal followers). It was designed as a deterrence so that people would think twice about defying the gov’t.

I wouldn’t put much value in Mr. Masadas statements. If you’ve ever read the Books “Holy Ghost, Holy Grail.” or “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” which came out in the 70’s??? I Think??? Mr. Masada is either stealing their arguments against Christianity, or stealing from someone else who read these books.
Both of these books have been de-bunked and not even an Honest Atheist would refer to them without being laughed at.
The “Davinci Code” got many of its Ideas from the books above.
The idea that Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah is ridiculous.
Everything Jesus did or said pointed to the incarnation. When he forgave sins, he was saying he was God. When he called himself the Bridegroom he was saying he was God. Jesus even testified in 2 courts of law, 1st Herod’s, 2nd Pilots, that he was the Messiah.
I earlier pointed to a book called, “The Case for Christ” by a former Atheist, now Prodestant Minister I believe, Lee Strobel. Mr. Strobel Debunks the ideas of these books above as well as anything Mr. Masada has ever posted. Being a former Journalist that wrote for the Chicago Tribune’s criminal and legal dept, Mr. Strobel put forth the evidence for Christianity as it would be presented in a Court of law. While trying to proof Christianity as false, he ended up being converted.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I appreciate all of that ^^. However, my point was not to engage in logical refutation of the “facts” against Christianity, but to remind him that the basis of religion is faith, more than logic. It is true (such as the example you cite) that some people come to Christianity at the end of an intellectual/logical search. (Some of those include people interviewed on EWTN’s Journey Home; other converts include people who have written books about their journeys and the intellectual process that got them there.) However, probably more people arrive at their various religious beliefs, and/or stay there, out of a combination of intuition and experience (which can include upbringing). For myself, ultimately my faith is not intellectually reducible. Certainly that is true when it comes to experience of the sacraments. Grace is not a chemical formula. But neither is the Jewish prayer experience, Jewish belief, Jewish understanding of their own scriptures – not to mention the Mishnah and the Talmud — or Jewish religious identity. In the very terms that Ben Masada refutes the “facts” of Christianity, similarly a considerable volume of Jewish belief can also be called “non-factual.”

 

[NotWorthy]

In the Bishop Sheen’s book “Life of Christ”, Sheen speculates, for instance, on the whole conversasion and meaning of the Greeks coming to talk with our Lord. He speculates how witnessess to the Crucifixion expected Jesus to act as he was being crucified on the Cross, as opposed to forgiving his executioners.

Yes, you are right. But they evidently weren’t experts on their own Scriptures. Psalm 109 -
O God, whom I praise, do not be silent, for wicked and treacherous mouths attack me. They speak against me with lying tongues; 3 with hateful words they surround me, attacking me without cause. 4 In return for my love they slander me, even though I prayed for them. 5 They repay me evil for good, hatred for my love.

Jesus prayed and asked God to forgive them, for they knew not what they were doing.

 

[Just_Returned]

Yes, you are right. But they evidently weren’t experts on their own Scriptures. Psalm 109 -
O God, whom I praise, do not be silent, for wicked and treacherous mouths attack me. They speak against me with lying tongues; 3 with hateful words they surround me, attacking me without cause. 4 In return for my love they slander me, even though I prayed for them. 5 They repay me evil for good, hatred for my love.

Jesus prayed and asked God to forgive them, for they knew not what they were doing.

I agrree, This is Obvious. However, The Bishop Sheen talks about the fact that those who were crucified cursed the day they were born, yelled slanderous obcentities at everyone, Including their own mother for giving birth to them. In contrast to Jesus asking the Father to forgive them. Sheen speculates that there were probably some in the crowd that, while expecting obcentities, were in awe of this Condemned man who still Loved unto death. Not just any normal Death. But a HORRENDOUS display of Mans INHumanity against Man.
That could even be the reason why the one witnessed said, “Truly he was the Son of God”.

 

[jean8]

kimmielittle;4704171:

Hiyas Ben
" I am a Jewish man with knowledge of Jewish Law, ancient and modern."]…

Then you would know the difference between speculation and fact.

Yes, you can say that again. This case recorded by John is pure speculation of very bad taste.

You can not make speculation, thoughts, conjectures - fact… without proof,

I know the Jewish Law about women caught in adultery. The Gentile who wrote that case in the fourth Gospel knew zero of it.

You can not ‘prove’ insert ] your speculations - without disproving what is accepted…as being false. In all of your posts you fail to do this.

I have indeed disproved the case here, and rather quite well. You don’t see it because your faith won’t allow you to.

Using your basis of speculation, alone…
I might as well be trying to sell… say, The Kennedy’s where assassinated by Harry Potter.

I am sure you know very well that your remark does not apply to the issue at hand.

You are presenting your subjective according your mindset ] , . theory… only.
In short it takes more than a shadow of doubt…new OR old law…to be accepted as fact

I have used Logic to prove my point. You can’t see it because where faith begins Logic ends. And where there is no chance to apply Logic, knowledge is handicapped. And for lack
of knowledge people perish. That’s in Hosea 4:6.

Ben:

Hello Ben,
Isn’t this a strange question to ask? The Bible doesn’t tell us what Jesus wrote. Of course we can speculate, but then we will come up with several different answers.
You didn’t include the passage where it can be found. I’m not going to get my Concordance out to look up this unanswerable question?
If you know, then tell us.

God bless,
jean8

 

[jcrichton]

I wonder if that girl, when she answered, “…none, LORD”, knew He was indeed… LORD? Or, a Lord of Law. Or, of her civilian status. To me, it addresses all three.

BTW: Thank you. I have been allowed to learn so much from you all.

…the fact that she did not scurry away demonstrates that she understood that Jesus was not just a simple Rabbi…

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

I appreciate all of that ^^. However, my point was not to engage in logical refutation of the “facts” against Christianity, but to remind him that the basis of religion is faith, more than logic. It is true (such as the example you cite) that some people come to Christianity at the end of an intellectual/logical search. (Some of those include people interviewed on EWTN’s Journey Home; other converts include people who have written books about their journeys and the intellectual process that got them there.) However, probably more people arrive at their various religious beliefs, and/or stay there, out of a combination of intuition and experience (which can include upbringing). For myself, ultimately my faith is not intellectually reducible. Certainly that is true when it comes to experience of the sacraments. Grace is not a chemical formula. But neither is the Jewish prayer experience, Jewish belief, Jewish understanding of their own scriptures – not to mention the Mishnah and the Talmud — or Jewish religious identity. In the very terms that Ben Masada refutes the “facts” of Christianity, similarly a considerable volume of Jewish belief can also be called “non-factual.”

Your point is quite valid. I attempted to disuade him from his quest; I offered that there was nothing to gain by dismatling our respective Faiths… I may not have been as intelligible as I thought I was being; it is ridiculous to argue from a silent Christ while rejecting the New Testament–as it is to validate the Old Testament, but only when interpreted as to be devoid of Christ and His Incarnation.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Yes, you are right. But they evidently weren’t experts on their own Scriptures. Psalm 109 -
O God, whom I praise, do not be silent, for wicked and treacherous mouths attack me. They speak against me with lying tongues; 3 with hateful words they surround me, attacking me without cause. 4 In return for my love they slander me, even though I prayed for them. 5 They repay me evil for good, hatred for my love.

Jesus prayed and asked God to forgive them, for they knew not what they were doing.

…not only that, but they were unable to internalize Jesus’ Teachings… a fantastic example is Jesus’ Parable of Lazarus and the rich man… Jesus states that people would not believe even a man returned from the grave… this is exactly what happened as even His own did not readily believe!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ben Masada;4707135:

Hello Ben,
Isn’t this a strange question to ask? The Bible doesn’t tell us what Jesus wrote. Of course we can speculate, but then we will come up with several different answers.
You didn’t include the passage where it can be found. I’m not going to get my Concordance out to look up this unanswerable question?
If you know, then tell us.

God bless,
jean8

---

It’s very simple my friend. All you have to do is to use logic and read between the lines. That’s what I mean by logic.

Although I do not believe that case ever happened, but in the mind
of the gospel writer, I’ll repeat here to you what I have already said.

First of all, why did that group of men bring that woman to be stoned? Because she had been caught in adultery. Therefore, she was a sinner. Then, Jesus started writing on the sand.

Second, why those men could not stone that woman? Because they were also sinners. By now, I am sure you already have an idea of what Jesus was writing on the sand.

When he finished writing, the men had gone. They understood what Jesus had been writing. We haven’t yet. But wait.

To conclude, Jesus asked the woman where were her accusers. They could not condemn that woman because they were also under condemnation for being sinners.

Now, what does Jesus tell that woman? “Neither do I condemn you.” That’s what he was writing on the sand: No one can condemn you, because we all are sinners. And that includes Jesus himself. Now, if you can separate emotions which are caused by faith, you will see how logic makes sense.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

I. In the very terms that Ben Masada refutes the “facts” of Christianity, similarly a considerable volume of Jewish belief can also be called “non-factual.”

---

Hi Elizabeth, we are discussing Scriptures, which is supposed to be a dogma of faith for you Christians and for us. So, it will be a waste of time to try to refute extra-Biblical Literature, yours or mine. As I do my best to leave off Catholic extra-Biblical literature, I think you can leave off anything that’s not
Biblical Judaism. Let’s study the Truth from the point of view of the Bible.

Ben: