diverging

joined 1 year ago
[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 15 points 4 months ago

The anno domini (AD) dating system started in 525. The concept of zero did not make it to Europe until the 11th century.

[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 8 points 4 months ago

... refuse to return escaped slaves? No, that's not it.

[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 months ago

Leap year creator

That's Julius Caesar. Sort of...

[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

who devour widows’ houses

OK, I'll give you that. It's a full chapter after he drove out the buyers and sellers, with only irrelevant preaching in between, but it's in there.

Poor exegesis incoming

Of course it is poor exegesis, I started with "If we take it literally".

Orthodox Study Bible

What? Because orthodox is the one true version of Christianity. You say it yourself it is an interpretation, and no interpretation is more authoritative than any other.

“money changing” was an exploitative racket

You could make the argument that any business is exploitative, inside the temple and outside the temple, but he just kicked them out of the temple, he didn't outright ban commerce. This is leaning toward option 2. Now, how does that justify assault?

[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (3 children)

where merchants were taking advantage of poor widows etc

Where are you getting that from? The bible says nothing of the sort. It says "And He entered the temple area and began to drive out those who were selling and buying on the temple grounds" Both selling and buying. Jesus cast out the poor old widows who just wanted to worship the way God told them to. The vendors were selling offerings that people could burn as part of their worship and animals to be sacrificed. They were providing goods that were necessary for worship at the temple. It is not at all clear what Jesus was complaining about.

If we take it literally, I see two options:

  1. He did not like that there were burnt offerings and animal sacrifices, but Jesus alludes to the temple being a house of prayer, which is a reference to Isaiah 56:7 "their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all people." The burnt offerings and animal sacrifices were intended by God.
  2. He just didn't like commerce within the temple. He complains about the temple being turned into a den of thieves, not about there being thieves at all. Which means as long as the den of thieves was outside the temple Jesus would have been fine with it.

As far as I see, neither of these justify assault.

[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago

wtf It's really not the same.

[–] diverging@lemmy.ml -2 points 4 months ago (9 children)

Does "be kind to each other" include attacking them with a whip?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleansing_of_the_Temple

[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 28 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)
[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 21 points 4 months ago (5 children)

I think that is DR Congo. More french speakers than France.

[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 8 points 4 months ago

00:00:00 is the 1st second of the day. 23:59:59 is the 86400th second of the day. That's 24 hours.

[–] diverging@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 months ago

Greed and gluttony have been pervasive throughout history. I have no idea why you would think they were recent phenomena.

view more: next ›