Did Jesus Condemn Those Who Condemned Him?

When the Markan Jesus was standing before the Council who were about to condemn him to death and hand him over to the Romans for crucifixion because he claimed to be the Messiah, did he condemn them when he said they would "see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven"?
Tagged:
«134

Comments

  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited August 2019
    Well, at the risk of being shot down in flames for giving an incorrect answer, these don't sound like words of condemnation.

    They could, I guess, be taken as words of prophecy, which those doing the condemning might conceivably take as an intimation of trouble in the future...

    What do you think?
  • Thanks for weighing in!
    Personally, I used to think the words were condemnatory. I used to think, as you said, that Jesus' words would suggest that "those doing the condemning might conceivably take [the words] as an intimation of trouble in the future..."

    Other opinions? How else might the words be taken? Pro or con?
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited August 2019
    So, presumably, you now think that the words are not condemnatory?

    I wonder if Jesus was, in a way, thinking out loud, and envisaging his future - thus making these words, words of prophecy only.

    YMMV.
  • Right. I now think they were not condemnatory. But I wouldn't mind hearing arguments on both sides before I say what I think and why I think it.
    (It's a bit wild, in a way.) :blush:
  • DooneDoone Shipmate
    I suggest that he wasn’t condemning, as such, but that it links to the idea of people looking at Him at His second coming and realising the enormity of what they had done. Hopefully, then falling to their knees in sorrow and repentance.
  • Wow. You're snibbing so close to me you're taking away some of my "thunder."
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    I had read that text as Jesus finally revealing His identity as the Messiah by quoting a recognised Messianic prophecy to the high priest.

    But do go on...
  • Yes, I see.

    What @Doone said, too.
  • Shouldn't this be in Kerygmania?
  • I wondered that, but I daresay a kindly Host will move it if necessary.
  • Can't in the least see how that's condemnatory.
  • Looks as though we all agree, then!
    :wink:
  • Well, at the risk of being shot down in flames for giving an incorrect answer, these don't sound like words of condemnation.

    They could, I guess, be taken as words of prophecy, which those doing the condemning might conceivably take as an intimation of trouble in the future...

    What do you think?

    I agree with Paul. Who agrees with mousethief.
  • Well, if we all agree with Paul, as well as with each other, what's not to like?

    I hazard the guess that, if Our Lord had wanted to condemn those judging him, he would have said so explicitly.
  • Well, if we all agree with Paul, as well as with each other, what's not to like?

    I hazard the guess that, if Our Lord had wanted to condemn those judging him, he would have said so explicitly.

    Especially when he so explicitly forgave so many people, including the soldiers that did the deed in the end.
  • Why hasn't JB2 trotted out Jesus' threat of unforgiveness to the Sanhedrin because they knew what they were doing?
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    Jesus also told Pilate that the one who delivered Him over was guilty of a greater sin than his (John 19: 11).
  • Aye, that were it: Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

    Which has been argued here recently, probably by JB2 or yourself, to mean God. My money's on the llama eating the bucket. Oooh, sorry wrong thread! Or is it? Just before that thread he finished this thread, although the finished thread came after both.
  • threadorrhea
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    @Martin54

    The idea that Pilate has his authority 'from above' is a Jewish circumlocution for God. 'The one who delivered me over' probably refers to Caiaphas. (John 18: 24, 28). The reference to a greater sin implies that there are also lesser sins (Matt 5: 19).

    The cry of dereliction from Ps 22 in Mark and Matthew does imply that Jesus felt abandoned by God on the cross. But the Jesus of Luke's gospel never experiences God forsakenness. He commits His spirit to God in the words of Ps 31. Even in death He remains in control. John's account is similar: 'It is finished.' It is the basis of the Jesus Victor model of the atonement.
  • I apologise for my previous post. Uncalled for.
  • Rublev wrote: »
    I had read that text as Jesus finally revealing His identity as the Messiah by quoting a recognised Messianic prophecy to the high priest.

    But do go on...

    Actually, Jesus' revelation of his messianic identity to the high priest consisted of his affirmative answer to the high priest's direct question, "Are you the Messiah, the son of the Blessed One?"

    Jesus' affirmative reply, whether "I am" (Mark) or "you have said so" (Matthew) or "You say that I am" (Luke)* was so offensive to the high priest that in all three gospels he tore his garments and cried out for Jesus' execution.

    So Mark's "I am" was what really mattered. And to that, Jesus added the words "And you [plural] will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven" -- which could be seen as a threat if Jesus meant, "and though you condemn and kill me, you will soon get your comeuppance."

    I still haven't said what I think.
    _______
    *The NIV translations of Matthew ("Yes, it is as you say") and Luke ("You are right in saying I am") seek to make clear that Jesus' reply in all three cases was affirmative.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited August 2019

    So Mark's "I am" was what really mattered. And to that, Jesus added the words "And you [plural] will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven" -- which could be seen as a threat if Jesus meant, "and though you condemn and kill me, you will soon get your comeuppance."

    I still haven't said what I think.

    But surely you just did, in the paragraph above...and it's a thought I've already expressed upthread.
    :confused:

  • No, I have not given a full presentation of what I think. I do not think Jesus intended the added words as a threat, but I have not told the full and somewhat complicated reason for why I think that.
  • No, I have not given a full presentation of what I think. I do not think Jesus intended the added words as a threat, but I have not told the full and somewhat complicated reason for why I think that.
    Wouldn't this be a good time instead of stringing us along?
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited August 2019
    mousethief wrote: »
    No, I have not given a full presentation of what I think. I do not think Jesus intended the added words as a threat, but I have not told the full and somewhat complicated reason for why I think that.
    Wouldn't this be a good time instead of stringing us along?

    Either that, or show some mercy, pity, etc., and don't go into 'full and somewhat complicated reasons'...try keeping it simple, instead.

    BTW, you forgot the Oxford comma after 'and'.
    :wink:

  • I have been accused of talking too much. I am now allowing plenty of time for responses to anything I say. But I will be providing a full disclosure of my own view sometime today or tomorrow and I can't help the fact that it is not simplistic.

    I worked rather hard on the "My God, My God" thread this morning and my daily schedule is becoming busier. I can't keep spending all my time on this.
  • Neither can we, so please do try to keep it as simple as possible.
  • I have been accused of talking too much.
    But you have also been accused of playing the professor setting assignments for his charges. It would be nice for all of us lesser mortals if you did neither.
  • Seconded.

    Please see my plea for simplicity, above.
  • No, I have not given a full presentation of what I think. I do not think Jesus intended the added words as a threat, but I have not told the full and somewhat complicated reason for why I think that.

    More is less,.
  • Rublev wrote: »
    @Martin54

    The idea that Pilate has his authority 'from above' is a Jewish circumlocution for God. 'The one who delivered me over' probably refers to Caiaphas. (John 18: 24, 28). The reference to a greater sin implies that there are also lesser sins (Matt 5: 19).

    The cry of dereliction from Ps 22 in Mark and Matthew does imply that Jesus felt abandoned by God on the cross. But the Jesus of Luke's gospel never experiences God forsakenness. He commits His spirit to God in the words of Ps 31. Even in death He remains in control. John's account is similar: 'It is finished.' It is the basis of the Jesus Victor model of the atonement.

    What about the therefore?
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    What about the llamas?
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited August 2019
    Perhaps Jesus meant 'donkeys', as llamas hadn't been invented then. Buckets had, AIUI.
  • O dear. We appear to have descended into farce, or whimsy.

    I blame Martin54.

    And the llamas.

    But...as I remarked earlier, we do seem to be agreed, generally, that Jesus' words to the Sanhedrin/Council were not explicitly condemnatory.

    If I'm right, and it has been known, then this thread has achieved something.
    :grin:
  • @mousethief
    In hell, you quoted something I said on the "My God, My God" thread and then you said,

    MOUSETHIEF:
    The clear implication is: "You all go ahead and make fools of yourselves, and then when you're done, I will give the correct answer."

    Could you just discuss this with us as an equal, rather than as our smug superior?
    ____________

    Well, if that was how you took my words, I regret it. I do have ideas and I will share them, and others can either engage with me here, agreeing or disagreeing, or ignore me. For example, on this thread I said that I thought @Doone has already come close above to what I will eventually say-- and I would like to think that when I do say it, he may perhaps appreciate my take on a matter that I think lies in his direction but is also a good bit different. He may or may not agree with my particular take -- a take I do not necessarily regard as superior, but as a different way of seeing something, similar I think to what he said he sees, but also different.

    I would like to think that sort of thing could be intriguing.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited August 2019
    That post would be more useful on the Hell thread, I think, as that would give you a better chance of explaining your position.

    Just sayin'...
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    I'm up for some theological intrigue. And I wonder if the silence of Jesus before Pilate was intended as a warning to him (John 19: 8).

    Caiaphas was clearly a lost cause as he had already registered his murderous intent (John 11: 49-53).
  • Well, we could speculate about all this until the cows come home.

    Jesus' dignified silence before Pilate might well have been a warning to him, but it says more about his (Jesus') patience under duress, I think.

    YMMV.
  • Rublev wrote: »
    I'm up for some theological intrigue. And I wonder if the silence of Jesus before Pilate was intended as a warning to him (John 19: 8).

    Caiaphas was clearly a lost cause as he had already registered his murderous intent (John 11: 49-53).

    Why bother?
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    Dear Jimmy-the-Boz:

    I'm a former journalist / current ordinary composition teacher at a US college. May I offer some writing advice to one who has been told he talks too much?

    Creating suspense is a fiction-writing device. The device works well in fiction to sustain interest already gained from individual readers; works poorly in attracting / sustaining interest among participants in an online discussion forum.

    You're fairly new here; we don't know you. We therefore can't hold much expectation about what you might eventually cough up. Why make us work for your revelations? How do we know they'll be worth our effort? What rationale can you offer us for dragging this out of you? Only when that process proves (A) fun, (B) authentically enlightening, (C) startlingly new and/or different will we have motivation to play silly-buggers guessing games with you.

    The problem here is NOT that you talk too much. It's that you don't speak enough to whatever the central issue is.




  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    edited August 2019
    @Martin54

    I prefer it to cows and llamas myself. Did you know that the Romans introduced cats into Palestine? It's the reason they are not mentioned in the Bible.

    @Bishops Finger

    Following Gethsemane, Jesus ceases to 'do' and is 'done to' instead. And this may also explain His mysterious silence before Pilate. The gospels describe the Passion narrative as a series of 'handing-overs' of Jesus:

    Judas plots to hand over Jesus to the chief priests (Mark 14: 11).

    The soldiers hand over Jesus to the Sanhedrin.

    The Sanhedrin hand over Jesus to Pilate (Matt 27: 1-2).

    Pilate hands over Jesus to Herod - and Herod hands him back to Pilate.

    Pilate hands over Jesus to the crowd - and then hands over Jesus to be crucified (John 19: 16).

    I once heard an outstanding Holy Week sermon about this at Canterbury Cathedral.

  • Yes, indeed, I take your point.

    It's quite moving, the sequence of 'hand-overs', with Jesus still maintaining (mostly) that dignified (resigned?) silence.
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    Yes, Jesus allows His betrayal(s) to unfold in accordance with God's will while He accepts the role of the Suffering Servant and is silent as a sheep before its slaughterers. It's particularly clear in John. And moving, as you say.
  • @Rublev -- Interesting point about switching from doing to having done to. Thank you.
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    edited August 2019
    There is a well known theology book on the theme of the 'handing over' of Jesus in the Passion story with Giotto's Kiss of Judas on the front cover. But I can't for the life of me remember the name of it. In Mark's gospel Jesus suddenly switches over from being the 'man of action' to being the passive recipient of the action. But this apparent passivity represents the true accomplishment of His mission.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Rublev wrote: »
    There is a well known theology book on the theme of the 'handing over' of Jesus in the Passion story with Giotto's Kiss of Judas on the front cover. But I can't for the life of me remember the name of it.
    Vanstone, The Stature of Waiting?

  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    edited August 2019
    Yes, that is it! I hoped that one of the shipmates would recognise it because it has been bugging me. The Holy Week preacher outlined the theme in his sermon. And I was so impressed that I went out and got the book. Thank you Dafyd.
  • Canon Vanstone was very highly thought of in his day, and still is, I believe.
Sign In or Register to comment.