Jesus Starting a Riot


#1

Should we expect to find an account from a historian mentioning Jesus going into the temple on passover and starting a riot? I’ve heard this claim before. She said if that really happened, there would have been so much of an up roar that at least ONE historian–besides the gospels-- would have mentioned it. And yet we have nothing. Is this true.


#2

None of the accounts in the Gospels even implies that Jesus organised a riot. According to all the Evangelists, Jesus’ protest was personal and no one else was involved in it. John refers to the prophecy “The zeal for your house will cosume ME” to emphasise Jesus’ personal reaction and divine wrath.


#3

Yeah, that’s whataid, and the person countered saying that what Christ did would’ve started a riot.


#4

Maybe he did start a riot. So, who would have been there in the temple? Romans maybe? I think not. Jews maybe? I think so. Let’s assume he started a riot, maybe the kind of riot that would have gotten the Jewish leaders thinking that he was a threat and started them thinking about putting him to death. Maybe the Jews who saw the riot realized if they wrote about it they might wind up there also…

[FONT=Arial]Your friend does not know for sure that what Jesus did could have started a riot or not. This is honestly one of the weakest arguments I’ve ever heard. Good luck, and bless you for trying to answer their questions.[/FONT]


#5

Yeah I agree, and thanks.


#6

The temple in Jerusalem was an immense place, around one fourth of a mile on a side, and filled with thousands of people at the time of passover. A little pushing and shoving and yelling in one area would hardly be noticed by the vast majority.

The resurrection is certainly a far more significant event and yet not ONE historian–besides the gospels-- has ever mentioned it.


#7

Although open to debate, it is a widely held belief that the Jewish historian Flavius Joseph wrote about Jesus around 93 AD. Here is some info: members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS/testimonium.htm


#8

[quote="TheDoctor, post:7, topic:120415"]
Although open to debate, it is a widely held belief that the Jewish historian Flavius Joseph wrote about Jesus around 93 AD. Here is some info: members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS/testimonium.htm

[/quote]

The Testimonium Flavianum, Josephus' account which refers to Jesus - albeit briefly, has been demonstrated for centuries to be a forgery.

truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

However, even if Josephus' writings of Christ were his own (and the article closes with this point also), the fact that it's written nearly a century after Jesus' death hardly makes it a reliable account in establishing Jesus' historicity.


#9

[quote="The_Catholic, post:1, topic:120415"]
Should we expect to find an account from a historian mentioning Jesus going into the temple on passover and starting a riot? I've heard this claim before. She said if that really happened, there would have been so much of an up roar that at least ONE historian--besides the gospels-- would have mentioned it. And yet we have nothing. Is this true.

[/quote]

the gospel account never says he started a riot. suggest your friend read the actual passage without adding details that are not there.


#10

Here's a model of the Jewish temple. At times of festivals the place would have been overflowing with people, both outside and inside. Around the perimeter, merchants would have set up stalls. A disturbance in a part of that area would hardly have been noticed by the vast majority of people there.


#11

PS: Roman guards would have been patrolling the perimeter roof. They would be the ones in the best position to note any disturbance. And a riot--but nothng less--would have gotten them involved.


#12

[quote="bigdaddy1978, post:8, topic:120415"]
The Testimonium Flavianum, Josephus' account which refers to Jesus - albeit briefly, has been demonstrated for centuries to be a forgery.

truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

However, even if Josephus' writings of Christ were his own (and the article closes with this point also), the fact that it's written nearly a century after Jesus' death hardly makes it a reliable account in establishing Jesus' historicity.

[/quote]

False. It has been suggested to have been interpolated but the vast majority of not just Biblical Scholars and theologians but Josephian scholars and ancient historians agree that that is only a partial interpolation.

Next, it isn't "nearly a century". It's 60-64 years. And good chunks of ancient history are chronicled not by people 60-64 years after the fact but people 1-3 centuries after it!

Truthbeknown is an awful, awful source. Here and here are 2 much more honest and well-built analyses of Josephus on Jesus.


#13

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.