Forty-nine of us, forty-eight men and one woman, lay on the green waiting for the spike to open. We were too tired to talk much. We just sprawled about exhaustedly, with home-made cigarettes sticking out of our scrubby faces.
Study Limitations We will focus here only on what is directly relevant to the arrest and trial of Jesus, beginning with marginally the intentions of the Jewish leaders and ending with the leading away to the Crucifixion.
We will exclude, except where tangently related: The Gospels, of course, are our primary sources for the trials of Jesus. An immediate objection raised by Skeptics is a simple one - where did the evangelists get their information from?
The Apostles were an obvious source: John is noted to have accompanied Peter. But even so, that still leaves the question of sources open.
Let's run down the possible answers and objections to them: We consider this to Prompt and utter destruction essay the most likely answer.
Jesus was with the disciples for 40 days after the Resurrection - plenty of time to relate the sundry details of what happened once the more theological stuff was out of the way. And certainly, Peter would want to know what his Lord had been put through as he was waiting anxiously in the courtyard.
More specifically, there is good reason to say that the events of the trial probably were told to the disciples by Jesus -- it would serve perfectly as a vehicle for His teaching.
He was always describing what would happen to Him, and He could very easily have used the historical details as the "I told you so Jesus was big on the fulfillment of prophecy -- cf. In point of fact, the accounts of the Passion, the earliest materials of the gospels probably recorded, contain much of this material.
This pattern of narrative-interspersed-with-theological-explication was adopted by the evangelists as a METHOD, and hence could easily be seen as deriving from Jesus as paradigm-teacher. If Jesus related His Passion in this way, it would certainly explain how the disciples picked up that practice.
And the Passion story, as the earliest, is the closest to the mouth of Jesus, and thus the least susceptible to embellishment. Also, remember that Jesus was consistently explaining His words and actions to the disciples in private afterwards -- so why would He not do it in this case? To simply dismiss the possibility of Jesus filling in His disciples on the trial afterwards as "fruits that naive faith can yield" [Fric.
CMJ, ] is presumptuous at best and circular reasoning at the worst.
Certainly within the Christian paradigm, this cannot be dismissed as a possibility, if indeed as a likelihood. However, even allowing that Jesus might not have given such an account to his disciples - which we would note as the best, and most parsimonious, explanation - other witnesses were possible, who might also have added to the mix: There may also have been other members of the Sanhedrin who became well-disposed towards Christianity, but these two were really all that were needed.
And for the trial before Pilate - well, if Joseph had the will to ask for Jesus' body, why not also the will to ask what happened from Pilate himself? Skeptics say little against this possibility.
DJ, 34; see also Carm. UCO, 87] can only offer in reply that: CMJ, ], only slightly more realistic in his viewpoint, admits to the "possibility" of using Joseph as a source, but objects that Joseph is: He is never cited as a reporter on the trial which would have been a key role and has no significant part in the Gospels.
Carmichael's commentary against the "pious" aside, I hardly see any reason here to deny that Joseph or Nicodemus could have been sources of information. Ancient writers saw no obligation to reveal their sources; hence we would hardly expect Matthew or Luke to say, "I got this information from Joseph of Arimathea.
I would maintain that Nicodemus provided a great deal of information for the Gospel of John. Some may suggest that it is an argument from silence either way as to whether Joe and Nick were at the trial; but actually, since it is indicated by Luke that Joseph did not agree with the course of action taken by the Sanhedrin, it is likely either that he WAS present, or else had someone reporting things to him.Beyond the destruction, division, and confusion of the murders interlaced in the vaccine enterprise, there is even more confusion, division, and destruction impacting our society as a result of vaccines.
Related Documents: Analysis of Prompt and Utter Destruction Essay Essay on Threat of Gradual Destruction Emma Ayala Period 1 November 27, Unsound Argument Mr.
Ventimiglia Threat of Gradual Destruction The greatest threat to society is not drugs, promiscuity, or violence. The film version follows the book absurdly closely, with the vast majority of content unabridged from the book, dialogue and all.
Depp, a close personal friend of Thompson, also gives a spot-on (and very informed) performance. This trope comes into play when the supreme deity of a given setting is not just a mere jerkass — he/she/it is actively malevolent, a jealous, callous, sadistic, monstrous tyrant who created the world or universe to be such a miserable Crapsack World, preparing Disproportionate Retribution and an.
Printed from monstermanfilm.com On the Trial of Jesus. The purpose of this essay is to provide an overview of the many issues and questions. The Censored War: American Visual Experience During World War Two [George Roeder Jr.] on monstermanfilm.com *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers.
Early in World War II censors placed all photographs of dead and badly wounded Americans in a secret Pentagon file known to .