Was Jesus Poor?
- Thread starter Ahanu
- Start date
wil
UNeyeR1
I have yet to watch your video....but i dont think ya get to wear robes without seems or you and your band of merry men travel around getting fed from town to town or travel with a treasurer to settle your bills or preach to thousands or heal a bunch of folks without access to funds from your good works.
Alif Balaam Yashin
SINISTERIST
- Messages
- 171
- Reaction score
- 75
- Points
- 28
Poor in what way?
Ahanu
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,472
- Reaction score
- 644
- Points
- 108
Financially and materially poor.
Ahanu
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,472
- Reaction score
- 644
- Points
- 108
"Joanna (Koine Greek: Ἰωάννα, romanized: Iōanna, also Greek: Ἰωάνα), the wife of Chuza (γυνὴ Χουζᾶ), is a woman mentioned in the gospels who was healed by Jesus and later supported him and his disciples in their travels. She is one of the women recorded in the Gospel of Luke as accompanying Jesus and the twelve apostles and as a witness to Jesus' resurrection. Her husband was Chuza, who managed the household of Herod Antipas, the ruler of Galilee; this is the origin of the distinguishing epithet commonly attached to her name, differentiating her from other figures named Joanna or Joanne."
Largely ad hominem.
Actually, having looked round, it seems this isn't the only guy to makes such risible claims.
Jacobovici seems to have made a career out of sensational claims, discovering, among other things, the lost tomb of Jesus, the lost nails from the cross, a lost gospel, the lost tribes ... he's written books and made tv documentaries, won awards, etc., etc.
Jacobovici makes his claims via the popular media, rather than via the normal scholarly channels, where the claims and the evidence are subject to peer review. I suggest there's a very good reason why he doesn't do this.
2:04 "Not one time in all the gospels does it say Jesus was poor."
Therefore he must be rich?
2:33 "In fact, if you look at the entire Christian Bible, the New Testament, the only reference to Jesus's bank account is by Paul in Corinthians. And what does he say? Jesus was a rich man."
Oh, dear me ... 2 Corinthians 8:9 ... even if we read that literally, "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich." then clearly he had money and gave it all to the poor, and was poor himself – so this argument defeats itself.
+++
But generally, that Jesus was the rich son of a successful real estate developer, that the disciples were the rich sons of successful fishing conglomerates, that the rich and famous in his entourage gave him access all the way up to Emperor Augustus himself?
No, for some reason, I find myself unconvinced.
Jacobovici seems to have made a career out of sensational claims, discovering, among other things, the lost tomb of Jesus, the lost nails from the cross, a lost gospel, the lost tribes ... he's written books and made tv documentaries, won awards, etc., etc.
Jacobovici makes his claims via the popular media, rather than via the normal scholarly channels, where the claims and the evidence are subject to peer review. I suggest there's a very good reason why he doesn't do this.
2:04 "Not one time in all the gospels does it say Jesus was poor."
Therefore he must be rich?
2:33 "In fact, if you look at the entire Christian Bible, the New Testament, the only reference to Jesus's bank account is by Paul in Corinthians. And what does he say? Jesus was a rich man."
Oh, dear me ... 2 Corinthians 8:9 ... even if we read that literally, "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich." then clearly he had money and gave it all to the poor, and was poor himself – so this argument defeats itself.
+++
But generally, that Jesus was the rich son of a successful real estate developer, that the disciples were the rich sons of successful fishing conglomerates, that the rich and famous in his entourage gave him access all the way up to Emperor Augustus himself?
No, for some reason, I find myself unconvinced.
Thinking about it ...
If one wanted to argue that Jesus was rich (and the question is what agenda are you serving in seeking to do that), I would have thought there was a more logical and rational argument available.
Another riches to rags story:
In ancient Christian apocryphal traditions, the parents of Mary, the mother of Jesus, were Joachim and Anne. In the Protoevangelium of James, Joachim is a rich and pious man, who regularly gave to the poor. The couple were childless, and for that reason his offer of sacrifice at the Temple was rejected, as their childlessness was interpreted as a sign of divine displeasure. Joachim withdrew to the desert, where he fasted and did penance for 40 days. Angels then appeared to both Joachim and Anne and promised them a child.
Joachim rushed home, to be met by Anne, waiting for him at the gate in the city walls. An ancient belief held that a child born to an elderly mother, one who had given up hope of offspring, was destined for great things. (We have Sarah, wife of Abraham, in the Old Testament, or Elizabeth, mother of John the Baptist, in the New.)
The veneration of Saint Joachim and St Anne continue in the Orthodox Church.
The birth of Mary is regarded as somewhat miraculous, and in the Orthodox Tradition is is held that she was a consecrated virgin in the Temple of Jerusalem from the age of three (her story continues below)... but her parents would have put money aside for her future.
Alongside this, we have Zechariah a priest of the Temple and husband of Elizabeth, a cousin of Mary. So we may assume that Mary was a daughter of a wealthy family, and a blood-relation to Elizabeth puts her in the Temple hierarchy, those to whom the author of the Gospel of John would refer to as Judeans. Zechariah and Elizabeth need not be rich, but they moved in the upper echelons of Jewish society.
If one wanted to argue that Jesus was rich (and the question is what agenda are you serving in seeking to do that), I would have thought there was a more logical and rational argument available.
Another riches to rags story:
In ancient Christian apocryphal traditions, the parents of Mary, the mother of Jesus, were Joachim and Anne. In the Protoevangelium of James, Joachim is a rich and pious man, who regularly gave to the poor. The couple were childless, and for that reason his offer of sacrifice at the Temple was rejected, as their childlessness was interpreted as a sign of divine displeasure. Joachim withdrew to the desert, where he fasted and did penance for 40 days. Angels then appeared to both Joachim and Anne and promised them a child.
Joachim rushed home, to be met by Anne, waiting for him at the gate in the city walls. An ancient belief held that a child born to an elderly mother, one who had given up hope of offspring, was destined for great things. (We have Sarah, wife of Abraham, in the Old Testament, or Elizabeth, mother of John the Baptist, in the New.)
The veneration of Saint Joachim and St Anne continue in the Orthodox Church.
The birth of Mary is regarded as somewhat miraculous, and in the Orthodox Tradition is is held that she was a consecrated virgin in the Temple of Jerusalem from the age of three (her story continues below)... but her parents would have put money aside for her future.
Alongside this, we have Zechariah a priest of the Temple and husband of Elizabeth, a cousin of Mary. So we may assume that Mary was a daughter of a wealthy family, and a blood-relation to Elizabeth puts her in the Temple hierarchy, those to whom the author of the Gospel of John would refer to as Judeans. Zechariah and Elizabeth need not be rich, but they moved in the upper echelons of Jewish society.
Story continued ...
The Consecrated Virgins of the Temple in Jerusalem are a disputed fact. Nevertheless, there is some evidence ...
They formed something of a guild, serving the necessary tasks at the Temple: sewing and creating vestments, washing the vestments of the priests, preparing liturgical linen, and weaving the veil of the Temple. Most importantly, by offering prayer.
The tradition holds that most women of the guild left around marriageable age (about 14), while a few, such as the prophetess Anna, who served as teachers and governesses for the virgins under their care. Anna was a widow, so there is the possibility that once widowed, one-time members of the guid could return in their later years.
"And the virgins also that were shut up, came forth, some to (High Priest) Onias, and some to the walls, and others looked out of the windows. And all holding up their hands towards heaven, made supplication." (2 Maccabees 3:19-20)
There is further testimony of temple virgins in the traditions of the Jews:
"The veil of the Temple was a palm-length in width. It was woven with seventy-two smooth stitches each made of twenty-four threads. The length was of forty cubits and the width of twenty cubits. Eighty-two virgins wove it. Two veils were made each year and three hundred priests were needed to carry it to the pool" (Mishna Shekalim 8, 5-6).
When the Romans sacked Jerusalem in 70CE, "the virgins who were weaving threw themselves in the flames" (Pesikta Rabbati 26, 6). These virgins lived in a three-storey building inside the Temple walls.
The apocryphal 2 Baruch was written late 1st/early 2nd century, and records the destruction of Jerusalem:
"Moreover, (you priests) take you the keys of the sanctuary, and cast them into the height of heaven, and give them to the Lord and say: 'Guard Your house Thyself, for lo! we are found false stewards.'
And you, you virgins; who weave fine linen and silk with gold of Ophir, take with haste all (these) things and cast (them) into the fire, that it may bear them to Him who made them, and the flame send them to Him who created them, lest the enemy get possession of them." (2 Baruch 10:18-19).
The Consecrated Virgins of the Temple in Jerusalem are a disputed fact. Nevertheless, there is some evidence ...
They formed something of a guild, serving the necessary tasks at the Temple: sewing and creating vestments, washing the vestments of the priests, preparing liturgical linen, and weaving the veil of the Temple. Most importantly, by offering prayer.
The tradition holds that most women of the guild left around marriageable age (about 14), while a few, such as the prophetess Anna, who served as teachers and governesses for the virgins under their care. Anna was a widow, so there is the possibility that once widowed, one-time members of the guid could return in their later years.
"And the virgins also that were shut up, came forth, some to (High Priest) Onias, and some to the walls, and others looked out of the windows. And all holding up their hands towards heaven, made supplication." (2 Maccabees 3:19-20)
There is further testimony of temple virgins in the traditions of the Jews:
"The veil of the Temple was a palm-length in width. It was woven with seventy-two smooth stitches each made of twenty-four threads. The length was of forty cubits and the width of twenty cubits. Eighty-two virgins wove it. Two veils were made each year and three hundred priests were needed to carry it to the pool" (Mishna Shekalim 8, 5-6).
When the Romans sacked Jerusalem in 70CE, "the virgins who were weaving threw themselves in the flames" (Pesikta Rabbati 26, 6). These virgins lived in a three-storey building inside the Temple walls.
The apocryphal 2 Baruch was written late 1st/early 2nd century, and records the destruction of Jerusalem:
"Moreover, (you priests) take you the keys of the sanctuary, and cast them into the height of heaven, and give them to the Lord and say: 'Guard Your house Thyself, for lo! we are found false stewards.'
And you, you virgins; who weave fine linen and silk with gold of Ophir, take with haste all (these) things and cast (them) into the fire, that it may bear them to Him who made them, and the flame send them to Him who created them, lest the enemy get possession of them." (2 Baruch 10:18-19).
Story continued ...
So Mary lives within the Temple precincts, dedicated to the liturgical life. She might well have been a waver of the Veil of the Temple. When she reaches marriageable age, being a 'better class' of person, a husband is chosen for her. But her sanctity has been remarked, and even among the virgins she is held as something special. Remember she was born to parents who themselves had past the age of bearing children, therefore no ordinary husband would do.
Joseph is seen as a viable candidate. He was married, now a widower, he has children, and no need of someone to carry on his line. He is a successful artisan. A sober and righteous person, well-established. It's unlikely her family would have chosen a husband from outside their class, so they would be looking for someone well-established and well founded. Should their daughter decide to remain in her virginal state, he would not object.
He agrees to the proposal.
Then he hears that she is with child. His decision is to 'put her away', a discreet divorce, no fuss, no fanfare. Between his and her families, they have influence enough to keep things quiet. No-one need ever know.
Then, in a dream, he has a visitation from an angel.
+++
Mary's son grows strong. He's schooled in the Scriptures, but excels, his insights putting his tutors to shame. His name is mentioned abroad. He's destined for high things. Meanwhile his cousin John, who went native and joined the Essenes, has now been thrown out by them, and is preaching his own mission. as long as he's preaching to rustics he's OK, but he's starting to challenge the authority of the temple, and that's causing problems.
He is known to the ruling elite, and when he speaks out against Herod Antipas, his words hit home.
Jesus, meanwhile, has turned his back on his family and their fortune. he is on a mission to bring succour to the poor ...
... so in this fiction, he is born into wealth, privilege and entitlement, but he turns his back on all that, and goes to to preach to the poor and the dispossessed. As something of a prophet, an ascetic, and an apocalyptic preacher, his mother remains close to him. (His father has probably died.) His wider family is mixed in their reaction, as he is something of a trouble-maker as far as they are concerned.
But he is known among the Jerusalem elite, and although he preaches mainly in the countryside, he is in communication with the upper echelons of society. Some of his disciples are likewise sons of successful fishing families, who own fleets, rather than just a man and a boat. Jesus knows Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathea, both members of the Sanhedrin, but both keep their association with him secret.
There are well-to-do women who help fund his missions, but women are irrational creatures, so tolerated.
Clearly he was from influential circles, but he turned his back on all that, and when the time came, when he proved just too troublesome (like John before him), those from those circles of power, authority and influence turned against him, not just because of his message, bad enough as that was, but for the more serious crime of being one of their own, and for that betrayal he must pay the ultimate price.
Pilate saw it for what it was. Spite and revenge. He wanted no part of it, but these people were skilled in political manoeuvre, and they would not be denied. The howling mob, he could ignore them, they'd go away, and next week it would be something else. But the upper echelons, who had friends in high places, who wrote letters, who made waves, those he could not ignore.
So Mary lives within the Temple precincts, dedicated to the liturgical life. She might well have been a waver of the Veil of the Temple. When she reaches marriageable age, being a 'better class' of person, a husband is chosen for her. But her sanctity has been remarked, and even among the virgins she is held as something special. Remember she was born to parents who themselves had past the age of bearing children, therefore no ordinary husband would do.
Joseph is seen as a viable candidate. He was married, now a widower, he has children, and no need of someone to carry on his line. He is a successful artisan. A sober and righteous person, well-established. It's unlikely her family would have chosen a husband from outside their class, so they would be looking for someone well-established and well founded. Should their daughter decide to remain in her virginal state, he would not object.
He agrees to the proposal.
Then he hears that she is with child. His decision is to 'put her away', a discreet divorce, no fuss, no fanfare. Between his and her families, they have influence enough to keep things quiet. No-one need ever know.
Then, in a dream, he has a visitation from an angel.
+++
Mary's son grows strong. He's schooled in the Scriptures, but excels, his insights putting his tutors to shame. His name is mentioned abroad. He's destined for high things. Meanwhile his cousin John, who went native and joined the Essenes, has now been thrown out by them, and is preaching his own mission. as long as he's preaching to rustics he's OK, but he's starting to challenge the authority of the temple, and that's causing problems.
He is known to the ruling elite, and when he speaks out against Herod Antipas, his words hit home.
Jesus, meanwhile, has turned his back on his family and their fortune. he is on a mission to bring succour to the poor ...
... so in this fiction, he is born into wealth, privilege and entitlement, but he turns his back on all that, and goes to to preach to the poor and the dispossessed. As something of a prophet, an ascetic, and an apocalyptic preacher, his mother remains close to him. (His father has probably died.) His wider family is mixed in their reaction, as he is something of a trouble-maker as far as they are concerned.
But he is known among the Jerusalem elite, and although he preaches mainly in the countryside, he is in communication with the upper echelons of society. Some of his disciples are likewise sons of successful fishing families, who own fleets, rather than just a man and a boat. Jesus knows Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathea, both members of the Sanhedrin, but both keep their association with him secret.
There are well-to-do women who help fund his missions, but women are irrational creatures, so tolerated.
Clearly he was from influential circles, but he turned his back on all that, and when the time came, when he proved just too troublesome (like John before him), those from those circles of power, authority and influence turned against him, not just because of his message, bad enough as that was, but for the more serious crime of being one of their own, and for that betrayal he must pay the ultimate price.
Pilate saw it for what it was. Spite and revenge. He wanted no part of it, but these people were skilled in political manoeuvre, and they would not be denied. The howling mob, he could ignore them, they'd go away, and next week it would be something else. But the upper echelons, who had friends in high places, who wrote letters, who made waves, those he could not ignore.
Last edited:
Alif Balaam Yashin
SINISTERIST
- Messages
- 171
- Reaction score
- 75
- Points
- 28
Jesus of Nazareth would not have been impoverished, but neither would he have been wealthy. He came from a working-class background, his legal guardian, Joseph, was a tekton, meaning a craftsman or builder. In that time and region, this trade placed one slightly above the peasant class but below the merchant or landowning elite.