He was tried and executed - Matthew 27:11-66

[Mendalla]

I am not sure we can say that with great certainty. The Jewish authorities of the day were likely in place to help keep the Roman Peace (Pax Romana) so any threat to that peace would threaten both equally. Certainly the Jewish puppets would be in the really difficult place of "getting it from both sides" in such a case.

That was the standard Roman MO in a lot of the provinces. Get prominent locals onside and rely on them to keep the peace, with the threat of Roman power to back them up. Herod the Great, for instance, was a "client king" allowed to rule his kingdom but with the Roman emperor as his "patron" or political backer. Some of his family, like Herod Antipas, were in similar positions. So the temple authorities in Jerusalem were likely the local authorities that the Romans chose to back.

Pilate actually failed at this in the end, by the way, which was why the Governor of Syria had him sent home, after which he disappears from history. IIRC, troops under Pilate's' command committed a massacre in Samaria or something like that, causing an upset. This is why I find the reference to him worrying about causing a riot interesting, because at one point he did almost cause one by placing legionary emblems in the temple precinct or something like that.

Which I guess brings up the point that Pontius Pilate is a well-documented historical figure, definitely not a made-up character.

 

[paradox3]

I am not sure we can say that with great certainty. The Jewish authorities of the day were likely in place to help keep the Roman Peace (Pax Romana) so any threat to that peace would threaten both equally. Certainly the Jewish puppets would be in the really difficult place of "getting it from both sides" in such a case.

Very true. But could it be the Jewish authorities were trying to appease the Romans enough that they could keep practicing their religion?

And if cost them an upstart of their own, (Jesus, say) well, so be it?

Watership Down has a story like this. It has to do with a group of bunnies who live a very good life on a farm. Only thing is one of them disappears and gets eaten for dinner every so often.

 

[unsafe]

This is interesting here in these verses as ------it says ---that the Saints who were asleep were resurrected and appeared to many in the Holy City ---which would be Jerusalem ---

So Jesus was not the only one that God Resurrected on that day ------- interesting that nothing else is said as to what happens to these Saints after they are seen in the Holy City by many -----

Did they remain alive for some time ????---or were they Raptured up with Jesus on the Cloud ?????-----apparently God thought that telling us was not that important as these Saints are not mentioned again --

We see also that the Temple Curtain was torn from top to bottom -----

What does this signify ----? to you all ------


51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. The earth shook, and the rocks were split.

52 The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised.

53 After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many.

 

[unsafe]

In John's version of the Crucifixion we see this statement

John 19:25-27

New International Version​

25 Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.

26 When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to her, “Woman,[a] here is your son,”

27 and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.

Here we see He calls His Mother ----Woman -----He does say ----Mother here is your son -----

Why would He call His Mother --Woman --at that time ?????

 

[Luce NDs]

Can that be taken many ways as the vectors expound? resembles porcupine π ... prone to UN reason ... and a prickly order of urchins! Exponential emotes ...

 

[Mendalla]

After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many.

Sorry to say, but dead people coming out of their tombs and appearing to many in the city sounds more like a horror story than anything. It really is not a good sales pitch anymore. I mean, the whole "living dead" genre is, in the end, nothing but that (well, except those dead people eat the living).

It is an interesting image though, and is part of why I referred to Matthew's imagery as "apocalyptic". It sounds to me like the writer of Matthew did, in fact, think the Day of Judgement began with the Crucifixion.

 

[unsafe]

Sorry to say, but dead people coming out of their tombs and appearing to many in the city sounds more like a horror story than anything

Might sound like a horror story ----but the dead Saints will rise again when Jesus comes to gather up His Saints for the Rapture ---before this earth is under great Horror ------

 

[Redbaron]

View attachment 7866

Might sound like a horror story ----but the dead Saints will rise again when Jesus comes to gather up His Saints for the Rapture ---before this earth is under great Horror ------

Do you find it rather odd, that, if this was such a big event, NO OTHER GOSPEL EXCEPT MATTHEW even mentions it? Nor is there any mention of it in Paul's letters? Nor, for that matter, anywhere else in the New Testament? Why do you suppose that is?

 

[Mendalla]

Do you find it rather odd, that, if this was such a big event, NO OTHER GOSPEL EXCEPT MATTHEW even mentions it? Nor is there any mention of it in Paul's letters? Nor, for that matter, anywhere else in the New Testament? Why do you suppose that is?

You know, the snark was highly unnecessary here. A simple questioning of his post would have sufficed.

But, yeah, Matthew seems to have punched up the drama level here. Most other accounts just talk about the darkness and tearing of the temple curtain.

What is the symbolism of the curtain, by the way? I think I have heard it before but I don't recall

 

[unsafe]

But, yeah, Matthew seems to have punched up the drama level here

From Google
Matthew's gospel is clearly written for a Jewish Christian audience living within the immediate proximity of the homeland itself. Matthew's is the most Jewish of all the gospels.

So this may explain why this is in only Matthew as the audience would be very familiar with the scriptures and the Jewish theology ------

Interesting Read -----as it seems that the raising of the Saints was fulfilling a Prophecy and the Jewish people would have understood this

The Gospel of Matthew and the Resurrection of the Saints

The Resurrection of the Jerusalem Saints - Associates for Biblical Research

The Jerusalem saints that were raised were just the firstfruits of a greater harvest / resurrection to come. The rapture and final resurrection will be soon.

biblearchaeology.org

-saints-at-the-feast-of-the-firstfruits?
highlight=WyJqZXN1cyIsImplc3VzJyIsImplc3VzJ3MiLCInamVzdXMiLCInamVzdXMnIiwiY2hyaXN0IiwiY2hyaXN0J3MiLCJja

The gospel of Matthew the only gospel to record the account of the opening of the tombs and the saints being resurrected.

Matthew, also called Levi, was a scribe and a tax collector (Mark 2:14; 3:18; Matt. 9:9; 10:3). He was also the author of the gospel that bears his name. This book was written primarily to the Jewish people to demonstrate that the Lord Jesus was the fulfillment of all that the Hebrew prophets wrote about, and spoke, concerning their Messiah, the Son of God. The key word that is used over and over in the book is the word “fulfilled.” Usually, “that which was fulfilled that was spoken by the prophets, or written by the prophets.” Verses of the Hebrew Scriptures are quoted over and over again in this gospel. Matthew assumes his readers have a Jewish mindset, that they know the Torah, and they are familiar with rabbinic theology, and therefore does not explain some things. Christian readers need to know this material as well, in order to fully appreciate the words of this gospel because it is a Jewish book.

It should be observed that the resurrection of the Hebrew saints occurred when Jesus rose from the dead. Chronologically, that would have occurred by Sunday morning. What was going on in Jerusalem on Sunday morning of Passover week? For this we need to turn to the Hebrew Scriptures

The Omer of the Firstfruits of the Barley Harvest

The LORD has a divinely ordained agriculture / religious calendar that began in the month of Aviv, also known as Nisan. Moses, being a prophet (Deut. 18:15), wrote of this divinely given calendar in what is known as the “Feasts of the LORD” found in Leviticus 23. This calendar could also be seen as God’s prophetic program of redemption for individuals as well as nationally, for all Israel. The Sunday morning after the Shabbat that followed the Passover was the harvesting of the omer of the first fruits of the barley harvest (Lev. 23:9-14).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is from -----

Who were the saints that were raised from the dead at Christ’s death? | Bible.org

The following comments from The Bible Knowledge Commentary should answer your questions. 27:51-53 (Mark 15:38; Luke 23:44-45). At the time of Jesus’ death, three momentous events occurred. First, the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. This curtain separated the holy...

bible.org

Who were the saints that were raised from the dead at Christ’s death?​

some say they may have been raised with glorified bodies like the Lord’s. Walvoord suggests this event was “a fulfillment of the Feast of the Firstfruits of harvest mentioned in Leviticus 23:10-14. On that occasion, as a token of the coming harvest, the people would bring a handful of grain to the priest. The resurrection of these saints, occurring after Jesus Himself was raised, is a token of the coming harvest when all the saints will be raised”

 

[GordW]

That was the standard Roman MO in a lot of the provinces. Get prominent locals onside and rely on them to keep the peace, with the threat of Roman power to back them up. Herod the Great, for instance, was a "client king" allowed to rule his kingdom but with the Roman emperor as his "patron" or political backer. Some of his family, like Herod Antipas, were in similar positions. So the temple authorities in Jerusalem were likely the local authorities that the Romans chose to back.

If we are honest it is the politics of Empire in general, not just the Romans. The British and American Empires have done similar things in their time.

But, yeah, Matthew seems to have punched up the drama level here. Most other accounts just talk about the darkness and tearing of the temple curtain.

What is the symbolism of the curtain, by the way? I think I have heard it before but I don't recall

One understanding of the tearing of the curtain that I have heard was that it symbo;izes the removal of a barrier between GOd and God's people (which admittedly can be taken in a rather anti-Judaism direction)

THe dead saints being raised, which only Matthew notes and then only in this passage (not mentioned during the Resurrection stories) seems to me to be a reference to the expectation in some 1st Century Jewish circles (remembering that to say there was ONE Jewish understanding of anything in the 1st century is as ridiculous as saying there is ONE Christian understanding of something in 2023) of a general that would happen when GOd breaks into the world and makes all things right again. PAul also refers to this understanding in 1 Corinthians 15 when he speaks of Christ's resurrection as the first-fruits.

 

[Mendalla]

The British and American Empires have done similar things in their time.

It is really the only sensible model for a far-flung empire, esp. prior to modern communication systems. Trying to keep your own governors and troops at sufficient strength in every part of your empire is likely doomed to fail when it can take days to months to get messages, supplies, or reinforcements to a distant location. Smaller, older ones, like the Egyptian empires, didn't really have the same supply and communication line issues.

One understanding of the tearing of the curtain that I have heard was that it symbo;izes the removal of a barrier between GOd and God's people (which admittedly can be taken in a rather anti-Judaism direction)

Okay, I think that's the one I have heard.

The whole story can be taken as anti-Semitic depending on your reading of who is really the "villain" behind Jesus' murder/execution. If it is "the people" read as being the "people of Judaea", then you're definitely on anti-Semitic ground. But if you read it is as being the temple elites who are really behind it (and I do) and are manipulating the popular reactions, as we see in Matt 27:20, then it becomes a different story, more about Jesus as a populist Jewish revolutionary branded as dangerous by those in power who are willing to use any means to get rid of him.