07-17-2014, 04:15 AM
Tom,
I agree with most of your criticism, except one. Jesus spoke in Aramaic, but the picnic goers most probably only Latin, or at best Greek. I believe in the Bible Jesus said to say these words in a very loud voice. If the picnic goers did not understand the language, nor the context in that Jesus was quoting Psalm 22:1, it would I think seem like a rant. After all the man believed he was God, and in Roman society that would have made him insane, either that, or the fact he was in tremendous pain could have had something to do about it. Anyway, this family, the wife would have had no education at all, the boy would have been too young, and the man, probably a common soldier/tradesman etc., would not have probably not known what he was saying either, but even if he did, I doubt he would have revealed that to his wife and son, as it would defeat the object lesson of watching the crucifixion. The last thing the father would have wanted to do is cast Jesus in a sympathetic light. That's my rational anyway. TE summed it up better than I have
"It does a lot to show a time and culture when public ridiculing and murders where a common form of entertainment, as well as a way of making an example."
This sort of thing was not uncommon, even in the old west at a hanging. People would bring the whole family and have a picnic. People tend to think the ethics of those times were the same as they are today, and when they see a deviance like this they think it extraordinary, when really it was quite mundane.
Billy,
Thanks for catching the typos, and other problems. I'll bring them on board.
And yes it was a rough draft, and this was to a purpose. In this form there are more possibilities than if I have edited the crap out of it, and had been more or less ahem, set in stone. And it seems to have worked as you have given me some great was to go with this. I appreciate all the input, except for sir loco which, while not helpful was very entertaining. This was not an attack on Christianity (If I were going to eviscerate Christianity I would have done a much better job that this), but rather an attempt to show the event from a different point of view.
Thanks again all for your critiques,
Dale
I agree with most of your criticism, except one. Jesus spoke in Aramaic, but the picnic goers most probably only Latin, or at best Greek. I believe in the Bible Jesus said to say these words in a very loud voice. If the picnic goers did not understand the language, nor the context in that Jesus was quoting Psalm 22:1, it would I think seem like a rant. After all the man believed he was God, and in Roman society that would have made him insane, either that, or the fact he was in tremendous pain could have had something to do about it. Anyway, this family, the wife would have had no education at all, the boy would have been too young, and the man, probably a common soldier/tradesman etc., would not have probably not known what he was saying either, but even if he did, I doubt he would have revealed that to his wife and son, as it would defeat the object lesson of watching the crucifixion. The last thing the father would have wanted to do is cast Jesus in a sympathetic light. That's my rational anyway. TE summed it up better than I have
"It does a lot to show a time and culture when public ridiculing and murders where a common form of entertainment, as well as a way of making an example."
This sort of thing was not uncommon, even in the old west at a hanging. People would bring the whole family and have a picnic. People tend to think the ethics of those times were the same as they are today, and when they see a deviance like this they think it extraordinary, when really it was quite mundane.
Billy,
Thanks for catching the typos, and other problems. I'll bring them on board.
And yes it was a rough draft, and this was to a purpose. In this form there are more possibilities than if I have edited the crap out of it, and had been more or less ahem, set in stone. And it seems to have worked as you have given me some great was to go with this. I appreciate all the input, except for sir loco which, while not helpful was very entertaining. This was not an attack on Christianity (If I were going to eviscerate Christianity I would have done a much better job that this), but rather an attempt to show the event from a different point of view.
Thanks again all for your critiques,
Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.