The Alabaster Jar as symbol of the old temple

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3411
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: The Alabaster Jar as symbol of the old temple

Post by DCHindley »

Giuseppe wrote:Jesus's value is 300 denarii for the mysterious woman (Roma?).

Jesus's value is 30 pieces of silver for his traitor Judas.

Are these the same value?
Eh? Not if you are talking about real money. As far as I know there were no 10 denarii coins.

300 denarius =

=4800.000000 assarion
=12.000000 aureus
=14400.023040 chalkos
=300.000000 denarius
=300.000000 drachma (silver)
=30000.000000 dr. (cu, copper) (V BCE)
=18000.720029 dr. (cu) (IV-220 BCE)
=36001.440058 dr. (cu) (220-149 BCE)
=33602.150538 dr. (cu) (149-89 BCE)
=16800.134401 dr. (cu) (89-III CE)
=3600.014400 dupondion
=38397.542557 lepton
=3.000000 mina
=2.884615 mnaieion
=1800.007200 obol
=19200.000000 quadrans
=1200.000000 sesterce
=75.000000 shekel
=75.000000 stater
=0.050000 talent
=75.000000 tetradrachma

But of course this is not what you were really asking ...
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2098
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: The Alabaster Jar as symbol of the old temple

Post by Charles Wilson »

So...What adds up to 300 (Gematria Edition)?
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3411
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: The Alabaster Jar as symbol of the old temple

Post by DCHindley »

Charles Wilson wrote:So...What adds up to 300 (Gematria Edition)?
300 = "T" for Tau, which MUST refer to the majestic cross that Jesus was to bear. Then again, maybe it is just half of the cosmos. See how God provides for those of us who have overactive imaginations? :cheeky:

DCH
Martin Klatt

Re: The Alabaster Jar as symbol of the old temple

Post by Martin Klatt »

Deleted
Last edited by Martin Klatt on Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:25 pm, edited 15 times in total.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The Alabaster Jar as symbol of the old temple

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Martin Klatt wrote: Wed May 16, 2018 3:18 pm Hmm, as I figured it the sum mentioned in Mark of the worth of the oil was more than 300 denarii, let's for a moment humour me and make it 360.
Then let's look at the action inspired by the waste of such a handsome sum on only the head of Jesus:
Disciples become annoyed and complain it could have been given to the poor. And they scolded her. Then Jesus defended her action and said they should worry about the poor later when he is gone from them. "The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them whenever you want. But you will not always have Me. She has done what she could to anoint My body in advance of My burial." Now watch that Judas responds to this by going to the chief priests to betray Jesus. They promise him money but don't mention any sum. Now Matthew has the story as well. He doesn't mention the worth of the oil but mentions the sum the priests are willing to pay Judas. 30 pieces of silver. Wow how convenient 360/12=30. I propose the "poor" are in fact the disciples themselves who were pissed off by the lucrative loot that went by their noses and only Judas recovers his share of it by betrayal.
Puzzle solved.
Several issues:
  1. A sum of "over 300 denarii" is not necessarily 360 denarii. You asked us to humor you "for a moment," but there was no payoff. At the end nothing really comes together, and we are still left with the assumption that 360 is the amount in question.
  2. The sum of over 300 denarii comes from Mark 14.5, but Mark (as you admit) lacks any mention of the 30 pieces of silver; meanwhile, the 30 pieces of silver come from Matthew 26.15, but Matthew (as you also admit) lacks any mention of the 300 denarii, settling for calling the amount "a high price." Either the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing here or there is some kind of conspiracy afoot, if your suggestion holds merit.
  3. Nobody knows what kinds of silver coins Matthew 26.15 means to imply (if any kind is implied at all). Not all silver coins are denarii; there are also Tyrian shekels (= tetradrachmae), drachmae, or staters.
  4. It is not clear in Mark that the disciples are the ones who object to the woman's gesture; all that is said is that "there were some" who objected. Mark does not explicitly limit those in attendance to the twelve disciples only.
  5. We already know whence the 30 pieces of silver derive: from Zechariah 11.12-13, confused in Matthew 27.9-10 with something from Jeremiah. So Matthew stands explained. All that remains is Mark's "over 300 denarii," which is not exactly a clear way of expressing the equation you are promoting: 12 × 30 = 360. If Mark precedes Matthew, then why should Mark have to explain something which has not even been written yet? You need to trace a trajectory somehow that incorporates both data smoothly before announcing that the "puzzle" has been "solved."
  6. There may be a better explanation for who "the poor" are supposed to be, one having to do with the village of Bethany itself.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply