`Anointing` Of Jesus?

Author: Stephen ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 26
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen

    This is not a new debate on this particular story, however; 
     while  atheist have come to expect many contradictions in the anomalous half stories that make up scriptures  the telling of this particular event in the life of Christ seem to be an exception in that they don’t appear to be contradictory;   but are these reported events the same story? If so, why is Luke’s account distinguishable from the other gospels?

    Luke7:36-37
    Jesus invited to the home of Simon the Pharisee.

    “And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat. A woman in that town who lived a sinful life learned that Jesus was eating at the Pharisee’s house, so she came there with an alabaster jar of perfume. As she stood behind him at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears. Then she wiped them with her hair, kissed them and poured perfume on them”.

    Jesus at the home of Simon the Leper

    Matthew26:6-7 Now when Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper,a woman came up to him with an alabaster flask of very expensive ointment, and she poured it on his head as he reclined at table.

    Mark14:3 And while he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper,as he was reclining at table, a woman came with an alabaster flask of ointment of pure nard, very costly, and she broke the flask and poured it over his head.

    John12:3
    “Then Mary took about a pint of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus’ feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.”

    Some believe these are different events while many other scholars agree that this is the same event told to varying degrees of detail.


    One can pick over the detail of this story but they all do appear to amount to one thing; Jesus is undergoing an anointing ritual/s of sorts. But are these two separate anointings or one.?"


    Side by side

    (1) Sinner Woman  .                                                                 Mary of Bethany

    (2) Luke 7.                                                                                    Matt 26, Mark 14, John 12

    (3) In Nain.                                                                                   In Bethany.

    (3) Simon the Pharisee’s house.                                         Simon the leper’s house.

    (4) Poured on His feet.                                                            Poured on His head and feet.

    (5) Washed feet with her tears.                                           No mention of washing feet with tears.

    (6) Wiped feet with her hair.                                                 Wiped feet with her hair.

    (7) Simon sees the woman as sinful .                              Judas sees it as a waste of money.




  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,945
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @Stephen

    A biblical tale that is typically ambiguous and variously reinterpreted.  

    But as foot washing and head oiling was a common pleasantry back in the day, it's probably best to not read to much into it.

    And best either, not kiss lepers or miraculously cure them.

    And also typically misogynistic of the day, having women scrabbling about on the floor pandering to men's requirements....Such were Jesus's expectations also, it seems.



  • janesix
    janesix avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 1,809
    3
    3
    3
    janesix avatar
    janesix
    --> @Stephen
    If you want to know the truth, anointment is the release of dmt by the pineal gland during the mid stages of "enlightenment". It doesn't necessarily mean you will reach enlightenment at this point, but it is a necessary stage of it. It brings you into an enlightenment-ready consciousness. 
  • FLRW
    FLRW avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 526
    3
    2
    5
    FLRW avatar
    FLRW
    --> @janesix
    The idea that the pineal gland produces enough DMT to produce psychoactive effects came from the popular book “DMT: The Spirit Molecule,” written by clinical psychiatrist Rick Strassman in 2000.
    Strassman proposed that the DMT excreted by the pineal gland enabled the life force into this life and on to the next life.
    Trace amounts amounts of DMT have been detected in the pineal glands of rats, but not in the human pineal gland. Plus, the pineal gland might not even be the main source.
    The most recent animal study on DMT in the pineal gland found that even after removing the pineal gland, the rat brain was still able to produce DMT in different regions.


  • janesix
    janesix avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 1,809
    3
    3
    3
    janesix avatar
    janesix
    --> @FLRW
    Even if it isn't dmt, it is something, because I experienced it. There is a physical, as well as spiritual element going on. It is like air, like water, but different from both. It is blue. 
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @janesix
    Even if it isn't dmt, it is something, 

    Melatonin.  Which  means "night worker", from the Greek melos: black,  tosos: labour. It is also called "the hormone of darkness" being produced only at night or in the dark. When produced in great quantities it heightens the senses. The Egyptians knew about the pineal gland and used to "feed " it . 

     It may well be the reason that Jews wear skull caps?   But this is not the thread to discuss this on.
    I recommended a book to you recently which dedicates quite some time to  this in great detail, Jane.




  • janesix
    janesix avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 1,809
    3
    3
    3
    janesix avatar
    janesix
    --> @Stephen
    Thanks, I will look into it.
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @zedvictor4
    But as foot washing and head oiling was a common pleasantry back in the day, it's probably best to not read to much into it.
    Maybe so Vic.  But it appears that this was no customary welcoming of a guest.



    ,,,,it's probably best to not read to much into it.

    Indulge me if you will.

    This was far too much of an expensive deal in this case and to perform this ritual  twice would be doubly expensive. 

    The KJV tells us:      " Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly [..............,}and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment."John 12:3.  So, enough to stink the house out.

    The ESV tells us:      "Mary therefore took a pound of expensive ointment made from pure nard," John 12:3

    So I don't think there is an argument as to the fact that this was no ordinary cheap  oil that would be wasted on the next door neighbour  just dropping in for a cuppa tea.

    When we take another verse concerning this anointing we can read just how expensive this oil was, as one disciple complained:


    “Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?”  John 12:5.   And all bibles agree on the cost with one bible expanding and saying
    "That perfume was worth a year’s wages." NLT

    Just "a pound of ointment of spikenard"  costing 300 denarii in todays money is around £80.00 - 100.00 .


    So in my opinion , this is an indication that these two accounts are one and the same event, regardless if or not it was  as you put it, " common pleasantry".

    As an aside , the comment made about selling this expensive oil and giving it to the poor came from Judas Iscariot ,John 12:4-5 the irony being is that Judas was always stealing the funds. 

    " He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it." John 12:6

    And it  appears then that "Satan entered Judas" well before the last supper.John 13:26-27







  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,945
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @janesix
    Spirituality is real, but wholly internal and self generated....That's is not to say that external stimuli do not affect or cause internal functions and responses.
  • janesix
    janesix avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 1,809
    3
    3
    3
    janesix avatar
    janesix
    --> @zedvictor4
    Internal, yes. But self-generated? I don't know about that. God is certainly involved.
  • Bringerofrain
    Bringerofrain avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 516
    3
    4
    7
    Bringerofrain avatar
    Bringerofrain
    If you have 2 witnesses to an event, they will give contradictory details. Nobody takes the bible as being 100% accurate. Humans wrote it.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 57
    Forum posts: 2,392
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    Luke's account is, at best, secondhand, because Luke never met Christ. Consider the children's game of putting 10 children in a circle, and whisper a very short story or verse to the first child, and each cild, in turn, hears the story and passes to the next. The story is likely altered in the first telling, not to mention subsequent renditions.
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,945
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @janesix
    Yes of course...Though your personal interpretation of the GOD principle, is itself  an internally generated concept, in response to acquired data.

    God is what you create.

    And you are the result of a GOD principle, whatever that might be.....Maybe it is the floaty about bloke with a beard. The one of Middle Eastern folklore you were perhaps encouraged to accept as a child....Or maybe not....We can but speculate.

    As for "Anointing of Jesus"......Well, the biblical Jesus may have been based upon a real character, and anointing was an archaic practice similar to aromatherapy.
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @Bringerofrain
    If you have 2 witnesses to an event, they will give contradictory details. Nobody takes the bible as being 100% accurate. Humans wrote it.

    I haven't said that these two accounts are contradictory, only that they appear to be so. . Please read  the op.     I am suggesting that they could well be the same event. I have given one reason for believing they are reporting the same event.


      Are you suggesting that they are the same account i.e as per my question in the op and that  these two accounts relaying the same anointing event in your own opinion,
    yes they are the same event,  or no, they are not the same event?


    And yes we all know how rumours work especially childish rumours. Although,  in the case, we are not talking " a large number of children" but only four adults that appear to be able to read a write.... and translate Hebrew into GREEK!!!!

  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @zedvictor4
    As for "Anointing of Jesus"......Well, the biblical Jesus may have been based upon a real character, and anointing was an archaic practice similar to aromatherapy.

    Again,  it is the cost,  as I mentioned to you above.#8

    And I am pretty sure that aromatherapy was the last thing they had in mind at the anointing of Queen Elizabeth II at  her coronation  June 2nd 1953, Vic. This was the initiation rite performed on a British monarch - a Crowning, not to  mention too that she is (High Priestess) Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

    But one event or two separate events, is my concern here.

  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,945
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @Stephen
    Well, the root of the word "anoint" is typically Latin.....Inungere...To smear with oil.

    And QE2...What the heck.

    Nonetheless: One event or two?

    In my honest opinion....Chinese whispers relative to a possible event...More than likely the same possible event, variously interpreted.  The details lost,  misinterpreted or forgotten and reconstructed to suit....

    And that's assuming that all characters mentioned, including Jesus, are based upon real people....

    And to be fair, a lot of the basic bible information is probably loosely based upon real people, places and events.....The problem lies with inconsistent, latter-day interpretations  and associated supernatural embellishment introduced therein.




  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @zedvictor4



    Nonetheless: One event or two?
    In my honest opinion..  .................More than likely the same possible event, variously interpreted. 

    Yes that is what I am beginning to believe.  I would find the honest opinion of the faithful helpful. Its ether one even or two .


    And that's assuming that all characters mentioned, including Jesus, are based upon real people....

    Of course. But I do happen to believe that these characters did exist.



    .The problem lies with inconsistent, latter-day interpretations  and associated supernatural embellishment introduced therein.

    I agree . As  I  have  shown a few times.       And when we have people such as Early Christian scholar, ascetic, and theologian Origen of Alexandria,  admitting:

    "The differences among the manuscripts have become so great, either through the negligence of some copyists or through perverse audacity of others; they either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions",  then one is given every reason to doubt the scriptures as they have come down to us, as I do.

    That will be Origen that happens to agree with Greek  philosopher and opponent of early Christianity,  Celsus,  


     "Some believers, as though from a  drinking bout, go so far as to oppose and alter the original text of the gospel three or four or several times over, and they change its characters to enable them to deny difficulties in the face of criticism". 




  • Bringerofrain
    Bringerofrain avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 516
    3
    4
    7
    Bringerofrain avatar
    Bringerofrain
    --> @Stephen
    It's obviously the same event. Have you even been a juror? Well intentioned people who are witnesses always have different recollections of events whether they are adults or not. This is why eyewitness testimony is usually not enough to convict
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @Bringerofrain
    It's obviously the same event.

    That's what I wanted to know. And that is what I was hoping you would say because it isn't that "obvious"  to me.

    So , tell me, being that it is so "obvious" to you, how do you know that they are the same account?






  • Bringerofrain
    Bringerofrain avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 516
    3
    4
    7
    Bringerofrain avatar
    Bringerofrain
    --> @Stephen
    It isn't the same account LOL. It was from 2 different witnesses right? 2 different witness accounts?

    Unless you were trying to bring in the Q document which is believed by some scholars to be what a few of the gospels are taken from. I think if the account was taken from the Q document though, the 2 different alleged witness accounts would line up better though

  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @Bringerofrain

    It isn't the same account LOL. It was from 2 different witnesses right? 2 different witness accounts?

    But are we talking the same event, yes or no?   You say above at  #18   "It's obviously the same event".



    So , tell me, being that it is so "obvious" to you, how do you know that they are the same event?


  • Bringerofrain
    Bringerofrain avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 516
    3
    4
    7
    Bringerofrain avatar
    Bringerofrain
    --> @Stephen
    I know they are the same event based on the following evidence.


    Luke7:36-37
    Jesus invited to the home of Simon the Pharisee.


    “And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat. A woman in that town who lived a sinful life learned that Jesus was eating at the Pharisee’s house, so she came there with an alabaster jar of perfume. As she stood behind him at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears. Then she wiped them with her hair, kissed them and poured perfume on them”.

    Jesus at the home of Simon the Leper

    Matthew26:6-7 Now when Jesus was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper,a woman came up to him with an alabaster flask of very expensive ointment, and she poured it on his head as he reclined at table.

    Mark14:3 And while he was at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper,as he was reclining at table, a woman came with an alabaster flask of ointment of pure nard, very costly, and she broke the flask and poured it over his head.

    John12:3
    “Then Mary took about a pint of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus’ feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.”

    Those seem like the typical contradictory witness accounts of the same exact event. 

    No reasonable person reading those witness accounts would think those are different events. 

  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @Bringerofrain

    No reasonable person reading those witness accounts would think those are different events. 
    I am inclined to agree (many don't). The clue for me is as I explained above -   the cost, but that is just me and my opinion, which is not evidence or proof. But then I believe there could be evidence found  to prove the contrary.

    But in your own case and from your own belief,  are those seemingly contradictory accounts that I had  already set out at #1 and that you have repeated above,   your only evidence that you say proves that all four gospel writers are relaying the same anointing event? 






  • BrotherDThomas
    BrotherDThomas avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 1,599
    3
    3
    7
    BrotherDThomas avatar
    BrotherDThomas
    --> @Bringerofrain


    Bringerofrain,

    Barring the FACT that you have run away from my godly posts, you have been very silent to my request of you creating a thread upon the forum relative to your faith of  *cough* Hermeticism.  Is there a reason for you not performing this simple request?  Are you afraid of the possible laughter that might follow, or are you too embarrassed to at least try and bring forth your Hermeticism faith because you are still trying to swallow it and remain intelligent looking in the aftermath?

    Simple questions to you above that should be easily answered.


    .
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,471
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @BrotherDThomas

    It appears in this case Brother , that Bringerofrain's  only proof to these two anointing stories actually being one and the same event are the very verses that I posted at post #1
    in the OP. Which are contradictory and do not compliment one another in anyway but for the actual anointing performed by a woman.

    The anointing is the only thing that these two stories actually have in common  and all other details cancel out one another.   If we are to take them as read and literally true and as being one single event - then they raise a few awkward questions,  don't they Brother? And the only way around these awkward problems is for Christians to have to face a few facts. 


    For instance, 

    Matthew 26:6-13

    6 Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper,
    7 There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat.
    8 But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste?
    9 For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.
    10 When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me.
    11 For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.
    12 For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.
    13 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her.

    from 13 the story goes into the story of Judas` betrayal.

    Here's a clue.  Leprosy isn't that contagious. It is contracted only if you come into close and repeated contact with nose and mouth droplets from someone with untreated leprosy.
    BUT!  a recent review of leprosy in the journal PAIN discusses how acute (severe) and chronic pain are major symptoms of leprosy. Acute pain may be a presenting symptom, even before skin lesions develop, and may persist even after treatment.

    The  very first  painful treatment for this disease only came about in the 1940's and  the only other known cure for it was through the power of Jesus, if the  scriptures are to be believed?  Which - and please take note -  I do not. I am as you say, an  " hell-bound atheist".

    Do you see my point, Brother. Of course you do. You are the only Christian here honest enough to realise that while Judas and the disciples were whining and arguing about the cost of the anointing oils and the "poor", and Jesus was having his head and feet bathed in this expensive perfume,  and tears were flowing all over the place,  and Jesus was having his feet kissed and wiped with a woman's hair and another woman was moaning about who was going to do the dishes,  all this time,  SIMON, the leper must have been writhing in excruciating pain.

    Not in any single one of these versions will we read that Jesus had cured Simon of this dreadful excruciating disease before, during or after the event..  WHY?