BS: An Easter Question

Subject: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 08:29 AM

This has always puzzled me, and I wondered if anyone on here could enlighten me.
We are told Jesus' body was left in the tomb overnight wrapped in a shroud. When the open tomb was discovered on Easter Sunday, this gravecloth was found neatly folded, but Jesus had disappeared.
Soon afterwards he was seen by various folk, walking about quite the thing. Now what was he wearing? And where had he obtained the clothes?
Also I presume he wore some form of sandals. Where had he managed to find them? I just can't explain this. Even if he'd pinched them from somewhere, he'd have been naked as he came out from the tomb. Very strange...

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 08:38 AM

Oh dear ............. I hope you are not suggesting that Christ was a thief.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 08:39 AM

It was a miracle.........sheesh!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 08:39 AM

One of the questions often asked in Liverpool when I was young was "Who did the washing up after the Last Supper" - bet it was a woman!!.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 09:13 AM

A miracle...
So not only was he resurrected, but an entire set of clothes of the right size appeared too. Did they sort of float down from the sky, or appear on hangers in the cave, or did an angel come up and ask him what size he required in sandals?

Believe it or not, I'm a regular churchgoer and our Rector would be a bit displeased to hear of my doubts.

This is tongue in cheek to some extent, but I'd still like to know the official line on these matters!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 09:15 AM

Whatever he was wearing, it caused Mary Magdelene to mistake him first off for the gardener (John 20 15). Maybe he had borrowed some ordinary looking working clothes?

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 09:28 AM

Then he met two disciples walking to Emmaeus and they didn't recognise him [tho they had been doing everything together continuously & nonstop for 3 years] till they sat down to eat and he said grace & 'their eyes were opened' and he disappeared [Luke 24].

All a bit confused and mysterious and folklorish, eh?

I think Caravaggio's The Supper at Emmaeus perhaps the greatest painting in the National Gallery in London, mind.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Musket
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 09:34 AM

Or alternatively, go back before the Christianity story and ask how Mithras or any of the fabled messiahs pulled the trick. It's all the same story

Nowadays, we'd call it a continuity error and have a pop at the film director.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 09:35 AM

Well, for a fellow capable of dying after being bled dry then coming back to life, the matter of obtaining a few clothes, by comparison, must have been an absolute cinch.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 09:49 AM

Wardrobe provided by Miracle Clothing.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 09:57 AM

Hahaha Guest! That must be it!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 12:35 PM

Going back to Caravaggio's painting I mentioned 5 posts back. Jesus appears in it without a beard. I have always taken this to be the artist's explanation as to why those who met him, altho they had long known him, didn't recognise him at first after he rose from the dead. He avoided immediate recognition by shaving off his characteristic beard.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,#
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 12:48 PM

What happened with his foreskin? Was it discarded, preserved, has it become a wallet which when rubbed turns into a suitcase? Anyone?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Musket
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 12:49 PM

Most famous people employ doubles. Explains a lot of things, especially if his agent inadvertently told his double the beard had to go, relaunch of image and all that.

Worked for David Bowie and look how much adulation and respect he got (and deserved.)

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 03:16 PM

"What happened with his foreskin? "
I thought that it became the ring around Saturn

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 03:45 PM

I'm sure Mary (His Mother) and the other women there washed and dressed Him. Wouldn't you have?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 04:14 PM

Ah .......... isn't that nice and civilised, just the sort of thing that would happen in Palestine 2000 years ago.

Streuth, the lengths some people will go to.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 04:20 PM

People is People

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:04 PM

How did he die?

Evidence seems to show he was crucified in the Roman manner which was on an X propped on the ground and tied to a stake.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: BobL
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:04 PM

I seem to remember that Mel Gibson's film on the Passion ended with Jesus exiting the tomb in his birthday suit, so a least this question has been considered before.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:06 PM

Must admit Eliza , that it had,nt occurred to me that Jesus would need to requisition new clothes after conquering death. Certainly a God who validates the sacrifice of his Son by raising him from death is unlikely to be thwarted by what he will wear , but of course I don't know either where the new apparel came from. We are told that in creation he only had to speak and it was created, so I guess a new suit is small fry in comparison. As to not being recognised post resurrection we are told in one place that they were prevented from recognition till he broke bread.   And of course they were not expecting to see him , especially well and whole.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:13 PM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 09:35 AM

Well, for a fellow capable of dying after being bled dry then coming back to life, the matter of obtaining a few clothes, by comparison, must have been an absolute cinch.

Surely a 'cinch' is just the belt, or rope, around his robes!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:19 PM

So was Jesus one of the earliest recorded accounts of a zombie ?

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:29 PM

I'm going to spend this Easter emulating Jesus. Piss off tonight and reappear on Sunday morning...

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: keberoxu
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:29 PM

Good point, MGM Lion, about Mary Magdalene: They have taken him away, and I know not where they have lain him.

Ought to double-check "The Man Who Died" by D. H. Lawrence. I recall that Lawrence's modus operandi was that Jesus was not dead, but catatonic. But I don't recall about the clothing.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:37 PM

In most cases in the real world, lots of unanswered questions and contradictions cause people to have....ummm.. suspicions... about the story being told.

In religious matters, it's just "Oh, god(s) can easily do anything." Very convenient.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:44 PM

But Pete, he wasn't 'well and whole' because apparently he still had the holes in his hands for Thomas to look at.

Oddly, I find it perfectly acceptable that he rose from the dead in the tomb, but getting hold of some clothes/footwear and tidily folding up his shroud before he left somehow makes me giggle.

Our Rector will probably excommunicate me now as a heretic. She's quite broad-minded though, so maybe I'll be spared.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 05:52 PM

Ah, but he will have kept the stigmata, Eliza, as a sort of memento, and identifier. It's not everyone, after all, whose palms have been pierced by bloody great nails!

I don't think parish clergy in the C·of·E actually have power of excommunication, BTW!

Best ··· ≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 06:03 PM

I watched a documentary years ago which pointed out that nails through the palms of the hands wouldn't hold the weight of the body. The nails would in fact have been knocked through the wrist bones. (barbaric and unspeakably cruel)

Oh phew, Michael, that's a comfort! (She's actually very nice, and I doubt if she'd throw a strop at my over-logical doubts)

After his resurrection, Jesus apparently stood on the shore and told a group of disciples who were out fishing where to get a large catch. They brought the fish ashore and they all sat down and had a feast. Does this mean Jesus actually ate and drank? With his hands, brow, side and back lacerated and wounded? And presumably his digestive tract was in working order which I find strange, though I can't explain why.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 06:07 PM

His wrists would surely have been tied to the arms of the cross, like those of the thieves crucified along with him, and nails added just as a bit of extra nasty just for him...

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 07:29 PM

True Eliza , he still had the marks of his passion , but otherwise a ressurection body. It may well be that it was as he broke the bread that the deciples saw the wounds. To Thomas was shown the wounds in his feet and hands, and nothing was said about any other wounds preserved in his ressurected body. I am uncommitted as far as the Turin shroud is concerned but I understand that image shows the nail marks as on the wrists.   Another interesting detail as regards the grave clothes is it is thought the text indicates not their being folded but vacated .....but I might need to check that....so in his ressurection body he passed through them , as it seems he did the stone which was not rolled to let Jesus out but that others might see he was not there. And, also, in one of his post ressurection appearances when "the doors being shut" he stood among them. And the gospels do record him eating with the deciples and this would be evidence (for them, not our resident skeptics!) that it was not a spirit/ghost but he himself .

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Musket
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 07:47 PM

You know, with most novels you can just read what it says. Not having read it, does the bible say what he did to look decent?

Anyway, a nice story but plagiarised from earlier ones apparently.

History however relates that crucifixion had a pretty good success rate so if anyone of that name got nailed to a cross, I doubt it failed to kill him. They tended to leave you till you were really dead.

A nice aside concerning clothes but unless the story says something about them, any question should start with the idea nobody ever got up again once they actually died and doesn't the story say he dies up there? The novelist cocked up with that one because unless he introduced a ghost, it's a bit difficult attributing adventures to a stiff.

Still, I do like Eliza's question concerning the continuity error. pete's reply that God can do anything is good too. Perhaps he can sort out the carnage, mayhem and obscene loss of life in the name of him going on at present then pete!

No, thought not zzzzzzz

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 08:55 PM

anyone remember the book
The Passover plot

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,#
Date: 25 Mar 16 - 10:27 PM

How crucifixion kills.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Thompson
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 01:55 AM

Didn't St Catherine of Siena have a supposed relic of the circumcision of Jesus, a ring that she wore, saying that she had been married to God "not with a ring of silver but with a ring of his holy flesh…"

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 03:32 AM

MGM says: All a bit confused and mysterious and folklorish, eh?

I think there's a lot of truth in Mike's comment.

It always seems strange to me that people here on a folk music Website can't accept folklore if it has religious implications. When it comes to religion, they accept only the "literal interpretation."

I get this a lot when I'm telling stories to kids. I tell the story and 95% of the kids are going along with me, and some damn kid interrupts and wants to know what color shoes the hero is wearing.

It ruins the whole friggin' story. Sometimes, it's best just to enjoy a story as a story, and not get bogged down in the details. Those people experienced something that had a profound experience on them. What was it? Maybe they didn't get the details right, but there must have been something that had such a profound effect on them.

And no matter what, it's a good story, so don't sweat the details.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 03:41 AM

Thompson sez: Didn't St Catherine of Siena have a supposed relic of the circumcision of Jesus, a ring that she wore, saying that she had been married to God "not with a ring of silver but with a ring of his holy flesh…"

Yuck! Better to leave the foreskins to David. He had a thing about them. And by the way, is Michaelangelo's David circumcised?

But yes, Catherine of Siena had some strangeness to her writings, and much of what we know about her is mostly folklore. The most important thing about Catherine is that she was a woman who dared to confront the Pope. And yes, she and a number of other female mystics had some sort of "mystical marriage" to Jesus. I can't get too concerned about that, until they start having mystical children...

Never heard the foreskin story before. Maybe it's an absurd conversion of a metaphor into literalism. Apparently, Catherine claimed the ring indicating her marriage to Christ, was invisible.

Odd, but interesting story, nonetheless. And Siena, by the way, is a strange and interesting city to visit.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 03:53 AM

And for that matter, are foreskins kept by any culture after circumcision? Seems to me, it might be a good idea to keep them for David when he's told to collect 100 and decides to collect 200 instead.
I wonder what he did with all of them...sold them to Catholic virgins for use as wedding rings?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 05:08 AM

In my husband's culture (Malinke/Muslim Senoufou ivorian) foreskins are buried wrapped in a large leaf under the floor of the family hut (earth floor) but this is in the remote villages. I must ask him what happens to them in the city of Abidjan. As most of the shanty shack floors are solid concrete, they'd need a pneumatic drill to make a hole.

Joe, I often concern myself with the details as it's among them one can verify the big story. (A bit like Sherlock Holmes.) I tend to subscribe to the explanation that Jesus was in the form of a very clear 'apparition' so he could walk through walls and so on. Thus the clothes would be part of the vision and not actually real clothes at all. I'm rather suspicious of doctrine which counters a perfectly reasonable doubt with "Well, it's so, and you should concentrate on the spiritual and holy side of things, not quibble like this!" If I'm going to subscribe to an entire religion I like to read the small print so to speak. Jesus' disciples were men of their age; they hadn't the benefit of modern science and knowledge. We have, and should be allowed to exercise them.


I've taught eight year-olds for thirty years and know only too well the pertinent questions with which they interrupt a gripping story. But that's natural scepticism and a very healthy thing.

Musket, my biggest stumbling block with accepting God is the point you make above. If he's all powerful, whatever is his mindset regarding the unspeakable suffering and pain inflicted in his name all over the world. My sister says it's people doing it not God. But presumably with a wave of his hand he could put a stop to it all. She says 'free will'. But I sometimes wonder if he has any pity in him at all. When I pray I often have a rant at him about this, but one has to 'let it go' or faith would wither completely.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Stu
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 05:12 AM

"I wonder what he did with all of them..."

He used to ping them like rubber bands at the heads of passing Samaritans.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 05:12 AM

My sister says it's people doing it not God. people are not smallpox or maleria

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST,Eliza
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 08:55 AM

Exactly Les. And volcanoes, earthquakes, droughts, myriad nasty, painful diseases, venomous creatures.
It's true humans have free will and free choice, but the victims on the receiving end of evil actions have no choice about it whatsoever.
As the Scots say, "Ah hae mae doots aboot it a'."

Husband says cut-off foreskins in the city are taken away by the circumciser and 'disposed of'. He thinks probably chucked in a bin. (ugh)

Ah I nearly forgot: Happy Easter everyone!

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 12:28 PM

I'm a life long agnostic/atheist - ie i'm not exactly certain of my exact position on that spectrum.

But I like the tradition of enjoying a good jesus movie at easter.

.. part of my culture, along with Zulu, The Great Escape, The Magnificent 7, The Italian Job, The Battle of Britain, Planet of the Apes, etc
on other bank holidays....

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 12:43 PM

that last guest was me...😜

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Raggytash
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 12:55 PM

Yea, have another three marks and TWO gold stars AND you can give out the inkwells !!! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 02:05 PM

Hi, Eliza-

You say "Jesus was in the form of a very clear 'apparition.'" That's more-or-less the way I see it.

The question of suffering is a big one. I guess I think that suffering just happens. I don't see God as scripting what happens in our lives. We're in a universe that works according to certain principles that are best defined by science. We operate within those principles, affected by the very powerful forces of consequences and coincidences. It takes real effort to go beyond those forces and accomplish significant change. I see God as a spiritual force that inspires that effort.

I usually give my definition of God as an essence that is both within and beyond each of us, and I see that essence as good and as calling us to good. If I respond to that essence, I can accomplish things beyond the ordinary flow of things.

Other people have other understandings, but mine is what works for me. I don't see an interventionist God that defies the laws of physics - including natural consequences and coincidences.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: frogprince
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 05:10 PM

", are foreskins kept by any culture after circumcision?"

About 46 years ago, a college roommate and I surmised what those so-called "pork skins" in the vending machines really were...

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 05:17 PM

Well he. might as well defy the laws of physics, as his very existence is predicated on just that. No matter how you define him.

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Joe Offer
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 07:39 PM

Steve, I think it's only your definition of God that requires the Divinity to defy the laws of physics; and you seem to require that all people of faith adhere to your narrow definition, so that you can more handily refute them.

I came across an article about Rob Bell, an evangelical pastor who has recently been on a speaking tour, promoting the concept of evolution to evangelicals. He says that any conflict between religion and science has been overblown by small groups of extremists at either pole. I agree.

Frogprince, wasn't it George H.W. Bush who was very fond of pork rinds? Makes you wonder. Maybe there's a comparison between Bush senior and King David?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: An Easter Question
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 Mar 16 - 08:03 PM

"Steve, I think it's only your definition of God that requires the Divinity to defy the laws of physics; and you seem to require that all people of faith adhere to your narrow definition, so that you can more handily refute them."

Now why would I bother to come up with a definition of something that isn't there? What's my definition of God, Joe? And when have I ever required anyone to do anything? I don't know whether there's a God and I don't care whether you believe in him or not. You don't know whether there's a God or not but you organise a whole institution around him notwithstanding, and you're cool with passing that uncertainty-wrapped-in-certainty down to your kids. Refuting isn't my modus operandi. All I want is your evidence. I don't expect a direct, honest reply, of course.