Hey Dr. Powell, I had a question about a statement you made at (51:40-52:01). Earlier I believe y'all spoke of the two other men crucified with Jesus as criminals or theives. And they are regularly and traditionally referred to as the two thieves, one of whom stole heaven on the cross. So if common criminals are not usually crucified but just immediately stoned or punished, I suppose these other two men crucified with Jesus aren't really correctly referred to as "thieves", but more likely were rebels, right?
Hi Nathan, yes, that’s absolutely right. The word used in the Gospels that we often translate as “thieves” or “robbers” is “lestai”, which refers to rebels or revolutionaries. Crucifixion was a very long, resource-heavy way to kill someone (as opposed to something like stoning or beheading). Rome largely reserved this for people guilty of treason (or similar) as a way to make a public example of them. So, in other words, the other two men were probably guilty of precisely what Jesus was accused of, but innocent of.
To put it bluntly- why are our translations so bad? Almost every exegesis I hear, regardless of denomination or translation, seems to begin “this word doesn’t actually mean what it says here”, and it seems like we could’ve avoided that at some point. Is King James I to blame?
Thank you very much as always. To say that these blow my mind every single week would be an understatement. Would you be willing to do a podcast about each of the days of the Triiduum as well? I'm assuming it would obviously be way too late for this year, but maybe for a future year? Especially since the readings are exactly the same every year? thank you again. And I know these are free for everyone, but I'm happy to be a paying subscriber to support all of this.
33:08 Tabernacles reference!
43:42-44:10
-Yeah, this is nearly half the comments I leave on this site. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
Hey Dr. Powell, I had a question about a statement you made at (51:40-52:01). Earlier I believe y'all spoke of the two other men crucified with Jesus as criminals or theives. And they are regularly and traditionally referred to as the two thieves, one of whom stole heaven on the cross. So if common criminals are not usually crucified but just immediately stoned or punished, I suppose these other two men crucified with Jesus aren't really correctly referred to as "thieves", but more likely were rebels, right?
Hi Nathan, yes, that’s absolutely right. The word used in the Gospels that we often translate as “thieves” or “robbers” is “lestai”, which refers to rebels or revolutionaries. Crucifixion was a very long, resource-heavy way to kill someone (as opposed to something like stoning or beheading). Rome largely reserved this for people guilty of treason (or similar) as a way to make a public example of them. So, in other words, the other two men were probably guilty of precisely what Jesus was accused of, but innocent of.
Thank you!
To put it bluntly- why are our translations so bad? Almost every exegesis I hear, regardless of denomination or translation, seems to begin “this word doesn’t actually mean what it says here”, and it seems like we could’ve avoided that at some point. Is King James I to blame?
Thank you very much as always. To say that these blow my mind every single week would be an understatement. Would you be willing to do a podcast about each of the days of the Triiduum as well? I'm assuming it would obviously be way too late for this year, but maybe for a future year? Especially since the readings are exactly the same every year? thank you again. And I know these are free for everyone, but I'm happy to be a paying subscriber to support all of this.
I would love this too!
Take a bonus drink, everyone, every member of the School said “Tabernacles”!!