Talk:Jesus wept
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] More Interpretation
The verse is "Jesus wept" or variations thereof, not "God himself wept". Claiming that "Jesus wept" implies that God himself can come along side [sic] us in his compassion for us and cry with us is a little bit slanted. However, to retain the spirit of the interpretation without the non-NPOV wording, I changed *The sorrow/sympathy of Jesus for all mankind. to *The sorrow, sympathy, and compassion felt Jesus for all mankind.
[edit] Use as an Expletive
"In western society, the phrase "Jesus wept" is common curse spoken when something goes wrong." I can't think of anything to say here that wouldn't sound... well, I don't know... but it's not very common among... well, it's not very, shall we say, urban! What about those of us whose roads are paved? Wetman 21:46, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It's used as a curse when something goes wrong and is scaled that if Jesus was physically alive today he would weep at weep at the misdemeanour.
I looked this page up because a friend of mine who's in her 20s and a town-dweller and works where I do in London keeps using this phrase. But I do know what you mean, it sounds a bit quaint from someone of my generation. Iwilliamson 14:25, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Could we possibly do something about the "Big Bad Jews Killed Jesus" slant of the "Context" section? At the very least change it to Jewish opposition rather than a supposed conspiracy to kill Jesus. If it absolutely must stay, this should be linked to an article discussing how this topic is not at all clear cut. unixslug 20:44, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
Well, no one's touched it in the last few days and I'm not quite sure why a perfectly NPOV context by Gary D back in November wasn't just maintained. I'm reverting back to it or something like it until someone wants to argue about it. unixslug 18:13, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Interpretation
Having power over life and death, Christ would not have wept over Lazarus' death. It is clear He is weeping as a result of their lack of faith.
Here are the verses for reference:
11:32 Then when Mary was come where Jesus was, and saw him, she fell down at his feet, saying unto him, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.
11:33 When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled,
11:34 And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see.
11:35 Jesus wept.
— Nathanlarson32767 (Talk) 04:27, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I agree it seems that there's some inconsistency between the Context section and the Interpretation section.
Also, I'm not sure the Interpretation section is phrased carefully to be NPOV. Each statement after the bullet points is very much open to question, and carries with it a certain interpretation of the Bible and the historical events behind it. But the article can certainly be read as simply stating each bulleted point as fact, and saying that, because of these facts, some people have attributed significance to the phrase. I think the article could be more carefully NPOV if it were clarified to show that the reasons are points argued by certain people. I think the article could also be improved if it were said who has attributed significance and who has put forward these reasons. So, something like "Christian readers of the Bible have often attributed significance to this phrase. Arguments they have put forward to support its significance include:"
Someone with more knowledge than I have would need to supply details of who has said what.
Iwilliamson 14:17, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Text of the Verse
I am not at all convinced of the wisdom of having the text verse in eleven English translations. It would be more enlightening to have the verse (and its context) – here it would make sense – in the original Greek. Pilatus 16:47, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Context
It is the context section that was not NPOV.
It is not at all clear that Jesus was weeping over their lack of faith. Jesus could just have easily been saddened by seeing His friend in that condition, or saddened to see the pain and suffering the death caused.
If Jesus had such an impassionate and cavalier attitude toward death, we could easily ask why he was so saddened on the eve of His own, actually begging God in a very human moment to avert it.
Also, while Jesus does indicate that the death is an opportunity, it is not stated in the text that He purposefully arrived late.
(My use of the capital pronouns referring to Jesus is indicative of my own POV and not meant to insult those who view Jesus merely as a historical figure, and not as a deity.)
- Gdewar 18:18, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "citatin needed" edit of mild expletive statement 10/13/06
Hi,is this "everyday knowledge" in the UK for example? If so, maybe no citation is needed. But I would prefer instead of "some" for location, a few locations, or at least one location, where it's a common expletive be stated. As a matter of fact I've never heard it as an expletive in my life.I live in USA. But I don't run in Christian circles. On a personal note, to me it's one of the most touching and beautiful phrases in the Bible that this agnostic knows of. It's a shame it's an expletive.Cheers,Rich 05:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More on mild expletive in cultural significance section
1st, can we move this to close to the bottom of the article? 2nd, why is this the only (or even in) thing in the cultural sigificance section? Could we rename the section as "Slang" or "Use as an Expletive" and put it near the end of the article?Thanks, Rich 05:24, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- I went ahead and moved "mild expletive" and "relics" under the Sundry heading. Then ther was nothing under "Cultural Significance" so I erased it, which is too bad. Can we find someone who knows a lot about it to write about the cultural significance and get the heading back? Thanks,Rich 09:11, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
