United States | News & Politics

Josphius

Josephus is awesome, but he isn't a particularly trustworthy source because his motivation was highly political (get respect from Romans and Greeks for his people), so he often exaggerates and distorts the truth. He certainly wouldn't mention something that wouldn't fit his narrative.

So he's a great resource, just a little unreliable, but there's really no other options.

The text doesn't say that

Let's look at the text then. I'll include the relevant portions from each of the four gospels:

Matthew 21:12-13:

And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons.

He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.”

Mark 11:15-18:

And they came to Jerusalem. And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold and those who bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons.

And he would not allow anyone to carry anything through the temple.

And he was teaching them and saying to them, “Is it not written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations’? But you have made it a den of robbers.”

And the chief priests and the scribes heard it and were seeking a way to destroy him, for they feared him, because all the crowd was astonished at his teaching.

Luke 19:45-48:

And he entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold,

saying to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a den of robbers.”

And he was teaching daily in the temple. The chief priests and the scribes and the principal men of the people were seeking to destroy him,

but they did not find anything they could do, for all the people were hanging on his words.

John 2:14-16:

In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers sitting there.

And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables.

And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; do not make my Father's house a house of trade.”

They're remarkably similar accounts, and in each he points out that the issue is that they're making the temple a house of robbers (i.e. they're profiting from something that should be a gift to God). And it wasn't just the moneychangers, but the people selling sacrificial animals as well, the probably is buying and selling stuff in the temple, not donations to Rome.

To me that's pretty clear, Jesus cared far more about the people trading in the temple than whoever's face was on the money. These were in the original accounts (as much as the current Bible is "original"), not a fabrication 1700 years later.

And yeah, using the money is fine, Jesus didn't seem to have an issue with the money itself, he just had an issue with profiteering from items used in temple ceremonies within the temple complex itself.

We also know he was funneling money to the Jerusalem community.

Why not click the links?

Regardless, I mostly made my point. For the "reap what you sow" message, my personal opinion is that it isn't literal. I don't think he's saying they'll get wealthy with worldly money if they donate money (i.e. charity as an investment), but that they'll receive spiritual blessings for putting others ahead of themselves (i.e. if you sow love, you'll reap love).

The reason for moving money to Jerusalem was likely two-fold, a famine in Egypt likely impacted Judea more than other regions, and Paul wasn't well liked in Jerusalem, so he worked extra hard to get money to those suffering in Jerusalem to help solve both problems. He was a prominent figure in the church, hence why repairing that relationship is important. That sounds like a pretty reasonable explanation, but we obviously have limited information here. He likely also raised money for local congregations, but there wouldn't be as much of a point to dwelling on that in a letter that's intended to build faith.

No one would ever lie

Well, given that he's dead and we don't have many accounts of his life, I can't really speak to his trustworthiness. There are people I absolutely trust to use money appropriately, and there are those I don't. Supposedly he gained the trust of certain groups and not others. We don't know how he used the money, we just know he thanked people for donations, at least in certain cases.

So any statements about his character are going to be baseless.