• Discussion Forum

  Describe the place of the temple in first-century Jerusalem’s social, economic, and political life.

  Craig Wiley replied 3 weeks ago 20 Members · 21 Replies

  • CH505-01

• 

  Martha McCaskill

  Member

  12/03/2023 at 13:13

  1. The temple was a place where offerings could be made to God.
  2. Socially people interacted and made connections to further their business or political careers.
  3. It was economically important to small businesses to supply a large amount of goods to the temple.
  4. It was politically important because of the ties to ruling authorities.
• 

  Tania Martin

  Member

  01/03/2023 at 17:19

  The was the epicenter of Jerusalem’s social, economic and political life. The people in Jerusalem depended on the temple economically to purchase the products of their trade: pottery, baking, wools, olive oil, carpentry, stone cutting, and the like. Many of the small shop owners probably would have gone out of business if not for the large number of pilgrims who frequented Jerusalem. Socially, the course structure was largely based on your relation to task performed for the temple or not. The poor were dependent on the welfare system that was administered by the temple. The political ruling course, the Sanhedrin, was headed by the high priest.

• 

  Paul Burges

  Member

  12/16/2022 at 02:16

  Everyday life was dependent on the temple. This included bankers, shopkeepers, traders, day labourers, ordinary priests; all made up a network revolving around it. Thousands of pilgrims came in purchasing goods and the poor were dependent on the welfare system administered by it. Wealthy landlords, priests and Levites were also dependent on it. Chief priests ran courses at the temple. There were also 9,600 singers, guards, doorkeepers making up perhaps a third of the population of Jerusalem.

• 

  Sidney Smart

  Member

  10/29/2022 at 15:45

  Jerusalem at that time was something of a Vatican City, meaning that everything in their area’s social, economic, and political life revolved around the temple. Socially the city was made up of those who were very rich all the way down to those who were very poor, including slaves. In the middle course there were ordinary priests, small shopkeepers and trader and all came under an interconnected network involving the temple. Economically the temple tax affected everyone either because everyone had to pay or those who couldn’t pay lived on the welfare system funded by the tax. The wealthy landowners, who produce, livestock and other products were either used by the High Priests and the people who were employed by the temple, or they sold to those who could afford it and depended on the temple buying goods that supported the poor. Politically the power lay with the religious leaders, the largest political body being the Sanhedrin made up of 71 members and everyone, yes everyone knew on which side their bread was buttered. All of life revolved around this. Jerusalem was unlike any other city, busy, bustling, cross-cultural and, could we say corrupt?

• 

  Sidney Smart

  Member

  10/29/2022 at 15:44

  Jerusalem at that time was something of a Vatican City, meaning that everything in their area’s social, economic, and political life revolved around the temple. Socially the city was made up of those who were very rich all the way down to those who were very poor, including slaves. In the middle course there were ordinary priests, small shopkeepers and trader and all came under an interconnected network involving the temple. Economically the temple tax affected everyone either because everyone had to pay or those who couldn’t pay lived on the welfare system funded by the tax. The wealthy landowners, who produce, livestock and other products were either used by the High Priests and the people who were employed by the temple, or they sold to those who could afford it and depended on the temple buying goods that supported the poor. Politically the power lay with the religious leaders, the largest political body being the Sanhedrim made up of 71 members and everyone, yes everyone knew on which side their bread was buttered. All of life revolved around this. Jerusalem was unlike any other city, busy, bustling, cross-cultural and, could we say corrupt?

Log In to Reply

• Discussion Forum

  How did onlookers react to the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost? How did Peter respond? What was the outcome?

  Craig Wiley replied 3 weeks ago 21 Members · 20 Replies

  • CH505-01

• 

  Tania Martin

  Member

  01/03/2023 at 17:07

  Many onlookers amazed but some thought the disciples were drunk with wine. Peter declares that they are not drunk and took the opportunity to preach the gospel from the Old Testament. The outcome was that many were saved in response to Peter’s message.

• 

  Paul Burges

  Member

  12/16/2022 at 02:30

  According to Howard Marshall, God wanted that people would respond by hearing the message in their own language and spread it to their own homes, planting new churches in the process. However, not all were convinced. Some said they were ‘filled with new wine,’and ridiculed them. Peter stood up and preached to them referring to Joel, and claiming it was only 9am. He went on to explain that the age of fulfilment (the new phase of the Kingdom of God) had arrived, Jesus was the Messiah and a call to repentance.

• 

  Sidney Smart

  Member

  10/29/2022 at 15:31

  As could be imagined there were about as many reactions as there were people present and that was a lot. Some were just simply amazed and astounded, as I would have been. Tongues of fire, now that’s not normal. They hadn’t been told what this would look like so they were exactly prepared, whatever that could have looked like. Of course, there were the doubters and the deniers and the “conspiracy theorists” who stated that it was all fake somehow and the participants who were able to speak in other languages were “all drunk.” Somehow I think I have been hearing the same things around me today.
  Peter, with whom I can always resonate because he didn’t think before he spoke but, after Pentecost, he couldn’t open his mouth without a sermon coming out. I’ve been told I have that same characteristic. From the apostle who had last been seen in the garden and around the trial area where Jesus was…well, we know that story – about how he denied our Lord three times and how Jesus how told him he would and then he locked eyes with his Lord and Savior. Can you even imagine? Then at Pentecost he stood up for the people who were receiving the Holy Spirit to say “no, they are not drunk” and then went on to preach a dynamic sermons…or two or three whereby the church body increased in number exponentially! Praise be to God!

• 

  Sean Francis

  Member

  08/02/2022 at 19:54

  There were many responses. Some mocked the disciples calling them drunk. Others became strengthened in their faith. Peter responded by delivering a message explaining what had occurred as promised by the God through the prophet Joel and many were added to the church therafter.

• 

  Shemuwel Baruwk

  Member

  07/05/2022 at 19:09

  The people that hear them thought they were drunk. Peter explained that they were not drunk and quoted Joel’s prophecy to let them know that this was the works of GOD. The onlookers felt convicted and asked what was required to be saved.

Log In to Reply