Talk:Jesus wept

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.

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)

In my entire life living in Australia, I have never heard the scripture "Jesus wept." as an expletive. The article should be edited or removed as it isn't very common at all.60.240.2.203 12:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I was going to leave a smart remark about "Gee if it's never said in Australia, that proves it's not common. But, 3 years later, the article's still here, and it's clearly prominent enough given teh various uses in the media and popular culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.173.80.198 (talk) 22:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

In terms of using "Jesus Wept" as an expletive, why has no one taken into consideration that perhaps when using the expletive for one's failure, you are saying "That even the divine Jesus messed up" this would infer that you are on the same footing as jesus, which in a way is sacrilegious in its own right to utter. Because it would imply that you are just as flawed as the lord. I gathered this ideal after watching "Hell Raiser" and after screaming out in pain from tortorous agony, the antagonist says "Jesus Wept" before being torn apart violently. This leads me to believe that he is implying that jesus is just as weak as he is to having wept during a failure. Granted these are not my own personal believes on religion, but more of an idea on the curse. -AnonymousMovieCritic — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.87.76.246 (talk) 05:13, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

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)

I would suggest deleting the material from Witness Lee. It's overtly anti-Semitic and it adds nothing to the discussion. The comment concedes that Jesus wept in sorrow for his friend, making the previous comments about the blindness of the others part of a old trope.

I attended my cousin's funeral, whereby a pastor told of "Jesus wept." He suggested Jesus was weeping because He knew where the spirit of Lazarus was (in His mansions above), and therefore was weeping because He was about to snatch him from that existence, back into our Earth. Knowing this caused Jesus to weep.

Thoughts? Pamdewitt (talk) 12:01, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

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)

I added the Greek but I think the multiple translations are necessary too. savid@n 23:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

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)

"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)

• Yes, it is a well-known piece of slang in the UK. I added the text back, with some references to online UK and Australian slang dictionaries {not the most academic citation I agree, but the best I could find}. Can I suggest in the future that people don't just remove information without doing some basic checking first? Putting "jesus wept" slang into Google gives a couple of thousand hits, many giving nice examples of its use as a slang expression. Dave w74 06:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I didn't know about that kind of basic checking at all,and that it would suffice as an authority. Thanks for informing me.Rich 10:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

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)

Page move?

Should this be moved to John 11:35? Floaterfluss ^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Alan Clark

Did not Alan Clark complain that trendy modern Christians were promoting a version that read "Jesus burst into tears", which is less elegant, and implies the writer has no knowledge of the verb to weep? --81.105.251.160 04:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Job 3:2?

Job 3:2 says "He Said". I believe that that is shorter than "Jesus wept". Shouldn't that be mentioned somewhere? Tavix (talk) 04:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, but not here. There's a link at the end of this article to "Chapters and verses of the Bible#Statistics (including shortest verses)." Fayenatic (talk) 06:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes and right here on this talk page might be the best place to mention it. The verse is not a "phrase famous for being the shortest verse in the bible" or "an expletive". It is common for being a sarcastic remark. The other two claims are unsourced. ~ R.T.G 21:27, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jesus wept. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081223224542/http://www.scifidimensions.com/Aug00/jnf_shroud.htm to http://www.scifidimensions.com/Aug00/jnf_shroud.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=John&chapter=11&verse=35

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:44, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

God becoming Jesus.

To say that God became man in the form of Jesus is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Why on Earth would he pray to Himself? God is God, Jesus is Jesus and the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit. You're confusing people. 2601:58B:C00:2DDE:829:242B:F88E:46C (talk) 17:37, 26 July 2022 (UTC)