How large was Jesus following while alive?

[outhouse]

And then your question is a complete waste, and you are knowingly wasting our time. You might as well have said he was a pink unicorn, and then when someone disagreed with you, stated that we can only make guesses.

So I'm guessing he walked around with a sword and screamed at little kids to get off the grass, and then had bears rip them apart. You know, like a good wizard.

I understand we live off educated guesses, and sometimes most scholars and historians agree with these said guesses in certain gray areas.


You try and create theology and historicity through your personal persepective, and then complain when others do the same. :slap:

 

[outhouse]

Sanhedrin scribes were at his trial. He cured a Centurions slave

we dont even know if he had a trial. theres a good chance he didnt have one with Pilate or Caiaphas.


a executive order to go and put him on a cross could have been given

He turned over a Jewish Temple

some scholars think this came from the OT and give it little historicity while others call it a demonstration and others a riot.

One of his followers was a scribe

dont buy that at all or there would be written accounts

Pilate crucified him

its possible, if he even took the time

Herod was supposed to have killed the children of Bethlehem looking for him

fable/fiction

 

[outhouse]

I'll entertain this question through the gospels narrative. John the Baptist, presaging Jesus, was very popular in Jewish society. the NT links the two people and John is interwoven into the narrative. the NT tells us that Jesus had Pharisee friends (like Nicodemus), people who believed in his abilities from among the Jewish population, Romans, and Samaritans. I also believe the NT talks about certain popularity Jesus had among the Jewish people in general, and its impossible to ignore the fact that the followers of Jesus in early Christianity, most of whom were Jews reached a certain stage that they were recognized as a sect both by other Jews and by non Jews.

I feel this is a mix of biblical jesus

while jesus was alive though, I'm not sure he had a large enough following to call a sect.

while he did possibly pick up most of johns followers, I dont think they are sure how large this was.

I think followers needs to be defined at this point.

we had the inner 4 who may have traveled with him.

12 may be a OT refference as well as the 70 or 72.

we know the story is exaggerated heavily, and we know a large following that traveled with him would have been unlikely.

im sure he popular in some towns and gained popularity, and he bombed in others like Nazereth.


with a guess of 400,000 at the temple for passover, im not sure 100-200 people would count as a sect

 

[outhouse]

I am not saying he did or didn't because I don't know, but if Jesus didn't exist, someone would have had to have created him. Why not Paul?
He seemed to write a few books and a lot of the early forgeries were claiming to be Paul, he seemed to be the authority after the fact.

Paul couldnt have made that much fiction and the fact is, there was a movement already started he was writing about that was switching away from mainstream judaism.

he latched onto something for a reason.

while a authority on biblical jesus, paul talked up theology and almost states nothing of jesus himself as a man. Paul does talk of jesus more or less in a spiritual way not historical. the movement however, we can find information

 

[Caladan]

I feel this is a mix of biblical jesus

while jesus was alive though, I'm not sure he had a large enough following to call a sect.

while he did possibly pick up most of johns followers, I dont think they are sure how large this was.

I think followers needs to be defined at this point.

we had the inner 4 who may have traveled with him.

12 may be a OT refference as well as the 70 or 72.

we know the story is exaggerated heavily, and we know a large following that traveled with him would have been unlikely.

im sure he popular in some towns and gained popularity, and he bombed in others like Nazereth.


with a guess of 400,000 at the temple for passover, im not sure 100-200 people would count as a sect

I am of course talking about the sect regardless of the time of Jesus but as a historical reality in general. an early Christian sect did exist, and this group was indeed recognized by Jews and non Jews alike. the time of their existence on a historical time table was not long after Jesus, and links could be made through the members of the sect to Jesus and his time.

 

[fallingblood]

Price is, if I recall, rather clear that he doesn't believe in the historical Jesus. I've only read his contributions to The Historical Jesus: Five Views. I have the book so I can look again. But while he and Carrier are historians, neither have published anything in any academic work. Carrier has written a lot of blogs, and Price some popular books, but as far as I'm aware nothing published through academic venues.


You've read it too. I'll have to go back and look. I thought he was pretty clear on the non-historicity.

EDIT: So I checked. It seems he does entertain the possbility that there may have been a man behind them myth.

Yeah, none of them have published anything through academic venues. And that really is as good as it gets for the Jesus myth idea. What I find interesting though is that Price nor Carrier get to the extremes that the idea usually goes to. For instance, neither one denies that Nazareth existed during that time.

 

[fallingblood]

I understand we live off educated guesses, and sometimes most scholars and historians agree with these said guesses in certain gray areas.


You try and create theology and historicity through your personal persepective, and then complain when others do the same. :slap:

I'm not creating theology at all. And I'm not really complaining that others have different perspectives. My point was that if we assume it is all guesses, and just label everything as having no historicity, then why not make up anything?

What is the point of asking a question if you don't believe we have anything better than guesses to go off? Clearly you don't think the scholars have this right, and that we supposedly can't know anything for sure about Jesus, so we are left (if we use your parameters) with no possible answer to your question. And I suspect you probably weren't looking for a real answer anyway.

So, if we are only guessing, I'm guessing Jesus yelled at kids and sent bears to eat them, and that he carried a sword. Being a good wizard after all. And really, that is one I wouldn't mind watching a movie about.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Yeah, none of them have published anything through academic venues. And that really is as good as it gets for the Jesus myth idea. What I find interesting though is that Price nor Carrier get to the extremes that the idea usually goes to. For instance, neither one denies that Nazareth existed during that time.

And as you say, even Wells backed off thanks to (if I recall) a rebuttel by J.D.G. Dunn. Price and Carrier may be extreme in their views, but in order to follow some of the theories out there one needs an almost complete lack of familiarity with both the primary and the secondary literature.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

So, if we are only guessing, I'm guessing Jesus yelled at kids and sent bears to eat them, and that he carried a sword. Being a good wizard after all. And really, that is one I wouldn't mind watching a movie about.

That depends. Are we talking Gandalf archetype wizard or Harry Potter as an adult? Because I'd watch the former, but the latter...only if there was really nothing else on and I was desperate.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

in that time leaving a poverty striken mother and children at home would be a death sentance for the whole family had a disciple walked away from it all. I find the whole notion ludicrious.

He wouldn't have been the first nor last cult leader to demand that sort of obedience from his followers.

 

[outhouse]

Clearly you don't think the scholars have this right,

I would have to say, some do. Im not alone in this and my view if anything does follow mainstream scholarships with a slice of zealotry thrown in.

My point was that if we assume it is all guesses, and just label everything as having no historicity, then why not make up anything?

Im not going to that extreme either.

im basing all of my judgement on the lack of information we have.

And I suspect you probably weren't looking for a real answer anyway.

false


ive been viewing early christianity as a very very small movement from a backwater hillbilly type who was close to the poverty level and surrounded himself with the worst kind of people avalible, tax collectors, prostitutes and other sinners and some fishermen, Who wanted in part to fight against roman occupation and corrupted jewish governement the only way he knew how, and start a new religion that wasnt infected with roman politics that got back to its pure roots, instead of a money making circus attraction the temple had become.

my only hitch was how did a small rebellious teacher/healer get the ball rolling with such a small following, even in pauls time this following was still relitively small.

So I wanted to try and find out as much about the population of followers as possibly while he was alive.

what ive found is there are only refferences to the inner 4 that are not more or less refferences and built up dogma straight from the OT that can be held with certainty as his core.

and I learned his following at pauls time was much smaller then I thought

 

[outhouse]

He wouldn't have been the first nor last cult leader to demand that sort of obedience from his followers.

remember, were talking about biblical dogma added to make jesus more priest like instead of more pirate like. [not that he was but] from what little we know of his followers they dont seem like family types anyway. tax collectors and prostitutes and other sinners and some fishermen. We dont have one later book or letter saying anything about a disciple having second thoughts of leaving his family to starvation.

if biblical dogma was added to jesus, it was added for his disciples as well. And we know this happened.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

We dont have one later book or letter saying anything about a disciple having second thoughts of leaving his family to starvation.

No but we have Judas. And Judas might have betrayed Jesus not for the money but because he had second thoughts about Jesus, And that seems to be the case. Jesus was a failed messiah and in all probability Judas wanted out. They left their families because Jesus promised Paradise but Paradise didn't come. We do have a record of this and more

 

[fallingblood]

That depends. Are we talking Gandalf archetype wizard or Harry Potter as an adult? Because I'd watch the former, but the latter...only if there was really nothing else on and I was desperate.

Gandalf for sure. He was actually who I was thinking of.

 

[fallingblood]

No but we have Judas. And Judas might have betrayed Jesus not for the money but because he had second thoughts about Jesus, And that seems to be the case. Jesus was a failed messiah and in all probability Judas wanted out. They left their families because Jesus promised Paradise but Paradise didn't come. We do have a record of this and more

There is another idea with Judas (if we existed. I know some scholars doubt if he existed or not), and that is that he was trying to force Jesus into bringing out the Kingdom of God. The idea is that Judas wouldn't have believed that Jesus was going to actually die, but that he would be forced to speed up his plans, and usher in the Kingdom of God right then.

 

[fallingblood]

I would have to say, some do. Im not alone in this and my view if anything does follow mainstream scholarships with a slice of zealotry thrown in.

What scholars? Because you seem to dismissed a bunch in this thread already, and they were in the mainstream. So do you have some scholars, possibly sources?

Im not going to that extreme either.

im basing all of my judgement on the lack of information we have.

You stated, and I quote, "jesus doesnt have that much historicity to begin with, to do anything but make guesses." You clearly stated that Jesus doesn't have much history, and we can't do anything but make guesses. Dozens of times now, you have written things as not having any historicity (and it seems that the common denominator here is that they are written in the Bible, which really is the source for Jesus), or written off other things as belonging to biblical Jesus.

So we have guesses, and your question is impossible to answer. If one can't use the Bible, then we have nothing.

false

Yet, when someone presented a position, you generally say it has no historicity. Not really a good way of achieving an answer. Neither is working with just a lack of information.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

There is another idea with Judas (if we existed. I know some scholars doubt if he existed or not), and that is that he was trying to force Jesus into bringing out the Kingdom of God. The idea is that Judas wouldn't have believed that Jesus was going to actually die, but that he would be forced to speed up his plans, and usher in the Kingdom of God right then.

There is also the theory that Judas just got disenchanted, figured Jesus wasn't the messiah and just wanted to go home. In one of the gospels Judas tells the guards "keep him safe" those are not the words of a greedy man

 

[outhouse]

No but we have Judas. And Judas might have betrayed Jesus not for the money but because he had second thoughts about Jesus, And that seems to be the case. Jesus was a failed messiah and in all probability Judas wanted out. They left their families because Jesus promised Paradise but Paradise didn't come. We do have a record of this and more

Ill take Sprongs approach to Judas


Judas Iscariot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The book The Sins of the Scripture, by John Shelby Spong, investigates the possibility that early Christians compiled the Judas story from three Old Testament Jewish betrayal stories. He writes, "...the act of betrayal by a member of the twelve disciples is not found in the earliest Christian writings. Judas is first placed into the Christian story by the Gospel of Mark (3:19), who wrote in the early years of the eighth decade of the Common Era." He points out that some of the Gospels, after the Crucifixion, refer to the number of Disciples as "Twelve", as if Judas were still among them. He compares the three conflicting descriptions of Judas's death - hanging, leaping into a pit, and disemboweling, with three Old Testament betrayals followed by similar suicides.
Spong's conclusion is that early Bible authors, after the First Jewish-Roman War, sought to distance themselves from Rome's enemies. They augmented the Gospels with a story of a disciple, personified in Judas as the Jewish state, who either betrayed or handed-over Jesus to his Roman crucifiers. Spong identifies this augmentation with the origin of modern Anti-Semitism.

 

[outhouse]

So we have guesses, and your question is impossible to answer. If one can't use the Bible, then we have nothing.

then we have nothing??

false.

we have history of the culture from archeology, and history of the culture tends to be more accurate in th ebible, then history of a man/god mythology.

in scripture they created a myth over a man according to scholars and historians.


Im stating jesus history is very grey at best, but some history can be pulled out. and what is pulled out is up for debate.

Yet, when someone presented a position, you generally say it has no historicity.

because I try and state its my opinion, not common knowledge. I also have no problem admitting were guessing at alot of this.

there is only so much known with certainty and that is very little, EXCUSE me for trying to investigate and try and find answers to gain more knowledge on the subject.

Not really a good way of achieving an answer

false again, we are dealing with opinions here, not facts.

. Neither is working with just a lack of information.

thast exactly what historians and scholarships are all about

adding information to their base

 

[outhouse]

They left their families because Jesus promised Paradise but Paradise didn't come

for me Cynthia

that would be biblical jesus, the preacher the author wants you to see.

I dont think he promised paradise at all.

my version is as such

if we just follow some of the gospels in a very vague light guessing for the truth. we dont see the biblican man. We see a man who walked and taught over 2000 years ago who was a poor man, and he was a working mans preacher, he was a preacher for everyday modern man. In my opinion its why he was so popular. He didnt require money his religion didnt need it. But he wasnt just a preacher, he didnt follow normal methods and he was healer a doctor for the times as well. He viewed the evil in his world and it was roman occupation and a corrupt jewish government, he traveled with nothing other then some of the most unsavory people he could find. Not exactly family type's. With a unothodox teaching style as this, I find it hard that he would pull people away from their families, UNLESS it ment "hey follow me leave your mom and dads house and come out and follow me" leaving your family doesnt mean forever and if he said it, he could have been talking about leaving their brothers and sisters. [not wife and kids ] were talking about poor people with nothing anyway like himself. People who had nothing to loose. You dont tell rich people to drop your "beggar bowl" you wont need it with me. Hell taking off with jesus was more like a job for some of these poor slobs.

again were talking about a 1 to 3 year time period he was a preacher. right there tells you how little we know about him. We dont even know how long he taught. im guessing a very short time.

I feel part of what he taught was to give up everything so you cant be taxed. On the road you were taxed by how many possessions you carried, there were poll taxes, temple taxes that at times were voluntary, property taxes, hell romans taxed anything and everything they were excellent at extorting money to th epoint of collapsing the economy. Everywhere you went tax colectors were everywhere and they were all thieves and hated by everyone due to their extorsion. If you didnt pay, they could take your land. its said jesus preached to all the tax collectors and made one his disciple and preached to one "Zacc" and talked him into giving his money back to the people.

there was a tax war around the time of his birth and a tax war after his death. jesus was questioned as to why he didnt pay taxes, and shortly after he throws the bank tellers money around in the temple, and he is accused of perverting the nation, not paying taxes and claiming to be king in which he claims is not of this world, shortly before his death.

im leaving some out, im just rambling on to long LOL