Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Survive? because of the 400,000 possible witnesses of his death at Passover
Thrive? it didn't for a few hundred years. It slowly grew.
You would have been better off not using that as an argument, LOL. Most Christians do not read the Bible. Many do not know Jesus was Jewish. Many think he was born on Dec. 25th. with three wise dudes who brought him gifts. Alot of them think his last name was Christ. I could go on if you want, LOL.
I don't think you read what I said correctly. I was stating how I was talking about how scholars in the field do not create very diverse views of Jesus. While there are specifics that are different, the core is generally the same. This is because these scholars use each other.
I never said there weren't a variety of portraits. What I stated was that they were not completely different. A basic framework is primarily used. The specific details are the ones that are debated.
Fair actually does have to do with it. Yes, we have a limited amount of evidence; however, when you take outsiders, as in those who actually aren't in the field, then yes, you can get very divergent ideas. You can't judge the field though by those who are not in it. It simply is not logical. It would be like reading a biography of Harry Houdini who never actually studied his life. You can get a very different view; however, you can not really use that to judge the actual field.
Actually yes . There is only one disciple who was said to wield a sword in the garden when Jesus was arrested.
Bandits, thieves, it doesn't really matter. It still doesn't translate to rebels.
I thought you said Mark? More so, it doesn't state that the event just happened. The NLT is hardly a good translation, other translations put it more closely with the Greek, in which basically states that there were some present who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood had been mixed in with their sacrifice by Pilate. What the text actually tells us is that Jesus is just being told something. No timeframe is given.
It wasn't out of context. I quoted your entire statement on the point. You stated that early Christians were known for wanting to die for their faith. You stated this right after asking if Jesus committed suicide. Thus, your argument is that since Christians were known for wanting to die for their faith, that is a probability for Jesus. However, that simply can't be valid as Jesus was not a Christian. Your point is moot.
Where does Borg say that? And what other scholars? I am not convinced, as I have read Borg, I graduated from the school he went to (and took classes by teachers who taught him), and I have never seen this.
The Gospel of Judas? Are you really saying that is credible? Even though it is far removed from the actual events, and scholars consider it to be non-credible, you want to accept it at face value? And basically, by doing so you have to reject earlier sources based on nothing more than a bias.
The Kingdom of God certainly existed before John. And John may have taught Jesus a tradition that was passed onto him by someone else. But that does not mean that the Jesus movement, or Christianity, began at that time. Religions and traditions borrow from older ideas. However, that does not mean that those new ideas also existed at an older time.
What about Josephus? Josephus in fact mentions John.
Scholars now largely reject the idea of a split between Hellenistic Judaism and Israelite Judaism (usually stated as Palestinian Judaism). It is accepted that Palestine also experienced Hellenism. Even the Essenes, via the Dead Sea Scrolls, show some influence of Hellenism. The term Israelite Jew is also really redundant and makes little sense.
Not really. There may have possibly been 400,000 in Jerusalem, but how many actually would have gone out of the city, and watch Jesus be crucified? Not many. Those who would have seen him would have been those entering the city, and most would have been in Jerusalem for quite some time.Survive? because of the 400,000 possible witnesses of his death at Passover
What is traditional Judaism? You make it sound as if there was one standard Judaism and everything else was some how else not authentic. But that simply is not true. More so, as I have explained, and as we can see clearly through the use of Greek, Hellenism also influenced Jews born and raised in "Israel" (I'm not fully sure about this statement as well. Israel had already been conquered. Palestine may be a better geographic location to use; however, the Judaism there was quite diverse. More so, even in Jerusalem we seen many signs of Hellenism. In Galilee itself there were Hellenized cities. So I am not sure what you mean by Israel, because it no longer existed).
How do you get that? Most scholars accept that Paul, Matthew, and John (many also accept Mark) were Jews. And how would they benefit from distancing themselves from Judaism? Later Christian writers tried quite hard to show that Christianity in fact originated from Judaism, as many were suspicious of new religions. Having an older religion, one that had a long tradition, was seen being more prestigious and trusted.
Judaism was never wiped out. Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed; however, by all accounts, Christians (or those who would later be labeled as such) were on the side of the Jews. This is because they saw themselves as Jews (or at least many did). Again, Judaism was never wiped out.
There was only one demonstration. Also, most would not have even known that Jesus was killed. There were after all, as you claim, some 400,000 people there. They would not be focused on a man who made some disturbance in the Temple, as that was not too uncommon, but would have been focused on the actual celebration.
They placed them outside the city. Now, considering that this was more in the middle of the event, how many would have been entering or exiting the city? Not many at all, as they would be celebrating. If it was actually on the Passover, or during a time of preparation, the amount of people who would take time out of celebrating and participating in the event would have been extremely few.
How do you figure? Jesus was not the first to cause a disturbance during this time. More so, Jesus was not arrested publicly. He was arrested in secret. Most would not have known about this.
Have you read the letters of Paul? Each church he addresses (besides Rome) were churches he established. Meaning, he did spread the message. Seeing that many scholars also accept that he went to Arabia and spread the message as well (on what most consider a failed missionary trip), he would have spread quite a bit.
Yes, there were many teachers; however, we have no idea which of them wrote or not. We know later individuals also wrote letters, and that people also wrote in the name of Paul. This means that in fact, other teachers were also writing letters.
How can you say this? The fact that Paul's letters were preserved shows us that he was deemed important. They didn't preserve authors that really weren't seen as important, as it was expensive and time consuming.
What does this mean? How can something grow in Hellenism?
I won't address the problem of Hellenistic and traditional Judaism again, as I already did above. Jesus was not originally remembered as just a martyr though. Our earliest sources remember him as a miracle worker. The Gospels record that he did miracles, and they are our earliest sources on Jesus. To say that he was not remembered as such simply is not accurate.
So? We can say that with many leaders who were killed. However, that does not mean they are only remembered for being killed.
What Pauline overwriting? Most of the Gospel writers seem unaware that Paul existed. Luke does accept that Paul existed; however, he also disagrees and contradicts Paul. Luke also doesn't even really refer to Paul as an apostle, which is something Paul himself really fought for.
Can you point out some examples?
The Jesus story survived as his followers were dedicated and thought they seen the resurrected Jesus.
The most popular metaphor in the four Canonical Gospels is the use of the word bread. Many scholars think the Gospel of Mark was written first of the four Gospels. In Mark chapter six Jesus feeds five thousand people with five loaves of bread and two fish. Five plus two equals seven. The number seven is significant because it is the symbol for completeness. After the five thousand ate and were satisfied, the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces of bread and fish. The number twelve is also significant. The number twelve is also symbolic of completeness. The broken pieces of bread and fish are significant too. I’ll get to that later. In chapter eight of the Gospel of Mark, Jesus feeds another hungry crowd. Shortly after the feeding Jesus tells his disciples, “Be careful. Watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees and that of Herod.” This yeast is most definitely a metaphor. Yeast will puff something up but does not give it anymore substance. The Pharisees were hypocrites. What the Pharisees was doing was to appear to look larger or more important than what they actually were. The disciples did not understood the significance of the left over twelve baskets of pieces from the first feeding nor the seven left over five baskets from the second feeding. The story then ends with Jesus saying, “Do you still not understand?” This feeding was not literal food. This feeding was the word of God. It is only the word of God that can satisfy someone’s spiritual hunger. This type of food is complete. Where does this bread metaphor come from? We cannot look for answer in the Gospels of Mathew, Luke or John. They were not written yet. We must look farther back. The answer lies in the exodus of the ancient Jews. For forty years the Jews wondered in the desert. What did they eat for all those years? The answer is found in Exodus chapter sixteen. Each day bread fell from Heaven. Each day the Jews had more than what they can eat. Just like Jesus did. This bread was the word of God. What sustained them all those years was there faith in God.
If he literally turned water into wine, he must have been a party animal
Jesus going into Jerusalem is Pauline.
Hi..... I don't think that there is a consensus about the above. The 'stripped' synoptic gospels might just show 11 months in the life of a carpenter handyman living in Capernaum, who possibly made (stuff like) fishing and flax processing equipment etc and traveled around the lake area in his work... who was very interested in healing, herbal pharmacy, etc and was a very good teacher and social guide. He became famous for his healing and teaching, such fame soaring in oral tradition after his death, and people like Paul 'clicked' on how to turn round the whole 'problem' for the Jewish aristocracy by escalating the whole story into an amazing manipulator and controller for the masses.
I don't think the Kingdom is a future Kingdom. It was right there and then, at that time. The Jews were lead by, ruled by, provided for by.... God. Theirs was a lone theocracy. They were the children of God. Every man was a son of God. They lived within the Kingdom of God.