Your POV on the historical Jesus

[nPeace]

Here's the point you don't seem to grasp.
There's no objective evidence that the Christ described in the Gospels existed. Even evidence I would fully expect, were the Gospels accurate, such as an uprising of the people who knew that Jesus had preached, been publicly executed, and then reappeared a week later. According to gospels, there were thousands of such people. I would expect effects of that stupendous event to at least be noticed, especially before the Ascension. Certainly just after.

But no.
Nobody noticed anything until St Paul created new religion, based primarily on turning the meaning of Messiah completely upside down.
Tom

Am I wrong in saying that these are you claims and opinions... which you said yourself, they are your claims?

 

[columbus]

Am I wrong in saying that these are you claims and opinions... which you said yourself, they are your claims?

That's not very clear.
What are you asking me?
Tom

 

[nPeace]

That's not very clear.
What are you asking me?
Tom

You started your post here, with... Here's the claim I am making.
Then you proceeded to make claims, while giving your opinion, on what you think.
Isn't that what occurred?

Take your very first claim, for example... Nobody but gospel authors ever made a claim that Jesus existed with any credibility.
That is a claim, and is apparently your opinion, because it is not true.

Josephus' writings are considered credible, and he spoke of Jesus as a real person.
Flavius JosephusTHE ANTIQUITIES OF THE JEWS : L.20, C.9
Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned

So, from the very start, you demonstrated that you are indeed making claims, and voicing your opinion, which are not true to the facts.

 

[pearl]

The idea that "low christology" preceded high christology is no longer held by the majority of scholars.

I did not include Paul as I was referring to the Gospels only. Yes it is evident that a descending Christology is present in Paul.

So, descending incarnational christology was there from the beginning of the Jesus movement - just not seemingly from Jesus himself but rather a belief that emerged amongst his earliest circle of followers.

My only point is that it is critical to acknowledge the Christological movement within the NT as opposed to a fundamentalist or literalist interpretation for the life of faith today.