Chili

That is Christ and not Jesus. Jesus had a beard, remember? and only after they crucified him with a shave he buggered off and we know nothing about him. So this is Christ.

Sheshbazzar

Sharp observation Chili.

"I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting."

mountainman

The question relates to history - where did Big J. get his majesty?




I seek to understand in the historical sense how the idea of Jesus was associated with the majesty of the Roman state.

mountainman

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.

mountainman

I am seeking names and dates please aa5874.

I have these for the Loch Ness Monster thanks to Philosopher Jay's past research.

Who first gave Jesus the official majesty of state?

sotto voce

'To us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called wonderful counsellor, mighty God, everlasting father, prince of peace.' Isa 9:6

mountainman

The LXX was an option listed in the opening post.

So you appear to think that the origin of the majesty of Jesus was the LXX.

By what process was this majesty transferred to the Roman State?

sotto voce

It was funny the first time.

By a process common wherever the Roman State spread its baneful, bloody aegis. The kings of many peoples, all over Europe, learned the truth of the adage, "Si non cecidit, iunge."

or,

"If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

But for once, it was the Roman State that encountered a force greater than itself: that megashite Galilean, who drags us all here. The mountain would not move to Mahomet, so Mahomet had to get off his butt and go to the mountain. It injured his pride, yes; but nothing more. But I'm sure we know this already.

And as we know, the Roman State had already arrogated to itself, by force of corruption, the imagined majesty of deity, so it was not a question of transfer of majesty itself. It was a question of changing the name of the deity while making very sure that no majesty whatever adhered to the Galilean and his frightening following. A matter of cosmetics, then, along with the usual spying and entryism. Obviously, a new set of temples was required, which, while adding to the running costs of the government, at least kept some of the plebs occupied.

As we know, of course. So the Hebrew Isaiah wrote 'a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders', but by the time of Theodosius, the son had fully been relieved of government; and Latins had done the relieving. And indeed Mahomet took an Arabic leaf out of their book, a few centuries later.

mountainman

The process also included the imperial legislation that "Religious privileges are reserved for Chrestians/Christians".

Only when the legislations and actions and majesty of a Roman Emperor was thrown behind the Jesus Figure did the Jesus Figure hit the Top Forty Divinity Charts of antiquity. Before the 4th century the majesty of the Jesus Figure was not recorded by even one figurine. Go figure sv.

sotto voce

You are surely not posting this in the belief that it meant what it said?

:constern02:


Figure, eh.


:wave: