Vorkosigan

Steven, this was not the intention of the writer of GMark. Diogenes was dead on when he rebuked you earlier in the thread. Mark's Jesus is Adoptionist and is meant to represent, in allegorical form, the experience of the new believer in accepting Jesus and casting off his new identity.

But right or wrong here is not important. Having a meltdown and then spewing hacks on people who like and respect you is something that later you will regret. Speaking as an expert in such behavior with much experience of that signature stupidity.... Stop making the stupid comments about mythicists' character and motivation. It isn't making you friends or increasing your own self-respect. If you don't like the HJ/MJ debate, don't stick your nose in it.

I speak as someone who reads all your posts and admires the effort and insight you bring to the forum and to what you write. I always read them even though I do not have enough mastery of the topic to comment intelligently. Please stop attacking your friends and allies.

Vorkosigan

Diogenes the Cynic

The Temple authority at that time was appointed by the Romans, so there was much collusion. The populace despised the priests as collaborators at the time, and the Temple authority would have had no problem with helping to arrest and hand over troublemaker.

outhouse

jesus never paid his tax, he sent peter fishing, he surely didnt pull a coin out of his purse and pay, nor even out of a fishes mouth.


first if you learn the anthropology of the time you would know he was questioned about the poll tax, not the temple tax.

but remember this, jesus was a poor peasant who lived below poverty, he went from town to town preaching and healing for scaps of food.

he is said to have even told his followers to leave their beggar bowls behind.

he traveled with no money, and told his followers to ditch all their belongings. No property and no money, means no taxation. He's beating the romans at their own game.


against the jews, well of course. we are only left with a biased roman view


take into account the lack of more taxation in the gospels are due to the roman audiences it was written for not painting a villians picture, and this was all common knowledge back then to jews and romans.



he wasnt a man on the run, no one cared about a poor broke jew from a backwater village.



being a poor jew with no tax money to pay temple fee's and poll taxes, is one thing, but then to start preaching to tax collectors against roman taxation was a money issue

tipping the table in the temple was a money issue.

messing with roman money on payday would get you put on a cross without a trial or a blink of a eye. Pilate came into town to haul back his tax collections from the holiday event and to make sure with Caiaphas that it went off without a hitch.


spirituality didnt matter as much as money to poor desperate illiterate jews, and his fight against the corrupt roman infected temple and the non violent fight against over roman taxation was what made him popular.

NOT the roman version of what really happened

outhouse

with the emphasis that this was the biggest payday for the temple and romans for the year.

this was not a time to try and stop or slow this down. Had jesus started a riot, it would have cost romans dearly.

steve_bnk

That I did not know about Romans apointing temple priests. I'd assume Rome was also skimming the profits?

I know supporting temple worship with materials like animals for sacrifce was big bisiness. A documentary painted a pictiue of temple workers carrying in a sream of livestock and carrying out a stream of bloody caracses. Emphasis on bloody and bloodstained.

It adds to the image of a traditional Jewish prophet.

Diogenes the Cynic

The Gospels say he was caught at the bottom of the Mount of Olives, which is at least historically accurate as to where Pilgrims camped during festivals. The Mount of Olives is right across the Kidron Valley to the east (it was basically a slope "behind" the Temple relative to its orientation on the Temple Mount). This lower slope was basically a tent village during Passover. It would make sense that this is where they would go to look for a fugitive. I think it also makes sense that they might let him escape from the Temple courtyard on his own rather than trying to wade into a potentially hostile mob. Jesus was already supposedly someone known as a regular in the courtyard, so it probably would have been no big deal to wait until dark and go get him more quietly.

I think of it as being akin to a familiar street preacher, someone basically regarded as harmless, going to Mall of America every day and preaching at people passing by, then one day just going nuts, knocking over a couple of kiosks and sprinting out into the parking lot. Rather than bother chasing him, they just send somebody to the mission they know he stays at. Nowadays, somebody like that would get sent to a hospital for examination. Pilate had a much more truncated path to resolving such an individual's case.

smeat75

No, that was Plato.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantis

outhouse

jesus would have been invisible in the sea of people

self proclaimed messaihs and preachers would have numbered in the thousands



I agree with what Diog has posted except I toss between how much they would let someone mess with money in the temple and get away with it, and a escape due to crowds.


so little historicty that can be dug from this, I wish there was more.

steve_bnk

Point being myths have always been part of the cionversation.

steve_bnk

This all reinforces my view there was an HJ. Or that the name or persona of JC became a generic name for a character to which a number of anechdotal stories were attached and embellished.

Given the liklihod of many Jews pissed off at Rome and a general plausibility for some of the stories, the question would then ssem to be where the ressurection got injected into the story.

It was added, or an HJ really thought he was son of god on a mission.