aa5874

But tradition has not identified Jesus as a carpenter, since another asked if he was the carpenter's son.

Matthew 13.55Mark 6:3 -

maryhelena

Agreed!

maryhelena

I'm sorry if you did not find my attempt at a little humor appropriate....

My point with the humor bit really relates to the fact that, from a mythicist position, the gospel Jesus could have been attributed with any profession. That he was attributed with the profession of a carpenter - well then, lets looks to see what, from a symbolic perspective, being a carpenter could
have been used to signify. Elements within a symbolic/mythological story line usually having a bit more relevance than merely being window dressing or stage props.


Tradition - I don't go along with the traditional take on the gospel Jesus...
I'm squarely in the mythicist camp. However, that said, being in the mythicist camp does not rule out the very real possibility that there was a specific historical individual on whom the OT prophecies, regarding the messiah, have been put.

Jesus of Nazareth is a mythological creation - hence any search for a historical core to early Christianity is not, should not, be centered upon the gospel mythological figure. That there is not, cannot be, a historical Jesus i.e. a Jesus without his mythological clothes, does not negate the possibility that there was a specific historical individual that the gospel writers viewed as being important for their prophetic interpretations of the OT. To assume that such an individual would be in anyway some sort of a de-mythologized counterpart, an 'ordinary' reflection of the gospel Jesus - is to assume too much.

As I have said previously, put Jesus of Nazareth on the shelve - and re-consider the actual history of the date stamp in the gospels. Put the whole mythological story on one side - and re-look at the appropriate history without the mythological presupposition. In other words, don't cherry pick the gospel story line i.e. virgin birth = no way - miracles = no way = walking on water = no way - water into wine = no way - physical resurrection = no way - carpenter - yes..........

The more likely scenario for the beginnings of early Christianity is that it was an intellectual movement - of educated, well positioned individuals. The gospel story line of a poor carpenter preaching to the poor and downtrodden - brilliant marketing......

Solo

Hell, then it must be that the upper middle class theologian loafers who did their dirty work for the oppressor urban classes changed their mind about the need of having Jesus do also some honest work !

Jiri

aa5874

Well, now. If Jesus was the carpenter's son, he could have been a theologian loafer who did dirty work for the oppressors.

show_no_mercy

Heh. Does this mean that Jesus was a Sophist or Cynic (one who makes clever arguments)?

No Robots

Nope, still a Jew:

In Talmudic sayings the Aramaic noun denoting carpenter or craftsman (naggar) stands for a 'scholar' or 'learned man'.--Jesus the Jew: a historian's reading of the Gospels‎ by Géza Vermès, p. 21.

maryhelena

Nice.....

So instead of the Cedar logs from Lebanon used by carpenters for the re-building of Solomon's temple - the new spiritual temple is being built with 'logs' of intellectual fiber. Scholars and learned men - the usual background from which intellectual evolution springs...

And of course, the gospel passages do tie in the carpenter with the local Nazareth synagogue - and question where the carpenter's son got his wisdom from......

Great bit of work here on the part of the Christian mythologists.....

Solo

..your humour is fine, maryhelena. It's just that you have been derailing the debate. That happens here quite often, btw. Done it myself on occasion, I have to admit.

Which is fine, really ...it is just not relevant in a debate whether the mythicists can simply declare Jesus' connection to carpentry un-historical based on some absurd sociological non-sequitur.

...but he could not have been a country carpenter before the heavens were opened to him. Is that what you are saying ?

Unfortunately, there is nothing else at the moment.

In other words, there very well may have been a historical individual without his mythological clothes, who likely had a name, was born of a woman (without worry that this in the future might give rise to theological arguments), someone who lived some place(s) and died by either a natural cause, including an accident and/or encounters with carnivors, or by someone else's hand, if not his own.

So, one might want to look at this possibility fairly and squarely or one may have all sorts of commitments which preclude him or her from doing that. I am not easily fooled when people play headgames and say : not only is it not true that he walked on lake Gennesaret owing to certain laws of physics but he could not have been a country carpenter by trade because the first believers were city slickers and well-to-do, who had no reason to worship a genuine carpenter and therefore supplied a mythical one.

I am with you insofar as this implies that one could not reasonably claim to be able to distill (if that is the word) a historically accurate portrait of a human Jesus from the gospel stories or declare that this or that saying definitely originated with the historical man himself.

Maryhelena, if I knew how to apologize for looking stupid I would. I like to think though that the impression is false and you are setting up a straw man.

At any rate, you see me doing that.... :huh:

Hmmm......you forgot to mention the well-to-do Jesus seekers were to give away their money to the poor,... surely the smartest trick in the marketing scheme !

Jiri

No Robots

Geza Vermes is a Jew.