angelo

Paul's writings were the first to appear, and he seems to know very little of the crucifixion. What he says fills just one line. 'Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures.'' That is all Paul seems to know. The words ''in accordance with the scriptures'' alludes to the old testament passages that have nothing to do with Jesus, but are words from their ancient prophets to there own time, but people like Paul were searching their scriptures for an understanding of this son of God who was crucified aproxx. 30 years before he put pen to paper. The N/T was given birth by the O/T.

Amaleq13

Or he cares about very little about the event except that Christ was crucified.

The idea of the messiah being crucified does not come from Hebrew Scripture but is imposed upon the text by Christians who already believe Christ was crucified.

This particular aspect of the story does not appear to be derived from Hebrew Scripture.

spin

While I ostensibly agree with this last statement, was the crucifixion imposed by christians? How can we know? Dying gods getting ripped apart or suffering other ignominious deaths is not confined to christianity. Isn't it a trope of other mystery religions as well? Messianic speculation in the context of a diaspora world with mystery religions could lead to a amalgamation of the suffering servant with the dying god. That would be pre-christian wouldn't it?


spin

Roger Pearse

The same issue causes Marcion to claim that the crucification was all an illusion, and Tertullian to twit him for it in De carne Christi 5.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

spin

Ummm, it's about weight of sacrifice, isn't it?? The suffering servant was, after all, badly mistreated. Christians didn't originally go round advocating that their god got crucified in the streets. Look at all the stuff the apologists wrote. They were cagey about their faith. Remember you don't get to know about OP7 (it even got up to 9!) when you start on the E-meter. (But you might eventually get to learn about looney tunes such as Xenu if you keep on.)


spin

Cege

Paul's writings refer to the crucifixion by mention of the "cross" several times, as in 1 Cor 1:
17For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

18For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

It's impossible to know from Paul's epistles how much detail he knew about Jesus' crucifixion on a cross, but it's apparent that he believed that Jesus died on a cross and the act was a message from God.

aa5874

It must first be established that Jesus was crucified before it can be determined if the Hebrew Scriptures were imposed on the crucifixion.

The KJV Bibles, that I have, all cross reference events of the crucifixion to Hebrew Scriptures even statements purported to be made by Pilate and the last words of Jesus.

According to the KJV, with respect to Matthew's version of the crucifixion, the following verses are cross-referenced:

Matthew 27.24---Psalms 26.6
27.26---Isaiah 50.6
27.35---Psalms 22.18
27.39---Psalms 109.25
27.43---Psalms 22.8
27.46---Psalms 22.1
27.48---Psalms 69.21
27.57---Psalms 53.9

Now, if the Hebrew scriptures were available before the crucifixion story, then it is premature to suggest imposition when fabrication of the crucifixion is another option, the very issue before us.
Can it be established that Jesus was crucified under Pilate?

Amaleq13

I was referring to impositions upon Hebrew Scripture. The passage(s) which are claimed by Christians to be prophetic predictions of the crucifixion of the messiah (ie "pierced").

IIRC, you agree that those interpretations are clearly forced.

angelo

It is a fact, that Paul says nothing at all about the ''historical'' Jesus! He is concerned only with the crucified and resurrected Christ, whose importance is entirely mystical. It's also possible that his later letters [The Pastoral's] are forgeries because they contradict his earlier letters and were written to combact divisions in the church.

spin

I was putting forward a slightly different issue. You imply that those who (initially) put the crucifixion interpretation on the texts under consideration were christian. I don't know if one can support that. Could Jewish messianists not have done the imposing?


spin