Vorkosigan

The answer is contained in the first half:

“From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh; even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer” (2 Cor. 5:16).

Clearly "according to the flesh" does not refer to "being alive on earth" as you are wont to claim, since the first half of 2 Cor 5:16 can't possibly mean that everyone on earth is no longer to be regarded as alive on earth. Rather, it clearly means that "according to the flesh" has some meaning for Paul that is figurative rather than what you call literal. Perhaps if you read Galatians 4:23 further light could be shed on what Paul means by "according to the flesh".

The idea of christ being obedient to the death could refer to life on earth or to the cosmic drama that Doherty-style mythicism argues for. Nothing probative about it either way.

Vorkosigan

Toto

Obedience unto death sounds like holiness. It doesn't sound like the sort of personal quality that would lead followers to assume that a person was either the Messiah or that he was resurrected.

The "theme" appears to be based on the suffering servant of Isaiah.

Your argument here seems to be that this was a consistent theme running through early Christianity. How does that make it historical?

GakuseiDon

So in your view what did Paul mean in saying "even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer", after telling us that Christ was from the Israelites according to the flesh, was of the seed of David according to the flesh, and so on?

Toto is asking about Jesus' life before resurrection, and why they considered someone worthy of resurrection. Paul is clear: obedience unto death. Agreed on it not impacting on HJ/MJ debates directly. It's just a common theme that runs through early Christianity. Justin Martyr suggests that the Jews were expecting such a Christ.

GakuseiDon

You are obsessed with the historical Jesus! It doesn't. It just shows a common theme running through early Christianity about Jesus' life before crucifixion, from Paul onwards. Jesus was "obedient unto death". To repeat your words above, "Jesus must have done something or been something before his death to create this impression."

aa5874

It NOT true at all that "the sense of Jesus earning his "Son of God" status by suffering, obedience "unto death" and being somehow perfected because of that, is a common theme that runs through early Christianity".

If the Synoptics Gospels are considered early then we see that Jesus is RECOGNIZED as the Son of God at the very START of his ministry.

Mark 3:11 -
Mark 5:7 - There is ZERO common theme that Jesus EARNED his Son of God status.

In ALL the Synoptics Jesus was ALREADY publicly recognised as the Son of God before he suffered.

mountainman

The most consistent theme running through early Christianity is forgery.

aa5874

Yeah!!!! You are so right.

"Early Christianity" itself is a product of FRAUD, FICTION and FORGERY.

We don't know who wrote what, when, where and why.

And Jesus Christ was a REAL GHOST but his disciples saw him.

Toto

First you deny that this has to do with the historical Jesus, then you claim that it is evidence of the historical Jesus because Jesus must have done something in historical time and space to create that tradition. . . . except that the tradition came from the Hebrew Scriptures, so why did Jesus have to have done anything to create that impression?

This whole discussion is a waste of effort.

mountainman

Can the Historical Jesus be exorcised in the name of a mythicist heretic ?

At least one author thinks Jesus may have been exorcised himself.
Why Did The Spirit Exorcise Jesus? Studies in Mark

GakuseiDon

I'm not sure that I've ever said that it is evidence of a historical Jesus. But it is evidence about a pre-crucified Jesus, which is what I thought the discussion was about. Regardless of whether Jesus was MJ or HJ, "obedience unto death" is a common theme running through the writings which describes what Jesus was about before death.