Steven Carr

Who was Jesus? The Son of God?

Grog

That is the underlying flaw in the standard explanation given, this time, by GDon, in circular attempts to reconcile these passages.

GDon: Heard all this before and I've rejected it. SC pinpoints the main reason for why this explanation does not work. Paul uses the distinction "rulers of this age" when speaking of the evil elements rather than just "rulers" as he does in Romans 13. In your explanation you have to postulate early Christians who within a generation marched from horror and devastating disappointment of the crucifixion of their "messiah" (said to be an impetus for exalting him to deity status) to not holding out blame for the Romans that they crucified Jesus. Indeed, the Gospel story where Jesus says "forgive them for they know not what they do" is a historicization of these early Christian beliefs articulated Paul. You allude to this event as if Paul could have somehow had in mind that Jesus actually articulated those words from the cross. That is a vulgar reading into Paul of the gospel story and the number one methodological mistake when reading Paul.

The author of gMark retells the story of Jesus crucified by the "rulers of this age" into a historical setting. That is all. It is fiction, piecing sources (not sources of an earthly Jesus!) together. Psalms, Antiquities, Daniel, are all fitted into the story to recast this story. Think of the Richard III movie with Ian McKellar or Ethan Hawke's Hamlet. Or even Jesus Christ Superstar where the Romans have Uzis and tanks at their disposal.

Diogenes the Cynic

Yes, Paul blames the Jews, but it would have been understood by his audience (and alluded to indirectly by Paul) that the Romans did the actual killing. The Jews didn't crucify people.

Diogenes the Cynic

According to Paul, Jesus was the first fruit sacrifice.

"Son of God" doesn't mean anything supernatural in Judaism.

Diogenes the Cynic

This is simply asserting a conclusion, not making an argument for one. Can you give an example of Paul using that phrase unambiguously to refer to supernatural forces?

Can you show anybody using the word archon to refer to demons before 70 CE? The ordinary meaning of that word to Paul's Hellenistic audiences would have just meant people holding public office.

Grog

Where did Paul get this idea? Did Jesus teach that he would be the "first fruit?" Was this human preacher on a suicide mission? Maybe so.

Interesting. So the completely human Jesus was crucified, declared to be the "first fruit" by the first Christians and coincidentally was called "son of god" (during his lifetime?) in an non-supernatural sense.

Don't you feel like you have to pile rationalization upon rationalization to maintain this house of cards?

Steven Carr

What part of 'the Jews, the Jews 15 who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets ' means somebody else killed Jesus and the prophets?

Steven Carr

So the Romans didn't recognise who Jesus was - an ordinary human being?

aa5874

You claim has been repeatedly shown to be UTTERLY erroneous. Every time you repeat your mis-leading claim I will EXPOSE IT. In Hebrew Scripture, it is claimed GOD had Sons.

It makes no sense to continue to make unsubstantiated claims when it is Documented in the O/T.

In the book of Job, it was claimed that GOD had Sons and that Satan was with them when they PRESENTED themselves to the Lord.
Job 1:6 KJVJob 2:1 KJV Jewish writers BELIEVED their GOD had Sons in the heavenly realm.

Sheshbazzar

It is impossible to make practical sense out of contrived theological horse-shit.