spamandham

Although many will, I don't find this at all implausible. Imagine the superstitious polytheists of Greece/Rome being handed this book and told it contains ancient wisdom. Would someone take that and run with it? I don't see why not - possibly even as an official attempt to undermine the more traditional messianic movement and prevent a 3rd major Jewish uprising.

aa5874

Up to or around 135 CE it would appear that Jews in general still expected a human only Messiah, even after the destruction of Temple at around 70 CE. In order for Simon Bar Cocheba to have been successful, and eventually believed to be the Messiah, he must have had or was likely to have had the support of virtually all Jews or at least the vast majority of Jews.

The God/man Messiah is anti-Jewish, the anti-Christ of the Jews.

In gMatthew 5-7, the anti-Christ, the God/man Messiah, would teach the Jews to abandon the teaching of the Jewish Messiah. or Jewish Laws.

Examine Exodus.
Exodus 21.23-25 This is the God/man Messiah, the anti-Christ of the Jews


Matthew 5.38-45
And now the words of Judas Maccabeus a messianic figure as found in Antiquities of the Jews 12 It is clear that Jesus was the anti-Christ of the Jews, perhaps only non-Jews would believe Jesus the Messiah was God.

ApostateAbe

That is a very early argument against Christianity that Christians violently struggled with--if the Old Testament is correct, they are supposed to believe in one God only, so how can Jesus be God? And it was one of many reasons for Jews to disbelieve the claims of Jesus as the Messiah. That is probably why the religion spread much more among the gentiles than the Jews and why the Apostle Paul became the torchbearer of Christianity instead of the Apostle Peter.

aa5874

There is no evidence that the Pauline writers were torch-bearers of Christianity. Justin Martyr did not use the Pauline writings anywhere at all in his defense of Christianity up to the middle of the 2nd century. Theophilus of Antioch and Athenagoras did not appear to know anything about Pauline letters.

It is also erroneous to think that all christians believed in the identical God/man Jesus as found in the NT. It would appear that by the 2nd century the God/man Christ concept was out-numbered maybe more than 15 to 1.

This is a partial list of other Christian sects.
Valentinus, Ptolemy, Colorbasus, Marcus, Simon Magus, Menander, Saturninus, Basilides, Carpocrates, Cerinthus, Ebionites, Nicolaitanes, Cerdo, Marcion, Tatian, the Encratites and the Barbeliotes

Anat

Many centuries later Maimonides said that the only difference between his times and Messianic times is whether the Jews are in a state of subordination to foreign nations. Others expected a more significant change.

ApostateAbe

I think you are right in a respect. The line of Christian thinking we know today did not seem to appreciate Paul until late in the game. Marcion made him the central apostle. He adopted revisions of the Pauline letters into his canon. I suppose Paul was popular among the gnostics. I overstated when I said that Paul became the torchbearer of Christianity. He certainly didn't become so immediately.

IamJoseph

This belief predated Christianity, and seen with Hellenism [Mitrash], and Roman, Egyptian divine emperors. It is a factually evidenced premise which makes the Christian doctine non-original.

There is no scenario possible to vindicate this premise. It contradicts Monotheism and the first two Commandments. To extend, even God could not effect such a premise - based on the factor of God is and represents indevisable truth.

Clearly, there was a good reason the Hebrew scriptures assured a Messiah would be a plain, normal human in every sense of the world. There is no merit in a spiritual force performing miracles or resurrecting himself - there is when this refers to humanity. Moses was a Messiah of his time - and remains the most believed human - by period of time, cencus and impact. And he was just a man.

show_no_mercy

All one has to do is read the context of Matthew's "prophecies" about Jesus or even Paul's exegesis of the LXX to realize that this quote-mining and reinterpretation happened. Even Philo reinterpreted the LXX to get his Logos concept, so it wasn't even restricted to non-Jews.

bacht

Thanks Spam. I'm skeptical about conspiracy theories as I think you are also, but your scenario seems at least as plausible as the Jewish origin paradigm. The Pliny evidence suggests some kind of Christian activity before bar-Kochba but who knows if this included Jews, it could have been god-fearers or just converted pagans.

Deus Ex

This is the book that I am currently reading that might be of interest to some here:

The Only True God: Early Christian Monotheism in Its Jewish Context (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Review
"This work puts forward a compelling thesis, questioning the default assumption that what separated first-century Jews and Christians was the Christian elevation of Jesus of Nazareth to divine status as equal with YHWH. McGrath shows decisively that this was not so, arguing with clarity and force and engaging the relevant bodies of primary and secondary literature with precision. A significant and useful book." Paul J. Griffiths, author of Lying: An Augustinian Theology of Duplicity (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Product Description
Monotheism, the idea that there is only one true God, is a powerful religious concept that was shaped by competing ideas and the problems they raised. Surveying New Testament writings and Jewish sources from before and after the rise of Christianity, James F. McGrath argues that even the most developed Christologies in the New Testament fit within the context of first century Jewish "monotheism." In doing so, he pinpoints more precisely when the parting of ways took place over the issue of God's oneness, and he explores philosophical ideas such as "creation out of nothing," which caused Jews and Christians to develop differing concepts and definitions about God.