Elijah

I don't know if he would have a hard time with that prediction if he is establishing himself as the Messiah and an anti-authority meme. When trying to start an ideological revolution it should be expected. If he was a morality teacher killed and made into a messiah claimant later then the unlikeliness of the statement originating from him can be argued but if he was an actual messiah claimant he shouldn't have any problems with that kind of speculation. He would actually need reasoning for why his followers shouldn't expect the same flack for following him as he was expecting or already getting from the authority.

ApostateAbe

I think you are right about that. The Jewish anticipation of the Messiah, grounded in scriptural prophecy, was that he would be a conquering military hero. You can imagine that such an attitude would gain popularity in a time of oppressive foreign imperial rule. I don't find much evidence in the synoptic gospels that Jesus ever claimed that he himself was the messiah. That is perhaps for good reason. If he did, that would be seen as laughable, because he had no military force as the prophecies predicted. He always talked about the "Son of Man" in third person, who comes leading angels from the heavens in power and glory, never using a first-person pronoun.

Elijah

Mark 10:43 “But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

Should I really interpret the person serving and giving his life as ransom for many as someone other than Jesus in the story? What about Mark 14:21? Is someone else’s betrayal being referred to other than his own there?

I’m not sure what type of figure you feel is being presented in the gospels but if he’s asking his followers to follow him and be willing to sacrifice your life he should expect the same trouble down the road for his followers that he was expecting or receiving himself and from whom.

You are correct that he would have probably been laughed at because of what they were expecting in a physical leader and what he was trying to give him in a spiritual leader.

ApostateAbe

You make another good point. Mark 10:45 and Mark 14:21 both strike me as interpolations, not because Jesus identifies himself as "the Son of Man," but because he seems to be speaking of future events, events that he would not be expected to anticipate (the betrayal and his "sacrifice"). I suppose it is possible that Jesus had that kind of foresight, but it just isn't as likely as later Christians putting the words in his mouth. If that is what they did, then those examples of Jesus making himself to be "the Son of Man" must be likewise doubted, as later Christians surely did think of Jesus as "the Son of Man." Maybe that is only an ad hoc explanation, though.

Elijah

Is there any actual evidence of those passages being interpolations? The predictions themselves individually are nothing impressive. If he is doing suicide by authority then his death isn’t a prediction at all but an inevitable outcome from going against the authority. Betrayal and death are those predictable predictions that anyone can make like famines and earthquakes or these buildings will eventually fall, while the ability to spot the ratfinks just comes from paying attention to those around you.

Now it could totally be something added to the texts later but it’s easier for me to imagine it being added to the individual to make him seem more messiah-like before the first draft. The prophecy about the temple being added later has some merit because those prophecies are about events in the future of the story but these events happen within so there should be no need for it to be added in later.

If you don’t think the story is trying to present a messiah figure what/who do you think the writers are trying to present?

ApostateAbe

I think Jesus might have been able to predict his execution at the hands of Pontius Pilate, if he wanted to do it, and I very much doubt he wanted to be crucified. Even more unlikely is the prediction that he would be seen as a sacrificial offering for sin. And most unlikely would be the anticipation of his betrayal. It would require that Jesus coordinated his own so-called betrayal. It is possible, yes, but it is so much more likely that those words were written or spoken by someone else, not Jesus himself. I don't have any evidence beyond that, and I don't know what critical scholars generally think. The story is trying to present a messiah figure, but I don't think Jesus intended himself to be seen as the messiah. Unless he was speaking about himself in third person and he was taking that unlikely step of declaring himself the messiah without any kind of force or evidence to back it up, he was making a prophecy about another man or man-god.

aa5874

But, Jesus secretly acknowledged he was the son of God and also claimed he would be dead for only three days and three nights which is far more laughable that calling himself the Messiah.

This is laughable.

Matthew 16.15-17Mt 12:40 - According to the NT, Jesus had thousands of followers, some appeared to have been armed with swords, as was described during his arrest where someone's ear was chopped off. Jesus claiming to be a Messiah would not be laughable.

In Josephus, John the Baptist with his numerous followers was taken seriously. John the Baptist was executed. The Egyptian who had thousands with him was taken seriousy, many were killed and the Egyptian fled.

Elijah

Well the story presents him as giving his life up, he may not have been thrilled with that task falling to him but it was still part of a willful plan. Now human nature may go against that but I don’t know what other evidence you would offer that it was something that happened against his will.

It’s not a sacrificial offering to a bloodthirsty genie. He sacrificed his life to start a vine for those that believed in him would be resurrected on the day of resurrection. Knowing that the wages of sin are death his salvation comes from the promise of eternal life later. This is part of plan being put forward to promote a particular figure as the messiah. Everyone who believes in him as the messiah gets eternal life is an awesome promotional campaign.

I don’t think it requires a coordinated effort to be betrayed. A rebel leader being betrayed seems inevitable and again knowing who the traitor in your immediate group just requires being able to read body language which most people are capable of.

So the sole reason you don’t think that Jesus was referring to himself as the messiah to come is the third person?

A few reasons I would consider before he was talking about someone… just based on the story presented.

1. He just talked about himself in the third person like a pro athlete would.
2. He is referencing prophecy and making sure the people know.
3. The old “gospels were spoken aloud” so saying “I” personalized it to the speaker so a title was used sometimes to not seem so blasphemous.

For your theory, did the followers not understand he was talking about someone else or after a long time of no other person showing up they figured he must have been talking about himself?

ApostateAbe

All of those things are possibilities. But they seem to be somewhat unlikely possibilities. I always try to favor the greatest possibilities, and that means accepting the likelihood that Christians inserted those things into his mouth post-death, because the Christians had an apparent interest and Jesus didn't.

So the sole reason you don’t think that Jesus was referring to himself as the messiah to come is the third person?

No, that is not the sole reason. There is also the reason that it would come off as an absurdity for Jesus to say such a thing.

For your theory, did the followers not understand he was talking about someone else or after a long time of no other person showing up they figured he must have been talking about himself?

They transferred that identity to Jesus himself, probably not long after the start of the myth of the resurrection, merely because they were cult followers of Jesus and not the unidentified Son of Man. They are still waiting for Jesus to come from the Kingdom of Heaven on the clouds in glory, so that wouldn't be a problem.

Elijah

I’m a big fan of going with the greatest probability as well but nothing I’ve mentioned seems improbable. I guy with a messiah complex that uses his own death to spread his message seems more likely than a non messiah figure being turned into one. Especially a figure that did nothing that was expected of the messiah. It would be one thing if his legend turned him from a regular guy into the messiah if he seemed to fulfill that role but he didn’t. So what seems more likely to you; that a person who thought he was the messiah was able to convince people he was so with a dramatic death or some people decided to just make him out to be the messiah even though he didn’t want that, nor did he do anything to deserve the title?

No, that is not the sole reason. There is also the reason that it would come off as an absurdity for Jesus to say such a thing.

Maybe that would be the fourth option for third person. It shows humility and keeps him out of trouble with the public to do it in third person.

So is the son of man to Jesus like the Helper in John? What type of figure was Jesus without the Messiah aspect to you, just a prophet or morality teacher? I guess he had to be a teacher of some type to have followers.