Tortie Cat

James would have addressed the Messiah in a Jewish context. Namely that the Almighty had used his powers to bring Jesus back from the dead or possibly that (like Elijah) Jesus had never really died at all but the Almighty had tricked everyone into believing him dead.

We cannot regard Acts as being a faithfully rendered account of the events. Remember that Acts was written by the author of Luke who accepted Paul's view of things. Indeed Acts can be read rather like an early sort of novella with Paul as the hero of the tale!

The Gentile converts were not those men who had followed Jesus from Galilee. It was these Galileans who were his disciples.

TC

Amaleq13

Thanks for the clarification. What do you think the Galilean Disciples of the living Jesus believed about him (before and after the crucifixion if you think the beliefs changed)?

Tortie Cat

The beliefs changed because Paul hijacked them. Christianity did not exist until Paul came along. It was Paul who through his “revelation” saw and spoke with the semi-divine Christ (rather like Mohammed and his visions). Following the First Jewish War, the complete destruction of Jerusalem, and those original disciples of Jesus the only accounts of the early days left are those of Paul. Prior to 66 CE the Pauline Christian movement had been struggling to survive against the strong disapproval of the Jesus Movement (i.e. the Messianic sect set up by his disciples). With all trace of that movement obliterated the Pauline Church was now free to set about expanding its soteriological view of Jesus. The God-fearers within the Jerusalem Church would presumably have taken the same view of Jesus as did his brother and other disciples. Namely that he was not a divinity but a man touched by divinity.

However, Paul’s views (written either by him or taken by his followers and spread around the Hellenistic world) were more readily acceptable to Gentiles. At this period there were dozens and dozens of religions and mystery sects around in the Hellenised world. The conflation by Paul of the gravitas of Judaism with its strict laws and ethical code and the belief in a Saviour God who dies and is reborn would no doubt have been extremely popular with Hellenised people. Nor would they have had any problem with the idea of a God in human form (or a God impregnating a mortal) since the Ancient world was littered with such characters and events!



TC

Amaleq13

Torie Cat,


Thanks for the clarification.


What, then, do you make of Mark's portrayal of the "pillars" (i.e. Cephas, James, John) as original Disciples who failed to understand the living Jesus?

Doctor X

[Engage Pain in Ass Mode--Ed.]

Hamlet. However, you do properly quote it; most start with "Methinks."

[Disengage Pain in Ass Mode Engage Syncophantic Mode--Ed.]

Great post.

--J.D.

CX

Spin and Answerer, please refrain from rhetorical one liners. Simple silence will suffice and help the signal-to-noise ratio considerably.

Thanks,

CX - BC&H moderator