aa5874

Come on Toto!!! Tell us of the INTERVENTION of Pagan Gods??? You ought to know that the Greeks and Romans worshiped Myth Gods that were INCAPABLE of intervention.

Greeks and Romans were incapable of effectively arguing against the resurrection of Jesus when they also believe in a resurrection of the dead.

Examine First Apology It is TODAY, the 21 st century, that the Jesus story will be demolished.

Toto

If - but we have no indication from non-Christian sources of these miracles and prophecies.

,

We do have evidence of Christian support for orphans and the sick, from several centuries later. But this has little or no connection to events of the first century.

The subject of this thread - that there was a crucified man who was regarded as a messiah.

It's a story based on the gospels. The question is whether it is credible, or more likely than an alternate scenario that lacks the putative early movement before the alleged crucifixion, or the supposed missionary zeal of early apostles.

GakuseiDon

They were at least proclaiming them, and through Jesus Christ:

Romans15:17 Therefore I have reason to glory in Christ Jesus in the things which pertain to God.
18 For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed,
19 Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.

2 Cor 12:11 Truly the signs of an apostle were accomplished among you with all perseverance, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds.
13 For what is it in which you were inferior to other churches, except that I myself was not burdensome to you? Forgive me this wrong!

1 Cor 12: 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all:
8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit,
9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by *the same Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.

Not very charitable.

Then I would say that the reason it played out the way it did was because the early Christians thought they had a friend in Jesus in heaven, and that they were able to prove it. Nothing to do with the MJ/HJ debate; it's the same whether Jesus had been crucified on earth or hanging in the air.

Assuming a HJ for a moment (so probably won't get much interest on FRDB): the question for me is, at what point did Jesus get known as the Christ? Was it something he claimed for himself or others claimed for him before he died? Or was it something that others decided was the case after visions of Resurrection indicated God had risen him?

It's what the evidence suggests IMHO, at any rate.

Diogenes the Cynic

No, because there was no claim of a physical resurrection, just claims to have seen him after his death, and conclusions that he had been raised to Heaven (prior to judgment day) I think we should remember that this was more significant event to them than it sounds because they didn't think people just went right to Heaven when they died, they were all still in their graves and waiting for judgment day. Going to Heaven early, with or without a body, was already a privileged status. The "raising up," for those first followers did not have to mean anything more physical than the way people now believe that Aunt Agnes goes to Heaven.

It would mean, at the least, that Jesus had some kind of exulted status. Looking to Jewish tradition, the last guy who got taken straight up to Heaven was Elijah (2 Kings 2). Elijiah was supposed to come back from heaven to herald the Messiah. They might have even thought Jesus was an Elijah figure at first rather than the Messiah. It would fit somewhat neatly with Jewish scripture and imagination of the time. Jesus announced the coming of the Son of Man, Jesus was taken up to heaven, there for Jesus was Elijiah and the Son of Man was about to return.

This could easily morph into a belief that Jesus himself was the son of man and had been transformed into such after his ascension.

No, it was at his baptism. John was Elijah.

No, it was at his birth.

No, it was before he birth. He always existed with God.

He WAS God.

I'm not presenting this an attempt to advocate it, and am certainly not prepared to defend it against peer review or anything, but I think it has at least as much plausibility as either the Romans deciding that Attis was a backwater Galilean faith healer, or that Palestinian Jews constructed Jesus out of a pastiche of pagan gods and themes, and it has the advantage of being a Jewish explanation for the origins of a Jewish sect.

It doesn't mean that pagan themes and associations weren't layered on afterwards (I think they clearly were. The miracle at Cana, for instance, is transparently some kind of association with Dionysus), but the movement still had a Jewish origin and needs a Jewish explanation. Is it implausible to believe that Gentiles Hellenized a Jewish splinter sect beyond all recognition?

aa5874

What a joke!!!! A Christian does NOT know when his Jesus was known as Christ!!!!

Who does this Christian want to resolve his confusion???

You must know what ANCIENTS thought.

In the earliest gMark story, Jesus publicly claimed he was the Christ on the very day the Jews DEMANDED that he be Crucified even though Pilate had NO idea what he did wrong.

Now, Christians don't even want to accept the words of their OWN Bible.

GakuseiDon

I agree, and to be clear I'm not arguing for a physical resurrection here, just resurrection, leading to the notion that people now had a friend in Jesus in heaven, able to intercede for them. Your points are along the lines I am proposing.

aa5874

ALL you do is INVENT stories after story. You seem to have little or NO use for evidence from sources of antiquity.

Examine Mark 9 I don't want to hear your invented stories. I want the written statements form antiquity.

In the NT, Jesus met Elijah when he TRANSFIGURED on a mountain.

Sheshbazzar

Not at all clear on what you mean by that. There was no physical resurrection? but there was 'just resurrection'? of what?

Diogenes the Cynic

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with the word, "hypothetical."

Diogenes the Cynic

Paul said resurrections happen in "spiritual bodies." He was actually fairly emphatic about denying that physical bodies can be resurrected, and called people "idiots" for thinking they could be. A physical resurrection doesn't turn up in Christian literature until Mark (or arguably even Matthew, since Mark doesn't have any physical appearances, but only an empty tomb), and it's not found in Paul, Q or Thomas. The mythos starts only with some kind of "appearances" interpreted as signs that Jesus had gone (spiritually) to Heaven, not with beliefs that Jesus literally walked out of a tomb.