Why is Jesus not a "madman"?

[EGross]

Did you read my post at all?

Yes. I can't challenge you on those points. Just answering your question. If your points were answering your own rhetorical question then I missed the tone.

I got it. Especially since the concept of "son of god" would have been a completely foreign notion. It would be like saying "I am the son of Zeus!" to the Jews back then. Same thing. Had he even said it "I am the son of god!" (and had he even existed), the zealots would have sliced him a new windpipe before he could say "Gaaahk....".

To understand what would have happened, one needs to understand the religious hatred and division going on during that day as the house of Shammai was invaded by dangerous wackos (think of the "tea party" in the USA taking over the Republican party, but without any fear of jail - freedom to do anything!). The year 30 was the year that the judges left the Temple area because capital cases were being brought forth so often for even the smallest infraction, that they wanted nothing more to do with it. And all feared the Sicarii (the name of the knife they carried) and the Biryanim (thugs who used fire rather than knives.)

So yeah, had someone said "God knocked up my mother when she was 12, but hey, I'm cool with that", the zealots would have had a field day.