Unconventional Religion

[Consilius]

Interesting theory. If it's true, however, Christ served a poor resolution to the theological crisis in the eyes of the Jews. The hundred or so that became his followers stood in the face of tens of thousands of adherent Jews, who eagerly accepted the many other claimants to the title "Messiah" who came after Christ's death. A product like Jesus tailored to attract attention would have been more popular with the Jewish nation, particularly heading for the powerful and drawing on their authority to gain a much larger following. It would seem like a much more plausible marketing scheme.
Not to mention Christianity's large number of Gentile adherents. Wouldn't a man championing the poor have incited them against the rich?

---

In some cases money comes first, in others morals. Which is why you should make choices such that you'd rarely have to choose.

In some cases? I didn't realize that human morality changed value with the situation.
To think that the right thing should ever be equated, let alone replaced, with cash or comfort sounds wrong.
Would I be wrong to say that your opinion is grounded in moral relativism?

---

The Jesus of Revelation is the closest to what the Jews were expecting. He was a celestial warlord who leads an army to triumph over Israel's enemies.

Revelation was addressed to Gentile Christians, and the author is talking about their persecution under Rome. There is no reason for the author to purposely attract Jewish appeal.

The Epistles had little to say of Jesus' trip to earth ("take and eat", a quoted reference to the pagan Eucharist is the only quotation of Christ's earthly life as found in the Epistles that I'm aware of). They were more concerned with a celestial lord that had existed from the beginning and had sacrificed himself and offered us salvation.

The early evangelists believed that the world would end during their lifetimes. They were more concerned with Christ's moral message than the details of his life.
The writer of many of the Epistles, Paul, also had not witnessed Christ's ministry.

Jesus would later be rewritten as God-incarnate in John's Gospel, the only one compatible with Trinitarian theology.

Jesus said, “I am with you for only a short time, and then I am going to the one who sent me." John 7:33
John doesn't make it any less confusing.
Matthew, Mark and Luke were more concerned with Christ's life story than they were with theology. Jesus acted as if He was not God to cover his messianic secret as well as to pose as a model for holiness. John was impacting theology in his Gospel, so he had to explain Christ for who he really was.

And let's not forget the very first commandment:

Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

So the OT *forbids* us to have an intercessor.

Christ is not another God, hence the Trinity. An intercessor isn't a God. Christ was the Judeo-Christian God and a human being at the same time.

In fact, the OT seems to require that a blasphemer like Jesus be put to death:

Deuteronomy 13:1-6 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams.

Jesus didn't advertise a new God.

Gehenna is:

• A place associated with a sadistic god
  
• A place associated with a rival of the Judeo-Christian god
  
• A place of torment and suffering
  
• A place of fire
  
• A place where the wicked would be tossed after their death
  

Sound familiar?

It's easy to see how this idea of Hell evolved and was incorporated into Christianity.

Christ's description of Hell was a physical allegory used for the benefit of a very physical culture (so physical that slaughtering goats symbolized absolution for sins). It fit the culture of the time, hence it was very well understood by Jews and Gentiles.