Did Jesus want to create a poli-theism religion?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

For a generally bright person, you’re being stubbornly stupid about this.

Boru

This is a category that you should reserve for mythicists; I am not a mythicist.

It’s got nothing to do with the historic or mythic status of Jesus. You’re persistently and deliberately refusing to understand what my ox cart comment was and ignoring my explanation of it.
Boru

[Jehanne]

That authors took liberties with their stories isn't in any way a problem for the looney hypothesis, meanwhile, though I do think it's kind of looney to pick that specific detail out as confirming some historical hypothesis.

The Roman Empire was a police state; all scholars agree on this. As a police state, the Romans conducted public executions, namely, crucifixion. Dying by crucifixion was not a quick process; Josephus requested that a crucified individual be removed from his cross, a request that was granted. Such proves that individuals could survive being crucified. Those individuals left to die (virtually everyone) suffered periods of extreme agony. In this respect, the account in Mark has contextual credibility.

[Ranjr]

Doc Holiday really did say, "you're a daisy if you do," at OK Corral, because that was a saying at the time.

[The Grand Nudger]

That's all very nice, but..the man in question did not survive this, and these were supposed to be his last words. The story is highly thematic, and not biologically credible. Like I said - not a problem for the loon hypothesis, but a poor hill to pick to die on. Let's just assume there was a man and he was everything you think he was. This part of the story, still...is an invention of deeply jewish authors stressing jesus nature as one of them, a part of the cultural traditions from which this entire set of myths grew. Hey, maybe, if you want to split the baby, we could posit that the real man who was a real loons final words were actually "uuuuuuuugh" - but that had to be prettied up a bit.

[Jehanne]

That's all very nice, but..the man in question did not survive this, and these were supposed to be his last words. The story is highly thematic, and not biologically credible. Like I said - not a problem for the loon hypothesis, but a poor hill to pick to die on.

Compare Mark & Luke. Mark's account (dying in agony of having been betrayed) versus Luke's (dying in complete control fulfilling God's plan) highlights that which is plausible as compared to that which is completely implausible.

[The Grand Nudger]

It highlights the changing views of the movement. That development ends with the wildly unjewish john, where this part of narrative is completely absent and jesus was a god before he was even born. A god would not, ofc, ask himself why he abandoned himself. The god of john and the people of john are not the jewish god and his people. They are distinctly and uncharacteristically triumphant. Narrative and cultural incongruity.

[The Grand Nudger]

To put a very fine point on it, the disagreement here is not between plausibility and implausibility, or a historical jesus vs a mythical jesus. Regardless of any of those things, there are observations that can be made about the development of the narrative itself, and the characters as they exist in the narrative without respect to those other alleged, assumed, or hypothetical states of affairs or personages.

There is an embarrassment of riches to be had in this, with respect to understanding the beliefs, if we can separate the two in our minds, as they are distinctly separate in mere reality, and particularly in the case of the loon hypothesis being true.

I'll give you an analog from another mythology - setantas taboo against eating dogs. Setanata was the son of the sky god lugh, but legally a successor of earthly authority (conor of ulster - yet another godman with two fathers...) - and got his given name, cu chulain, because he killed a mans guard dog, and because of his honor, replaced that dog at it's post (even though there was a fucking rager going on inside!). An odd story with strangely specific and even plausible details. However, it;s far more likely that this story is meant to telegraph to the listener that despite his divine origin, the hero was a soldiers soldier who did not take the killing of the lowest man lightly, and would stand in the place of the lowest man to his own disadvantage and potential societal shame - in this event contextualized as a dog - to satisfy that honor-debt.

Or, you know, this whole episode was totally literal, completely legit, and didn't mean anything other-than some guy wasn't at the party...and this is a detail from which we can reconstruct some aspect of his very real life........

[Ranjr]

Paul, who preceded Mark, knew nothing of a Nazarene, earthly Jesus.  Paul's Jesus was killed by demon spirits in the firmament.  Let's not mistake fan fiction for history.

[The Grand Nudger]

Or ape the mistakes of those believers who premise their notions of religion and reality on a strict sense of literalism and factual historicity not present in the texts to which we refer.

[LinuxGal]

Paul, who preceded Mark, knew nothing of a Nazarene, earthly Jesus.  Paul's Jesus was killed by demon spirits in the firmament.  Let's not mistake fan fiction for history.

Galatians 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law

That says Paul knew Jesus was a human being and a Jew.

Acts 22:8 And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest.

That says Paul knew Jesus was a Nazarene.