Was Jesus Radicalised?

[Hope]

I've seen Floo's post thank you, which isn't my point.

You've advanced the idea before that the authorities at the time could have produced the body of Jesus to scotch any rumours of resurrection, implying that Jesus was seen by these authorities as being more than just a routine irritant, and here you seem to be using Floo's post to reinforce this very same point - which seems to be an assumption.

Well, it posited by Floo, and all I was doing was pointing out that if that was the case, it gives the 'Christian pov' more support than otherwise.  At the same time, and here we have Vlad to thank, this would not have been merely a routine irritant.  Barrabas and the other messianic figures were calling for the military overthrow of the Roman authorites - so would have been arrested and punished by those same authorities.  Jesus was challenging the Jewish authorities rather than the Romans and therefore, in the Jewish authorities eyes, the Jewish nation.  I think you would agree that, if that was the case, they would want to make sure that his followers had no place to call his final resting place or uncertainty over his status, around which to build a martyr claim.  That is why I mentioned the fact that bin Laden's body was disposed of in the way it was - at sea.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Since neither you nor I were around at the time, it remains a matter of opinion. 

Nope The epistles of St Paul acknowledge that resurrection was not generally believed.

The acts of apostles acknowledges that.the Charsmatic utterances of the first Pentecost was initially received as being the results of a morning drinking session.

The miracles in the NT do not give any reason for us to think these things were widely believed.

[Leonard James]

Nope The epistles of St Paul acknowledge that resurrection was not generally believed.

The acts of apostles acknowledges that.the Charsmatic utterances of the first Pentecost was initially received as being the results of a morning drinking session.

The miracles in the NT do not give any reason for us to think these things were widely believed.

All educated people would have known that there were other "resurrection" beliefs in other religions from long before Jesus' time.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/03/jesus-just-one-more-dying-and-rising-savior-2/

[Hope]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/03/jesus-just-one-more-dying-and-rising-savior-2/

What the author of the blog fails to mention is that the idea of 'dying and rising' wasn't that prevalent within Judaism.  So, to suggest that the gospel writers borrowed, from other sources, something that was foreign to their own way of thinking and that of their fellow Jews, is to stretch the analogy quite thin.

[Leonard James]

Even in the Old Testament it was not unknown.

http://www.pathlightspress.com/resurrection.html

[Leonard James]

What the author of the blog fails to mention is that the idea of 'dying and rising' wasn't that prevalent within Judaism.  So, to suggest that the gospel writers borrowed, from other sources, something that was foreign to their own way of thinking and that of their fellow Jews, is to stretch the analogy quite thin.

See my previous post.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

All educated people would have known that there were other "resurrection" beliefs in other religions from long before Jesus' time.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/03/jesus-just-one-more-dying-and-rising-savior-2/

But obviously didn't believe them.

[Leonard James]

But obviously didn't believe them.

Quite! They preferred their own 'come back to life' stories in the OT.

[Hope]

Possibly - assuming that the these 'authorities' (as Hope refers to them) at the point of Jesus being executed thought that; a) Jesus was high profile, and b) they were aware of resurrection rumours.

Are there any records that confirm these 'authorities' thought as much at the time?

Why have you put tyhe word 'authorities' in inverted commas, Gordon.  Remember that, even by the 1st century, the Jews were a theocracy; what the religious leaders said and taught helkd a considerble amount of influence.  If they didn't regard Jesus as 'high profile' why did they press for the death penalty - something that (officially) only the Romans could carry out?  As for being aware of the 'resurrection rumours - no one was aware of them at the time of Jesus execution - they didn't exist.

Regarding records, I believe that the various secular records indicate that Jesus was executed by the Romans at the behest of the Jewish religious authorities.  As I've pointed out before, there may well have been official Jewish documentation to this effect which would likely have been kept within the Temple precincts which, of course, were destroyed in 72AD by the same people as destroyed much of the Great Library at Alexandria.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Quite! They preferred their own 'come back to life' stories in the OT.

No because the NT epistles make it clear that people were highly sceptical of resurrection.

[Gordon]

Why have you put tyhe word 'authorities' in inverted commas, Gordon.

Because it is a term you have used previously and I don't know exactly who you are referring to.

Remember that, even by the 1st century, the Jews were a theocracy; what the religious leaders said and taught helkd a considerble amount of influence.  If they didn't regard Jesus as 'high profile' why did they press for the death penalty - something that (officially) only the Romans could carry out?  As for being aware of the 'resurrection rumours - no one was aware of them at the time of Jesus execution - they didn't exist.

So, they wanted rid of Jesus, hence they sought his execution, which seems reasonable - but having done so the matter would have been closed: the 'problem', such as it was, is resolved from the perspective of the religious leaders.   

Regarding records, I believe that the various secular records indicate that Jesus was executed by the Romans at the behest of the Jewish religious authorities.  As I've pointed out before, there may well have been official Jewish documentation to this effect which would likely have been kept within the Temple precincts which, of course, were destroyed in 72AD by the same people as destroyed much of the Great Library at Alexandria.

So, no contemporary details that are external to the much later NT.

[2Corrie]

Did John the Baptiser Radicalise Jesus into his way of teaching about the apocalypse?

What was John's way of teaching about the apocalypse?  And do you know what apocalypse means?

[Leonard James]

No because the NT epistles make it clear that people were highly sceptical of resurrection.

There have always been intelligent people about to counterbalance the tom-foolery of others.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There have always been intelligent people about to counterbalance the tom-foolery of others.

That's just a platitude Len offering no insights nor furthering any investigation.
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.....or my favourite.....a stitch in time saved mine.

[Hope]

Because it is a term you have used previously and I don't know exactly who you are referring to.

Previously, I have almost always qualified the term with the adjective 'religious'; I assumed that by now most people would have understood that association, especially as it was these same people who are recorded as having requested the death penalty of the Roam authorities

So, they wanted rid of Jesus, hence they sought his execution, which seems reasonable - but having done so the matter would have been closed: the 'problem', such as it was, is resolved from the perspective of the religious leaders.

I would agree, if it had taken years for any 'resurrection'claim to have surfaced, but the fact that it surfaces at the very next religious festival - Shavuot - a mere 50 days later (hence the Jewish term Pentecost - '50th day') suggests that it hasn't gone away.  Why else arrest the apostles and try to ban them from preaching and speaking about Jesus?

So, no contemporary details that are external to the much later NT.

"So, no contemporary details ..." can equally be laid against the vast majority of documentation from the period.  And, of course, many of them give a Roman slant on the situation.

[Hope]

There have always been intelligent people about to counterbalance the tom-foolery of others.

Except that, when the 'tom-foolery of others' runs largely counter to a cultural understanding, one doesn't have to be particularly intelligent to 'counterbalance' it; nor does it mean that the majority are correct.

[floo]

What was John's way of teaching about the apocalypse?  And do you know what apocalypse means?

That word means whatever you want it to mean!

[Leonard James]

Except that, when the 'tom-foolery of others' runs largely counter to a cultural understanding, one doesn't have to be particularly intelligent to 'counterbalance' it; nor does it mean that the majority are correct.

Absolutely! Believers still outnumber the enlightened.

[Hope]

Absolutely! Believers still outnumber the enlightened.

Or perhaps the enlightened are the believers   

[Shaker]

Or perhaps the enlightened are the believers   

We'd need some evidence for that

[Leonard James]

That's just a platitude Len offering no insights nor furthering any investigation.

Nope, anybody with intelligence will recognise the truth of it.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.....or my favourite.....a stitch in time saved mine.

Indeed! If "God" had had the intelligence not to create evil, he would have saved us all a lot of heartache.

[Leonard James]

Or perhaps the enlightened are the believers   

They can't be! So many of the beliefs of believers are contradictory.

[Leonard James]

That word means whatever you want it to mean!

That applies to the whole of the Bible texts. Hence the countless factions.

[floo]

That applies to the whole of the Bible texts. Hence the countless factions.

True.

[Hope]

That word means whatever you want it to mean!

Sorry, Floo, but not only does the word 'apocalypse' have a pretty narrow meaning in ordinary language, it also has a pretty narrow one in a religious sense.

As for the use of it in the OP, I'm not sure that JtheB even referred to the apocalypse.

Its possibly also worth pointing out that, though JtheB was 6 or 7 months older than Jesus, as cousins they would probably have met each other on several occasions before the 'baptism' event (remember that John's father was one of the Temple priests).  John would likely have been aware of Jesus' precociousness - especially his facing up to the teachers in the Temple when he first went to Jerusalem (Luke 2).