It is an interesting question, surely (I refer to the part put in blue by me). Why "Mark" ehuemerized Jesus is entirely another question (where surely the Destruction of Jerusalem could have a role) but what is interesting about your question is: why did Paul consider "mature" (only for few people) the knowledge that "demons" killed Jesus? While I can't answer to this question, yet I may derive some implications from that recognized fact:GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Sun Dec 31, 2017 3:08 pm
That's something that I don't really understand about the Dr Carrier/Doherty mythicist position: in a world where nearly everyone thought there were demons flying around, causing disasters and evil, why is it the more "mature" view that Jesus was killed by demons in the air, if that fit into the beliefs of people of the time? Why wouldn't the common people just go "yep! makes sense!" Why try to place the god on earth in a historical time-period at all? Not that I expect you to give a detailed answer to this, it's just that would be an inevitable question that would come up if Carrier mythicism became the mainstream position.
1) the outsiders knew only that the "Christ" was "crucified".
2) the mere Christian "brothers" knew only that the Christ was crucified by demons.
3) only the "perfects" knew that Christ was crucified by demons "without knowing who he was".
The effect of the point 1 is that some Pagan or Jew could suspect that Christ was a real historical man crucified by Romans for sedition.
The effect of the point 2 is that the Christian "brothers" could imagine or need some fantastic reason why the demons would have crucified Jesus: did Jesus realize something of extraordinary on the earth to derive the attention of the demons against him?
The effect of the point 3 is that the "mature" Christians are "mature" since they don't need of other explanations to explain the death of the Christ, differently from the ignorant outsiders and the mere "brothers".
This is a possible answer to your (very optimal) question.
In addition, my second observation:
Giuseppe wrote: ↑Mon Jan 01, 2018 2:12 am It is possible to interpret the same 1 Cor 2:6-8 as the Paul's reaction against who was inventing - already in the time of Paul - some historicist legends about Jesus to explain WHY he was crucified by the demons.
The best way by Paul to destroy in advance these rumors is to give himself a REASON of the death of Jesus: the demons didn't know who he was.
Hence the natural question would be: against which kind of historicist legends about Jesus was Paul polemizing, if he wrote 1 Cor 2:6-8 to stop their diffusion?
I think that the Gospels were not still in circulation in the time of Paul.
Therefore the only possible historicist legends about Jesus were something of very similar to the following:
http://gnosis.org/naghamm/adam-barnstone.htmlThe whole creation that came from the dead earth will be under the authority of death. But those who reflect on the knowledge of the eternal god in their hearts will not perish. They have not received spirit from this kingdom but from something eternal, angelic. . . . The illuminator will come . . . Seth. And he will perform signs and wonders to scorn the powers and their ruler.
Then the god of the powers is disturbed and says, “What is the power of this person who is higher than we are?” Then he brings a great wrath against that person. And glory withdraws and lives in holy houses it has chosen for itself. The powers do not see it with their eyes, nor do they see the illuminator. They punish the flesh of the one over whom the holy spirit has come.
In short, in these pre-70 historicist legends about Jesus, in an immemorial time Jesus had performed "signs and wonders" on the earth to scorn the demons and move them to kill him.