What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Aleph One
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 12:13 am

What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by Aleph One »

So I'm wondering what the cause or purpose behind jesus's death was for the earlist christians, like paul. I gather paul thought christ's death freed humanity from the jewish law but is it because jesus lived a perfect life under the law and was still executed, invalidating the deal between god and his chosen people? To me this version makes more sense under a gnostic cosmology where the law was put in place by a deal between man and the lesser gods/demons (because otherwise im not sure how god secretly sending his own son to die invalidates his (god's) own covenant) but perhaps i'm missing something.

This line of reasoning also doesn't make sense for the early jewish christians paul speaks of, right? They still believed in living under the law apparently so did they have a totally different understanding of christ's death?

One explaination i've heard is that jesus was the perfect sacrifice to end all sacrifices, therefore negating the need for the temple cult in jerusalem. My issue with this is that it mostly makes sense as a reaction to the temple's destruction, and christianity was apparently flourishing before that. Also i'm assuming in this scheme that having jesus executed by the jewish authorites would be important, yet the earliest indications are that paul held general powers or demons accountable for the crucifixion instead.

I guess what I'm looking for isn't a statement of theological doctrine or the like but more the reasoning behind the crucifixion (and how it worked) in the minds of the earliest christians. I think it's something i've taken for granted for a long time, and the more i thought about it lately, the less i understood, so hopefully someone here can help illuminate matters, a bit, for me. It's much appreciated!

:cheers:
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Aleph One wrote: Sun Jan 17, 2021 9:48 pm So I'm wondering what the cause or purpose behind jesus's death was for the earlist christians, like paul. I gather paul thought christ's death freed humanity from the jewish law but is it because jesus lived a perfect life under the law and was still executed, invalidating the deal between god and his chosen people? To me this version makes more sense under a gnostic cosmology where the law was put in place by a deal between man and the lesser gods/demons (because otherwise im not sure how god secretly sending his own son to die invalidates his (god's) own covenant) but perhaps i'm missing something.

This line of reasoning also doesn't make sense for the early jewish christians paul speaks of, right? They still believed in living under the law apparently so did they have a totally different understanding of christ's death?

One explaination i've heard is that jesus was the perfect sacrifice to end all sacrifices, therefore negating the need for the temple cult in jerusalem. My issue with this is that it mostly makes sense as a reaction to the temple's destruction, and christianity was apparently flourishing before that. Also i'm assuming in this scheme that having jesus executed by the jewish authorites would be important, yet the earliest indications are that paul held general powers or demons accountable for the crucifixion instead.

I guess what I'm looking for isn't a statement of theological doctrine or the like but more the reasoning behind the crucifixion (and how it worked) in the minds of the earliest christians. I think it's something i've taken for granted for a long time, and the more i thought about it lately, the less i understood, so hopefully someone here can help illuminate matters, a bit, for me. It's much appreciated!
In my view neither Paul nor the early Jewish Christians who still kept the Law understood Jesus' death as negating the Law in an ontological sense. Rather, Jesus died a righteous martyr's death and, in so doing, was able to appease God's wrath against the nation of Israel, a wrath regarded (A) as having been provoked by deliberate sins by the nation of Israel and by all the nations of the world against God and (B) as able to be satisfied only under particular conditions. This kind of martyrological salvation is reflected elsewhere in Judaism:

2 Maccabees 7.37-38: 37 “I, like my brothers, give up body and life for the laws of our fathers, appealing to God to show mercy soon to our nation and by afflictions and plagues to make you confess that he alone is God, 38 and through me and my brothers to bring to an end the wrath of the Almighty which has justly fallen on our whole nation.”

Paul himself added a layer of meaning to Jesus' death which particularly applied to the Gentiles and their relationship to the Law. (He never actually tells us his view of how Jews now relate to the Law in his epistles; we have to fill in the blanks there.) As far as I can tell, this layer of meaning is his own special development, and it involves the Gentiles not having to become Jews (that is, not having to be circumcised) in order to participate in the eschatological salvation afforded by Jesus having satiated God's wrath. My suspicion is that Paul, by lowering or even eliminating the entrance requirements for Gentiles into the people of God, was seeking an advantage in the marketplace of religious ideas. There were plenty of Greeks and Romans who were interested in Eastern religions perceived to be ancient and venerable (especially one native to Judea, home of Jerusalem, a true jewel among Eastern cities), but a requirement like male circumcision would have deterred many (albeit not all).

The Suffering Servant motif obviously stands both behind 2 Maccabees and behind Paul. The basic idea is that the collective sins of the many can be mitigated by the faithful actions of the few or even of the one: a remnant or representative standing in for all of Israel to shoulder God's righteous anger and thus to restore the divine relationship.
rgprice
Posts: 2102
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by rgprice »

I'm not entirely sure myself, I'm still trying to figure it out. One issue is that we really don't know anything about the earliest Christ worshipers other than what Paul tells us, and we don't know how representative his views were.

What I've been able to piece together is something along these lines:

1) It was believed that the Final Judgment was at hand. (I believe this was a result of the death of King Agrippa in 44.)
2) Joshua the Anointed was going to be the judge who executed the Final Judgement.
3) Having faith in Joshua was key to ensuring that Joshua judged you favorably.

That's sort of "step one". This version of Christ worship applied primarily to Jews.

Prior to Paul even, a Gentile expansion of this outlook took place. Believing that the Final Judgment was at hand, certain Jews wanted to save the Gentiles from the Final Judgement. They proselytized to God-fearers, telling them about the coming Judgement and telling them that they needed faith in Joshua in order to avoid judgement, and they also needed to enter the covenant of Abraham.

Here we get a split. There were Jews that asserted this required circumcision, and other Jews (prior to Paul) who asserted that they didn't need circumcision, only faith in Joshua the Anointed. This is where persecution came in -- persecution of those claiming to convert Gentiles without having them undergo circumcision. Paul began by persecuting these groups of non-circumcisers.

Then Paul came to the understanding that the Final Judgement was eminent, so Paul too adopted the circumcision-free model, in order to convert as many Gentiles as possible prior to the Final Judgement.

Now we pick up with Paul's logic.

God's promise of redemption only applied to Abraham and his descendant Joshua the Anointed, whom God named.

Paul's logic appears to be that at some point (when that is I'm trying to figure out) Joshua the Anointed was hung on a tree as a sacrifice to redeem all those who lived under the law, i.e. practiced circumcision. This is necessary because it is impossible to actually obey the law. Paul's logic about the law is that the law is impossible to follow, so everyone who is under the law is cursed, because inevitably, everyone breaks the law. So Joshua hung himself on a tree to take everyone's curses onto himself. At some later time (3 days, a year, thousands of years?) Joshua was raised from the dead in preparation for the Final Judgment. The raising of Joshua from the dead was the sign that the Judgement was at hand. Now that Joshua was raised from the dead, his Spirt went out to all the Gentiles.

Now all of the Gentiles could enter the covenant of Abraham purely through faith in God's promise of redemption, which was expressed by believing that God had in fact raised Joshua the Anointed from the dead. So if you believed that God had raised Joshua from the dead, that's all God asked of you, he no longer required that you show devotion to him through circumcision.

The question is, who is Joshua the Anointed? Is it Joshua son of Nun? It is a hidden figure whose identity is revealed through peshers using scriptures about Joshua son of Nun and Joshua son of Jehozadak, the stories of which are actually allegories that reveal the truth about a hidden mystical Joshua?

What's clear is this. The raising of Joshua from the dead was a sign that the Final Judgment was at hand. There must have been some preexisting concept about the raising of Joshua from the dead being a sign of the End Times. I believe that whatever Joshua Paul was talking about, its some Joshua who had ben dead for a long time. This wasn't a recently killed figure, this was a figure that had been dead for thousands of years.

Ezekiel 37, the prophecy of the dry bones, has something to do with the concepts about the raising of the dead and faith in the Lord.
4 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! 5 This is what the Sovereign Lord says to these bones: I will make breath enter you, and you will come to life. 6 I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.’”

7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I was prophesying, there was a noise, a rattling sound, and the bones came together, bone to bone. 8 I looked, and tendons and flesh appeared on them and skin covered them, but there was no breath in them.

9 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Come, breath, from the four winds and breathe into these slain, that they may live.’” 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army.

11 Then he said to me: “Son of man, these bones are the people of Israel. They say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off.’ 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: My people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. 13 Then you, my people, will know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves and bring you up from them. 14 I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the Lord have spoken, and I have done it, declares the Lord.’”
As in this story, the dead who are raised are ancient Israelites. I think Joshua was also an ancient figure, a figure of dry bones, whose breath of life was put back into him by the Lord, showing that now was the time that had spoken and announced the Final Judgement.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by Ben C. Smith »

There must have been some preexisting concept about the raising of Joshua from the dead being a sign of the End Times.
Joshua son of Nun was a descendant of Joseph through Ephraim. It may be worth your time to look into the Messiah ben Joseph angle.
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by Bernard Muller »

The original logic? Jesus was put to death because some Jews thought he would become "king of the Jews" and the disturbance in the temple. His crucifixion was meant to be a deterrent.

Proto/Jewish Christians then believed "The king of the Jews" had to rule: consequently he had been saved in heaven and then will come back during the day of the Lord to fulfill the kingship.
The Son's sacrifice for atonement of sin came later through Paul, who got it from Apollos of Alexandria, himself inspired by the writing of Philo of Alexandria, such as:
"Who then is the chief butler of God? The priest who offers libations to him, the truly great high priest, who, having received a draught of everlasting graces, offers himself in return, pouring in an entire libation full of unmixed wine" (Philo, On dreams II, ch. XXVII)
To be compared with:
"... he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people." (Apollos, Hebrews 2:17)
"... high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people: for this he did once for all, when he offered up himself." (Apollos, Hebrews 7:27)

Cordially, Bernard
Last edited by Bernard Muller on Mon Jan 18, 2021 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
lsayre
Posts: 771
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by lsayre »

rgprice wrote: Mon Jan 18, 2021 6:21 am As in this story, the dead who are raised are ancient Israelites. I think Joshua was also an ancient figure, a figure of dry bones, whose breath of life was put back into him by the Lord, showing that now was the time that had spoken and announced the Final Judgement.

Might Revelation 13:8 find relevance here, with its reference to the 'lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world'?
Last edited by lsayre on Mon Jan 18, 2021 9:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Aleph One
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 12:13 am

Re: What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by Aleph One »

Thanks again to everyone who replied (especially Ben for taking that much time, and Bernard). A lot of angles to think about here! :thumbup:
rgprice wrote: Mon Jan 18, 2021 6:21 amPaul's logic appears to be that at some point (when that is I'm trying to figure out) Joshua the Anointed was hung on a tree as a sacrifice to redeem all those who lived under the law, i.e. practiced circumcision.
I knew eschatology was super important to early christianity but wasn't sure how to connect it to the crucifixion, so that stuff helps. I also noticed that paul talks a lot about his revelation of "christ crucified." Could the jewish christians have preached a non-crucified christ or does the whole idea of an anointed savior or whatever make no sense without it?
rgprice wrote: Mon Jan 18, 2021 6:21 amAs in this story, the dead who are raised are ancient Israelites. I think Joshua was also an ancient figure, a figure of dry bones, whose breath of life was put back into him by the Lord, showing that now was the time that had spoken and announced the Final Judgement.
I know some places in the new testament refer to jesus as the second adam. Maybe there's a midrashic connection to this passage then because it sure sounds like god making another man.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8887
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by MrMacSon »

rgprice wrote: Mon Jan 18, 2021 6:21 am
The question is, who is Joshua the Anointed? Is it Joshua son of Nun? Is it a hidden figure whose identity is revealed through peshers, using scriptures about Joshua son of Nun and Joshua son of Jehozadak, the stories of which are actually allegories that reveal the truth about a hidden mystical Joshua?
.
I think those could be key questions ...

rgprice wrote: Mon Jan 18, 2021 6:21 am There must have been some preexisting concept about the raising of Joshua from the dead being a sign of the End Times.
or perhaps various concepts about a or the return of Iēsous / Ἰησοῦς - and perhaps competing concepts.

I till wonder about the role of the so-called gnostic sects (and/or even the role of other less clear 'religions' such as the Egyptian mystery religions)
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8887
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by MrMacSon »

Aleph One wrote: Sun Jan 17, 2021 9:48 pm One explanation i've heard is that jesus was the perfect sacrifice to end all sacrifices, therefore negating the need for the temple cult in jerusalem.
I think that notion or proposition is likely to have been attractive to many Jews, though I think Jews well away from the temple were already using portable tabernacles and altars?

Aleph One wrote: Sun Jan 17, 2021 9:48 pm My issue with this is that it mostly makes sense as a reaction to the temple's destruction
I agree.

Aleph One wrote: Sun Jan 17, 2021 9:48 pm christianity was apparently flourishing before that
I'm not so sure about that.

Aleph One wrote: Sun Jan 17, 2021 9:48 pm Also i'm assuming in this scheme that having jesus executed by the jewish authorities would be important
Perhaps?

Aleph One wrote: Sun Jan 17, 2021 9:48 pm So I'm wondering what the cause or purpose behind jesus's death was for the earliest christians, like paul.
Being a forerunner to resurrection? Hope for followers to similarly cheat death? (and to also help cheat circumcision?)

Aleph One wrote: Sun Jan 17, 2021 9:48 pm I gather paul thought christ's death freed humanity from the jewish law
Paul seems to say it was said to have freed Jews and Gentiles for specific aspects of the Law, especially circumcision(?)

I think there are likely to have been a few layers to it all; including, as you allude, to roles of 'gnosticism', 'docetism', etc (+/- other influences)

+/- a role of adversary to and from various things including to Judaism and to 'gnosticism', 'docetism', and other influences
Aleph One
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 12:13 am

Re: What was the original logic behind Jesus's death?

Post by Aleph One »

MrMacSon wrote: Tue Jan 19, 2021 12:52 am I think that notion or proposition is likely to have been attractive to many Jews, though I think Jews well away from the temple were already using portable tabernacles and altars?
Aleph One wrote: Sun Jan 17, 2021 9:48 pm Also i'm assuming in this scheme that having jesus executed by the jewish authorities would be important
Perhaps?
Good point. My idea was that in order for the sacrifice analogy to hold the executioners should be the jewish leadership. If that was true i would expect paul to emphasize their culpability more in the matter. However, the analogy will never be exact, and in fact there was a significant jewish diaspora already extant in the roman world, so who knows how different jewish groups (or god-fearers for that matter) might interpret it (someone might know, just not me).
Post Reply