No evidence for Bethlehem of Judea early 1st C

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: No evidence for Bethlehem of Judea early 1st C

Post by Ulan »

Kris wrote:So what do people think this might mean with regard to the argument of a historical versus myth Jesus? Anything at all? I don't know Israeli geography that well, but would this other Bethlehem still be considered to be in Judea? Because supposedly David was born in the Bethlehem of judea, right?
No, the other Bethlehem is in Galilee, just a few kilometers from Nazareth. I don't think the question has much meaning with regard to the Jesus myth debate, except for biblical literalists. If anything, it could be used more as an argument for historicists.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: No evidence for Bethlehem of Judea early 1st C

Post by DCHindley »

bcedaifu wrote:
DCHindley wrote:and when the war of 66-74 CE crippled Jewish Christianity, they found their own way and reinterpreted what Jesus was all about, turning a messianic figure into a divine redeemer.
Jewish Christianity? I hope you are not referring here to "Ebionists", mispronounced and misspelled as Ebionites, a perjorative term. ... There exists no evidence of xyz...christianity, prior to mid second century AT THE EARLIEST. ... No Jew, in my opinion, in any century, would commit blasphemy by acknowledging that YHWH needed, sought, or created a son.
As you probably know, I think there was more likely than not a real man (not God or son of God or an adopted human made into a God or a created being like an archangel, yada yada) who got reshaped into a Divine Redeemer. So, I was referring to the original Judean (and Galilean) followers of Jesus, who, I think, were awaiting the coming of a "kingdom of God."

Personally, I am on the fence as to whether Jesus saw himself as the king who would usher in this era, or whether he merely spoke about the coming kingdom and/or king and his followers came to think he was Nemo (i.e., "the One") after his death. I also think there was a smattering, perhaps more than a smattering, of gentiles who saw such a kingdom of God as a good thing and associated with the Jewish Jesus movement, some to a greater degree than others. Maybe a few, or even more than a few, had circumcised themselves and followed the law, or were at very least proselytes to the Judean way of life and lived the Judean way to the best of their abilities.

I cannot see how these hypothetical Jewish followers of Jesus could not have been decimated by the War with Rome. Some may have gone to battle with one or more of the rebel factions, and others waited things out as quietly as they could, although the Romans wouldn't care who was rebel and who was not when they sacked towns and villages as they marched through. Having severed all links to their gentile way of life, a separation that only widened into a huge chasm during the war of 66-74 CE as the population stratified between Judeans and gentiles even into areas controlled by Tyre & Sidon. I would even go so far as to suggest that some Judeans shut the door in the faces of these converts at this time, which they took somewhat personally. They still yearned for that just kingdom of God, but in a quite painful way realized this was not going to come by armed insurrection. But how? They eventually came to reject their conversions and redefine who Jesus was (a divine redeemer), and how they as gentiles fit into God's plans for the establishment of that ever elusive just kingdom of God (they replaced the Jews because the Jews were baaad, very baad, and did not recognize that the KoG would not be established by warlike means on the part of Jews).

It would be gentile followers of the Jewish Jesus, then, who created the Christianity we know from the NT and early Christian literature (yes, likely all written or at least finally edited as we know them in the early to mid 2nd century CE). But separated in the refugee times from Judean Jesus followers, the Gentiles who had followed Jesus simply lost touch with the others, boo hoo, and never really reconnected with them. They preferred to imagine that they believed as they (the gentile followers of later times) did at least until the early-mid 2nd century, but even they had become debased by the mid 2nd century, as all gentile followers ("Christians") knew of Judean followers of Jesus were those they called "Ebionists" (as you term it).

IMHO, the "Ebionites" they knew of were probably other gentiles who had attempted to fully convert and adopted Jewish customs, but their beliefs in a fully human Jesus seem to contradict the idea that they are converted Christians, who had a much more exalted image Jesus. I do not know whether they were even "Christians" as we think of it, much less adoptionists (a human Jesus being adopted by the Christ figure at his baptism, or some such line).

Enough ... :banghead:

DCH
Post Reply