I think you can add a choice to those two:MrMacSon wrote:Who are you saying wrote the NTouthouse wrote: A real Jew. An oppressed Israelite. The exact opposite culturally speaking from a Koine speaking Hellenistic Jew typical of those living in the Diaspora.
You know, the people who wrote all of the NT.
(I suspect you mean the latter - (b) - but one never knows ...)
- a. a real Jew or real Jews ?? ---or
b. one or more Koine-speaking, Hellenistic Jews typical of those living in the Diaspora ??
1) Judeans resident in the traditional Judean heartland (Judea & Galilee)
2) Hellenized Judeans of the Diaspora
3) Gentile proselytes to Judaism (either formerly, or currently at time of writing)
I rather tend to think that many NT books, especially the canonical Gospels and Acts, were written by former proselytes who had since renounced their circumcision and all that it entailed (Law observance) in favor of a kind of salvation brought about by Jesus' death and the resurrection he was believed to have already undergone.
The writers of the Gospels and Acts, and the folks I believe edited Paul's letters, knew a great deal about Judean holy books, but made mistakes in many details, showing that they were not likely Judeans of the Judean heartland. They could have been Judeans of the Diaspora, but I think option #3 above is more likely.
To these authors, the mantle of favor in God's eyes, which had formerly rested on the shoulders of the Judeans (anyone circumcised and Law abiding, however interpreted), now rested on the shoulders of gentiles who believed in the saving act performed by Jesus. The saving act was loosely based on the ritual of release of the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement yet somehow conflated with the slaughter of the Passover lamb, whose shed blood caused God's avenging angels to "pass over" that house on the way to killing all the firstborn in Egypt.
It is my has-to-be-wrong opinion that these proselytes had attached themselves to Judaism as practiced in Judea, Galilee, and southern Syria, with the hope of surviving the "Day of the LORD" which was something they saw as a coming cleansing of bad people from the face of the earth by angels of wrath in preparation for the beginning of a fruitful Judean led kingdom of God on earth.
This was similar to Paul's beliefs, although Paul felt that his gentile friends would be saved because they believed that God will one day establish this just fruitful kingdom and include all who believed it was a good and just thing. The Paul I see was not associated with the Jesus movement at any time, and likely never heard of him.
On the other hand, the former proselytes who wrote the Gospels & Acts had been associated with a Jesus movement that was inclusive of non-Judeans, although likely only for those who had converted to the Judean way of life or were willing to accept second class inclusion as strangers after renouncing all idol worship. They had since become disillusioned with Judeans in general, which I would attribute to the social upheaval and atrocities perpetrated on all sides in the Judean rebellion of 66-74 CE, and had rationalized Jesus' role from expected messiah to rule that kingdom to the role of a divine savior figure who performed a ritual atonement similar to that of a Greek or Asian mystery cult. In other words, they fell back on what they had formerly known before becoming proselytes.
But, ohhh boy, that HAS to be wrong, because it explains the origin of Christian dogma as the product of syncretistic processes at work due to historical pressures. AHHHHHHHH!
*For the believer, this is all HERESY and EVIL-UTION. "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow!" His role as a Divine Savior figure is a REVEALED religious truth.
*For Mythicists, because I assume a real Jesus being transformed into a savior God on account of historical circumstances, they just KNOW it cannot be the case, because Savior Jesus dogma is OBVIOUSLY based on the rearrangement of details of pagan MYTH, which does not require historical circumstances to reform as they did, other than being around to be plucked as needed to weave the Savior Jesus myth for nefarious purposes.
Isn't religious faith, or faith in a lack of faith, a funny thing?
DCH
