32630 The Messiah
From Jesus to Christ, it has been suggested that Jesus' impact on his followers was so great that they could not accept this failure. According to the New Testament, some Christians believed that they encountered Jesus after his crucifixion. They then argued that he had been resurrected (the belief in the resurrection of the dead in the messianic age was a core Pharisaic doctrine), and would soon return to usher in the Kingdom of God and fulfil the rest of Messianic prophecy such as the Resurrection of the dead and the Last Judgment. Others adapted Gnosticism as a way to maintain the vitality and validity of Jesus' teachings.
Since early Christians believed that Jesus had already replaced the Temple as the expression of a new covenant, they were relatively unconcerned with the destruction of the Temple, though it came to be viewed as symbolic to the doctrine of Supersession’s.
According to historians of Hellenistic Judaism, Jesus' failure to establish the Kingdom of God, and his death at the hands of the Romans, invalidated any messianic claims (false prophet). In the aftermath of the destruction of the Temple, and then the defeat of Bar Kozeba, more Jews were attracted to the Pharisaic rabbis than Christianity. Maybe because, in the aftermath of the revolt, many Jews were afraid that talk of a new king and a new kingdom would provoke Roman wrath, (as it would) or because most Jews did not feel that, the destruction of the Temple signified the abrogation of their covenant with God.
Jesus' central teachings to love one's neighbour, and to love God with all one's heart, soul, and might, were also fundamental to Pharisaic teaching and therefore had no special appeal. Most of Jesus' teachings were reasonable and acceptable in terms of Second Temple Judaism; what set Christians apart from Jews was their faith in Christ as the resurrected messiah. The belief in a resurrected Messiah is unacceptable to Jews today and to Rabbinic Judaism. Jewish authorities have long used this fact to explain the break between Judaism and Christianity. Some historians have suggested that, before his death, Jesus forged among his believers such certainty that the Kingdom of God and the resurrection of the dead were at hand. With few exceptions (John 20: 24-29) when they saw him shortly after his execution, they had no doubt that he had been resurrected, and that the restoration of the Kingdom and resurrection of the dead was at hand.
These specific beliefs were compatible with Second Temple Judaism. In the following years the restoration of the Kingdom as Jews expected it failed to occur. Some Christians believed instead that Christ, rather than being the Jewish messiah, was God made flesh, who died for the sins of humanity, and that faith in Jesus Christ offered everlasting life. Just a question on what you want to believe never has to be real, any suggestion or fantasy will do if it has a promise in it that attract the mind. A principle well understood by authoritarian rulers, such as the God made emperor of Japan till 1945, Hitler till 1945 and present Donald Trump.
The foundation for this new interpretation of Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection are found in the epistles of Paul and in the book of Acts. Most Jews view Paul as the founder of Christianity, who is responsible for the break with Judaism. It was more deeply rooted in Hellenistic Judaism than generally believed. Paul of Tarsus combined the life of Jesus with Greek philosophy, and the interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in terms of the Platonic opposition between the ideal, real and false, fantasy and fiction. In a religion, in which belief is not based on God, rather on the descent from Abraham, a fictional figure described in the Jewish bible as a rough and drunk who was visited by God, and told the land he was would be all hiss, a belief physically marked by circumcision, and focusing on how to live this life properly.
Paul did see the symbol of a resurrected Jesus as a possibility of a spiritual rather than corporeal messiah. He used this notion of messiah to argue for a religion through which all people — not just descendants of Abraham — could worship the God of Abraham. Unlike Judaism, which holds that it is the proper religion only of the Jews except the Noahide Laws, (Beginning with Genesis 2:16, the Babylonian Talmud listed the first six commandments as prohibitions against idolatry, blasphemy, murder, adultery, and robbery and the positive command to establish courts of justice (with all that this implies). After the Flood a seventh commandment, given to Noah, forbade the eating of flesh cut from a living animal (Gen. 9:4). Though the number of laws was later increased to 30 with the addition of prohibitions against castration, sorcery, and other practices, the “seven laws,” with minor variations, retained their original status as authoritative commandments and as the source of other laws. As basic statutes safeguarding monotheism and guaranteeing proper ethical conduct in society, these laws provided a legal framework for alien residents in Jewish territory. Maimonides thus regarded anyone who observed these laws as one “assured of a portion in the world to come.” Throughout the ages scholars have viewed the Noahide Laws as a link between Judaism and Christianity, as universal norms of ethical conduct, as a basic concept in international law, or as a guarantee of fundamental human rights for all).
Pauline Christianity claimed to be the proper religion for all people.
In other words, by appealing to the Platonic distinction between the material and the ideal, Paul showed how the spirit of Christ could provide all people a way to worship God. The God who had previously been worshipped only by Jews, and Jewish Proselytes, although Jews claimed that He was the one and only God of all, see, for example, Romans 8: 1-4; II Corinthians 3:3; Galatians 3: 14; Philippians 3:3. Although Paul was Hellenic and had his roots in Hellenistic Judaism, it is insisted that Paul was thoroughly Jewish. Nevertheless, Pauline theology made his version of Christianity so appealing to Gentiles, they could not resist. Nevertheless, this Platonic reworking of both Jesus's teachings and Pharisaic Judaism as essential to the emergence of Christianity as a distinct religion, because it justified a Judaism without Jewish law. And in a time that war raged all around, slaves were poor and disabled soldier even poorer any message that it all would get soon better, was eagerly accepted, see also Hitler’s; I will make Germany great again, and Trumps; I will America great again, based on the same principle Paul used.
His actions the events and trends lead to a gradual separation between Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism. Early Christianity ceased to be a Jewish sect when it ceased to observe Jewish practices, when the Popes in Rome decided for a complete separation.
Among the Jewish practices abandoned were Circumcision which was rejected as a requirement at the Council of Jerusalem, c. 50, though the decree of the council parallels Jewish Noahide Law. Sabbath observance was modified, perhaps as early as Ignatius' Epistle to the Magnesians 9.1. Quartodecimanism. The siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 included a major fire at the Temple which destroyed all except the western wall, and what remained (including the altar tablet) was taken by Titus to Rome as trophies. The destruction of Jerusalem, and the loss of significant portions of Jewish cultural records were significant, with Flavius Josephus writing (about 5 year later c. 75 AD) in the "Jewish War" (Book VII 1.1) that Jerusalem had been flattened to the point that "there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited." And once what was left of the ruins of Jerusalem had been turned into the Roman settlement of Aelia Capitolina, no Jews were allowed to set foot in it; and almost no direct records survive about the history of Judaism from the last part of the first century through the second century.
Most early Christians left Jerusalem for Pella just before Jerusalem was subjected to the final lock down in AD 70, in the face of this total destruction we must accept that no first hand Christian document from the early Jerusalem Church has reached us if they ever existed.
Yohanan ben Zakkai, was appointed the first and he re-established the Sanhedrin at Javneh under Pharisee and Roman control. After that two organized groups remained: the Early Christians, and Pharisees. It was at this time, when Christians and Pharisees were competing for leadership of the Jewish people, that accounts of debates between Jesus and the apostles, debates with Pharisees, and anti-Pharisaic passages, were written and incorporated into the New Testament. There is widespread disagreement among scholars on the details of the life of Jesus mentioned in the gospel narratives, and on the meaning of his teachings, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.
According to New Testament, all modern scholars consider the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion to be historically certain, however proof fails. They state that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent" and "rank so high on the 'almost impossible to doubt or deny' scale of historical 'facts' they are obvious starting points for an attempt to clarify the what and why of Jesus' mission, however as said facts are failing." The crucifixion of Jesus is seen as a historical fact and states that based on the criterion of embarrassment Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader. However, from this there is also no factual proof. The criterion of embarrassment is also used to argue in favour of the historicity of the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as it is a story which the early Christian Church would have never wanted to invent, this questionable as the invention would strengthen the story. Based on this criterion, given that John baptised for the remission of sins, and as such, Jesus was viewed as without sin. The invention of this story would have served the purpose to make sure that John would be ranked lower than Jesus, John with sin and Jesus without sin, it forms a clear indication that for this reason the story if it was, was invented and included.
Scholars attribute varying levels of certainty to other episodes. Some assume that there are eight elements about Jesus and his followers that can be viewed as historical facts, namely:
Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist. A disputed presumption.
He called disciples.
He had a controversy at the Temple.
Jesus was crucified by the Romans near Jerusalem.
Jesus was a Galilean.
His activities were confined to Galilee and Judea.
After his death his disciples continued.
Some of his disciples were persecuted.
Scholarly agreement on this extended list is not universal, and is severe doubted.
The Mishnah (c. 200) may refer to Jesus and reflect the early Jewish traditions of portraying Jesus as a sorcerer or magician. Other references to Jesus and his execution exist in the Talmud, but they aim to discredit his actions, not deny his existence.
Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, each with distinct characteristics and based on different research criteria, which were often developed during that phase. The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed in these processes have often differed from each other, and from the dogmatic image portrayed in the gospel accounts. In the 21st century, the third quest for the historical Jesus witnessed a fragmentation of the scholarly portraits of Jesus after which no unified picture of Jesus could be attained at all.
The mainstream profiles in the third quest may be grouped together based on their primary theme as apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish Messiah and prophet of social change. But there is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, or the methods needed to construct it, the reason is that nobody knows what Jesus if he ever existed did look like. There are, however, overlapping attributes among the portraits and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others. The criterion of embarrassment developed during the second quest was applied to the Baptism of Jesus.
The Christ myth theory is the proposition that Jesus of Nazareth never existed, or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity and the accounts in the gospels. Nobody actual knows, was it a Paul invention, was it a Pharisee invention to keep hold over the people, nobody knows. The ones who believe it will say it is true others will say proof it first, while we waiting......... we live in the trust that the creator is at least a reality as we standing on his creation and look at it in the sky at night.