• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Star of Bethlehem

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Zealot yes, semi passive yes. Teacher/healer yes. Political activist, in my opinion yes.

Yes, yes, yes and yes. Cool! No probs with that


Jesus had a small traveling movement, if it was large, not only would they not be fed enough to survive living on generosity, but they would have been visible to authorities.

They hung around the Lake. It gave them food, a variety of venues, access to their own, and food!

Jesus in my opinion was smart enough not to become large or well known. he had witnessed the mistakes JtB made and avoided growing large and well known in one spot. Being well knowmn is what got JtB killed, Jesus didnt make the same mistake.

No probs.

No it cannot.

There probably wasnt a trial. And at no time ever has there ever been a choice given to free jewish prisoners.

Pilate was a bloodthirsty killer who would never be portrayed as wishy washy. he wasnt.

Barrabas........ is there no record of his existence? Pilate survived ten years in careful diplomacy with a difficult country. One mistake and he was gone, which of course happened.

Remember these books were for Romans, they were not going to write in the truth of how brutal the Romans really were. They were placing the guilt on the Jews with this story.

The Romans did not get a good press in the Gospels. Jesus is clearly shown to be prefering (wanting) to speak with his own... not bloody romans or upper-jews. Saul/Paul jazzed it up for the Romans, and his influence affected the Gospels, even after his death. All of Christianity is Pauline, save for much of the (1st two) Gospels.

Thanks for the links
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
And the Festival was in Jerusalem, true?

Yes....... they say it was a huge event. I have read that the priesthood somehow forbade or heavily discouraged any kind of sacrifice anywhere else in the land, and thus, a huge company of people assembled for festivals, and probably visited regular 'business' at other times.

The people were not allowed to use their own currency to purchase sacrifices or give offerings with, and the financial turnover amongst the brokers would have been massive. The taxation point was easy for the ruling Jews, which probably followed some kind of system recognised by the Romans.

Outhouse reckons that up to 400,000 vistors would have congregated for the Passover festival. So I don't reckon the senior priesthood would have been anywhere else!!

The whole event....... the whole country just seems to have been a corrupted mess. I once was told that prophets only ever appear at such times and in such places. They (some of the historians) say that there were masses of people like Jesus all around the land, but I can't see that. I reckon that after John/Baptist's murder that Jesus stood out as a solitary point of light in the darkness...... well, as seen by those who knew or had heard of him. That, and his moments of anger in the Temple would have triggered the actions leading to his death.

But ...... what do you think?
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Yes....... they say it was a huge event. I have read that the priesthood somehow forbade or heavily discouraged any kind of sacrifice anywhere else in the land, and thus, a huge company of people assembled for festivals, and probably visited regular 'business' at other times.

The people were not allowed to use their own currency to purchase sacrifices or give offerings with, and the financial turnover amongst the brokers would have been massive. The taxation point was easy for the ruling Jews, which probably followed some kind of system recognised by the Romans.

Outhouse reckons that up to 400,000 vistors would have congregated for the Passover festival. So I don't reckon the senior priesthood would have been anywhere else!!

The whole event....... the whole country just seems to have been a corrupted mess. I once was told that prophets only ever appear at such times and in such places. They (some of the historians) say that there were masses of people like Jesus all around the land, but I can't see that. I reckon that after John/Baptist's murder that Jesus stood out as a solitary point of light in the darkness...... well, as seen by those who knew or had heard of him. That, and his moments of anger in the Temple would have triggered the actions leading to his death.

But ...... what do you think?


A few points

The Saducees ran the temple.

The Saducees were a hated group, who did not survive after the temple fell.

Before the temple fell, the Pharisees were also greedy hence the
"Woe's of the Pharisees" and were known for using Roman muscle to extort tithes from the common man

Caiaphas was placed in power by the Romans.

Caiaphas ran the temple which was the Jewish treasury


There were many teachers/healers, some were famous as they recorded their events and magic. Look at the battle of magic where Jesus drops the other guy after lifting him up in the air breaking his leg.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
A few points
Great......

The Saducees ran the temple.
OK.........

The Saducees were a hated group, who did not survive after the temple fell.
Nobody survived after the temple fell! :D But, yeah....ok.
But that was 40 years later.

Before the temple fell, the Pharisees were also greedy hence the
"Woe's of the Pharisees" and were known for using Roman muscle to extort tithes from the common man
Yep........

Caiaphas was placed in power by the Romans.

Caiaphas ran the temple which was the Jewish treasury
Yes...... I understand that the Jews 'milked' their own, and passed tribute up to the Romans. They were everything that Jesus accused them of....


There were many teachers/healers, some were famous as they recorded their events and magic. Look at the battle of magic where Jesus drops the other guy after lifting him up in the air breaking his leg.
I'm just going to look that up....... wherever I can find it. I did not know about it. Some were famous? Forgetting the chumps who promised to part Jordan's waters, or find Moses' tablets, etc..... can you think of any?


I don't think that Jesus fits your findings about him closely.
I don't think.......:
....that he 'worked' villages and hamlets with 'magic' for a meal.
.....that he was a messianic after Crosson's 'model'.
...... that his main ministry was a only week (or so).
....... that he was very 'reduced', more of just a stoic.
.........that he was an unknown nobody. Amongst his own he was known.
..........that he only had a very few 'hangers on'. They filled (local) dwellings, and several instances are described where, for instance his mother and brothershad to wait outside.
Question:- Do you know how big a local dwelling was?
etc etc

But I do think that he fits your findings in that.....:
.........He remained in and around Galilee for most of his ministry
.........He travelled down to Jerusalem one, twice, or so.
.........He kept his head down, amongst his own.
.........He told his disciples to keep their heads down as well.
.........He taught, guided, healed his own.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
There were many teachers/healers, some were famous as they recorded their events and magic. Look at the battle of magic where Jesus drops the other guy after lifting him up in the air breaking his leg.

I can't find it. Don't know where to look.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Question:- Do you know how big a local dwelling was?

Yes.

But geographic location was key.

A family would live in a very very small space, the size of our small bedrooms, would be the size of most houses. They lived with their animals in the same house. Two story houses would have a loft in which the people slept, animals in the basement/first story.

I dont see Nazareth having a lot of two story houses in the first century, I think it was more single story, with rock courtyards and rock fences to keep animals in, if one even had animals.


....that he 'worked' villages and hamlets with 'magic' for a meal.

It wasnt magic for a meal, but there were always people who needed some sort of medical help, Candida Moss claims christianity started out as free health care for the poverty stricken. So we know Jesus healed when he could. As would many teachers.

Again part of his message would have been political, his death was. he didnt die for being peaceful and spreading love.

.....that he was a messianic after Crosson's 'model'.

Crossan goes overboard on different aspects of Jesus movement. I dont think Jesus viewed himself as a messiah. After his death, people made that claim.


...... that his main ministry was a only week (or so).

I never stated a week

We dont know. 1 to 3 years is what is typically thought.

Im sure his movement evolved.

.........that he was an unknown nobody. Amongst his own he was known.

Define "his own" Judaism was wide and diverse. He didnt focus on the rich, they sort of were after the outcast type living on the fringe. Yet we have him making friends with tax collectors and teaching to those the outcast type would hate. He had dinner with Zacc and got him to give back its stated much of his profits.

I think Hellenistic Judaism was not "his own" and those who were poor and oppressed Galileans were his own. Many may have known of him as he traveled but this wasnt widespread popularity where he would go into a village and be known by all. he wasnt known by all.

We have passages in Gmark where he goes into these small villages and yells, Listen! Listen to me! so that he can get peoples attention to get his message out. It definately was not "Oh look" its Jesus coming everyone run out and circle him like a rock star.

Before his death unknown, after his death people came out of the woodwork describing events and details. This isnt the oral tradition were left with. It had to go cross culturally after decades within the campfires of Hellenistic Proselytes before these collections were compiled into stories that were later compiled in literature. And if you didnt know, written material had little value since most couldnt read. Carrier goes into this in detail.


..........that he only had a very few 'hangers on'. They filled (local) dwellings, and several instances are described where, for instance his mother and brothershad to wait outside.

They were not hangers on. He had a very small movement as that is what it took to #1 eat to survive, and #2 to not be noticed and survive by not looking like a political threat, sedition. 12 guys traveling around would look like a threat.

But most of all, your reading Hellenistic Proselytes version who are competing Jesus divinity with the Roman Emporers. Roman Emporers were worshipped as "son of god" before Jesus was born. They placed him many times talking in front of large crowds just like the Emporer, then attributed miracles to make him more grand then Emporers.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
And to keep on topic, these same Proselytes who wrote the scriptures competing Roman divinity, used Augustus "son of god" divnity taking his story from Caesar and using his celestial event for Jesus birth with the brightest star in the night sky.

This is followed by quite a few of the best scholars we have.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Again part of his message would have been political, his death was. he didnt die for being peaceful and spreading love.

John the Baptist died because he was popular, and the crowds that gathered around him worried Herod.

Also, there might have been a smaller element similar to above, plus the priests did not like his speeches, plus he 'lost it' in the Temple. I want to include those three 'causes' for his arrest, trial and execution.
No Trial? If you had been a senior Sadducee, you would have wanted him dragged before you. You would have wanted to watch his reduction. For his death, you would have needed to send him along to Pilate, who was interested in the case because of how it p-ssed off the priesthood.
Yes..... Pilate could kill with a gesture, no doubt, but this case would have mildly interested him.

It seems reasonable to accept that at Passover Pilate would grant a request from the 'populace' made through the priesthood :)D) and Barrabus may well have existed. Pilate must have enjoyed this kind of situation as a relief from the humdrum of running a difficult land.

Crossan goes overboard on different aspects of Jesus movement. I dont think Jesus viewed himself as a messiah. After his death, people made that claim.
Yes......

I never stated a week
We dont know. 1 to 3 years is what is typically thought.
Im sure his movement evolved.
Yes.......

Define "his own" Judaism was wide and diverse. He didnt focus on the rich, they sort of were after the outcast type living on the fringe. Yet we have him making friends with tax collectors and teaching to those the outcast type would hate. He had dinner with Zacc and got him to give back its stated much of his profits.

I think Hellenistic Judaism was not "his own" and those who were poor and oppressed Galileans were his own. Many may have known of him as he traveled but this wasnt widespread popularity where he would go into a village and be known by all. he wasnt known by all.

I like that........ I agree...... I reckon that the Lakeside-people were his people. Hence the lakeside meetings and in the hills beside the lake. He wasn't for the rich, although he helped them when they came (because they had heard about him :yes:)

Because he walked into (through?) villages, calling out to the people, that does not make him 'unknown' to Galilee. Mrs Badger can't believe how few celebrities I don't know about, but the rest of the world does know them (apparently!)


Before his death unknown, after his death people came out of the woodwork describing events and details.
I can't accept this fully. I reckon he was well known amongst his own. Later his name was used, magnified and built up to 'massive'. I am not interested in the 'massive'. I am interested in the man.


But most of all, your reading Hellenistic Proselytes version who are competing Jesus divinity with the Roman Emporers. Roman Emporers were worshipped as "son of god" before Jesus was born. They placed him many times talking in front of large crowds just like the Emporer, then attributed miracles to make him more grand then Emporers.
I accept that the story was adapted, but so many slips and mistakes were left, that the original true account shows through in places.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
And to keep on topic, these same Proselytes who wrote the scriptures competing Roman divinity, used Augustus "son of god" divnity taking his story from Caesar and using his celestial event for Jesus birth with the brightest star in the night sky.

This is followed by quite a few of the best scholars we have.

You've written this many times. I am not interested in the rubbish that got slipped into the story to impress a crowd of romans. I wish to try and strip out that, to see what can be salvaged from these Pauline lies. I accept that Luke (who did write) and Mark (who did write) and even Matthew (who did write) were manipulated to some extent by Paul before his death and before they wrote. I accept that others interfered with the writings as well. John? I reckon John was a convert of Paul's, and don't read him unless somebody points out a passage.

The very best lies could well be slight adaptations from the truth, where possible. I am interested in the nativity.... don't see why I should throw it out. (baby with bathwater!).

I don't accept:
That the Romans required the populace to go to their natal towns. How crazy! Right, everyone to natal towns, that'll screw up the country for a few weeks! Then, when you've all registered (and we've stripped some cash off you) you can all sod off back to where you came from so we have no clue about where any b-gger is. Super idea! Let's do that.......... what -----.

I do accept:- Everybody goes home. When you're home you will register with the district publican (whoever), then you can go off back to where you were working.

-----------------------------------

I think the census of 5BCE (?) caused a lot of trouble. The working classes moaned, then, rumbled, and then some rebelled. Sepporis was one area where they rebelled. Good on 'em. I would have dragged my old slings out of the roof and checked 'em for decay etc.... made new ones. Drop a few treacherous toffs....... nice thought! Maybe Joseph did?

Maybe he needed to run, after he failure of the revolt? That's why he needed to take pregnant Mary with him. They had to stop somewhere, because she went into labour. (what a nightmare). Working folks helped working folks, hence the shepherds' assistance. Maybe the Magi were in fact wealthy working class merchants who could walk with the rich nor yet lose the common touch, and they advised Joseph on simple night-time navigation. Ergo, follow a star.

Into Egypt. Maybe South was safer than East....... The Romans ruled Egypt, but 'frying pan or fire?' .......Egypt.

Your Emperor? His Deification? His star? His coin? Neat! Reverse the story into all that.

The scholars? ..... I want to read investigators, who can detect some truth from past claims. They can look at what the scholars have found, but the scholars guesses are no better than .......guesses!
 

steeltoes

Junior member
John the Baptist died because he was popular, and the crowds that gathered around him worried Herod.

As Crossan points out there appears to be some confusion between what people believed came from John the Baptist and what came from Jesus:




Mark.

27 "On the way he [Jesus] asked them, "Who do people say I am?"

28 They replied, "Some say John the Baptist."

"29 "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"

Peter answered, "You are the Messiah."

30 Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him."​
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
As Crossan points out there appears to be some confusion between what people believed came from John the Baptist and what came from Jesus:

Mark.

27 "On the way he [Jesus] asked them, "Who do people say I am?"

28 They replied, "Some say John the Baptist."

"29 "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"

Peter answered, "You are the Messiah."

30 Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him."​

Hi again...!

Yes.... I can see that there was confusion. I like the first couple of lines because I can understand how people make mistakes, about all kinds of situations. The next two lines trouble me more. I need to study up on the word 'Messiah'. I expect that most people today (like me!) are confused by just that word....... I've got a feeling that it had a different meaning back then, to what it does amongst, say, christians...... or most people.

I can understand the last sentence, in that Jesus probably did ask his friends, disciples, followers..... don't talk about my whereabouts, where I go, what my habits are etc.... because he was probably cautious after John the Baptist's arrest etc. Actually, it's hard to know if anybody up in Galilee actually knew about John's execution, or, put a different way, how long it took for news to travel.
 

steeltoes

Junior member
Hi again...!

Yes.... I can see that there was confusion. I like the first couple of lines because I can understand how people make mistakes, about all kinds of situations. The next two lines trouble me more. I need to study up on the word 'Messiah'. I expect that most people today (like me!) are confused by just that word....... I've got a feeling that it had a different meaning back then, to what it does amongst, say, christians...... or most people.

I can understand the last sentence, in that Jesus probably did ask his friends, disciples, followers..... don't talk about my whereabouts, where I go, what my habits are etc.... because he was probably cautious after John the Baptist's arrest etc. Actually, it's hard to know if anybody up in Galilee actually knew about John's execution, or, put a different way, how long it took for news to travel.

More confusion; In many gospel scenes Jesus has to deal with large crowds of people gathering wherever he goes, yet some people today claim that Jesus was not well known. Why do you suppose they say this?


Matthew 4:

24 News about him spread all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralyzed; and he healed them.25 Large crowds from Galilee, the Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea and the region across the Jordan followed him.


9: 26 This news spread throughout all that land.



14:1 At that time Herod the tetrarch heard the reports about Jesus


Mark 1:28
News about him spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee.

Luke 4:14
Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside.

15:As evening approached, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a remote place, and it’s already getting late. Send the crowds away, so they can go to the villages and buy themselves some food.”


John 21

:25Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
More confusion; In many gospel scenes Jesus has to deal with large crowds of people gathering wherever he goes, yet some people today claim that Jesus was not well known. Why do you suppose they say this?

Hi again...... I'm sorry that I can't answer for other people..... can only answer for myself. I don't think Jesus was as well known as many of the Gospels reports suggest. Reason? We (you, me and the rest of us) have a tendency to exaggerate reports beyond our own emotions and feelings, whether into the positive or the negative. And so something 'good' can become something 'fantastic' (whatever), and something bad can become something dreadful, horrific, terrible etc.. Then there is hyperbole, then written agenda, then propaganda.....and so on. And so I have learned to consider this whenever I have had to hear or read reports about situations from other people. In the above examples that you have given, I think Jesus was known, popular, loved, needed in and around Galilee. Some desperate people might have traveled further. That's my view and interpretation.

What do you think?

Matthew 4:
24 News about him spread all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralyzed; and he healed them.25 Large crowds from Galilee, the Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea and the region across the Jordan followed him.

I think Jesus would have been able to help with a very high % of all the conditions mentioned above. But I now believe that if he had been as popular as written above, he would have been taken and executed earlier.

9: 26 This news spread throughout all that land.
Galilee?

14:1 At that time Herod the tetrarch heard the reports about Jesus
Yes.... He heard about John the Baptists soon enough....

Mark 1:28
News about him spread quickly over the whole region of Galilee.
Perfect, imo.

Luke 4:14
Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside.
Perfect, imo

15:As evening approached, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a remote place, and it’s already getting late. Send the crowds away, so they can go to the villages and buy themselves some food.”
Yes...... I can believe this

John 21
:25Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

I don't trust John much. His motive was fine and he probably believed everything that he wrote, but I believe he was a very keen convert, not the disciple.


What do you think?
 

gnostic

The Lost One
I have not posted much lately, because we have gone-off-the-beaten-track...that now I'm utterly lost. :eek:
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
I have not posted much lately, because we have gone-off-the-beaten-track...that now I'm utterly lost. :eek:

Hi!
Well.....:eek: ....... it was like this...... we just veered off course into all kinds of 'historical-Jesus' discussions. I guess we could have got told off for that.

But since the thread is supposed to be about 'Star of Bethlehem', I did post some suggestions as to how the star might really have come into the story. Sadly, the nativity seems to have been totally discarded by historians.

I've just read this from Wiki. Here is the www address and sentence:-
Nativity of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bruce Chilton and archaeologist Aviram Oshri have proposed a birth at Bethlehem of Galilee, a site located seven miles from Nazareth at which remains dating to the time of Herod the Great have been excavated.

I didn't know about this place, just seven miles away. It always seemed crazy to me that taxpayers would be expected to travel to their natal towns, or that Censors would want to register taxpayers anywhere other than their homes.

The idea that Joseph would have taken his heavily pregnant wife on an 80+ mile trudge when only he himself would have needed to report for poll and trade-tax........ seems strange.

However, regardless of all that, I'm sad that the historians have chucked the nativity away, and don't seem to want to review that decision. I reckon that the star event/situation was about an important aspect of the nativity story,possibly to do with travel and navigation ...... maybe for Joseph and Mary's escape somewhere.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
oldbadger said:
Well.....:eek: ....... it was like this...... we just veered off course into all kinds of 'historical-Jesus' discussions. I guess we could have got told off for that.

But since the thread is supposed to be about 'Star of Bethlehem', I did post some suggestions as to how the star might really have come into the story. Sadly, the nativity seems to have been totally discarded by historians.

To me, I see 2 different nativity myths from 2 different authors. It is not possible to tell which story is correct, but as far as I can tell both of them inventions of their own makings.

I don't think there can ever be historical nativity.
 

steeltoes

Junior member
To me, I see 2 different nativity myths from 2 different authors. It is not possible to tell which story is correct, but as far as I can tell both of them inventions of their own makings.

I don't think there can ever be historical nativity.

So much for oral tradition. Mark is not aware of a birth story and even has Mary and family coming to collect Jesus because they thought he had lost his mind. Did she forget all that virgin birth stuff that made him divine? John lacks a birth story as well.

Mark 3:21 When his [Jesus] family heard what was happening, they tried to take him away. "He's out of his mind," they said.
 

steeltoes

Junior member
Hi!
Well.....:eek: ....... it was like this...... we just veered off course into all kinds of 'historical-Jesus' discussions. I guess we could have got told off for that.

...

However, regardless of all that, I'm sad that the historians have chucked the nativity away, and don't seem to want to review that decision. I reckon that the star event/situation was about an important aspect of the nativity story,possibly to do with travel and navigation ...... maybe for Joseph and Mary's escape somewhere.

I think the star has more to do with setting the plot. A future king is born amongst ordinary people and some day he will challenge the throne.
 
Last edited:

Rakhel

Well-Known Member
Mark: This is the story as my grandparents told me and my brothers...
Matthew: Well, that's not the story my grandparents told me. The story went like this...
Luke: While those stories are close, they are not the stories I was told. The actual story went like this...
John: You're all wrong. The story went like this...
 
Top