Any Alternative Explanations of Jesus of Nazareth?

[cloudyday2]

Why would it not be possible for the Crucifixion to be the sacrifice of Jesus as the Passover Lamb that came as a result of the Jewish establishment's rejection of God's chosen Messiah? In other words, why either/or? Why not both?

Occam's Razor? Combining both explanations increases the complexity and adds nothing except for being more in-line with tradition.

 

[Uber Genius]

I was trying to pinpoint why I don't call myself a Christian. I'm NOT convinced by the fully naturalistic view of reality promoted by skeptics, because I have experienced seemingly spiritual things - often involving Christian symbols and ideas. So why don't I believe in Christianity? At least one reason I don't believe is that the teachings of Jesus about an imminent Kingdom of Heaven and the climax of the Crucifixion sounds all too much like a mistake. Jesus comes across as a brilliant but deluded religious leader whose idealism was crushed by the heartless practicality of Roman rule.

The usual explanation that Jesus came to be a sacrifice on the Cross for the sins of the world just isn't plausible to me. So I was wondering if there are other ways to understand Jesus that make Christianity workable?

Yes. Absolutely.
We must understand the nature of the Old Testament and its major themes. Mainstream Protestant, Catholic, and Evangelicals have one thing in common, they ignore the second-temple Judaic context of the the NT writers. They read and quoted many ideas about the scriptures that are completely nonsense without the context.
In the OT we see not one but three rebellions:
Adam in the garden
Sin of the Watchers (Gen 6:1-4; 1 Enoch 1-36)
Tower of Babel

The Kingdom of God that Jesus is ushering in is summarily redeeming all three falls. In the 100s of thousands of documents we have found and translated out of the qumeran finds (Dead Sea Scrolls) only a handful isolate Adam's sin as needing to be redeemed thousands of references point to the other rebellions needing to be redeemed as well.

For a comprehensive thematic view of the OT and the NT understood from the perspective of the Second-Temple Jewish cultural context see:

Dr. Heiser is a Semitic Languages Specialist and discusses ancient near east beliefs and how the OT interacts with the various Mesopotamian cultures.

3-4 hours of video will give you a foundation few Christians have.

We can drill down on questions and Kingdom of God after you have that background.

It is very informative and palatable.

 

[cloudyday2]

Dr. Heiser is a Semitic Languages Specialist and discusses ancient near east beliefs and how the OT interacts with the various Mesopotamian cultures.

3-4 hours of video will give you a foundation few Christians have.

We can drill down on questions and Kingdom of God after you have that background.

It is very informative and palatable.

Thanks! Coincidentally I have been reading "Supernatural" by Heiser, and I just finished "Reversing Hermon". I thought "Reversing Hermon" had a lot of interesting information, but I didn't like his style of writing. I haven't gone far enough into "Supernatural" to form a judgment.

I haven't watched your links, but how does Heiser explain the Crucifixion? If he explained that in "Reversing Hermon" I overlooked it.

 

[Starcomet]

I can answer any questions as to how I approach Jesus if you message me. I will try to help.

 

[Uber Genius]

Thanks! Coincidentally I have been reading "Supernatural" by Heiser, and I just finished "Reversing Hermon". I thought "Reversing Hermon" had a lot of interesting information, but I didn't like his style of writing. I haven't gone far enough into "Supernatural" to form a judgment.

I haven't watched your links, but how does Heiser explain the Crucifixion? If he explained that in "Reversing Hermon" I overlooked it.

He is focused on the divine council worldview that starts with God intending man to help Him govern Earth and through 3 separate rebellions, Adamic, Noahic, and Babel, God hands over governership of the world to "70 other gods." These are former members of the divine counsel filled with "Sons of God." They are opposed to God's purposes and draw the people they govern into false worship. God creates a separate people he calls his own and he governs (The Jewish Nation).

Reversing Hermon is the book that will describe how Jesus' death and resurrection reverse all of the previous rebellions. Specifically chapter 6. "When Jesus chose to go to Mount Hermon to be transfigured, He was claiming it for the Kingdom of God."

According to Heiser's reading, Jesus was reversing the damage done by the Watchers when they came to the same mountain and made a pact to sin against God together.

He is not addressing the crucifiction and resurrection in terms of the typical framework due to the fact that the ideas of penal substitution, Christus Victor, ransom theory, all apply, but what hasn't been made clear was how the geography ties back to Hermon and the pact by the Watchers.

Kingdom of God is central to Jesus' message. But to understand KOG, we must recognize that it entails authority to rule. When we look at the NT understanding we see the following features (this is not Mike Heiser anymore, this is George Eldon Ladd):
Kingdom has present and future elements
Jesus ushers in the KOG with his ministry of destroying the work of the evil one, casting out demons, healing the sick, preaching the gospel.
Jesus gives authority to the 12 then 70 to do the same (Luke 10 and 11, Matt 11, Mark 6).
As they engage and defeat Satan's work and make disciples they are transforming people unwittingly serving Satan to people openly opposed to Satan who destroy Satan's work and his army at every encounter.

Heiser sets a deeper context that convinces us this is not just about saying the "sinner's pray," attending church, and voting republican. Throughout history there have been a number of cosmic battles and humans have the privilege to join in God's plan and those who fight and persevere will sit on God's throne and rule with him (or sit around playing harps all day long I can't remember which it is).

I have prayed for lots of people who were sick and a few have been supernaturally healed according to a physician. I have cast out demons numerous times and helped Christians and non-Christians overcome evil in their lives. I have preached the gospel to hundreds and a couple dozen have given their lives to Christ. My point is that we can join the battle. And if done correctly, you will walk with a limp. Satan doesn't pay attention to Christians in Name Only. You will know you've got it right when the persecution shows up. Ping me if you have questions about KOG. It is taught poorly many places. Ladd was enormous helpful. John Wimber made Ladd's work easy to implement.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

The usual explanation that Jesus came to be a sacrifice on the Cross for the sins of the world just isn't plausible to me. So I was wondering if there are other ways to understand Jesus that make Christianity workable?

No.
CHRIST CRUCIFIED ! is THE message , THE PLAN, GOD'S PLAN... to save who-so-ever will call on Him to be saved from THIS EVIL POPULATION.

The only ATONEMENT for your sin is BY THE BLOOD OF JESUS, THE PERFECT LAMB of YAHWEH SLAIN for our sins, in our place.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Why would it not be possible for the Crucifixion to be the sacrifice of Jesus as the Passover Lamb that came as a result of the Jewish establishment's rejection of God's chosen Messiah? In other words, why either/or? Why not both?

If you look at the details of the passover sacrifice and the subsequent eating of it, then compare it to the other types of sacrifices in the OT, the passover is NOT a sin offering. It is closest to a peace offering.

 

[cloudyday2]

I have prayed for lots of people who were sick and a few have been supernaturally healed according to a physician. I have cast out demons numerous times and helped Christians and non-Christians overcome evil in their lives. I have preached the gospel to hundreds and a couple dozen have given their lives to Christ. My point is that we can join the battle. And if done correctly, you will walk with a limp. Satan doesn't pay attention to Christians in Name Only. You will know you've got it right when the persecution shows up. Ping me if you have questions about KOG. It is taught poorly many places. Ladd was enormous helpful. John Wimber made Ladd's work easy to implement.

Thanks, I didn't see your reply until now. I have noticed the alerts don't always work.

So I agree that the Book of Enoch and other apocryphal texts influenced early Christianity, but how do you as a modern Christian accept that fact without losing faith? As I read Heiser's book "Reversing Hermon" I found myself wondering how he could know these things and continue to be a Christian.

Of course you have the evidence of seeing your prayers answered when sick people were healed, but what about the possibility that a non-Christian God answered your prayers instead of a Christian God? Maybe the non-Christian God isn't concerned about your religious ideas but wants to encourage your empathy by sometimes answering your intercessory prayers.

 

[SinoBen]

At least one reason I don't believe is that the teachings of Jesus about an imminent Kingdom of Heaven and the climax of the Crucifixion sounds all too much like a mistake. Jesus comes across as a brilliant but deluded religious leader whose idealism was crushed by the heartless practicality of Roman rule.

The usual explanation that Jesus came to be a sacrifice on the Cross for the sins of the world just isn't plausible to me. So I was wondering if there are other ways to understand Jesus that make Christianity workable?

Freedom is not free. There's responsibility and there is a price to pay.

 

[ananda]

I was trying to pinpoint why I don't call myself a Christian. I'm NOT convinced by the fully naturalistic view of reality promoted by skeptics, because I have experienced seemingly spiritual things - often involving Christian symbols and ideas. So why don't I believe in Christianity? At least one reason I don't believe is that the teachings of Jesus about an imminent Kingdom of Heaven and the climax of the Crucifixion sounds all too much like a mistake. Jesus comes across as a brilliant but deluded religious leader whose idealism was crushed by the heartless practicality of Roman rule.

The usual explanation that Jesus came to be a sacrifice on the Cross for the sins of the world just isn't plausible to me. So I was wondering if there are other ways to understand Jesus that make Christianity workable?

IMO I suspect he may have come into contact with the Essenes and Therapeutae at the time, two groups that may have arisen due to the missionary efforts of the Buddhist Emperor Ashoka, all the way into the middle east, around 200+ years before his birth.

The groups seemed to arisen from a fusion of their knowledge of their native Judaism with the ideas introduced by Buddhism. If Jesus was exposed to these ideas, he could have easily learned about the more esoteric Buddhist practices like meditation which, when practiced, could have given him some miraculous powers (cf Matthew 6:6), and a recollection of an allegedly almighty God (c.f. DN1 paragraphs 38-44) among his council of lesser gods/angels, as Buddhism also teaches.

Exposure to the Buddhist virtues (loving-kindness, compassion, empathetic joy, and equanimity) might have very well compelled Jesus to preach similarly, in opposition to (or perhaps, a modification of) the hard-line, ritualistic Judaism of his day.

This exposure might also explain things like Paul's description of a third level of heaven (2 Corinthians 12:2). Compare this with Buddhist ideas of a multiplicity of levels of heavens, each more refined and blissful than the last: The third heaven in Buddhism is the realm of the Great Brahma - "a deity whose delusion leads him to regard himself as the all-powerful, all-seeing creator of the universe"; this is the deity which those of lesser meditative development would preach about on earth, as is described in DN1 38-44.

Then there are hints about rebirth in the Bible, e.g. Matthew 11:13-14, John 9:1-2, Job 1:21, Hebrews 7:10, etc.

As for the Crucifixion: he was probably just seen as a threat by and to the establishment (Jewish & Roman), and it was a way to eliminate it. It is not unknown in Buddhist scriptures to read where a man dies, finds himself reborn as a deva-god in one of the heavens, then returns to visit earth (e.g. MN 143).

 

[cloudyday2]

IMO I suspect he may have come into contact with the Essenes and Therapeutae at the time, two groups that may have arisen due to the missionary efforts of the Buddhist Emperor Ashoka, all the way into the middle east, around 200+ years before his birth.

I agree that Jesus and the Early Christians had some commonalities with the Essenes and Therapeutae, but also they has some differences, and I don't see know about the Buddhist commonalities or differences. There is nothing moderate about Jesus or the Essenes, and I thought that moderation was important in Buddhism.

Here are some random differences between Jesus and the Essenes:
- the story of the ox falling in a ditch on the Sabbath was a specific teaching of the Essenes that Jesus was ridiculing
- the Essenes didn't allow people with physical imperfections such as diseases or blindness to join

The similarities are:
- John the Baptist is thought to have been an Essene
- the common property of the early Christians
- the centrality of the communal dining that later evolved into the Eucharist
- the hostility to the Jewish Temple which the Essenes considered hopelessly defiled
- the references to early Christians as "the elect"
- the importance of the "Son of Man" and a coming apocalyptic battle between good and evil

You can probably do better than me on listing differences and similarities with Buddhism because I've never been able to understand Buddhism.

 

[ananda]

There is nothing moderate about Jesus or the Essenes, and I thought that moderation was important in Buddhism.

Moderation of the Buddha's "middle way" is generally only in reference to a point of balance between the extreme pains of asceticism and the extreme pleasures of indulgence. It does not involve moderation of all things.

 

[Peter1000]

IMO I suspect he may have come into contact with the Essenes and Therapeutae at the time, two groups that may have arisen due to the missionary efforts of the Buddhist Emperor Ashoka, all the way into the middle east, around 200+ years before his birth.

The groups seemed to arisen from a fusion of their knowledge of their native Judaism with the ideas introduced by Buddhism. If Jesus was exposed to these ideas, he could have easily learned about the more esoteric Buddhist practices like meditation which, when practiced, could have given him some miraculous powers (cf Matthew 6:6), and a recollection of an allegedly almighty God (c.f. DN1 paragraphs 38-44) among his council of lesser gods/angels, as Buddhism also teaches.

Exposure to the Buddhist virtues () might have very well compelled Jesus to preach similarly, in opposition to (or perhaps, a modification of) the hard-line, ritualistic Judaism of his day.

This exposure might also explain things like Paul's description of a third level of heaven (2 Corinthians 12:2). Compare this with Buddhist ideas of a multiplicity of levels of heavens, each more refined and blissful than the last: The third heaven in Buddhism is the realm of the Great Brahma - "a deity whose delusion leads him to regard himself as the all-powerful, all-seeing creator of the universe"; this is the deity which those of lesser meditative development would preach about on earth, as is described in DN1 38-44.

Then there are hints about rebirth in the Bible, e.g. Matthew 11:13-14, John 9:1-2, Job 1:21, Hebrews 7:10, etc.

As for the Crucifixion: he was probably just seen as a threat by and to the establishment (Jewish & Roman), and it was a way to eliminate it. It is not unknown in Buddhist scriptures to read where a man dies, finds himself reborn as a deva-god in one of the heavens, then returns to visit earth (e.g. MN 143).

Interestingly enough, your post uses these words: IMO, suspect, may, seemed, if, could have, might, hints. As you know, these words do not command confidence in your theories.

We believe that Jesus was the God of the OT people, from the beginning of earth time. So the good tennants of Budhism and other isms are a reflection of his teachings to Adam, and the Patriarchal line of prophets down through time.

Many times there was apostacy from the truth. The people rejected God and His teachings. It is during these times of apostacy that alternative belief systems were able to take hold. They had similar teachings such as loving-kindness, compassion, empathetic joy, and equanimity. But they lacked the centerpiece of Jesus Christ as Son of God and Savior of all mankind.
So Jesus Christ, Son of God came first, and all other aberations of that doctrine came later. So the idea that Jesus Christ in the flesh would absorb an alternative gospel or doctrine is not compatable with his gospel (the only gospel).

IOW, Jesus would teach the Budha, not the other way around. The Budha will oneday be taught the true gospel, and when he hears it, perhaps from Jesus himself, he will kneel before Jesus and acknowledge his Godhood and ask to be permitted into his kingdom. Budha, being a great man, will come to know the love of Jesus and will readily believe. You see, in Budha's day, the gospel of Jesus was not taught, being a time of apostacy, therefore he did not have a chance to hear the true gospel and with his eyes not wide open, did the best he could to come to spiritual balance in his life. He will, however, get an opportunity to know Jesus and he will believe.

Third heaven interesting and also interesting is your words about the great Brahma - "a deity whose delusion leads him to regard himself as the all-powerful, all-seeing creator of the universe". Are you sure you want to use the word "delusion" in this context?

 

[ananda]

Interestingly enough, your post uses these words: IMO, suspect, may, seemed, if, could have, might, hints. As you know, these words do not command confidence in your theories.

Yes. I purposely used those words to show that I do not know, through direct experience, the alternative explanation I provided in my post. In the same way, I do not know, though direct experience, the claims of the common Bible either. I was just writing about a potential alternative, as the OP requested.

We believe that Jesus was the God of the OT people, from the beginning of earth time. So the good tennants of Budhism and other isms are a reflection of his teachings to Adam, and the Patriarchal line of prophets down through time.

Many times there was apostacy from the truth. The people rejected God and His teachings. It is during these times of apostacy that alternative belief systems were able to take hold. They had similar teachings such as loving-kindness, compassion, empathetic joy, and equanimity. But they lacked the centerpiece of Jesus Christ as Son of God and Savior of all mankind.
So Jesus Christ, Son of God came first, and all other aberations of that doctrine came later. So the idea that Jesus Christ in the flesh would absorb an alternative gospel or doctrine is not compatable with his gospel (the only gospel).

IOW, Jesus would teach the Budha, not the other way around. The Budha will oneday be taught the true gospel, and when he hears it, perhaps from Jesus himself, he will kneel before Jesus and acknowledge his Godhood and ask to be permitted into his kingdom. Budha, being a great man, will come to know the love of Jesus and will readily believe. You see, in Budha's day, the gospel of Jesus was not taught, being a time of apostacy, therefore he did not have a chance to hear the true gospel and with his eyes not wide open, did the best he could to come to spiritual balance in his life. He will, however, get an opportunity to know Jesus and he will believe.

I personally know about loving-kindness, compassion, empathetic joy, and equanimity (things taught in Buddhism). I do not personally know the allegations about Jesus, the God of the OT, Adam, the patriarchs, prophets, the son of god, savior, etc (things taught in Christianity).

Third heaven interesting and also interesting is your words about the great Brahma - "a deity whose delusion leads him to regard himself as the all-powerful, all-seeing creator of the universe". Are you sure you want to use the word "delusion" in this context?

Yes, it is a word translated from the existing Pali.

 

[Uber Genius]

Thanks, I didn't see your reply until now. I have noticed the alerts don't always work.

So I agree that the Book of Enoch and other apocryphal texts influenced early Christianity, but how do you as a modern Christian accept that fact without losing faith? As I read Heiser's book "Reversing Hermon" I found myself wondering how he could know these things and continue to be a Christian.

Of course you have the evidence of seeing your prayers answered when sick people were healed, but what about the possibility that a non-Christian God answered your prayers instead of a Christian God? Maybe the non-Christian God isn't concerned about your religious ideas but wants to encourage your empathy by sometimes answering your intercessory prayers.

I would need more details to understand how an Enochian account of the context of paasage in the NT is faith-weakening. It is not intuitively obvious why that would be the case.

Secondly, my reasons for believing Chritianity is the best explanation of the world I see around me has to do with cosmological, teleological, moral, and transcendent arguments, historical facts and claims, as well as a posteriori experiences of a personal, loving God. So although various religious cultures will producing healing, and some types of prophecy, words of knowledge, and even some relief from demonic attack, they are less able to account for other features of the external world. So my belief that Jesus is the one choosing to Heal is part of a rich tapestry of premises in support of arguments giving my belief warrant.

 

[Peter1000]

Yes. I purposely used those words to show that I do not know, through direct experience, the alternative explanation I provided in my post. In the same way, I do not know, though direct experience, the claims of the common Bible either. I was just writing about a potential alternative, as the OP requested.

I personally know about loving-kindness, compassion, empathetic joy, and equanimity (things taught in Buddhism). I do not personally know the allegations about Jesus, the God of the OT, Adam, the patriarchs, prophets, the son of god, savior, etc (things taught in Christianity).

Yes, it is a word translated from the existing Pali.

You are aware that "delusion" would imply that the great Brahma was delusional in thinking that he was a deity and the all-powerful, all-seeing creator of the universe? He is not. Jesus Christ is the all-powerful, all-seeing creator of the universe, and he had no delusion that he was.

You might consider looking into Jesus Christ, the creator and Jesus Christ, the God of the OT, and Jesus Christ incarnation of, and Jesus Christ in the flesh, and Jesus Christ, the God of Adam and the Adamic line or Patriarchal men of God since the beginning, and Jesus Christ, teaching of, and Jesus Christ, resurrected, and Jesus Christ, second return of.

Learn about Jesus, his teachings fit very well with Budha's teachings. The one major thing Budha lacks is Jesus Christ and his role in our Eternal life. But that makes all the difference in the world.

 

[ananda]

You are aware that "delusion" would imply that the great Brahma was delusional in thinking that he was a deity and the all-powerful, all-seeing creator of the universe? He is not. Jesus Christ is the all-powerful, all-seeing creator of the universe, and he had no delusion that he was.

How did you come to know (not merely believe) for yourself that he has no delusion?

You might consider looking into Jesus Christ, the creator and Jesus Christ, the God of the OT, and Jesus Christ incarnation of, and Jesus Christ in the flesh, and Jesus Christ, the God of Adam and the Adamic line or Patriarchal men of God since the beginning, and Jesus Christ, teaching of, and Jesus Christ, resurrected, and Jesus Christ, second return of.

Learn about Jesus, his teachings fit very well with Budha's teachings. The one major thing Budha lacks is Jesus Christ and his role in our Eternal life. But that makes all the difference in the world.

There are many teachings attributed to Jesus in the Bible that does not fit with the Buddha's teachings.

 

[Peter1000]

How did you come to know (not merely believe) for yourself that he has no delusion?

There are many teachings attributed to Jesus in the Bible that does not fit with the Buddha's teachings.

First of all, he does not tell us he is delusional. That's a good start. Jesus tells us exactly who he is.

Second, after he was resurrected, and ascended to heaven, he returned to visit the martyr Stephen. Who testifies just before he is put to death, that the heavens were opened, and he saw Jesus standing on the right side of God in his glory.

Third, after the appearance to Stephen, Jesus returned again to the apostle Paul. In his glory he appeared to Paul and instructed him to stop working against him and start working for him.

So Jesus had no delusion about who he was. He is the all-powerful, all-seeing Creator of the Universe.
Men have seen him as a human, and men have seen him in his glory, in his Godhood.

 

[Steve Petersen]

First of all, he does not tell us he is delusional. That's a good start. Jesus tells us exactly who he is.

Rather, his followers tell you who THEY think he is.

Second, after he was resurrected, and ascended to heaven, he returned to visit the martyr Stephen. Who testifies just before he is put to death, that the heavens were opened, and he saw Jesus standing on the right side of God in his glory.

Third, after the appearance to Stephen, Jesus returned again to the apostle Paul. In his glory he appeared to Paul and instructed him to stop working against him and start working for him.

Nice stories. Prove any of them are true.

 

[ananda]

First of all, he does not tell us he is delusional. That's a good start. Jesus tells us exactly who he is.

Second, after he was resurrected, and ascended to heaven, he returned to visit the martyr Stephen. Who testifies just before he is put to death, that the heavens were opened, and he saw Jesus standing on the right side of God in his glory.

Third, after the appearance to Stephen, Jesus returned again to the apostle Paul. In his glory he appeared to Paul and instructed him to stop working against him and start working for him.

So Jesus had no delusion about who he was. He is the all-powerful, all-seeing Creator of the Universe.
Men have seen him as a human, and men have seen him in his glory, in his Godhood.

Aren't all these things which you've heard from others (hearsay), and haven't experienced any of it for yourself?