----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Deborah Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 5:44 PM
Subject: Jesus-anity (was: New Hate-Mongering Chick Tract is out)


> > Travis Edmunds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > DISCLAIMER: I'm a rather agnostic fellow who has
> > some major problems with
> > organized religion. I think that should clear up any
> > potential misunderstandings below.
> <snip>
>
> > I really should add something more though. You say
> > that the Christianity
> > (which, like it or not IS based upon the teachings
> > of Jesus)...
>
> [Note: I tend to view the Gospel of John with a fair
> amount of reserve, as it differs from the other 3 in
> many respects, and was probably written later as
> well.]
>
> I think we have more Paul-anity, Augustine-anity, and
> even Aquinis-anity than actual Jesus-anity; many of
> his messages were - and still are - quite radical:
> Love your enemy?  Break bread with society's dregs?
> Judge not lest ye be judged likewise?

I find your quote interesting in that your sources for the views of Jesus
are older than the Paul that you question..The oldest known fragment of
those who considered Jesus the Christ is quoted in Philippians 2:6-11.

While being in the form of God
did not count equality with God
something to be grasped.

But he emptied himself
taking the form of a slave
becoming as human beings are

and being in every way like a human being
he was humbler yet,
even to accepting death, death on a cross.

And for this God raised him high
and gave him the name
which is above all other names

so that all beings
in the heavens, on earth and in the underworld
should bend the knee at the name of Jesus

and that every tongue should acknowledge
Jesus Christ as Lord
to the glory of the Father.

This probably dates back to the '40s.  Paul was from the mid 50's to the
mid 60's or so.  Mark, 67-70, Luke and Matt 80s, and John mid-late 90s,
with final redaction in the early 100s.

So, the earliest testimony to Jesus is in Paul.  The gospels are works that
reflect the early Christian community's faith in Jesus; they are not
directly attributable to Jesus.

One difficulty in trying to get to the historical Jesus is that, in
stripping away early commentators, one often uses one's own views and
feelings for what is original.  Thus, one can appreciate Schweitzer's
comment, that "a man does not so reveal himself as when he searches for the
historical Jesus."

The point of this is that, while one can obtain a good understanding of the
Christian community from primary sources that were written before
Augustine, the same cannot be said for the Christian community before Paul.
They weren't Christians then, that is fairly evident; they were Jews who
believed that the Messiah had come and the perusula was just around the
corner. Being called Christians was post Paul.  But, scholars differ
greatly when the comb the literature we do have and try to pick out the
remnants of early work.

One final point, one also needs to be very careful in defining Paul, since
only about half of the works attributed to him were written by him.  The
rest were written after he died.

Dan M.


_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to