Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mirage
Being individuals, they may have had various ideas about what Jesus was, and about what the crucifixion meant. I am guessing Jesus may never have made a definitive statement to them on that matter. Once when people wanted to know who/what He was, He turned the question right back to them.
|
We're on the same page here, at least in this area. When we read Acts, we can notice that there are discussions and disagreements over the issue of the circumcision of gentile converts and keeping kosher (remember that James catches Peter eating cheeseburgers with gentiles). These are not trivial items but are very much part and parcel with basic Judaism. Apparently, Jesus never got around to discussing these matters with his apostles.
As you mention above, Jesus appears to have used the Socratic method a great deal whereas he'd turn the questions back onto the ones asking the questions (us Jews are notorious for answering a question with another question-- must be a genetic defect of some type). As one who taught for 36 years, the Socratic method is a great way to teach, but it has some drawbacks. One is that it may leave the questioner confused as far as what the teacher actually believes. Another is that the process takes quite a bit of time, and since Jesus' ministry was quite short as it was...
However, I really don't think that Jesus made an attempt to deify himself, and the effort to do as such is far more likely to have occurred after his death imo. And I don't think it's likely just due to Paul as well because if Paul was that far off base, then why would the others tolerate him?
There's also the question about whether Paul and the others may have felt that Jesus was "of God" rather than "God"? There's a difference. And once the gentiles eventually took control of the church after 70 c.e., Jesus as "God" may have taken over the "of God" concept. This would be compatible with Greek and Sumerian beliefs.
Gotta go.