What an analysis of "preliterary fragments", the cult of Jewish apocalypticism, and the Bible itself tells us about what the first Christians professed and believed
I think that you overstate the apocalyptic belief in inverting the social hierarchy. This is an anachronistic projection of modern proletarianism onto early Christianity. It wouldnt be appropriate to call the prophesied extermination of 99% of the earth's population a social inversion considering that slaves outnumbered the elite social classes by a huge factor. The apocalyptic use of the lost sheep metaphor speaks more to the virtuous few being lost among the many sinners. Judaism is very comfortable with the collective punishment of the entire strata of society from Kings to children. Think the flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the destruction of Israel by Babylon (portrayed in terms as the scourge of God), and Revelations. Very few people are chosen to escape these Biblical apocalypses. While the archetype of the humble shepherd is idealized, this is more of a callback to Israel's nomadic origins rather than a broad idealization of the masses. To view a laborer of the land as honest and virtuous is not unique to Judaism, hence why Jesus also speaks very unfavorably of cities and the people and why his ministry is focused on finding the lost sheep among the decadent: the shepherds worshipped him from the moment of his birth while the urban mob condemns him. Furthermore, Jesus uses metaphors which reinforce the authority of father over son, master over slave, shepherd over sheep, harvester over soil. Jesus is portrayed as the personification of a dispossessed king who's authority has been usurped and betrayed by his earthly vicars. He is not, as some claim, a proto Marxist, although he is deeply life denying, but that, of course, is not the same thing, even though it quite trendy to say as much on ifunny. Early Christians hated the contemporary religous and political authorities because they thought they were traitors and heretics. In principle, they upheld traditional hierarchies such as the preeminence of Abrahamic (tribalism and racialism) and Davidic blood (nobility and monarchy), patriarchy, and priestly authority.
You're missing that the poor and lower class are stated to receive *rewards* from such an apocalypse. It's not a collective punishment - the low class are receiving the polar opposite of punishment, eternal life - it's an upheaval, a revolution. I don't see how your alternative interpretation gets around this sufficiently, I think it's abundantly clear in its meaning.
You also miss that the belief in vindication was not believed to be unique to just the Jewish people or just Christianity, it was universal and applied to man as a whole. The Son of Man will judge the whole Earth, not just Israel. Roman occupation may help explain psychologically how this vindictive mindset arose in Israel, but it does not refute the fact they prophesized an imminent reversal of fortunes for the classes. Quite the opposite.
The stated belief that the rich of the whole world will be punished and the poor of the whole world will be *rewarded* by such an extermination is definitely not mere commentary on the demography of classes or contemporary politics.
While I do not disagree that a reversal of fortunes is prophesied for the virtuous who are currently downtrodden by rulers who abuse their *God-given power (rulers are divinely appointed vicars), this is quite different from the poor of the whole world being rewarded. Jesus was, after all, advocating an extreme ascetic and priestly lifestyle: the standard is quite severe and selective. Being poor may be something which makes renunciation and life denial simpler, but it is not nearly enough to merely be poor: one must be supremely faithful and self sacrificing. The Book of Revelations is clear when it prophesies most of humanity, which would have been the low classes you speak of, as being easily deceived and failing to meet the ascetic standards of Christianity and therefore perishing along with the false Messiahs such as earthly rulers whom they followed.
This was a good read. I disagree with some of the conclusions you've reached, but I think you explained the 21st Century Jesus skeptic / historical criticism position quite well. Perhaps I shall respond and perhaps drive some engagement to your 'stack..
The first theophany he scored was at age fourteen, capable son of a gun. Father and Son, our Gods, stepped forth to him from the depths of being.
God, formally, but in his plowboy clasp that subtle dogma had diverged somewhat. In any case, they confirmed to him that none of the existing churches was true, over which dilemma the teen was despairing like another lad over pizza face. Three years later the angel Moroni showed him where in America the book of golden plates from the time before Columbus was buried, just around the shack. When he was 22, another angel put him in contact with the plates and hence we have the Book of Mormon.
All up to Mitt Romney today, no small potatoes teen, no?
I think that you overstate the apocalyptic belief in inverting the social hierarchy. This is an anachronistic projection of modern proletarianism onto early Christianity. It wouldnt be appropriate to call the prophesied extermination of 99% of the earth's population a social inversion considering that slaves outnumbered the elite social classes by a huge factor. The apocalyptic use of the lost sheep metaphor speaks more to the virtuous few being lost among the many sinners. Judaism is very comfortable with the collective punishment of the entire strata of society from Kings to children. Think the flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the destruction of Israel by Babylon (portrayed in terms as the scourge of God), and Revelations. Very few people are chosen to escape these Biblical apocalypses. While the archetype of the humble shepherd is idealized, this is more of a callback to Israel's nomadic origins rather than a broad idealization of the masses. To view a laborer of the land as honest and virtuous is not unique to Judaism, hence why Jesus also speaks very unfavorably of cities and the people and why his ministry is focused on finding the lost sheep among the decadent: the shepherds worshipped him from the moment of his birth while the urban mob condemns him. Furthermore, Jesus uses metaphors which reinforce the authority of father over son, master over slave, shepherd over sheep, harvester over soil. Jesus is portrayed as the personification of a dispossessed king who's authority has been usurped and betrayed by his earthly vicars. He is not, as some claim, a proto Marxist, although he is deeply life denying, but that, of course, is not the same thing, even though it quite trendy to say as much on ifunny. Early Christians hated the contemporary religous and political authorities because they thought they were traitors and heretics. In principle, they upheld traditional hierarchies such as the preeminence of Abrahamic (tribalism and racialism) and Davidic blood (nobility and monarchy), patriarchy, and priestly authority.
You're missing that the poor and lower class are stated to receive *rewards* from such an apocalypse. It's not a collective punishment - the low class are receiving the polar opposite of punishment, eternal life - it's an upheaval, a revolution. I don't see how your alternative interpretation gets around this sufficiently, I think it's abundantly clear in its meaning.
You also miss that the belief in vindication was not believed to be unique to just the Jewish people or just Christianity, it was universal and applied to man as a whole. The Son of Man will judge the whole Earth, not just Israel. Roman occupation may help explain psychologically how this vindictive mindset arose in Israel, but it does not refute the fact they prophesized an imminent reversal of fortunes for the classes. Quite the opposite.
The stated belief that the rich of the whole world will be punished and the poor of the whole world will be *rewarded* by such an extermination is definitely not mere commentary on the demography of classes or contemporary politics.
While I do not disagree that a reversal of fortunes is prophesied for the virtuous who are currently downtrodden by rulers who abuse their *God-given power (rulers are divinely appointed vicars), this is quite different from the poor of the whole world being rewarded. Jesus was, after all, advocating an extreme ascetic and priestly lifestyle: the standard is quite severe and selective. Being poor may be something which makes renunciation and life denial simpler, but it is not nearly enough to merely be poor: one must be supremely faithful and self sacrificing. The Book of Revelations is clear when it prophesies most of humanity, which would have been the low classes you speak of, as being easily deceived and failing to meet the ascetic standards of Christianity and therefore perishing along with the false Messiahs such as earthly rulers whom they followed.
This was a good read. I disagree with some of the conclusions you've reached, but I think you explained the 21st Century Jesus skeptic / historical criticism position quite well. Perhaps I shall respond and perhaps drive some engagement to your 'stack..
The first theophany he scored was at age fourteen, capable son of a gun. Father and Son, our Gods, stepped forth to him from the depths of being.
God, formally, but in his plowboy clasp that subtle dogma had diverged somewhat. In any case, they confirmed to him that none of the existing churches was true, over which dilemma the teen was despairing like another lad over pizza face. Three years later the angel Moroni showed him where in America the book of golden plates from the time before Columbus was buried, just around the shack. When he was 22, another angel put him in contact with the plates and hence we have the Book of Mormon.
All up to Mitt Romney today, no small potatoes teen, no?
Cheers