Posted: Jan 20, 2023 5:05 pm
by archibald
RealityRules wrote: Well, the pitch was as much to 'Gentiles'; or soon as much to (though, at first, the accounts might have just been literature to meet what was said to have been high demand for such literature ie. in the 2nd century)"[/b]

My take on it is that it began to include gentiles at some point. Even then, it seemed to have been asking them to convert. But my guess is it (the cult) started, before 'Paul' in Judea. Hence, I tend to think of it as originally Jewish. Indeed, a rift between the epistle writer's apparent desire to proselytise gentiles, and an earlier/original, Judean, jewish cult who were not so inclined, is something which runs through the epistles and Acts, and as such, suggests to me that it's less likely to be an invention, if one is willing to guess. I think it's plausible. Rifts and split offs are part and parcel of cults.

RealityRules wrote:But it's clear that the Gospel writers were not writing about a celestial entity or a celestial crucifixion

No, they weren't, but I personally put the gospels as later. I'm saying the epistles (which I take as probably earlier, though we can't know) don't talk of a celestial-only Jesus either.