Well folks i thinks its about time we all got back to the real reason why we are here. philosophical debate and not mud slinging in ANYONES direction…so to that end i have a question.
What did jesus do between his birth and 30th birthday?..Does it say in the bible and if not what do you think he would have been doing?..do you think he knew then he was the son of god?..and if so why didnt he begin his campaign earlier?
Grow, eat, sleep, and learn a useful trade.
There is the story of getting lost on the trip to Jerusalem. But that’s about it.
Yes.
Obedience.
jesus hit puberty and was afraid to show his face in jerusalem until it cleared up. 
doesn’t it talk about his teenage exploits in one of the books? And then he gets tempted by the devil for forty days in matthew?
How and why do you expect a mythical person to have a childhood anyways? He’s born miraculously, he performs miracles and hard to decode sayings. Is tortured, blood sacrifice for sin, ascension to heaven, etc etc.
On the hero test, he scores just below perseus.
That was his rebellious period…he was conflicted and spent hours in his room listening to loud lute music. He worried about being different and he wasn’t getting on with his demanding, authoritarian Dad…
He desperately wanted to play drums with a local troupe of musicians and his Dad wanted him to join the firm and sacrifice himself for humanity. Such a drag. Jesus couldn’t understand why his Dad couldn’t just go ahead and save humanity on his own without having to put him through all that tedious crucifixion stuff…since he was all powerful etc. but God would only mumble something about moving in mysterious ways.
Frustrated, he travelled,took up carpentry, did some drugs, flirted with Eastern philosophy for a while and then finally settled down when God convinced him the publicity from an early sacrificial death was a good career move for a musician and he’d have a massive fan base after that.
What did Jesus do between those times? I think like the rest of us, learned how to toddle, potty train, talk, walk, eat, write. When one wants to be a doctor, he goes to a medical school and learn then practice medicine. Jesus did the same thing, travelled and learned from great teachers and masters, maybe went to India getting heis best teaching from the Vedas. The 3 kings who followed his birth made sure he gets the best teaching so he can fulfill his mission about the “kingdom of heaven”. Do I think he knew he was the son of God? Did he not say that in the pages of the bible. Why he did not begin his campaign earlier is because like I said, one has to study, train first and pass your state board exam before you can practice your profession. Did not Jesus have trials(tests) before he started his mission? and the bible said he passed the tests.
I think there must have been an important phase between sixteen and thirty, since something obviously changed him in that time and it was fourteen years after all. The thing that occurs to me after years of studying the Bible, is that it probably wasn’t the stuff epics are made of. In fact, I think that Jesus probably didn’t stick out at all, except when there was reason to look closer. There seems to be the approach that Jesus was a bit like Superman, discovering his superpowers as a young boy, discovering that he didn’t come from earth at all, having doting parents who taught all of the good wholesome stuff. That seems to me the trouble with too much media.
It is written that Jesus started early on to understand scripture in a way that baffled the Scribes, and perhaps he could have entered a Pharisee school, but he veered off and began to criticise. Instead he went to the poor, the mourning, the sick and the lame, obviously asking where God was for them, and what part of the temple cult they could take part in. I believe that he discovered that Religion had become a cultural aspect of life and the Temple reminded them of better days. They were obviously proud of the work of Herod, even though he had been a despotic leader. Jesus, however, discovered that central issues were lost, and that the sick and the lame lined the streets, foreign soldiers marched to and fro and enforced ever growing taxation to a foreign country.
All his people could do, was to be thankful for small mercies and pay their taxes, which left little to nothing for the needy. From the north, where he lived, there had been numerous uprisings, so that the sight of a Galilean or the sound of their guttural dialect caused suspicious looks and people to move away. The splitting of the country into four provinces was splitting the nation, since any form of disturbance to the peace was rewarded with higher taxes. What could be done?
The Essenes prayed in the desert, the Pharisees prayed on the street and drove everybody wild with their tenth part of everything, the Sadducees sounded a gong when some beneficiary supported the Temple (and their income) but otherwise they chose to compromise themselves with the occupying force, so that traditions could be upheld. For that reason, an uprising in Judea was virtually ruled out, since the Sadducees had their own spies who made sure that any troublemakers were weeded out. The common people were just weary and burdened by the behaviour of the ruling class and academics.
These are some of the things that gave Jesus food for thought in his young years. He is also said to be in the number around John the Baptist until he is virtually forced by circumstances to step out. It seems to be all very normal to me.
Shalom
Bob,
It seems to me to be a problem of christian doctrine. Jesus is god. If god takes 30 years to perform miracles, and speak wisdom forming parables… what does that say about god?
Better yet, what does that say about our ability to imitate god. If christianitys greatest aspiration is to be like jesus (WWJD), what hope does the average man or woman have, when it took him 30 years to reach that point?
In apocrypha that’s true. The trouble with apocrypha is that … it’s apocryphal. The origin of the non-apocryphal scripture has a hard enough time standing up to actual history without throwing apocryphal scripture into the mix.
This statement is easier to believe… In mark (and the other gospels.) the disciples refer to Jesus as a rabbi. But, being from a poor background, it would’ve been unlikely.
And then he lead the revolution?
Wow, I don’t remember the story in the gospels being that gripping. Are you sure you’ve got the right time frame? There are a few early christians who place the time of christ at least 100 years before traditional thought. And certainly being that Paul wrote in the 40’s and makes no mention of the disciples or any other physical aspect of christ I find this scenario more likely. (especially given how large the christian community is when Paul writes.)
that’s quite a definition of normal. Join a revolutionary group, drive demons into pigs, condemn humanity to hell unless they believe in you, than have yourself brutally tortured and crucified.
yea, that’s perfectly normal for a god-man. But not for many men.
I have tried a discussion on Was Jesus a Jewish prince?
http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=150486&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
During his early life he would be preparing to be King.
Studying the religion of the Jewish people wouldn’t fit well in the new testament.
to be correct… jesus wasn’t mentioned between 12 years old and 30 (i think that’s right.) (also, i think that’s true.)
If no one else appreciates your humor. Leda. I did. =D>
Bob,
As always, informative and well thought out.
Jesus in his teen years? I imagine it is some what of a cross between what Bob said and Leda said. A young teen boy was actually a man back then. I assume he had responsibilities that his modern equals could not comprehend. How many teen boys have to dump the family waste buckets, for a minor example. I don’t imagine he had time to play games or enjoy luxuries, considering his family was poor. Consider Jesus a entrepeneur.
Google “infancy gospel”.
Midrash as a mechanism of collective meditation is an interesting means of perception. It’s relevant here i think, but i’m not sure how; something about letters and the way humans learned to write.
Hi MB,
You have the wrong perspective. By your perspective it took even longer than thirty years! It is about Kairos, not Chronos. It is about the right time, which on several occasions Jesus had to make clear hadn’t been reached. In addition, you are falling into the fundamentalist mode of assuming that the Bible describes a lineal reality into which a “Being†enters and rearranges things. Accepting the mystic or prophetic mode of much of what is written in the Bible, we observe that the time becomes right when we often think that it is the wrong time, but are unable to see this until afterwards. Only those who are able to see at this level (examples are Simeon and Anna) see such things coming.
Luk 2:46-47
And it happened after three days they found Him in the temple sitting in the midst of the teachers, even hearing them and questioning them. And all those hearing Him were amazed at His intelligence and His answers.
When Herod the Great died in 4 BC, his will divided Israel into three parts, with
Herod Antipas placed over the Galilee and Parea,
Herod Philippos over Gaulanitis (the Golan Heights), Batanaea (southern Syria), Trachonitis and Auranitis (Hauran);
and Archelaus as “king of the Jews” over the bulk of Herod’s mini-empire – Although Archelaus was later deemed incompetent by Caesar and replaced with a procurator in AD 6 (one of them, from 26-36 AD, was Pontius Pilate).
MB, the subject is the years before his ministry, and besides, is what you have written correct?
Shalom
So basically nobody knows what he did!..seems a bit weird to me.He is born and made a big deal out of and then his press agent does a runner and he doesnt appear in public again for 33 yrs.
afternoon bob (it is here.),
well not really… before those thirty years he was merely god. When he was born he became “god/man”.
But, on other occasions he did say it was the right time:
“I tell you I have come to fulfill the law.”
“I will return before this generation has passed.”
Bob, how do we know that’s how the bible is meant to be read? Are you telling me that the authors of leviticus and deuteronomy didn’t really mean for those things to be literal laws… but “prophetic” laws?
And the “prophetic” parts of the bible, are all “apocolypse now” prophecies. Repent or god will punish the people.
I also think you are transposing the way you want to interpret the bible as the correct way to interpret the bible. That wasn’t the common belief then, just as it is not now. The gnostics, may have believed that, but they were generally shunned as mystics of every generation are. And as I said before on this same topic with you months ago, if you want to be a mystic, you don’t need the bible. You can find inspiration from any source.
Why? You’re going so far beyond the interpretative capabilities of the book that it’s no longer meaningful to all but a few. The interpretation becomes so subjective that it’s become it’s own kind of fundamentalism.
Forgot about that brief snapshot of Jesus as a teenager… it’s only in Luke, which was the latest gospel written…
If it really happened, I think it would be in Mark (and then Matthew) also.
John doesn’t even record that scene, and he is from a completely different perspective.
What does that have to do with Jesus as a teenage rebel though? Paul wrote within 10 years of the crucifixion and makes no physical reference to christ or where he taught. Wouldn’t the living disciples have backed up what paul stated or refuted it? Wouldn’t he reference the beautitudes where it backs up his statement to the community?
And the community is of course the other problem. It was MUCH MUCH too large to have been that short of a time. It took Mohammed 100 years to cover an area the size of the roman empire with their religion. Are you gonna tell me that the disciples managed to do it in 10? And built places of worship (which Paul was writing to.)?
it’s as correct as anything can be from one’s own perspective. And I think that if we want to understand the years before his ministry we have to understand the ministry.
What drove jesus to act the way he did? Why did he speak of god’s love one minute, and condemn those who don’t follow him to hell in the next?
Did he believe he was god, or did his followers believe he was god?
Was he god? if so what does that say about humanity?
Hi MB,
I think you are citing from memory, which is OK in a bar after work, but if we want to have a serious discussion, we really do have to look at the evidence. You make a number of assumptions and present them as an argument, but you know me – I would have expected something more substantial.
You are doing the same here, as well as failing to note that the Bible is a collection of writings in different styles. Of course the allegorical can’t be applied to all of them, and besides, we were in the New Testament.
Now you are trying to bedazzle me, jumping from one subject to another. The helpful thing about looking back on the Aramaic and the Hebrew, is that they are still spoken and have Arabic as a language that developed from them. Even if the Hebrew of today may not be exactly the same as then, there are enough people who can tell you about the differences between Semitic and Hellenistic language and thought. Gnostics and mystics may appear to be the same, but they are not.
I am also not going beyond, but delving into the Bible, seeking out the meaning that the church left out. There may even be reason to believe that this wasn’t done on purpose, but as a result of the loss of Semitic influence in the church. If you would understand that all interpretation is subjective and for today, only a part of the reality behind the frail words, you would realise that the attempts to use a historical/ critical approach only dissects scripture, whereas the mystical/ prophetic approach allows it to speak to the soul. That is the big issue that is always being missed. Both are complementary to each other.
You have to realise that the traditions we have were oral traditions, but they were stories that had a distinct purpose – to spread a good news about salvation and resurrection. If you allow yourself to look at biblical scripture in the light of mystical traditions, you begin to realise how it became so popular. You suddenly see similarities in opinions, activities, as well as the cultural differences. The truth that is at the core of true religion is universal, its shell is cultural. Once you have seen the core, of course you can find inspiration from any source – even if some shells take some effort to crack.
Now, who made Jesus into a rebel?
Shalom
There’s a story in the gnostic books somwhere where Jesus kills one of his friends by throwing him off a building then revives him. I wish I had a better source on that, but its too weird to be made up.
gnostic books? I think that’s in Thomas, but it’s not contained in the bible. We don’t really know if that’s true or not, I think it’s just something you and I both watched on A&E.
I was citing from memory… I forgot I wasn’t in a bar, was too busy drinking this fine ale.
Mt 23:36 I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation.
Mt 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
next time I’ll deliver substantially from the get go… it did feel awfully lazy quoting from memory.
Yes I did it again…
But, I think you know that it’s there. I realize the bible is a collection of writings, some mythological history, some a mix of actual and mythological history. Some poetry, some stories, etc.
okay… but where do you draw the line of allegory? Was jesus just “kind of” crucified? Was he only “allegorically” born of a virgin?
You’ve crossed the line of accepted belief and are inserting your own belief into the words.
the gnostics often spoke of are… The gnostics in actuality were not very mystical. They did have quite different beliefs about christ versus the roman church though.
As for the language development… i have no idea how the languages developed, but it’s completely possible it’s like that. Circumcision was practiced for eons in Egypt before “moses” stated it was a good practice from god. (this may seem out of place but it’s related to the evolution of ideas.)
okay, that’s fine… but … then you are no longer “christian” it’s another belief entirely.
A lot of the new testament was written in the Diasporia in the languages of greek or latin. Greek and Latin translate much better to latin based languages… As far as I know, there are no New Testament scriptures that were written in Aramaic.
As for your mystical/ prophetic approach? I’m sure for you it does speak to your soul. BUT, it’s a completely subjective interpretation. No one else but you (and perhaps a few others) are going to come to that same interpretation. That’s why I say, you’ve delved away from what is “traditional christianity”.
People were more mystical during those times… there’s no doubt. But, they also possessed knowledge that we don’t (slightly unrelated tangent.) Like how to move 400 ton limestone blocks to form the temple mount in Jerusalem.
There may be a connection to a mystical understanding of the way the world works, and being able to use “mind over matter”.
in that light… you may have a correct interpretation of the OT. The NT wasn’t written for as mystical of an audience. It’s very blunt and to the point. (the parables are hit and miss… some are great wisdom, some are damning to the human race, for merely being human.)
you may be on to something… Though I still am skeptical that the shell of religion is necessary to find the core…
with a rebel yell,
mt 21:12 Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.