On The Celestial Christ And Earthly Jesus Theories

Among the basic tenets of Christianity are a belief in both a savior representative and in the resurrection of the dead.  During the embryonic era of Christianity there were well documented contrasting views as to the nature of each. The source documents are early Christian writings dated to the 2nd Century, among which are those writings commonly known as the New Testament. 

The contrasting views of the nature of the savior representative related as to whether such was a celestial being, a natural human being, or even a docetic humanoid. The debate as to the nature of the resurrection ranged from whether there was such an occurrence at all; to whether such was physical, celestial, post physical death, or a during one's lifetime event.

Conflicting ideologies as to the nature of the savior representative were reflected by varying views regarding the nature of the salvific process itself.  Questions as to whether salvation was this worldly or other worldly; a deliverance from elements of this world or from a celestial torment; on behalf of a specific demographic or catholic as to its scope were each factors as to any given perspective as to the nature and mission of the ideal savior.

With regards to Christianity itself, such perspectives eventually became a test of fellowship from the standpoint of the so called early Orthodox Church.  Accusations of heresy were levied against those who denied the physical resurrection of an earthly Jesus, and as is reflected in the writings of the Gnostic Christians, the feelings seem to have been mutual.  The teachings of the Pauline writings became a matter of debate as is revealed in 2nd-3rd Century Patristics; and Tertullian even labeled Paul as the apostle of the heretics. 

Thus the general claims of the Orthodox Church seems to have been that those who maintained faith in a celestial Christ had departed from the original doctrine of an earthly Jesus. Yet the chronological logistics of a seemingly evolving Christology are debatable, and the proverbial shoe may have been on the other foot. Consider the observations of Doston Jones; commentator on the Facebook Group "The Bible Geek Listeners", regarding the implications of Pauline writings such as 1 Corinthians 15:

"there are numerous reasons why I don't think that the Corinthian Creed is speaking of a bodily Earthly resurrection. But I'll give one reason that is not often discussed. In that very same chapter (and elsewhere in Paul's letters), Paul is addressing the concern among the churches that there will be no Resurrection. So, he goes out of his way to explain that there will in fact be a resurrection for believers, but that it will be in a spiritual body like Jesus. In fact, he goes out of his way to distinguish the heavenly spiritual body of Jesus from the earthly body of Adam.

This tells us two things: 1.) if the earliest and default belief among Christians was that Jesus was raised bodily on Earth, then we have to explain why the believers in Paul's churches did not think there would be a physical resurrection; and 2.) When Paul does describe the resurrection of believers, he says that it will be in *heaven* in a spiritual body (just like Jesus). Then he *contrasts* it with a human body (see generally, 1 Cor. 15:40-49)."

Now as to which concept of the savior representative preceded the other, the case may never be settled conclusively. Yet there remains another question related to the matter which in my judgment bears serious consideration and contemplation. That being whether either the concept of a celestial Christ or an earthly Jesus would have even developed to any noticeable degree during the era of the Jewish Independence Movement. This line of inquiry admittedly entails troubling consequences for the theories of the historicity of 1st Century Christianity. 

Nonetheless; it seems debatable whether either savior representative theory would have been marketable in Judea during the days of the Jewish Independence Movement; which commenced with the uprising of Judah of Galilee in 6 CE and which ended quite abruptly with the bloody and violent subjugation of the Bar Kochba rebellion in 135 CE. It seems inconceivable to imagine the concept of a non military messiah as a meaningful motif among a people whose quest for national independence resulted in two major wars and several minor uprisings over the course of 130 years. 

Now perhaps the origin of the Jesus myth may be traced to some minor pre 135 CE mystical cults who imagined such as a counter effort to the conventional clan of the Jewish Independence movement. But due to the lack of any credible evidence to substantiate the theory, the consideration of alternative possibilities seems both preferable and practical. 

That said, it is my personal thought that the very notion of a non military messiah and a spiritual kingdom are each concepts more suited to the plight of the post 135 CE diaspora Jews, than to those of the era of the Jewish Independence Movement.  In such a case, the nature of the savior representative would be irrelevant to the intended end of any given mythical narrative so related.

Though admittedly speculative, these are my thoughts as to both the celestial Christ and earthly Jesus theories.

Dave Henderson

Denison, Texas

Traces of Bar Kochba in the Lukan Prenatal Jesus Narrative (Luke 1)

It is my theory that the Lukan Prenatal and expanded Nativity/Early Childhood Jesus Narratives (Luke 1-2) each contain carefully calculated references to the aftermath of the Bar Kochba Wars. There appear to be contrasting comparisons between the state of Israel at the time of the writing itself, and the vision for better times which the author maintains in the light of messianic hopes attached to the birth of Jesus. 

The subtext seems to be that the downtrodden people of the diaspora should take solace in the thought that Jesus would succeed where Bar Kochba had failed. Now, among the survivors of the Bar Kochba War were those who had at one time pinned their hopes on the success of the militarized Jewish Independence Movement; only to be deported from their homeland after the Roman Army crushed the rebellion. The notion then that a baby born to a people in such desperate circumstances would somehow resolve their destitute situation must have initially seemed somewhat far fetched and fanciful. 

Yet the Lukan author carefully contrasted an underlying theme of despair and hopelessness; which included direct references to hunger, homelessness, and a diaspora, to a "with God nothing shall be impossible" theme (1.37), which in turn was demonstrated by the pregnancies and successful deliveries of an elderly barren woman (1.7,24-25,36,57); and a virgin (1.34-35; 2.5).

The very idea that God could bring forth life in such seemingly impossible circumstances would likely have been a message well received by the people of the post 135 CE Jewish diaspora; who were themselves without a homeland, helpless, and seemingly beyond hope. In the midst of such misery and despair, the promise of a messiah who would succeed where Bar Kochba had failed is a message which would surely been marketable to the downtrodden and defeated refugees of the diaspora. 

In this regard, Gabriel's speech to Mary (Luke 1.32-33)  may in fact have been a contrasting comparison between the defeated and deceased Bar Kochba and the soon to be born messiah Jesus:

-Jesus would be great; Bar Kochba was thought to be great until he was defeated

-Jesus; was the Son of the Highest; whereas Bar Kochba was called the Son of the Star

- Jesus would reign over the kingdom forever; whereas the reign of Bar Kochba was only 3 years 

Again, Mary seems a metaphor for post diaspora Israel (1.48-54); whose praise for God's mercy seems a mirrored mirage of the reality of their state of being after the Bar Kochba war:

- God's strength is demonstrated; Bar Kochba's weakness was revealed 

- God scatters the proud; the poor Jews were scattered after 135 CE

- God puts down the mighty from their seats; the mighty put down Bar Kochba and reassumed the seat of authority in Jerusalem 

- God exalts them of low degree; whereas the displaced Jews of the post Bar Kochba War diaspora, are at their lowest point since the Jewish Independence Wars had commenced in the 60's.

- God fills the hungry; many starved to death in the aftermath of the Bar Kochba War.

- The rich he hath sent away empty; those were sent away empty in 135 CE were the ones who became poor and destitute. 

- God has mercifully helped Israel; the homeless and nationless post 135 CE Israel was badly in need of merciful help wherever they could secure such. 

And again, the sentiment of nationalism in a state of exile seems to have been expressed in Zechariah's speech after his son John's birth (1.67-79):

- He praises God for visiting and redeeming his people.

- He references their enemies and all people that hate them.

- He refers to their state of being as sitting in darkness and in the shadow of death. 

Zechariah's statement that God would redeem his people could be the author's efforts to encourage the disenfranchised Jewish diaspora, whose desperate circumstances as exiled refugees is described as sitting in darkness and in the shadow of death.  As strangers in foreign lands, they would surely have been regarded as enemies and hated by many.   

Viewed as a collective then, these three speeches of the Lukan Prenatal Narrative seem to make calculated references to the destitute circumstances of the surviving diaspora of the Bar Kochba War. The underlying message being that of a reason to rejoice in spite of their seemingly dire straits by hinging their hopes upon a  messiah whose nature and whose destiny would differ significantly from that of the dead and departed failed messiah Simon Bar Kochba.