Theos-Talk Archives (December 2002 Message tt00172)

--- In theos-talk@y..., "Steve Stubbs" <stevestubbs@y...> wrote:
> Scholars think the Essenes took a hike in protest to what they 
> thought ofas the invalid, polluted, etc., Temple in Jerusalem. The 
> literary J starts an anti-Temple movement which would have had a 
very 
> realistic chance of bringing the thing down, since it was supported 
> entirely by superstitious belief and not by force of arms. That 
> would have made such a person extremely dangerous. Everything he 
> said and did including the ruckus in the Temple is consistent with 
> that theme, but the question still remains whether the luterary and 
> historical characters bore any resemblance to each other. That 
> question shall be forever unanswerable.

That there was some kind of anti-Temple message, and the offer of a 
direct connection to the Father without going through sacrifice, 
priesthood, etc., seems fairly well established. The question though 
is whether it was anti- in the sense of actively opposing the 
institution (which the Essenes did) or anti- in the more passive 
sense of encouraging people to live lives that were independent of, 
and contemptuous of, priestly authority but indifferent rather than 
actively hostile to it. The body of sayings about the lilies of the 
field, and resist not evil, and such, indicate the possibility of a 
less political message than that of John and the Essenes.

The problem, as I don't need to tell you, is that there are many 
layers of Jesus, and no solid way to determine which is the original 
layer and which were superimposed on the historical figure to make 
him serve some later agenda. However, much of the apocalyptic 
prophet persona seems like a convenient ex post facto construction in 
the wake of the Temple's destruction. Later Christians would have a 
motive for exaggerating Jesus's anti-Temple message in order to make 
him seem prophetic.

Cheers,

Paul