Oliver,
Zechariah was a commander in the Maccabean forces who constantly visited the caves of the Essene community of which he admired. The Essene community considered sexual relations as unclean and practised artificial insemination as the method of procreation.

Zechariah served as an attendant Priest in the school where Mary was dedicated and trained. Mary at puberty was not allowed under Levitical law to reside anymore in the temple complex. Zechariah looked for a precedent set in history for a girl dedicated to religious duty, and the precedent was Isaiah 9 where a young girl gives birth to the king and deliverer. Obviously Mary now pregnant knew him well as she spent time living with his pregnant wife Elizabeth. Zecherias had called all the eligible young men of the David line to choose a husband for Mary. Zecherias had chosen Joseph, who had at least two boys, to marry Mary. Zecherias was the father of John the baptiser. It was Zecherias intention that the two boys develop as Leaders in Israel. One as commander and the other as King of the Jews.

John was born six months prior to Jesus who was to be the forerunner of the Messiah. Joseph was a stonemason working for Rome at the time so was away. When King Herod who was a supporter of Rome, got word that such a plot was devised by Zechariah; he sent henchmen and had Zechariah slaughtered at the temple altar for failing to disclose the whereabouts of the boys (this murder is recorded by Luke and Josephus). The women both Elizabeth and Mary with Joseph fled. Elizabeth with John fled to the Essene Caves where he was raised. Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt where Jesus spent his infant life.
cont:

Cont:

Zecherias was now dead, and when John began his adult mission he was imprisoned and beheaded under orders from Herod. Jesus began his mission, which was at first accepted as to Israel where he praises Gentile faith while in the hometown synagogue. For this they attempted to stone him and this began a change in his focus to be a mission to the whole World. At Jesus death he is cited by Rome as King of Israel ironically as a threat to any insurrection. Throughout his life he is identified by others as King, Son of God or son of David - meaning in the Davidic line

Both John and Jesus had an ubringing different to what was expected by Zechariah. John in a very closed community and Jesus having spent time mixing with the common people developed a whole of the world view. He like Joseph in Egypt, like Daniel in Babylon, like Esther in Persia saw that their life had purpose despite occupation under foreign Governments. "Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar", "Love your enemies" etc, were some of his teaching. He was admires by several Roman soldiers, for one he healed his daughter, and another at his crucifixion felt he was innocent of insurrection and was actually a good man.

When Jesus began his ministry - John announced his coming as the "Lamb of God" the one who would take away the sin of the World. They both see an emphasis in Jesus mission that extended beyond Israel. Jesus at the close of his mission sees his teaching as for the whole world. The hatred and rebellion in the human heart extended beyond the nationalism of the Jews. It is found in every man who does not have an image of a loving and forgiving God. Jesus was about removing enmity and restoring relationships and this happens initially in the inner soul and is worked out by the will to forgive.

Philo,

I appreciated your last posting here. Thank for your effort and ability to build context to your beliefs. Moreover, for me, you demostrate how events might unfold, without burdening the non-religious, by placing the key emphasis on supernatural phenomena.

David,

How do you see the political status of Jesus in the first century? In debates ,more seems to have been said about Paul/Nicaea, because it is where creed substantially eminates. Yet, we "do" have the Jewish Messianic concept and Galillee's occupation by Rome and before by the Greeks. Furthermore, we do have a tradition of "medicate" Messiahs in the first century Middle East. Are you an atheist to the existence of an alledged historical Jesus [Joshua] involved in the events of Davanic [Jewish & Gentile] rule over a Kindom of God on Earth, even if there is no proof of God?

-- Even if we do not beleive in God our [me too] should adopt a methodology to disprove our own point of view [as should theists]. We might find our main hypothesis is wrong or alternatively we might learn something else [e.g., how relions develop and operate]. What we cannot do is simply say, "it aint so" and just sit. Stagnation by either antagonist in this debate does not lead to discovery. --

Oliver,

I’ll have to be quick as I’m flat out in preparation for an AFA meeting.

That the character known as Jesus is a historical identity as recorded in the NT, or was an exaggerated character of the time, or was from a compilation of earlier messianic persons or something else, is not of great importance to the AFA. There is no compelling evidence for the existence of a Jesus but if new undeniable evidence came to light, then I and the AFA would accept it.

The political status of the alleged Jesus in the first century reflects the oppression of the times. In my opinion, the ever-present desire of people from all of history to escape a brutal life culminated in a psychological movement much the same as in the 60’s when conservatism was ousted in a world wide movement. In that example, there is no one person responsible. But who knows, in a thousand years it may be attributable to Bob Dylan or the Rolling Stones or Jimi Hendrix. One thing for sure, in that time ahead there will be groups adamant that one or all of those people were the originators of the changing times.

Of course, Christianity got an unfair leg up with Constantine.

Atheists have every right to sit stagnant, as you put it. Those who wish to control society with claims of supernatural authority have a duty to justify their stance as it can and does affect not only believers, but also others, who are not.

While we are waiting for evidence in support of religion, we will point out the social harms and planetary dangers in civilisation following unsubstantiated beliefs. I have done so in part, in the second AFA post on this thread.

David

Thankyou Oliver , but i think within the context David set on this thread and the point I made went over Philo's head. Christians dont own xmas or what ever anybody wants to call this Euro-Asian tradition. Wether God is thanked for this years Ale Vintage or Jehova is thanked for giving his son as a human sacrifice to save Christians is beside the point I think. Christmas / Saturnalia or whatever during the summer/winter solstice belongs to the culture that has inherited it, this now includes the peoples of all continents. A festival of the Rainbow Serpent has now the same validity at this time as Dion or Jesus under the term "Christmas". The occult ritual od mass makes no difference , we may as well call it Mithras Spell, as Shakespear said 'A rose by any other name'. Davids point I think is Christians try and exclude everybody who is not part of their cult through propaganda at this time as part of their on going program of ethnic cleansing.

I feel Philo is just expressing that Christian tradition of ethnic cleansing.

You as the excluder will find "Ethnic Cleansing" strong words Philo , but this has been going on since Nicea and ethnic cleansing is Christianities only acheivement.