Adoptionisn : One of Christianities earliest incarnations..

Adoptionism is the belief that Jesus was born a normal man , but as his resurrection was “adopted” by god. That Jesus was such a righteous individual. That upon being crucified. God stepped in and said “nope” and changed him into a divine being.

This is one of the earliest firms of Christianity and according to first century scholars like Bart Ehrman, is most likely what the earliest followers of jesus believed.

According to Ehrman, This is based on a later cultural misconception.

When we here “adopted” , we think less than “biological”.

Biological child >adopted child


But first century Judea was part of the Roman Empire and the Roman Empire has the oposute, and maybe more logical view of..

Adopted child > biological child

See to the Romans an adopted kid trumps a biological kid..

You do not choose who your biological kid is. Your biological kids are a roll of the dice.

But an adopted kid you personally chose because he was just sooo awesome in whatever way.

According to Ehrman and other scholars, later people’s without the same view changed it to increase the credibility of jesus..

If he was born a man he could be lying..

Or he could be over ruled by a later prophet, but if he were the son of god.. we’ll that changes everything!!

Well unless your a Roman who still considers adoption superior to biological heirs..

This was a huge contention in early Christianity.. many got people burned in the arguments..




I just found the way the Romans had the reverse view of adoption and the thought of the change over fascinating!!

Would it change anything if he wasn’t born of a Virgin and instead was adopted at the resurrection??

I don’t think so..

ADDED IN EDIT:

Appearently this is what people mean hen they say the “son of god” stuff was a later addition. Not the jesus wasn’t divine, but that he didn’t become divine till the resurrection. Where he was “remade” into a divine being.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox



Would it change anything if he wasn’t born of a Virgin and instead was adopted at the resurrection??

I don’t think so..

Actually, this would change everything for me.
If this is what is meant by "son of god" - an adopted, human man, then yes, I may even concede that such a person could have actually existed and believed that he was "awesome".

That is actually believable.
The literal "son of god" story - not so much.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

So good old Bart said that eh .Got a linky for us .

Would it change anything if he wasn’t born of a Virgin and instead was adopted at the resurrection??

If Jesus were adopted instead of being born God's Son, he would not be worshiped. He would be admired, looked up to , emulated, held as an example of how man should live. The examples of how to live like a man are much more attainable than should the examples be presented by a ''born' son.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

Just because he hypothetically wasn’t the “son of god” wouldn’t mean EVERYTHING else except the Virgin birth wasn’t true..

Jesus could still be gods premier chosen messenger. Plus in the resurrection he would have been “remade” no longer the “man” at All.. now he would be exclusively a god/Demi god/whatever.

I cannot recall the title of a book I read many years ago about Saul of Tarsus, who became Paul. Googling '' saul of Tarsus liar, will get you a plethora of speculation on how he fundimentally changed the course of the Jesus story early to be able to fit into a new religion with built in top down controls by whoever might become the new bishops of that religion.

Eventually it was the Romans of course that took possession of that religion. Paul woke up one night on the road to Damascus to continue his persecution of early Christians and realized that their faith could be utilized rather than squelched to build that religion.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Google/youtube Bart Ehrman “was jesus divine”


Hell just Bart Ehrman debate will give you 1000 topics and a scholar from the Christian POV to provide the counter arguments.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Yes because Mohammed is just admired..

Because the Buddha is just admired..

There are a laundry list of people who are worshipped but born a human..

David Koresh for a recent example..

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Joseph atWill claims that Paul was a Roman agent and maybe even Josephus or the cadre of priests willing to bend the knee..


Plus the Romans put down the rebellion. Then destroyed the temple, killed huge a.m. deaths of the population, mainlty the priests and confiscated or destroyed all religious texts.

Creating a religious bottleneck where someone really could “fudge the numbers”.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I did a recent post on it.

It’s a leap but the variables are all there..

a reply to: JoshuaCox

So no linky to where he said what you said he said eh . thanks

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Yes because Mohammed is just admired..

Because the Buddha is just admired..

There are a laundry list of people who are worshipped but born a human..

David Koresh for a recent example..

What do you mean by that?

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: JoshuaCox

So no linky to where he said what you said he said eh . thanks

I’m quite sure I’m wasting by my time , but here is a condensed 4 min clip where he runs over it all. You will need to watch whole debates due the finer points.
youtu.be...

a reply to: enlightenedservant

He said that if jesus wasn’t born a Virgin people wouldn’t have worshipped him. That the resurrection alone wouldn’t cut it.

I listed people who had done less than being resurrected, yet were still worshipped.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Yeah, that's what I thought you meant. FYI: The Prophet Muhammad isn't worshiped. In Islam, worshiping anything other than God is literally the biggest sin, called "Shirk".

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Fair enough..

There are oodles of other examples..
there is no shortage of humans worshipping things with little or no logical cause.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

I can't disagree with that. Just had to clarify that single point.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Jesus was divine from the beginning...

John 1:1-3,10,14

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

John 9:5-38

35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?

36 He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?

37 And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee.

38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.

John 10:28

28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

John 14:2-3

2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Wow really interesting about the cultural thinking on adpotoon! And even more so the possibility regarding the changeover in the story!

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Man, at first I thought you had a decent thought going where there was something to work with. But then you went on...andon...andon... with crazy presupposed ideas you have that encompasses your entire thought no matter how weird. You always want to establish what christians believe and once believed and how you know why they were/are delusional. But dude, you make no sense to any of us.

For me, you lose me on the "j" sound. It is only a few hundred years old. Talk to a jesuit.

I believe you are confusing lsgsnds and myths.
There were 2 "christs walking the earth at that time. The 2nd Adam and the son of god (zeus).
One of them was destined as the lamb of Yah. The propitiation for all sin.
The other was to inherit the earthly kingdoms and its religions. This man is who you are pointinv to.
Appolonius of Tyana. The pagan christ. The man who pilgramaged through the Himalayan highlands. The man who resided in the temple of zeus in pergamum. Probably who met the true Christ and tempted Him in the desert. Are you sure you even know His name?

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Bart likes to mix it up a bit imagining what they were thinking early on but the NT has some of the conversations and what they were or were not thinking about Jesus at the time . Did it change over time ..Yes it did as they thought even deeper about what it meant and we are still today thinking and re-thinking what the Cross means and what kind of influences other cultures had back in that day . But I will leave you with a important part of the story to think about .

Luke 24New International Version (NIV) Jesus Has Risen 24 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. 2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3 but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4 While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5 In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, “Why do you look for the living among the dead? 6 He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 7 ‘The Son of Man must be delivered over to the hands of sinners, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.’ ” 8 Then they remembered his words. 9 When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. 10 It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11 But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. 12 Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened. On the Road to Emmaus

13 Now that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles[a] from Jerusalem. 14 They were talking with each other about everything that had happened. 15 As they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked along with them; 16 but they were kept from recognizing him. 17 He asked them, “What are you discussing together as you walk along?” They stood still, their faces downcast. 18 One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, “Are you the only one visiting Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?” 19 “What things?” he asked. “About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. 20 The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. 22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning 23 but didn’t find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive.
24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but they did not see Jesus.”

25 He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

Just as other doctrines developed the basic's were set down across a good many witnesses . They talked about this stuff for years before ever putting it to pen and parchment . The virgin birth part came from his Mom and gets woven into the narrative later on . According to John there were a lot of things Jesus said and did that were not written down . I suspect that Bart will have a new book to sell in the future when he fills those blanks in for us all .

There is a part of Roman History that Dr. Ernest Martin writes about in his book The History People Forgot www.askelm.com... that has some nuggets where at a certain point of the Roman Empire they gave all their slaves citizenship . I guess that could be a kind of adoption .