The first Jedi?

I've been doing some reading as of late. Along with some research revolving around early Christianity..

The area of my research was around the so-called "gnostic" movements. As well as the common misconceptions about it. From reading different books like the Gospel of Thomas or Valentinian scripture. I don't see the commonly held views about non-orthodox movements..

Which brings me to my main point..

To me, in the non-canonical scripture, Yeshua is teaching about the indwelling of The Light. How that process is done and what it gives. Also about the distinction between Light(Fulness) and Darkness(Emptiness).. This being one with "The Father of Lights", or The Force, as the true purpose of the teaching has parallels within canonical scripture as well. It seems to me that the crucifixion, that's so focused on today, was only an outer demonstration of the Truth..

Could Yeshua have actually been what we could call the first Jedi? A person who not only knew the Light(The Force) but lived it? Could he have been the first to fully embody what some people call God?..

https://theculturetrip.com/asia/articles/the-8-oldest-religions-in-the-world/

Jedi is, in the end, a matter of identity.

For example, my parents are Noahide. And I find few things as irksome as when I do something... i dunno, honest, selfless, ect (because I am a Jedi)... and they say that it's a very Noahide trait, as if I'd join their faith simply because they're my parents. Faith, whichever way it is directed, if directed at all, when practised is an identity. He was Jewish, and did all he did as such and identifying as such.

So would he be 'the first Jedi'? No. Even if living light made one as such, he wasn't the first to do so, so that would rob him of this 'first' thing. But he didn't identify as a Jedi, and thus wasn't one.

For the most part I'd just echo Ari's points, but let's say for the sake of it we all get together at the great big prophet-hijacking meeting and decide that Yeshua (Or Prince Adam) was "The First Jedi"

What difference does it make?

I'm not trying to be flippant, I'm just wondering if there is an If/Then/Else sort of thing to this, or if you may as well have said the moon is made of cheese, it can be debunked (or not) and it changes nothing to how anyone does business.

As a Jedi you are allowed to make up what ever mythology you want and then take that and reinterpret it into other mythologies just as you have done here. By corrupting other mythos in this way you embody the spirit of what Jediism is through the excuse of syncreticism. So sure Joshua was the first Jedi, what ever you say!

If we're renting key historical figures to prop up our mythology can we avoid all the popular ones?

Lets have Diogenes (Patrol Saint of Trolls), Ted Kaczynski (Patron Saint of complaining about the ways things are), and Simo Häyhä (Patron Saint of Getting Things Done), and Eiichiro Oda (Pirates are cool)

The usefulness of the Jedi label is to identify with the movement. As such, it makes no sense to call someone from another time a Jedi.

As for the eternal ineffable Truth we all seek, it has so many names, we can’t possibly expect to lay claim to it exclusively.

Also, Buddha beat Jesus to it.

I can go with Jesus (Yeshua) being a Jedi, even though he didn't call himself one. American Indians, Neanderthals, and savants haven't applied those labels to themselves either, but that is nevertheless what they are based upon their cultural and physical traits.

But if we accept the Christian history as having at least a possible basis in fact, he wouldn't be first. The Jewish prophet Elijah ascended before him, and Moses freed his people from what seems to have been seen as an otherwise unopposable enslavement. Joseph, robbed and cast into slavery, shows his Jedi-ness in his ultimate forgiveness of his siblings. The Buddhist Bodhisattvas would almost certainly qualify as well. Each of these displays a devotion to most of the Jedi ideals in the very expression of their lives, even though they never even heard the word "Jedi".

Since JamesSand proposed some non-traditional historical names to consider as Jedi, I'll propose a few others - not all so well known - to add to the list. I'll nominate Corrie Ten Boom, Emma Goldman, Smedley Butler, Oskar Schindler, Chris Gardner, Ralph Nader, and - if a fictional character may be allowed - Forrest Gump.

JamesSand wrote:
Lets have Diogenes (Patron Saint of Trolls)

Took me a while to remember what Diogenes had to do with trolls, and then I remembered he was a troll in the metaphorical sense Given the stories with Alexander's shadow and Plato's chicken, I pick up some mischievous "Yoda" vibes from Diogenes. But he's definitely not a pillar of moral character...

I'd agree with Arisaig - Jediism is an identity and a perspective more than an infallible code. You could look anywhere in history and find a shred of something that meets your definition of Jedi. So some of us might align the core of our Jediism with Siddhartha, while others find it in the teachings of the early Christians.

Personally, my "Jedi identity" was shaped most strongly by ecology and stoicism. The latter could possibly fit your definition of "The first Jedi", if you consider that Zeno of Citium, founder of Stoicism, dates back to around 300 BC. I've actually never read any of Zeno's work so I can't personally vouch for him. But I've always viewed the teachings of Epictetus, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius as in harmony with the doctrine here.

Jedi are all about the human experience, and who best explained what humanity is all about than Diogenes (who predated Jesus)?
We really ought to have a pantheon of Jedi saints of sorts