It was a sore point with the religious establishment in Jerusalem that Jesus was not one of them - not one of the select community of scholars.
Certain sectors of the present religious and academic establishment display the same contemptuous attitudes towards the 'unschooled' as did their spiritual forefathers.
Theologians have always arrogated to themselves sole rights to Jesus - made him their own special and private property. Only they have the appropriate scholarly credentials to interpret scripture. It is self-evident to them that ordinary folk, the people for whom the New Testament was written, could in no circumstances be entrusted to think for themselves.
Perceptions can be skewed dramatically in the rarified air of academia. Theologians gather to gorge on scripture then, in an apparent bid to see who can develop the most outlandish and grandiose interpretations, regurgitate what can only be described as swill. Some of these interpretations appear to be founded on nothing more than their proponent's own delusions of grandeur.
That Jerusalem was totally convulsed by the appearance of Jesus is one such grand theological view. The reality is that, in his own time, Jesus was considered a lunatic and a blasphemer - hardly the type of man to take an immediate grip on popular imagination.
The picture of the pathetically small handful of people lamenting the death of their leader on a Roman stake - the scriptural position - is at odds with the picture existing in the public's perception. This does not imply that Jesus was unimportant or unknown. All it proves is that his contemporaries failed at the time to perceive the more lasting significance of these events.
It does not seem to be generally appreciated that Jesus expected a slow, almost imperceptible spread of his teachings, an attitude consistent with the picture of a man whose principles are fixed, whose views are long and whose will is determined.