Commentary: What would Jesus really do?

[angminas]

Even if we assume that's true (and I don't buy it), you left out the more important half of "that 1 simple idea". You subtracted from Jesus' message. You said doing that was a perversion, and did it yourself in the same post. You're missing the point at least as much as any of the rest of us, my friend. Go read the Bible.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: angminas
Even if we assume that's true (and I don't buy it), you left out the more important half of "that 1 simple idea". You subtracted from Jesus' message. You said doing that was a perversion, and did it yourself in the same post. You're missing the point at least as much as any of the rest of us, my friend. Go read the Bible.

Read it plenty already.

 

[J Heartless Slick]

Jesus was a first century apocalyptic Palestinian Jew. He thought that in his lifetime god was going to come down, kick out the Romans, punished the sinners, and reward the worthy.

Jesus' message was basically prepare for the end of the world by behaving properly. Give up your wealth, take care of the needy, and follow the law of Moses.

People who read something different or more into Jesus's message than that are making it up and using religion to further their political agendas.

 

[manowar821]

I love Jesus, and I'm an atheist. He's my ultimate hippie.

 

[RightIsWrong]

I wouldn't go as far to call myself an atheist...probably more of a fence-sitting agnostic...but, I have thought of Jesus more as a philosopher than as a deity.

Do I believe that, from the documentation surrounding his life, he tried to live and preach a life of love, peace and sacrifice. Sure do. Do I believe that he is the literal "Son of God"....if forced to answer, I would have to say no.

I believe that the Bible, itself, is the problem. And, before I am railed on for that comment, allow me to explain.

The Bible, to me, is more of a tool than anything else. Originally, that tool was used to strike fear into the masses and force them to obey or they would face the mighty wrath of God. It was a control method for those that would dare question the thought process of the leaders and dare to use their ability to think for themselves.

The New Testament is the realization that fear was no longer working. Either the populace was growing completely weary of being told that they would burn in hell or they were becoming apathetic to it. Either way, they needed to reshape the message. Along comes Jesus. He started modifying the message so as to incorporate love and goodwill into the same message of fear. He took the "child" from the abusive parents and put them in a new home with caring "foster" parents. Ones that would be forgiving and wanted nothing more than their "child" to succeed in life. As long as that life was within the confines of the Church.

In come the Romans. Their mighty empire is in the latter stages of its existence and they are realizing that they are losing their grip on a large number of people and facing some resistance. What do they do? They hold a council at Constantine's command to find a way of bridging the gap between those that they still have scared for their lives (mortal and/or immortal) and those that have transcended to these "free-love" teachings of Jesus. They decide to merge the two and cover all the bases. Voila....the birth of "modern" Christianity.

Now, before you (the "True" believers) wail on me for that....answer a couple of questions.

How is it that man is able to decide what is and is not the true "Word of God"? What constituted the acceptance of a book into the Bible and what constituted its dismissal? Were all of those at the council divinely inspired also like the writers of the books? Or, could it have been that those that we left out, didn't quite mesh with the message that they were trying to convey and would have led to questioning? What do you make of all of the other writings that were destroyed and unaccounted for? Were they destroyed because God wanted them destroyed or were they merely contradictory to the desires of those in power?

I guess, if I had to wrap all of this up in a nice and tidy soundbite......it would be this quote:

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth."

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Jesus came with a message, that is "Love your neighbour as yourself". That is the culmination and extent of what Jesus said. Anything Added or Subtracted from that is a perversion.

Yep. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Live by that alone and you will be more like Jesus than 99.9% of "Christians" out there.

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: sandorski
Jesus is not:

1)
-snip-
9)Christian
10)Jewish

Jesus came with a message, that is "Love your neighbour as yourself". That is the culmination and extent of what Jesus said. Anything Added or Subtracted from that is a perversion.

Facinating, Jesus is/was not Jewish, nor could be "considered" a Christian (in spite of the fact that he is the "original" Christian).

No, he is NOT the "original" Christian.

The word "christian" literally means "Being Christ-like".

JC could NOT have "been Christ-LIKE" because he WAS Christ. You can't "be something" and be "like something" at the same time. That's unpossible.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: J Heartless Slick
Jesus was a first century apocalyptic Palestinian Jew. He thought that in his lifetime god was going to come down, kick out the Romans, punished the sinners, and reward the worthy.



that is so wrong, where does one even begin with you.
When christ went before pilate, he refused to even speak in his defense, about the false accusations brought against him.
If you look in John18:36
Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is not my kindom from hence."



Jesus' message was basically prepare for the end of the world by behaving properly. Give up your wealth, take care of the needy, and follow the law of Moses.


And The word also clearly states and shows that Christ was the fulfilment of the mosaic law.
I suggest you start with the book of Galations as a very good place to clear up your misconceptions.

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: angminas

Originally posted by: daniel49

actually you chopped half of it off
Mark12 28-31
Background
One of the scribes in this verse (28) in reference to the Mosaic law asks Jesus "Which is the first( or greatest commandment?)

v29-31..and Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear O Isreal; the Lord our God is one Lord;
and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
And the second is like, namely this, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandments greater than these.

Well said, and an important point- God's commandments are often surgically altered. Instead of converting themselves to Christianity, they convert Christianity to themselves...and, of course, once you change it to suit your views, it's not Christianity anymore- it's humanism. Although I will say Fern was more right than most, and obviously has read the Bible more than most. That gets some points.

To the thread in general, it's true in a way that these two commandments are all you need to do...but here's the big thing that very few admit or realize...you can't just do what you feel like and call it obeying the commandments...

You have to learn how and why to obey them!

That's what the rest of the Bible is for, to put it very briefly. Anybody who says you can fit Jesus' entire message into one paragraph is calling him a liar. Why did he say and do all those other things if they were not important? What purpose was served by His disciples continuing to follow Him around and observe His actions and speaking if He'd already said all He had to say? Why did he quote the Old Testament dozens of times if it was just useless fluff compared to the "real message"? What did he mean when he gave them additional commandments after the main two? Why didn't he just say that part and then go die immediately so that his followers could begin to receive the Holy Spirit in Acts 2? See, here's the trap. You can't say his entire message fits into a thimble and then say his other messages had merit, too. You're making him out to be a fool.

Just for one single example- what good would his message have been if, in addition to saying to love people, he hadn't lived a perfect life and died for our sins?

None at all.

You can't just talk the talk- you've got to walk the walk too (Matthew 7, James 2, many other scriptures). Loving God, your neighbor, and yourself in the way God commands does not come with the flick of a switch- it's a lifelong journey. How can you sustain yourself on that journey with one paragraph? Is that what Jesus came here to do?

Well, see what HE had to say about it. Otherwise you're just doing your own thing and not His thing...which means you're not a Christian. That's in the Bible too. Know where?

true , in this case he was merely capsulizing the entirety of the mosaic law.
The "Simplicity of the Gospel if you will"

Whats the verse the Jews seek for a sign.......(thunderbolt from heaven)
and the greeks wisdom (trying to understand God with your intellect)
but we preach Christ crucified unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness. 1 cor 1: 22-23

For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. 1 cor 3:19