Why doesn't Jesus sound smart?
- Thread starter advancedatheist
- Start date
kuroyume0161
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2001
- Messages
- 1,628
Followed shortly thereafter by the Crusades and the Grand Holy Inquisition...
Hate the sin, not the sinner.
Kill the sinner, not the sin.
Noone, ever? I smell a false statement.
ruach1
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2005
- Messages
- 561
Look it up if your nose senses something wrong.
"Love your enemies."
Can't be beat--
even by the unquestionably bad deeds of some of the faithful.
Thank-you. I stand corrected. How the gospels came to be chosen as "divinely inspired" from the other versions floating around centuries later is something I'll have to look into more thoroughly.
Are you quite sure? There were a lot of people who lived before Jesus was born, and since, that history hasn't remembered.
Last edited:
teacher
Scholar
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 119
Jesus - both man and God. On earth, Jesus as the 2nd person in the trinity is limited in power. The very earth would limit Him anyway. He does as instructed by God and has many restrictions, but still has many abilities too during his short ministry following his baptism and time in the desert. At the temple with the market sellers; imagine if He got REALLY mad!!! Just a thought.
Jesus grew up as a normal human, because He was fully, 100% human. He thought as a child when He was a child. The very point was that He should be as one of us and experience the very same temptations, tiredness, anger, love and pain, which He did.
The language of the day is the one reflected in the New Testament - gutter language, rather like 'the Message' translation of Peterson. English from 500 years ago is very hard and different to follow. How so Ancient Greek 2000 years old from Palestine during Roman occupation? Even French people today have a different language that is translated differently, even when speaking to an English speaking person.
Jesus did not speak some exotic angelic language or walk around in a monk-like prayer mode. He was a very normal Jewish person who was 'nothing to look at' according to the Bible. He spoke in their language and I'm sure that any sayings (if the content - relative things like fishing and farming etc.) would likewise be down to earth. Many fail to see this - that God and perfection can be found in everyday words and everyday language.
Would Jesus: trip up when walking? Forget what He was going to say or stumble on His words? Be visually drawn to a nice looking woman? Play ball games? Tell jokes? Not want to get up in the morning? Lie in? I would not be surprised if He did much of this. If you think perfection is this, you’re looking for perfection in the wrong places or don’t understand perfection or Jesus’ limitations and subjectivity on earth.
Jesus spake some amazing things and was said by several people to be phenomenal. Rabbis, Nichodemus, leaders, the High priest, Pilate and others all had something good to say and most were amazed at what He spoke and how He spoke with an authority they had never come across, and some of these were very old, learned leaders of the Jewish faith and Sanhedrin.
"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone' is just one amazing saying of many.
Many times they tried to catch Him out but couldn't.
He read a prophecy about Himself from the OT, live in a synagogue to the priest and congregation.
He performed many healings to prove His authority.
Sadly the Bible has a stigma attached to it, so it's rarely read, especially in public - try it and watch the reaction! Few, (including many so called Christians) actually have a really good crack at it other than finding (dis?)proof texts. If we only rely on others or quotes or opinions of those who say they have read it, we cannot get a good sense of it from which to comment personally and honestly.
The fact that so many from all positions have said it is the most amazing and widely published book and Jesus, the most influential person in the history of the world deserves more credit that is currently being got. A quick plug for the classic philosophers too, read them.
I mentioned Jesus being 'relatively uneducated' (all the more reason for those who met Him to be amazed) because that is the consensus of most scholars given his parentage, job, time and culture and what we know so far. Some (e.g. extreme health and wealth Pentecostals) believe He was very rich (from huge gift parcels at birth), had posh clothes, a plush flat and a travelling Bible school. The evidence is very vague ambiguous parts of verses in the gospels.
Several mentions of 'I heard someone say' or 'I read somewhere'. Even when you find quotes (e.g. by the Jesus Seminar who are a minority with a bias – focussing on, for example separating the historical Jesus from the Christ of faith, and not representative), if it is a suitably negative claim, you raise it. I notice no claims dragged out that show confirmation of the authenticity of any scripture or of Jesus' existence, despite the majority of study and research being so. I wonder why? This is why threads like this are not going anywhere serious. No minds are going to be changed and little education will happen on this particular topic, the attitudes and biases are just wrong for it.
Jesus grew up as a normal human, because He was fully, 100% human. He thought as a child when He was a child. The very point was that He should be as one of us and experience the very same temptations, tiredness, anger, love and pain, which He did.
The language of the day is the one reflected in the New Testament - gutter language, rather like 'the Message' translation of Peterson. English from 500 years ago is very hard and different to follow. How so Ancient Greek 2000 years old from Palestine during Roman occupation? Even French people today have a different language that is translated differently, even when speaking to an English speaking person.
Jesus did not speak some exotic angelic language or walk around in a monk-like prayer mode. He was a very normal Jewish person who was 'nothing to look at' according to the Bible. He spoke in their language and I'm sure that any sayings (if the content - relative things like fishing and farming etc.) would likewise be down to earth. Many fail to see this - that God and perfection can be found in everyday words and everyday language.
Would Jesus: trip up when walking? Forget what He was going to say or stumble on His words? Be visually drawn to a nice looking woman? Play ball games? Tell jokes? Not want to get up in the morning? Lie in? I would not be surprised if He did much of this. If you think perfection is this, you’re looking for perfection in the wrong places or don’t understand perfection or Jesus’ limitations and subjectivity on earth.
Jesus spake some amazing things and was said by several people to be phenomenal. Rabbis, Nichodemus, leaders, the High priest, Pilate and others all had something good to say and most were amazed at what He spoke and how He spoke with an authority they had never come across, and some of these were very old, learned leaders of the Jewish faith and Sanhedrin.
"Let him who is without sin cast the first stone' is just one amazing saying of many.
Many times they tried to catch Him out but couldn't.
He read a prophecy about Himself from the OT, live in a synagogue to the priest and congregation.
He performed many healings to prove His authority.
Sadly the Bible has a stigma attached to it, so it's rarely read, especially in public - try it and watch the reaction! Few, (including many so called Christians) actually have a really good crack at it other than finding (dis?)proof texts. If we only rely on others or quotes or opinions of those who say they have read it, we cannot get a good sense of it from which to comment personally and honestly.
The fact that so many from all positions have said it is the most amazing and widely published book and Jesus, the most influential person in the history of the world deserves more credit that is currently being got. A quick plug for the classic philosophers too, read them.
I mentioned Jesus being 'relatively uneducated' (all the more reason for those who met Him to be amazed) because that is the consensus of most scholars given his parentage, job, time and culture and what we know so far. Some (e.g. extreme health and wealth Pentecostals) believe He was very rich (from huge gift parcels at birth), had posh clothes, a plush flat and a travelling Bible school. The evidence is very vague ambiguous parts of verses in the gospels.
Several mentions of 'I heard someone say' or 'I read somewhere'. Even when you find quotes (e.g. by the Jesus Seminar who are a minority with a bias – focussing on, for example separating the historical Jesus from the Christ of faith, and not representative), if it is a suitably negative claim, you raise it. I notice no claims dragged out that show confirmation of the authenticity of any scripture or of Jesus' existence, despite the majority of study and research being so. I wonder why? This is why threads like this are not going anywhere serious. No minds are going to be changed and little education will happen on this particular topic, the attitudes and biases are just wrong for it.
By what standard is that a wise teaching? Clearly, judging Christianity's teachings by the standards of Christianity indicates that's fantastic - but that's true of any set of teachings.
By any rational standard I can think of, that's a profoundly stupid teaching.
jjramsey
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2005
- Messages
- 1,494
Yes, which is why the Black Panthers were so much more effective than Martin Luther King.
Um, wait a minute...
You mean, like Plato, who said that no war could be just? Socrates certainly had a lot to say about love in the Symposium...
ruach1
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2005
- Messages
- 561
They were talking about philos which is a type of philosophical love they thought could only be shared between two men. (Don't. you know what...)
Jesus' love is more about agape or the spiritual Love God has for humans and, consequently because of Jesus, humans can have for one another.
Philos is of the mind and exclusive to male thinkers. (according to Plato)
Agape is of the spirit (or whole inner being, not just intellect), and it is inclusive of everyone. Even your enemies--
Last edited:
Jesus: "But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also."
Churchill: "We shall never surrender..."
Jesus was on an agenda. His teachings were for his predicament, not for the Ages. Imagine if Churchill had of applied Jesus beatitudes to the situation of WWII.
Still; Jesus, Churchill, the Nazis, etc, etc - all using god to justify their cause. Human nature?
Churchill: "We shall never surrender..."
Jesus was on an agenda. His teachings were for his predicament, not for the Ages. Imagine if Churchill had of applied Jesus beatitudes to the situation of WWII.
Still; Jesus, Churchill, the Nazis, etc, etc - all using god to justify their cause. Human nature?
Last edited:
lol
uruk
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2003
- Messages
- 5,311
No he said it, but he didn't mean it.
Sorry for the really obscure "Spinal Tap" refrence.
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
Of course it's possible, as Mercuryturrent suggests, to decide that Jesus was inauthentic, but it's also possible, as some biblical scholars have suggested, that the reason his sayings often sound like someone else's is that they were usually reworked from contemporary Jewish traditions of parables, prayers, etc., as would be appropriate for someone with Jewish training. There's very little in the gospels about Jesus's youth, and there is the possibility that he was better educated than we think. The sermon on the mount, for example, draws on numerous prior sources, but usually bends them a little to a new purpose. It's been a long long time since I read up on this stuff, but the beatitudes are one example, I think, and as I recall the Lord's prayer is a composite of two or three standard Jewish texts as well. Of course if you want to make the case against Jesus youcan say that he's unoriginal, or that this stuff was compiled later out of scraps and he needn't even have existed, but if you choose you can also see the possibility that Jesus was a pretty savvy orator who knew both his texts and his audience.
Aristophanes's story in the Symposium was about love as the completion of being, between male and female. I think he uses "Philos" too, but I don't have my Loeb with me. Philos is not necessarily gender exclusive, you have it mixed up with Socrates's admitted homosexuality.
the Four Loves by CS Lewis mentions Friendship (philia), Eros, Charity (agape), and Affection (storge). All of which lost something in the Bibles' translation into the English language. Another reference here
Last edited: