I have come to the last of the questions I had planned for this topic.
What is Jesus' central teaching?
Liberal Christians would probably say that it is the command to love one another. Conservatives more likely believe it is the "good news" that Jesus died for us. Of course there is some crossover. Liberals like to say that Jesus' death on the cross is the supreme example of love, and conservatives will agree that we should love one another because our Savior commanded it. Neither is correct.
The command to "love one another as I have loved you" comes from the Gospel of John, a late work (ca 90 CE) which hardly contains one authentic word of Jesus. In fairness, Jesus probably did quote the OT command to "love your neighbor as yourself" as recorded in the other three gospels. The three synoptic gospels contain all that we know of the teaching of Jesus, but they are certainly not free from additions. Most NT scholars with no commitment to biblical inerrancy are confident that that the material in the synoptics about Jesus' sacrifice have been injected back into the story, especially the account of Passion Week. Take, for instance, Jesus' supposed words at the Last Supper: "This [bread] is my body given into death for you." This represents the theology that developed around Jesus years after his death rather than his actual teaching.
Matthew 16:28 gives us the kernel of Jesus' teaching:
This is not the only passage which promises a speedy coming of God's kingdom. There is also Matthew 10:23 where Jesus tells the disciples: "Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes." Christians sometimes try to evade the problem by claiming that these prophecies refer to the destruction of Jerusalem which did indeed happen less than 40 years after Jesus; ministry. Certainly he thought Jerusalem would be destroyed but for him it is merely the immediate prelude to a cataclysm involving the whole earth as he more than once foretells catastrophes in the natural world such as the sun darkening and the stars falling from the sky (Matt. 24:29) and also Luke 21:
The first to recognize that apocalyptic prophecy is at the heart of Jesus' message was Albert Schweitzer in 1906. Yes, the humanitarian medical doctor who also had a doctorate in theology. Bart D. Ehrman tells us this is now the prevailing view among NT scholars.
Modern scholars recognize a fair chunk of the synoptic gospels as the authentic teaching of Jesus, namely the prophecies of the end, the parables and the moral teaching such as the sermon on the mount. These are all connected. The parables all convey a sense of urgency. Be watchful, for the end could come at any time. One good example is the parable of the ten bridesmaids, half of whom are prepared with extra oil, and half of whom have no oil for their lamps.
I've mentioned in a previous post the extreme nature of Jesus' moral teaching. Take no thought for the morrow, sell all that you have and give it to the poor, if someone steals your coat, give him your cloak also. These commands are all impractical for getting through a lifetime, but they make perfect sense if the end is nigh.
I have a theory as to why the history of the church has been one long succession of mistaken prophecies of the end. Jesus was very sincere and spoke with urgency and was also a master of rhetoric. The believer reads his words and responds to them, but Jesus is now acknowledged as divine. It never occurs to the pious disciple that Jesus could have made a mistake and so he applies the urgent prophecy to his own time and then engages in a weird numerological game with various bible passages to seek confirmation.
What is Jesus' central teaching?
Liberal Christians would probably say that it is the command to love one another. Conservatives more likely believe it is the "good news" that Jesus died for us. Of course there is some crossover. Liberals like to say that Jesus' death on the cross is the supreme example of love, and conservatives will agree that we should love one another because our Savior commanded it. Neither is correct.
The command to "love one another as I have loved you" comes from the Gospel of John, a late work (ca 90 CE) which hardly contains one authentic word of Jesus. In fairness, Jesus probably did quote the OT command to "love your neighbor as yourself" as recorded in the other three gospels. The three synoptic gospels contain all that we know of the teaching of Jesus, but they are certainly not free from additions. Most NT scholars with no commitment to biblical inerrancy are confident that that the material in the synoptics about Jesus' sacrifice have been injected back into the story, especially the account of Passion Week. Take, for instance, Jesus' supposed words at the Last Supper: "This [bread] is my body given into death for you." This represents the theology that developed around Jesus years after his death rather than his actual teaching.
Matthew 16:28 gives us the kernel of Jesus' teaching:
Quote:Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.C. S. Lewis called this "the most embarrassing verse in the Bible." Jesus saw his mission as warning people that the end of the world would come within the lifetime of his contemporaries. Thus he fits in with a long line of apocalyptic prophets from Daniel in the Old Testament to Harold Camping a few years ago, all of whom definitely prophesied the end within the space of a few years.
This is not the only passage which promises a speedy coming of God's kingdom. There is also Matthew 10:23 where Jesus tells the disciples: "Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes." Christians sometimes try to evade the problem by claiming that these prophecies refer to the destruction of Jerusalem which did indeed happen less than 40 years after Jesus; ministry. Certainly he thought Jerusalem would be destroyed but for him it is merely the immediate prelude to a cataclysm involving the whole earth as he more than once foretells catastrophes in the natural world such as the sun darkening and the stars falling from the sky (Matt. 24:29) and also Luke 21:
Quote:25 “There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. 26 People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. 27 At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
The first to recognize that apocalyptic prophecy is at the heart of Jesus' message was Albert Schweitzer in 1906. Yes, the humanitarian medical doctor who also had a doctorate in theology. Bart D. Ehrman tells us this is now the prevailing view among NT scholars.
Modern scholars recognize a fair chunk of the synoptic gospels as the authentic teaching of Jesus, namely the prophecies of the end, the parables and the moral teaching such as the sermon on the mount. These are all connected. The parables all convey a sense of urgency. Be watchful, for the end could come at any time. One good example is the parable of the ten bridesmaids, half of whom are prepared with extra oil, and half of whom have no oil for their lamps.
I've mentioned in a previous post the extreme nature of Jesus' moral teaching. Take no thought for the morrow, sell all that you have and give it to the poor, if someone steals your coat, give him your cloak also. These commands are all impractical for getting through a lifetime, but they make perfect sense if the end is nigh.
I have a theory as to why the history of the church has been one long succession of mistaken prophecies of the end. Jesus was very sincere and spoke with urgency and was also a master of rhetoric. The believer reads his words and responds to them, but Jesus is now acknowledged as divine. It never occurs to the pious disciple that Jesus could have made a mistake and so he applies the urgent prophecy to his own time and then engages in a weird numerological game with various bible passages to seek confirmation.
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people — House
