Open debate: What does Jesus teach?

[LastPoet]

Please, do tell us what has this 'jesus' taught us that was so transcendent? Had he so great knowledge or morals, unknown to the rest of the world?

It is a shame that people that are intelligent, are wasting such attributes to a fantasy, a fleeting dream. It does make me feel less of a loser tough.

[vorlon13]

And if all the items in the 4 Gospels is so 'inspirational' why do the cafeteria (mainstream majority) Christians care so little about following even a few jot and tittels recorded in them ?

Why don't Christians, for instance, and I AM serious here, picket and protest grocery stores that sell fig containing products? Doesn't really matter why Jesus doesn't like them, they just have to believe and put in the effort to please their Lord, and stamp out the damned things. Yet, we see nothing of the sort.

I also note it odd, as a plant product, Jewish dietary law doesn't really say much about figs, other than, I suppose, one shouldn't batter dip them and deep fry them in lard, that Jesus had a problem with the fig tree. He healed the lame, made the blind to see, and raised the dead. Seems like fixing a fig tree wouldn't have been much of a hurdle.

[Mudhammam]

The crucifixion isn't exactly coming out of left field. They had to slaughter their sacrificial lamb somehow. They don't seem to have been interested in continuing on in their "jewishness" such as it was. Ask the jews.

I think that goes more to the OP's point, and one that Nietzsche succinctly made in his excellent work, The Anti-Christ: Paul, for whatever reason, forsook a large degree of his heritage and re-wrote Jesus for a non-Jewish audience; he himself repeatedly makes clear that that was his purpose. And in the process, he mutated and distorted the original Gospel, which was VERY Jewish, and was originally intended for Jews (whereas again, a crucified Messiah was extremely antithetical to traditional Jewish beliefs, the OT being interpreted very liberally by Jesus' followers after the fact).

[The Grand Nudger]

Of course it does, I'm onboard with the OP in that regard. The idea of a blood sacrifice washing away inequity though...well.....that's exceedingly jewish. I'm not willing to comment on what Paul may have re-written about jesus - because that would imply that we have any notion as to who jesus was or what he said in the first place. We have only the claims of others.

[Ryantology]

Hi Arc,
I want to answer some of your writing.
When Jesus said to the Jews to keep the laws, the New Testament had not begun, therefore, that was the correct teaching.
The New Covenant began when Jesus became the sacrifice- which replaced the sacrifice of animals that could only cover sin- not redeem the ones for whom it was made.

That's funny, because I can't find any version of the Bible in which this passage reads "until the New Covenant begins, not an iota, not a tittle, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished." I don't know about heaven, but the last I checked, the earth's still very much in existence. Also, the last I checked, Revelation is supposed to be a future event, so all is not yet accomplished.

Jesus sets forth two clear conditions which must be met before the Law no longer applies to his followers, and it's an objective fact that neither have been met. So, tell me, why do you think you have any chance of going to heaven when Jesus makes it very plainly obvious that you're not?

[Mudhammam]

I'm not willing to comment on what Paul may have re-written about jesus - because that would imply that we have any notion as to who jesus was or what he said in the first place. We have only the claims of others.

No doubt, and it doesn't help much that biblical scholarship seems to divide people along lines that have more to do with their personal beliefs than a more rigid science should seem to permit. I would suggest a really great place to start is Larry Hurtado's book "How On Earth Did Jesus Become a God?"

(By the way, I've heard he is a Christian but I really couldn't tell from reading his book and I think he even does a fine job of outlining a perfectly reasonable, naturalistic explanation for the transformation of Jesus into the Christ).

[ThomM]

Hi Arc,
I want to answer some of your writing.
When Jesus said to the Jews to keep the laws, the New Testament had not begun, therefore, that was the correct teaching.
The New Covenant began when Jesus became the sacrifice- which replaced the sacrifice of animals that could only cover sin- not redeem the ones for whom it was made.
Paul declared he received revelation directly from Jesus, that NO man had taught him.

Paul wrote all those letters to the churches in the NT to instruct them on what was revealed to him from God.
In one place, Paul stated, about something he wrote, that what he is saying is from himself- clarifying a separate instruction. Making note it was from him rather than from the Holy Spirit.
It is apparent that Paul was chosen to replace the son of perdition- Judas.

I believe it was Paul who came against Peter for falling into the idea that the Law can justify them.
Paul asked in one letter, "Who has bewitched you?
To think you can be made perfect by the law".

ALL of the religions of the world system are Works Systems wherein the adherents believe they can raise themselves up by their boot straps.

The Gospel is taking the Pardon Jesus paid for and any good works done is to be a reflection of having received Grace.

Since you seem to have some grasp on history, note that the red thread that would turn white upon the Jewish priest's yearly sacrifice, no longer changed color after Jesus' sacrifice.
The Jews didn't get it.

40 years later their sacrifices stopped completely.
40 is the number of Testing.
When Jerusalem was surrounded by armies, the Christians remembered the words of Jesus and fled.
The OT clingers didn't and were killed by the Romans.

No - You don't Get it

Your story of the "New Covenant" is just another fabrication of the Xtians - and YOU have no grasp of History - the stories of the bible are not Historical - they are MYTHICAL - not real. There is no record of Israel in the historical record until about 1400 BCE - so we can assume that stories of a million people is nonsense. WE know that the story of bondage to Egypt is not true - we have a list of those who were - and the Hebrews were not on it. Either they did not exist - or were too insignificant to do so - either way the bible is not historical. ANd there is no mention of the christ in the historical record of his supposed time - none at all.

The bible is nothing more than a bunch of Myths and Fables of a bunch of ancient cave dwellers - goat herders - and fishermen - largely uneducated - making up stories to explain things that they did not understand. If you claim otherwise - PROVE the earth is a flat circle - and Prove that you can eat any seed bearing plant for food. And prove that the christ existed based on actual evidence that can be dated to that supposed time - there is NONE.

The problem with a claim of a "New Covenant" is that it admits that the god LIED - and its word it therefore worthless. If the god was all knowing - it would have know that it was not going to fulfill the original covenant - before he supposedly made it - so going ahead and making it - and then doing something else -= is simply showing that the god lied.

There are so many contradictions - errors of fact - and obvious nonsense in the bible -that quoting from it - normally can be contradicted by quoting from it.

And PAUL never saw the christ in life - no one can be proven to have done that. THe idea that Paul god the word directly from the christ is something that superstitious ancients might believe -= but an educated and intelligent person from this century looks at such a statement as nonsense.

[Mudhammam]

40 is the number of Testing.

[Tonus]

So in summary: Jesus taught to keep the whole of the OT law, he never taught any different.

Jesus needed to step lightly in the area of OT laws.

Why would god need to "step lightly" in any circumstance, much less when dealing with the laws that he presumably wrote?

[Aractus]