What Did Jesus Actually Do?

[PureX]

This is anti-Jewsh nonsense.

Also it's off-topic.

Judaism is all about the ideal of God being outside of the self. An EXTERNAL deity that had to be obeyed, or placated, or worshiped, or whatever, and who responded to us through It's control of circumstance. But Jesus introduced a whole new conception of God, as being a part of us, and we as expressions of 'Him'. This was an outrageous claim to the Jewish high priests. Tantamount to calling oneself, a god. And they reacted accordingly. Just as they (and many Christians) would, today, if one of their own made that same proclamation.

 

[Rival]

Judaism is all about the ideal of God being outside of the self. An EXTERNAL deity that had to be obeyed, or placated, or worshiped, or whatever, and who responded to us through circumstance. But Jesus introduced a whole new conception of God, as being a part of us, and we an expression of 'Him'. This was an outrageous claim to the Jewish high priests. Tantamount to calling oneself, a God. And they reacted accordingly. Just as they (and many Christians) would, today, if one of their own made that same proclamation.

No it isn't, now would you please take your off-topic debate elsewhere.

 

[Marcion]

"God within us" completely transcended Judaism. It was a whole new theological perspective. It wasn't inside or outside Judaism, because it wasn't anywhere until Jesus introduced it to humanity.

Nah, this type of tantric mystic teaching is millenia old and nothing new at all.
Also, Judaism had/has its mystic side as well.

 

[PureX]

Nah, this type of tantric mystic teaching is millenia old and nothing new at all.
Also, Judaism had/has its mystic side as well.

I'm not talking about 'mysticism', and neither was Jesus.

 

[Audie]

Most of that is religious belief for which there is insufficient support. I have no reason to believe it, and so don't consider them accomplishments.

Jefferson's opinion is not mine. The precepts of Jesus are easily improved upon. Jefferson did so himself in the Declaration of Independence, which took a moral position contradictory to scripture regarding the right to unseat unjust tyrants even if they were allegedly divinely appointed, and therefore commanded by God to submit to.

Jesus was a relatively ordinary-for-his-time, peripatetic, religious zealot that was in the right place at the right time for people like Paul and the latter Roman emperors to launch a new religion about him.

The world is now being made better by the ongoing decline of organized, politicized Christianity, especially in the States.



Nor should people believe that story. Yet, allegedly Jesus performed miracles as testimony to his divine nature so that he would be believed, but according to you, wouldn't be believed if he had written about it, or, presumably, by second hand accounts.



Agreed.

I've asked a similar question many times and received no satisfactory answer: What original and valuable contribution did Jesus make to moral theory?

I can find a few valuable ideas, but as you note, they predate Jesus.

And I have found what I think are ideas original to Jesus, but not valuable ones, such as "Blessed are the meek." That's wrong. The meek are accursed by a failure of the spirit to assert themselves when they ought to be. Caspar Milquetoast was meek. Stan Laurel's character was meek. Milton from the movie Office Space was meek. None were blessed or to be admired.​

Just as the bible itself appears to be a
partial collection of the stories, superstitions
and folk wisdom of a people, "Jesus" appears
to be t he embodiment of the wisdom and
morality of his time, the figure onto which those
are projected.

Kind of like G Washington being the embodiment
of certain American ideals.

If there were not such good records, no telling what
he might turn into!

 

[Audie]

A debate:

• during which no opinions, except of each other, will be changed;
• at the end of which, no opinions, except of each other, will be changed;
• with some entertainment value to some but not all;
• and no popcorn or booze.

Yup, you've started a debate. Good on ya' ....Have fun.

Terrif that you is so above it all.
Gonna go play vid games now?

 

[Marcion]

I'm not talking about 'mysticism', and neither was Jesus.

The teachings of Jesus are profoundly mystic. There is nothing exoterically religious about his teachings.

 

[Brickjectivity]

From a historical standpoint, what, in his own lifetime, did Jesus of Nazareth achieve? I am having trouble figuring this out, because I can see objectively that Muhammad had a huge impact upon not only his own society but others, all within his lifetime. That the impact was either good or bad is not my point here, but that had had one. Baha'u'llah had some direct impacts, if small, upon his society. In contrast, I can't think of anything Jesus did that no-one else could have done.

He was born, he preached, he was executed.

This is probably going to turn into an 'It was all Paul not Jesus' thread, but have at it anyway.

I would say that he did his best, and that's all anyone can do. Its a high standard. The thing is that the work he starts is still ongoing, and so from a certain perspective he has accomplished all things. If that work were to stop before everything was accomplished then it would not be so, but for a Christian that would not be possible. To a Christian everything has been accomplished in a future sense. Ok, I admit not many modern Christians are taught that. In fact most Christian forums would toss me if I even brought it up.

You can think of his life as a seed, and so the tree it grows into is also part of his work. From that perspective he has not finished his work, yet. The NT writings are very mythical in how they talk about abiding in him, calling him the vine, but they are speaking of dedication. From the Didache it appears that some of the early Christians said that Jesus opened the Vine of David to themselves. There probably are different ways of describing Christ: branch of a vine, plant from a seed, grafts onto the natural stock. These are talking about the future accomplishments that come through Jesus which are not visible, yet; but Jesus believes in them. As long as Jesus and his followers believe in them and keep working towards them, then his work is ongoing; and so as long as his work is still ongoing then in faith it can be said that Jesus has accomplished everything. If a person is baptized into that then they accept the responsibility of doing their part towards making it happen -- or ought to. This is not something most churches inform their congregants of, because most of them are upstarts from here in America who don't know.

 

[Ellen Brown]

My own cautious opinion is that Paul likely derailed what Jesus had intended. Perhaps Christianity was not his objective at all? From my own point of view, I do not see that Christians are a bit better than Muslims or Jews, and they have just LOTS of blood on their hands. The idea that "America is a Christian Nation" is so much fluff, especially in the 20th Century. The Civil War was perhaps punishment for Slavery.

And, I often wonder if the first several hundred years after the Crucifiction, satan just cemented his control over mankind ???

Every single religion seems to reject the different, and imagine horrific things about them. I'd like to advance the premise that we think we wait on Jesus to return, but perhaps he is waiting for us to achieve at least some civility toward each other?

 

[PureX]

Just as the bible itself appears to be a
partial collection of the stories, superstitions
and folk wisdom of a people, "Jesus" appears
to be t he embodiment of the wisdom and
morality of his time, the figure onto which those
are projected.

Kind of like G Washington being the embodiment
of certain American ideals.

If there were not such good records, no telling what
he might turn into!

Nearly all mythical characters and their stories are part history and part fantasy. But the important point to keep in mind is that myth has a purpose, and that purpose is NOT to convey accurate historical fact, but to convey an important ideological truth held by the people who created and maintained the myth. The 'exaggerations' are there to highlight the points of key ideological import.

 

[Kenny]

From a historical standpoint, what, in his own lifetime, did Jesus of Nazareth achieve? I am having trouble figuring this out, because I can see objectively that Muhammad had a huge impact upon not only his own society but others, all within his lifetime. That the impact was either good or bad is not my point here, but that had had one. Baha'u'llah had some direct impacts, if small, upon his society. In contrast, I can't think of anything Jesus did that no-one else could have done.

He was born, he preached, he was executed.

This is probably going to turn into an 'It was all Paul not Jesus' thread, but have at it anyway.

In my understanding, he went to the lowest parts of Hell and paid the price for humanity and resurrected. I'm not sure that Muhammad or Baha'u'llah did that?

 

[Rival]

In my understanding, he went to the lowest parts of Hell and paid the price for humanity and resurrected. I'm not sure that Muhammad or Baha'u'llah did that?

This is your belief.

I want to know what he did objectively to make him deserve his place in history not just amongst the Christians.

 

[Kenny]

This is your belief.

I want to know what he did objectively to make him deserve his place in history not just amongst the Christians.

You did ask what was the difference... And Ceasar and King Herod never did find a body. And then again, there were 500 witnesses and the believers grew exponentially thereafter.

Is there a reason why I should disbelieve it?

 

[sealchan]

From a historical standpoint, what, in his own lifetime, did Jesus of Nazareth achieve? I am having trouble figuring this out, because I can see objectively that Muhammad had a huge impact upon not only his own society but others, all within his lifetime. That the impact was either good or bad is not my point here, but that had had one. Baha'u'llah had some direct impacts, if small, upon his society. In contrast, I can't think of anything Jesus did that no-one else could have done.

He was born, he preached, he was executed.

This is probably going to turn into an 'It was all Paul not Jesus' thread, but have at it anyway.

He started what has become the most popular religion?

I recently heard a lecture that indicated that Islam emerged out of an active dialog with Jewish and Christian and its backstory isnt what it is famed to be...rather than a revolution started by one man it was a gradual process of a people trying to understand how they were growing and prospering and beginning to challenge the powers that be.

 

[PureX]

The teachings of Jesus are profoundly mystic. There is nothing exoterically religious about his teachings.

That doesn't make them 'mystical'. I think they were basically pragmatic, not mystical. He was a Jew talking to other Jews. And when he did so, he did so as an observant and obedient Jew. He was not trying to "fix" Judaism or start any new religions. And he wasn't talking to US when he was talking to his fellow Jews 2000 years ago.

What he was doing, I think, was connecting the human spirit with the divine. Something religious Judaism had not really done (being based on 'the fall', after all). Jesus was showing us the way past 'original sin', in very pragmatic terms. Love God, yourself, and your fellow humans as one and the same 'beloved'.

 

[Rival]

You did ask what was the difference... And Ceasar and King Herod never did find a body. And then again, there were 500 witnesses and the believers grew exponentially thereafter.

Is there a reason why I should disbelieve it?

This has nothing to do with what I asked.

 

[sealchan]

I'm not talking about 'mysticism', and neither was Jesus.

I think that depending on which gospel author you read Jesus was talking about ideas from the more mystical traditions.

 

[Rival]

He started what has become the most popular religion?

The movement, like many messianic movements before and after it, would have died imo if not for Paul. I think Jesus himself had very little impact upon it and it's doubtful he intended to create a new religion.

 

[Kenny]

This has nothing to do with what I asked.

"From a historical standpoint, what, in his own lifetime, did Jesus of Nazareth achieve?"

Well, as I understand it, it is historical, he did do it in his life time... so I think it qualifies.

Now, if the question is "From a historical standpoint, and conforming to what i want you to say, what, in his own lifetime, did Jesus of Nazareth achiever?"

Well... then we have a WHOLE nutter animal.

 

[Rival]

"From a historical standpoint, what, in his own lifetime, did Jesus of Nazareth achieve?"

Well, as I understand it, it is historical, he did do it in his life time... so I think it qualifies.

Now, if the question is "From a historical standpoint, and conforming to what i want you to say, what, in his own lifetime, did Jesus of Nazareth achiever?"

Well... then we have a WHOLE nutter animal.

Would you like me to try a third time or is it pointless?

What did Jesus do that isn't a part of nominal Christian belief that awards him a place in history both secular and religious?