So, just what was Jesus' message?

Great Debates
102

Czar, if you are willing, then I am too, to put our differences behind us and approach one another with respect for our opinions and beliefs (or lack of them).

Regarding your last post:

It is a mistake to think of agape love as a feel-good emotion. The nature of love is that it overpowers evil, just as light overpowers darkness. Love is not wimpy. As you can plainly see, He is right. Look at how you and I have divided over Him.

That is hate in the sense of Webster’s Unabridged definition number three: “To love less, relatively.” It even cites the above verse as an example of usage.

If you complete the passage, the meaning is clear.

Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters–yes, even his own life–he cannot be my disciple. And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.

"Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Will he not first sit down and estimate the cost to see if he has enough money to complete it? For if he lays the foundation and is not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule him, saying, ‘This fellow began to build and was not able to finish.’

"Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Will he not first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.

"Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; it is thrown out.

“He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”

— Luke 14:25-35 (bolding mine)

We are to hate everything in comparison to our love for Him, not in the sense of scorn and ridicule, but in the sense of letting it go and never desiring it again.

103

And that is precisely the message that I have trouble with. To me, Jesus is saying that he must be loved more than you love anything else, and that to love him more you must deliberately love everyone else less. This jealous type of love is something you expect from insecure children. Love is not a finite substance in short supply, and one does not need to love one person less in order to love another person more-one needs only to provide more love.
I have my doubts about the definition of “hate” that is provided, because it sems convenient to your religious beliefs to say that when Jesus says “love” he is speaking directly, but when he says “hate” and “swords” and “take up against” we must search through dictionaries and translators until we can come up with a definition that will somehow match the beliefs that you already hold. This is the part of Biblical analysis that I personally find dangerous, because this allows people to get out of the Bible that which they already believe. I am afraid that when people say “This is what that passage really means…” they are in fact saying “This is what I want the Bible to say…”.
“In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.” This passage also disturbs me. This phrase, and it’s slight variations, is one method used today to tell religion from cult. From Jim Jones to Scientology, this method of controlling people has caused tragedy. Self, and self-control, are what allows us to control our destiny, and I am suspect of any creed that tells me to start loving others less, give up what is mine, and listen to only one source for all I need to know.

104

I have a question for you, Czar:
SInce you beleive that Jesus, or God if you will, doesn’t exist,
do you not think everyone who beleives He does is mentally ill and should be locked up?
I’m not being sarcastic here, I’m curious.:confused:

105

Naw. First we’d have to lock up Christians, then the Jews, then the Moslems, then people who believe in Bigfoot, then the UFOlogists, etc. This would raise my tax rates through the ceiling.:slight_smile:
Look, I’ve said before that we all have different life experiences,and have different standards for accepting evidence. Actually, in a way we are all atheists-I just believe in one less god than you do.

106

Czarcasm, I truly can respect the idea that you cannot find anything in the Christian message that gives you any reasonable ground for holding such a belief as most Christians have – and that much of what gets parroted as supposed “proof” and “evidence” leaves a bit to be desired along those lines.

However, I have come to know you as, when you yourself do not feel threatened and looked down on, the sort of person who will respect those who review the evidence and come to a different conclusion than yourself, provided that they’re actually thinking in the process of doing so. And, as someone who has subjected his own beliefs to mildly skeptical analysis, I can respect that POV.

In my humble opinion (no, not your forum! ;)), the actual content of the Christian message can be boiled down to:
> An omnipotent, omniscient God not only exists as some kind of far-off abstract but is particularly interested in and caring of you personally.
> This is evidenced by the life and work of Jesus of Nazareth, about whose life and work we have some information. Because of his impact on the lives of those he worked among, that information is by definition slanted towards belief in who he was and what he taught, but does add up to a coherent whole, subject to the usual parsing out of mild differences from the testimony of different witnesses to be expected in any such analysis.
> His teaching calls for a life lived in radical love of God and humanistic showing of love towards one’s fellow man. This differs from “feelgood glurge” in calling for a thorough examination of the moral consequences of one’s deeds based on those two premises.
> As a consequence of the demand to show love towards one’s fellow man, one is to judge only as one would himself wish to be judged – with compassion and forgiveness accompanied by help in overcoming problems.
> One is to take an optimistic view that each of us, with God, is able to overcome all obstacles – or achieve victory in defeat (detailing this would take too many paragraphs, but I’m sure you have a handle on whereof I speak.)
> One is to put one’s trust in God and fearlessly do His will.
> One is promised a much richer, more fulfilling life if one does all this.
> One is to spread this message as widely as possible, both by the speaking of it and more importantly by the doing of his will, a much better testimony than the mere words.
> The proof guaranteeing all this is that in some way the man Jesus who lived 2000 years ago was somehow able to transcend death and be present to his followers after his body died – and remains able to do so today.

Now, large chunks of that may sound glurgy but actually call for a stringent self-control of morality combined with a kindly, forgiving attitude towards others that is not always the easiest thing for human beings to accomplish – we seem blessed with the ability to rationalize every desire of our own as our just due while quick to condemn the choices of anyone different from ourselves. And of course with no experience of the proof given in the last paragraph and with the testimonies to its truth all slanted towards belief in him, it’s fairly easy to discount that, and hence to reject the whole picture.

You’ve heard my testimony, of experiencing something that appeared to be the Triune God as an overpowering, loving presence, and that my consequent following of Him did in fact lead to a life that was richer and more fulfilling (and I can go into extensive detail on this), including being led to take steps that had consequences which changed my outlook where the actual steps taken were not ones that I would have subconsciously wanted the eventual consequences of at the time of taking them.

I would welcome your deconstructing this sequence of statements (with the same respect for me as I have for you, rather than sardonic putdowns of the parts with which you disagree, if you please, because you are playing with a part of my heart here) so that I can attempt to answer the questions and objections you will presumably have to them.

107

I understand, but there ARE mentally ill people out there who believes God signals them and some such.
Whats to differentiate between them and us regular christians?

Heck, I could also say that we’re all christians…you just haven’t realized it yet.:wink:

108

Oh Poly, my pastor mentioned you this morning!
:):stuck_out_tongue:

109

Most Christians I have encountered have claimed to have a “personal” relationship with their god, and some claim that their god talks to them. You tell me how to tell the difference. Unfortunately, “If you believe hard enough, and cast away doubt, the answer will come.”, which I have heard over and over, applies to all sects and creeds. There are people of other religions who pray just a fervently as you do, study their holy books just as hard as you do, and believe just as much as you do. Yet the very nature of theri religion, and your religion, demands that only one can be true. How do I decide between which Chirstian is not nuts? How do I decide which holy book to believe, and why? If I believe that the Bible is true, who’s translation and explanation of which version of the Bible do I follow?
More to the point of the OP, if all I need to get from Jesus’ message is “All you need is love”, I can get the same message from any number of sources with a lot less ambiguity. Perhaps the OP should have been, “What positive messages can you derive from the words of Jesus?”

110

I don’t think spirituality is a zero sum game. It’s eternity, man; there’s enough to go around! Now I also don’t think God is going to kick you, screaming all the way into either Heaven or Hell, and I know that many Christians have thought exactly that. I pretty much ignore that, except to express the alternate opinion, that infinite love has infinite time to accomplish salvation, so the smallest amount of faith in the Lord will suffice to allow it. Only turning away relentlessly will circumvent that love.

I lack the scholarly credentials (or real interest) for a game of duelling verses. The Bible is a book about some people who came to know God. Reading it to find contradictions, and lies will not disprove anything, and certainly not bring your heart to know the Lord. Reading it to seek to know Him can work, but using it to prove that God exists is pointless.

Since I do not support killing babies for God, and do not expect Him to come by any time soon to smite my enemies, or even His own, I cannot participate in that defense of Christianity either. I suppose I will have to just take my tired old loving God off into a corner, and sulk.

So, what was Superman’s message?

Tris

111

After that little incident with Lex Luthor losing his hair, I guess it would be"No good deed goes unpunished".

112

How are they at odds? Don’t you have a personal relationship with your mother (not the bag of mostly water, but the beautiful person inside the bag)? And doesn’t she speak to you (not the sound waves, but the beautiful message that they carry)?

113

And by the way, wouldn’t you take it personally if someone ridiculed her, or went out of their way to tell you that she isn’t worthy of your love, or that you made up her existence? :wink:

114

If you wish, I could record my mother’s voice and put in online. I also have her home address if that is not enough. You?
Also, my mother is quite capable of taking care of herself, and we are secure enough in our relation not to wory about the opinions of strangers. She feels no need to convince total strangers of her existence because it is non of their business. BTW, I did this on a telephone directly, and I didn’t have to interpret her messege in any way.

115

Oh, and Lib? That “feeling” you get that you interpret as a personal message from you god? That is the exact same feeling others get when they get personal messages from their god, gods or goddesses. It is not an experience unique to your religion, or the sect of your particular religion that you currently follow.

116

Well, like I said, not the sound waves (such as those things that come out of telephone receivers) but rather her message of love. You might hear it clearly while I don’t hear it at all. As for the “feeling” (it is in fact an awareness, though feelings can ensue), I’m certainly the last one to claim any unique possession of God’s message. You must have missed the many times that I’ve explained that.

117

Lib, you have completely misunderstood what I wrote. I didn’t say that other people also “receive” your god’s message-I said that they receive messages from gods and goddesses that you might not believe in. And believe me, unlike the feeling or “awareness” you claim to have, if my mother spoke to you in person or over the telephone there would be no philosophical discussion afterwards as to whether or not you heard her.

118

If I may presume to speak for Libertarian, and he represents a view not precisely mine but not far different from it, the words heard by others who understand them as the messages from “other gods and goddesses” are in fact the work of the same one transcendent god manifesting himself/herself to others according as they are able to perceive him/her, just as he does to us what we are able to perceive.

And the question is not unlike the telephone question – in that one might have someone with a perspective that, “yeah, I see that implement on the table with the twisted-pair wire connecting it to a wall outlet, but how am I supposed to believe that your mother, who is 500 miles away, can talk to you through that thing.” And who, by the way, regards the Alexander Graham Bell story as nothing but legend-making – spilling acid and “Mr. Watson, come here, I want you” indeed! Clearly mythmaking at its best!

119

Thanks, Poly. I missed Czar’s reply, but you understood, of course. Would you try to explain to him the difference between hearing his mother’s sound waves and hearing her love? I’ve tried twice.

120

I think you’re being unclear because you’re trying to use a word for a physical process that’s inadequate to describe contextual communication.

When Czarcasm’s mother speaks to him, there’s a lifetime (Czar’s lifetime) of shared experience of each other which underlies all of their communications and which makes explicit for Czar certain meanings which would be completely opaque to others who do not share the full context. While a listener could certainly glean the nominal content of a conversation between Czar and his mother, even the most attentive could not hope to completely understand the meaning of the conversation.

ISTM that those who describe a personal communication with their God are speaking of the same sort of contextually meaningful communication.

121

Xeno, it’s as though you understand completely. And I see that you’re right. I was unclear. You’ve explained it perfectly. Do I remember correctly that you’re an atheist?