Still trying to figure out Jesus

[Hagoth]

I have pretty much lost the ability to maintain a belief in the magical parts of the Jesus story, but I still really like a lot of the teachings.

I have met all kinds of devout Christians, particularly in my Bible-belt mission, and the thing that I have constantly been confronted with is the idea that the essential part of the gospel is accepting Jesus' miraculous atonement and resurrection, and that is the ONLY way you can attain salvation. But the thing that moves me about Jesus is what he is purported to have said about loving one another, forgiving, blessing those that curse you, etc.

The thing is, you can believe in the the divine mission of Jesus and in his resurrection, and accept Him as your personal savior, but still be a proud member of the KKK, but you can't be a member of the KKK, or any other white supremacist or hate group and truly follow Jesus' teachings. This is quite a conundrum, especially when these hateful people are generally aligned with the political right and the political right is constantly painting the political left as godless.

It seems to me that it's relatively easy to come to Jesus by proclaiming faith in him and accepting his salvation, especially if you have the type of personality that leans toward belief, but it is much harder to love your enemy, bless those that curse you, and so many things that he actually taught.

In the Evangelical world you can live all of Jesus' teachings but you will burn in eternal hell if you don't proclaim your faith in His divinity.

Personally, I feel like I have a big enough task ahead of me learning to do the things Jesus taught, which I believe in, whether or not he was a historical figure. Until I have achieved the do, does the believe really matter that much?

Fire at will.

[wtfluff]

Personally, I feel like I have a big enough task ahead of me learning to do the things Jesus taught, which I believe in, whether or not he was a historical figure. Until I have achieved the do, does the believe really matter that much?

Nope.

[dogbite]

As has been said of Mormonism, it is good and unique but the good parts aren't unique and the unique parts aren't good..

Wait no that's not right. The good parts of Jesus' story are found in lots of places, and there aren't any unique parts of Jesus' story either.

I guess I don't see the need to understand Jesus story in any particular way. after reading God is not One I realize the claims for Allah and God and Jesus and all the other religions really aren't talking about the same being. They have fundamentally different purposes in solving flaws of humanity. The fundamental flaws to be fixed aren't shared between the beliefs. Nor are the final achievement goals consistent between the beliefs.

After reading Big Gods I realize that we're at a transition point in social structure as regards religion and the rule of law. Religion was the first social law for larger societies and much of the West is transitioning beyond that necessity. As such religion is striving to redefine its own purpose and position in society in the light of its failing historical function.

The kinds of things Christian salvation was supposed to give you are largely available to Modern Western Society. Health, comfort, food, housing, long life. What traditional Christianity has defined as sin not so much sinful. I credit the riseof the Prosperity Gospel as one of the new interpretations Jesus will take on. No longer is the problem sin and overcoming sin but the problem is money and not having enough of it. In The Name of the Rose, the Franciscans open their debate by saying we are here to debate whether Christ owned his clothes. The other side responds no it's not whether Christ was poor but whether the church should be poor. Now no one has to be poor. So what can religion promise instead.

[Mad Jax]

Well... if it's free discussion, then I think Jesus has some loathsome teachings. I don't think it's a stretch that the parable of the widow's mites has convinced countless suffering elderly folks to hand over what they could ill afford to lose in order to donate to a group of silken clad clerics living in marble edifices. After all, the Son of God says it's the greater of all the sacrifices. Wouldn't want to abstain from an action that's perfectly in line with Him.

Also, depending on how you interpret it, the sermon on the mount is a combination of prohibitions against thought crime and extremely bad advice. I will grant that the LDS interpretation gets this charge off the table, but the idea that even a moments thought - which is well understood to be mostly out of our control - is equivalent to the performance of the offending act is pure attempt at thought control. And "take no thought for the morrow" is plainly foolish. But again, many people legitimately interpret this differently. So why am I including it?

Because Jesus is largely, if not completely (though I don't buy Richard Carrier's arguments) a fabrication of men who wished to exert control over a population they could convince to be docile to their whims. And whether or not one's interpretation is exactly as I've outlined seems irrelevant to me since Christians ignore the vast majority of scripture anyway. Almost everyone's interpretation of Jesus involves taking what's written literally and mixing it with a healthy dose of confirmation bias. So I think he's largely irrelevant to somebody who wishes to be ethical and decent.

I understand your desire to seek out somebody who can guide you with a good set of teachings, but if I might be so bold, if you're seeking somebody to guide you through life's choices, I think Hagoth is the best choice you can make.

[Palerider]

Hagoth,
I think there are some good and thoughtful answers to your questions/suppositions. And I think that the reason those answers aren't more readily available is because of the poor quality of scripture study among most Christians, including Mormons.

But for me to take on the effort of the exegetics required is more than this format or venue allows. I'm not sure many here would be willing to read something that long. Some seemingly simple questions require complex or involved answers. Ask any scientist.

Some of the difficult verbiage in Paul's and the Savior's teachings give me headaches from time to time but as a reward I've also had numerous "Aha!" moments that were really enlightening.

The interesting take away is that God is much more understanding than we (especially clergy) give him credit for. I end up finding many times I've limited God's intelligence because of my own limited understanding.

[Hagoth]

I don't think we have any way of knowing anything Jesus said or did (if anything at all). I just like the positive teachings that are attributed to him. They leave little room for bigotted hatefulness in his followers. My point is that maybe those ideals should be more important to people who consider themselves followers of Christ than whether or not he had a miraculous way of dodging a bar tab or whether he literally went for a walk after his heart stopped beating.

[Palerider]

I don't think we have any way of knowing anything Jesus said or did (if anything at all). I just like the positive teachings that are attributed to him. They leave little room for bigotted hatefulness in his followers. My point is that maybe those ideals should be more important to people who consider themselves followers of Christ than whether or not he had a miraculous way of dodging a bar tab or whether he literally went for a walk after his heart stopped beating.

So are you equating (as you mentioned in your initial post) un-christian behavior by supposed believers as something that only occurs among alt-right or conservative people?

[1smartdodog]

You lost me when you equated the political right with the KKK

[Hagoth]

[So are you equating (as you mentioned in your initial post) un-christian behavior by supposed believers as something that only occurs among alt-right or conservative people

?
Not at all, I'm merely commenting on the broad chasm between using Jesus as a political qualifier and actually living his simplest teachings. KKK members must swear an oath to uphold Christian values. They burn a cross as an symbol of intolerance. People like the Bundys justify their words and behaviors as the will of God. These are the extremes, of course, but anyone who follows elections will observe that the name and supposed intentions of Jesus are cited for validation more frequently the further you move right (think Tea Party).

I'm just saying that maybe "love your enemies" is a better gateway into Christianity than loud proclamations. In the south I was always being asked "are you saved?" and "have you accepted Jesus as your personal savior?" as if verbal devotion is the real litmus test, sort of a second anointing to assure your salvation while providing flexibility your behavior. The mere failure to verbally proclaim Jesus as your savior is enough to earn an eternity of fire and torture (Have you read the Jack Chick tracts that are handed out in Bible Belt churches?)

But I really started this thread out of self introspection. How important is it to believe that Jesus was the literal son of God compared to following his teachings regarding our fellow men? Which would be more important to Jesus if you found yourself standing before his judgement bar?

[Corsair]

I'm just saying that maybe "love your enemies" is a better gateway into Christianity than loud proclamations. In the south I was always being asked "are you saved?" and "have you accepted Jesus as your personal savior?" as if verbal devotion is the real litmus test, sort of a second anointing to assure your salvation while providing flexibility your behavior. The mere failure to verbally proclaim Jesus as your savior is enough to earn an eternity of fire and torture (Have you read the Jack Chick tracts that are handed out in Bible Belt churches?)

But I really started this thread out of self introspection. How important is it to believe that Jesus was the literal son of God compared to following his teachings regarding our fellow men? Which would be more important to Jesus if you found yourself standing before his judgement bar?

I am increasingly partial to Christian Universalism and the practical tenets of Christianity that are taught in mainstream Christian churches. Once arguing over finer points of doctrine enters the fray, I tend to lose practical interest. If a church is teaching a view of Christ that emphasizes a stricly defined worship rather than simply being kind to everyone, I immediately imagine that the Creator of the Universe cannot possibly be so petty. Marcus Aurelius is wrongly, but admirably, attributed as saying, "If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them."

[Hagoth]

Although the Jesus presented in the NT speaks at times like a millennialist, and although the real Jesus was almost certainly an iconoclastic rebel/zealot, I get a stronger vibe that maybe whoever originated those teachings was saying that the kingdom of God is really here and it is really us to the degree that we are able to emulate the love one another sentiment embodied in the character of Jesus.

[EternityIsNow]

But I really started this thread out of self introspection. How important is it to believe that Jesus was the literal son of God compared to following his teachings regarding our fellow men? Which would be more important to Jesus if you found yourself standing before his judgement bar?

This is the real question. How important are the Jesus teachings for our own personal happiness in life (or the afterlife). And I think there is a unique answer for each of us, because your Jesus is not the same as my Jesus, or anybody else's Jesus. We all build an image in our minds of the character and personality and role of God or Jesus, or whatever deity we believe in (if any), based on our own experiences with religion, prayer, philosophy, etc.

To make a contrast, we all have the same basic information about the life of a modern celebrity, we can actually see or meet them, there are contemporary accounts. But all we know about Jesus is that he appears in some old stories. Stories that are too old to fact-check, lending themselves to endless spin to support whatever philosophy a person desires them to be. If deities were alive today, like celebrities, we would have better information. But we don't. So we get the Mormon Jesus, the Baptist Jesus, the Catholic Jesus, the Muslim Jesus (prophet only), the academic Jesus (mythical figure), and so on. Jesus can serve any purpose you want him to, which in my mind, makes him an arbitrary figure, not very real.

So for me, the next question is, who do you want Jesus to be? Because to your mind, that is who he really is.

For now, I now look at the historical Jesus as a fictional Roman ideal of a religious figure, a blended character designed to reduce religious factionalism in the empire. That is who he is in my mind. A nice summary of the state of religious philosophy in the third century, when the Romans standardized the story.

[Hagoth]

So for me, the next question is, who do you want Jesus to be? Because to your mind, that is who he really is

Good-time party Jesus handing out jetpacks!

[EternityIsNow]

Although the Jesus presented in the NT speaks at times like a millennialist, and although the real Jesus was almost certainly an iconoclastic rebel/zealot, I get a stronger vibe that maybe whoever originated those teachings was saying that the kingdom of God is really here and it is really us to the degree that we are able to emulate the love one another sentiment embodied in the character of Jesus.

Looks like your vibe has defined your Jesus, and he sounds like a 1970s style 'Love each other' character. I liked that Jesus, and miss him in the modern religious warfare

So for me, the next question is, who do you want Jesus to be? Because to your mind, that is who he really is

Good-time party Jesus handing out jetpacks!

Yes!