Jesus For The Non-religious

[_richardMdBorn]

Hi Roger,

Roger As you know, John, whomever he was, tends to add embelishments to the biography of Jesus that are not found in M, M or Luke. Does this falsify Jesus? Not necessarily, but it does glorify the legend, and give reason to question John's historical authenticity... Having said that...

To get some context out of this-teaching it must be considered with all of Jesus' other admonitions, as we have them. In my reading of the New Testament my sense is that Jesus was concerned with the pains and suffering of the family of "God" as they lived daily with each other. His efforts were directed to helping them understand their relationship to each other--their interdependence--the earth/ground from which they extracted life, and their inherent connection (never having fell) to the Spirit-of-life/"God": The entity that Jesus represented to humanity.

With 'that' understanding, it simply follows that Jesus wanted them to know "God" and how life can be mastered. That "mastery" is only attainable by learning knowing, and doing the correct things. Simplistically, "...you'll never go wrong doing right..." Through out his whole mission Jesus attempted to get his listeners to believe 'HE' was sent by "God" to teach them...

Richard Most scholars believe that Paul’s letters were written before any of the Gospels. One of the most important theologically is Romans.

"that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved". Rm 10:9

Clearly, salvation is a result of faith, and not works, in the substitutionary atonement of Jesus. Of course, as James points out, a living faith results in good works. One of the points of Jesus’ ministry was to teach us the need for this sacrifice. The man who believes that his good works can satisfy God’s standards has missed the whole point (see the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican – who went home justified). Since you are suspicious of John, let us look at Mark which is the gospel generally thought by modern scholars to have been written first.

“For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” Mk 10:45

Again, there is the teaching of Christ dying as a ransom – the substitutionary atonement.

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Richard, isn't it amazing how our electronic 'clocks' set them selves to the 'new-time'!? Even my new watch is "Radio Controlled"!! Makes me wonder why the primitive scape-goat idea still reigns supreme in the minds of most "Christians"? Maybe not relevant...but seriously, the blood of one man saves the billions of souls who have tread this earth, from the absolute inescapable consequence of BIRTH: DEATH is simply irrational and without natural precedence. Further, that verbalizing a few specific words takes one even beyond death into a Heavenly Relm, is more than this "Christian" can believe.

Thanks for the site you recommended. It is interesting. The clarity wasn't the best but, his ref to the Sermon on the Mount as being basic to understanding Jesus, and His presentation of the "Social Gospel" (not his words, but you know what i mean) as being too seldom our focus, is in line with my thinking. It seems he and i are in agreement, that we know enough, we simply lack faith to exercise our knowledge. Much easier to avoid reponsibility and hand it all back to Jesus, "to fix everything when He comes again!" Generally speaking... You say:

Richard Most scholars believe that Paul’s letters were written before any of the Gospels. One of the most important theologically is Romans.

"that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved". Rm 10:9

RM: See my comment above. True, dating Paul's writings. However, Paul, as a Pharsee is conditioned to the Messianic message, so to him "This-is-it!" Christ is returning 'momentarily'!! Stand in holy-places!! Two-thousand years later... Jesus is "at the door!" "Save YOURSELF before it's tooooo late!"

Clearly, salvation is a result of faith, RM: Absolutely! No other justification! and not works, in the substitutionary atonement of Jesus. Of course, as James points out, a living faith results in good works. RM: How do you account for the "Good Works" of those who do not confess "faith"? Are those folks, and their "works" of no account? One of the points of Jesus’ ministry was to teach us the need for this sacrifice. The man who believes that his good works can satisfy God’s standards has missed the whole point (see the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican – who went home justified). Since you are suspicious of John, let us look at Mark which is the gospel generally thought by modern scholars to have been written first.

RM: And yet, the parable of the 'Good Samaritan' was totally about "Good Work". With no attached conditions, or rewards...just do what is seen to be done. The other interesting aspect of the GS story: the righteous, and ordained didn't measure up to the pariah. How are we to take that??

“For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” Mk 10:45

RM: "...those who are greatest shall serve, not master..." doesn't get a lot of Pulpit-time. Little question that He gave His life on a cross. However, the questions remain: "why" and, " for what purpose"?? Our current dispute...

Again, there is the teaching of Christ dying as a ransom – the substitutionary atonement.

RM: There definitely is that "teaching". I addressed the "scape-goat" above.

Richard, i think we are both "Christians" in that we each believe in the Historical Jesus. I surmise from there You take to heart the traditional, creedal faith-based belief in Jesus redeeming humanity from "the Fall"...

From there, i believe his reason for being was to teach humanitarian/spiritual/universal principles to apply in all and every situation humans encounter in their personal, and collective life-journey. He wept for their pain and sufferings at the hands of those who exploited and suppressed them... He was angered by those who misrepresented "God"... He dared to question the "Priest Craft" that lay "heavy yokes" upon their people... He made clear that the inner-person based the whole person... Extranious stuff was/is a cover-up... Blessed are peace-makers... "Two New Commandments"....Blah... Blah... Blah...

I think Spong is doing good-stuff. I do hope you have read his News Letter i sited for you... Warm regards, Roger