Was Jesus a great teacher?

[McCulloch]

Christianity's biggest strength is the teachings of Jesus. They're the very foundation of Christianity. Jesus was a great teacher and being a Christian myself, I see no one who has ever topped Him, nor have I found any of His teachings too difficult to defend.

Questions for debate:
Was Jesus a great teacher? Are all of his teachings easy to defend? Is there anything that he could have made clearer? Did he make mistakes? Did he leave out anything important? How could he have improved as a teacher?

[TheTruth101]

[Replying to post 1 by McCulloch]

As others have already pointed out, it's difficult to know how good/bad Jesus' teachings were. For example, we don't really know who wrote the Gospels, and what we call Christianity was handed to us (primarily) by St. Paul who never even met Jesus. (And yes I am very familiar with Paul's (AKA Saul's) vision of Jesus when Paul was struck blind).

A few years ago I read a very interesting book called, "Jesus Beyond Christianity: The Classic Texts" by Barker and Gregg. It's a very thorough look at Jesus and his teachings, from the viewpoint of other religions including, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc. In this book, it is especially interesting to look at why Jews do not accept Christ as the messiah, and how Christians have twisted Old Testament scripture and "prophecy" to make it appear that he was. It becomes obvious pretty quickly why, at least for Jews, Jesus wasn't what was predicted.

Kept telling you guys from day 1, Jesus is not the messiah, Holy Spirit is.

[TheTruth101]

Jesus was a great teacher. All of his teachings are easy to defend. He could have been literal, however he chose to say about his stuff in parables. Why? To make us dig in more and seek and search. He made no mistakes, he was God in flesh. He said eveything there is to say. He could have done NOTHING else to improve his teachings.

It is the followers that have messed up big time in twisting all scriptures.

The whole mainstream christianity nowadays is "lost" in my eyes.

[Reverend Richard]

[Replying to post 1 by McCulloch]

As others have already pointed out, it's difficult to know how good/bad Jesus' teachings were. For example, we don't really know who wrote the Gospels, and what we call Christianity was handed to us (primarily) by St. Paul who never even met Jesus. (And yes I am very familiar with Paul's (AKA Saul's) vision of Jesus when Paul was struck blind).

A few years ago I read a very interesting book called, "Jesus Beyond Christianity: The Classic Texts" by Barker and Gregg. It's a very thorough look at Jesus and his teachings, from the viewpoint of other religions including, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc. In this book, it is especially interesting to look at why Jews do not accept Christ as the messiah, and how Christians have twisted Old Testament scripture and "prophecy" to make it appear that he was. It becomes obvious pretty quickly why, at least for Jews, Jesus wasn't what was predicted.

I will totally agree with the viewpoint of the Jews, and also because the concept the Jewish faith has of what the messiah is supposed to be is totally at odds with the Messiah of the Christians.

Another interesting thing to look at is the various Christian writings from the 1st to the 4th century that pop up that are not cannon. A fragment of a 4th century Copic scripture contains has Jesus referring to his wife (which immediately had the Vatican proclaiming it was a forgery.)


All indications is that it was a genuine 4th Century writing though.

Yes, Goat. I suspect if someone could discover/recover/uncover additional manuscripts about Jesus from the 1st or 2nd century, we might be surprised by what we find.

Another thread on the forum recently posed the question about why so much of Jesus' adult life is missing from scripture. I'll be the first to admit I have very little knowledge of Jewish culture, but from what I can learn from my reading and research, as an eligible Jewish male, he probably would have had a wife and a family (and perhaps drove an SUV in the burbs ) Point being: it would be no surprise to learn that Jesus was married. You may already be aware of the speculation that Mary Magdalene was actually Jesus's closest disciple (perhaps even more than just a disciple), but the early church (an early pope) distanced her from Jesus by labeling her a prostitute. However there is little evidence to support that.

[Reverend Richard]

Jesus was a great teacher. All of his teachings are easy to defend. He could have been literal, however he chose to say about his stuff in parables. Why? To make us dig in more and seek and search. He made no mistakes, he was God in flesh. He said eveything there is to say. He could have done NOTHING else to improve his teachings.

It is the followers that have messed up big time in twisting all scriptures.

The whole mainstream christianity nowadays is "lost" in my eyes.

I partially agree with your comments, but to say Jesus taught in parables in order to make us seek and search doesn't make much sense. Jesus taught in parables because that's all most of the population could relate to. 98% of the population could not read nor write, and there was no "scripture" written for several decades after Jesus' death. So what were they supposed to research more deeply? Early church tradition was mostly oral. It was not until Paul's epistles and letters to the early churches appear that we find anything written down that resembles early theology.

I also agree that followers have twisted scripture. So much for seeking and researching. Seeking and researching corrupt scripture will only yield corrupt conclusions.

[Zetesis Apistia]

Was Jesus a great teacher?

I am in awe of everything he said. Nuff said

Are all of his teachings easy to defend?

They need not be defended.

Is there anything that he could have made clearer?

It wouldn't make a difference. Those who are predisposed to disbelieve would find fault with 2 + 2 = 4 if he would have suggested it.

Did he make mistakes?

You would have to ask God since our interpretations are subjective.

Did he leave out anything important?

Not one jot or tittle

How could he have improved as a teacher?

He couldn't. The guy was a genius.

[bjs]

Was Jesus a great teacher?

I dont know how we can prove or disprove this, but I consider his words to be the pinnacle of human teaching. He is teachings were greater than anything that came before him, and the greatest teachers since his day have relied on what Jesus said. As a teacher Jesus has never been surpassed.

Are all of his teachings easy to defend?

I dont know if easy is the right word. He spoke on deep topic and genuine understanding requires effort. However, all of his teachings are defendable.

For instance, McCulloch mentioned the teaching about marriage " that marriage is for life and to divorce and remarry, except in certain circumstances, is the same as adultery. Jesus teaching is absolutely correct. A life-long promise should be kept for life. The fact that not all people have followed this command doesnt make the command bad. If failure to follow a teachers instructions makes the teacher bad then we have had no good teachers in human history.

Concerning McCullochs other remarks: in context, Jesus talking being a eunuch seems to be symbolic of life-long abstinence, as opposed self-mutilation. Jesus does not command anyone to do this. He gives his followers a choice between abstinence and monogamy. His command seems right both on a moral level and on the level of what is best for society.

Is there anything that he could have made clearer?

I agree with Zetesis on this one. If Jesus had said that 2 + 2 = 4 then someone would have found fault with it or misused it. Teaching about the human condition requires a certain degree of vagueness so that it can be applicable to different cultures, but Jesus words seem clear enough to those who are willing to study them.

Did he make mistakes? Did he leave out anything important? How could he have improved as a teacher?

He left out many things. His teachings came out of what we call the Tanakh, and those writings, enlightened by the words of Jesus, help fill out our understanding. At other times we are expected to apply the general principles he taught to specific circumstances in our culture.

I can think of nothing that would have actually improved his teaching.

[Divine Insight]

Those who are predisposed to disbelieve would find fault with 2 + 2 = 4 if he would have suggested it.

And if Jesus would have said 2 + 2 = 3 the religious zealots would claim that this was some kind of profound wisdom that we simply can't comprehend with our puny human minds.



In fact, we already have examples that basically amount to this same thing:

Matthew 6:26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?

This is every bit as stupid as saying 2 + 2 = 3.

No God feeds the birds. That's as false as saying 2 + 2 = 3.

Birds have to go out and find food on their own under dangerous and perilous conditions. Many birds will even prey on other birds. Birds themselves have to prey on other living animals. Often times they themselves are attacked and eaten by other animals as they are hard at work trying to find food for themselves.

Jesus lied. No God feeds the birds.

That as big of a lie as saying that 2 + 2 = 3.

It's really no different at all. It's clearly false. Jesus told a lie.

And if he was truly an all-knowing God he should have known better to make such absurdly false claims.

So there you go. Jesus may as well have said that 2 + 2 = 3, because he clearly was wrong about other facts of life. Evidently Jesus didn't know very much at all about how the bird and bees actually live. If he thought that some Fatherly God feeds the birds. He was living in a delusion.

[10CC]

Christianity's biggest strength is the teachings of Jesus. They're the very foundation of Christianity. Jesus was a great teacher and being a Christian myself, I see no one who has ever topped Him, nor have I found any of His teachings too difficult to defend.

Questions for debate:
Was Jesus a great teacher? Are all of his teachings easy to defend? Is there anything that he could have made clearer? Did he make mistakes? Did he leave out anything important? How could he have improved as a teacher?

38,000 contradictory christian denominations and counting. By his fruits shall he be known.
I guess that's a fail in the teaching department.

[Goat]

[Replying to post 1 by McCulloch]

As others have already pointed out, it's difficult to know how good/bad Jesus' teachings were. For example, we don't really know who wrote the Gospels, and what we call Christianity was handed to us (primarily) by St. Paul who never even met Jesus. (And yes I am very familiar with Paul's (AKA Saul's) vision of Jesus when Paul was struck blind).

A few years ago I read a very interesting book called, "Jesus Beyond Christianity: The Classic Texts" by Barker and Gregg. It's a very thorough look at Jesus and his teachings, from the viewpoint of other religions including, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc. In this book, it is especially interesting to look at why Jews do not accept Christ as the messiah, and how Christians have twisted Old Testament scripture and "prophecy" to make it appear that he was. It becomes obvious pretty quickly why, at least for Jews, Jesus wasn't what was predicted.

I will totally agree with the viewpoint of the Jews, and also because the concept the Jewish faith has of what the messiah is supposed to be is totally at odds with the Messiah of the Christians.

Another interesting thing to look at is the various Christian writings from the 1st to the 4th century that pop up that are not cannon. A fragment of a 4th century Copic scripture contains has Jesus referring to his wife (which immediately had the Vatican proclaiming it was a forgery.)


All indications is that it was a genuine 4th Century writing though.

Yes, Goat. I suspect if someone could discover/recover/uncover additional manuscripts about Jesus from the 1st or 2nd century, we might be surprised by what we find.

Another thread on the forum recently posed the question about why so much of Jesus' adult life is missing from scripture. I'll be the first to admit I have very little knowledge of Jewish culture, but from what I can learn from my reading and research, as an eligible Jewish male, he probably would have had a wife and a family (and perhaps drove an SUV in the burbs ) Point being: it would be no surprise to learn that Jesus was married. You may already be aware of the speculation that Mary Magdalene was actually Jesus's closest disciple (perhaps even more than just a disciple), but the early church (an early pope) distanced her from Jesus by labeling her a prostitute. However there is little evidence to support that.

It would not be surprising to me if a historical Jesus existed, and there was some kernel of truth in the Gospels, it would be not surprising to have Mary Magdalene as his wife. There is also the possibility that , due to the high level of maternal mortality in that time frame, he could have been a widower.

There is also the possibility of him being a 'mamzer'.. a product of one of the 'illicit' relationships in the bible (i.e.. if Mary had a child by someone other than her husband, Joseph) in which case, he could not marry in the temple or synagogue, but shacking up would quite acceptable. Just because someone could not get married in the temple doesn't mean they can't raise a family and be part of the community.

There are many possibilities.. none of which has any evidence for, one way or another.

[Reverend Richard]

[Replying to post 1 by McCulloch]

As others have already pointed out, it's difficult to know how good/bad Jesus' teachings were. For example, we don't really know who wrote the Gospels, and what we call Christianity was handed to us (primarily) by St. Paul who never even met Jesus. (And yes I am very familiar with Paul's (AKA Saul's) vision of Jesus when Paul was struck blind).

A few years ago I read a very interesting book called, "Jesus Beyond Christianity: The Classic Texts" by Barker and Gregg. It's a very thorough look at Jesus and his teachings, from the viewpoint of other religions including, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc. In this book, it is especially interesting to look at why Jews do not accept Christ as the messiah, and how Christians have twisted Old Testament scripture and "prophecy" to make it appear that he was. It becomes obvious pretty quickly why, at least for Jews, Jesus wasn't what was predicted.

I will totally agree with the viewpoint of the Jews, and also because the concept the Jewish faith has of what the messiah is supposed to be is totally at odds with the Messiah of the Christians.

Another interesting thing to look at is the various Christian writings from the 1st to the 4th century that pop up that are not cannon. A fragment of a 4th century Copic scripture contains has Jesus referring to his wife (which immediately had the Vatican proclaiming it was a forgery.)


All indications is that it was a genuine 4th Century writing though.

Yes, Goat. I suspect if someone could discover/recover/uncover additional manuscripts about Jesus from the 1st or 2nd century, we might be surprised by what we find.

Another thread on the forum recently posed the question about why so much of Jesus' adult life is missing from scripture. I'll be the first to admit I have very little knowledge of Jewish culture, but from what I can learn from my reading and research, as an eligible Jewish male, he probably would have had a wife and a family (and perhaps drove an SUV in the burbs ) Point being: it would be no surprise to learn that Jesus was married. You may already be aware of the speculation that Mary Magdalene was actually Jesus's closest disciple (perhaps even more than just a disciple), but the early church (an early pope) distanced her from Jesus by labeling her a prostitute. However there is little evidence to support that.

It would not be surprising to me if a historical Jesus existed, and there was some kernel of truth in the Gospels, it would be not surprising to have Mary Magdalene as his wife. There is also the possibility that , due to the high level of maternal mortality in that time frame, he could have been a widower.

There is also the possibility of him being a 'mamzer'.. a product of one of the 'illicit' relationships in the bible (i.e.. if Mary had a child by someone other than her husband, Joseph) in which case, he could not marry in the temple or synagogue, but shacking up would quite acceptable. Just because someone could not get married in the temple doesn't mean they can't raise a family and be part of the community.

There are many possibilities.. none of which has any evidence for, one way or another.

True.