Should Christ have done more?

[marco]

In many ways Christ is an embarrassment. I was thinking that if he were around in the present pandemic he would have done absolutely nothing about it. Instead of thundering on the earthly scene with challenges for Rome and large-scale improvements in man's way of living, he helped John smith with his sore ear and Mary Jane with her eye trouble. He had a kind of pop festival where he sang to the crowds and gave them free food for listening. Given the chance to show the world his divine passport he said, presumably to a grin from Pilate, "I have some private soldiers waiting in the sky, so watch out."

He's muddle- headed - "I'll die and come back with a knife, sitting on a cloud." What for? Had he said - "maybe in 2000 years time" his listeners would have laughed.

So - what is Christ's great legacy? The stuff we have is the Christmas wrapping paper of the Church - nothing inside it.

Is Christ a small man magnified by the Church?

If he really was divine, why did he not perform on a bigger stage instead of, say, catching lots of fish and saying they came from God?

[1213]

Then was Jesus stupid in resurrecting Lazarus, and even crying over his demise?

Sorry, I don’t offer my opinion on this. One reason for this is that I think it is obvious. But I want to ask, did he really cry over his demise?

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 19 by Elijah John]

I'm sorry if I worded the impression I got from, your post.


Elijah John, may I ask:

Do you worship God despite being dispappointed at Almighty Gods ineptitude and misjudgements?

I ask because even though neither of us believe Jesus to be God it seems to me He (God) could well be accused of the same shortcoings as Jesus and a defence for GOD might well rest on the same arguments as those proposed for a defense of JESUS,

Your thoughts?

JW

Moderator Comment
For what it's worth I wanted to dismiss the report but a comment has been issued and you have asked twice now, so let it go.

In the end, it is a leading question from you and these are usually uncivil.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Mithrae]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

"Should Christ have done more"?

If Jesus was God, then yes he should have. But since it is likely he was not, it seems he did what he could to alleviate human suffering, with the healings (that is if they did indeed actually happen in some way). And also with his ministry to the outcast and downtrodden, making them realize they were beloved of God. And also helping them to believe in the Father's mercy.

By implication if Yahweh is God, then surely he should do more to alleviate human suffering and demonstrate his reality and worthiness of devotion. Why does it become the case that a god should suddenly start doing so much more if and when he temporarily sets aside all his power and knowledge to experience human frailties and weaknesses? That really seems nonsensical. Whatever we say that a divine Jesus 'should' have done, surely applies a thousand times more to Yahweh himself!

But whereas we can say that Jesus founded the Christian movement, offered teachings which include (among other things) some of the loftiest moral standards ever seen, and provided the basis for an inspiring legend of self-sacrificing love, Yahweh... not so much. There's actually nothing we can clearly attribute to him, and the picture of him we see sans Jesus, in the Tanakh, is mostly one of an overbearing dictator micromanaging the fashions and diets of his favoured people while showing a callous indifference to all human lives, including theirs. Jesus' scorecard may be a small positive, arguably, but it is at least that much. If that isn't good enough for a God-become-man, then what little we see of the actual proposed God must be considered a rather miserable showing, yes?

[marco]

Then was Jesus stupid in resurrecting Lazarus, and even crying over his demise?

Sorry, I don’t offer my opinion on this. One reason for this is that I think it is obvious. But I want to ask, did he really cry over his demise?

Sometimes the simplest points are the hardest to answer, 1213. You made the comment:

"In Biblical point of view, it would be stupid to be obsessed with material world."

Obsession with anything is perhaps unwise but perhaps you think the material world is unimportant, in biblical terms. That being so, it is right to ask why Jesus bothered bringing Lazarus back for a further spell of pointlessness. Presumably the poor soul had already prepared himself for heaven's unheard delights, and he was brought back. The message seems to be that it was good that he returned. We can interpret Christ's tears in many ways - was he acting? - was it sadness at losing a pal? - or empathy with those genuinely mourning around him?

Tennyson, a better conveyer of the important things in life than Jesus, said: "Tears, idle tears, I know not what they mean." Christ spent his few years telling folk that goodness was unattainable, that poor people were rich and children wiser than philosophers. In practical terms he said nothing of any importance. He was probably a very confused individual, going by his predictions.

[JehovahsWitness]

By implication if Yahweh is God, then surely he should do more to alleviate human suffering and demonstrate his reality and worthiness of devotion. Why does it become the case that a god should suddenly start doing so much more if and when he temporarily sets aside all his power and knowledge to experience human frailties and weaknesses?

You make a fair point. I think it is reasonable and you have raised some issues that should be addressed. Personally I think if one has the power to allieviate a problem one should have good reason to refrain from doing so or be rightly open to being considered callous or incompetent.

I hope it is violates no forum rules reply to your post, Mithrae, sharing my thoughts on what you posted. PLEASE NOTE I make no comment in what you believe, I have shared my own personal thought on the contents of your post.





JW

[1213]

… it is right to ask why Jesus bothered bringing Lazarus back for a further spell of pointlessness. Presumably the poor soul had already prepared himself for heaven's unheard delights, and he was brought back. The message seems to be that it was good that he returned. ….

To me the message is, don’t fear death of a body, it is not the end.

[marco]

To me the message is, don’t fear death of a body, it is not the end.

And to Muslim men it is about green couches and beautiful maidens. We get scam messages telling us we've inherited a fortune. We get biblical messages telling us we've inherited eternal happiness, complete with piano lessons.

On every wind there's a promise. Why would we listen? Had Christ been genuine he'd have used more than empty promises. But the good thing about Christ's and Muhammad's promises is that no living soul can ever prove they are false. And when he did try to make his promise concrete and verifiable - "I will return before some of you have tasted death" - we know he was wrong. But his followers then invent an alternative meaning. And the dance goes on.

[marco]

But whereas we can say that Jesus founded the Christian movement, offered teachings which include (among other things) some of the loftiest moral standards ever seen, and provided the basis for an inspiring legend of self-sacrificing love, Yahweh... not so much.

There's truth in what you say, Mithrae, but in a sense both Jesus and Yahweh are the beneficiaries or victims of foreign attributions and exaggerations. Yahweh is the destroyer of worlds, as well as the architect. Jesus lifts spirits and devalues them. Jesus did not found Christianity - his name was taken to build a powerful religious organisation, and in modern times he is used by branches of that main Christian artery to further some group motto: "Who is as good as we are?" Telling folk to be as good as God is lofty but useless. I agree, he provided the basis for a legend that eventually saw a Jewish boy become a god, despite the protests of Jews.

[1213]

… Had Christ been genuine he'd have used more than empty promises…

I don’t see any reason to think he gave empty promises. By what I see, everything goes as he told.

… And when he did try to make his promise concrete and verifiable - "I will return before some of you have tasted death" - we know he was wrong. But his followers then invent an alternative meaning. And the dance goes on.

It seems to me that you have given alternative meaning. Please show the scripture and I can show you why you are wrong.

[marco]

… Had Christ been genuine he'd have used more than empty promises…

I don’t see any reason to think he gave empty promises. By what I see, everything goes as he told.

Any promise that relates to us today has been unfulfilled. People argue he predicted the Roman destruction of Jerusalem's temple; that depends on when the accounts were written. Remember Jesus never wrote a thing. I wonder how you "see" that death has lost its sting. Or in what quarter of the globe the poor are inheriting the earth.

It seems to me that you have given alternative meaning. Please show the scripture and I can show you why you are wrong.

There is no question of my being "wrong" and you getting the right answer. You have an interpretation.

I think you know the context - Matthew 16 will do:

"27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.

28 “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.�

The obvious interpretation is the one his listeners would have taken. They weren't genius interpreters. Christ would be coming to tie things up on Earth.... soon!

Another explanation is to accept that Matthew makes things up, and may have continued to do so here. Christ may never have said this.

Despite talk of Father's glory and chanting angels, we could say it referred to when Jesus would take a few of his friends and rise into the air. Although this hardly agrees with what Christ has said here it gets out of a difficulty.

I think the sensible interpretation is that Christ, immersed in his own importance, believed he'd be back soon, with a vast crowd of heavenly bodies. The Earth is still waiting and all his listeners have tasted death.