Why did Christ not indicate advances?

[marco]

A super-intelligent being walks around but doesn't correct misconceptions or scientific untruths. He sees lepers but doesn't suggest any cure, except prayer. He left it to other clever people to advance human knowledge.


Was he educated in anything but Scripture?

Did he know the Earth orbits the sun, and was he aware that imparting this simple fact would have saved lives?

Or was he just a preacher, rumoured to have healing powers?

[Talishi]

A super-intelligent being walks around but doesn't correct misconceptions or scientific untruths. He sees lepers but doesn't suggest any cure, except prayer. He left it to other clever people to advance human knowledge.


Was he educated in anything but Scripture?

Did he know the Earth orbits the sun, and was he aware that imparting this simple fact would have saved lives?

Or was he just a preacher, rumoured to have healing powers?

Jesus had a demon-based theory of disease, rather than a bacteria-based or genetic-based theory. He affirmed the Great Flood. He thought a mustard seed was smaller than all other seeds and grew to become greater than all other shrubs. He didn't know what season fig trees bore fruit. He thought the Day of the Lord would occur before 800 AUC. He thought John the Baptist was the reincarnation of Elijah and taught others so.

[Divine Insight]

Or was he just a preacher, rumoured to have healing powers?

After having studied this religion in great detail for several decades I have concluded that Jesus was most likely nothing more than a preacher who didn't know anymore than anyone else from his time period. He most certainly wasn't the virgin born son of the creator of this universe.

[Elijah John]

Or was he just a preacher, rumoured to have healing powers?

After having studied this religion in great detail for several decades I have concluded that Jesus was most likely nothing more than a preacher who didn't know anymore than anyone else from his time period. He most certainly wasn't the virgin born son of the creator of this universe.

I actually agree with you here, but does someone need to be a scientist in order to be a great preacher/ moral philospher?

[Divine Insight]

Or was he just a preacher, rumoured to have healing powers?

After having studied this religion in great detail for several decades I have concluded that Jesus was most likely nothing more than a preacher who didn't know anymore than anyone else from his time period. He most certainly wasn't the virgin born son of the creator of this universe.

I actually agree with you here, but does someone need to be a scientist in order to be a great preacher/ moral philospher?

No, but if they want to be a respectable moral philosopher they shouldn't claim to be anything more than a philosopher. And besides, I don't think Jesus was such a great moral philosopher anyway. According to the Gospels, (which is all we can know of his supposed teachings) he actually taught some pretty immoral things, not the least of which was to tell people that they should hate their family members and follow him, and that if anyone should refuse to follow him they should be brought before him and killed.

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

I see no reason to hold Jesus up as a great moral philosopher. According to Luke 19:27 he was no better than a fascist dictator. Why worship Jesus as a moral philosopher? Surely you could offer a higher moral philosophy than this yourself?

[Elijah John]

Or was he just a preacher, rumoured to have healing powers?

After having studied this religion in great detail for several decades I have concluded that Jesus was most likely nothing more than a preacher who didn't know anymore than anyone else from his time period. He most certainly wasn't the virgin born son of the creator of this universe.

I actually agree with you here, but does someone need to be a scientist in order to be a great preacher/ moral philospher?

No, but if they want to be a respectable moral philosopher they shouldn't claim to be anything more than a philosopher. And besides, I don't think Jesus was such a great moral philosopher anyway. According to the Gospels, (which is all we can know of his supposed teachings) he actually taught some pretty immoral things, not the least of which was to tell people that they should hate their family members and follow him, and that if anyone should refuse to follow him they should be brought before him and killed.

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

I see no reason to hold Jesus up as a great moral philosopher. According to Luke 19:27 he was no better than a fascist dictator. Why worship Jesus as a moral philosopher? Surely you could offer a higher moral philosophy than this yourself?

Those "hard sayings" of Jesus are admittedly very disturbing to me and I think to many other thinking people, even some other Christians The only way I personally come to terms with them is by seeing Jesus as a poet in addition to being a preacher. He was likely using hyperbole...exageration to make a point.

[Zzyzx]

.

Those "hard sayings" of Jesus are admittedly very disturbing to me and I think to many other thinking people, even some other Christians The only way I personally come to terms with them is by seeing Jesus as a poet in addition to being a preacher. He was likely using hyperbole...exageration to make a point.

Another strong possibility, EJ, is that many of the words attributed to Jesus were not his at all, but were supplied by later people promoting their own agenda.

It is unfortunate that there are no existing documents from Jesus himself.

[Divine Insight]

.

Those "hard sayings" of Jesus are admittedly very disturbing to me and I think to many other thinking people, even some other Christians The only way I personally come to terms with them is by seeing Jesus as a poet in addition to being a preacher. He was likely using hyperbole...exageration to make a point.

Another strong possibility, EJ, is that many of the words attributed to Jesus were not his at all, but were supplied by later people promoting their own agenda.

It is unfortunate that there are no existing documents from Jesus himself.

This is certainly true. However, this is extremely problematic in theology. Especially if a person expects to be any type of preacher of clergy.

I can easily dismiss many of the verses that have been attributed to Jesus that I personally don't care for. However, I would then be charged by other Christians for creating my own personal Jesus based on how I would like to believe Jesus to be. Doing this can also get one accused of using Jesus to promote their own moral values whilst dismissing what the Gospels actually having Jesus saying.

I actually agree with the problems of creating our own personal Jesus (especially if we are going to then preach those views to others).

This is why I have decided that if I'm going to promote my own moral values why not just do so directly? It seems to me that any attempt to assign Jesus with my moral values amounts to nothing more than an attempt by me to try to obtain support for my moral values by associating them with a popularly recognized religious figure.

And of course, in my case, I've also come to the realization that I most certainly don't need Jesus to support my moral values. If anything all I can do is give my approval to some of the moral values that may have been attributed to Jesus. And I most certainly would not want to give my support to everything that has been attributed to Jesus in the Gospels.

So I no longer see the point in dragging Jesus around as an anchor that I need to defend. Instead I'm far better off just standing up for my own moral values.

In fact, many Christians seem to hate my Jesus simply because my Jesus is too nice. They don't seem to like a nice Jesus for some reason. And they are quick to point to scriptures that support a not-so-nice Jesus. Why they are so anxious to support a not-so-nice Jesus is beyond me, but that seems to be the most popular Christian position.

[Willum]

[Replying to Talishi]

Yup, had he been in touch with the creator of the universe, knowing about truths beyond reality, more temporal truths should have been easier, or at least the same.

Building logically, you must start with Jesus temporal impacts - what did he want us to do, here on Earth?

Obey both Jewish and Roman gods. "Render to (the god) Caesar... etc."
Obey Rome and not molest it's tax collectors. never before has the tax collector enjoyed such a prominent place in religion - am I wrong?

Also building logically, since he has a demon-based theory of disease, and vaccines were possible back then, with a correct based knowledge of disease, we must conclude Jesus was a false construct.

That is what can be shown... and then what else is there?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

As ond of Jehovah's Witnesses I believe Jesus did increase the sum of human knowledge in regard to the most important things, namely matters of faith. His purpose was not in my view to teach science, which is limited and cannot answer the most important questions such as

- what is the purpose of life?
- what happens when we die?
- why are we here?
- why is there so much suffering?
- what does the future hold?
- Is there a God who cares?

etc