Jesus' teachings. Profound?

[McCulloch]

Perhaps, but for me the miracle things are secondary, in comparison to what Jesus taught. The teachings of Jesus are for me the greatest thing, not the miracles.

In what way are Jesus' teachings extraordinary? Can it be demonstrated that Jesus had great insight? What profound wisdom is there in Jesus' teachings?

[theophile]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

Please be more specific about The Jesus method and remember Socrates came long before Jesus so if it is similar in approach to The Socratic method then it is not a contribution of Jesus but merely Jesus copying others.

Jesus is constantly confronted by challengers (pharisees, sadducees, disciples, etc.) who test his knowledge and try to expose his outlaw teachings (i.e., teachings that are outside the Mosaic law of the Jews).

His method is not Socratic. He does not show his interlocutors that they know nothing so that they can all rebuild in the rubble. Rather, his responses serve to open up the law to its true intent through incisiveness.

It is more about opening hearts than it is opening minds. And breaking the extreme legalism of the Jews. (If there is a method, it is pushing the law he is confronted with - about divorce, working on the sabbath, stoning adulterers, etc - beyond its stated boundaries toward what truly brings life.)

If you think the Socratic method involves gnit-picking then your doing it wrong. it is supposed to be practiced co-operatviely rather than adversarialy.

I never said that. I said that it invites gnit-picking. It is an intensive line of Q&A that undermines the interlocutors position. But as an intensive line of Q&A it creates multiple points where divergent answers could be given. Answers that possibly undermine the argumentative strategy of the method...

That was my point.

Jesus doesn't do this but rather gives simple, thought-provoking and extremely challenging responses to questions that expose the moral void of the questioner and pushes them to a more considerate, loving state.

It is far more constructive, IMO, than destructive (as per the Socratic method). One thing I was always left wanting for when reading Socrates is where the construction comes in... All he seems to do is dismantle.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 21 by theophile]

Definition of nit–picking
: minute and usually unjustified criticism

Again if your nit-picking, you are not practicing the Socratic method as each line of questioning is supposed to be pointed and move towards building a deeper understanding. If your questions move towards nit-picking they need to be refined as nit-picking the minutia in an unjustified manner is the opposite of what the method is intended todo.

It is far more constructive, IMO, than destructive (as per the Socratic method). One thing I was always left wanting for when reading Socrates is where the construction comes in... All he seems to do is dismantle.

My hypothesis

All bumpkins are incapable of receiving constructive criticism.

Interlocutor

Are you good at giving constructive criticism?

New hypothesis

If I improve my constructive criticism bumpkins could receive it.

We now constructed a refined worldview towards bumpkins. No nit picking involved.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 21 by theophile]

4 “Teacher,� they said to Jesus, “this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 The law of Moses says to stone her. What do you say?�

6 They were trying to trap him into saying something they could use against him, but Jesus stooped down and wrote in the dust with his finger. 7 They kept demanding an answer, so he stood up again and said, “All right, but let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone!� 8 Then he stooped down again and wrote in the dust.

Hypothesis

The law states we must stone adulterers

Jesus

Those without sin can stone the adulterer

Conclusionary hypothesis

The law states we must stone adulterers


The Jesus method you pointed to actually does nothing. It was at that moment a way to sidestep the law but there is no refinement or deeper understanding of the law. In practice this line of reasoning doesn't even work in real life given that capital punishment still exists...

[theophile]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

The Jesus method you pointed to actually does nothing. It was at that moment a way to sidestep the law but there is no refinement or deeper understanding of the law. In practice this line of reasoning doesn't even work in real life given that capital punishment still exists...

Was the woman stoned? No she was not. So apparently the Jesus method does do something.

It opened the hearts of the crowd to the woman and their own shortcomings as human beings and the mercy they would want to be shown.

[Zzyzx]

.

Was the woman stoned? No she was not. So apparently the Jesus method does do something.

It opened the hearts of the crowd to the woman and their own shortcomings as human beings and the mercy they would want to be shown.

The 'Jesus Method' certainly held up well during the Dark and Middle Ages, didn't it?

Inquisition, Crusades, Burning at the stake, Witch trials all illustrate the actions of religious fanatics (Jesus followers in those cases) when not constrained by saner minds and forces.

Current examples of fanatical religion abound in the Middle East -- on the part of Christianity's sister religion, Islam. Both are offspring of Judaism and worship the same 'God'. Both religions use literature which mandates killing of adulteresses, non-virgin brides, homosexuals. Examples of man's inhumanity to man.

Even in the US currently some prominent Christian fanatics promote draconian treatment for people of whom they disapprove.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

The Jesus method you pointed to actually does nothing. It was at that moment a way to sidestep the law but there is no refinement or deeper understanding of the law. In practice this line of reasoning doesn't even work in real life given that capital punishment still exists...

Was the woman stoned? No she was not. So apparently the Jesus method does do something.

It opened the hearts of the crowd to the woman and their own shortcomings as human beings and the mercy they would want to be shown.

Correction that is what the story says. There is no reason to believe this actually did anything other than exist in a story. Arkansas is trying to execute 8 individuals this month, would the Jesus method work to stay their execution?

[theophile]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

Correction that is what the story says. There is no reason to believe this actually did anything other than exist in a story. Arkansas is trying to execute 8 individuals this month, would the Jesus method work to stay their execution?

And Plato's depiction of Socrates questioning various folks is not a story?

Both accounts are probably more fictional than true, and in both cases, the "storied" nature of them in no way impacts the method.

[theophile]

[Replying to post 25 by Zzyzx]

The 'Jesus Method' certainly held up well during the Dark and Middle Ages, didn't it?

Inquisition, Crusades, Burning at the stake, Witch trials all illustrate the actions of religious fanatics (Jesus followers in those cases) when not constrained by saner minds and forces.

Current examples of fanatical religion abound in the Middle East -- on the part of Christianity's sister religion, Islam. Both are offspring of Judaism and worship the same 'God'. Both religions use literature which mandates killing of adulteresses, non-virgin brides, homosexuals. Examples of man's inhumanity to man.

Even in the US currently some prominent Christian fanatics promote draconian treatment for people of whom they disapprove.

Pretty sure the "witch trials" are about as far from the Jesus method as you can get.

Please compare those episodes in our dark history to Jesus' forgiveness of the adulteress. Clearly these Dark Aged 'Christians' were out of touch with their teacher and his method of opening / softening hearts.

[bjs]

Perhaps, but for me the miracle things are secondary, in comparison to what Jesus taught. The teachings of Jesus are for me the greatest thing, not the miracles.

In what way are Jesus' teachings extraordinary? Can it be demonstrated that Jesus had great insight? What profound wisdom is there in Jesus' teachings?

Personally, I think that Jesus’ teaching are exceedingly profound. Only a handful a people in history can even hold a candle to him. I am slightly shocked that anyone who has read what was written of his words with a desire to understand would ultimately disagree.

However, there is no objective standard for “extraordinary� or “profound.� Perhaps “profound� just means that he gave words to what I already believed. I cannot prove this one way or the other, so debating the topic seems like an exercise in futility.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

Correction that is what the story says. There is no reason to believe this actually did anything other than exist in a story. Arkansas is trying to execute 8 individuals this month, would the Jesus method work to stay their execution?

And Plato's depiction of Socrates questioning various folks is not a story?

Both accounts are probably more fictional than true, and in both cases, the "storied" nature of them in no way impacts the method.

Yes but the difference being application of said method. The Socratic method produces results. The Jesus method doesn't really do much but offer platitudes.

Let's try an objective example. Use the Jesus method to improve my hypothesis:


Hypothesis:

The Jesus method is useless.