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 post 30 by DanieltheDragon]

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.

Umm - could you do a Socratic breakdown to show what results it yields in this 'objective' example?

I'm not tracking. Nor do I think Jesus' method applies here.

Here's the Socratic method in my estimation:

He starts with a question like "what is piety?" or "what is justice?"
He then takes his interlocutors through a series of Q&A to an undeniable answer.
He then starts again and takes his interlocutors to the opposite answer to the same question.

So if the first series of Q&A led to piety is X, the second series would lead to piety is not X. (In the 'objective' example you ask about, Socrates would show that Jesus' method is both useless and useful, and as a result show that you know nothing - no offense.)

Thus, the method reveals that the interlocutor has NO IDEA what they are talking about, even though they claimed to from the beginning.

Hence the Socratic mantra, all that I know is that I know nothing.

Which in my estimation means:

You can prove anything you want. Reason and its word games get us nowhere. -- Recognizing this is the true beginning of wisdom...

And perhaps this gives a good indication of why Jesus' method is so much better. It is not focused on opening our minds (to our lack of knowledge) and leaving us destitute, but rather on opening our hearts (to our lack of mercy and care) and leaving the world better off for it.

It is far more constructive and doesn't waste time with the word games that Socrates proves to us are so clearly of no value.

The results are infinitely superior. Lives are saved. Children are fed. The sick are tended...

Versus a bunch of aristocrats feeling ignorant and stupid and wanting to kill the guy that made them feel that way.... (Granted, Jesus made a bunch of aristocrats hate him too for challenging their understanding of the law, but in the process he healed and saved lives - at least according to the story, which is all we have in either case.)

[alwayson]

Remember the Gospels were written AFTER Paul's letters.

New Testament article on Encyclopedia Britannica: "The books are not arranged chronologically in the New Testament. The Epistles of Paul, for example, which address the immediate problems of local churches shortly after Christ's death, are considered to be the earliest texts."

Gerd Lüdemann:
"Not once does Paul refer to Jesus as a teacher, to his words as teaching, or to [any] Christians as disciples."

[alexxcJRO]

[Replying to post 1 by McCulloch]


First,

Love thy enemy predates Jesus. The same with the golden rule which can be found in texts from Ancient China and Egypt.
The words and message transmitted by this perfect "man-god" is no more special, more insightful, wise, then those propagated by the regular, more inferior, sinful humans.
Jesus teachings, words were not more profound then of Buddha, Confucius, Gandhi.
All systems, ideas seek the loss of ego-consciousness enlightenment, death to self, and so one.

Second,
Even though some children are feed, clothed, lives saved and sick tended let's not forget one tiny fact:

The book inspired by this perfect triune God Yahweh-Jesus-Ghost lead its followers to commit great atrocities and murder against innocents.(according to Rudolph J. Rummel Christians killed 100,000 innocents(=so called "witches") , through the inquisition they butchered 350,000 innocent men, women and children, through the Crusades they killed 1 million innocent civilian men, women and children (not in combat), the killings in Africa (The 1994 Rwandan genocide or in countries like Zimbabwe,Uganda, Central African Republic ) . We have the so called good news propagated by Jesus that few will walk the path that leads to salvation and will end up tormenting forever in agony and separation from their Creator in other dimension just because of not being gullible enough.

On the other hand we have Buddhists that never started a war. There was never a Buddhist Inquisition. They emphasized wisdom, compassion, loving kindness, and personal transformation. No one is agonizing in hell, no bigotry, no scapegoating, no genocides, no logical impossibilities.

C: Why people find Jesus teachings, Bible teachings and Christianity so compelling is beyond me.

There is no need for this kind of God who/which just messes things up. It seems we humans are more then capable of getting things done.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 31 by theophile]

Here is the problem,you are making claims about the Jesus method without representing its merit. In order to compare your Jesus method to the Socratic method you need to first demonstrate the following:
1. The application of the method
2. The utility of results
So forget the Socratic method for a minute we will come back to that. I am trying to get a better blueprint of your Jesus method. So in order to make a better comparison.
If you don't think the Jesus method is flexible enough to deal with the hypothesis provided let's try something along the lines of what you think applies.

Hypothesis:

All pot smokers should be executed.


Use the Jesus method to confirm deny or expand upon the hypothesis.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 31 by theophile]

And perhaps this gives a good indication of why Jesus' method is so much better. It is not focused on opening our minds (to our lack of knowledge) and leaving us destitute, but rather on opening our hearts (to our lack of mercy and care) and leaving the world better off for it.

I have to disagree with your conclusions.

The Socratic method opens our minds and allows us to reduce bias and gain a deeper understanding not destitute.

It is not shown if the Jesus method is a method or that it can do as its claimed.

[theophile]

[Replying to post 34 by DanieltheDragon]

Here is the problem,you are making claims about the Jesus method without representing its merit. In order to compare your Jesus method to the Socratic method you need to first demonstrate the following:
1. The application of the method
2. The utility of results
So forget the Socratic method for a minute we will come back to that. I am trying to get a better blueprint of your Jesus method. So in order to make a better comparison.

Keep in mind that I'm speaking loosely when I say there is a Jesus 'method.' It's not as clear-cut as Socrates'. But if it helps, let's add some context.

Jesus is operating in a time when the law had become oppressive. Where the Jews were too extreme in their legalism and it caused their hearts to harden and miss the true intent and purpose of the law, which is ultimately and above all to create conditions for life on this earth - supporting it, protecting it, ensuring it can flourish.

So I would say to 1. (at least narrowly) that the application of the method is to the law and questions about the law. Stone adulteresses? Work on the Sabbath? Get divorced? ...

And I would say to 2. that the utility of the results is to reorient a people who took the law too literally and extreme back to the truth. To reopen their hearts to life, and to the law's purpose to create the conditions for life on earth. It is to create more servants of life on earth, and through this, more life in general.

So should we stone adulterers? No, the Jesus method says. Forgive them and let them live instead. Sure, society may break down if we can't trust each other's commitments ("surely adulterers will die," just as the law says), but the point of the law isn't to accelerate that process. Rather, it is to turn us away from that result toward the opposite (toward life) by making clear and codifying the ultimate consequences of adultery.

When the Jews read the law's dictates as a punishment they should enact versus a consequence that should be avoided, they became too quick to execute. They missed the whole point of the law to bring and work toward life by causing us to avoid the things that ultimately lead to death. The utility of the result, again, is softened hearts. Forgiveness. Care. More life in the world and those who serve it..

If you don't think the Jesus method is flexible enough to deal with the hypothesis provided let's try something along the lines of what you think applies.

It's not about proving an hypothesis. It's about discerning what truly creates the conditions for life on earth.

Hypothesis:

All pot smokers should be executed.

Use the Jesus method to confirm deny or expand upon the hypothesis.

It's the same as adultery. If the law says "pot smokers will surely die" this would be in the last analysis like adultery. Where society would breakdown if everyone was high all the time. That is not the way to life, and hence we would be wise to avoid that way.

But again, actively killing all pot smokers isn't the way to life either. Hence the Jesus method would respond to such harsh legalism with forgive. Help the pot smokers moderate their use. Show them care and compassion versus hostility and violence.

That is what it means to create the conditions for life on earth, and is the true purpose of the law (that the Jesus 'method' would reorient us to).

[Tired of the Nonsense]

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?

Jesus taught many things that were not only already a part of his own religious cultural heritage, but was already commonly accepted wisdom at the time and in the region.

Matthew 5:
[44] But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Proverbs 25:
[21] If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:

Wikipedia
Egyptian Instruction of Amenemope

Row that we may ferry the evil man away,
For we will not act according to his evil nature;
Lift him up, give him your hand,
And leave him [in] the hands of god;
Fill his gut with your own food
That he may be sated and ashamed. (circa 1300–1075 BCE)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instruction_of_Amenemope

Wikipedia
Instruction of Amenemope (also called Instructions of Amenemopet, Wisdom of Amenemopet) is a literary work composed in Ancient Egypt, most likely during the Ramesside Period (ca. 1300–1075 BCE); it contains thirty chapters of advice for successful living, ostensibly written by the scribe Amenemope son of Kanakht as a legacy for his son. A characteristic product of the New Kingdom “Age of Personal Piety�, the work reflects on the inner qualities, attitudes, and behaviors required for a happy life in the face of increasingly difficult social and economic circumstances. It is widely regarded as one of the masterpieces of ancient near-eastern wisdom literature and has been of particular interest to modern scholars because of its relationship to the biblical Book of Proverbs.

Comparison of texts
A number of passages in the Instruction of Amenemope have been compared with the Book of Proverbs, including:
(Proverbs 22:17-18):"Incline thine ear, and hear the words of the wise, And apply thine heart to my doctrine; For it is pleasant if thou keep them in thy belly, that they may be established together upon thy lips"
(Amenemope, ch. 1):"Give thine ear, and hear what I say, And apply thine heart to apprehend; It is good for thee to place them in thine heart, let them rest in the casket of thy belly; That they may act as a peg upon thy tongue"[49]
(Proverbs 22:22):"Rob not the poor, for he is poor, neither oppress (or crush) the lowly in the gate."
(Amenemope, ch. 2):"Beware of robbing the poor, and oppressing the afflicted."[49]
(Proverbs 22:24-5): "Do not befriend the man of anger, Nor go with a wrathful man, Lest thou learn his ways and take a snare for thy soul."
(Amenemope, ch. 10): "Associate not with a passionate man, Nor approach him for conversation; Leap not to cleave to such an one; That terror carry thee not away."[49]
(Proverbs 22:29):"[if you] You see a man quick in his work, before kings will he stand, before cravens, he will not stand."
(Amenemope, ch. 30):"A scribe who is skillful in his business findeth worthy to be a courtier"[49]
(Proverbs 23:1):"When thou sittest to eat with a ruler, Consider diligently what is before thee; And put a knife to thy throat, If thou be a man given to appetite. Be not desirous of his dainties, for they are breads of falsehood."
(Amenemope, ch. 23): "Eat not bread in the presence of a ruler, And lunge not forward(?) with thy mouth before a governor(?). When thou art replenished with that to which thou has no right, It is only a delight to thy spittle. Look upon the dish that is before thee, And let that (alone) supply thy need."[49] (see above)
(Proverbs 23:4-5):"Toil not to become rich, And cease from dishonest gain; For wealth maketh to itself wings, Like an eagle that flieth heavenwards"
(Amenemope, ch. 7):"Toil not after riches; If stolen goods are brought to thee, they remain not over night with thee. They have made themselves wings like geese. And have flown into the heavens."[49]
(Proverbs 14:7):"Speak not in the hearing of a fool, for he will despise the wisdom of thy words"
(Amenemope, ch. 21):"Empty not thine inmost soul to everyone, nor spoil (thereby) thine influence"[49]
(Proverbs 23:10): "Remove not the widows landmark; And enter not into the field of the fatherless."
(Amenemope, ch. 6): "Remove not the landmark from the bounds of the field...and violate not the widows boundary"
(Proverbs 23:12):"Apply thine heart unto instruction and thine ears to the words of knowledge"
(Amenemope, ch. 1):"Give thine ears, hear the words that are said, give thine heart to interpret them."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instruction_of_Amenemope

Wikipedia
Book of Proverbs.
The "wisdom" genre was widespread throughout the ancient Near East, and reading Proverbs alongside the examples recovered from Egypt and Mesopotamia reveals the common ground shared by international wisdom.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Proverbs

[theophile]

[Replying to post 35 by DanieltheDragon]

The Socratic method opens our minds and allows us to reduce bias and gain a deeper understanding not destitute.

Open up one of Plato's dialogues and tell me how Socrates does not leave us destitute with his method.

Paradigmatic case is the Parmenides wherein a young Socrates shows the origins of his own method in Parmenides' approach, which does precisely what I said: shows contradictory viewpoints are true, thereby undermining the entire rational enterprise and its ability to generate so-called 'knowledge.'

As Socrates himself says: his only knowledge is that he knows nothing.

What is that but the very definition of destitution? Arrived at through the method and the 'examined life'...

It is essentially destructive. So I agree with you insofar as it opens minds and reduces bias. The problem is... where do we go from there?
...

[JP Cusick]

The problem in this world is the same as in this thread by competing and competition which are just subtle forms of violence.

The discussion here ongoing is just a competition and that is the problem.

Socrates and Jesus are not in competition.

The Egyptian knowledge and the Bible's wisdom are not in competition.

If people were truly seeking the truth or seeking God then there is no need to win, and there would be no reason to defeat the other people.

It is the mentality of competition which continues to argue, and never draws any conclusion, and will always miss the mark.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 36 by theophile]

would say to 1. (at least narrowly) that the application of the method is to the law and questions about the law.

So it's useful for lawyers and politicians. The application is essentially to narrow to be applicable outside these fields.

nd I would say to 2. that the utility of the results is to reorient a people who took the law too literally and extreme back to the truth. To reopen their hearts to life, and to the law's purpose to create the conditions for life on earth. It is to create more servants of life on earth, and through this, more life in general.

Lets examine each of these claims:

1. Reorient people back to truth

A. Your using truth loosely here, where you are making a subjective truth claim and giving what you think your opinion of truth whatever that is. Aside from that there is no proof that Jesus's linguistic style is capable of doing what you intend it to do.

2. Reopen hearts to life.

A. The heart pumps blood so I take it you mean the emotional state of ones mind with regard to the value of life. How does Jesus's linguistic approach change someone's mind?

the final two points about conditions for life and creating servants for life seem to be Christian platitudes involving goals but no utility.



From reading your posts on the subject, you seem to be deriving grandiose claims about Jesus. Your belief system centers around Jesus so this is natural. First you start out saying that the Jesus method is a method that is better than the Socratic method. Which is a fine claim. Then we delve a little further and find out it's not really a philosophical method at all but really just the belief that if you give a pointed one liner that you will magically convert people to suddenly reopen their hearts to life and the truth of law and create more life on earth.

In conclusion, the Socratic method and the Jesus method are not comparable. The Jesus method isn't even a method and there is no evidence it actually even works.

Pretend for a minute that your not a Christian and that Jesus is just another character in some book. Would you honestly believe, that you could just take one liners and get hard fast believers of something to change their minds?

Look simply at our politics with pot. Now I will agree it was a bit extreme to say execute them. However valid your points are on the topic it won't actually do anything to influence the hardliners. Who have heard your statements before and were indifferent.