Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 220 times

Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #1

Post by oldbadger »

The gospels repeat, again and again, that Jesus taught the people.
I don't think that he did, I think that he made political speeches.
His whole campaign was about a return to the old laws and an end to the corruption of the leadership.
His campaign was temporal, not spiritual, and he was a very poor teacher, more of a speechmaker.
If you have any doubts about this, you can read in the gospels about how so few people actually understood what he was saying.

So what's all this about 'teaching' and 'taught'?
Over to you all.......... :)

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #11

Post by Tcg »

theophile wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 7:19 am
So, for the sake of argument, if the original intention and direction of the law was to serve life, even by giving rights to slaves for instance (as hard as that sounds), then fulfilling the law ultimately means setting slaves free, and helping them out, since that is what it truly means to serve life. See what I mean?
Rights to slaves? Let's see:

Leviticus 25:44-46

44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."

Based on this I for one have no idea what you mean.

Similarly, if the law is to serve life, which depends on trust, then it may outlaw adultery. But as we see from Jesus, fulfilling that law ultimately means not casting any stones, and letting the adulterer go, since that is the true fulfillment of the law's intent.
The passage you are referring to is a later addition, not part of the original text. Beyond that, Jesus doesn't change anything. The law states the adulterers (plural) should be stoned. This later addition story presents only the woman to be stoned. That is not following the law. Therefore, the story has the Jesus character not casting the first stone as he is following the law.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

2ndpillar2
Sage
Posts: 841
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 4:47 am
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #12

Post by 2ndpillar2 »

oldbadger wrote: Mon May 02, 2022 3:36 am The gospels repeat, again and again, that Jesus taught the people.
I don't think that he did, I think that he made political speeches.
His whole campaign was about a return to the old laws and an end to the corruption of the leadership.
His campaign was temporal, not spiritual, and he was a very poor teacher, more of a speechmaker.
If you have any doubts about this, you can read in the gospels about how so few people actually understood what he was saying.

So what's all this about 'teaching' and 'taught'?
Over to you all.......... :)
Yeshua was just fulfilling the Law and the prophets, such as in Matthew 13:13, when he quoted Isaiah, "you will keep on hearing but will not understand", which is mirrored in Daniel 7, in which it is stated that the "wicked"/lawless, will not understand. As most have adopted the false prophet Paul's gospel of lawlessness, the "many" (Mt 7:13), will not understand, and follow the wide road to "destruction". Yeshua's message, the "kingdom", was given alongside of examples of the power of the Spirit of God, whereas the dead were raised, and the sick were healed.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2690
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #13

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #12
Yeshua was just fulfilling the Law and the prophets
Considering the departures from the law in his teaching on divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1-2) and oath-taking (Numbers 30:1-2), he doesn't seem to have been fulfilling the law very well.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #14

Post by Tcg »

2ndpillar2 wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 10:16 am Yeshua's message, the "kingdom", was given alongside of examples of the power of the Spirit of God, whereas the dead were raised, and the sick were healed.
Jesus' reported message was appended with tales of healing and resurrections long after he failed to reform Judaism. These were added later in an attempt to salvage his failure and make it appear that he intended to start a new religion. He didn't, but it's a pretty good spin.



Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #15

Post by TRANSPONDER »

oldbadger wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 11:01 am Hello @TRANSPONDER. I don't accept all of the claims for Jesus, nor all his words, but most of G-Mark seems to be the true account to me, less the Christian additions.

Very few researchers agree about everything or even much. :)
There is still a lot of debate (as there should be) but I think I can prove that Mark is Not the original but itself has a lot of editorial additions (as well as common material with Matthew not found in Luke - a sort of Matthew/Mark "Q" document) even though it reflects the original synoptic gospels, though Luke (heavily edited and amended though it is) still shows some features of the original gospel.

As relates to topic, I am inclined to thinking that Jesus existed, he had followers and Paul got his messianism from these followers. But I also think that Paul adapted the Apostolic teachings to suit Gentile Romans and the Greek Christian Gospel -writers went even further than Paul, in making Jesus God, targeting Jews and Judaism and getting Rome off the hook for executing Jesus.
theophile wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 7:19 am My two cents on the discussion if interested: It's not a return to the law. Jesus was a law-breaker. It's more a return to what gave rise to the law in the first place, and what the law was always meant to achieve. (Along the lines of Transponder's position.)

The trick is rethinking what it means to fulfill the law. By which I mean, when Jesus says he came to fulfill the law, and not to abolish it, we should understand that as fulfilling the law's original intention. What the law was made to do in the first place and what it directs us toward. He does not mean fulfill the law in the sense of obeying it...

So, for the sake of argument, if the original intention and direction of the law was to serve life, even by giving rights to slaves for instance (as hard as that sounds), then fulfilling the law ultimately means setting slaves free, and helping them out, since that is what it truly means to serve life. See what I mean?

Similarly, if the law is to serve life, which depends on trust, then it may outlaw adultery. But as we see from Jesus, fulfilling that law ultimately means not casting any stones, and letting the adulterer go, since that is the true fulfillment of the law's intent.

Or same with not working on the Sabbath. If that law was made to serve life, then fulfilling the law may mean breaking the law and working on the Sabbath (as Jesus also shows).

So it's clearly not a straight-up return to the law (there is no way to reconcile that with Jesus' actual actions). It is more precisely a return to what gave rise to the law in the first place, and what the law directs us towards.

Anyways, food for thought.
I agree and whether or not we agree on the finals of the theology, I concur that the Fulfilling of the law means the spirit, and that not a jot passes away is an intentional mislead. Sure the old Law intact with not a dot or scribble changed can be forgotten while Christians play nice, do good on the Sabbath and talk decent even if they do eat prawns. I think it's a crafty gloss of Matthew who evidently is much interested with the OT background of Christianity, revising the Law as in 'But I tell you' and in producing prophecies based on OT passages which he clearly doesn't understand. Like 'Rachel weeping for her children' was about the Assyrian smashing of the Northern kingdom, and nothing to do with a massacre in Bethlehem - which neither the historians nor the other gospel - writers know about, quite apart from the nativities are demonstrably fabrications.

I know... :D the 'oh they didn't think it worth mentioning' excuse. Which wears damn thin when used to explain why John has no Transfiguration . I don't know where we will end up, but I look forward to further discussion of "My Pet Theory" :D which I truly and honestly think is amply evidentially supported and consistent, and I am at a loos as to why no Bible scholars (even skeptic ones) seem to have twigged it.

Anyhow, I get it that fulfilling the law in the spirit by playing nice (including freeing slaves) would make perfect sense. Which only makes one wonder why God, giving Jesus his teleprompt material, didn't have him say 'Ye have read that ye may take slaves for life from the nations around ye; but I say that thou shouldn't notst own another person as property; and I say unto you that in the days to come, it will be seen as an evil thing,'.

But maybe God decided not to do that as it really gives the game away doesn't it? O:) It's such a good prophecy that it proves that God must be real and He can't provide convincing evidence like that, or it would abrogate Faith.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2690
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #16

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #15
Fulfilling of the law means the spirit, and that not a jot passes away is an intentional mislead.
According to Deuteronomy 13:18 the letter of the law and the spirit of the law are one and the same, the following of the first being the course prescribed for following the second.

2ndpillar2
Sage
Posts: 841
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 4:47 am
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #17

Post by 2ndpillar2 »

Tcg wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 6:19 pm
2ndpillar2 wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 10:16 am Yeshua's message, the "kingdom", was given alongside of examples of the power of the Spirit of God, whereas the dead were raised, and the sick were healed.
Jesus' reported message was appended with tales of healing and resurrections long after he failed to reform Judaism. These were added later in an attempt to salvage his failure and make it appear that he intended to start a new religion. He didn't, but it's a pretty good spin


Tcg
Yeshua's message was to confess your sins, repent, get baptized, and produce good fruit in line with one's repentance (Mt 3). His message was not to "reform" "Judaism", for he taught that you are to do what the scribes teach, just not do what they do. This is in respect to the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, which he referred to as the leaven. As per Matthew 3, the Pharisees were looking at being cut down and thrown into the fire if they did not produce good fruit. The "kingdom" is with respect to when Israel will be reunited on the and given to Jacob, under the kingship of David, and they will "observe My ordinances" (Ez 37:24-28).

2ndpillar2
Sage
Posts: 841
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 4:47 am
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #18

Post by 2ndpillar2 »

Athetotheist wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 6:00 pm [Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #12
Yeshua was just fulfilling the Law and the prophets
Considering the departures from the law in his teaching on divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1-2) and oath-taking (Numbers 30:1-2), he doesn't seem to have been fulfilling the law very well.
As Yeshua explained in Mt 5:22, he doesn't do away with the law, he simply ties it in with spirituality, and makes it stricter, such as if you even look at a women with lust, you have already committed adultery. He was per Matthew 5:17, to fulfill the Law and the prophets. As per Matthew 24:30, per Daniel 7:13, the prophets have not been fully fulfilled, and no one will know the "day or the hour" of that fulfillment. According to Psalms 110:1-2, the Lord will sit at the right hand of the LORD, until the LORD makes his enemies "a footstool for thy feet". We are now approaching the 3rd day, after 2000 years of Hosea 6:2, when Judah and Ephraim, will acknowledge their "guilt", and become healed, such as reunited in the land given to Jacob (Ez 37), under the leadership of king David, whereas they would no longer suffer hunger, and become the sanctuary of God.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2690
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #19

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #18
As Yeshua explained in Mt 5:22, he doesn't do away with the law, he simply ties it in with spirituality, and makes it stricter, such as if you even look at a women with lust, you have already committed adultery.
You shall not add to the word which I command you....
(Deut. 4:2)

2ndpillar2
Sage
Posts: 841
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 4:47 am
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: Jesus did not teach, he made speeches!

Post #20

Post by 2ndpillar2 »

Athetotheist wrote: Sat May 07, 2022 1:34 pm [Replying to 2ndpillar2 in post #18
As Yeshua explained in Mt 5:22, he doesn't do away with the law, he simply ties it in with spirituality, and makes it stricter, such as if you even look at a women with lust, you have already committed adultery.
You shall not add to the word which I command you....
(Deut. 4:2)
I don't know, per Yeshua in Matthew 5, from the "beginning", man and women were made one flesh (Gen 2:24), and no one was to separate (Mt 19:6). Are you as an "athetotheist", asking for the law given by Moses to be enforced over the more strict law of righteousness? I am not sure, but you will apparently will not hold up to either. It was because of the "hardness of heart" that "Moses permitted you to divorce our wives, but from the beginning it has not been this way". Are you arguing against "divorce" or for it? Or are you a Progressive, who thinks your morality is better than that of God or his prophet Yeshua, and simply want to do what you want to do under any argument you can come up with? If you want to cling to "you shall not add to the word which I command you", I think you are going to find yourself in a hole, for God told Moses that he was going to send a prophet that the people must listen too. I don't know, it seems you are hanging out in left field, and you left your glove in the dug out.

Post Reply