How Badly is Jesus Misrepresented Today?

[Richard Aberdeen]

From an unbiased historical perspective and, unlike Christianity in all of its twisted and insidious incarnations has grossly misrepresented him for centuries, it is fair to say that Jesus is neither the founder of Christianity or any other religion. Rather, it is far more accurate to conclude Jesus is the founder of human and civil rights and free quality public education for the masses, as well as the Messiah sent from God to save humanity from our sins.

Jesus is by far the most misunderstood and misrepresented individual in human history. He far more fairly belongs in the categories "human behavior" and "morality and ethics", rather than "religion", although there is no single category accurately representing him, as his teachings and actions span history, psychology, science, logic, ethics, education, literature, philosophy and virtually every major category invented.

The words and deeds of Jesus are foundationally focused on the axiom that we should treat other people the way we want them to treat us. For this reason we will not kill, we will not steal, we will not falsely accuse and, if there is anything else that matters in securing love, freedom, peace, equality and justice on earth, it is summed up in this, that we should love our neighbor as our self.

As an example of how poorly translated most bibles are today, the now famous John 3:16-17 is more accurately translated as: "For God so loved the people that he gave the only begotten son, that whoever believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the people, but that the people through him, might be saved." Changing the poorly translated vague and impersonal "world" to "the people" (Greek; sea of humanity) significantly underscores the true intention.

Note how much more "people-centered" this more accurate translation is, which is consistent with Jesus being portrayed as champion and friend of the common people throughout the New Testament narrative. The word translated as "church" in modern bibles, does not at all refer to either a religion or a religious organization or building of any kind and, it is actually a bad translation. The correct translation is "assembly".

The book of Acts for example, clearly states that God "does not live in temples made with hands." Note how the Bible does not refer to a "little man in the sky" in reference to God, as many modern atheists are found of misrepresenting. Rather, according to the Bible, the heavens and what lies beyond cannot contain God and, in God we "live and move and have our being."

Modern science is aware that trillions of microbes are living within every human being and it is believed there are far more viruses than any other form of life on earth. Thus, it is not at all hard to accept that God is everywhere and we live within God. Can a virus inhabiting a microbe living within the intestines of a human being, accurately say there is no human being, probably no human being or might be no human being upon which it depends for its very survival?

And likewise, can human beings say with any honesty at all that there is no God, probably no God or might be no God? How would they know, what evidence do they have for how else the universe happens to exist. And, why should common average people either believe them or pay taxes to have our children 'educated' by purveyors of such gross superstition?

What evidence do they have that energy, heat, motion, light, gazillions zillions trillions of parts within parts, life, intelligence, the highly complex dual language and functionality of DNA or even something as rudimentary as human mathematics, can magically exist without an Eternal Primary Cause and Supreme Intelligence behind the grand design universal reality?

The correct translation "assembly" is borrowed from the Greek word for political assembly, "ekklesia". Apparently, Jesus himself chose this particular commonly understood secular term to define followers of Jesus, which is again consistent with the champion of the common people New Testament portrayal of him.

Since the death of Cesar Chavez and Martin Luther King, Jr. note how badly today we need a true champion of the common people to offset the greed and avarice of the wealthy, powerful, famous and elite among us. Such need is also overwhelmingly true regarding common people throughout the record of human civilization.

It should be of supreme interest to anyone involved with modern activism and everyone with even a tiny bit of education and historical perspective, that the real historical Jesus is not the founder of a conservative religion (which he utterly hated) nor a religion for the rich and powerful and silvery of tongue, as he is severely grossly misrepresented as being in the modern age, nor the founder of any religion, unless one believes loving one another is a religion.

There is no such thing as a "prosperity gospel" found anywhere in the Bible and, anyone claiming to represent Jesus who pockets more than the average common person for their own use, is a liar and a fraud. Those who become wealthy by tugging at the pious heartstrings of well-meaning common people, are the worst kind of grifters, charlatans and frauds within the history of humanity.

Consider that Jesus and Peter, James, John, Paul and his other early followers, were among the poorest of people and yet, they still gave to the poor. Paul, often blamed for modern conservative Christianity, worked as a tent maker to support himself, while many if not most historians consider Paul to be among the most liberal authors in history.

Religious quacks claiming to represent Jesus who wear odd hats, vestment gowns, other religious garments, crystal crosses and other trinkets, belong in a mental institution. Perhaps the only thing worse than this are those who handsomely profit off of what they call "the gospel", which by-and-in-large, are the same people.

Many religious-sounding words found in most modern bibles are in fact Old English mistranslations. For example, in the Koine Greek, the secular "good news" is correct, rather than gospel (an obscure Old Saxon word meaning "Godspell"}; disciple means "follower" or "student", doctrine means "teaching", epistle means either a formal or personal letter and preach means "to proclaim".

Anybody can proclaim the good news about Jesus, a degree in a theological cemetery is not required and invariably gets in the way and confuses average people. Jesus is not about theology, he is about forgiveness, grace, mercy, love, peace, life and freedom for all people.

According to Jesus himself, he came "to heal the broken-hearted", "to proclaim liberty to the captives" and "to set at liberty those who are oppressed", the opposite of how his name is routinely and consistently misrepresented, misused and otherwise abused here in the 21st Century. We should be wise enough to read the New Testament for ourselves, rather than depending on "blind leaders of the blind."

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... rsion=NKJV

[RBD]

[Replying to RBD in post #6]

Why do you find it necessary to lie about Jesus. Loving other people as our own self is not humanism,

Loving others as ourselves is conditioned on how we love ourselves.

I don't want liberal activist communists loving me as themselves. Nor does Jesus, whose gospel is perverted by Judas Iscariot thieving socialism.

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "to each according to need" is the foundation of modern socialism, which traces directly from Acts chapter 2.

And in due time, they were the poor saints in need of charity from the other churches.

You are badly mistaken. You apparently follow a nefarious religion that teaches you it is wrong for the government to "provide for the general welfare" of its citizens

General justice against criminals, and deence against foreiggn and domestic enemies, is not a welfare state.

Today we have more dangerous domestic enemies that foreign: liberal activist communists.

And so, I will love you by no more arguing with communists profaning pure religion of Jesus Christ. Goodbye.

Mat 15:14
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

[OneJack]

[Replying to Bible_Student in post #9]

Don't say I didn't warn you, because I did, there is no Christianity in Jesus.

May we know where you've heard and learned that there is no Christianity in Jesus? Are you in the company of the Lord Jesus Christ today?

[OneJack]

[Replying to Bible_Student in post #7]

Well, Jesus can't be a religion, because he's a person.

What exactly do you mean by your phrase 'he's a person?' Is Jesus a man, flesh like us?

What Jesus did was teach his disciples how they should behave to please God, so he effectively taught a system of worship, something we know today as "religion."

What religion are you talking about?

[Richard Aberdeen]

[Replying to RBD in post #11]

People who do not want to love other people and people who deliberately harm immigrants, the sick and the poor, are against Jesus, the holy spirit and our father in heaven.

You seem to have little to no understanding of where Jesus is coming from.

Jesus says, "this is my commandment, that you love each other."

Liberals are not the enemy or equal to sin. Some of the worst sinners in America are conservatives, including the current president.

You are badly mistaken.

[Bible_Student]

[Replying to Richard Aberdeen in post #10]
Anyone who reads the inspired Christian writings (especially the Book of Acts of the Apostles) learns that the Christianity that emerged after the death of Jesus was an organized religion.

[Richard Aberdeen]

[Replying to Bible_Student in post #15]

Jesus says, this is my commandment, that you love each other, as I have loved you."

This is NOT an organized religion. It is correct morality and ethics and is what God wants of ALL people.

You are badly mistaken. If you are not anti-war, you are neither pro-life nor a follower of Jesus. If you are not pro healthcare and pro helping the poor and needy who are already born, you are neither pro-life nor a follower of Jesus.

Your organized religion is meaningless to God, who "does not live in temples made with hands."

Jesus says, "Herein is my father honored, when you have love for each other."

[JehovahsWitness]

#QUESTION Do the teachings and philosophies of Jesus as expressed in the Gospels, taken by themselves, indicate he intented to start a "new" religion?

There are many that contend that Jesus had no intention of "starting a new religion" and/or that he simply wanted to instigate certain changes of attitude and/or end organised religion entirely and have his followers believe in their hearts and love everybody. The follow is the biblical response to the above.


#1 HIS CHURCH Jesus explicity stated his intention to set up (built) a church in his name. Jesus said... "I will build MY CHURCH and the gates of hell [hades/ grave] shall not prevail [be prevailing] against it" (Matt. 16:18 ).

#2 LEADERSHIP Jesus set up an alternative religious leadership. Matthew 18 verse 17 Jesus provided the following guidelines:
"If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.."- New American Standard Bible (1995)
http://bible.cc/matthew/18-17.htm

Under the Jewish religious system again only the priests and ultimately the High Priest had the right to excummunicate a worshipper. All judgement was reserved for the Priestly class, something a Jewish male was born to by being a descendant of Aaron. Jesus was thus implying a system that would have been totally illegal under the Jewish religion. If Jesus had no intention for his followers to be part of a CHURCH or community of believers from which one could be excluded in some way, what were these guidelines pointing towards? If Jesus never wanted a church, why did he say he intended to build one?

#3 RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION: Jesus instructed the instutution of a system by which religious instruction and encouragement to be administred through a pre-prescribed chanel - as opposed to each individual member praying to God and being guided indepently to spritually upbuilding information. Jesus chose 12 Apostles and gave them (notably Peter) instructions to feed his sheep, metaphorically refering to his disciples. It seems clear then that Jesus was indicating that there would be an identifiable group ("sheep") which Peter and his fellow Apostles, would be able to "feed" (give religious instruction to). (see John 21:15-17).

#4 RELIGIOUS MEETINGS : Jesus indicated he wished his Christian followers to stay in some kind of contact with each other; for example, on the last night of his life on earth, Jesus instituted a ceremony that involved bread and wine. He commanded that his followers "keep doing this in remebrance of me" (Luke 22:19). Indeed in Matthew Chapter 18 verse 20 Jesus stated "where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst. Thus indicating far from his teachings to simply be carried in the heart of each individual follower, his people would meet together on a regular basis. Interestingly Jesus said explicity that the day would come when true worship would NOT be centered at the Jewish Temple (John 4: 23, 24) but this does not mean there would be no organised coming together "in his name".

#5 NEW RELIGIOUS RITUALS. Jesus indicated his disciples would continue to "meet together" (Matthew 18:20) and follow at least two religous ceremonies (Baptism - Not a requirement under the Jewish system), and later the memorial of his own (Jesus' death) again something certainly that had no place in the Jewish system (Luke 22:19; Mat 28:19). Although gathering for instruction in local communities (for example in local synagogues) was encouraged there was no allowance in that religion for the institution of additonal religious ceremonies as indicated by Jesus, evidently he was not suggesting "reforms" (not something permissable in the Jewish system) but something "new", something arguably Jesus was alluding to when he mentioned not putting new wine (a new religion) into old wineskins (a old obsolete system of worship).

#6 PRAYER One the last night of his life on earth, Jesus instructed his disciples to pray "in his name". There was nothing in the Jewish law that allowed for requests to be made to God through someone else. The High Priest offered prayers on behalf of the people and of course each individual Jew had the right to pray to God himself, but never through (on the merit of) someone else. Like the other features mentions this notion could not exist as a sect of the Jewish faith it was something radically new.

#7 PREACHING THE GOSPEL "Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded YOU." - Matthew 28: 19, 20 NWT In the Jewish religion, people that had heard of their God and wished to worship him were free to come and worship (in a limited way) at the temple, but Jesus last commission quoted above instigated something new, a religious system based on the authoroity not of the Priests or the Temple but on God's Son.

CONCLUSION All of the above indicates that Jesus

1) Was setting up a new religion (rather than attempting to reform or instigate changes in the Jewish system)

2) that Jesus was fully aware that his instructions would result in a religion (rather than a group of individuals loosely linked by a common ideology) and that this was completely in line with his intended purpose

RELATED POSTS

Can the first century church be rightly described as "an organised religion"?
viewtopic.php?p=1062104#p1062104

Can one obey Jesus words without a church or church leaders?
viewtopic.php?p=1081725#p1081725

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

RELIGION, ORGANISATION and ...CHRISTIANITY

[tam]

Peace to you,

#QUESTION Do the teachings and philosophies of Jesus as expressed in the Gospels, taken by themselves, indicate he intented to start a "new" religion?

There are many that contend that Jesus had no intention of "starting a new religion" and/or that he simply wanted to instigate certain changes of attitude and/or end organised religion entirely and have his followers believe in their hearts and love everybody. The follow is the biblical response to the above.


#1 HIS CHURCH Jesus explicity stated his intention to set up (built) a church in his name. Jesus said... "I will build MY CHURCH and the gates of hell [hades/ grave] shall not prevail [be prevailing] against it" (Matt. 16:18 ).

Church does not mean religion.

A religious institution is not the church.
The Church is the body of Christ, made of people, with Christ as their Head.

And He is the head of the body, the church - Colossians 1:18
And God put everything under His feet and made Him head over everything for the church, which is His body, Ephesians 1:22, 23
Now you are the body of Christ, and each of you is a member of it. 1Corinth 12:27
you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through [Jesus] Christ. 1 Peter 2:5

That Church - made of living stones (people) - is also the Bride:

For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, His body, of which He is the Savior. Ephesians 5:23


It has nothing to do with a religion, a religious institution.

#2 LEADERSHIP Jesus set up an alternative religious leadership. Matthew 18 verse 17 Jesus provided the following guidelines:
"If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.."- New American Standard Bible (1995)
http://bible.cc/matthew/18-17.htm

Again, the Church is the Body of Christ, the people.

It is not a select few people in a religious institution.

First you bring your grievance to your brother, then you bring 2 or 3 people along with you to talk to your brother if he does not listen to you, then you bring it to the church (the people.)

(of course you can also just forgive your brother and ask forgiveness for him)

Under the Jewish religious system again only the priests and ultimately the High Priest had the right to excummunicate a worshipper.

We are not under the Jewish religious system.

#3 RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION: Jesus instructed the instutution of a system by which religious instruction and encouragement to be administred through a pre-prescribed chanel - as opposed to each individual member praying to God and being guided indepently to spritually upbuilding information. Jesus chose 12 Apostles and gave them (notably Peter) instructions to feed his sheep, metaphorically refering to his disciples. It seems clear then that Jesus was indicating that there would be an identifiable group ("sheep") which Peter and his fellow Apostles, would be able to "feed" (give religious instruction to). (see John 21:15-17).

But this is an interpretation of Christ's words to Peter.It also contradicts things in the bible itself, such as:

1 - John told people they needed no one to teach them; that instead the anointing they received teaches them all things. 1John 2:27

2 - Christ did in fact state that His sheep would listen to His voice. In which case, He would be teaching them, speaking to them, disciplining them, feeding them. Not just the sheep present at that time, but the other sheep He had yet to call. Because He said that they, too, would listen to His voice. He even states outright that He disciples those He loves (in Revelation.)

3 - Christ told the apostles to teach others to obey everything He (Christ) commanded them (the apostles.) If the apostles are to listen to Christ, then they are to teach others to do the same. If the apostles are to wash one another's feet, then they are to teach others to do the same.

#4 RELIGIOUS MEETINGS : Jesus indicated he wished his Christian followers to stay in some kind of contact with each other; for example, on the last night of his life on earth, Jesus instituted a ceremony that involved bread and wine. He commanded that his followers "keep doing this in remebrance of me" (Luke 22:19).

A - So what is it that Christ said to keep doing in remembrance of Him?

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord [Jesus], on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. 1 Corinthians 11:23-26

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take it; this is my body.”
23 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, and they all drank from it. Mark 14:22-23

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”
27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. Matt 26:26-27

Is it not eating the bread (that means His body) and drinking the wine (that means His blood) what He said to keep doing in remembrance of Him?

B - One does not need to be part of a religious institution to be able to gather with other members of the body of Christ to eat and drink, just as He commanded us to do.

Indeed in Matthew Chapter 18 verse 20 Jesus stated "where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst. Thus indicating far from his teachings to simply be carried in the heart of each individual follower, his people would meet together on a regular basis. Interestingly Jesus said explicity that the day would come when true worship would NOT be centered at the Jewish Temple (John 4: 23, 24) but this does not mean there would be no organised coming together "in his name".

Stating that He will be with the two or three gathered in His name does not mean that He instituted a new religion.

People can gather together in His name without being a part of any religious institution.

In addition, stating that He will be with the two or three gathered in His name does not mean that He will not be with an individual who belongs to Him.

#5 NEW RELIGIOUS RITUALS. Jesus indicated his disciples would continue to "meet together" (Matthew 18:20) and follow at least two religous ceremonies (Baptism - Not a requirement under the Jewish system), and later the memorial of his own (Jesus' death) again something certainly that had no place in the Jewish system (Luke 22:19; Mat 28:19).

Again, neither of these things requires a religious institution. Baptism of holy spirit (which Christ gives) does not even require others to be present. The 'ritual' that you are calling the memorial is meant to involve eating and drink the bread and wine that mean the body and blood of Christ. If one is not doing that, then one is not doing the very thing he said to 'keep doing in remembrance of me.'

Although gathering for instruction in local communities (for example in local synagogues) was encouraged there was no allowance in that religion for the institution of additonal religious ceremonies as indicated by Jesus, evidently he was not suggesting "reforms" (not something permissable in the Jewish system) but something "new", something arguably Jesus was alluding to when he mentioned not putting new wine (a new religion) into old wineskins (a old obsolete system of worship).

Agreed.

But earlier in this post, you used the Jewish religious system to try and prove that that there should be a class of leaders/priests. That sounds more like creating an image of an old system, mimicking it while changing a few things here and there, and calling it new.

Christ said we are to worship in spirit and in truth.

Not on this mountain (religion) or that mountain.

But in spirit and in truth (in Christ.)


(Side note: I'm not sure there was 'ex-communication' in the law of Moses, rather than putting a person to death for a serious enough crime. In which case, Christ overrode that did He not, when He said 'let He who is without sin cast the first stone'? In the second temple period, the priests, etc, might be able to put someone out of the synagogue, and I'm guessing that is more along the lines of what you are speaking about. But how can you put another person out of the the Body of Christ, the Bride? Is it not Christ who calls and chooses? Is it not He who anoints people (or not)?)

#6 PRAYER One the last night of his life on earth, Jesus instructed his disciples to pray "in his name". There was nothing in the Jewish law that allowed for requests to be made to God through someone else. The High Priest offered prayers on behalf of the people and of course each individual Jew had the right to pray to God himself, but never through (on the merit of) someone else. Like the other features mentions this notion could not exist as a sect of the Jewish faith it was something radically new.

Again, there is no new religious institution required for such a thing.

(Also, Job offered sacrifices on behalf of his children, though I do understand that this occurs before the law of Moses and levitical priesthood.)

#7 PREACHING THE GOSPEL "Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded YOU." - Matthew 28: 19, 20 NWT In the Jewish religion, people that had heard of their God and wished to worship him were free to come and worship (in a limited way) at the temple, but Jesus last commission quoted above instigated something new, a religious system based on the authoroity not of the Priests or the Temple but on God's Son.

This also does not require a religious institution. It does not require human leaders.

It requires only God's Son, who can and does direct people to others. Just as He did with Phillip and the Ethiopian.



Peace again to you.