Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Did Jesus really preach that sermon?


eight bits
 Share

Recommended Posts

Did he say blessed are the cheesemongers?

  • Haha 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't the teachings be taken in isolation, never mind who wrote them? Surely all that matters is whether or not they are good advice . . . in these times?

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

Did he say blessed are the cheesemongers?

No. He said blessed are the cheesemakers.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ouija ouija said:

Can't the teachings be taken in isolation, never mind who wrote them? Surely all that matters is whether or not they are good advice . . . in these times?

That’s not all that matters to many Christians. Many, possibly most, would prefer to pin the things written about Jesus on him despite the fact all of it originates decades after his death by people who never knew him. 
 

cormac

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, eight bits said:

aren't we all entitled to doubt whether the guy was ever here?

Sure, nobody cares. Religions are based on Faith, not knowledge. Belief in God and Jesus are the same as believing in Santa and the Easter Bunny i.e. someone tells you something outrageously unlikely and completely implausible which is fun or exciting. You have the option to suspend disbelief or not. When you think about it, if you came from an alien culture and walked into a catholic church, what would you find? You'd find a people who worship a dead god they nailed to a tree, who regularly perform a ceremony where they ritualistically eat the dead god's flesh and drink his blood. They frown on idolatry, yet there are idols, everywhere, of gods they call saints whom they pray to and make offerings to. They wrap it all up in gaudy robes, redolent of the odor of sanctity, oblivious of the sheer barbarity of it all.

Edited by Hammerclaw
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ouija ouija said:

Can't the teachings be taken in isolation, never mind who wrote them? Surely all that matters is whether or not they are good advice . . . in these times?

Yes, one can do anything one wants with them and if one believes, one may walk privately with The Presence, in an inner garden of one's own device.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Sure, nobody cares. Religions are based on Faith, not knowledge. Belief in God and Jesus are the same as believing in Santa and the Easter Bunny i.e. someone tells you something outrageously unlikely and completely implausible which are fun or exciting. You have the option to suspend disbelief or not. When you think about it, if you came from an alien culture and walked into a catholic church, what would you find? You'd find a people who worship a dead god they nailed to a tree, who regularly perform a ceremony where they ritualistically eat the dead god's flesh and drink his blood. They wrap it up in robes of sanctity, oblivious of the sheer barbarity of it all.

A lot of people are exposed to religion before the capacity for critical thinking is developed in the brain. Great pull. Typically once a person starts adulting many revise their beliefs or outgrow them etc. etc. 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think about it, it seems like Jesus was just a story character meant to help teach different types of lessons. I think the problem arose when people started to take those stories literal. If you take them as just a tale. They make more sense and the meaning behind some of the stories is better. Plus the culture at that time was way different. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ouija ouija said:

Can't the teachings be taken in isolation, never mind who wrote them? Surely all that matters is whether or not they are good advice . . . in these times?

I'm unaware of similar efforts to pick apart, disprove, or otherwise impugn the reality of Muhammad or the Buddha.  There may have been a better historical trail for them but the efforts to essentially mock believers in Christ as uneducated and foolish go well beyond any scholarly need.  Gee... I wonder why that might be?  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

A lot of people are exposed to religion before the capacity for critical thinking is developed in the brain. Great pull.

The capacity is innate, the disciplines where one utilizes critical thinking, vary. Contextually, religious people are quite adept at secular critical thinking and yet, in a blink of the eye, switch to theological critical thinking which runs in parallel tracks, within the context of their theological indoctrinations and Bible absolutism.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

The more I think about it, it seems like Jesus was just a story character meant to help teach different types of lessons. I think the problem arose when people started to take those stories literal. If you take them as just a tale. They make more sense and the meaning behind some of the stories is better. Plus the culture at that time was way different. 

I think some parenting approaches would use the Jesus stories to help a kid feel accepted, some kids go thru hard things really young, then there are parents who beat their kids over the head with the Bible, in turn you get kids that grow into adults who beat their peers over the head with the Bible. Some have no religion exposure until the brain develops the capacity to critically think and then these parents would stress questioning everything and conclude by basing ones beliefs on the evidence and have the sense to know the difference. Excellent add to Xeno. Another add to: few parents would use many of the stories as they are violent and awful the monotheist god is a tyrant and would scare children, hence the popularity of a Jesus, he is kid friendly. 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

I think some parenting approaches would use the Jesus stories to help a kid feel accepted, some kids go thru hard things really young, then their are parents who beat their kids over the head with the Bible, in turn you get kids that grow into adults who beat their peers over the head with the Bible. Some have no religion exposure until the brain develops the capacity to critically think and then these parents would stress questioning everything and conclude and base ones beliefs on the evidence and have the sense to know the difference. Excellent add to Xeno. An add to: few parents would use many of the stories as they are violent and awful the monotheist god is a tyrant and would scare children, hence the popularity of aJesus, he is kid friendly. 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, and-then said:

I'm unaware of similar efforts to pick apart, disprove, or otherwise impugn the reality of Muhammad or the Buddha.  There may have been a better historical trail for them but the efforts to essentially mock believers in Christ as uneducated and foolish go well beyond any scholarly need.  Gee... I wonder why that might be?  

Well, there are questions about the historicity of Mohammed, and especially of the Buddha. While there is, as you say, a better historical trail for Mohammed than for Jesus, there really isn't for the Buddha.

As to why these matters get less ink (nowadays fewer electrons?), there are several factors. First, let us not be so politically correct as to overlook that people have been killed in recent times for raising any questions at all about the excellence of Mohammed. (Nor should we develop amnesia that when Christians could kill people with impunity for raising questions about Jesus, Christians did so with enthusiasm and a strong work ethic.)

More basically, both Mohammed and Gautama play different roles in the religions that revere them than Jesus plays in mainstream Christianity. Jesus is worshipped as the one and only God. It is easy to imagine a Buddhism without a Buddha (in my mind's ear, I can hear the zen people saying "we told you so," lol). It is harder to imagine Islam (not so long ago frequently called "Mohammedism") without a Mohammed. However, the actual authority figure there is supposedly Gabriel... But Christianity without a Christ is an oxymoron.

Bottom line? It's more important whether or not there was a Jesus than whether or not there was a Mohammed or a Buddha.

When you say you wonder why - could it be that in reality you have a theory about why? Please share if you do.

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, eight bits said:

For the last few weeks, I've been inspired by threads featuring claims about the real teachings of Jesus. Well, longer than a few weeks if you count threads centering on that thick Blue Book so often cited hereabouts.

Here's Bart Ehrman's take on how hard it is for anybody to know what Jesus really said (even assuming as a given, as Bart does, that there was a Jesus to say anything really).

https://ehrmanblog.org/did-jesus-give-the-sermon-on-the-mount

Although Ehrman focuses on the uncertainties of Matthew chapters 5-7, his discussion touches on the fog surrounding all of the sayings attributed to Jesus.

On a personal level, I still have hope for Professor Ehrman on the historical-vs-mythical Jesus question. Come on, Bart. We don't and can't know what he said, we do know that much of what Jesus supposedly did never happened because it's impossible ... aren't we all entitled to doubt whether the guy was ever here?

Love this. I took a few of Erhman’s courses on Jesus thru The Great Courses back in 2006ish and  found them interesting. I would love to read a follow up book from him.  Wonderful to see you posting was wondering about you. Hope life finds you well. 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, eight bits said:

Well, there are questions about the historicity of Mohammed, and especially of the Buddha. While there is, as you say, a better historical trail for Mohammed than for Jesus, there really isn't for the Buddha.

As to why these matters get less ink (nowadays fewer electrons?), there are several factors. First, let us not be so politically correct as to overlook that people have been killed in recent times for raising any questions at all about the excellence of Mohammed. (Nor should we develop amnesia that when Christians could kill people with impunity for raising questions about Jesus, Christians did so with enthusiasm and a strong work ethic.)

More basically, both Mohammed and Gautama play different roles in the religions that revere them than Jesus plays in mainstream Christianity. Jesus is worshipped as the one and only God. It is easy to imagine a Buddhism without a Buddha (in my mind's ear, I can hear the zen people saying "we told you so," lol). It is harder to imagine Islam (not so long ago frequently called "Mohammedism") without a Mohammed. However, the actual authority figure there is supposedly Gabriel... But Christianity without a Christ is an oxymoron.

Bottom line? It's more important whether or not there was a Jesus than whether or not there was a Mohammed or a Buddha.

When you say you wonder why - could it be that in reality you have a theory about why? Please share if you do.


Nota Bene: my use of “you” and “your” is in a general sense.

For me an add to: I think Buddhism can even go as far to add that this path isn’t about becoming a “mini Buddha” but it is about offering some suggestions for living see if they even work for you and if they don’t, no worries, and share your feedback on how it could be better if useful at all. And, no one’s gonna tear you a new ******** for finding what works best for you even if it doesn’t include Buddhism. It is about finding the wisdom in your life too to have quality of life here and now. Quality life is about some a priori outline or book that one can never challenge or let go if for something else. And, I do not think there was a Buddha either. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@eight bits

A revision for my post #17.

For me: Quality of life is not about some a priori outline or book that one can never challenge or let go of to try something else. And, I do not think there was a Buddha either. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eight bits said:

Jesus is worshipped as the one and only God. .

 

Actually, with those who know who Jesus is, like a lot of Christians do, that isn't exactly the case. I wouldn't say it's more complicated than that, because it just might be instead, something plain and simple. But yes, in the universe of his making; Jesus is God.

 

"In the highest sense, we worship the Universal Father and him only. True, we can and do worship the Father as he is manifested in his Creator Sons, but it is the Father, directly or indirectly, who is worshiped and adored.

 

 

 

Edited by Will Due
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don’t have to look far to find one shared message in Hinduism, Buddhism, and the Abrahamic religions, and probably all others,?  it is, the invitation to Live/Be in Peace.  Now, and Forever.   Ideas like Heaven, Nirvana, & any covenants  with god ,are all ideas of  Peace.    ?

      Religions are psychological and emotional defense mechanisms. ??    :P    

Edited by lightly
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Will Due said:

Actually, with those who know who Jesus is, including a lot of Christians in my opinion, that isn't exactly the case. I wouldn't say it's more complicated than that, because it just might be something plain and simple instead. But yes, in the universe of his making; Jesus is God.

I wasn't easy with that sentence when I wrote it (Jesus is worshipped as the one and only God). Mainstream Christianity is orthodox, meaning its churches profess the Nicene Creed. On the one hand, there is only one God, but on the other hand, Jesus isn't the only "person" whom the God comprises.

Nevertheless, for the mainstream Christian Jesus is God, while for the Muslim, Mohammed isn't God, nor is Gautama a god for the Buddhist. The belief that the one God walked on earth, in Palestine, during the 1st Century, as a historical man distinguishes Jesus's role in Christianity from the other founders' roles in their religions.

@lightly

Quote

Religions are psychological and emotional defense mechanisms. ??

That's an important piece of the puzzle, IMO.

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I’d like the earliest ‘religions’ best….Everything is God/God is Everything.    Simple.  :)

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, eight bits said:

Jesus isn't the only "person" whom the God comprises.

 

Yes, as I understand what I think you're referring to, you're right.

 

2 minutes ago, eight bits said:

Nevertheless, for the mainstream Christian Jesus is God, while for the Muslim, Mohammed isn't God, nor is Gautama a god for the Buddhist. The belief that the one God walked on earth, in Palestine, during the 1st Century, as a historical man distinguishes Jesus's role in Christianity from the other founders' roles in their religions.

 

Yes, he does. But as He is manifested in Jesus, it is the Universal Father who is worshiped.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, and-then said:

I'm unaware of similar efforts to pick apart, disprove, or otherwise impugn the reality of Muhammad or the Buddha.  There may have been a better historical trail for them but the efforts to essentially mock believers in Christ as uneducated and foolish go well beyond any scholarly need.  Gee... I wonder why that might be?  

Every religion has its wise men and scholars, and there is a long tradition of that in Christianity.  Every religion has its foot soldiers too.  It is as true for Christianity as it is for Islam.  They may not know why they believe or the nature of God, but they have faith nonetheless. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

but they have faith nonetheless. 

 

Yes and that's because faith is the important thing.

Even Abraham, the progenitor of those who spawned three of the world's greatest religions went about putting the sword to many during his lifetime. But apparently that didn't matter. It was because of the faith that Abraham had that he was sought out by the Sage of Salem, Melchizedek. Who also apparently, had faith in him.

And this should say something ordinarily not thought about in my opinion when contemplating faith. That there are two involved. That it's a two-way street. First, God the Father has sent a part of himself to dwell within each and every one of us and in my opinion he does this not only because he loves us, but because he has faith in us too. Why else would he want to be so close? And in my opinion, the faith God has in us is the same faith all good fathers and mothers have in their children.

 

 

 

Edited by Will Due
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.