What Did Jesus Actually Do?

[sojourner]

You want more, the 4 gospels do not agree with each other in several key points. You really would think they would get their stories straight before going into print

They are four different stories with four different theological thrusts and four different intended audiences. Why should they agree with one another?

 

[Goodman John]

Yeah. It matters. The whole of Christian theology revolves around the reconciliation of the human with the Divine.

If I'm told that doing A, B, and C will get me into Heaven- and I faithfully do A, B, and C- does it matter if it was Akhmed the Plumber who told me or God himself who told me? Isn't the purpose of doing A, B, and C served either way?

 

[ChristineM]

You're the one who's getting the definition wrong.

I provided the dictionary definition are you saying the OED is wrong and you are right? I would love to see the explanation for this.

 

[sojourner]

If I'm told that doing A, B, and C will get me into Heaven- and I faithfully do A, B, and C- does it matter if it was Akhmed the Plumber who told me or God himself who told me? Isn't the purpose of doing A, B, and C served either way?

It's not about checking off spiritual boxes. It's about building right relationship. That's why God meets us face-to-face in the Person of Jesus.

 

[sojourner]

I provided the dictionary definition are you saying the OED is wrong and you are right? I would love to see the explanation for this.

You merely spouted "fictional works." I answered that the texts are Gospels, not Fiction.

 

[ChristineM]

They are four different stories with four different theological thrusts and four different intended audiences. Why should they agree with one another?

Sure different occurrences will be different but the same occurrence should be the same and not contradictory.

 

[ChristineM]

You're the one who's getting the definition wrong.

The dictionary definition is not wrong, sorry if that disturbs you

 

[ChristineM]

You merely spouted "fictional works." I answered that the texts are Gospels, not Fiction.

You gave evidence they are not fiction?

I have evidence of the dictionary definition

 

[Goodman John]

It's not about checking off spiritual boxes. It's about building right relationship. That's why God meets us face-to-face in the Person of Jesus.

But then that means you have to believe in God/Jesus before you really know what he/she/it is all about.

When was the last time you signed a contract without knowing what was in it? When was the last time you took your car in to have the tires changed without knowing what tires they were going to put on or how much they were going to charge you or when your car would be ready?

When was the last time you voted for a Presidential candidate whom you knew nothing about other than his resume' he printed out? He's not showed up for any debates, hasn't shown his face in decades, but he's asking you for your vote. You'd be crazy to vote for such a person- but that's exactly what you're saying you have to do- not do A, B, and C, but follow someone you know virtually nothing about before you can learn what he stands for.

If you take the time to ask these basic questions about car tires or a political candidate, shouldn't you be asking an awful lot more questions before you sign on to anything when it's your SOUL that's in the balance?

Ahhh, some will say, but we have 'inspired writings' from figures through history to tell us what God and Jesus are all about. Of course they're going to tell us about the product in glowing terms with absolutely no down side to your signing on sight unseen. That's exactly what any used car salesman wants you to do, too.

 

[sojourner]

Sure different occurrences will be different but the same occurrence should be the same and not contradictory.

One would think so! That's certainly the prevailing logic. But I think what many don't realize is that these are not "the same occurrence." These are four writers, writing at very different times, in very different places and in very different circumstances. They each had a unique theological point to make. They're all "about Jesus," but it's the what about Jesus that matters. That's why they differ in what seem to be basic detail. And remember, they're not writing histories -- at least not in the way we understand history, in the way of fact-reporting. For them, facts were not so important as the gist of the story they were telling. And this is why I'm adamant about the differences between Fiction and Gospel: these are not fiction, in that they're not written for enjoyment. These are stories about the real world, that convey meanings about the cultures in which they're found. If you look beyond just "the facts," you'll find that the Gospels DO speak to the meaning people were making about their lives. That's a huge difference between Fiction and Gospel.

 

[1213]

From a historical standpoint, what, in his own lifetime, did Jesus of Nazareth achieve? I am having trouble figuring this out, because I can see objectively that Muhammad had a huge impact upon not only his own society but others, all within his lifetime. ....

I don’t really see how you can say Muhammad had impact but not Jesus. Firstly, Quran itself says Jesus is the prophet of God and that people should believe him.

…The Messiah, Jesus, …was but a messenger of Allah …. So believe in Allah and His messengers…
Surat An-Nisā' 4:171
Surah An-Nisa [4:171]

But it seems Muhammad has not much influence, if people don’t believe that.

 

[ChristineM]

One would think so! That's certainly the prevailing logic. But I think what many don't realize is that these are not "the same occurrence." These are four writers, writing at very different times, in very different places and in very different circumstances. They each had a unique theological point to make. They're all "about Jesus," but it's the what about Jesus that matters. That's why they differ in what seem to be basic detail. And remember, they're not writing histories -- at least not in the way we understand history, in the way of fact-reporting. For them, facts were not so important as the gist of the story they were telling. And this is why I'm adamant about the differences between Fiction and Gospel: these are not fiction, in that they're not written for enjoyment. These are stories about the real world, that convey meanings about the cultures in which they're found. If you look beyond just "the facts," you'll find that the Gospels DO speak to the meaning people were making about their lives. That's a huge difference between Fiction and Gospel.

So josephs genealogy was at 2 different times? Ok

Jesus was born at 2 different times

Was jesus baptised or not?

And when was the last supper?


Sorry, not the same occurrence makes not the slightest sense as an excuse

 

[sojourner]

You gave evidence they are not fiction?

I have evidence of the dictionary definition

Here's the difference.

"The author's purpose [in writing Gospel] is thus explicitly theological: to inspire live-giving faith in his readers.
Because the Evangelists [Gospel writers] were committed believers in Jesus' divine Sonship and saw their writing task as more theological than historical, it is particularly difficult for scholars analyzing the Gospels to separate what may be authentic memories of Jesus' words and actions from later theological interpretation (and embellishment) of them."

"Like all literary narratives, the Gospel stories have the basic elements of setting, character, dialogue, plot, style, and rhetorical techniques, such as the use of irony. As readers become familiar with and Evangelist's distinctive views, they will eventually be able to explain why Matthew's rendition of the wedding feast parable, for example, differs from that of Luke of Thomas. In each case, the author edits the parable to fit his religious perspective."

(Stephen Harris, The New Testament: A Student's Introduction, 4th Edition; McGraw-Hill, 2002; pp 99, 111)

Here's a fair article discussing the Gospel as a genre: What is a “Gospel” Anyway? A Few Thoughts on Gospel Genre and Why it Matters

 

[sojourner]

But then that means you have to believe in God/Jesus before you really know what he/she/it is all about.

When was the last time you signed a contract without knowing what was in it? When was the last time you took your car in to have the tires changed without knowing what tires they were going to put on or how much they were going to charge you or when your car would be ready?

When was the last time you voted for a Presidential candidate whom you knew nothing about other than his resume' he printed out? He's not showed up for any debates, hasn't shown his face in decades, but he's asking you for your vote. You'd be crazy to vote for such a person- but that's exactly what you're saying you have to do- not do A, B, and C, but follow someone you know virtually nothing about before you can learn what he stands for.

If you take the time to ask these basic questions about car tires or a political candidate, shouldn't you be asking an awful lot more questions before you sign on to anything when it's your SOUL that's in the balance?

Ahhh, some will say, but we have 'inspired writings' from figures through history to tell us what God and Jesus are all about. Of course they're going to tell us about the product in glowing terms with absolutely no down side to your signing on sight unseen. That's exactly what any used car salesman wants you to do, too.

Again: this is about building relationship. This is all about discovering the Jesus story, developing that intuitive sense of understanding your life experiences in theological terms. This isn't something you just "do." It's a life-journey.

And I disagree: there are plenty of people who don't "believe" in Jesus who follow the way of relationship-building.

 

[ChristineM]

Here's the difference.

"The author's purpose [in writing Gospel] is thus explicitly theological: to inspire live-giving faith in his readers.
Because the Evangelists [Gospel writers] were committed believers in Jesus' divine Sonship and saw their writing task as more theological than historical, it is particularly difficult for scholars analyzing the Gospels to separate what may be authentic memories of Jesus' words and actions from later theological interpretation (and embellishment) of them."

"Like all literary narratives, the Gospel stories have the basic elements of setting, character, dialogue, plot, style, and rhetorical techniques, such as the use of irony. As readers become familiar with and Evangelist's distinctive views, they will eventually be able to explain why Matthew's rendition of the wedding feast parable, for example, differs from that of Luke of Thomas. In each case, the author edits the parable to fit his religious perspective."

(Stephen Harris, The New Testament: A Student's Introduction, 4th Edition; McGraw-Hill, 2002; pp 99, 111)

Here's a fair article discussing the Gospel as a genre: What is a “Gospel” Anyway? A Few Thoughts on Gospel Genre and Why it Matters

So they are different because they are different authors. Fair enough,i never said the bible wasn't a good book, i said it was fictional with no evidence to validate the words and actions of the major players.

 

[sojourner]

So josephs genealogy was at 2 different times? Ok

Jesus was born at 2 different times

Was jesus baptised or not?

And when was the last supper?


Sorry, not the same occurrence makes not the slightest sense as an excuse

Why does any of that matter, though? It doesn't! The story details are all just vehicles for the theological point that's being made; they're not the point of the stories, themselves.

 

[sojourner]

So they are different because they are different authors. Fair enough,i never said the bible wasn't a good book, i said it was fictional with no evidence to validate the words and actions of the major players.

Well, yes. Different authors, different cultures, different time periods. Some of the details are absolutely fictional; some are not. But again, this is theology, not science or history.

That's why the Gospels are a separate genre.

 

[ChristineM]

Why does any of that matter, though? It doesn't! The story details are all just vehicles for the theological point that's being made; they're not the point of the stories, themselves.

Of course it matters if the gospels coincided they would be more believable than they are simply because they contradict each other.

 

[ChristineM]

Well, yes. Different authors, different cultures, different time periods. Some of the details are absolutely fictional; some are not. But again, this is theology, not science or history.

That's why the Gospels are a separate genre.

As i said, fictional. Thanks

 

[Rival]

I don’t really see how you can say Muhammad had impact but not Jesus. Firstly, Quran itself says Jesus is the prophet of God and that people should believe him.

…The Messiah, Jesus, …was but a messenger of Allah …. So believe in Allah and His messengers…
Surat An-Nisā' 4:171
Surah An-Nisa [4:171]

But it seems Muhammad has not much influence, if people don’t believe that.

Muhammad united warring Arabian tribes into a single confederacy within a lifetime. Even if he hadn't brought a new religion, what he did would still have changed the world map.

Jesus was a wandering nobody. What did he do that non-religious people should take note?