Was Jesus a pacifist or a pragmatist?

[ajay0]

No. There was no "editing" of the Gospels to remove political messages.
Firstly, no evidence.

How can you state that there is no evidence. You can clearly see that there were variant strains of christianity at those times.

The first council of Nicea came strongly against the teachings of Christian theologican Arius. The first council of Constantinople came down strongly against Apollinaris.

All those christian sects which varied with the official one put up by the romans and refused to conform to it, were systematically wiped out.

Origen, who is considered the first great theologian in christianity, was declared a heretic by Emperor Justinian for his contradictory views and his writings were burnt . Origen was also condemned by the second council of constantinople and by St. Jerome for his teachings on reincarnation.

 

[PruePhillip]

How can you state that there is no evidence. You can clearly see that there were variant strains of christianity at those times.

The first council of Nicea came strongly against the teachings of Christian theologican Arius. The first council of Constantinople came down strongly against Apollinaris.

All those christian sects which varied with the official one put up by the romans and refused to conform to it, were systematically wiped out.

Origen, who is considered the first great theologian in christianity, was declared a heretic by Emperor Justinian for his contradictory views and his writings were burnt . Origen was also condemned by the second council of constantinople and by St. Jerome for his teachings on reincarnation.

Okay... I am with you. Here you are referring to strands of Catholic doctrine.
I believe there is only one Catholic mentioned in the New Testament, the heretic
Diotrophes in John's epistle. This might have been the first Catholic Bishop
recorded in the Roman Catholic Church's history.

 

[metis]

Okay... I am with you. Here you are referring to strands of Catholic doctrine.
I believe there is only one Catholic mentioned in the New Testament, the heretic
Diotrophes in John's epistle. This might have been the first Catholic Bishop
recorded in the Roman Catholic Church's history.

The bishops were and are an extension of the apostolic authority through appointments, and one can see that process in play in Acts.

The "mark" of the early Church was whether your appointees could be traced back to the apostolic appointees, thus to the apostles themselves. Catholics, Orthodox (including Copts), Anglicans, Moravians, and some Lutheran synods in Scandinavian countries recognize and accept this.

 

[Road Warrior]

We have no real idea of when the Gospels were written. It's clear these writers wrote before the fall of
Jerusalem. No matter - the message wouldn't have changed. Jesus had no interest in Jewish or Roman
politics - even his enemies conceded that.

Actually we do.

The Story Of The Storytellers - An Introduction To The Gospels | From Jesus To Christ | FRONTLINE | PBS

When were the gospels written and by whom? | CARM.org

When Were the Four Gospels Written?

As Biblical scholars and historians note, the Catholic church didn't just suddenly pop into existence. The beliefs about Jesus varied greatly, mostly divided into the camps of whether or not he was divine. The Trinity concept didn't solidify for over 300 years after Jesus was crucified. When a story is written several decades after the event, especially in those days, there is a lot of room for embellishment much like a fisherman's tale (<-- see what I did there? Jesus, fisherman?)

 

[sooda]

Actually we do.

The Story Of The Storytellers - An Introduction To The Gospels | From Jesus To Christ | FRONTLINE | PBS

When were the gospels written and by whom? | CARM.org

When Were the Four Gospels Written?

As Biblical scholars and historians note, the Catholic church didn't just suddenly pop into existence. The beliefs about Jesus varied greatly, mostly divided into the camps of whether or not he was divine. The Trinity concept didn't solidify for over 300 years after Jesus was crucified. When a story is written several decades after the event, especially in those days, there is a lot of room for embellishment much like a fisherman's tale (<-- see what I did there? Jesus, fisherman?)

This is very good. I'll enjoy watching it again.

The Story Of The Storytellers - An Introduction To The Gospels | From Jesus To Christ | FRONTLINE | PBS

 

[Muffled]

Jesus appears somewhat different from the founders of other Abrahamic Faiths such as Moses or Muhammad. During His brief 3 1/2 year ministry, Jesus was never engaged in armed conflict unlike Muhammad who defended His people against the assault of the Quraysh tribe. Unlike Moses who killed a man, He never physically harmed anybody.

Jesus never advocated initiating armed conflict against the Romans. This could be due to Him being a pragmatist, in that He recognised it was unwise for the Jewish people to be provoking an enemy who would most likely defeat His people. Alternatively, He may not have believed in armed conflict under any circumstances and so was a pacifist. There may of course be other narratives.

So was Jesus a pacifist or pragmatist? How come?

I believe He was not a pacifist because His overturning the tables in the temple was aggressive.

I believe He was not pragmatic because He went to the cross.

I believe He followed His own agenda.

 

[sooda]

I believe He was not a pacifist because His overturning the tables in the temple was aggressive.

I believe He was not pragmatic because He went to the cross.

I believe He followed His own agenda.

He scourged the livestock and overturned the tables. Very odd story.

 

[Muffled]

Non-violence is my often the best and most pragmatic choice IMHO. That appears to be exactly what Jesus taught (Matthew 5:38-40).

I believe that is what he taught but that is not what he is. He as God in the flesh reserves some actions for Himself.

 

[Muffled]

The issue of the Divinity of Christ is a separate but related issue (John 1:1-3). While it could be argued Jesus taught non-violence, it is clear that the God of Abraham as recorded in the Hebrew Bible commanded the invasion and colonisation of the land of Canaan, using considerable force and violence towards the lands inhabitants. So while some would argue on the basis of selected verses that Jesus was a pacifist, the God He represented certainly wasn't.

And yet I believe Jesus will return and wipe out a whole army with a fiery sword. There is no difference between Jesus and God because God acts the same in the body or out of it.

 

[sooda]

And yet I believe Jesus will return and wipe out a whole army with a fiery sword. There is no difference between Jesus and God because God acts the same in the body or out of it.

That's not Biblical .. that's Scofield.

The sword in Jesus' mouth is the truth NOT a weapon.

Revelation 19:15