[billmc]

"We are Christians who have found an approach to God through the life and teachings of Jesus."

Lately, I've been reading a number of books, including the gospels, on the life and teachings of Jesus. Being somewhat new to progressive Christianity (but very thankful to find this flavor of the faith), do you think that the life and teachings of Jesus refer to:

1. Those of the historical Jesus (as mainly found in the gospels)?
2. Those of the resurrected Jesus (as mainly found in Paul's epistles)?

Do you think there is a difference between Jesus' earthly teachings and the teachings of Christ that the apostle Paul claimed to have received by revelation?

If you do see a dichotomy there, which teachings seem to help you most in your approach to God?

(Please feel free to move this post, moderators, if it is not appropriate here.)

[flowperson]

W2K
I'm glad you brought this up. I believe that there is a distinct dichotomy, but this reality is reflected throughout the Old and New Testaments.

The dualistic realities of the world and the universe around it that science has formalized in recent times are downplayed, except for the use of metaphorical references, in the Judeo-Christian writings, because there is an active aim in the entire body of this knowledge to unify oppposing forces and viewpoints, if you will. This starts with the side by side creation stories of Genesis, and the New Testament writings are also consistent with this thematic structure. I do not believe that it is an accident that the cannon was composed and officially recommended in the form that we know it today. This is why Gnostic viewpoints and certain popular novels and films pose such a threat to the established orthodoxy these days.

In the case of the NT there are the accounts of the historical sayings and actions of Jesus based upon the testimony of those who knew and followed him two thousand years ago. Then there are the writings and revelations of a former tax collector who was so emotionally moved by what overtook him on the road to Damascus that he dedicated the rest of his life to writing and teaching about the life and works of the holy man that he only knew spiritually, and never in the flesh.

This all, I believe, is meant by G-d to teach us all that there are two ways of believing. It is easier to believe what we see and hear and then pass that on to others. Remember that Jesus continually remonstrates his audiences with the phrase, "Do you not have eyes to see and ears to hear".

But then the Pauline knowledge, being based not on these sorts of realities but rather on profound and personal spiritual experiences, serves to test those who must rely upon the spiritual experiences of others to build their faith upon, rather than upon supposedly fact-based experiences with the primary personalities. At least that's the way I see it all.

Thanks for bringing this up.

Flow....

This post has been edited by flowperson: 03 May 2006 - 06:28 PM

[October's Autumn]

wayfarer2k, on May 2 2006, 09:03 AM, said:

"We are Christians who have found an approach to God through the life and teachings of Jesus."

Lately, I've been reading a number of books, including the gospels, on the life and teachings of Jesus. Being somewhat new to progressive Christianity (but very thankful to find this flavor of the faith), do you think that the life and teachings of Jesus refer to:

1. Those of the historical Jesus (as mainly found in the gospels)?
2. Those of the resurrected Jesus (as mainly found in Paul's epistles)?

If I understand your question, the historical Jesus or what at least one can reasonably assume to be the historical Jesus.

Quote

Do you think there is a difference between Jesus' earthly teachings and the teachings of Christ that the apostle Paul claimed to have received by revelation?

Absolutely. They are as different as night and day. Paul is about Christ returning in glory "any day, now" and Jesus is about ushering in the Kingdom of God/Heaven in the here and now based on how we live our lives -- not in the sense of do we have sex before marriage but in the sense of do we feed the hungry and clothe the naked.

Quote

If you do see a dichotomy there, which teachings seem to help you most in your approach to God?

Since Christ didn't return in Paul's time as he expected I put some (although not necessarily all) of what he said in the same box as any other "the end is near" type person.

When I got to know the historical Jesus I found a connection for the first time. I never felt connected to Christ where as Jesus I could identify with as real, live human being. That was part of what I experienced on my trip to Israel. I've always connected to God directly, not through Christ. I never prayed to Christ or anything like that because it didn't mean anything to me. But I felt like I have a better view of God after I met both Jesus and many of the prophets in the Hebrew Bible who have similar messages. Even the Torah reveals a great deal about God's desire for us to have compassion on those who are vulnerable. I went from the common belief that the God of the OT is angry all the time and the God of the NT is loving and caring to realizing they are one in the same. Our misconceptions come more from proof texting, idolizing the bible, and Sunday School than from the scripture.

[mystictrek]

I do not believe there is much difference between the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus in the Pauline epistles. Both sources reflect the needs of a community of faith seeking to spread these teachings in new contexts. The genius of both Paul and the Gospel Writers is their ability to adapt and synthesize and integrate and create a new and powerful narrative for a new age. We need to do this again and again and again.

The teachings of Jesus are *always* the teachings of a faith community trying to discern the will of God in ever new and changing situations.

If the message of "God is Love" and "Love One Another" is not the main theme, then the Good News is not there and we need to look elsewhere. I find every book or letter in the New Testament is full of this main theme and that's good enough for me. Each book and letter also has a filter working which makes the message change for different contexts. Sometimes we simply need to disregard teachings which are culturally-conditioned and clearly do not stand the test of time.

[AslansTraveller]

mystictrek, on May 9 2006, 10:18 AM, said:

I do not believe there is much difference between the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus in the Pauline epistles. Both sources reflect the needs of a community of faith seeking to spread these teachings in new contexts. The genius of both Paul and the Gospel Writers is their ability to adapt and synthesize and integrate and create a new and powerful narrative for a new age. We need to do this again and again and again.

The teachings of Jesus are *always* the teachings of a faith community trying to discern the will of God in ever new and changing situations.

If the message of "God is Love" and "Love One Another" is not the main theme, then the Good News is not there and we need to look elsewhere. I find every book or letter in the New Testament is full of this main theme and that's good enough for me. Each book and letter also has a filter working which makes the message change for different contexts. Sometimes we simply need to disregard teachings which are culturally-conditioned and clearly do not stand the test of time.

This is so well put I had to quote it completely. That is what differs a living faith from dry and dead legalism. We don't follow Paul slavishly, but we do pay attention to what he did and how he dealt with the issues he faced. Modern New Testament studies show that Paul wasn't a systematic theologian, but was a pastor and church founder dealing with specific issues and problems as he came upon them. I especially appreciate your refusing to toss Paul in the dumpster (as so many do) simply because it can be difficult to blend the different parts of the NT into a nice, systematic whole. It's a living document which was formed over time in a living process, not a well planned out book by one author. Do I think it's inspired and the Word of God? Yep, but as the Old Testament shows in the messiness of God's dealings with the Hebrews, even inspiration can be an uneven process.

[rivanna]

To me there is no dichotomy between the teachings of Jesus and those of Paul, other than the obvious difference of context. It has always seemed very significant to me that Jesus chose not to write anything down, no hard and fast rules, but rather a spirit, a principle. He knew the dangers of rigidity and idolizing text. Likewise, it seems important that Paul hardly ever spells out Jesus' teachings. His message focuses almost entirely on Christ's death and resurrection.

[des]

To me there is a dichotomy. Although it is hard to tell which are and aren't the real statements
of Paul. Paul doesn't talk so much about actions as I think Jesus did. Even when he makes
that wonderful speech on love and what love is, by listenign to it one wouldn't know what that
means, what actions does one do for it and so forth. They are beautiful words (same with
"there is no Jew nor Greek").

OTOH, many of Jesus' words were quite a bit more concrete.

Another thing is that Paul emphasizes the resurrected Christ vs the live Jesus (only natural perhaps, given
the date). But the Gospels (except for John) are very mixed and inconsistent about the resurrection.
Jesus is a very much alive man who dies a violent death on the cross.


There is an interesting link here:

http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/
Yes, Rayuson, very interesting site. Thanks. Of course you kept me up the other night reading this stuff.
:-)

--des

This post has been edited by des: 08 October 2006 - 01:08 AM

[rivanna]

It's true, there are few statements on what specific actions to take, in Paul or in the gospels--I think that's intentional. As Borg says, "Life with God is not about believing certain teachings about God. It is about a covenant...faithfulness, fidelity to the relationship." And Jesus redefined that relationship, addressing God as Abba, as the loving father of the prodigal son. "It is your father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom."

Which teachings of Jesus and Paul are most relevant to PC? probably the idea of inclusiveness and equality, as you pointed out, the phrase from Galatians. Also, the idea that Jesus is Lord, not Caesar.

Another point from Paul is being reconciled or justified by grace-- not by law or performance. Whoever is in Christ is a new creation. As Tillich says, "No particular religion matters, but a New Being has appeared, and we are all asked to participate in it." It's about receiving before we can truly give, IMHO.

From Jesus, some of the teachings that help me most:

this is the work of God, that you believe in whom he has sent
seek the kingdom first
be not anxious
peace I give you, not such as the world gives
come unto me, and I will give you rest
ask, and it shall be given; knock, and the door shall open
abide in me and I in you

If we could stay in this state of mind, we could trust in the validity of all our actions that flowed from it. At least that's how it seems to me.

[AslansTraveller]

Quote

As Borg says, "Life with God is not about believing certain teachings about God. It is about a covenant...faithfulness, fidelity to the relationship."

Quote

"No particular religion matters, but a New Being has appeared, and we are all asked to participate in it." It's about receiving before we can truly give, IMHO.

Excellent! And for me that is a key point. It isn't just referring to Jesus for a set of proposed ethics to which to give intellectual assent, but to be involved, related and relating to a living Person, Someone who guides, loves and comforts here and now. Turning to Jesus just for a set of suggestions about how to behave is, in my experience, pointless. The world is full of great ethics, great and wise sages and their ideas and guidance. Big deal. But as a Christian, I believe that Christ will work with us, directly and lovingly through the Holy Spirit to give us what we need to follow Him. It isn't just a matter of "being a nice guy". There of plenty of nice guys, Christian and not Christian. Christ offers a reality and relationship which is far more than that.

[canajan, eh?]

AslansTraveller, on Oct 12 2006, 09:31 AM, said:

Excellent! And for me that is a key point. It isn't just referring to Jesus for a set of proposed ethics to which to give intellectual assent, but to be involved, related and relating to a living Person, Someone who guides, loves and comforts here and now. Turning to Jesus just for a set of suggestions about how to behave is, in my experience, pointless. The world is full of great ethics, great and wise sages and their ideas and guidance. Big deal. But as a Christian, I believe that Christ will work with us, directly and lovingly through the Holy Spirit to give us what we need to follow Him. It isn't just a matter of "being a nice guy". There of plenty of nice guys, Christian and not Christian. Christ offers a reality and relationship which is far more than that.

Jesus here, Aslan. I'm a bit confused, and wonder if you'd allow me to paraphrase your remarks. Do I understand correctly that you believe great ethics are no big deal to Christians or to me personally? Am I really to believe it isn't just a matter of "being of nice guy"? If it isn't a matter of being a nice person, what is it? What else matters? How are you or others to make this world a better place -- the Garden of Eden you long for -- if you don't start with yourself, and become the nicest guy you can possibly be? What relationship could I offer you that would be more important than helping you be a nice guy? What do you think my commandment to love your neighbour as yourself means if not that?

Please let me know if I have misunderstood your sentiments.

Best.

Love Jesus
October 12, 2006

[Mystical Seeker]

canajan, eh?, on Oct 12 2006, 11:02 AM, said:

Jesus here, Aslan. I'm a bit confused, and wonder if you'd allow me to paraphrase your remarks. Do I understand correctly that you believe great ethics are no big deal to Christians or to me personally? Am I really to believe it isn't just a matter of "being of nice guy"? If it isn't a matter of being a nice person, what is it? What else matters? How are you or others to make this world a better place -- the Garden of Eden you long for -- if you don't start with yourself, and become the nicest guy you can possibly be? What relationship could I offer you that would be more important than helping you be a nice guy? What do you think my commandment to love your neighbour as yourself means if not that?

Please let me know if I have misunderstood your sentiments.

Best.

Love Jesus
October 12, 2006

We could do worse than have a world full of people following Jesus's ethics.

That being said, my own belief is that Jesus's teachings were not just ethical, but also social, political, and theological, and I think that all of those different aspects of his teachings were wrapped up together in the Kingdom of God. To be a follower of Jesus means, in my view, to take seriously all of those teachings. I believe that Jesus preached and lived the inbreaking Kingdom of God by challenging the earthly Kingdom of Rome. It isn't just about being nice. It is about living out God's kingdom on earth. It is about bringing about social justice, it is about challenging religious orthodoxy when it oppresses us, and it is about understanding that loving God means loving one's neighbor and creating a peaceful, just world.

My two cents worth, anyway.

[canajan, eh?]

Mystical Seeker, on Oct 12 2006, 03:56 PM, said:

It isn't just about being nice. It is about living out God's kingdom on earth.

Agreed. But who says they're not the same thing? I can't disagree with anything you've said -- thank you for posting your eloquent thoughts. But I ask you to go deeper and push hard against the belief systems that all human beings are dealing with. In what way would your becoming as nice a person as possible be the same thing as living out God's kingdom on earth? Where is the point of convergence between being a nice person and being an advocate of social justice? There is one, and the angels call it the Christ Zone.

Seek that place, and you will know, as I did, the wonder of your heart and mind opening with radiant love to all that the Mother and Father are. Best wishes on your journey.

Amen to our blessed Mother and Father.
Love Jesus
October 12, 2006

[Mystical Seeker]

canajan, eh?, on Oct 12 2006, 03:37 PM, said:

In what way would your becoming as nice a person as possible be the same thing as living out God's kingdom on earth? Where is the point of convergence between being a nice person and being an advocate of social justice?

How does being nice relate to how we resist the powers that oppress us? What would being nice entail? The dominant forces in the Empire, those who deny social justice, and those who oppress, might not consider it very "nice" when we resist them, even nonviolently, even peacefully. Is nonviolence the same as being nice?

[des]

But Jesus never says to be nice, and he is quite specific about behaviors. The whole litany about
the doing onto the least of these and so on. I don't see any of that kind of language in Paul. Paul is general
in exactly the ways Jesus in not. He is specific in ways that Jesus is not as well (towards treatment of women, slaves towards masters, actions of women in the church, etc.).

--des

[canajan, eh?]

Once upon a time, there was a man who had a beautiful garden. Neighbours came from miles around to see the lilies he grew. No one had seen lilies like these. When they asked him how he grew such healthy, thriving plants, he replied, "I love my plants as myself."

Each morning, the man got up, and after attending to his bathing and breakfast and morning lessons, he went out to the field where his lilies grew. He spent hours in the field. He wheelbarrowed fresh dirt. He brought buckets of water to quench the lilies’ thirst. He trowelled the earth about their feet. He pulled marauding beetles from the underside of their leaves. He sang and he smiled from the time he arrived in the field till the time he left. The lilies grew and blossomed and filled the air with heavenly perfume.

One day, his neighbours returned. They were angry.

“You lied to us. You told us your garden is beautiful because you love your plants as yourself. We tried that, and our young plants died. You did not tell us the secret.”

The gardener said to his neighbours, “I’m sad that your lilies died. Tell me, what is it you did to show the lilies your love?”

“We held hands, and we prayed together that the lilies would feel our love for them.”

“Ah,” said the gardener. “And who among you wheelbarrowed the fresh dirt?”

“No one,” they replied. “You spoke only of love, not wheelbarrows.”

“Ah,” said the gardener. “And who among you fetched the heavy buckets of water?”

The neighbours looked at each other, then at the gardener. “No one. The Lord will provide the rain if the Lord deems it appropriate.”

The gardener removed his gloves, and brushed the dirt from the knees of his work pants. “Who among you bathed this morning?” he asked.

“All of us.”

“And who breakfasted?”

“All of us, naturally. We know how to look after our families properly.”

“Because you love your families?” he asked. “Or because the Lord rained buns and cheeses and bathwater into your houses? It is not sufficient to talk of love, but to take no action. Each of you loves yourself, and because of this you ensure you have bread and water and all other things you need. To love another as you love yourself, you must do more than pray. You must work.”

The neighbours, chastened, went home. After a few more weeks, though, they returned to the gardener’s field, and this time they furiously mobbed the plants and ripped the bulbs out one by one.

“How can you justify this unjust act?” cried the gardener in dismay.

“You told us that if we worked and sweated in the field, we would have beautiful lilies. But we have only ragged, limp stems that refuse to flower. We’re tired of working, and we’re tired of seeing the lilies of your field. You lied to us again.”

“Tell me then,” the gardener said through his tears, “when you worked in the fields, did you give thanks to God that you could be of service? Did you give thanks for all the tools God provided so you could be of service? Did you sing and smile?”

“You spoke only of wheelbarrows and buckets, not singing and smiling.”

“And because you do not know how to love, you punish me? I have never lied to you. From the beginning, I told you what to do. I told you to love the plants as yourself. As you feed yourself, so must you feed the plants. As you quench your thirst, so must you quench theirs. As you seek companionship and laughter and music and kind words, so must you offer them in equal measure. It is clear why your plants failed to thrive. There is no love in your hearts. You are like the stones of the field, and I cannot help you.”

“Teach us then how to have love in our hearts.”

“Very well. Any among you who steps forward now and apologizes to me for this violent act, and who offers repair, and who asks to become a humble apprentice, this person’s word I will trust.”

No one stepped forward.

The gardener smiled sadly and said, “The seasons of heaven answer to no man. Blessed be those who listen.”


Love Jesus
October 13, 2006

This post has been edited by canajan, eh?: 13 October 2006 - 08:16 AM

[canajan, eh?]

Hey, don't look at me. I'm just the channeller, and this morning I woke up with a message from Jesus that he wanted to channel a parable. Some things just don't change, not even after 2,000 years.

Mystical Seeker, you ask if nonviolence is the same as being nice. I spent a long time on this question. At first I thought the two must be synonymous. But then Jesus started asking me questions like, "What if a serial pedophile showed up at your door during a thunderstorm that had knocked out power and phone service, and you were home alone with your young child? Would you meekly let him in? Or would you slam the door in his face and do everything in your power to protect your child within the confines of the law?" (Naturally, it wouldn't be helpful to your child if you shot the pedophile in the head and then found yourself in prison on murder charges.)

Being nice entails being empathetic, and compassionate, and forgiving, and responsible, and well organized, and courteous, and in command of your own thoughts, feelings, and actions. The extraordinary thing that Jesus discovered about being nice was that the nicer he got, the stronger his links to God became. The nicer he got, the more courageous he became. The nicer he got, the more aware he became of the political and social realities around him. The nicer he got, the tougher he became. He got nice, and because he got nice, the angels trusted him more and more. They gave him insights and answers his human mind probably wouldn't have thought of. You could almost say he got smarter, though really he simply became a better listener. (Naturally, it was God he was listening to.)

I used to feel terribly guilty if an oppressive individual told me I wasn't being nice. Eventually, with a ton of help from Jesus, I realized there are two different groups on the planet -- the human beings who want to be nice, and the human beings who don't. The human beings who don't are the ones who make life awful for the rest of us. They're not acting like angels-in-human-form. They're acting like jerks. I no longer care if such individuals think I'm not being nice. It's their problem. They can do better as human beings -- a lot better. I believe in their true potential, I believe in the beauty and integrity of their souls. But by golly, I refuse to put up with their unangelic bullying tactics.

That's how I see it, anyway.

Love Jen

[Sunday School Lady]

Quote

Our misconceptions come more from proof texting, idolizing the bible, and Sunday School than from the scripture.

So how do we keep Sunday School from teaching "proof texting" and "idolizing the bible"? We could start out teaching our toddlers and preschoolers about the loving deity Jesus points to, and teach our elementary children that the bible is a book of stories about the people who worshipped a god named "YHWH", and teach our youth about historical and source criticism. Then we could teach and model the type of life that we believe the teachings of Jesus (and I mean the historical Jesus who taught the god of Love) calls us to.

While carefully choosing or writing curriculum resources is probably key, there is also a need to educate our teachers how to teach and model the Way Jesus taught and lived.

[des]

Sunday School lady, this is way way way off the topic, but your net name reminds me of the Saturday Night Live skits starring the "Church Lady" (who was Dana Carvey, I think). The Church Lady had hysterical skits.
See: http://www.danacarvey.net/snl.html
for a cute little one (I didn't say) about OJ and Madonna.

And now back to our regular scheduled broadcasts. Sorry sorry.


--des

[rivanna]

Paul often gets associated with the small instructions on church behavior, but those were not his main concerns, and some were later additions by other writers.

In the Acts, we hear some of Paul's early teaching. The Jews already had the law; he wasn't trying to change that. He says Jesus was the long awaited Messiah, even though he was a suffering servant rather than a national military hero. That he rose from the dead, that we would all be resurrected. Again and again, Paul bore witness to the vision he had of Christ, the blinding light, the voice, the journey to Damascus, the scales falling from his eyes, the glimpse of heaven he had. He taught repentance toward God in the sense of returning our hearts, and faith toward Jesus who sets us free from whatever entombs us.
With the Greeks and Romans, Paul persuaded them there was no sense in worshipping false idols, that God didn't live in shrines and didn't need sacrifices.

The Way the apostles spread seems to expect individuals to respond according to their different needs and gifts, members of the body. It reminds me of the language used by a later Paul--Tillich.

"Nothing is demanded of you, not being religious, not being wise, not being moral, not being Christian. What is demanded is only your being open and willing to accept what is given to you, the New Being of love and justice and truth as it is manifest in Him...Most people want to be told what to think. And they accept Jesus as the infallible teacher and giver of a new law. But even the words of Jesus, if taken as a law, are not the truth which makes us free. How do we reach this truth? By doing it ....Doing the truth means living out of the reality which is He who is the truth, making His being the being of ourselves and of our world."

[Kay]

The Shaking of the Foundations by Paul Tillich