What About the Teachings of Jesus?
So I was talking the other day, about the CS Lewis question on Jesus’ position in life. But, the historical person of Jesus - who may or may not have existed, said various things and died - is, in my mind, kind of separate from the teachings that are attributed to him.
I don’t think we should dismiss the teachings attributed to Jesus just because of their provenance. I don’t see how that would be either rational or reasonable. I think we should ideally judge ideas on their own merits, not on our like or dislike of the people that said them.
I’m personally interested in the sayings and parables attributed to Jesus because they form a strong part of my cultural identity - I grew up listening to Bible stories - and also because I think some of them are illuminating. I don’t think that they are the be all and end all of humanity, of course.
What I think they definitely are, is odd. If you strip away any interpretation of what they mean, they aren’t very straightforward. I appreciate this in the way of a curiousity, and it can make them much more striking. But definitely still odd - like the Kingdom of God is like a someone who invites a someone off the street to a wedding feast and then throws him out for not being dressed smartly enough (Matthew 2:1-13).
What do you think about the sayings attributed to Jesus? Do you ignore them as religious claptrap? Do you think they have value but are vastly over-rated? Do you try to live by them (if that’s even possible)? Leave a comment and let me know.
Popularity: 32% [?]
Comments
4 Responses to “What About the Teachings of Jesus?”
Got something to say?
Your questions have several answers, depending upon which of Jesus’ teachings are being considered at any time.
Some of his teachings, like the Golden Rule, are useful wisdom sayings, but they are not unique to him. In these cases, it’s good to value the content of the saying without assigning the speaker an undeservedly superior status.
Some of his teachings, like the notion of eternal torment (weeping, and gnashing of teeth, etc.) are vicious. Of course, few Christians will agree with that assessment.
Overall, I think Jesus’ teachings are a mixed bag of the good, the bad and the ugly. I try to disregard the bad and ugly stuff. As for the good, I accept it as valuable because it accords well with the wisdom passed down by many others through the ages and with my own personal experiences and reflections. I don’t value them simply because Jesus said them.
Some of his teachings, such as his “I Am” statements are, at the very least, mistaken, and in a worse case, arrogant.
EDIT (sorry - a paragraph got misplaced in the previous comment):
Your questions have several answers, depending upon which of Jesus’ teachings are being considered at any time.
Some of his teachings, like the Golden Rule, are useful wisdom sayings, but they are not unique to him. In these cases, it’s good to value the content of the saying without assigning the speaker an undeservedly superior status.
Some of his teachings, like the notion of eternal torment (weeping, and gnashing of teeth, etc.) are vicious. Of course, few Christians will agree with that assessment.
Some of his teachings, such as his “I Am” statements are, at the very least, mistaken, and in a worse case, arrogant.
Overall, I think Jesus’ teachings are a mixed bag of the good, the bad and the ugly. I try to disregard the bad and ugly stuff. As for the good, I accept it as valuable because it accords well with the wisdom passed down by many others through the ages and with my own personal experiences and reflections. I don’t value them simply because Jesus said them.
A few factors influence my answer to this question: first of all, if you assume that Jesus’ teachings were preserved more or less with the meaning intact; second, whether there is a chance that the mystical aspects were inserted by his followers, and third, if there is any value to be found in a teaching even if you don’t find any worth in the teacher.
First, it seems to me like Jesus probably said and meant most of the things attributed to him. As the chaplain said, it’s not terribly original stuff.
Second, I also imagine many of the more mystical aspects were claimed by his followers. If you look at the Bible - which in my opinion is the composite work of hundreds of people with differing agendas which render some of the more obscure passages be almost incomprehensible - his “voice” seems strongest and most consistent with the more simplistic teachings. I like to think the mystical stuff attributed to Jesus is stuff written up and inserted by people trying to build up his divinity after his death - claims to be THE son of God rather than A son of God, for example.
Third, I think Kurt Vonnegut said something about the Golden Rule being the perfect philosophy. Whether or not you believe in the divinity of Jesus, I think there’s tremendous value in his teachings. “Only he who is without sin (fault) should cast the first stone?” “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you?” Etc. Sure, there are a few bad apples in there - “if your eye offends you, pluck it out” and so on, but regardless of that I think Jesus - like Buddha, like Moses, like Vonnegut, like Thomas Jefferson, etc. etc. had wonderful things to say, regardless of his divinity or lack thereof.
I don’t live by Christian teachings - and I agree with Nietzsche that the first and last Christian died on the cross - but I do try to keep the Golden Rule in mind. It’s a simplifying concept if there ever was one, and I have yet to find fault with it.
I’m also a fan of the golden rule. And I dismiss the things that I think are a load of nonsense. One of the interesting things about the Bible is how many phrases have filtered into the English language, and I think for that reason, although there are many other ways of saying the same thing, I’m quite fond of the teachings of Jesus.