Jesus Seminar

[RubySera_Martin]

If I might say so, I think I agree with you, Q, that Jesus would at least try to win the hearts of those who came to him - if indeed, there was an ounce of sincerity within them, in their motivation for coming to him. What was it about faith the size of a mustard seed?

However, I also think RubySera's point cannot be overlooked. The vast majority of those alive in Jesus' time could not, would not, and DID NOT grasp His message, or even try.

It looks like we are talking about two different things. I thought the question was whether or not everyone who heard Jesus accepted his message. I think we have ample evidence that they didn't. However, I like to think he tried to win all those who were sincere. Yet there are a few stories about Jesus in the New Testament that really bother me. The woman who wanted him to heal her daughter (Matt. 15, Mark 7) and the Greeks who came to the Temple to talk with Jesus (John 12:20. He refused to respond when the woman asked for help and made her follow him all day. When he and the disciples got tired of her bugging he tried sending her away by calling her a dog. Regarding the Greeks who came to the Temple to talk with Jesus, it seems he never went to talk with them; instead he started philosophizing about his death and mission in the world. We can make excuses for him but I think we need to also look at the situation realistically. The reality is that he made some people work awfully hard to get his attention.

 

[taijasi]

The reality is that he made some people work awfully hard to get his attention.

I expect 98% of folks here will run with this a different way ... so I'll slip in my 2 cents before the bag of gold falls from heaven.

Perhaps the key word is karma. What was the karma involved - of the people that wanted the healing, of those for whom they wanted it, as well of those who wanted easy answers? Imo, Jesus did everything for a reason, and to serve a Purpose. Nothing was a mistake per se, and as soon as we slip into the error of the scholars in attempting to account for Jesus actions & behavior as somehow keeping in line with the prevailing tradition or sentiment ... we go astray. Yes, Jesus went out of his way to fulfil certain prophecies, but clearly he knew what he was doing.

Riding an ass through the whichever gate it was in Jerusalem, for example (on - Palm Sunday? man I got no clue, somebody here can correct me) ... that was a piece of tremendous symbolism and said everything to those with the eyes & ears to see & hear. But it boils down to the fulfilling of prophecy. Notice the response given by Jesus to the disciples when they ask if it was the man's karma from his own previous incarnations (DUH!!! pretty obvious that's what they meant!) or that of his parents, that he was born blind. In how he answers them, I think you can get a glimpse of what I mean.

And - Jesus COULD NOT heal the sick when he visited his home town ... again, the scholars can fill in the details here - but this boils down to the utter lack of faith. I mean, this is just ol' brother joe over here, ted or fred, you think he's Who!?! ROFL HA HA HA ... what nonsense. The people had no faith in such powers or potential, and that totally short-circuits Jesus' ability ... most likely overlapping with - as I say - `karma.' Jesus did not heal and raise dead people indescriminantly, or universally ... and for a REASON!

Also, if you chase it down, you will see where the Apostle Peter was healing & ministering, and reference is made to the shadow of someone "unclean" passing over him (deeply telling and obviously symbolic language). Or maybe it was Jesus and Peter was with him, I forget. But basically, the "power passed out of him" - I mean WHOA!!! This is right there, in plain language for us to see ... and it returns to the idea that the laws operative here, the very mystery of the "miracles" being performed - is NOT something we're not meant to understand! Rather, the hints are provided clearly, even after all the wrangling that's gone on. I dunno, maybe they goofed and left these references in there. Of course, a scriptural passage can be found for EVERYTHING I've mentioned. But those who know their Bible probably already know EACH of the references I've made.

I am constantly amazed at the notion many people hold that Jesus was somehow the very Son of God with all the miraculous powers so often attributed (none of which I dispute) ... yet they then make him into the most ignorant and superstitious of his own people, the Jews, and cannot accept the least of his behavior that might go against what any other pious Jew or Rabbi would have done at the time (in the times). We need to think about the degree to which Christ did not want to stir up unnecessary trouble, give him a little more credit for understanding the political and religious climate of the day (and being AMAZINGLY sensitive to the tensions present in EVERY given situation, as well as at large), and for action in EVERY instance according to Divine Purpose and Reason.

But finally, Ruby, if I studied the passages you mention, most likely I'd be as mystified as you are, and as confused as can be about how Jesus' behavior squares with what I've just said. And that's why for me, it's back to the karma of those involved, plus ANY NUMBER of other factors of which we're not aware. And while so many will say that "if it's not between these here pages, it ain't worth lookin' at" ... I just shake my head and say, it's a shame. Perhaps those of more theological bent will have an answer; I am certainly curious.

Love and Light,

taijasi

 

[Dondi]

It looks like we are talking about two different things. I thought the question was whether or not everyone who heard Jesus accepted his message. I think we have ample evidence that they didn't. However, I like to think he tried to win all those who were sincere. Yet there are a few stories about Jesus in the New Testament that really bother me. The woman who wanted him to heal her daughter (Matt. 15, Mark 7) and the Greeks who came to the Temple to talk with Jesus (John 12:20. He refused to respond when the woman asked for help and made her follow him all day. When he and the disciples got tired of her bugging he tried sending her away by calling her a dog. Regarding the Greeks who came to the Temple to talk with Jesus, it seems he never went to talk with them; instead he started philosophizing about his death and mission in the world. We can make excuses for him but I think we need to also look at the situation realistically. The reality is that he made some people work awfully hard to get his attention.

I think the text answers this question:

"And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.

But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour." - Matthew 15:22-28


In the Jewish mindset, Israel is God's Chosen people. Jesus came to save His people from their sins (Matthew 1:21). Any outsiders such as Greeks or Gentiles were culturally considered dogs, for the Jewish nation is a bloodline back to Abraham. There were provisions for Gentiles to join the Jewish nation, but there were certain places and things they were forbidden to do, according to OT law.

Even Paul acknowledged this precedency in his letter to the Romans:

"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." - Romans 1:18

In fact, Paul in Romans 11 explains how the Greeks are engrafted in the olive tree as wild branches and that Israel is the natural branches.

As far as the Greeks who sought Jesus in John 12, I see nowhere that Jesus ignored them, in fact in verse 23, He answered them by saying that He will be glorified, then this was confirmed by a voice from heaven. I wonder what the Greeks thought of that?

But let's not forget the incident with the Roman centurian:

"When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help.
"Lord," he said, "my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering."

Jesus said to him, "I will go and heal him."
The centurion replied, "Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed.
For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, 'Go,' and he goes; and that one, 'Come,' and he comes. I say to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it."
When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, "I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith.
I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.
But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Then Jesus said to the centurion, "Go! It will be done just as you believed it would." And his servant was healed at that very hour." - Matthew 8:5-13

Here Jesus commends the centurain for having greater faith than any Jew in Israel. Go figure.

But then again, Jesus tells the Samaritan woman (Samaritans being looked down upon by the Jews for much the same reason as Greeks), that there will be a time when "...the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him." - John 4:23.

 

[wil]

Seems to me 2000 years later we are still trying to figure out not only what he said, but what he meant. And somehow I suspect the discussion will still be going on 2000 years from now...

Funny how when Orville and Wilbur left the bicycle shop a hundred years ago...set out to prove that we could fly..and now we go to the moon...and around the world like it nothing... but 2000 years ago Jesus said we could have it all....and we've progressed so slowly in that regard..

 

[RubySera_Martin]

I expect 98% of folks here will run with this a different way ... so I'll slip in my 2 cents before the bag of gold falls from heaven.

Has someone got a "bag of gold" coming from heaven one of these days??? I didn't know about it so that can't be my motivation for making that statement.

as soon as we slip into the error of the scholars in attempting to account for Jesus actions & behavior as somehow keeping in line with the prevailing tradition or sentiment ... we go astray.

I don't think you can accuse me of that, either. I don't know enough about the "prevailing tradition or sentiment" of Jesus' time to take that approach. But when I hear someone making a blanket statement about something--in this case that Jesus responded in kindness to everyone who came to him--I automatically check the universe for opposing evidence. If none exists I agree that the statement appears to be correct. If I can find something I bring it up for discussion. Since this is a discussion forum it seemed quite in line to raise the objection that we do have evidence of Jesus not always accepting of everyone who came to him; that he made some people work pretty hard for a response of any kind.

Perhaps the key word is karma. What was the karma involved - of the people that wanted the healing, of those for whom they wanted it, as well of those who wanted easy answers? Imo, Jesus did everything for a reason, and to serve a Purpose. Nothing was a mistake per se

I don't understand karma so I won't comment on that. It bothers me that you imply that I said Jesus made a mistake. I didn't say that. I just showed that the original statement was not one hundred percent accurate.

Yes, Jesus went out of his way to fulfil certain prophecies, but clearly he knew what he was doing.

How do you prove that?

Riding an ass through the whichever gate it was in Jerusalem, for example (on - Palm Sunday? man I got no clue, somebody here can correct me) ... that was a piece of tremendous symbolism and said everything to those with the eyes & ears to see & hear. But it boils down to the fulfilling of prophecy. Notice the response given by Jesus to the disciples when they ask if it was the man's karma from his own previous incarnations (DUH!!! pretty obvious that's what they meant!) or that of his parents, that he was born blind. In how he answers them, I think you can get a glimpse of what I mean.

Sorry, but I don't see how this connects with the present discussion.

I am constantly amazed at the notion many people hold that Jesus was somehow the very Son of God with all the miraculous powers so often attributed (none of which I dispute)

Nowhere on this site have I said that I believe Jesus was "the very Son of God." In fact, I have said the opposite. I think the whole thing is a myth.

... yet they then make him into the most ignorant and superstitious of his own people, the Jews,

Listen, tiajasi, you are putting an awful lot of words in my mouth. I am saying this Jesus guy was a really sophisticated man. We have the story of him talking alone with a Samaritan prostitute at Jacob's well. He did anything BUT hold to the superstitions of his people. He did a lot to dispel them. But he did apparently have limits. He made this one woman follow him all day just to get him to acknowledge her presence.

And I said you could come up with all kinds of excuses for him. That is exactly what you are doing. This, however, does not change the fact that this one statement needs qualification, i.e. Jesus did not kindly accept all who came to him.

But finally, Ruby, if I studied the passages you mention, most likely I'd be as mystified as you are, and as confused as can be about how Jesus' behavior squares with what I've just said.

This quote suggests three things:

1. that I've studied these passages
2. that I'm mystified
3. that I'm confused about Jesus' behaviour

Not one is true. Like I said above, all I did was think if there was any opposing evidence and I realized there was. I went to the work of actually looking up the references and posted the evidence. You added all the stuff regarding my motivations and levels of insight and emotional conditions.

Okay I just looked it up again. I see it was you who made that statement. No wonder you fight so hard to defend it in spite of so much opposing evidence. You can always go back and qualify the statement or inform me that I took it out of your intended context and explain in what way I did so. But to tell me I made an inaccurate statement when the evidence points to the contrary...you don't expect me to just accept that, do you???

 

[RubySera_Martin]

I think the text answers this question:

...But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Right. But you're just making excuses for him. If it was wrong to heal that woman's daughter is was wrong. Period. Since he did eventually heal her it must not have been wrong. But who was looking after the poor girl all that time that Jesus made her follow him before he ever acknowledged her presence?

In the Jewish mindset, Israel is God's Chosen people. Jesus came to save His people from their sins (Matthew 1:21). Any outsiders such as Greeks or Gentiles were culturally considered dogs, for the Jewish nation is a bloodline back to Abraham.

There were provisions for Gentiles to join the Jewish nation, but there were certain places and things they were forbidden to do, according to OT law.

Surely you're not trying to make the argument that Jesus was awfully concerned about keeping the laws of the OT!?!?! I thought he was above such biggoted concerns. Why he took advantage of the situation when an attractive woman showed up when was resting all alone at Jacob's Well. So satisfying did he find the intimate exchange with her that he had no appetite for the lunch he had sent his disciples to buy. And then there was also the time when he allowed Mary to wash, dry, and annoint his feet when he was at a dinner party. His host was very clear on his opinion of such goings-on.

As far as the Greeks who sought Jesus in John 12, I see nowhere that Jesus ignored them, in fact in verse 23,

I read the passage fairly carefully and it seems when the disciples told Jesus about the Greeks' desire he just started philosophizing on the spot. There is no indication that he went to hunt down the Greeks. Or are you suggesting the Greeks followed the disciples when they went to inform Jesus of their desire? Providing this was proper social ettiquette, this would be a possiblity. But they were obviously concerned about social ettiquette, i.e. they approached the disciples regarding their desire rather than the Master himself.

But let's not forget the incident with the Roman centurian:

Right. He was quite willing to go out of his way for a prominent Roman official. But he made the woman of no special status follow him all day just to get him to acknowledge her presence.

 

[lunamoth]

There are many passages in the Gospels that if taken only literally they are confounding, or even bizarre like something out of Alice in Wonderland. I think these passages are pointing at Something beyond what the words say. And it is this Something that the writers of the Gospel want us to get, not just whether the actual situation happened or the exact words were spoken by Jesus. For example, this passage from Mark 14:

1Now the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were only two days away, and the chief priests and the teachers of the law were looking for some sly way to arrest Jesus and kill him. 2"But not during the Feast," they said, "or the people may riot."

3While he was in Bethany, reclining at the table in the home of a man known as Simon the Leper, a woman came with an alabaster jar of very expensive perfume, made of pure nard. She broke the jar and poured the perfume on his head.

4Some of those present were saying indignantly to one another, "Why this waste of perfume? 5It could have been sold for more than a year's wages[a] and the money given to the poor." And they rebuked her harshly.

6"Leave her alone," said Jesus. "Why are you bothering her? She has done a beautiful thing to me. 7The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want. But you will not always have me. 8She did what she could. She poured perfume on my body beforehand to prepare for my burial. 9I tell you the truth, wherever the gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her."

10Then Judas Iscariot, one of the Twelve, went to the chief priests to betray Jesus to them. 11They were delighted to hear this and promised to give him money. So he watched for an opportunity to hand him over.

The central part of the passage is so strange! Just imagine, first Jesus and his followers are hanging out in the home of someone named Simon the Leper. You just know this guy is not one of the town elite. And they are reclining at the table, very relaxed, and a woman walks up to Jesus, breaks a jar and starts pouring expensive perfume on His head! Can't you just see the oil dripping down his face, his hair all stringy, the woman pouring from the broken clay jar, maybe rubbing it onto His scalp. Everyone else is there enjoying nice full stomaches after dinner, watching this, the perfume soaking Jesus' clothes and dripping onto the floor. Don't you see this woman with a kind of dazed look on her face, as if she is in a dream. Does it not seem like the whole thing has a dream-like quality?

And the disciples, clueless as always, thinking about 'the cause,' rebuke her. Her act of love has been a waste in their eyes. But Jesus now tells them no, look beyond the act to see the love behind it, and He also tells them that He will not be with them long, that this anointing is in perparation for His burial. And He further says you will always have the poor, but not alwyas have Him. Doesn't that seem like a selfish act, to care more about Himself than about the poor? It seemed that way to the disciples.

And this whole bizarre scene is bookended by the plotting of the priests and teachers to kill Jesus, and then Judas betraying Him, delivering to the priests and teachers the means to their goal.

The Jesus Seminar might look at this passage and try to determine whether it really happened, what part of it if any the historical Jesus really said. And that misses the point just as much as the disciples worrying about the wasted perfume. The Gospels are a product of community. They have spin. They tell episodes about the life of Jesus not just so we, 2000 years later, can read about His miracles and believe He was the Son of God, but so we can look deep into the message and discover what it is we are to believe.

Christ is annointed as King, and His death is part and parcel of this, not something that could have been avoided.

2 c rambling late on a Saturday night,
luna

 

[taijasi]

Apologies, Ruby, I was merely attempting to use your post as a springboard. Won't do it again, I assure you. I had no intention of putting words in your mouth. I try to say things like "people assume" and "many people" rather than you are saying and you assume. If I meant that, I would have said so - therefore, again, apologies for tying things in too closely with your post.

I've also just about had it with argumentativeness for the sake of argumentativeness. No wonder people can't understand Jesus.

taijasi

 

[Dondi]

Right. But you're just making excuses for him. If it was wrong to heal that woman's daughter is was wrong. Period. Since he did eventually heal her it must not have been wrong. But who was looking after the poor girl all that time that Jesus made her follow him before he ever acknowledged her presence?

No, I was just pointing out the fact that there was a precedence in where Jesus' teaching was directed. The Jews are God's chosen and thus they had first crack at salvation. The Canaanite woman knew where she stood in relation to the Jews. She recognized herself as a "dog" of the Gentiles. She further recognized her place as a woman in those times. And I believe Jesus played along to test her faith. She was as persistant as the widow in Luke 18. And Jesus rewarded that.

Surely you're not trying to make the argument that Jesus was awfully concerned about keeping the laws of the OT!?!?! I thought he was above such biggoted concerns. Why he took advantage of the situation when an attractive woman showed up when was resting all alone at Jacob's Well. So satisfying did he find the intimate exchange with her that he had no appetite for the lunch he had sent his disciples to buy. And then there was also the time when he allowed Mary to wash, dry, and annoint his feet when he was at a dinner party. His host was very clear on his opinion of such goings-on.

In the first place, Jesus was all about keeping the Law:

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
- Matthew 5:17-20

In the second place, how do you know that the woman at the well was attractive? Just beause she had 5 husbands and the one she was with was not her husband does not necessarily mean she was attractive, just promiscuous. But what does attraction have to do with anything anyway? Jesus wasn't there to entertain the lady. He was there to save her soul. In fact, not just her, but when she went off to tell others, many more believed. She became a very effective witness for the Lord.

If you are suggesting that there was any romantic encounter going on, you are sorely wrong. Same goes for the Mary who anointed His feet.

I read the passage fairly carefully and it seems when the disciples told Jesus about the Greeks' desire he just started philosophizing on the spot. There is no indication that he went to hunt down the Greeks. Or are you suggesting the Greeks followed the disciples when they went to inform Jesus of their desire? Providing this was proper social ettiquette, this would be a possiblity. But they were obviously concerned about social ettiquette, i.e. they approached the disciples regarding their desire rather than the Master himself.

Why wouldn't you think that the Greek didn't follow the disciples? And of course Jesus was philosophizing, as it was a standard form of teaching for the Greeks to philosophize. Does Plato, Aristotle, or Socrates ring a bell? the text clearly says, "And Jesus answered them, saying..." Then He gives a discourse of who He is. this is to Greeks who at come up to the feast to worship. They were already believers of God, now they are being told to be believers in Christ. The voice from heaven confirmed this.

Right. He was quite willing to go out of his way for a prominent Roman official. But he made the woman of no special status follow him all day just to get him to acknowledge her presence.

Again, you must go back to the attitude and cultural differences between men and women of that day. For example, men and women were separated from each other in the synagoge. Paul hints at this attitude in I Cor. 14:34-35:

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

So in regard to Jesus, He was just observing the cultural attitude of the day. It is instructive to take what one reads in scripture in context with the circumstances that it takes place.

 

[RubySera_Martin]

Apologies, Ruby, I was merely attempting to use your post as a springboard. Won't do it again, I assure you. I had no intention of putting words in your mouth. I try to say things like "people assume" and "many people" rather than you are saying and you assume. If I meant that, I would have said so - therefore, again, apologies for tying things in too closely with your post.

I've also just about had it with argumentativeness for the sake of argumentativeness. No wonder people can't understand Jesus.

taijasi

Sorry for taking personally what was meant for people in general. Yeah, I don't like argument for its own sake either. I aim at arriving at the truth of a matter and it seemed to me like discussion was going around a main point as a way of refuting this point. I did not understand your style. My apologies.