No Robots

Most people see Christ himself as the good news. Finally, there is someone who speaks directly to the inner spiritual neediness of mankind (or at least of some individuals).

Elijah

I think that would be Paul's way around obedience to the Law to get the gentiles grafted into the resurrection; by establishing faith, not works, as that which defines the Jew. The good news is that you get to inherit eternal life if you have faith in Jesus as your savior, not that you don't have to cut your penis to show your faith... though an admitted bonus for grown men with their foreskin.

James Brown

Given that so much of Jesus' teachings were unoriginal, why do you say, "Finally"? What did Jesus preach prior to his crucifixion that was so unique and spoke "directly to the inner spiritual neediness of mankind"?

No Robots

I guess I just mean that for people fed up with run-of-the-mill existence, Christ's words come as a breath of fresh air.

ChristMyth

I don't think Jesus taught what we call the "good news" which I take to be his death and Res. This was Paul's and the gospel authors "good news."

I believe Jesus would have taught a form of Judism, sort of a "be baptised and have your sins washed away and return to the Torah" a.k.a. John the Baptist type of message. This wouldn't be surprising since Jesus was a follower of Johns before starting out on his own.

aa5874

But, if you read Antiquities of the Jews 18.5.2, it may be that John the Baptist did NOT preach remission of sins by baptism at all. Baptism by John may have been only for the purification of the body, not as an alternative to Mosaic Laws.

Elijah

True that you could say that the actual gospel didn’t start till after Jesus’ resurrection proved the dead could rise but he was still trying to establish eternal life for his followers. It’s one of the main themes in John but down played in the synoptics. Though it’s still found in (Mk 10:17) with the young man asking how to inherit eternal life, also (Mt 25:46), (Lk 18:30) and it seems to be the idea behind the narrow gate in (Mt 17:14).

I’m not sure how baptism washing away sins could be a key to a return to the Torah, maybe you could explain that some? We don’t know how John understood his forgiveness of sins concept, all we know is the ritual he used, so it’s difficult to know if Jesus was preaching the same thing but it’s probably safe to say that it was similar or based off of it at least.

Forgiveness of sins really comes in two flavors here. The first is that there isn’t really anything such as sin to forgive. It’s not real; there is no cosmic mark on your soul for your previous indiscretions so everyone is forgiven. In this understanding the baptism is just symbolic to help the follower accept that reality (if that’s what kind of forgiveness JTB was preaching). This concept is seen in the plank the eye, all things are lawful and nothing is unclean but thinking it is unclean.

Then there is forgiveness of sins that are real, just not understood as evil or anything irrational. Sinning is just stumbling or making mistakes but they are mistakes that lead you towards your death. As Paul says the “The wages of sin is death but the free gift is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom 6:23) This is a little more than just jumping into some water and feeling free of your sins. This about trying to overcome the problem that sin brings; that being that they lead to our deaths.

The way around death (to forgive sins) is found in the idea of a future resurrection of the dead. The only problem was getting to that New day and then getting yourself on the call-up list somehow. Jesus seems to be trying to establish a new kingdom to help get us there based around him as a spiritual king in order to counter the “rulers of this world” that he was trying to “cast out”. (Jn 12:31) Because as Paul says it’s only after “destroying every authority and power” then he destroys the last enemy “death”. (1 Cor 15:24) It’s basically just trying to establish an anti-king to bring a new day which is supposed to lead to eternal life and the resurrection of the dead.

The other problem of getting on the call-up list is solved by having faith in Jesus, which grafts you into the vine so that when he is resurrected (being the messiah) he will hopefully call up all those who helped get him elected by having faith which promotes him as the real Messiah. This is how “whoever believes in him may have eternal life.” (Jn 3:15) is accomplished and understood. It’s not about glorifying Jesus without reason; it’s about trying to establish a new kind of kingdom based around a spiritual king.

Paul’s good news wasn’t just about Christ’s death and resurrection, it was about what that meant to his followers. “For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.” (Rom 6:5) No more worry about death and oblivion or obedience to the law or abstaining from worldly pleasures, just faith in Jesus is all you needed and you are saved.

renassault

Peter argues with Christ about this long before they entered Jerusalem (Mark 8:31ff.). Quite simply, they probably never had a clue what he was talking about in the first place (Luke 17:34), or were puzzled over why he was saying it, so it's not like they are depicted as understanding at first, and later on start to defy Jesus.

spamandham

Congratulations on discovering inconsistency number 22,375 of the official Christian story.

Come on, is there really any good reason to even suspect anything in the Gospels is historical? If not for the dominance of Christianity upon scholarly work, I think it would be obvious these are nothing more than stories in a book.

ChristMyth

I'm not saying that baptism was a key to returning to the Torah or that it was a replacement to Mosic Law. Jews could just as easily return to the teachings without it. Baptisim, as I understand it, was a purfication of the body.

Jesus could have taught that the body the Jews of his day needed to be cleansed from the sins of what he thought of as getting away from the true teachings of the Law and to return to the the original Torah.

(I'm going on the idea that there actually was a HJ, but even if there wasn't, this is what a HJ might have taught).

Of course, I could be completely wrong.