Jesus' teaching as I see it.

@FreddieUK
What author? At any rate, the story of Jesus is not a transmission of anything by anyone.

@sree251 as someone who studied it in detail partially in its original languages I would beg to differ. There were many people who contributed and they were writing for a purpose. They were transmitting their knowledge and understanding of Jesus either is contemporaries or very soon after. Obviously, this is no place to have a serious discussion about an academic and faith matter which has engaged people for many centuries.

@FreddieUK
Studied what, Freddie? This topic is about Jesus' teaching and not about biblical research.


True but the understanding of Jesus' teaching is what you have gotten for yourself. Do you want to discuss it?


Quite right. This thread is not for scribes and pharisees arguing about the Talmud.

@sree251 I studied the Bible at university as and academic discipline and have taught (and continue to learn) as a devotional discipline. I have learned from teachers and preachers and, yes, know intimately the teaching of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels. Having said that, I don't regard myself as having a definitive understanding as I still have more to learn. I am very happy to discuss what I found for myself on that basis.

@FreddieUK
I have nothing more to learn from books. Like you, I also studied biblical scripture as a devotional discipline but couldn't cut it and gave up my attempt at being a Jesuit.


What have you found? What is Jesus' teaching as you see it?

@sree251 Wow! Becoming a Jesuit would have required much stricter adherence to non-Biblical material and quite a different approach to my own. I have respect for that branch of the Church, but many reservations too.

Jesus teaching in simple form is to invite (not cajole, force, intimidate) following Him by faith and the power of the Holy Spirit. He shows how that might display itself not just in His words, but His life and sacrificial death. If we try to follow the instructions of, say, the Sermon on the Mount 'religiously' we will fail and be no better than those who tried to impose the Jewish Law and declare it as the way to Heaven. He included those normally excluded from society, he forgave those who would normally be condemned and ostracised and he forcefully condemned religious hypocrites.

He welcomed people who came trusting and taught His disciples to treat God not as a remote, frightening person, but as a father to his children. He said that if you have seen Him (Jesus), you have seen the Father. He promised His Spirit to those who follow on.

He accepted crucifixion even though He had done nothing wrong and His resurrection is a promise that death is not the end for those who follow.

This is becoming a book, so I'll stop there. Others will no doubt pile in and add their bits, but that's something of my summary. You will note a lot of assertions: this must be so when confined to such a medium as this.

@FreddieUK
You have given excerpts from your "book" but they are commentaries on your reading of the Christian Bible. They do not reflect Jesus' teaching as you see it. Jesus' teaching as you see it, is the very living of it. You don't tell stories about Jesus walking on water. You walk on water.

@sree251 Are you asking how my understanding of Jesus teaching is reflected in my life? You asked about my understanding: that’s a head question. Your clarification seems to be about how I live my life in the light of that understanding. Have I got it right now?

@FreddieUK
Yup, you've got it right on the money. Being a Christian is not the same as being Christlike. By this I don't mean being a wacko Jesus lookalike with beard, long hair, donning a robe and accosting pedestrians on a city sidewalk. Peter O'Toole reprised this role well in his movie "The Ruling Class".

@sree251 We are very much agreed on this statement:


Are you asking me to prove to you that my life is Christlike? If so, that is not something I am prepared to go into detail about here. I can say what I like and you would have no idea what I'm really like when I'm not writing things on SW. I will say this: as a sinner saved by grace, I continue to strive towards the goal of being Christlike in my attitudes and demeanour. That's what the Bible asks for, that we press forward to the goal that is set before us. I'm still a sinner, but I strive to clothe myself in Christ as Paul has injuncted. Any more personal comment will have to be in PM.

@FreddieUK
No, I am not looking for proof. I am asking you to share your realization of Jesus' teaching as you see it. Let me do what I am asking of you. "Turn the other cheek". This, to me, is the one fundamental teaching that is unique. No other moral guide tells me to do this. Trump cannot do this. If he is struck, he would strike back harder. He would never turn the other cheek. If he can't strike back now, he would do it later when he has the cards and you have none. He is "an eye for an eye" kind of guy whose moral compass was made in New York. It is strange that this ethic of Judaism guides the foreign policy practiced by all western nations sharing a Christian heritage. A strike against one is a strike against all: this is NATO's article 5 warning against all enemies. Jesus said 'love your enemies, do good to those who harm you". I digress but you get the point.

I can't turn the other cheek. It's human nature to hit back. If I don't hit back, the anger burns inside and turns to rage: a deadly sin. I watch that rage turns to hate but that's me. There are times I don't hit back not because I love my enemy but because I am cowed by fear. To be Christlike is to live with grace, a state of equanimity untouched by fear, hate and rage. Is this just talk? Can I do it? Can you do it?



As long as you are striving, you are not there yet. Clothing oneself in Christ is a form of lying that leads to hypocrisy.


No PM. We must do this in the open. Being Christian is pretending to be Christlike. It is awful because it is sick, and I mean literally sick. (See below)

The Divided Self: An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness, by R.D. Laing, is a groundbreaking 1960 book that argues psychosis is not a medical condition but a comprehensible, existential response to alienation, exploring the split between a person's true self and the false self they present to the world.

@sree251

I sense some aggression here. But I will continue a bit longer.

We have some very basic misunderstandings because you are picking bits of the Bible and you have a different belief, it seems, of what it is to be a disciple of Christ. Of course I'm not there yet. Salvation is a process that goes on throughout our lives. The being clothed in Christ is an injunction in Paul's letter to the Galatians. Hypocrisy is condemned in the strongest terms by Jesus, so to become like Him, to inhabit Him, is to do the opposite of what He calls us to.

I find nothing Christlike in Donald Trump: I have no more to say about him.


I contest that anyone living on this earth would not be touched by those things. Jesus was the victim of the last three, so why would not those who follow? Indeed, He warned them they would be. You mention one thing from The Sermon on the Mount which you feel you cannot do. When reading this kind of teaching are you aware of the use of hyperbole used at that time to make a point? It happens frequently in Jesus' teaching. The point, in this case, is that in a personal dispute, we should not continue to escalate the situation. Jesus goes on to talk about controlling anger and not seek revenge. Even worse, He says, love your enemies.

You ask good questions:
The answer is not on our own. This is where we need the Holy Spirit. Striving to do this by our own efforts is what caused the need for Jesus to come in the first place.

Now to your last point. Are you telling me that you believe that all Christians are essentially hypocrites because this academic has written a convincing book that we all suffer from a psychosis?

@sree251 I appreciate having a genuinely challenging conversation with someone who is not setting out to be negative. Thank you.

I take the point about distinguishing 'hypocrite' and 'hypocritical' but I would push back at the suggestion that all are hypocrites. I would suggest that different behaviours with different people is not 'acting' or being disingenuous. Rather, it is acknowledging those differing relationships by moderating (or otherwise) language and actions out of respect. Thus, one might hold back from, say, swearing in the presence of certain people who are known to be offended by it, or, in another example, offering help when it might be inconvenient to yourself because you know that person is unable to receive it elsewhere.

I haven't come on here as a 'Christian' (see my profile, if you haven't already) precisely because as soon as that word is used a host of differing definitions come to people's minds, especially in these fevered times where the word has been hi-jacked (along with 'evangelical') by right wing forces on both sides of the Atlantic. However, as this conversation proves, neither do I hold back from serious debates around faith. I don't like making it about me, though. I describe myself as a disciple of Jesus Christ and let others ask questions...as you have done. It will have become apparent to you by now that I am not part of the Roman Catholic tradition, although I am aware of some of its teachings and practices.

(Incidentally, a favourite poet of mine is Gerard Manley Hopkins, the Jesuit priest.)

@FreddieUK
Your comment is noted. By "aggression" do you mean combative? I can't see myself but you can see me, and your perception is the reflection of me. You are my mirror, enabling me to see myself. This conversation is a dialogue with myself. No aggression directed at you as an entity separated from me.


I have no Christian beliefs, Catholic or otherwise. This allows for an unstructured, collaborative dialogue that allows freedom to share views without strict paradigmatic constraints.


What do you mean by "clothed in Christ"?

Paul's injunction. This was a stumbling block in my religious vocation. I was not studying to be a soldier of Paul. And he stood between me and the vows I had to take.


Inhabiting a persona, even for practical purpose, in itself is make-belief. To be Christlike through imitation is hilarious. Priest, pastor, bishop, and pope do this to provide spiritual leadership. And yet, each would beat his own chest to acknowledge unworthiness for the task. Why do it then?


I need to cite examples of human conduct, including my own, for purpose of discussion. It is ok as long as I don't stomp on and burn the effigy to vent hatred. I view my body as an effigy, a three-dimensional representation of me, the person. I won't mention Trump again if that is your wish.

@FreddieUK
A challenging conversation, if it is not a battling of ideas, is an inquiry, an objective exploration for the truth that can set us free.


A hypocritical person is a hypocrite but no one is hypocritical all the time. Branding some one a hypocrite is damning that person, a strategic purpose of creating a unique identity and perception of that person permanently in the minds of others.


I agree that it is not disingenuous to conduct oneself as various personas appropriate to the situation that is consistent with convention. We do this reflexively and not consciously like an actor according to script.


Feel free to express your views as you please. I am interested in what you have to say about the teaching of Jesus as you see it.


I am not a Jesuit priest. I dropped out and did not go on to take my vows of chastity, obedience and poverty.

@FreddieUK
Thank you for this post. I will come back to this after doing a chore. In the meantime, I want to tell you that although I was disillusioned, I did like the way the Church was led by Anthony Quinn, as the vicar of Christ.
Did you see the movie?

[media=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7Pa567w314]

@sree251 I haven’t seen this film, and it won’t play on my computer at the moment. I am only popping in here for a few minutes. Hope to beback later.

@FreddieUK
You should watch it even if it is to familiarize yourself with my religious background. If you were a Christian from the Church of Christ, Scientist, I would read up on its doctrines in order to relate with you better. Spiritual inquiry is not a dogmatic enterprise. I have debated rimpoches on what the Buddha taught.

@FreddieUK
By the way, forget about watching that movie (Shoes of the Fisherman). It was an insensitive request on my part. I wasn't thinking. Imagine some Latter-day Saints discussant asking me to watch a film on Joseph Smith. I don't think I could muster the energy to do it. lol

You are ok, Freddie. Christianity has not wrecked your mind. You are not a Bible thumper. You have not lost the objectivity of a scientific mind that is sane even though it cannot transcend the material world.

@sree251 Thank you. (By the way, I regard the LDS as a heresy.)

Happy to keep in touch.