• BitconnectCarlos
    1.8k


    What I mean by "universalism" is, imo, revealed in Jesus's dialogues/arguments with the Pharisees. I found that Jesus's views were often (but not always) grounded in the early books of Genesis. Gen 1-11 is universal/applies to all of mankind. Gen 12-50 is particular to Israel. Just something that I noticed whether it relates to marriage, food purity, or the sabbath among others.

    Jesus surely did consort with the common folk; he consorted with the lowest of the low. Tax collection in antiquity was a nasty institution yet Jesus did not shun them. Jesus shuns no one. That's what is unique about the character and places him in the "very good" or "very bad" camp. Traditional Jewish sages caution us against associating with the wicked. But I also believe the quote reveals he was a man of appetites and not like the ascetic John the Baptist.

    I'm fascinated though in the ways that that Jesus helps socialize one. He is the ideal in many ways, if not all ways. So he is potentially something to emulate. I found that through internalizing at least some of his teachings the person becomes transformed and this is what I find so fascinating.
  • Vera Mont
    3.3k
    Appetites, maybe; and therefore sympathy for the weaknesses of other men. To what degree did he satisfy them? There is very little indication in the gospels - but then, I suppose those chroniclers would want to present him, and themselves, in the best possible light.
    (You've put me in a mood to watch Jesus Christ, Superstar again.)

    He is the ideal in many ways, if not all ways. So he is potentially something to emulate.BitconnectCarlos
    Might that be why the modern capitalist Christians shy away from him and cleave to Moses? And why the punitive, repressive evangelists prefer the OT?

    I found that through internalizing at least some of his teachings the person becomes transformedBitconnectCarlos

    I don't know about that. Certainly, some of the most altruistic (though not necessarily sensible) people I've met were devout Christians - but I wonder whether it was Jesus who changed them or if they were drawn to Jesus in the first place by their own character?

    I don't believe in a divine Jesus - which is just as well, since the sacrifice of animals, people or demigods is an abhorrent practice and any god who demands it is abhorrent - but the biblical character had some good speech-writers.
  • BitconnectCarlos
    1.8k


    Alter is indeed brilliant. One of the top in the field.

    I have not read Spinoza but I'm sure I could gain something from it. I'm not partial to pantheism but I know Spinoza was brilliant. Heschel I would read but have not yet. Am currently reading Nahum Sarna's work on Genesis and Exodus. Recently read Shaye Cohen's "From Maccabees to the Mishnah" which is a good overview of later second temple Judaism, roughly around the time of Jesus.
123456Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.