Was Jesus Orthodox? (or Baptist?) - LOL

[SteVen]

SteVen said:
Granted, I don't have anyone to compare Jesus too. But based on the Biblical text he seemed to be quite the unique phenomenon.
Was anyone teaching in the way He was? The Beatitudes, the parables, healing, raising the dead, walking on water, calming the storm, etc.
Not a unique phenomenon?

I believe that's called "moving the goal post." If we're going to include things like raising the dead, walking on water and being resurrected - well, perhaps that was a bit unorthodox and unique.

Fair enough. But you did write... "Jesus..." was not "... some unique phenomenon."
And I wrote that I don't have anyone to compare Jesus too.
You seemed to indicate that others were equally phenomenal. ??? Like who?

Here's a related question/comment:
I contend that Jesus did his miracles in his humanity, not in his deity.
Reason being, he expects/encourages/enables us to "do" miracles with God;s help.
"Speak to the mountain." (thrown in the sea) I know, I know... figuratively.
Jesus said he could do nothing on his own. (John 5:19: John 8:28)

Thoughts?

John 5:19 NIV
Jesus gave them this answer:
“Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself;
he can do only what he sees his Father doing,
because whatever the Father does the Son also does.

/

 

[O'Darby III]

That's just not accurate. The priesthood has always been propped up as special and promoted as experts in the law.... talking to a lawyer here, I know. It was positional authority at best-- a family business at it's worst, in ways that could make the mafia blush. In fact-- that's how Moses intended it. What you refer to as 'Fundies' or Catholics, or Southern Baptists et. al. --each one of them have their versions of orthodoxy.... doctrines and dogma, laws, rules, practices and 'religious' rites that are considered essential to orthodoxy. It's rather silly to insist that there was no such thing as an orthodox Jew. My evidence is the temple, and everything about it.

What's your evidence for there being no evidence?

This is becoming semantic silliness. Jesus went to the synagogue on the Sabbath and taught: "When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him...." Luke 4:16-17. "Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. He was teaching in their synagogues, and everyone praised him." Luke 4:14-15. Only observant Jews were accorded this privilege, and it required an invitation from the chief ruler of the synagogue. He was addressed as "Rabbi," a term applied to recognized teachers of the Torah, even by the scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees. He observed the Jewish feast days. He taught in the Temple in Jerusalem: "Each day Jesus was teaching at the temple, and each evening he went out to spend the night on the hill called the Mount of Olives, and all the people came early in the morning to hear him at the temple." Luke 21:37-38. The privilege of teaching was not allowed to non-observant Jews. (It is believed Jesus confronted the money changers in the Court of the Gentiles, which was a huge commercial area, but also taught in the restricted Women's Court where the treasury was located, Mark 12:41, the Jew-only Court of Israel, Mark 14:49, and Solomon's Colonnade, a portico on the east side, John 10:21.)

I'm not sure what fine line you folks are attempting to draw or what you think the significance is. Jesus was an "observant Jew" by any standard and was recognized as such. The term "orthodox Jew" was not used until the 18th century, but suffice it to say that first century Judaism was as diverse as Christianity is today and Jesus was solidly in the mainstream of the apocalytpic movement.

With that, I will bury the wombat.

 

[O'Darby III]

You seemed to indicate that others were equally phenomenal. ??? Like who?

Here's a related question/comment:
I contend that Jesus did his miracles in his humanity, not in his deity.
Reason being, he expects/encourages/enables us to "do" miracles with God;s help.
"Speak to the mountain." (thrown in the sea) I know, I know... figuratively.
Jesus said he could do nothing on his own. (John 5:19: John 8:28)

Miracle workers were ubiquitous in the first century. From good 'ol Bart Ehrman:

What is remarkable is that Apollonius of Tyana and Jesus were not the only two persons in the Greco-Roman world who were thought to have been supernaturally endowed as teachers and miracle workers. In fact, we know from the tantalizing but fragmentary records that have survived that numerous other persons were also said to have performed miracles, to have calmed the storm and multiplied the loaves, to have told the future and healed the sick, to have cast out demons and raised the dead, to have been supernaturally born and taken up into heaven at the end of their life. Even though Jesus may be the only miracle-working Son of God that we talk about in our world, he was one of many talked about in the first-century.​

​

More: https://no-pc.blogspot.com/2018/12/miracle-workers-of-ancient-world.html.

Perhaps if we had been there, we would have seen that Jesus' miracles were qualitatively different (i.e., real) while the others were more dubious.

Craig Keener has done extensive work on miracles today: https://www.amazon.com/Miracles-Today-Supernatural-Modern-World/dp/1540963837. The "problem," if you want to see it as one, is that miracles cut across all religions and belief systems, including atheism.

 

[SteVen]

Miracle workers were ubiquitous in the first century. From good 'ol Bart Ehrman:

What is remarkable is that Apollonius of Tyana and Jesus were not the only two persons in the Greco-Roman world who were thought to have been supernaturally endowed as teachers and miracle workers. In fact, we know from the tantalizing but fragmentary records that have survived that numerous other persons were also said to have performed miracles, to have calmed the storm and multiplied the loaves, to have told the future and healed the sick, to have cast out demons and raised the dead, to have been supernaturally born and taken up into heaven at the end of their life. Even though Jesus may be the only miracle-working Son of God that we talk about in our world, he was one of many talked about in the first-century.​

​

More: https://no-pc.blogspot.com/2018/12/miracle-workers-of-ancient-world.html.

Perhaps if we had been there, we would have seen that Jesus' miracles were qualitatively different (i.e., real) while the others were more dubious.

Craig Keener has done extensive work on miracles today: https://www.amazon.com/Miracles-Today-Supernatural-Modern-World/dp/1540963837. The "problem," if you want to see it as one, is that miracles cut across all religions and belief systems, including atheism.

I see.
No reason to believe that Jesus was anything special then?
We could call upon any of these other "deities" to the same effect?

/

 

[O'Darby III]

I see.
No reason to believe that Jesus was anything special then?
We could call upon any of these other "deities" to the same effect?

/

As I said, perhaps "you had to be there" to grasp why Jesus' miracles were qualitatively different. There is also the question of the role of the miracles in Jesus' ministry - what was the purpose? Acts 2:22 indicates the miracles, wonders and signs showed that Jesus was "a man accredited by God." I would think Jesus' miracles would have to be viewed in the context of his entire ministry, up to and including the resurrection, as accrediting him as the Real Deal and "something special." The easy way out, which many Christians take, is to simply declare all miracles, signs and wonders that occur outside the Christian context to be demonic. This seems too simplistic to me. I would tend to go the other direction and say that all genuine miracles are the work of God for his purposes, even in the context of Hinduism and atheism.

 

[SteVen]

Good post, thanks.

I would tend to go the other direction and say that all genuine miracles are the work of God for his purposes, even in the context of Hinduism and atheism.

That's an interesting point.
Why couldn't the miracles of God come through anyone he chooses?
He is not limited to working through Christians. That in itself would be limiting! - LOL

]

 

[O'Darby III]

Good post, thanks.

That's an interesting point.
Why couldn't the miracles of God come through anyone he chooses?
He is not limited to working through Christians. That in itself would be limiting! - LOL

]

Yes, I find it an odd concept that all other religions and belief systems are "off limits" to God.

I happened to be listening to "Christian" radio today as I was driving. Pope Francis apparently stirred controversy with some statement that God allows other religions and that they are "willed" by God. (Here ya go: https://www.americamagazine.org/fai...aid-god-has-allowed-different-religions-world.) Anyway, the host was literally foaming at the mouth that other religions are SATANIC, SATANIC, SATANIC!!! As Fate would have it, I was driving to visit a wonderful, devout, 84-year-old LDS woman who has raised 16 foster children - SATANIC, SATANIC I TELL YOU!!!

Something is simply insane about all this.

 

[SteVen]

Yes, I find it an odd concept that all other religions and belief systems are "off limits" to God.

Universalism to the rescue. - LOL
Ultimately Jesus is Lord. It matters not what background one come from,
every knee will bow and every tongue acknowledge Jesus as Lord.
There will be a whole to sort all this out.

Ultimate reconciliation, restoration and redemption. (is what I hope for)

]