|
|||||
Kickass Phone Rates from 3U
|
|||||
| PLACES TO GO: |
A real person? Almost definitely. A wise man? Definitely, if records are accurate. A great prophet? Probably, depending on your definition of 'prophet'. Son of God? I'm afraid the jury is out on that one. I can see it being the case and I can see it not being the case, both ways. Because I don't take the Bible to be a literal translation of the events that happened, I have to leave that one up in the air. Again, my faith centre tends to say, "Yes", but I must defer to examining that in the face of what I'm comfortable with and what I can logically deduct. I think Jesus has already been well enough proved to have lived during the time indicated, so there isn't a lot of discussion on that one. It's the manner of his nature that is always in question; as followers wrote the events recorded many years after the actual events, and after a significant number of people had become believers in the movement. It wouldn't have been the first instance of "embellishment of the press" that we've seen in history. However, one hopes that the pure fear that the followers would have had of corrupting the actual truth would have lent some validity to the recorded information. It is really difficult to say without having an eyewitness, and they're extremely rare. All that being said, biblically speaking, Jesus is a very interesting character. He is an advocate of peace, but he is not a wimp -- there are too many impressions of Christ as a pacifist. In reality, he is often calling for action more than discouraging it. The scene in the temple with the moneychangers proves that he is not against taking action in the correct circumstances. Remember his preaching about, "if he slaps you on the cheek, turn the other one to him also"? Seems a pretty pacifist statement until you look at the underlying history and context (which is why it's important to do so.) In Roman times, the left hand was considered the "dirty" hand because your right hand was used for eating, your left for wiping after defecating. If someone slapped you, it was with his or her right hand. If you "turned the other cheek" it meant that it was opening it up to them to slap you...but with the wrong hand, the left. Since it was considered "taboo" to do anything with the left (especially touching people), it was more of an insult -- a taunt. A pacifist solution, perhaps, but not one without attitude. There are other examples. The "if a man forces you to walk with him one mile, walk with him two" passage? Any Roman solider could commandeer any person to carry his armor for them. However, the legal limit was for one mile. If they carried it farther than a mile, he was obligated to pay the person. Thus, by "walk with him two" would force the solider to pay for your services. Still a pacifist reaction, but not without an underlying sense of resistence. Jesus was not silent and calm all the time, although he certainly had his moments. He was a great storyteller and a very charismatic individual, as he could charm huge crowds just with his speaking. He was a lover of parties and friends, as evidenced by his participation in the famous wedding where the water was turned into wine. Regardless of whether the miracle occurred, this man clearly loved parties and friends. He stuck around and gave out the best wine he could find to his friends and family who were likely just starting in for a good night of celebration. I envision him either up and dancing to the music or reclining on cushions in some corner with a circle of friends around, engaged in a huge belly laugh at somebody's joke. Some of the wisest people in the world were great partyers and I don't think this was an exception. Socrates was off his nut most of the time and yet had extreme moments of profoundness. Jesus spoke of leaving behind standard conventions and reaching for higher understanding of God, the world, and human interaction. He could see beyond the day-to-day activities of people and their default deeds. The people of Israel in that day were locked into years and years of tradition and handling issues and thoughts the same way they always had...or the way they were told by the priests. Jesus urged them to think for themselves, to examine each situation and respond as they think a righteous person would, not as they always had traditionally. "He who is without sin throw the first stone." Breaking the default paradigm was very much Jesus' credo. I like to think of Jesus as the human-aspect of God as a whole; in a sense, a distilled version of God, extruding the human aspects thereof while yet retaining the essence of Godness. Hence, if Jesus is God-in-a-man, then it is this essence of the being of God contained within the human framework that is used to translate the nature of God to the human masses at their level. Of course, as we can see from scripture (provided it is accurate, of course), Jesus' transmissions of the ideas of God weren't always clear -- I suspect this is due to the fact that when you take concepts of God and dilute them to a human level you suddenly hit a language/cognitive barrier. My examination of who and what Jesus is/was is still continuing as I haven't completely decided what it's all about. However, whether or not he was the Son of God, this much is true: There is much wisdom to be learned from his teachings, from his actions, and from his manner of interacting with people that everyone of every faith or belief can take away to make a better, more conscious and wise world. |
||||
