The New Testament: Orthodoxy and Heresy

[Túrin Turambar]

Another curious thing about Matthew 19 is this little line here:

And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God

Jesus apparently denies that he is perfect. Does this mean that his human limitations while in human form make him less than truly good? If so, does that mean that he has sinned? And if so, how does substitutionary atonement work as it is premised on the idea that Jesus was sinless so he could pay the penalty for our sins? It also raises questions surrounding the trinity, but I plan on visiting that when we discuss Arianism.

Jesus further seems to reinforce the argument that perfection = charity in Matthew 25, which is the only other place that I can find where he discusses salvation and damnation in detail:

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Of course, I have to wonder why the righteous would need to ask Jesus the question now that he’s told them the answer in the Bible .

[Frelga]

Of course, I have to wonder why the righteous would need to ask Jesus the question now that he’s told them the answer in the Bible

Because the righteous may not be from the Bible-reading faith? Remember Good Samaritan? Jesus considered the pagan who did the charitable thing to be more righteous than a Cohen - a Priest! - who didn't.

[Cerin]

Lord_M, it seems to me to be a pretty clear progression from the law, to something beyond the law (giving everything to the poor, which as far as I know is not part of the law), to ultimately following Jesus. Even if you include the giving all to the poor (which is related to receiving treasure in heaven), following Jesus is still the way to perfection.



Frelga, you're equating entering the priesthood with following Jesus? That doesn't make sense in the context. Jesus wasn't a priest, and he was abhorred by the Jewish clergy.


edit: cross-post

[Frelga]

Jesus wasn't a priest, and he was abhorred by the Jewish clergy.

What are you referring to, Cerin?

[Cerin]

Jesus apparently denies that he is perfect.

Jesus does not deny that He is perfect. He asks the young man why he is calling Jesus good, when none but God is good. He is getting him to examine his statement and recognize who Jesus is.

[Cerin]

What are you referring to, Cerin?

I'm referring to the fact that Jesus was constantly creating an uproar in the synagogues, and that they sought his arrest for preaching heresy.

[Túrin Turambar]

Of course, I have to wonder why the righteous would need to ask Jesus the question now that he’s told them the answer in the Bible

Because the righteous may not be from the Bible-reading faith? Remember Good Samaritan? Jesus considered the pagan who did the charitable thing to be more righteous than a Cohen - a Priest! - who didn't.

That’s a remarkable observation – Jesus apparently throws open the idea that salvation is available for non-Christians (or, more accurately, non-Jews) if they truly love their neighbour as themselves.

It’s actually worth pulling out the entire parable, seeing as it’s another clear reference by Jesus to salvation:

And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour? And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

This parable appears only in the Gospel of Luke, and here Jesus’ message is slightly different in form to his pronouncements in Matthew, although not really in substance. He simplifies the two commands to obey the law and to feed and house the poor, care for the sick, etc, as ‘love God’ and ‘love your neighbour’. Presumably one who loved God would seek to obey his commandments, and one who loved everyone would feed, house and clothe them, and visit them in hospital and prison. His message is essentially the same.

It is worth noting though that a non-believer who sought salvation would still need to love God. Samaritans were an off-shoot of Judaism, so they were fine. And presumably a Muslim or Jew who acted in the way that Jesus describes could be saved in the same way. It doesn't seem that Jesus is open to salvation for non-monotheists, though - loving God is an essential component of righteousness.

Lord_M, it seems to me to be a pretty clear progression from the law, to something beyond the law (giving everything to the poor, which as far as I know is not part of the law), to ultimately following Jesus. Even if you include the giving all to the poor (which is related to receiving treasure in heaven), following Jesus is still the way to perfection.

That is true, but why should ‘following Jesus’ be interpreted as anything other than following his commands (ie. upholding the commandments, being charitable and loving your neighbour as yourself) or following him literally (ie. joining his disciples)? Jesus himself never equates righteousness or perfection to faith in his ability to redeem someone from their sins.

[Cerin]

That is true, but why should ‘following Jesus’ be interpreted as anything other than following his commands (ie. upholding the commandments, being charitable and loving your neighbour as yourself) or following him literally (ie. joining his disciples)?

Because people of my ilk interpret Jesus' words in light of what followed after -- his death and resurrection, and in light of the Bible taken as a whole.

[Túrin Turambar]

That is true, but why should ‘following Jesus’ be interpreted as anything other than following his commands (ie. upholding the commandments, being charitable and loving your neighbour as yourself) or following him literally (ie. joining his disciples)?

Because people of my ilk interpret Jesus' words in light of what followed after -- his death and resurrection, and in light of the Bible taken as a whole.

That leads to an interesting question - did things fundamentally change upon Jesus' death and resurrection?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

What are you referring to, Cerin?

I'm referring to the fact that Jesus was constantly creating an uproar in the synagogues, and that they sought his arrest for preaching heresy.

This is edging into some very sensitive territory.

[Frelga]

It does, but then Cerin and I have been posting together for a while. I hope we can give each other the benefit of doubt when it comes to treading in dangerous waters.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Fair enough. But I still want to remind people that folks of other faiths are reading (even if they are not commenting), and to try to be sensitive when discussions like this this intersect different faiths.

[Lalaith]

What are you referring to, Cerin?

I'm referring to the fact that Jesus was constantly creating an uproar in the synagogues, and that they sought his arrest for preaching heresy.

This is edging into some very sensitive territory.

I really have to disagree with you here. Cerin speaks nothing but the facts here. I fail to see how that treads into sensitive territory.

Did Jesus unsettle the Jewish religious leaders of his time? Yes.

Did Jesus' teachings rattle the status quo in the synagogues of that time? Yes.

Did some of those same Jewish religious leaders seek his arrest (and subsequent death) based on what they felt was the heresy he was speaking, i.e., he was God? Yes.

Those are facts. They shouldn't offend anyone. ?? There is no condemnation of Judaism in those statements.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Those are not "facts" Lali. They are an interpretation of historical events that some people accept as true, and that many, many others do not. Worse, it is exactly these "facts" (particularly the assertion that Jewish leaders sought Jesus' death), that have been used as justification for centuries of horrible treatment of Jewish people by Christian people.

[Cerin]

Whether or not they are facts (I realize not everyone accepts them as facts), they are what is stated in the Gospels, and it was my understanding that the Gospel texts are what we are discussing here, and so that was the basis for my statement. All of my statements are made with the understanding that not everyone takes the Gospels as .... gospel.

Thank you, Frelga.

I'm happy to leave that avenue of discussion, Voronwë. I personally did not have anything further to add.


edit: cross-post with Voronwë

[Túrin Turambar]

As Cerin pointed out, this thread is based around the New Testament books. It’s like when we have a discussion on the Silmarillion and say something like ‘Thingol lived in Doriath’ – its shorthand for ‘the Silmarillion says that Thingol lived in Doriath’ because, obviously, he never existed. That doesn’t mean that stating that Jesus was persecuted by the existing Jewish establishment as fact isn’t problematic, although I am inclined to the view that he was. Regardless, I agree about the need for sensitivity about this topic.

If anything, I’m probably more wary of offending Christians – I’ve come close at a few points to de facto accusing mainstream Christians of heresy.

Anyway, what does everyone think of my 'Paul as an Annihilationist' theory?

[Frelga]

Well... I do have something to add, I'm afraid.

First let me say that I feel that everyone is trying their best in this discussion. It's a sensitive ground, since it is impossible for any of us not to say something that strikes at the very heart of one faith or another.

Second, could Lali or Cerin point me to the passages you mean? I have some familiarity with the Christian Gospels, but I am by no means an expert. I can only recall the incident with the merchants at the Temple (sorry, what knowledge I do have was based on Russian translations, so I am probably not using the right terms).

Jesus was also reported to have numerous debates with the Pharisees, but that was hardly going to cause an uproar. I mean, uproar was the default state in the debates of the time, when so many conflicting ideas boiled and collided. If you read the Talmud, which records centuries of such debates, you will see something like "Rabbi Eliezer said this but Rabbi Johanan said something completely different." It must have been like Lasto in there, only much louder. The goal was not to seek the one correct answer but to reach some consensus. Even when for the purposes of everyday practice the rulings of one sage are taken over another, the minority opinion is often quoted, or else a compromise is reached.

Nor was the teaching of Jesus revolutionary for his time. As I tried to illustrate in my first post in this thread, it was in fact a logical outgrowth of the state of contemporary Jewish thought, although mainstream Judaism eventually took a different direction.

More later.

[Lalaith]

I had a long post typed up, and my computer froze. I'll take it as a Divine Sign.

Honestly, I'm afraid to participate in this discussion, because my definition of offensive is obviously quite different than others'. So, I'm sorry, but I'll have to bow out for now.

[Túrin Turambar]

Can we split off a separate thread on the degree to which Jesus was persecuted by Jewish authorities?

[JewelSong]

I am one of the people "lurking" in this discussion and I think it has been fascinating so far...and very respectful.

Please don't stop the discussion just because we edge into some "sensitive territory!"