I feel that I do understand Jesus in ONE way others do not. Jesus was, after all, a man, and as a man I understand how he was frustrated near to tears by his followers’ ability to use his words and completely miss his POINT.
Attention deficit makes coming up with examples on the spot very hard, but I do have a couple and have noticed many more.
For example, the Lord’s Prayer. That section was not about the prayer, it was about the fact that a fish is a fish. The Lord’s Prayer was an EXAMPLE of how one could talk straight to God.
It was not, in fact, the Lord’s Prayer.
The example Jesus gave was a bit of a shock to those who heard it. The idea was that you didn’t just tell God what was on your mind. If laymen cod do that, what would the Priests of the Temple do for a living?
So we Praise the Lord, which is exactly the kind of thing the Lord’s Prayer is a good example of NOT doing. That is probably why the last part, telling God how fine he was, was added to Jesus’ own words.
“The poor we have with us always” is always a favorite for some paid clergyman who wants to talk about Relevant Social Issues. If you read the text, it had nothing to do with the poor or with social issues. Jesus could have said the rich we have with us always. His point was that at that moment, he himself was standing in front of the crowd, and it was no time to get stuck on the State of the Poor or other current events.
When Jesus had the Last Supper, he instituted an entirely new custom just when Jews were supposed to be celebrating Passover. That was an enormous precedent, but I haven’t seen it discussed as such. Like his statement to the Jews that no one cold have salvation except through him, it as not the sort of thing the Society of Christians and Jews likes to dwell on.
If Jesus couldn’t do it, I sure as hell can’t. But it would be nice if commenters would at least mention the point I actually made before going on to their world view. World view is what General Discussion is for.
But it’s not a critical point. I just don’t want comments to be used the way “Christians” use the Gospels to get off the POINT that was made.
I have mentioned before that Dave uses my name a lot and gets criticism for it. He is supposed to be currying my favor.
For WHAT?
No, I encourage Dave to use my name to keep him on the point. It wouldn’t hurt if other commenters used a similar discipline, being sure they give a moment to being sure that they at least read the article they are talking about.
They damned well better, or I will withdraw all my wildly valuable Curried Favor from them.
Recent Comments