From a secular academic perspective, what did Jesus actually say that would be interesting philosophically or theologically? I'm not talking about his historical importance or how what he said was later interpreted, but his actual recorded words in the cannonical new testament. I feel like secular scholars often conflate his teachings with the obviously hugely important Christian legacy, but I'm interested in the actual novel ideas (if any) presented in the specific gospel quotations. Assuming he was not the Son of God, which I believe he was
>>18423415He said that if you desire a woman you commited a sin. Which is like the LGBTQ+ ideology but 2000 years early!
Actively willing the good of those harming you.
>>18423424Matthew 19:4-6
>>18423424Which leads to the obvious question of why God designed the entire biological and social reality of reproduction to rely on sin and lust.
>>18423426The academic term for this philosophy he invented is "cuckoldry".
The gospel youre looking for is gospel of thomas and in it he says "give unto ceasar what belongs to ceasar, give to god what is gods, and give me what is mine"This means to stop using money and acknowledge yourself as an individual with equal rights to earth... something that we only acknowledged with the enlightenment (locke, voltaire, etc). In the gospels it gets corrupted to make you think that 1) jesus was ok with money 2) he was okay with taxes
>>18423415Nothing that other Rabbis hadn't already been preaching since most of his messages are drawn straight from the Tanach aside from his whole "I am literally God" shtick (which he probably meant in a more metaphorical sense than his Apostles apostles interpreted)
>>18423415The whole point of Jesus was to get rid of the priest class and that it isn't needed to get close to God which is the real reason why the Jews turned on him. Too bad the church made it a point to get rid of that message. Paul was a Jewish psyop.
>>18423574>Paul was a Jewish psyop.Paul is the one who tore down the "jews-only" chosen people club and allowed followers to be uncircumcised.
>>18423415>From a secular academic perspective, what did Jesus actually say that would be interesting philosophically or theologically?Absolutely nothing because there is a complete lack of compelling evidence he ever even existed.
>>18423574>>18423588Paul was neither a Jewish supremacist nor a universalist. He was a Roman asset sent to tame the movement and extinguish its revolutionary potential.
>>18423600>tell everyone that jews are not the exclusive chosen people and that everyone can join the new covenant now>that will surely help suppress their movement! What were they thinking?
>>18423597What evidence do you have the Muhammad existed?
>>18423604The Idea was to make the Jewish sect concerned less with Jewishness. National identity = revolutionary potential.
>>18423527>(which he probably meant in a more metaphorical sense than his Apostles apostles interpreted)How can you take "I am literally God" more or less literally?
>>18423608>but what about this other desert monkey prophet from the other jew sect???Why are christcucks like this?
>>18423614If you read any other stuff besides the "church approved" gospels it's pretty easy to determine how Jesus referred to himself closer to the nous in neoplatonism than the same being as Yahweh. Conformity with the OT scriptures was something argued about for centuries.
>>18423618You don't believe Muhammad existed?
>>18423415I was listening to a Bart Ehrman podcast recently and he said the thing that set Jesus apart from most thinkers in his time was his belief that it was not good to dominate others but instead to serve them. Before Jesus the most admired kind of person would be someone like Alexander the Great, not someone who dedicates themselves to helping the poor or whatever.
> From a secular academic perspective, what did Jesus actually say that would be interesting philosophicallyIt’s not what he said. He was the living example of someone who embodied LOGOS.
