Skip to main content

Follow-Up: Jesus In The New Testament

 In my last post, I took a shot at Ricky Gervais. Well, not really. More like a shot at atheist-flavored ignorance, which even as an entertainer, he’s pretty visible for.

We need to actually speak plainly about what we have recorded in what Christians call the New Testament, or New Covenant. Church people, step out of the shoes of loving Jesus and His Church for one moment. How does the New Testament read or sound on the face of it? Let’s just focus on the four Gospels. That’s where all the stuff allegedly said by Jesus is recorded. Jesus as a liar doesn’t have much evidence behind it; he didn’t lounge in Malta after all the stuff, getting rich after selling purported baptismal water. He got called a blasphemer by his own people, and executed as a disturber of the peace by the Roman Empire. Let’s set aside Jesus’ alleged resurrection and every miracle he did for a moment as well.

Jesus being crazy seems to have some evidence behind it.

No sensible philosopher I have ever heard would talk like that. If Jesus sounds like a good teacher to you, you haven’t read the Gospels at all. Even taking into account the rabbinical penchant for purposeful overstatement, Jesus is pretty out there. Lewis was right: the “good teacher” cope is patronizing born of ignorance of the source material.

To be totally fair, Genesis to Malachi doesn’t read or sound like a home improvement book from Bob Villa. Not sure if you have noticed that. The comedians sure have, and they are not wrong.

Even if we only granted the possibility of miracles and prophecy to the first half of the book [God of Israel: The Motion Picture—.ed] Jesus’ opponents make strong points. I’m not kidding. You’d have to sympathize with the Pharisees recorded in St. John, who basically said, “C’mon, man. We watched you grow up, we know your family, and you came down from Heaven? OK.” In a way, if you don’t see “the bad guys” as the reasonable people, you won’t understand the magnitude of faith, of what God is expecting and inviting you into.

This, by the way, is why religion on ordinary TV seems so stupid: real believers don’t go to God to figure out how to be good people; they go to God because they know they aren’t, and the time for figuring that out and fixing it is very short. The plainer, blunter message is this: God forgives and invites into relationship, because He is going to fix and judge anything broken and evil. When he does, there’s nothing after that, but blissful relationship with God or Hell.

Figure out if it’s possible that the supernatural world could or does exist. Then figure out if that matters to you. But I have known good people at secular nonprofits. You don’t need religion or God, if all you’re trying to do is live and die with a bit of comfort in between.

But what if Jesus is Lord?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...