TED Conversations

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Is christianity what Jesus wanted?

According to what I've heard about the Buddha's teachings, he expressly did not want himself to become idolized and made into an object of worship and mere ritual, but rather he wanted his teachings to be only the starting point of ongoing critical investigation, practice and dialog. As far as I can tell, both have happened.

Personally, I don't know a whole lot about what's written in the bible, for example. But I don't find it hard to imagine that Jesus might have felt the same way about his teachings as the Buddha did.

So my questions are:

1 - Do you know of any concrete indications that Jesus in fact did or did not feel that way?

2 - In your view of christianity, would you say it is only idolized worship and mere ritual, or ongoing critical investigation, practice and dialog, or does it have aspects of both (and to what degree)?

3 - Why would you say that is, and would you say it needs more (or less) of one or the other?

0
Share:
progress indicator
  • thumb
    Apr 3 2011: My experience with my devout Catholic mother/teacher was to live life with integrity. Although taught as a Catholic, I abandoned the religious dogma at 19, and realized later in life that I was more aligned with Buddhism. I was puzzled as to how that happened, until I read something the Dalai Lama said: "If we are a good christian, we are a good buddhist". I interpret that to mean, if we are a good person, it doesn't matter what we call ourselves.

    While exploring various religions as an adult, including Catholicism, I stayed in a Benedictine monastery, working in their gardens, and participating in other aspects of their everyday life. While wandering in the library one day, I found an interesting little book called "Meeting Jesus AGAIN for the First Time" by Marcus J. Borg. With various passages from the bible, it convinced me that Jesus was a compassionate, humorous, loving person, and I discovered that the Benedictine priest's practice was very similar. Their practice didn't seem to be about dogma and ritual, as much as living life fully in every moment. They did their own logging, gardening, cleaning, cooking, etc., and had so much fun with each and every task. I later stayed with one of their sister communities in Mexico and found the nuns to be the same way. I traveled with them to mountain villages, where they helped educate and nurse those in need. Always, with both these groups of nuns and priests, there was joy, humor, gratitude, appreciation, love.

    I don't think we have any "concrete indications that Jesus... did or did not feel" a certain way. What we do have is information regarding how he lived his life. What I have, is an exploration of his life through some who believe in how he lived his life, and my own exploration of life based on how I've lived my life. I believe the prophet Jesus, encouraged us to live with kindness and love. Somehow, a very basic message became entrenched in dogma, that often doesn't effectively serve humanity.
  • thumb
    Apr 3 2011: I'm fully convinced that Jesus wouldn't be happy with the majority of Christian churces today. Jesus said in Matthew 7:21-23: “Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew YOU! Get away from me, YOU workers of lawlessness."
    The first priority for Jesus was to preach the good news about God's Kingdom. That is what he taught his followers to do.
    He would never have been part of the political arena, or promoted war. So he wouldn't have accepted anyone who claim to be a Christain, yet participate in politics and/or war.

    At least that's what I've understood from reading the Gospels.
  • thumb

    E G 10+

    • +1
    Mar 22 2011: I know very well what means to be an christian , and I can say you that practicing just some rituals it doesn't mean at all to be an christian.................... a lot ( in fact the most "christians" ) make it because is easier , comfortable but that isn't christianity and in this sense I think that christianity isn't what Christ has expected to be.
  • Mar 14 2011: It's hard to answer your questions because the real Jesus has been grossly distorted when Rome adopted Christianity as its official religion, and filtered out many of the things he was reputed to have said. But I'll try:

    1) On multiple occasions, the bible claims that Jesus referred to himself as the son of god, son of man, the king whose kingdom is not of this world, etc. He was noted for speaking with an air of authority, even to Roman officers.

    2) Christianity hinges on the Judaic concept of sin and scapegoats. Where all mankind is doomed because it sinned against god starting when Eve bit the apple, and only by having the whole nation place its sins on a goat, would it be possible to avoid their fate. In the Jewish contract with god (a covenant), scapegoats can only be used for a year. Jesus claimed that he was the son of god, had no sin, was a perfect sacrifice, and that it was good forever. Hence the term "lamb of god" and a new "covenant."

    3) Jesus participated in some religious rituals (he was called a rabbi/spiritual teacher), everyone in ancient Israel did. But his main message was that it is more important to be spiritually genuine. He spent a lot of time engaged in "direct action" against the religious authorities and despised their superficiality. He seemed to feel that rituals were worthless if people weren't spiritually genuine and adhered to the purpose behind the ritual. For example, it wasn't enough that you should avoid adultery, but that if you even looked at a women in lust, you were just as guilty.

    What draws many people outside of Christianity to him were his ideas of spiritual genuineness. However the institution of Christianity has grossly warped his teachings. In one of the unapproved works, he said: "the kingdom of god is inside and all around you." In short, you don't need buildings or a professional priesthood, or have any concerns regarding the natural world for they are corrupting influences. You can live on faith alone.
  • thumb
    Mar 13 2011: I am convinced that if the writings in the bible are even a reflection of what Jesus wanted, that the answer is no. Most 'Christians' have never read their own book. They simply are blown along by political forces who interpret the words of the book. If people were actually being led by the sentiments of the new testament there would be a lot more social harmony, a lot fewer poor people and a lot more caring for the downtrodden and a lot less judgement. I am convinced that today's 'sin du jour' is actually the one sin that the judger and proclaimer figures that he/she does not have. For example: with all the things in the world to rage against- why would anyone pick homosexuality? My guess is that it is the one 'sin' that a person can go through his own checklist and feel that it does not apply to him (or else that it is the one that he has to pretend most fervently does not apply to him in order to fit into his congregation).
  • Comment deleted

    • Mar 13 2011: Sure, I would tend to agree with that, I think in general any dogmatic or self-authoritative approach ultimately does more harm than good.

      Although it's interesting to keep in mind that a truly wise person would also adapt his teachings to the context of the times and the needs of the "target audience". It's conceivable that this could sometimes imply the institution of something more assuming and structured (even while realizing its limited and temporary suitability, and with the hopes that at some point it would outgrow its own usefulness).

      So the reason for my first question was to find out if there is anything specific in what Jesus might have said or done that could indicate his intentions in this regard, sothat it might serve as a more solid basis for constructive debate than imagination alone.
  • thumb
    Mar 12 2011: Here's how I see it. We have First Folio proof of Shakespeare's writing and we still do not understand it fully and it's only 500 years old. How could we possibly know what it was that Jesus really intended, how can we know if there really was such a person?