Were Jesus' Teachings Radical?

**InsaneHanz** · November 18, 2009, 06:46 PM

Looking at Jesus as a teacher, which of his teachings were actually radical? I'm only talking about teachings involving how to treat others, not any that involve the supernatural.

Whenever I ask Christians this, they just say "love". Was it really a new idea to be kind?

**S.L.I.G** · November 18, 2009, 06:47 PM

Yeah, it was...

**C-Rob** · November 18, 2009, 06:50 PM

Deciding to preach against an eye for an eye was pretty against the times.

**Hax** · November 18, 2009, 07:04 PM

Whenever I ask Christians this, they just say "love". Was it really a new idea to be kind?

Well...in that region of the world, perhaps. In the Far East, there had been some exceptional advances on that.

**S.L.I.G** · November 18, 2009, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by Elphir

Well...in that region of the world, perhaps. In the Far East, there had been some exceptional advances on that.

It was radical anywhere...the actual application of what Jesus' taught, in respect to treating others well, is STILL radical.

**Wilder** · November 18, 2009, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by InsaneHanz

Whenever I ask Christians this, they just say "love". Was it really a new idea to be kind?

Well, If the Christians were correct in their summery of his teachings, I would be led to concur that "love" is not that radical seeing as people have loved one another since before we were humans, but I think that is a poor sort of summary from the Christians.

What was radical about Jesus' teachings was that we should love one another regardless of conditionally. That is a standard which I don't think as ever really been achieved, so yes, fairly radical.

That said, Jesus was a little, hrm, shall we say "multifaceted" in his teaching, to put it politely. I would certainly not question that Jesus existed, but I remain unconvinced that all, or indeed any of his teachings in the bible comes from the same person.

**cfmonkey45** · November 18, 2009, 07:52 PM

It was radical to Judaism, if that's what you mean. Specifically because his disrupted the norms, did not honor the Sabbath as traditionally proscribed, and, more importantly, he claimed to fulfill the law, and in doing so, redefined it as implausible and impossible to keep. Thus, it is a moral compass and focus, but not a direct way to reach God.

**Sir Winston Churchill** · November 18, 2009, 09:05 PM

Well of course, most things need to be radical to get notice. The American Revolution, the Crusades, WWII, Freedom of Slavery, the Civil Rights Movement, all were radical. Jesus's teachings were no different on the scale of radicalism.

**hellas1** · November 19, 2009, 12:25 AM

@InsaneHanz,

Regarding:
"Looking at Jesus as a teacher, which of his teachings were actually radical? I'm only talking about teachings involving how to treat others, not any that involve the supernatural.

Whenever I ask Christians this, they just say "love". Was it really a new idea to be kind? "

Actually, you've got a good point.

Let's look at this issue intelligently and research for YOURSELVES what Rabbinic thought was like regarding the "Old Testament" during the time of Jesus.
Here's what I've researched and found out.

In the days of Jesus, there were 2 outstanding schools of Rabbinic thought:
A. The "House" of Shammai
B. The "House" of Hillel

House denoted "school of learning (Old Testament)"

The House of Shammai taught that the only reason that a person could leave his wife/husband was due to marital unfaithfulness (adultery.)

Jesus concurred with that particular schools understanding of the "Old Testament."

Jewish sources interpret that one "Eye for an Eye" verse ONLY as meaning to give back money to the person whom you have blinded as pay back!
Why?
In the act of actually removing another person's eye, you could kill the person, whereas the original offense was one of eye loss not loss of life!

Jesus said "Turn the other cheek" meaning to be humble. He also said "Do good to those who spitefully use you." The "Old Testament" prophets uttered the same things.

Finally, I've only given you a taste of Rabbinic thought in the time of Jesus!
For more info, Research it yourselves folks.

P.S. Please stop bashing Jesus
hellas1:32

**Hakkapeliitta** · November 19, 2009, 12:53 AM

Yes they were radical and are to this day. Even Christians think some of the things Jesus taught are just too idealistic, like loving your enemies, and very few think you must follow them as a Christian

**Flavius Nevitta** · November 19, 2009, 03:05 AM

Originally Posted by Hakkapeliitta

Yes they were radical and are to this day. Even Christians think some of the things Jesus taught are just too idealistic, like loving your enemies, and very few think you must follow them as a Christian

Depends on the context. Jesus was one of the "endtimes preacher types" and that's what early Christians believed (until they found out that it might take a little longer for the end of the world to happen).

His message could be summed up briefly as: " Respect the worldly authorities, be nice to the people around you and don't sin because the end of the world is near"...many people often forget about that last part.

Early Christians (and Jesus himself) believed that the end would come within their generation...THAT indeed does make a difference when it comes to following his teachings.

**Bovril** · November 19, 2009, 03:44 AM

Originally Posted by Flavius Nevitta

Jesus was one of the "endtimes preacher types"

This is actually a contentious issue in secualar scholarship and does not go without saying. The idea that Jesus was an end time preacher may be more related to the projection onto his preaching of Messianic ideas from his millieu rather than the content of his preaching. His NT term 'The Kingdom of Heaven' seems to have several meanings and cannot be read in a simply eschatological sense. It is also possible that different people understood Jesus in different ways. Our best ideas about this come from acts, where the behaviour of the early Christians as regards eschatological expectation is ambiguous, IMO. Paul's line about Jesus returning before the last of his generation was gone must be read in the context of what Paul thought Jesus' presence meant. Paul considered himself to be the last person to see Jesus, due to his vision on the road to Damascus, so for Paul the return of Jesus may well not signify the end time, but instead his appearance in visions. Of course its totally possible Jesus was an end tie preacher, but it does not go without saying.

**Hakkapeliitta** · November 19, 2009, 05:11 AM

Originally Posted by Flavius Nevitta

Depends on the context. Jesus was one of the "endtimes preacher types" and that's what early Christians believed (until they found out that it might take a little longer for the end of the world to happen).

His message could be summed up briefly as: " Respect the worldly authorities, be nice to the people around you and don't sin because the end of the world is near"...many people often forget about that last part.

Early Christians (and Jesus himself) believed that the end would come within their generation...THAT indeed does make a difference when it comes to following his teachings.

Oh I agree. Some things Jesus taught, like abandoning your family, giving away your wealth, worrying only about your salvation make a lot more sense if you believe the world is going to end very soon. And things like loving your enemies or giving away your possessions if someone asks for them aren't very practical if you want to build a lasting society on Jesus' teachings.

So if NASA was to announce that in a couple of weeks an asteroid is going to wipe Earth clean of life Christians following Jesus' teachings to the letter wouldn't be so radical anymore.