I am submitting a letter for publication and hope for your favorable consideration. It concerns the moral judgment of a man with regard to his _character_ as leader, certainly a timely subject by the way.
The letter now follows:
A thesis for debate: Jesus was the greatest king of the Jews, even if his kingship was entirely incognito and only acknowledged at the time by the gentiles. I dismiss historical accuracy and ask that the man be judged by the report itself, and so even assuming he was as deranged as Don Quixote.
This man has two missions as king, namely 1. to give his entire life and strength for the sake of the Jewish people including the most lowly, and 2. to personify and perfect their very faith itself (in contrast to Abraham who wavered in his at the Gate to Egypt). He consummates the first by rescuing a Jewish convict in the hands of gentiles, and the second by doing so nonviolently through changing places with the convict in torture and death, and by forgiving his own tormentors. Even at his death he comforts a Jew suffering his same fate.
By way of comparison I note that great King David sinned by abusing his gentile general in the land of Israel and indeed for the sake of personal and illicit gain. Jesus is reported as free from any guilt, except that he frequently violated the sabbath work taboo, but always only for the sake of a Jew in need.
I argue therefore that the man is to be deemed the greatest king of his people by all impartial judges. Indeed, I wonder if his character not be the exemplar for any leader of any people.
Philip McPherson Rudisill
To contact the author, please e-mail: pmr**kantwesley.com (note: the ** must be replaced by @)