Jesus without a stenographer.

November 13, 2015

A speculation as to how it could be that Jesus would not want to engage a stenographer. Mohammed had stenographers to insure that his actual spoken words would be recited correctly, by turning them into recorded words. Jesus did not. Why not? Here is a proposed answer.

Jesus distrusted words, at least to the extent they become the basis for argument and disputation. and unloving acts. The word had been given to the Jews, and the result was clear and disappointing: formality, external holiness, demeaning compliance with a rule in outward actions, but corruption and hatred within. What was needed was a spirit, a new spirit that Immanuel Kant observed and recognized in Jesus as revolutionary, one destined to transform human thinking and put it on a new track. And it was the conveyance of this new spirit that was the great task and difficulty for Jesus, namely: to get his disciples to understand the meaning of love, of universal love, of all-giving love and then through them to get all others also to understand. Due to the pride of the Jews indwelling in the disciples Jesus could not get them to grasp what was meant by love as opposed to obedience and compliance. Due to the sinful nature of the disciples (as of all people), Jesus had to die in the place of a murderer (Barabbas) without complaint in order for the disciples finally to understand the meaning of love and the spirit of love. and then to enable them to ask for such a loving spirit themselves. What was called for was not recitations, for that ends up being the toy of the scholars and philosophers and finaglers; it was spirit, a something which possesses one’s soul and conveys a different frame of mind, a sincere desire to do good to all others, even to one’s enemies. (See Awakening Atonement.)

The words of Jesus are very important as signals of his character and makeup, but it is his spirit that must fill those words and give them life. It is the recorded words of scripture* (Paul) which now keep the Christian from accepting the marriage of homosexuals, while the spirit of Jesus** will accept the homosexuals and their mutual love. (See God’s Left-hand Joke.)

* I have given up interest in the Jewish scriptures and consider them somewhat as an appendix to the Christian scriptures, needful only in order to understand the context of the speech and actions of Jesus and Paul and others, e.g., as they tried to convert the Jews to the new faith. See Matthew 7:12 as a scriptural justification of this take on the Jewish scriptures.

** This spirit now, along with a more updated understanding, would also bring Paul along. For just as he would no longer believe the sky was a metallic dome with lights (the science of his day), he would also no longer believe that homosexuals were any more rebellious or sick or depraved than left-handers. See Christian Liberty.

Kant observed (in his pietist parents, I suspect) that this revolutionary and vital spirit, which Jesus himself introduced and conveyed to the world, has sometimes only smoldered, but has never gone out and is able again to flare up and engulf the world.

Mohammed’s system falls along with that of Constantine the Great (who gave us the “official” church), where the spirit is ignored and the emphasis is on words and which then leads to strife among scholars and experts and scriptural amateurs. Jesus’ system does not fail, but does need to be fanned via the spirit and the spirit-filled actions of the Church.

Author contact: pmr#$, replacing #$ with @

Filed under: Christian,Islam,Kant

Tags: , , ,


November 2015
« Oct   Mar »

Recent Posts