What if the Bible was one long allegory and Jesus was merely a great moral philosopher like Socrates?

Question

Why didn't this question get many stars? bummer

Answer 1

Er, GREAT moral philosopher? Apart from the Golden Rule, which was hardly original, what great philosophical advances did he produce?

The 'turn the other cheek' thing was a cute idea, but way ahead of its time in a culture that was still having difficulty with Lex Talionis. It STILL hasn't caught on - because as stated it's too extreme.

Forgiveness is a good idea - now at any rate. At the time it wasn't very practical.

Some of these are good - but great? I think Socrates has the edge.

CD

Answer 2

This question brings to mind C.S. Lewis’ well known “trilema” from his book Mere Christianity in which the “open-minded skeptic” is supposedly willing to accept the historicity of Jesus Christ, but deny the orthodox view of Christ as the incarnate Son of God. Thus supposedly the “open-minded skeptic” is willingly to place Christ in the category of a “good man” but not accept the Biblical revelation of Christ.


It's purpose is to point out the fallacy of thinking that Jesus could be a “great moral teacher” and not accept Him for who He said is, God in the flesh. The “trilema” argument takes various propositions of Christ, as presented in the gospels, and states that if Christ claimed to be God and was deluded as to His identity (a lunatic), or mislead his followers (a liar), then he could not have been a “great moral teacher.” Thus the only option left is that He is Lord. On what basis do you believe the accounts of Jesus’ ‘good’ works or philosophy are reliable and yet other statements concerning Christ’s identity are not?

Answer 3

That's pretty much the way I look at it anyway. Though when it comes to Jesus, I see him in much the same light that I see King Arthur or Robin Hood. The stories of them have some basis in real people during those times, and sometimes real events (such as the Crusades in the story of Robin Hood and how bad certain parts of England fell because of it - as well as the RCC records showing there was a "Friar Tuck", but he was excommunicated because he "consorted with Pagans"). This hardly means I believe every word of the stories, nor that I would place a whole lot of "faith" in the writer(s). But they're fun to read, they have some good morals played out in them, etc... Now, I can't say the Bible is "fun" to read... there's too much rape, incest, grotesque violence in it for me to say that... but I see the stories the same way.

Answer 4

You know, you aren't the only one that came to this conclusion. I like some of Jesus' teachings, but the stuff by Paul is attrocious. James has some bright spots that back up what Jesus taught, but Christians by and large ignore Jesus and James in favor of Paul's mythology. They don't even realize that there are several different perspectives and philosophies on how to live your life that are being thrown at them, they think that it's all one divinely inspired opinion. If they looked at who wrote and said what, instead of just which testament it's in, then they may be able to see where Christianity went wrong.

Edit: So many thumbs down, and yet everything I said is truthful. Just proves my point. By and large, christians favor mystical over real. They fail to realize that the bible they haven't read all the way through but claim is consistent throughout, teaches many differing views because it has works in it by people who disagreed theologically. Not one of them can say that Paul and James were of the same mindset when it comes to works and faith. Paul said works are meaningless as faith is all that matters, James said faith without works is dead. They never agreed on this, but both are in the bible trumpeted as "the word of God." Why would God disagree with himself? Perhaps he didn't. Perhaps the books that were voted into the Christian bible were just that, books that were voted into the Christian bible, not divinely consistent works that assembled themselves. Jesus was a Jew that got fed up with what his religion had become. He had ideas to change the mindset and offered a different perspective that long overdue. He wanted to keep what was good about Judaism, but discard the bad. James was a Jew who was also fed up with what his religion had become, but like Jesus, decided to keep the good, but discard the bad. Paul, on the other hand, was a confessed liar who used the idea of Jesus (whom he never met) to create a new religion. Find out which books are attributed to who, and compare for yourself how the teachings of Jesus, the teachings of James, and the teachings of Paul differ. Don't take my word for it, find out for yourself.

Answer 5

Then He had a lot of good points and has helped a lot of people and should be voted philosopher of the Millenium lol

Answer 6

Then man would have no hope for forgiveness of his sins or a way to enter Heaven.

Answer 7

That theory has merit. I'm sure they stylized "him" after many smart men so the simple people would think him extraordinary.

Answer 8

That would make a loooooooooot more sense than the generally accepted theory.

Answer 9

Thats why i prefer Islam

Islam says Jesus was a mere Messiah and a Prophet

Answer 10

You don't have to worry about it, since what you said is not true.

The Bible is factual, word for word. It is God-inspired, and to doubt those words is sheer blasphemy.