| |
|
I've only read about the first page and a half of this thread, but I have some thoughts that I think are relevant (apologies if they've been mentioned already).
First off, on the name thing, I read a book (fiction) by Christopher Moore this summer called "Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal". First, good book, highly recommended. Second, Moore makes an interesting point: technically Jesus Christ means "Joshua Who is Annointed" or "Joshua the Annointed [One]", as apparently Christ (from Christos) means "Annointed".
Second, despite not being Christian, I did read several portions of the Bible last year (amused the chaplain at my Catholic highschool [long story] when I asked to borrow his). Jesus did have his moments of anger, just like any normal person (he demanded a fig tree to produce fruit out of season, when it wouldn't he struck it down, etc.), which I think makes him more humanistic than a perfect ideal.
Of course, Jesus/Joshua could act as a perfected ideal, being a paragon of compassion, sacrafice, love, etc., if that's what you're looking for.
Though really, at the root of his legend, you could really make a point for the story of Jesus/Joshua being about a guy who was really nice, wanted to help people, and opposed the current ruling authorities for being hypocrites and oppressors.
Someone brought up a point about "Christian charity". My main issue with this is that people shouldn't NEED religion to be charitable, but if its going to motivate them to do so...then that's fine as well. Does it really matter if you feel the need to tell someone you did something charitable, or that you did it for social reward, so long as you DID perform a charitable act? I dunno, maybe that's just my upbringing coming out (mom always said to just be nice to people because they're people). |
|
|
