What did Jesus Mean and What was his purpose? (Garry Wills)

[scorpian8king]

jesus was one of many messangers who bring love and justice to men. leads them away from satan.

[buddy85442]

GREAT ,discussion Gary Wills makes a compelling arguments why Christ would not be a christian! The fundamental "God is love" foundation to any follower of Christ ,precludes most so called christian people and groups . The popular phrase "What would Jesus do?"Has never been a more relevant question than today.

[MRGV7373]

Paul was very much alive when the term "Christian" was coined. Act 11:26. This man is good but is not so accurate in some ways.

[buddy85442]

@MRGV7373 Very good point ,but i think his intent is, the term christian was not started by Christ or the disciples but rather as a descriptive term used in the [negative] to specify a certain cult or sect, by the Jew's?as their attitude shows in Acts:28:22-23 .much like the{ Heavens gate} cult is referred to as [ Hale Bopp cult} just my opinion ....respectfully

[MRGV7373]

Wow, this guy really get it. One of the great explanations o the gospels.

[Paur]

15:27

Yeeeaaaa, that was bullshit, Garry.

Just because religion can shape someone's morality, doesn't mean it thus should or would play a defining role in those political decisions. Not to mention other things can play a role in our morality. Trying to equate religion to morality there was crap.

[longfootbuddy]

jesus didnt say to pay taxes.. he was saying that the money belonged to ceasar, so give back money to ceasar, and give to god what is gods.. jesus knew the evils of money, and he had no use for it.. many people use this to justify paying tax, but thats not what he was meaning.. when he answered this question, he knew that the questioner was trying to trap him, but jesus was not endorsing the act of taxation.. he was saying to let ceasar have his money, because it is ceasars

[Mystagogia87]

What bothers me about Wills is that he'll get into issues about whether Paul really wrote certain letters, or whether they're saying something legitimate to us, etc. There's room for intelligent Catholic debate, but when you try to open that old can of worms, and try to revive an old argument that was settled over a millennium ago (the canon), that's not helpful; it's regression. That debate is over.

[LovingScrubbies]

There is a lot to agree with in what Wills is saying except in his total separation of the the record of Jesus from the teaching authority of "the church". It was church authority and tradition which produced the record of Jesus. There was a christian church long before there was a christian bible. This is so as a matter of history whether you are a christian or not. He backpedals on this further into the discussion.

[66thPsalm]

Very interesting~ Thanks