It’s all very well discussing how the gospels came to be, but are they true and do Christians adhere to what Jesus purportedly tells them there? Let’s take a look at one of his instructions from Matthew 23.8-10:
But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah.
Context: Matthew’s cult community is moving away from synagogue worship and so supplies Jesus with words condemning Pharisaic practices. Instead, because the new cult at this point is egalitarian, they have him endorse its practice. One teacher: the heavenly Christ. One church: the brotherhood. One Father: God in heaven. One Instructor: the heavenly Christ again.
How quickly the church jettisoned this advice! By the time of Ephesians (written in the late 1st or early 2nd and certainly not by Paul who was long dead) the church is awash with ‘the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, (given by Christ) to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up (Ephesians 4.11-12)
A little later still, 1 Timothy – again, not written by Paul – speaks of hierarchical structures of overseers (‘bishops’), leaders, teachers and instructors (the two words have the same meaning), while later in the first century, and in direct contravention of Jesus’ admonition, the Roman church started calling its priests ‘father’. The Pope, – the term means Father or Papa – soon became the Father of all fathers.
Did the early church not really believe that Matthew 23.8-10 recorded the words of Jesus? (They’d be correct if so.) Or did they think that they didn’t matter; were, in fact, optional? (Parenthetically, what is it with gospel-Jesus habitually referring to saviour-figures in the third person? He does it here – ‘one instructor: the Messiah’ – and when he refers to ‘the Son of Man’. Why should we suppose he means himself when he does this? He’s not afraid to talk at length in the first person about himself in John’s gospel, but in the synoptics he’s apparently too timid to do so and feels compelled to use the third person and hide behind alter-egos. Unless of course fictional gospel-Jesus, or his script writers, regards ‘the Messiah’ and ‘the Son of Man’ as beings other than himself.)
Then there’s the modern church, with its pastors (‘shepherds’), bishops (‘overseers’), teachers, instructors and priests (‘elders’). Does it too consider that gospel truths about brotherhood, no father but God and no teacher except the Christ, to be optional – insignificant even? Apparently so.
Which other words of Jesus do believers feel free to jettison? We’ll take an occasional look in the weeks ahead.
rejectingjesus, 
Ha-Ha! Yes, I’ve often wondered about those “third-person” remarks on the part of Jesus. But it’s just one of the MANY things that believers overlook/ignore in order to perpetuate their fantasy.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Part of leaving the faith for me (and I’m sure others) was learning to read the Bible for what it says rather than what I’d been taught that it says.
And one of the things I saw was that Jesus never established a church. Never makes plans for a church or teaches his disciples how to run a church.
It seems clear that Jesus either considered himself the promised messiah or the messenger proclaiming a coming messiah. There would be no need for a church. All of Israel would come to support the messiah. Rome would fall before their might. The messiah would rule in Jerusalem and all the world bow at this feet.
The church was a later invention by those who held to a failed messiah.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Later? Like 50 days later?
LikeLike
Don: Later? Like 50 days later?
Sure, Don. Later that afternoon. 50 days later. A decade and a half later. All qualify as later. Congratulations on your grasp of a word most toddlers understand. Tell the room mother as you leave that you earned a gold star.
But, yet again, you are confusing history and ghost stories.
We’re doing history when we try to determine what Jesus likely actually said while he was alive.
You are telling ghost stories when you try to tell us what he said 50 days after he died.
LikeLike
Pentecost was celebrated fifty days after Passover. On that day, 50 days after the crucifixion of Jesus God gave the Holy Spirit to the followers of Jesus. That was the event that marked the beginning of the church.
But, yet again, you are confusing history and ghost stories.
I realize that you think reality is limited to the material. I think that reality is larger than that, but we’ve been done that path before.
We’re doing history when we try to determine what Jesus likely actually said while he was alive.
How are you doing?
I was responding to the following comment.
one of the things I saw was that Jesus never established a church. Never makes plans for a church or teaches his disciples how to run a church.
I wonder what he had in mind when he said, “And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.” (Matt. 16:18) Or Matt. 18:17?
Yes. I know in the Gospels “church” is found only in Matthew. But it is used in the LXX for the congregation of Israel. So, it is not a surprising word. And the Jews to whom Matthew wrote the Gospel would have understood ekkesia in that context. So, your question really is whether Jesus intended to gather a congregation of people who would represent the kingdom of God on earth And then whether this was an expectation that is found in the Old Testament.
The answer to the first is yes. It is implied in Matthew 28:19,20 and Luke 24:47-49 and John 21 where he gives instructions to Peter to” feed my sheep.” Who would those be if not the congregation that would be gathered. (You know I imagine that “church” is the Greek word ekklesia which means to call out to an assembly.)
There are also a number of parables that anticipate the growth of the kingdom and the seeking of the Lord for those who would belong to the kingdom.
The answer to the second question is yes. Isaiah 56:8; 60:3; 66:18. These refer to the end result of the gathering of people of all nations into the kingdom of God.
The calling of people into the kingdom (the synagogue or church of God) is what Jesus was about.
LikeLike
You do know the gospels were written 40-60 years after the cult started? They are designed to endorse the events that took place in those years –
Cult worship groups (‘churches’) had formed so Jesus ‘must’ have known they would.
The temple had been destroyed so Jesus ‘must’ have known it would be.
Some had had visions of him: he ‘must’ therefore have risen from the dead.
Cultists anticipated his return so he ‘must’ surely have said he’d be back.
They believed he was the promised Messiah so they included references to Jewish scriptures to ‘prove’ it.
This is how gospel Jesus came to be constructed.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The thing believers continue to miss/ignore is -IF- Yeshua had been the mashiach that the Jewish people had been looking for, the entire story as it exists in modern times would be moot.
But he wasn’t. However, based on Paul’s wacky vision, gullible people believed him and .. “The Church” (plural) was born! Yeshua was turned into a figure of worship (along with Mary, of course) and thus we have the plethora of beliefs and doctrines and worship rites … and CHURCHES of today.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Excellent comments both!
Another interesting jesus thing is the only time he was actually asked “what must I do to be saved?”,
in Matthew 19, he says “keep the commandments and sell everything…not quite “salvation by faith”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
goyo: …he [Jesus] says “keep the commandments and sell everything…not quite “salvation by faith”.
Jesus didn’t understand the gospel as well as Paul or modern evangelical Christians do.
LikeLiked by 2 people