What did Jesus actually say?

Matt Stone reflects on different approaches to biblical literalism in a recent post on Glocal Christianity. He favours an approach of giving greater weight to the teaching of Jesus when examining statements in different parts of the bible that contradict each other.

I share his perspective of the importance of the teaching of Jesus. However, this brings to mind another challenge, namely: what did Jesus actually say? The record we have in the bible is limited and incomplete. There are no doubt things Jesus said that were not recorded. Furthermore, the things that were recorded are made up of:

• legitimate sayings of Jesus
• words that correctly capture the teaching of Jesus, but were not actual quotes
• words where someone has honestly tried to capture the teaching of Jesus, but missed the mark
• words where someone has deliberately created, changed, or manipulated the teaching of Jesus to reinforce their own interests e.g. relgious institutional power

The difficulty in discerning which words are which, or the inclusion of the last group, does not diminish the value of the biblical text. It just highlights the importance of individual and communal study and reflection.

I find it helpful to consider the biblical text as a whole and look at the broad, underlying themes: love, justice, compassion, peace, etc. Then individual pieces of text can be interpreted in the context of these themes. An exhortation from Jesus to "love your enemies" fits well: so it is probably legitimate or at least a true reflection of Jesus' actual teaching. A command from God in the Old Testament to commit genocide doesn't fit: so this is likely, at best, to be a horrendous misunderstanding of will of God by those who recorded it.

In doing this, it is important to give some serious, objective thought to the passages, both individually, and in respectful, community discussion, particularly with others who see things differently. This helps guard against interpreting the way of God purely to suit ourselves. The recorded actions of Israel in Canaan show this is all too easy to do.

The Problem of Evil

On the topic of the Problem of Evil on the CafeChurch forum, I wrote:

I think part of the problem arises from a particular way of understanding God. In "The Heart of Christianity", Borg talks about two concepts of God: supernatural theism and panentheism. The former involves thinking of God as a person-like being. God is "in heaven" or "out there". Thus, to act in the world God must intervene in the form of miracles, wonders, supernatural events, etc. Thelogically, it then becomes difficult to rationalise an all-loving and all-powerful God who sometimes intervenes but other times doesn't.


Panenthesism, does away with the notion of God as a being. Instead, God is a "Spirit" and everything is grounded in God. Thus God is not "out there" but around and within us. Thus, there is no "intervention", only everything taking place in God with the intention of God to bring everything into harmony with God.

Why did Jesus die?

Here is a post I made on the Cafe and Kaos Church blog. You can follow the subsequent discussion in the CafeChurch Forum.

With Lent (the forty days before Easter, not including Sundays) getting under way yesterday, it seems like a timely question: why did Jesus die?

Some would say: "Jesus died so that we can be forgiven". I don't think so.

What sort of God would require, or even worse - arrange, the death of their own child as a pre-requisite for offering forgiveness? I reckon God always forgives - always has, always will. Before we even realize something is wrong, God forgives.

I think this is part of the good news that Jesus understood and tried to teach. In doing so, he upset the religious conservatives of his day, who thought God required endless bloody sacrifices in order to forgive. In order to deal with the threat Jesus posed, they had him executed.

I think Jesus did not die so that we can be forgiven but because we are forgiven.