Is it enough to just "follow Jesus' teachings"?

[Josh]

In other threads on MennoNet right now, one specific position taken by a certain poster or posters is that what is important is Jesus' moral teachings, not Jesus the man himself.

This raises some interesting questions. If what is important is following the virtues that Jesus taught, and this is as important or even more important than having a new birth conversion experience, then what is actually important about Jesus at all?

Let me raise a question: suppose someone was born who taught the exact same things Jesus did. (Not the part about him being the Son of God, but everything else. Suppose this person was even unjustly accused of blasphemy and ended up being crucified like Jesus was. Perhaps we can call this person "Abel".

Would it still be the same thing as Christianity to follow this person's teachings? Would Abelites be the same thing as Christians? Suppose that sincere followers of both Jesus and Abel end up basically living almost identical lifestyles, because the teachings are the same.

What would the difference be? Would being an Abelite be enough to escape hell and go to heaven?

[temporal1]

John 14:6
https://biblehub.com/john/14-6.htm

5“Lord,” said Thomas, “we do not know where You are going, so how can we know the way?”

6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

7If you had known Me, you would know My Father as well. From now on you do know Him and have seen Him.”…

Interesting (and devastating) question.
When mygrdaughter moved from Catholic school to public school, she learned immediately the Bible, any reference to God, Jesus, scriptures, Christianity, was forbidden. She was told, this was disrespectful of others. Quite a shock for her.

What i noticed - public schools seem to recognize the value of Christianity, they recognize the loss to public schools.
Their response to this shortfall??!

While first removing the words, “Jesus, God, Bible,” etc. with surgical precision, they attempt to appropriate Christian Truth in various ways - while deliberately never giving credit to the Originator. It’s absolutely bizarre, and excruciatingly painful.

These things, mixed in with various Eastern religions, yoga, etc. A big mish-mash, mass confusion, emptiness.

My grdaughter once shared, “i’d like to go to a school where everyone is the same religion.” ouch.
She liked the freedom to learn, the freedom to express herself, while not being accused of harming others - the last thing she would intend!

John 14:6

[joshuabgood]

In other threads on MennoNet right now, one specific position taken by a certain poster or posters is that what is important is Jesus' moral teachings, not Jesus the man himself.

This raises some interesting questions. If what is important is following the virtues that Jesus taught, and this is as important or even more important than having a new birth conversion experience, then what is actually important about Jesus at all?

Let me raise a question: suppose someone was born who taught the exact same things Jesus did. (Not the part about him being the Son of God, but everything else. Suppose this person was even unjustly accused of blasphemy and ended up being crucified like Jesus was. Perhaps we can call this person "Abel".

Would it still be the same thing as Christianity to follow this person's teachings? Would Abelites be the same thing as Christians? Suppose that sincere followers of both Jesus and Abel end up basically living almost identical lifestyles, because the teachings are the same.

What would the difference be? Would being an Abelite be enough to escape hell and go to heaven?

I am not sure if I am the poster to which you are referring, but if I am, I don't agree myself with the first sentence. Jesus teachings are important, however their import is derived from the importance of the Son of Man himself. That Jesus is King is the good news.

[Josh]

I am not sure if I am the poster to which you are referring, but if I am, I don't agree myself with the first sentence. Jesus teachings are important, however their import is derived from the importance of the Son of Man himself. That Jesus is King is the good news.

I am asking if Jesus' teachings have any meaning apart from actually being born-again and spirit-filled.

If what is important is the teachings themselves, then it doesn't matter what person delivers the message. The teachings remain the same.

"Jesus is King" is not a teaching or commandment.

[ohio jones]

What i noticed - public schools seem to recognize the value of Christianity, they recognize the loss to public schools.
Their response to this shortfall??!

While first removing the words, “Jesus, God, Bible,” etc. with surgical precision, they attempt to appropriate Christian Truth in various ways - while deliberately never giving credit to the Originator. It’s absolutely bizarre, and excruciatingly painful.

Interestingly, this is precisely what Gothard did in stripping out the biblical content from his curriculum and calling it "Character First" so it could be used in schools and other secular settings.

[joshuabgood]

I am not sure if I am the poster to which you are referring, but if I am, I don't agree myself with the first sentence. Jesus teachings are important, however their import is derived from the importance of the Son of Man himself. That Jesus is King is the good news.

I am asking if Jesus' teachings have any meaning apart from actually being born-again and spirit-filled.

If what is important is the teachings themselves, then it doesn't matter what person delivers the message. The teachings remain the same.

"Jesus is King" is not a teaching or commandment.

It doesn't compute that somebody would follow the commands of a King, without actually honoring the authority of the King. I don't know really know how such a thing could be parsed out. Jesus' teaching about the two sons, one who said he was going to dishonor the father, but then honored him by following the commands seems to teach that. The other supposedly honored him (and you might say was "born again") but didn't follow his teachings and clearly wasn't a disciple.

[temporal1]

What i noticed - public schools seem to recognize the value of Christianity, they recognize the loss to public schools.
Their response to this shortfall??!

While first removing the words, “Jesus, God, Bible,” etc. with surgical precision, they attempt to appropriate Christian Truth in various ways - while deliberately never giving credit to the Originator. It’s absolutely bizarre, and excruciatingly painful.

Interestingly, this is precisely what Gothard did in stripping out the biblical content from his curriculum and calling it "Character First" so it could be used in schools and other secular settings.

[Neto]

Without the new birth, and a changed life in the Holy Spirit (Ghost), there is no lasting purpose to any of it. The central thing about Jesus is that he provided the way to be reconciled to God the Father, AND the power to live a life that actually pleases him.
This is what we saw in our setting among the Banawa - they quickly saw that Jesus is "King", specifically as one who has power over all of the evil spirits. They gained some temporary earthly benefits from this, but not salvation, no matter whether we have the here-and-now element of salvation in mind, or the final living-with-God-in-heaven element in mind. I realize that by "King" "personal King" is probably meant, but that might not be clear to everyone. And of course we believe that he is not just a "good teacher", but that he is a living teacher. In short, there are "good moral people" who follow all sorts of different teachers or "personal kings". But w/o the element of full reconciliation with God through the mysterious work of Christ in his death & resurrection, there is no permanent benefit to any of this morality.

[RZehr]

In other threads on MennoNet right now, one specific position taken by a certain poster or posters is that what is important is Jesus' moral teachings, not Jesus the man himself.

This raises some interesting questions. If what is important is following the virtues that Jesus taught, and this is as important or even more important than having a new birth conversion experience, then what is actually important about Jesus at all?

Let me raise a question: suppose someone was born who taught the exact same things Jesus did. (Not the part about him being the Son of God, but everything else. Suppose this person was even unjustly accused of blasphemy and ended up being crucified like Jesus was. Perhaps we can call this person "Abel".

Would it still be the same thing as Christianity to follow this person's teachings? Would Abelites be the same thing as Christians? Suppose that sincere followers of both Jesus and Abel end up basically living almost identical lifestyles, because the teachings are the same.

What would the difference be? Would being an Abelite be enough to escape hell and go to heaven?

Seems like Franklin might find “Abelites” an appealing group to join.