The New Testament cites the Old Testament for proof texts and the title "Christ" he claims to be comes from the Old Testament, which is pretty clear in the books you're citing.
It doesn't make sense to be a Christian outside of a jewish context. At that point you're just creating a new sect like Muhammad did.
If you're only trusting the words of Jesus that don't source any other aspect of the tradition he's in, then you're left with content so scarce that you might as well be something else. Buddhists and Sikhs have the exact same values.
Sometimes keeping things simple is a good thing.
The majority of the new Testament are not Jesus' words or even quotes.
Calling people who follow a sect that contradicts Jesus' teachings doesn't make sense....
So you accept the gospels' account of Jesus' words, but not the narration surrounding it?
You realize the people who chose which accounts got preserved were the same ones who interpreted it through the rest of the New Testament, yeah? And that New Testament affirms the Old Testament and the institutional authority of the later church?
You either accept all of it, as a branch of judaism, or you accept none of it. This in between position of a judaism-free Christianity just doesn't make historical sense.
If you need some guru as an icon, pick one whose tradition you can affirm. Become a Zen Buddhist or something.
Yes but atleast they admit their narration is narration.
Jesus' main teachings of love and inclusivity are what made the religion survive as a sect riding on the coat tails of his words.
It may not make "historical" sense as you casually put it, however those are Jesus' words.
To each their own. I dont take kindly to people telling me what to do.
Dont need an icon, dont need to become anything.
Have studied all world religions very in-depth with a degree.
Most of our perceptions are illusions based on false senses narrated by false entities. You cannot believe anything to be reality except that you exist. This is the only thing one can know with certainty.
You're not a Christian then, and you were being dishonest by advocating Orthodoxy. You're just a modernist with an aesthetic.
Where was I "advocating" anything?
You called it "original" and defended it when it was pointed out that it was responsible for the destruction of European culture, only pivoting to redefine Christianity into something meaningless after the face.
Basically the most jewish way you could possibly have addressed it.
I did not comment on it destroying european culture.
You seem to be hell bent on antagonism and twisting peoples words in a pathetic attempt to gas light them.
If anyone is being "jewish" its you! 🚸
Your lack of knowledge on all these topics shines very brightly :)
Call me what you will, the churches are more modern than me lol
anyway you seem to answer questions with other questions.
I think I will stop answering yours now :)
