Why do we soften the troubling Jesus found in the Bible? Maybe our selective editing reveals something important about how human morality has evolved.
I spent decades around Christianity, and I know a lot of thoughtful, compassionate Christians (including clergy who have studied scripture far more deeply than I have). They know the troubling passages are there. But when we talk about who Jesus really was, we tend to emphasize the Good Samaritan, the Beatitudes, forgiveness, compassion, and love of neighbor. When Jesus starts talking about swords, hating your family, burning cities, or throwing people into outer darkness, suddenly we need context, metaphor, translation, theology, and sometimes a pretty impressive amount of interpretive gymnastics. And that raises an uncomfortable question: If these words belong to the Jesus Christians want us to follow, why do we so often need to soften them before we’re comfortable hearing them?
It would be easy for me, as an atheist and humanist, to stop there; to point at Christians and accuse them of editing Jesus into someone who better reflects their modern values. But that’s NOT where I’m gonna stop… because I think the far more interesting question isn’t whether we reinterpret the past. I think the far more interesting question is why we reinterpret the past. What moral framework are we using? And are we even willing to admit that we’re doing it?
So, let’s dive into that… in this episode of Afterthoughts!
