I believe that it is at the crossroads of ethical ideals and human potential that we discover the humanism of Jesus of Nazareth.

We must begin by recognizing that Jesus’ worldview retained a strong belief in God’s transcendence. We cannot deny that. But Jesus’ understanding of God was not so transcendent as to be otherworldly or even dualistic. Such a view came as a result of Platonic influences on Christian thought.

The Jewish tradition in which Jesus was formed would not allow him to separate God from this life. The “Master of the Universe” was an intimate reality woven into the structures of everyday experience. The eyes of God’s presence beheld even the fall of the smallest sparrow, but such a God was always beyond definition and theological formula. Jesus announced his concern that we “have life and life more abundantly,” without distinguishing between the corporeal and spiritual life.

Jesus never denounced his Jewish heritage, never defined himself as a Christian, and seemed more intent to restore the spirit of life in the Law of Moses. Indeed, there is not a single word attributed to Jesus that cannot be found in Torah, including the great commandment to “Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and mind and soul; and love thy neighbor as thyself.”

"The context of Jesus’ lessons was most often the world of nature or the human community. His examples included the lilies of the field, the mustard seed, and the lost sheep. He reminded us that the Creator is like the Good Samaritan, a woman who searches for a lost coin, or a sower of seeds. According to the teachings of Jesus, God is more at home in the human heart than all of the skies of heaven. “The Kingdom of God is within you,” he said. In fact, Jesus had very little to say about heaven or hell. He seemed more interested in the lives of fishermen, women, whores, tax collectors, and children – all of whom held very low social status in their culture..."

"The humanism of Jesus begins to emerge in the central importance he gave to human relationships and to the care, healing, and feeding of the human community. In the mind of Jesus we cannot separate the Kingdom of God from our relationships with one another. The human heart is the primary arena of sacred activity and is evidenced in the life of the community. Jesus violated many of the social taboos of his time to promote the radical interpretation he gave to his understanding that God is found in the just and ethical relationships of human communities.

In Jesus’ day, as in our own, there were many people who went to the scriptures for their interpretation of religion and holiness. They defined God out of their reading of the Bible and its laws. They prided themselves in their strict adherence to the many rules and demands of the Law of Moses. They were like the fundamentalists who are always quoting scripture to prove their point. Jesus was not a fundamentalist who believed that scripture took precedence over human relationships.

I am reminded of the fundamentalist seminary student who was dealing with a very difficult personal problem. He decided he would solve his problem by turning to the Bible. It had been his habit to close his eyes, open the Bible, point to a passage and learn the Bible’s response to his needs. On this occasion he closed his eyes, opened the Bible and set his finger on the page. Opening his eyes he read, “And Judas went out and hung himself.” Thinking that was not quite the answer he needed, he decided to give it another try. He closed his eyes, opened the Bible to a new section and placed his finger on the page. He was not encouraged when he read, “Go and do likewise.”

As I said, Jesus was not a fundamentalist who believed that scripture took precedence over human relationships. Recall the story in John’s gospel of the woman who had been caught in adultery. She was brought to Jesus who had been teaching in the temple. The angry lynch mob interrupted his lesson. Out of the dust and noise she was thrown down to the stone floor before him. Her eyes were gorged with fear and panic. Her body ached from the rough handling, the shoving, and, I suspect, the pinching. Panting, she fearfully raised her eyes to see the large stones in the hands of her accusers. Their fingers massaged the rocks in white knuckled anticipation of righteous indignation.

A shrill voice called out, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?”

Jesus knew that she was a pawn to entrap him. Would he rightly interpret the law or blaspheme? She did not mean anything to these men. They would use her one way or another. Jesus squatted down and doodled in the dust of the floor with his finger. He then said, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” After a long pause there was a shuffling of feet, muttering, cursing, and then the clatter of rocks dropping to the floor. Soon they were alone – Jesus and the frightened woman.

“Is there not anyone left to condemn you?” he asked.

“No one, sir,” she replied.

“Neither do I condemn you,” he responded. “Go home and sin no more.”

I think of the story of the woman at the well in John, chapter four. She was a Samaritan woman who was a whore, though Jesus politely refers to her as a woman who has had “five husbands.” In this story the disciples had gone to town to buy groceries. It was in the afternoon and he was sitting by the well. Apparently he was thirsty, but had no means to draw water. The woman approached the well and began to draw her water. Jesus asked her for a drink. She was immediately surprised and even stunned by his request. She asked him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan. How can you ask me for a drink?”

Understand that there are layers of issues here. First, Jesus was a teacher. Some might even call him rabbi. Rabbis were not supposed to talk with women, even in public. Secondly, Jesus apparently knew that this was a woman of questionable moral stature, which would only strengthen the taboo of speaking with the woman. But even greater than this was the fact that she was a Samaritan. The Jews and Samaritans had despised one another for centuries. The Jews considered Samaritans unclean, even fouler than pigs. If a Jew married a Samaritan his or her family considered the individual dead and held their funeral.

Jesus challenged major issues of law and social custom by asking to drink from the cup of a Samaritan woman of tarnished reputation. He reached past legalities to embrace the human being with one of the simplest acts of intimacy. He asked to drink from her cup, to press his lips to the same rim hers had touched.

What is more, he dared to touch the issues of a troubled heart. He had wisely guessed that the choices she had made in her life had not brought her happiness. She wandered from one frustrating relationship to another, searching for security and peace. She had been used and abused in the hope of finding a home. Jesus invited her to drink from the well of life’s richer resources. He invited her to be at home in the blessing of life that transcended religion, culture, gender, and sexuality. Neither Jerusalem nor Samaria was the address for her home. Her new address was her own conscience where she would dwell in the Spirit of truth – about herself, her world, and her values.

The humanism of Jesus placed emphasis on the human beings and our relationships with one another. Compassion, even with people who had violated the religious and cultural laws of his time, was the ethical imperative that defined his ministry. If Law did not serve Love it was necessary for Jesus to sidestep the Law and accommodate Love.

Jesus was about the business of giving people a new image of themselves. His constant attention to the marginalized people of society, the pariahs of culture, gives evidence that he believed in them. That is not too different from the Unitarian Universalist slogan, “The religion that believes in you.” He offered them respect when the Law had dismissed them as sinners and the chaff of hell.

I suspect that Jesus of Nazareth might have had some sympathy with the motives of the Humanist Manifesto. I think he would have agreed that people are indeed responsible for their lives and the condition of their interpersonal and global relationships. Jesus understood that the ethics of compassion, expressed through our relationships, serves to bring people to the fullness of their talent and potential. No one can become a self-actualized person in a climate of alienation, burdened by anxiety, guilt, jealousy, fear and anger.

Jesus’ challenge to the Humanist Manifestos would not debate its tenets. He would wonder whether humanists were more committed to the ideology of the Manifesto than to the world it seeks to serve. Humanism has failed if it is nothing more than a philosophy whose only purpose is to debunk faith and religious tradition. Humanism can be a life-giving agency of affirmation and compassion to women and men who want to live their lives with purpose and integrity. I believe that this was the agenda of Jesus of Nazareth.

(source: THE HUMANISM OF JESUS © Dr. Gary Blaine First Unitarian Church of Toledo , March 16, 2003)

---