Jesus Didn’t...Yet...“Religious” People Do!

Jesus didn’t go to Sunday-go-meeting church...Religious people do.
Jesus didn’t start denominations...Religious people do.
Jesus didn’t build denominational “churches”...Religious people do.
Jesus didn’t appoint deacons...Religious people do.
Jesus didn’t appoint elders...Religious people do.
Jesus didn’t take a stand for “christian" causes...Religious people do.
Jesus didn’t teach us about institutional churches...Religious people do.
Jesus didn't teach his followers to pray to Jesus...Religious people do. 
Jesus didn’t instruct people to say the “sinners prayer...Religious people do.
Jesus didn’t shun sinners...Religious people do.
Jesus didn't condemn sinners....Religious people do.
Jesus didn’t judge people...Religious people do.Well that is not 100% true, He did judge the religious people who judged other people.
Jesus didn’t legislate religious rules and regulations...Religious people do.
Jesus didn’t believe the Old Testament was inerrant and perfect...Religious people do.

Now this one requires some explanation, for I can feel the condemnation of the “inerrant, authorized” KJV onlyers as they say, “God is the author of every word”: It is the Christian “rulebook” “God said it, I believe it, that settles it.” The question is; is that the way Jesus handled the scripture? Not according to what is written in scripture.  Take for example, when one of Jesus' questioners asks him about the scripture's take on divorce, Jesus basically says, "Yeah, Moses gave you that rule because of your stubbornness, but that's clearly not God's truth on the matter."  Now tell your pastor that the passage he just preached from wasn't really God's truth, but was only written because the author considered his audience to be stubborn and see what his reaction will be. But this is exactly how Jesus handles scripture: "you've heard it said, but I say to you...".

Jesus re-interpreted the Old Testament.  Religious people open their Old Testaments and read it as if it was written to them, perfectly literally, with no Christocentric reinterpretations whatsoever.  There is actually no difference between the ways religious believers read the Old Testament and the way someone might read it without knowledge of Christ: they just open it and read it as-is, except for possibly where they find some overt prophecy of Christ.  But for some reason Jesus' disciples required a long, tedious reprogramming by Jesus himself as to what the scriptures were actually all about.

Neither did Jesus did teach that an inerrant, perfect New Testament book was coming.  Isn't that kind of strange, assuming the New Testament is, you know, supposedly the WAY we know God, and Jesus is the one who came to SHOW us the way?  Wouldn't there be at least a "oh, also know that a new book is coming, it'll be dead-right and have the answer to everything"?  Don’t you think it strange that if the “book” is the beginning and ending regarding Christian living, Jesus would have at least hinted about such an important book. Jesus didn't have a New Testament, write anything to go into the New Testament, predict a New Testament, or even mention a New Testament?  Jesus told his disciples that the Holy Spirit" is coming and He will teach you all things concerning me, but nothing about a coming "book" that will teach you all things. Have you ever wondered “Why” that is so?

Does that mean the Bible is not a valid and important document, most diffidently not, but is it meant to be IDOLIZED as the “Word of God” when the Bible itself makes no claim, for it claims that, JESUS is the “Word of God”.