We have reviewed far more details for the first point than we will for any of the others, largely due to our survey of some major non-Christian religious founders. Of course, the indication that Jesus taught his own deity plays a major role in the overall teaching and authority of Jesus, too. However, we will not delve into as many details with the remaining categories of Jesus’ uniqueness, stating the last five subjects more succinctly.

The second subject is that, in one way or another, often with differing messages and nuances, many major religious teachers have claimed to present God’s way of salvation.

Generally, as prophets and/or teachers, those who did so usually pointed to a path that often involved good works, though some other emphases such as worship, or specific religious disciplines also played major roles.

Examples of the different world religious roads to salvation certainly vary. As Hexham outlines it, for Judaism and Islam it might be “obedience to the law of GOD as expressed in their respective SCRIPTURES.” Personal piety is also emphasized. For Hinduism and Buddhism, there are different teachings in the various traditions, but release from the cycle of birth and rebirth in various reincarnations is a very frequent goal. Buddhism also prescribes the Fourfold Path as the means of dealing with the perception of suffering and its cessation by eliminating one’s desire. Further, the Buddhist Eightfold Path can be summarized under three headings: faith, morality, and meditation. In contrast, Christianity emphasizes God’s grace being given

freely so that humans may commit their lives in faith to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who died for their sins and rose from the dead.50

As an example of works and worship working together, the Qur’an teaches, “O you who believe! Bow and prostrate yourselves, and worship your Lord, and do good, that perhaps you may prosper” (Surah 22:77). Another passage encourages Muslims to give charity, obey Allah, and believe (Surah 92:1-7).51

Jesus also declared that he was pointing out God’s path of salvation, such as in calling out his disciples (Mk. 1:15-20). Some might view these passages as indicating the more-or-less typical prophet’s call. But the Gospels also went much further than simply Jesus declaring the presence of a way or the path. Even in the critically-respected texts, Jesus also proclaimed more precisely that what his hearers did specifically with him and his message determined their entrance into the Kingdom of God and the eternal age to come.52

So while the major world religious teachers might commonly be content with teaching

that they would help their followers discover God’s path, or teach them the secrets of life, or similar ideas, only Jesus emphasized the ontological truth that what they did specifically with him determined whether or not they would enter the eternal Kingdom of God. It was in himself that his hearers were confronted with God’s presence as well as God’s message.

As a major example, Luke 14:25-35 specifies Jesus’ radical demand that placed him first in his followers’ lives, before their family members (vs. 25-26; cf. Mt. 10:37), before even their own lives (14:26-27), and before their possessions (14:33; cf. Lk. 12:32-34). Jesus called for his disciples to love him pre-eminently. Several other texts teach similarly.53

Perhaps surprisingly, critical scholarship has long recognized the radical nature of Jesus’ call regarding himself. Dietrich Bonhoeffer charged that, “The call to follow implies that there is only one way of believing on Jesus Christ, and that is by leaving all and going with the incarnate Son of God.”54 Another such striking declaration is: “When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.”55 Even Rudolf Bultmann cited a large number Synoptic Gospel texts (a few of which are Mark 10:25; Matthew 6:19-21, 24; 8:22; 13:44-46; Luke 9:61-62; 14:15-32) in order to acknowledge that Jesus demanded radical obedience, including to himself. This sense of commitment is a widespread and influential notion over the last century, especially among critical researchers.56 More recent scholars like Vernard Eller, N.T. Wright, and James D.G.

Dunn are typical of the continued dominance of these ideas.57

The difference between Jesus and all the other religious founders at this specific point, then, is between pronouncing the epistemic theme that others knew the path of life, and teaching the further ontological message that Jesus was that path in himself. It is both less radical as well as less unique to teach, “Here’s the path, get on it” than it is to proclaim, “I am that path myself, so you need to place me above everyone and everything in your life.” The latter is the message that Jesus taught, and this also made him more radically different.58

Endnotes

50 Irving Hexham, Concise Dictionary of Religion, pages 194-195, 85, 72, respectively (Hexham’s emphasis); cf. also Levinson, Religion, 29-30, 94-95, 103.

51 See also Anderson, Christianity and Comparative Religion, cf. 68.

52 As in the so-called Q texts in Matt. 10:37-39 and Lk. 11:20. See also Mk. 10:26-30; Matt. 16:24-25 (cf. the Gospel of Thomas 55, 101a).

53 See Lk. 9:57-62; Matt. 6:19-33; cf. the parables in Matt. 13:44-46.

54 See Bonhoeffer’s influential book, The Cost of Discipleship, trans. by Reginald H. Fuller (New York: Macmillan, 1959), 67.

55 Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, 99. For an exceptionally challenging and convicting treatment of radical obedience, see pages 45-104.

56 For details on many other prominent critical scholars such as Bultmann, along with Emil Brunner, Günther Bornkamm, Raymond Brown, as well as some their sources, see Habermas, The Risen Jesus and Future Hope, 142- 144 and the corresponding endnotes.

57 James D.G. Dunn, Jesus’ Call to Discipleship, Understanding Jesus Today Series, ed. by Howard Clark Kee (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), particularly 4, 12-13, 25-26, 30-31, 125; N.T. Wright, Following Jesus: Biblical Reflections on Discipleship (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994), 29-30, 82; Vernard Eller, The Simple Life: The Christian Stance Toward Possessions (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1973).

58 Of course, across the broad spectrum of liberal, moderate, and conservative views on these and related subjects, there are a variety of positions on the question of an individual scholar’s views on the issue of Jesus’ deity. We are not addressing the personal question here, though we have argued above several indications that Jesus taught his own deity, and that view is undergoing a bit of a renaissance at present.