Whatever one thinks of Jesus as savior or Son of God, everyone seems agreed that at least he was a teacher. It’s when we begin to ask exactly what he taught, however, that agreement slips away. From one perspective, what Jesus taught is not unique: love one another, know yourself, help the poor. Such advice somehow seems ingrained in the human consciousness, and so unsurprisingly turns up in a variety of religions and philosophies.

But Jesus, more specifically, was a first century Jew living in what we now call Israel, and it is in this context that specific teachings emerge. There is, however, no unanimity on what these teachings are. Although most modern scholars believe that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet, preaching the imminent end of the world and the coming judgment of God, there are those who point to the Kingdom of God on earth as Jesus’ intent.

Aside from his position on the future and the end of time, what did Jesus teach about life in the here and now? Was he a Zealot who wanted armed insurrection against Rome, or was he a pacifist? Should we cooperate with Rome by paying taxes, or not? Opinions vary.

In short, it would seem that the teaching of Jesus falls into two categories. The first is a sort of a universal expanded golden rule, good advice, but not unique. The other is specific to his time and place, but also not unique to him inasmuch as there were contemporaries who represented the various positions on the issues that he may have held.

One reason why it is helpful to limit the discussion to the teaching of Jesus, is because it offers a historical basis for conversation. Christians and secular humanists, as well as adherents to other belief systems, can relate to one another more easily by limiting talk to the teaching of Jesus, even though that teaching may be variously understood. This approach is especially attractive to many today who seek universal connectivity and prefer not to search for any way in which Jesus might have been unique.

To be sure, no one ought claim that they have universal perspective. We are all parochial, influenced by our time and place in ways that are beyond our understanding. Christians should never proclaim that Jesus the Christ is the one and only whatever. But what Christians can proclaim is that, for them, the Jesus story makes sense. And the heart of that story, so often overlooked, is that when Jesus encountered those who became his disciples, something very special took place. If we seek to discover the transformative power of Jesus, we must seek to understand what happened when he encountered those who became his followers.

They did not follow because Jesus walked on water. Nor because he advocated armed rebellion. Nor because he was a community organizer. Nor because his teaching, however we see it, was so extraordinary. Why, then, did various common folk become his disciples? What happened?

The answer seems quite simple. When they were with Jesus, they discovered what it meant to be a fully human being. They saw it in him, and they knew that what they saw was a reflection of who they really were and could become. And because Jesus was a truly human being who was not confined by the parochialism of his culture, he was also the means by which the disciples could see God both in him and everywhere else. And when Jesus was dead and gone, they felt him to be alive in their midst, such that their fear of death was overpowered by their faith in God and love.

The encounter between Jesus and the disciples was, for them, the locus of personal and world transformation. Certainly, what he taught was part of that awakening process, but it goes beyond that. It must also include a discussion of who he was and how the disciples were impacted.