Firstly, this is slightly tongue in cheek, however I am interested in how people respond after giving it serious consideration.
Time and again, liberal Christians claim that Jesus is the ultimate role model for how humans should live.
When illiberal passages of the Bible are pointed out to them, they resort to what I believe is simply a modern construct of a hero based on thoughtful revisionism of Jesus mythology. In so many words, they deny that Jesus ever condoned
anything that the most progressive, peaceful, and reasonable person could find fault with; Jesus, to them, is an ultimate hero figure. This especially applies to those who assert that Jesus wasn't supernatural ie no virgin birth, no resurrection etc.
Some are quick to forgive offensive passages in the Bible by either pointing out that they shouldn't be taken literally, or by saying that the passages were appropriate for a certain time, place, and people but that it's now safe to disregard them. Afterall, the message of Jesus was flawless.
So, is the modern rational progressive idea of Jesus just the best person imaginable, 2000 year old dogma be damned? I suspect so.
All that in mind, what would be the shortcomings and advantages, relative to Christianity, of constructing a modern ultimate role model or Hero Myth based on someone who was actually a modern hero, such as Mohandas Gandhi?
If you're one who believes in the virgin birth, resurrection, or transubstantiation etc, this thought experiment might not go too far. For those who would prefer to construct an ultimate hero more appropriate to the world of 2006, fine. I think that's what the most rational Liberal Christians are doing anyway, though I seriously doubt any of them actually follow the example of their ultimate hero figure.
Before posting, I found Gandhism at wikipedia. Please try to refrain from looking at that article if you plan on replying in this thread. Again, this isn't necessarily about Gandhi - he's just a point of reference to start with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhism