Never mind most, try any.
There is no reason to assume that Yeshuwah the Rabbi considered himself to be the eternal moral leader of humanity, if in fact, such an individual ever existed.
Jesus was the son of God, the perfect moral being, and the person whom every human should strive to be like. According to thr Christian religion, at least.
Appeals to what the moral responsibilities of "Jesus" ought to be, or have been, are meaningless, and out of context for a discussion of Palastine two thousand years ago.
A pointless, but interesting discussion.
Questioning the morality of someone who is considered by millions to be the perfect moral being is a 'pointless discussion?'
I think Frank is trying to demonstarte the myopia of a religion that claims to be eternal and all-encompassing. It also makes a statement about the subjectivity of morality. I think this has been the point all along.
Ie- If the concept of slavery is wrong today, then it was wrong in Jesus time as well. If Jesus thought otherwise, then his morality cannot be eternal
On the other hand, even if Jesus did think slavery was wrong but chose not to speak out against it, it goes to show the myopia of his supposed all-encompassing morality.