A true humanitarian first and foremost gives each person their dignity as a good person who deserves the best. Doing good for the sake of others is not possible unless you give them dignity in the first place. Otherwise the works are only vanity projects.
Jesus in Matthew 5 warned during his Sermon on the Mount that not one line of the Law or Prophets could be invalidated and demanded punishment for anybody who tried to abolish anything. Early death, ill health and starvation were common then. They were the norm. Many were wasting their lives painstakingly copying those texts. Scrolls didn't last long so it was a constant ordeal. Jesus was clearly encouraging that waste. His fanatical reverence for the supposed word of God made that clear. He wanted all as familiar as possible with the texts. Their sacredness would mean that the time spent transcribing them is better than transcribing anything else including what a medic, historian or proto-scientist has written. Do you really think that Jesus would have wanted us to have Aristotle's writings if it had to be them or the Bible writings? And what was truly evil was how he could expect somebody to take a week to copy texts that were commanding that heretics, statue worshippers and homosexuals etc be tortured to death by stoning. And there was also the matter of the snuff porn style religious rites where animals were sacrificed.
Jesus refused to condemn the torture as commanded by his Bible God. His appalling neglect would suggest that he could have been involved in stonings etc perhaps before his public ministry. No Christian has the right to rule that out. He revered the texts though they amounted to a murder weapon. No they were a weapon. The one who commands you to shoot is the murder weapon not the gun. The scriptures were killing people in his day and have killed people since. Think of this. If a text commands something that one mistakenly thinks applies in a certain situation then the text and the preachers who say it is God's word are still to blame. Religion has to accept and make allowances for people getting things wrong. That is one of them.
In Matthew 23, Jesus was clear that the evil scripts were accurately preached and presented by the scribes and the Pharisees and must be adhered to for they say so.
Jesus regarded all people as being totally depraved as in being unable to do good properly with a heart devoted to God. Obviously then it would be too much to expect him to like anybody! The adage to love the sinner and hate the sin at the same time fails to provide an escape route. Sin reflects the kind of person I am so sin cannot be separated from me. I sin because I am bad not just because my sin is bad. My sin is me in a real sense and to hate my sin is to hate me. To say John’s homework is terrible is to call John terrible indirectly. And its being indirect doesn’t make it any less real.
Jesus as a student of the Law knew how from Exodus 21 that animals could be stoned to death too. The rule was that if you were warned that you had a dangerous ox and did nothing to confine it and somebody is killed by it, both you and the animal are stoned to death. Here an animal is treated as a murderer which implies that the animal sacrifice in the Old Testament that God sought was thought to be the sacrifice of people who had different bodies and abilities from us but who were still people.
A man came up to Jesus calling him good teacher. Jesus said that nobody was good only God: “Why do you call me good for nobody is good but God?” (Mark 10:17,18). Christians say that the man thought Jesus was a good man and Jesus was telling him that he could only be good if he was God. If right their interpretation would mean that all are sinners and cannot stay out of it. And the same interpretation holds true if Jesus was just telling him that his idea of good was wrong and that only God knows what good is and lives that goodness.
The man called Jesus a good teacher. Yet Jesus rejected this. It was not flattery for Jesus was famous as a teacher. The man meant it. Jesus just didn’t like being called good by anybody human for he thought that humans have an unclear idea of what good is and don’t understand real goodness as represented by almighty God. He thought humans were too sinful to have a clue about what it meant to worship God as good.
There are other interpretations but they don’t fit the Christian faith. For example, we could hold that Jesus rejected the compliment for he was a sinner like everybody else. Some say Jesus only meant that the man was flattering him and didn’t mean it which was why he rejected the compliment. But there is no hint of that in the text. You don’t say, “Why do you call me good for nobody is good but God?” to somebody that is flattering you. You say, “You flatter me.” And besides the man asked him about how to inherit everlasting life and Jesus answered him thus acknowledging him as sincere not as a flatterer.
Jesus despite being said to be a prophet never acted like one. He never gave revelations saying, "Thus says the Lord." And his prediction of the end times was cobbled from Old Testament texts and he was careful to keep it vague enough. It wasn't really his prediction but his presentation of what he thought the scriptures predicted. Religion fears that if we spot this we will start thinking that his ban on divorce was his mere opinion and that we can start saying he did err when he mistook common maladies for demons.
Despite knowing he was no prophet, Jesus was overbearing at times and wanted worship.
He obviously claimed to have the authority of Jewish rabbis to bind and loose in Matthew 18:18 and that he could delegate this power to his apostles. Binding and loosing were legal terms. They had to do with what was permissible or impermissible under Jewish law halakha.
Anybody who says sinners go to suffer forever at death wants that belief to be true for they could believe something nicer. Jesus advocated belief in such torment and said he accepted it as true. What does that say about him? If you could condone a God letting that happen to somebody you could condone anything. When you condone the workings of your invisible God you should condone the workings of your visible neighbourhood tyrant too. Fairs fair. What you see comes first.
Jesus didn't say we are to respect our neighbour as ourselves but to love our neighbour as ourselves meaning we must adore our neighbour as much as ourselves. Respect our neighbour as ourselves means we can treat a person properly despite having bad feelings for them. The Christians say that Jesus in commanding such love of neighbour did not mean that we must be crazy about everybody but only that we must treat them as we wish to be treated. They lie for he said love not respect. By asking us to do the impossible and by threatening curses and Hell and eternal torment on those who naturally fail, Jesus was putting us on an eternal treadmill from which there would be no reprieve. We would be unable to think we can do anything right or to please him. And once we start thinking that about ourselves our relationships will rapidly break down. Jesus tries to force us to be good in an impossible way. His example will drive us to force our gospels and versions of them on others. And if we can't do it, that will not stop us wanting to do it.
With Christianity and Islam being led to think that God alone matters, a fear of losing or lessening faith in him will surface. The other side of the alleged joy that God and/or Jesus offer is that a main reason for that joy is salvation from eternal damnation. That is relief masquerading as joy. Relief comes from fear and will give rise to fear again.
Only unprincipled people think they have the right to use a man like Jesus' tragic murder without his clear consent in writing. Even if he did give it it would still be wrong. They use it to feel that it has got their sins forgiven. Islam teaches that praying for pardon does not guarantee that Allah will listen. Christianity however says God will listen for Jesus has paid for your sins. That is toxic itself. It is a cover for treating getting pardon as some kind of duty from God. Jesus himself did urge that God be seen as a forgiveness factory. And not only do Christians want to be forgiven for a sin but to have it reversed and atoned as if it never happened meaning that you are now a saint no matter what you did. You as good as have not done it. Psychologically this is a conscience placebo and utterly selfish and the more harm you have done to others the bigger the disgrace this is. Jesus supposedly said he would die as a ransom for sinners. No humanitarian would invite such disrespect. You need to be given solid evidence to support such risky daring and huge claims. And nothing is even attempted.