• I agree a person called Jesus lived and died 2000 years ago.
• I agree a person called Jesus was crucified, rose and is alive today.
• I have a mental image of Jesus that I hold to be precise and accurate.
• I have a mental image of Jesus that I'll bet my life on.

jpilgrim27 said:

1. What does it really matter if a person believes that Jesus is actually the same person as God?

2. Why isn't it enough just to believe in God, and understand that I need him? So many people in the world believe in one God, creator of everything, but because they don't accept the theology of Jesus and the Trinity they are dammed.

"...the real issue, the one that can't be avoided, is whether a person has a "personal relationship" with God through Jesus. However, that happens, whoever told whomever, however it was done, that's the bottom line: a personal relationship. If you don't have that, you will die apart from God and spend eternity in torment in hell.

The problem, however, is that the phrase "personal relationship" is found nowhere in the Bible.

Nowhere in the Hebrew scriptures, nowhere in the New Testament. Jesus never used the phrase. Paul didn't use it. Nor did John, Peter, James, or the woman who wrote the Letter to the Hebrews.

So if that's it,
if that's the point of it all,
if that's the ticket,
the center,
the one unavoidable reality,
the heart of the Christian faith,
why is it that no ones used the phrase until the last hundred years or so?

And that question raises another question. If the message of Jesus is that God is offering the free gift of eternal life through him - a gift we cannot earn by our own efforts, works, or good deeds - and all we have to do is accept and confess and believe, aren't those verbs?

And aren't verbs actions?

Accepting, confessing, believing - those are things we do.

Does that mean, then, that going to heaven is dependent on something I do?

How is any of that grace?
How is that a gift?
How is that good news?"

The books of the Old Testament are listed chronologically. However, the books of the New Testament are not. The four gospels come first, followed by the Pauline Epistles and other shorter letters. I've wondered why. The fact of the matter is that all of Paul's letters chronologically occur first and therefore outdate the gospels. One conclusion I've come to is that Christianity as we have it today is based upon a Pauline construct. I believe Paul made Jesus Christian. However, Jesus (Yeshua) preached and taught “the Kingdom of God”, but what he got was the Church. The gospels (not only written significantly after Paul's letters and the beginning of the established orthodox doctrine, but even after his death) may very well have been tainted by this Pauline Christianity. There is significant evidence of editing and additions and tampering, possibly for doctrinal purposes. (1 John 5:8, the endings of Mark, etc.). But, again in the spirit of fairness and open mindedness, it is also possible that they were not.

I am left only with the idea that the truth of the Rabbi Yeshua of Nazareth is so enmeshed and coddled as to be inaccessible, hidden and even unknowable....


Coming to this conclusion leaves me with two problems:

1) The first is the Incarnation; whether Jesus was literally God.
Where at one point in time a few years ago I believed this was a critical question all needed to explore, I am now of the belief that it is a question that not only should be left unanswered, but shouldn't be asked at all. Mu.

Must he be literally God incarnate? I've stopped asking this question. I think the answer to that question hinges solely on choice, is inconclusive, but damningly divisive and destructive. I have come to leave it unanswered.

When we force the question of, "Was Jesus literally God" to be answered, we begin a journey down a path that cannot end in any other way but intolerance, discrimination, suffering, and a counterfeit religion. It ceases to be authentic – and some might argue – even valid

How do I, personally, come to terms with it? I am perfectly content (if I may use that word) in accepting Yeshua as a mortal man (even perfect man) – and wisdom teacher – who, through his life, presented a perfect or near perfect representation of the nature of God. God incarnate in metaphor. I don't (and believe, can't) look any farther. (This isn't denying Christ but rather avoiding Christolatry [Matthew 19:17, to some degree could suggest this position. ”Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God...”]). [And on a side note, to the Evangelical who would tell me this is the difference between Hell and Salvation, I say Jesus' core message was never “worship me or burn”].

I suppose by many definitions I am by no means even Christian.

jpilgrim27 said:

I've been told that this is a kind and understanding group so I'm hoping you all don't want to crucify me for not having a correct belief of God.

ringnut said:

It's doubtful he ever commanded anyone to worship him.

larrylad said:

However, the simple fact is, if you give any credence to the validity of scripture at all, you will have to give validity to Romans 14:11 - It is written: "'As surely as I live,' says the Lord, 'every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.'" and if you want more a more specific example, Philippians 2:9-11 - Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Sounds like a requirement to worship him to me.