The Love Of Jesus

[Guest end3]

No End...it's not a black and white issue. Yes, maybe Jesus was the Lord God but so is everyone/everything else. This is the meaning of omnipresence. God can't draw a line in the sand and pull "himself" away from "himself". Jesus talked about unity with God and his desire for others to experience this unity. What happened?

 

This is a dichotomy that just doesn't exist. He can be God, we can be God too, he may not be God, he leads us to God, he tells us we are Gods too, he may be 1/3 of God, God is external, God is internal, God is both. There are too many variables to set up a dichotomy here. This either or attitude is what stops people from garnering greater insights. God didn't draw any line, humans did by their lack of understanding and called it Christianity. Jesus may have never meant this at all.

 

You understand a little about mysticism. Are you going to say that those early mystics weren't Christians? Was John a mystic?

 

I don't know that we are understanding each other. Christianity is a belief that the Christ was Jesus. He may be all those things you describe, but the fact remains that Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

This is why it is binary....you either believe this, or you don't.

[Guest end3]

With all due respect, I still believe the conversation is missing the point altogether. The issue is not Christ as a symbol. The issue is, do you acknowledge Christ as the Lord God.

 

Also with respect, that is your issue, not the issue. Other people assess the reality of Jesus and "Jesus' love" as something different than you do, and you disagree with their assessment.

 

Phanta

 

Thank you, exactly! This is what makes our country great....the freedom to do this.

[Antlerman]

Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

This is why it is binary....you either believe this, or you don't.

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me. What does the word "through" suggest to you? I hear agency there, don't you?

[Guest end3]

You think Abi and I are heretics....put the prevalent theme of this thread out there and see where it lands...

[Guest end3]

I don't know that we are understanding each other. Christianity is a belief that the Christ was Jesus. He may be all those things you describe, but the fact remains that Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

You are, understandably, exploring Jesus and related concepts through a Christian lens, but you are trying to restrict us to this viewpoint as well. We want to look at these beliefs, ideas, and concepts through other lenses, and will continue to do so. So long as you keep trying to get us to stop, you're going to continually be frustrated.

 

Phanta

 

I'm excited that you are looking at it through any lens.....

[Guest Darcy Grant]

I don’t understand this claim that Jesus/God loves me (or anyone else). What has God ever done for me to demonstrate this love? I know that Christians say that God demonstrated his love for us by dying on the cross, by making himself a sacrifice for our sins, and they seem to think that this is something very beautiful. I just don’t see it, though.

 

What if I, as a mother, said to my children, “You’re flawed! You’re flawed! Each and every one of you! I can’t love and accept you because you’re so flawed!”

 

After saying that, I decided that the only way I could “forgive” my children for being flawed was to go into the kitchen, to take out a butcher knife, and to cut off my hand.

 

If I did this, would my children think that I had done something beautiful? Or would they think that I was a psychotic lunatic that they ought to be afraid of? I have a feeling it would be the latter.

 

If God exists and he loves me, then I find it impossible to believe that he had to come to earth as a man and suffer and die a brutal death on a cross so that he could find it within himself to love and accept me, imperfect as he made me.

 

Personally, I have no belief in the existence of God, so I do not reject his love anymore than I reject the love of the Big Elf. But even if God did exist, I wouldn’t believe that he loved humankind. I wouldn’t believe that he was a friend to humankind. What kind of “all powerful” friend stands by and does nothing when a five-year-old child is raped, tortured, and buried alive? What kind of friend speaks to you only in form letters that he allegedly wrote to all of humankind, thousands of years ago? What kind of friend wants me to beg him for mercy and for assistance but has no intention of ever providing me with any sort of personal response? What kind of friend “loves” me but refuses to interact with me, to answer my questions, to help me find answers that I seek?

 

When I was a Christian (years ago), I came to a point in my life when I wanted to be closer and closer to God. I began to read and study the Bible more and more each day. Beginning with the book of Genesis, I read through much of the Old Testament for the first time in my life. As I did, I became increasingly dismayed by what I was reading. Surely the cruel, primitive, and vindictive God portrayed in this book could not possibly be the loving, kind, compassionate, merciful God I had been taught to believe in when I was ten-years-old and I accepted Jesus as my “personal savior.”

 

The pastor posting to this thread mentioned a girl who recently accepted Christ as her savior. I have to wonder if this girl was at all like I was at one time. I have to wonder how much of the Bible this girl is familiar with. Does she, for example, know that in the Old Testament, this God who she is deciding to place her trust in, ordered men to kill women and children and to “keep the child virgins for themselves?” I doubt it. And given that that is the case, I don’t see how anyone could believe that she has made an informed decision to “place her trust” in God. Very likely, she doesn’t know God—she doesn’t know who the biblegod is--and when she finds out---if she ever chooses to read and study the Bible in an objective way, as I did in my early twenties, then I wonder if she, too, will feel a terrible sense of betrayal as she comes to the painful realization that there is no way that a God of love can be reconciled with the God portrayed in that book.

[Guest end3]

With all due respect, I still believe the conversation is missing the point altogether. The issue is not Christ as a symbol. The issue is, do you acknowledge Christ as the Lord God.

 

Also with respect, that is your issue, not the issue. Other people assess the reality of Jesus and "Jesus' love" as something different than you do, and you disagree with their assessment.

 

Phanta

 

Thank you, exactly! This is what makes our country great....the freedom to do this.

 

If you are agreeing with me, then one of us is grossly misunderstanding the other in this branch of the exchange. It could be me.

 

Phanta

 

The only misunderstanding I see is that what you label "my issue" is "the issue". The issue is the lack of acknowledgment that Jesus is God. Any way that you skirt the issue is not an acknowledgement of this.

[Guest end3]

Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

This is why it is binary....you either believe this, or you don't.

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me. What does the word "through" suggest to you? I hear agency there, don't you?

 

He was The Gate brother....half of the gate's being is exposure to one direction and half to the other direction....That was His claim. Are you the Gate as well or are you standing on one side. The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

[Guest end3]

Who knew I would be a fundy today? I didn't when I awoke....

[Rev R]

The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

 

Ok End I'll bite. No I don't believe the claim. What is your point?

[Guest end3]

The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

 

Ok End I'll bite. No I don't believe the claim. What is your point?

 

Thank you Rev. The point is I don't think you can dismiss Jesus as being only man.

[NotBlinded]

Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

This is why it is binary....you either believe this, or you don't.

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me. What does the word "through" suggest to you? I hear agency there, don't you?

 

He was The Gate brother....half of the gate's being is exposure to one direction and half to the other direction....That was His claim. Are you the Gate as well or are you standing on one side. The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

End, here you say he is the gate, but this is what you said to me:

 

I don't know that we are understanding each other. Christianity is a belief that the Christ was Jesus. He may be all those things you describe, but the fact remains that Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

This is why it is binary....you either believe this, or you don't.

 

So, is he the gate or is he the Source? There is no separate Ground of Being from the Source. They are the same. Any person can be a gateway to the source, but that gateway isn't something accessed through the person doing the showing. It is accessed through the person themselves. Jesus was showing people how to access this in their own inner being. You can't access it through him and have it come into you as something outside of yourself because it is your own nature as well. Nothing can exist outside of the Ground of Being or the Source.

 

Yes, I believe it, but I don't believe it is binary.

[Guest end3]

Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

This is why it is binary....you either believe this, or you don't.

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me. What does the word "through" suggest to you? I hear agency there, don't you?

 

He was The Gate brother....half of the gate's being is exposure to one direction and half to the other direction....That was His claim. Are you the Gate as well or are you standing on one side. The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

End, here you say he is the gate, but this is what you said to me:

 

I don't know that we are understanding each other. Christianity is a belief that the Christ was Jesus. He may be all those things you describe, but the fact remains that Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

This is why it is binary....you either believe this, or you don't.

 

So, is he the gate or is he the Source? There is no separate Ground of Being from the Source. They are the same. Any person can be a gateway to the source, but that gateway isn't something accessed through another person doing the showing. It is accessed through the person themselves. Jesus was showing people how to access this in their own inner being. You can't access it through him and have it come into you as something outside of yourself because it is your own nature as well. Nothing can exist outside of the Ground of Being or the Source.

 

Yes, I believe it, but I don't believe it is binary.

 

Messiah means The Annointed One......then it makes sense that we must be annoited as well, right? By what?

 

I forgot to add NBBTB.... ....all in fun.

[Shyone]

The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

 

Ok End I'll bite. No I don't believe the claim. What is your point?

 

Thank you Rev. The point is I don't think you can dismiss Jesus as being only man.

Why not? Other than some hints at magic tricks, faith healing and absurd miracles that vary from gospel to gospel, all I see is a poor deluded SOB that died a horrible death - although no more horrible than many others of that day. Not even as horrible as a death from cancer.

 

The really sad part is that not only was he convicted for heresy, but there never was any god to begin with. Sad, really.

 

At the very least, it should be obvious that he is not the son of any diety - he had a Y chromozome - or god was foolin' with you. XO is Turner's syndrome, and they are phenotypically female.

 

I could go on, but the whole thing is so pathetic.

 

Oh, and Mohammed's dead too.

[NotBlinded]

The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

 

Ok End I'll bite. No I don't believe the claim. What is your point?

 

Thank you Rev. The point is I don't think you can dismiss Jesus as being only man.

You can't dismiss anyone as being only man. We are Human.............Beings..........

[NotBlinded]

Messiah means The Annointed One......then it makes sense that we must be annoited as well, right? By what?

 

I forgot to add NBBTB.... ....all in fun.

Annoit yourself...kinda like what Shyone's picture states: Forgive yourselves.

 

I know it's all in fun with you. I love you end.

[NotBlinded]

Why not? Other than some hints at magic tricks, faith healing and absurd miracles that vary from gospel to gospel, all I see is a poor deluded SOB that died a horrible death - although no more horrible than many others of that day. Not even as horrible as a death from cancer.

 

The really sad part is that not only was he convicted for heresy, but there never was any god to begin with. Sad, really.

 

At the very least, it should be obvious that he is not the son of any diety - he had a Y chromozome - or god was foolin' with you. XO is Turner's syndrome, and they are phenotypically female.

 

I could go on, but the whole thing is so pathetic.

 

Oh, and Mohammed's dead too.

Well shit! Damn it all. Can I have the half empty glass you have? I want mine to be completely full!

 

 

 

(I'm just picking on you...again!)

[Guest end3]

The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

 

Ok End I'll bite. No I don't believe the claim. What is your point?

 

Thank you Rev. The point is I don't think you can dismiss Jesus as being only man.

 

A lot of people in this thread are not saying that he was only man.

 

Can you acknowledge that?

 

Phanta

 

The mechanism of what happened on the cross is vital to the Christian belief. Can God annoint someone that doesn't believe? I think yes, but will they under stand my belief that this annointing comes through Jesus Christ, maybe not.

[Antlerman]

Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

This is why it is binary....you either believe this, or you don't.

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me. What does the word "through" suggest to you? I hear agency there, don't you?

 

He was The Gate brother....half of the gate's being is exposure to one direction and half to the other direction....That was His claim. Are you the Gate as well or are you standing on one side. The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

So... Jesus is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit then. Sounds to me like you're not a Trinitarian at all. You're a Modalistic Monarchian! (seriously)

 

BTW, I don't believe that was ever his claim, that he is "God the Father" (and he certainly never said "God the Son").

 

Theologically speaking, now if you want to talk about Logos, that's another matter. As such, that agency of God, would be God's nature and the Manifestor. But Manifestor of what, end3? You could say the Expression of God, but the Nature of God is what is expressed. And that nature is in ALL manifestation. What Logos is then is Agency. What the writer of John had in mind was an image of Jesus as the Divine Logos, that Agent of Manifestation of the Nature of God.

 

Do I believe the actual man Jesus was this Divine Agent as the people of John's community imagined him (which you should really do a read of the Gospel of Thomas along with John, which is a most fascinating derivation of more pure form of Gnosticism in Thomas, tailored for the more "common" believer, 'dumbing it down' as it were by taking the internal processes of Enlightenment and externalizing them in Jesus as symbol in its gestures to the other Jesus movements - such as Mark's community, and Matthew's etc.)? I believe Jesus stands as symbol of that. In that sense, then that is what he is.

 

Do I use that symbol myself? Unnecessary. Does that mean I can't apprehend God if I don't?? That is the true question of this whole thread. You only have a theological argument to support the denial of it to those who don't adopt the symbol, and glaring contradictions in the reality of people the world over experiencing the Transcendent. To say if you don't use that symbol you can't get to God, to me betrays that those who say that either haven't experienced its transcending nature, meaning it goes beyond definitions and is all-inclusive, or they are so distracted by their system of signs that they see God as the signs themselves. Or put another way, they see "blue" and that is the same as "sky". Blue and Sky are one and the same. In either case, its not a conclusion that comes from the Heart within, its a conclusion of reasoning about things beyond reason.

[NotBlinded]

The issue is the lack of acknowledgment that Jesus is God. Any way that you skirt the issue is not an acknowledgement of this.

 

I need some chocolate. I'll be back.

 

P

Did you get enough to share?

[Guest end3]

Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the actual Source.....not a separate Ground of Being that Jesus is only a well tuned representative.

 

This is why it is binary....you either believe this, or you don't.

I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me. What does the word "through" suggest to you? I hear agency there, don't you?

 

He was The Gate brother....half of the gate's being is exposure to one direction and half to the other direction....That was His claim. Are you the Gate as well or are you standing on one side. The question still, is do you believe His claim, or don't you.

So... Jesus is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit then. Sounds to me like you're not a Trinitarian at all. You're a Modalistic Monarchian! (seriously)

 

BTW, I don't believe that was ever his claim, that he is "God the Father" (and he certainly never said "God the Son").

 

Theologically speaking, now if you want to talk about Logos, that's another matter. As such, that agency of God, would be God's nature and the Manifestor. But Manifestor of what, end3? You could say the Expression of God, but the Nature of God is what is expressed. And that nature is in ALL manifestation. What Logos is then is Agency. What the writer of John had in mind was an image of Jesus as the Divine Logos, that Agent of Manifestation of the Nature of God.

 

Do I believe the actual man Jesus was this Divine Agent as the people of John's community imagined him (which you should really do a read of the Gospel of Thomas along with John, which is a most fascinating derivation of more pure form of Gnosticism in Thomas, tailored for the more "common" believer, 'dumbing it down' as it were by taking the internal processes of Enlightenment and externalizing them in Jesus as symbol in its gestures to the other Jesus movements - such as Mark's community, and Matthew's etc.)? I believe Jesus stands as symbol of that. In that sense, then that is what he is.

 

Do I use that symbol myself? Unnecessary. Does that mean I can't apprehend God if I don't?? That is the true question of this whole thread. You only have a theological argument to support the denial of it to those who don't adopt the symbol, and glaring contradictions in the reality of people the world over experiencing the Transcendent. To say if you don't use that symbol you can't get to God, to me betrays that those who say that either haven't experienced its transcending nature, meaning it goes beyond definitions and is all-inclusive, or they are so distracted by their system of signs that they see God as the signs themselves. Or put another way, they see "blue" and that is the same as "sky". Blue and Sky are one and the same. In either case, its not a conclusion that comes from the Heart within, its a conclusion of reasoning about things beyond reason.

 

I think the distinction...."A symbol" vs "the symbol"....an intercessor, everthing that is expressed in that. Again, how is Christianity expressed as everyone being the Messiah? Where is that in the Bible?

 

Everyone's annointing comes from this specific Vessel. Is this not what Christianity is? I don't accept that the Spirit comes except through this Means.

[Guest end3]

Christianity is a specific belief in the Mechanism of the relationship between ourselves and God. I just don't think you can label your thread "The Love of Jesus" and then label other specifics to Jesus. Perhaps "The Mechanism of Spirit, Was it Jesus?"

 

And everyone is saying No. So then, that is not the Love of Jesus....it is the Love by some other mechanism.

[NotBlinded]

Christianity is a specific belief in the Mechanism of the relationship between ourselves and God. I just don't think you can label your thread "The Love of Jesus" and then label other specifics to Jesus. Perhaps "The Mechanism of Spirit, Was it Jesus?"

 

And everyone is saying No. So then, that is not the Love of Jesus....it is the Love of some other mechanism.

end, are you being hard-headed on purpose?

 

You are defining Christianity as how you see it. There are many sects of Christianity, but you know this. What was Christianity before it was defined by the Catholic Church? What is the Church's definition and has it changed? Were there misunderstandings by scribes? Was there purposeful misintent? Why were some books left out? Mystics go way back. So, it is fair to look at elements in Christianity as meaning more than what one interpretation puts forth? Yes. The Catholic Church knows that God is imanent in all Creation. One can take it from there.

[NotBlinded]

I think the distinction...."A symbol" vs "the symbol"....an intercessor, everthing that is expressed in that. Again, how is Christianity expressed as everyone being the Messiah? Where is that in the Bible?

 

Everyone's annointing comes from this specific Vessel. Is this not what Christianity is? I don't accept that the Spirit comes except through this Means.

It's in there end, but you have to have "eyes to see" and "ears to hear". Well, that's what they always tell us anyway, but really, there are parts that reference this if you are looking at it from a different mindset (and wade between the unenlightened parts).

[NotBlinded]

End,

 

I'm going to post something from A 2nd Tier Christianity here for you. This has to do with Ken Wilber's Intergral Model which Antlerman understands better than I do. I've listened to his CD's and it is really hard to grasp because he maps the levels of consciousness...anyway, this has to do with Christianity:

 

For example, many Christians have the experience of feeling God's love and forgiveness when they repent of their sins and seek forgiveness. The experience is real. But the transcendent reality behind that experience may not be a bearded, white-haired God (who cannot tolerate any unclean thing in his presence) forgiving us, because Jesus suffered in our place and thus satisfied this God's demand for justice. Rather, the transcendent reality behind this experience of love and acceptance may be an encounter with the 2nd person aspect of God or Spirit, out of which everything in existence arises, including each one of us and our many sins. This is an experience common to all of the world's spiritual traditions, though it may be interpreted differently in each tradition.

 

Many Christians also have experiences of personal transformation that enable us to better live Christ's teachings, to become more Christlike in our daily lives. Our hearts may be softened, so that we are more patient, and feel more love toward others. We may become less selfish and more giving. At amber, we may understand this transformational force to be God's Spirit helping us to better live the commandments. But the reality behind this experience may be what happens, in any tradition, when we surrender our individual desires and interests to a higher purpose or cause, and move up one or more stages on the vertical axis of the Wilber Combs Lattice. We become what we surrender to. So when we surrender ourselves and our lives to Christ as we understand him, the result is that we become more Christlike.

 

In the integral model, experiences of God are a subtle state phenomenon. God is an aspect of our own transcendent nature that appears as other in gross and subtle state experiences. So the ideal of Christ that we surrender to at amber, and thus become more like, may be what our own deepest I Amness or Christ Consciousness looks like when it is projected outward, onto the historical person of the awakened Master, Jesus.

 

Here is the link: A 2nd Tier Christianity

 

Look at it and poke around if you have time. If you have an excessive amount of time and want your brian fried, check out Ken's Integral Model here: Ken Wilber Online