Subject:
|
Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Jul 2002 03:25:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5283 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
>
> Ahhhh. Interesting. Then it is irrelevant whether you accept Christ as God
> (avatar of God?) in relation to whether you are a Christian or not? That's
> my own opinion, but I suspect the majority of those that describe themselves
> as Christians would not agree with that.
Uh, I wouldn't put it quite that way. Jesus was from God as no other had been
before or since. Only One from God who would know God's nature would be able
to reveal God to us (now this "us" could be interpreted as "the Jews" and then
to the world by extension)
But the actual nature of Christ is very complex. The fact that Jesus has so
many titles shows the struggle for the early church to come to grips with who
Jesus was/is:
Son of God
Son of Man
Messiah ("Christ" in greek)
Lamb of God
Savior
Redeemer
Lord
Master
King of Kings
Prince of Peace
etc, etc
Their attempts recall to me the story of the blind men and the elephant-- each
describing a facet of Jesus, but not the whole.
These titles are far from synonymous-- each carries a particular meaning, a
particular perspective as to people's take on Jesus' nature. Nobody could put
a finger on Jesus' nature and say, "He is this" or "that".
His true nature will always be a mystery (in this life, AFAIK). The concept of
the Trinity is at best implied in the Bible. The official "fully man, fully
God" stance is the "party line", but this is rather difficult to wrap one's
mind around. It leaves a lot of room for a thinking person to ponder.
-John
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
395 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
