What is Christianity morphing into?

[Desert Snake]

Anyways, much of modern Christianity zeitgeist seems to be morphing into a non-Deific Jesus idea. The question, is, what exactly is it morphing into? A demi-god middleman to the ''god of the Jews? How does this work, ? Serious question, is Xianity turning into a non-monotheistic religion, or, is the morphology, aimed at making Jesus 'merely a Rabbi', and then ...well, I don't know, you tell me.

Have a nice day!

 

[Rival]

Which Churches are you talking about? Who is teaching this?

 

[Desert Snake]

Which Churches are you talking about? Who is teaching this?

I don't know which churches specifically teach this. What I have observed on the forums, is that many Xians do not consider jesus to be God. So, I'm curious as to how they are rationalizing this with monotheism.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Anyways, much of modern Christianity zeitgeist seems to be morphing into a non-Deific Jesus idea. The question, is, what exactly is it morphing into? A demi-god middleman to the ''god of the Jews? How does this work, ? Serious question, is Xianity turning into a non-monotheistic religion, or, is the morphology, aimed at making Jesus 'merely a Rabbi', and then ...well, I don't know, you tell me.

Have a nice day!

I don't know why I'm a little confused what you're asking. I don't see Jesus as "merely a rabbi." Scripture called Him a Rabbi and high Priest. I don't see how that changes Christianity. If God sent a 100 percent human who is in union with His Father via His perfection, why question God or deify Jesus because God sent Him? He still holds the same title and mission. I just think deifying him takes the focus off of God the Father. It idolizes Jesus as if He is the Father than a way To the Father.

The focus that Jesus is God is an insult to the Jewish faith. Jesus followed that teaching, one God only. I also feel its insulting to Him.

If anything, deifying Jesus is morphed Christianity. That's were it is headed if indeed morphing.

EDIT

Monotheism says there is only One God. A human, no. Deified Jesus makes this rational.

Once you call Jesus a God of any type, That questions monotheism not the other way around.

 

[lovemuffin]

I think demographically the volume of anti-trinitarianism on RF does not really reflect the demographics of Christianity globally. It just appears that people belonging to certain groups are more active on the forums. For example if you look at the recent Pew survey, the size of the trinitarian denominations (evangelicals, mainline protestants, catholics, orthodox) dwarfs the non-trinitarian. While all of those denominations are in decline, the decline does not appear to be in favor of non-trinitarianism but the rise of the "no affiliation" cohort and other religions entirely.

Obviously that survey is US-only but I'm not aware of any other evidence suggesting a trend away from the deity of Christ among most or even many Christian groups. It should probably also be noted that those who hold non-deific views of Jesus tend to consider the trinitarians (or any view that holds to the divinity of Christ) the non-monotheists, and themselves the protectors of monotheism, so the "monotheism" angle seems like a matter of some dispute to me. But prior to that debate, I would question whether or not it's true that the "modern zeitgeist" of Christianity is moving away from considering Jesus divine.

 

[fantome profane]

Anyways, much of modern Christianity zeitgeist seems to be morphing into a non-Deific Jesus idea. The question, is, what exactly is it morphing into? A demi-god middleman to the ''god of the Jews? How does this work, ? Serious question, is Xianity turning into a non-monotheistic religion, or, is the morphology, aimed at making Jesus 'merely a Rabbi', and then ...well, I don't know, you tell me.

Have a nice day!

I don't know why you think this is new or modern, from the very first early churches there have been different ideas about who and what Jesus was.

 

[Desert Snake]

It should probably also be noted that those who hold non-deific views of Jesus tend to consider the trinitarians (or any view that holds to the divinity of Christ) the non-monotheists, and themselves the protectors of monotheism, so the "monotheism" angle seems like a matter of some dispute to me.

Any time there is more than one entity in the Godhead, or a demi-god, etc., though, it isn't monotheism. I don't have a ''problem'' with that, don't really care, but I wonder if people understand the traditional import of monotheistic belief in Xianity, and I wonder if they actually know what monotheism means.

 

[Politesse]

Anyways, much of modern Christianity zeitgeist seems to be morphing into a non-Deific Jesus idea. The question, is, what exactly is it morphing into? A demi-god middleman to the ''god of the Jews? How does this work, ? Serious question, is Xianity turning into a non-monotheistic religion, or, is the morphology, aimed at making Jesus 'merely a Rabbi', and then ...well, I don't know, you tell me.

Have a nice day!

There have always been syncretic and mystical variants on the Christian theme. And indeed, I'm sure our Muslim cousins could comment on whether even Western Christian orthodoxy counts as "monotheism" strictly speaking! But I doubt us heretic types will ever represent a majority, nor particularly wish to. Power is a corrupting *******.

I don't really see how any committed follower of the Son of Man thinks there is anything wrong with being "just a man", by the way. Human beings are the inheritors of the dominion of God, there is nothing shameful about being one.

 

[lovemuffin]

I personally think the most useful description of orthodox trinitarianism would be something like "qualified monotheism". There is certainly some sense in which the trinity is not a perfectly singular monotheism, hence the longstanding controversies, but at the same time the doctrine elaborated by the church councils does not intend to admit of "multiple entities in the Godhead", as disciple put it. The arguments have always been about what constitutes multiple "entities" and whether or not the orthodox dogma is coherent. But it certainly intends to be monotheistic and was understood by its formulators to be so.

 

[Politesse]

I personally think the most useful description of orthodox trinitarianism would be something like "qualified monotheism". There is certainly some sense in which the trinity is not a perfectly singular monotheism, hence the longstanding controversies, but at the same time the doctrine elaborated by the church councils does not intend to admit of "multiple entities in the Godhead", as disciple put it. The arguments have always been about what constitutes multiple "entities" and whether or not the orthodox dogma is coherent. But it certainly intends to be monotheistic and was understood by its formulators to be so.

When I was in seminary, my liturgy prof liked to say that there were "three persons, two natures, one God, and zero comprehension!"

 

[Brickjectivity]

Anyways, much of modern Christianity zeitgeist seems to be morphing into a non-Deific Jesus idea. The question, is, what exactly is it morphing into? A demi-god middleman to the ''god of the Jews? How does this work, ? Serious question, is Xianity turning into a non-monotheistic religion, or, is the morphology, aimed at making Jesus 'merely a Rabbi', and then ...well, I don't know, you tell me.

Have a nice day!

The other day I picked up a used book titled Why We're Not Emergent, because like you I would like to try and get a bigger picture of what is going on. I know what is going on with me but not with everyone.

I am sure I will find plenty to disagree with the authors about.

 

[lovemuffin]

When I was in seminary, my liturgy prof liked to say that there were "three persons, two natures, one God, and zero comprehension!"

I might say "zero comprehension" is a perfectly adequate expression of the apophatism of the trinitarian doctrine if we use a technical enough definition of "comprehension"

 

[Desert Snake]

I personally think the most useful description of orthodox trinitarianism would be something like "qualified monotheism". There is certainly some sense in which the trinity is not a perfectly singular monotheism, hence the longstanding controversies, but at the same time the doctrine elaborated by the church councils does not intend to admit of "multiple entities in the Godhead", as disciple put it. The arguments have always been about what constitutes multiple "entities" and whether or not the orthodox dogma is coherent. But it certainly intends to be monotheistic and was understood by its formulators to be so.

Actually, the multiple entities are more of a problem for much of the non-Trinitarian belief, or rather, Jesus is not God belief, because, the entity, Jesus, becomes a demi-god, or separated from God, in some sense. The only way for non-Deific Jesus ideas to be monotheistic, is if He becomes a 'man only', or, if He is an angel, or a man who is simply honored by Deity, therefore shares the responsibility of Deific duties, without being a Deity.

To me, none of those options make sense, and they question the very definition of ''Deity''

 

[Politesse]

I might say "zero comprehension" is a perfectly adequate expression of the apophatism of the trinitarian doctrine if we use a technical enough definition of "comprehension"

Yes, it can be taken seriously as well as jokingly. Thinking back (I was raised Lutheran) I definitely was raised to have an apophatic mentality even if we didn't call it that. The exact nature of God was not something humans should expect to know, and indeed a lot of the hard questions were answered with "That's not a question we're meant to have an answer for, but we experience the truth behind, in word and faith and by the grace of god."

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

I don't know which churches specifically teach this. What I have observed on the forums, is that many Xians do not consider jesus to be God. So, I'm curious as to how they are rationalizing this with monotheism.

I don't think you should consider self-described Christians on this forum to be representative of the Church as a whole...

 

[jonathan180iq]

I don't know which churches specifically teach this. What I have observed on the forums, is that many Xians do not consider jesus to be God. So, I'm curious as to how they are rationalizing this with monotheism.

The decisions of the early church fathers to deify Jesus doesn't have any real affect of Christianity as a whole, does it? There were followers of Christ before and after the RCC established it's official doctrine. So I don't Christianity morphing into anything more than something which already existed.

So views of Christ's deity vary... In the real world, haven't they always?

 

[Desert Snake]

The decisions of the early church fathers to deify Jesus doesn't have any real affect of Christianity as a whole, does it? There were followers of Christ before and after the RCC established it's official doctrine. So I don't Christianity morphing into anything more than something which already existed.

So views of Christ's deity vary... In the real world, haven't they always?

My research does not bear this perspective out. The RCC did not create the Jesus is Deific idea, they explained it via the trinity idea, and then the trinity doctrine. Technically, if we are looking at 'first churches', this would be shown in the Epistles, and the theology presented therein.

 

[Politesse]

And yet, Paul's letters allude to the existence in his time of the Ebionites, who at least by the time of Eusebius did not consider Jesus to be God, yes? That suggests that this idea might be older than any established Christian church.

 

[lovemuffin]

Technically, the church councils that elaborated the doctrinal ideas referred to in the Trinity predate the RCC in its modern form. They were prior to the great schism. The trinity owes its formulation mainly to the cappadocian fathers who were neither roman nor latin, although of course, given the later date of the schism between the latin west and the greek east, both continued to hold to those same councils. I realize this is a byzantine (pun intended) point, but I could hardly be expected to miss out on an opportunity to point out that there is more to "orthodox" Christianity than Catholics and Protestants

And yet, Paul's letters allude to the existence in his time of the Ebionites, who at least by the time of Eusebius did not consider Jesus to be God, yes? That suggests that this idea might be older than any established Christian church.

We should distinguish between trinitarianism in its final form and earlier ways of thinking about the divinity of Christ. The fact that the earlier ideas exist is clear just from the fact that the first councils were convened largely over the Arian controversy, which was a controversy exactly because of the question of Christ's divinity.

Re: Paul and early Christologies that seem to confer divinity to Jesus (but in a way somewhat distinct from the very greek philosophical gloss of the trinitarian dogma) I made this thread a while back that might be interesting (well, I thought it was)

Paul, Jesus' Divinity, and 1st century Jewish monotheism | ReligiousForums.com

 

[Desert Snake]

And yet, Paul's letters allude to the existence in his time of the Ebionites, who at least by the time of Eusebius did not consider Jesus to be God, yes? That suggests that this idea might be older than any established Christian church.

In regards to the earliest Xians, there isn't any indication to me, that these people did not consider Jesus as Deific. What little I have researched, as to what 'form' of Deific, it would seem to be at the 'extreme' of Deity, literally JHVH, or, a 'soft trinity'. Ie, something like the Oneness Pentecostals; or, Trinitarians who do not separate any aspects in the Godhead. The 'churches', if anything, watered down the 'Jesus is God', concept, partially, through a possible interpretation of separation via the father to son, aspect.