What is Christianity morphing into?

[Politesse]

I don't think "the earliest Christians" were a unified group at all. But I struggle to see how there could ever have been a relatively Torah-following Jewish segment of the church, as Paul describes, that also considered Jesus identical to YHWH. Such a belief does not an observant Jew make. And indeed, the pro-Jewish Christians we find later in written history rejected both Jesus' divinity and all of Paul's writings.

I find it odd, if everyone in Christendom believed Jesus to be some form of God, that this is never mentioned in the canonical gospels.

 

[George-ananda]

I don't see Christianity clearly morphing into any ONE thing. It's diverse and staying that way as far as I can see. Personally, I would like to see it morph in a more universalist direction meaningful to all. If anything, I see it morphing more in a do-it-yourself direction where people choose their own individual stance on the very many issues.

 

[Desert Snake]

I don't think "the earliest Christians" were a unified group at all. But I struggle to see how there could ever have been a relatively Torah-following Jewish segment of the church, as Paul describes, that also considered Jesus identical to YHWH. Such a belief does not an observant Jew make. And indeed, the pro-Jewish Christians we find later in written history rejected both Jesus' divinity and all of Paul's writings.

I find it odd, if everyone in Christendom believed Jesus to be some form of God, that this is never mentioned in the canonical gospels.

What is the relevance of this? you find something odd, so you are presenting an argument out of this? I said, my 'research', leads me to believe. I'm not even putting my own opinion into this, at all. Its apples and oranges. My own opinion is not even what I presented.

 

[Desert Snake]

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.

Actually, I wasn't presenting any argument. But, if you believe that Jesus is more than just a Rabbi, then you have to fit that into monotheism, unless you have multiple deities, entities, in the godhead. Im not really sure what your talking about, here. if jesus is just a man, then.... ok. whats your point

 

[Ingledsva]

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.

Because GOD still is GOD, and Jesus goes back to what he said he was - the awaited HUMAN Jewish Messiah.

Without the trinity idea we go back to true monotheism.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

But, you are CONSTANTLY saying that Jesus isn't the Messiah, lol.

wait, right?

I think you have been misreading what I have said.

I have said over and over - that Jesus is not God, - he is claiming to be the awaited Jewish Messiah, - whom is a special human from the line of David - whom brings about the END - and sits in Final Judgment of ALL whom are in Sheol.

God is God.

Jesus is a Human Messiah provided from God, per prophecy.

*

 

[Desert Snake]

I think you have been misreading what I have said.

I have said over and over - that Jesus is not God, - he is claiming to be the awaited Jewish Messiah, - whom is a special human from the line of David - whom brings about the END - and sits in Final Judgment of ALL whom are in Sheol.

God is God.

Jesus is a Human Messiah provided from God, per prophecy.

*

Ah, I thought that you were of the position that Jesus is not the Messiah. my mistake

 

[Aly Millard]

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!

In my experience I think it is turning into a Godless religion. What an oxymoron... Christians are putting themselves and other people before God. They don't really think about how God may feel about what they will do but what they will feel like when they do it. I think it's a good thing. The idea if a God is so old fashioned...

 

[Desert Snake]

In my experience I think it is turning into a Godless religion. What an oxymoron... Christians are putting themselves and other people before God. They don't really think about how God may feel about what they will do but what they will feel like when they do it. I think it's a good thing. The idea if a God is so old fashioned...

Could be.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Actually, I wasn't presenting any argument. But, if you believe that Jesus is more than just a Rabbi, then you have to fit that into monotheism, unless you have multiple deities, entities, in the godhead. Im not really sure what your talking about, here. if jesus is just a man, then.... ok. whats your point

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.
-
I have to back track here.

No. I feel its the other way around. Christianity has morphed by seeing Jesus as a deity. It used to be One God and Jesus was the follower of that one God. Everything was fine until now we read scripture and it says "the only way to get to the father is to get through me". So, people start worshiping Jesus instead.

I dont see Jesus as a demi God nor God. I just see christianity morphing or changing because now people do see Him as that.

No. No one is making Him a " 'mere' Rabbi". Scripture says He is and a High priest. Thats a given. So, I dont understand how that is related to christianity turning into a non monotheistic faith.

The moment people started worshiping Jesus it stops being monotheistic. I dont know what you call it; but, monotheist worship one God. No form of human attached. (If were talking strict abrahamic view)

 

[Forever_Catholic]

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?

There really has been a lot of morphing within and away from Christianity, which seems to have steadily accelerated in recent decades. But it’s not morphing into anything other than increasingly profound states of confusion and heresy.

If a Christian faith deteriorates to the point where a person no longer believes that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then there is no Christian faith left at all.

 

[Ingledsva]

In my experience I think it is turning into a Godless religion. What an oxymoron... Christians are putting themselves and other people before God. They don't really think about how God may feel about what they will do but what they will feel like when they do it. I think it's a good thing. The idea if a God is so old fashioned...

Ultimately - I think we are moving toward Spirituality, - without any religion's dogma, or Gods.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

There really has been a lot of morphing within and away from Christianity, which seems to have steadily accelerated in recent decades. But it’s not morphing into anything other than increasingly profound states of confusion and heresy.

If a Christian faith deteriorates to the point where a person no longer believes that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then there is no Christian faith left at all.

Why?

Christianity is/should be the belief that a Human named Jesus was the awaited Jewish Messiah.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say he was a God, or part of a trinity.

He never claimed to be either.

He only claimed to be the Messiah.

Dropping the trinity idea brings Christianity back closer to what it should have been under Jesus' teachings.

*

 

[Forever_Catholic]

Nowhere in the Bible does it say he was a God, or part of a trinity.

John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. - So Saint John recalls the first verse of Genesis, saying that at the time of creation, the Word, that is the Incarnate Word / the word made flesh (John 1:14) / Jesus was already with God and was God.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say he was a God, or part of a trinity.

1 John 5:7 - For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Dropping the trinity idea brings Christianity back closer to what it should have been under Jesus' teachings.

No, there are too many Biblical references disputing that statement -- too many for me look up right now, but consider John 20:22 when Jesus breathed on the apostles and said "Receive the Holy Spirit." How could Jesus breathe out God the Holy Spirit except that he is God the Son?

And this of course - Matthew 28:19 - Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
.

 

[Ingledsva]

John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. - So Saint John recalls the first verse of Genesis, saying that at the time of creation, the Word, that is the Incarnate Word / the word made flesh (John 1:14) / Jesus was already with God and was God.


1 John 5:7 - For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.


No, there are too many Biblical references disputing that statement -- too many for me look up right now, but consider John 20:22 when Jesus breathed on the apostles and said "Receive the Holy Spirit." How could Jesus breathe out God the Holy Spirit except that he is God the Son?

And this of course - Matthew 28:19 - Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
.

As we have pointed out OVER and OVER, - none of these verses say Jesus is God.

John 1 says Jesus is the illumination, - it does NOT say he is the Logos.

It says the Logos became enfleshed within Jesus.

The reason for this would be that he have the illumination, and Law, to teach and be the awaited HUMAN Messiah.

1 John says Logos, not Jesus.

We are told God and Logos are One, and the teaching is that the Spirit is the working Power of God going forth.

So these are ONE God, without the trinity Gods idea.

As to Matt, baptizing in the name of the Messiah, - in no way makes him a God/trinity.

*

 

[Forever_Catholic]

John says Logos, not Jesus.

And then John identifies "Logos" as Jesus - John 1:14 - The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

And he quotes Jesus:
John 14:9 "...he that has seen me has seen the Father."
John 10:30 - "I and the Father are one."

 

[Ingledsva]

And then John identifies "Logos" as Jesus - John 1:14 - The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

And he quotes Jesus:
John 14:9 "...he that has seen me has seen the Father."
John 10:30 - "I and the Father are one."

Except that it doesn't actually say that.

Look it up in the Greek.

It says the Logos became ENFLESHED and tabernacled among us.

Both words mean to enter into something.

Jesus is not the Logos in John 1. The Logos tabernacles within him. He is a Human.

*

 

[Forever_Catholic]

Except that it doesn't actually say that.

Look it up in the Greek.

Can't read Greek, but Saint Jerome was very meticulous in translating the Greek texts directly to retain the exact meanings in Latin, and I've never heard of him being disputed. So "Et Verbum caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis..." is "And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us... as it would come from Greek.

In any case, "enfleshed" and "The Word was made flesh" mean the same thing.

Jesus came to earth both fully human and fully divine, which should not be so hard to believe, because that is easily within God's infinite capabilities.

 

[fantome profane]

I don't think "the earliest Christians" were a unified group at all.

What is the relevance of this?

I think perhaps the relevance of this is that your research could benefit from a wider historical perspective, this is especially true when you are trying to look at a trend and project that into the future.

It seems to me that the different ideas of Jesus that you are referring to have always been around, and they will continue to be around for the foreseeable future. Christianity has always contained a variety of Christological outlooks. (and different theological outlooks as well)

 

[lovemuffin]

Except that it doesn't actually say that.

Look it up in the Greek.

It says the Logos became ENFLESHED and tabernacled among us.

As you said, this general topic has been done ad nauseum, so I'm hesitant to drag another thread into it, although if you were interested I would probably be willing to do a one-on-one debate with you about the assertion that the Bible provides no support for the idea of Jesus' divinity. These threads get so long and bogged down, I've always wanted to argue about this at more length but the threads tend to move too quickly and get too sidetracked for my taste. A more limited debate might be fun. Anyway, just an idea...

In any case, I did look it up in the Greek and fortunately the prologue of John's gospel is grammatically very straightforward. The verse in question begins και ὁ λόγος σαρξ ἐγένετο. (kai ho logos sarx egeneto). Sarx is a 1st person singular feminine noun, and the most literal translation is simply "and the word became flesh". In order to get to enfleshed, you would need something like the greek verb for incarnate: ενσαρκώνω (ensarkono), which is quite literally "enfleshed", you see the root sark in the middle, same as with sarx. But that is not what the Greek of John 1:14 uses. As a matter of interpretation, you could certainly argue that what the author of John means by "the word became flesh" is something more like your usage, but you can't legitimately argue that the Greek text itself provides direct support for that interpretation, because it doesn't.