Do differences in practices of faith mean we follow the same Jesus Christ? (reject, gospel)

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Orontes

A Roman Catholic and a Calvinist may well agree that Jesus is the Christ and the Savior of the world. However, they part company insofar as the Catholic asserts the wine and wafer during the Eucharist literally become the blood and body of Christ during each occasion of the rite.

And to you this means that they each follow a different Christ?

[madhatter85]

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

yes or no and why.

Again, the Jesus Christ came from the bible, not from any other reference material.
Hence, in this thread, the authenticity of the bible is not questioned, because it is the only reference where the life and teachings of Christ can be found.

if you want to question the authenticity of the bible please start a new thread, thank you!

if you limit it to only the Bible, but to some chrisitans (mainly LDS) parts of his life and ministry are also contained within the Book of Mormon. so the bible it not the ONLY book that testifies to the divinity of christ.


but as for the question you asked, yes, we think of the same person who was born in bethlehem. died on the corss and then rose again ont he 3rd day following. the great savior of mankind.

the difference that i think people have is to the nature of Jesus Christ and God the Father.

As LDS we believe that he is the Son of God, but not God the Father. that he is a separate personage from Him but one in purpose.

we also believe that he would not forget other nations around the world and that his ministry to other parts of the world following his resurrection are contained within the Book of Mormon.

I;m sure there are some religions who consider themselves to believe in a different Jesus than the average Chrisitan.

But as for the mainstream chrisitans (LDS, Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran ect....) we all believe in and akknowledge the exact same person though we may have varying beliefs as to his nature.

[madhatter85]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

And to you this means that they each follow a different Christ?

I don't think that is what he was saying.

[Orontes]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

And to you this means that they each follow a different Christ?

If Christ possess different metaphysical properties then that is a real difference. Further, per my other example: if Christ is engaged in double predestination then a deterministic Christ is different from a non-deterministic Christ.

Stressing differences or similarities seems a matter of perspective and one may opt for one or the other depending on the particular agenda.

[madhatter85]

Originally Posted by Orontes

If Christ possess different metaphysical properties then that is a real difference. Further, per my other example: if Christ is engaged in double predestination then a deterministic Christ is different from a non-deterministic Christ.

Stressing differences or similarities seems a matter of perspective and one may opt for one or the other depending on the particular agenda.

i think i see what you mean,

i think though it is not a debate as to a Different Chrsit, but as to the nature of him and his actual role in the plan of salvation.

[Orontes]

Originally Posted by madhatter85

i think i see what you mean,

i think though it is not a debate as to a Different Chrsit, but as to the nature of him and his actual role in the plan of salvation.

Consider the Christ of the Council of Chalcedon 453 A.D.. The Chalcedonian Christ has two natures and thus is dyophysite. This relates to the very being of Christ. A miaphysite Christ (as per the Oriental Orthodox Church that rejected the Council of Chalcedon i.e. the Coptic Christians in Egypt) view Christ with but one nature. These views are distinct. Therefore, the Christ as perceived by Chalcedon and the Christ perceived by those who rejected Chalcedon are in a real sense different.

I think Mormons might be sensitive to the "different Christ" issue, because it is a common refrain of anti-Mormons. But the reality is those who make the charge are typically quite ignorant of Christian Theology and that the same charge can quite easily be applied across the Christian theological spectrum.

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Orontes

I think Mormons might be sensitive to the "different Christ" issue, because it is a common refrain of anti-Mormons. But the reality is those who make the charge are typically quite ignorant of Christian Theology and that the same charge can quite easily be applied across the Christian theological spectrum.

You're right, it can, but to what end? To divide us all further than we're already divided? Who knows, if you want to delve deeply enough, you and I might believe in a different Christ.

[Orontes]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

You're right, it can, but to what end? To divide us all further than we're already divided? Who knows, if you want to delve deeply enough, you and I might believe in a different Christ.

Ends speak to agendas. I have no agenda. I was simply pointing out the notion of different Christ(s) can cover a large domain.