Do differences in practices of faith mean we follow the same Jesus Christ?

[uss_bigd]

You would probably tell me that I'm misled, but I would have to disagree.

I made no such conclusion ma'm...

 

[Orontes]

I think, though, that it would be safe to say that most Christians believe that they are, in fact, following the Jesus who was depicted in the Bible. The problem is that we all interpret what the Bible has to say about Jesus in slightly different ways. Personally, I would never feel justified in telling another Christian that he believed in the "wrong Jesus," a "different Jesus," or a "counterfeit Jesus" -- as many a Christian has said to me.

Hello,

I see where you are coming from. The thrust of this thread as I understand it is: one, the question of whether difference in faith practices constitute belief/worship of a different Christ. Two, that any truth claims that contradict cannot both be true. If one admits there are differences and people are making truth claims about those differences then where conflicting claims rub up against each other would seem to cancel out at least one of the claims. This seems reasonable to me.

As to differences: tabling the question of practice and simply looking at claims about Christ, I think clear distinctions can be pointed out. For example, a Christ that admits to transubstantiation, per Roman Catholic Theology is different metaphysically than a Christ whose being isn't affected by the Eucharist. Similarly, a Christ engaged in double predestination, per Calvinist Theology is different than a Christ who isn't tied to any determinism.

 

[Katzpur]

Hello,

I see where you are coming from. The thrust of this thread as I understand it is: one, the question of whether difference in faith practices constitute belief/worship of a different Christ. Two, that any truth claims that contradict cannot both be true. If one admits there are differences and people are making truth claims about those differences then where conflicting claims rub up against each other would seem to cancel out at least one of the claims. This seems reasonable to me.

As to differences: tabling the question of practice and simply looking at claims about Christ, I think clear distinctions can be pointed out. For example, a Christ that admits to transubstantiation, per Roman Catholic Theology is different metaphysically than a Christ whose being isn't affected by the Eucharist. Similarly, a Christ engaged in double predestination, per Calvinist Theology is different than a Christ who isn't tied to any determinism.

There is only one Christ. It is our perceptions and our understanding of Him that differ. If you were to tell me that George Bush is the greatest President to have ever led this country, the most honest, the most trustworthy, the most intelligent, the most articulate, etc. etc. etc., and I were to tell you pretty much the opposite, would we be speaking of the same George Bush? I think we would be, even though our opionions of him were very different. There are some pretty straightforward things the Bible says about Jesus Christ:

1. He was the Son of God.
2. He as the Creator of our universe.
3. His birth was foretold by the ancient prophets.
4. He was born in Bethelem to a virgin, of the house of David.
5. He led a sinless life.
6. He called twelve to serve as His Apostles.
7. He taught a gospel of love, and encouraged forgiveness and charity.
8. He performed many miracles, including bringing the dead back to life.
9. He was betrayed by one of His friends.
10. He offered Himself up as a sacrifice to atone for the sins of all who would follow Him.
11. He rose again on the third day after His death by crucifixion.
12. He ascended to reign in Heaven where He sits today on the right hand of God.

Now maybe I'm wrong, but I can't think offhand of any Christian denomination that would not accept these twelve essential points about Jesus Christ. Isn't a common belief in those twelve things sufficient to say that we believe in the "same Jesus Christ"?

 

[Ratiocinative]

There is only one Christ. It is our perceptions and our understanding of Him that differ. If you were to tell me that George Bush is the greatest President to have ever led this country, the most honest, the most trustworthy, the most intelligent, the most articulate, etc. etc. etc., and I were to tell you pretty much the opposite, would we be speaking of the same George Bush? I think we would be, even though our opionions of him were very different. There are some pretty straightforward things the Bible says about Jesus Christ:

1. He was the Son of God.
2. He as the Creator of our universe.
3. His birth was foretold by the ancient prophets.
4. He was born in Bethelem to a virgin, of the house of David.
5. He led a sinless life.
6. He called twelve to serve as His Apostles.
7. He taught a gospel of love, and encouraged forgiveness and charity.
8. He performed many miracles, including bringing the dead back to life.
9. He was betrayed by one of His friends.
10. He offered Himself up as a sacrifice to atone for the sins of all who would follow Him.
11. He rose again on the third day after His death by crucifixion.
12. He ascended to reign in Heaven where He sits today on the right hand of God.

Now maybe I'm wrong, but I can't think offhand of any Christian denomination that would not accept these twelve essential points about Jesus Christ. Isn't a common belief in those twelve things sufficient to say that we believe in the "same Jesus Christ"?

You seem to always forget to mention that there only one God and no others, though I know why you always do of course. You also left out salvation through faith and number 7 is also wrong. The gospel isn't love. God wants us to love others, but that isn't what the gospel is about. The gospel is that you were lost in your sin and headed to hell, but God became human to save you with his own blood. And the only way to receive that salvation is through faith in Christ alone. These three things are the core message of the Bible, how could you forget them so easily?

 

[Katzpur]

These three things are the core message of the Bible, how could you forget them so easily?

I thought we were speaking specifically about Jesus Christ, not about the Bible. I didn't forget anything, but I didn't want to go off-topic, so I didn't mention original sin or salvation or some of the things you felt I should have. I stuck to what I believe about Jesus Christ. I'm sorry you don't believe that Jesus Christ's gospel was about love. I guess that's one thing we differ on. I would agree with you that the "gospel" specifically refers to the "good news" about the fact that He was our Savior and was prepared to die so that we might be reconciled to God. When I said that He taught a gospel of love, mercy and forgiveness, I was speaking of the attributes He domonstrated in His own life, and which He told us to emulate. Which of the other twelve items I mentioned do you disagree with?

 

[Ratiocinative]

I thought we were speaking specifically about Jesus Christ, not about the Bible. I didn't forget anything, but I didn't want to go off-topic, so I didn't mention original sin or salvation or some of the things you felt I should have. I stuck to what I believe about Jesus Christ. I'm sorry you don't believe that Jesus Christ's gospel was about love. I guess that's one thing we differ on. Which of the other twelve items I mentioned do you disagree with?

Last time I checked, the Bible talks about Christ. A lot. It's no wonder your understanding of Christ and the gospel is wrong, since you ignore what the Bible says. If you don't believe that there is only one God, that Christ came to purchase his people who were lost in sin, and that believing in him is the only way to be saved, then you certainly are talking about a different Christ than the one mentioned in the Bible.

 

[Katzpur]

Last time I checked, the Bible talks about Christ. A lot.

Great, that's something we agree on, because the last time I checked, that's what I found, too.

It's no wonder your understanding of Christ and the gospel is wrong, since you ignore what the Bible says.

Actually, you've never mentioned anything in the Bible that I ignore. Furthermore, you didn't answer my question. Would you mind?

If you don't believe that there is only one God, that Christ came to purchase his people who were lost in sin, and that believing in him is the only way to be saved, then you certainly are talking about a different Christ than the one mentioned in the Bible.

Well, I do believe those things, so I guess I believe in the same Christ you do. (By the way, how many Christs do you believe there are to choose from?)

 

[Ratiocinative]

Actually, you've never mentioned anything in the Bible that I ignore. Furthermore, you didn't answer my question. Would you mind?

None other than seven, just that the list is missing the most important things about Christ.

Well, I do believe those things, so I guess I believe in the same Christ you do. (By the way, how many Christs do you believe there are to choose from?)

Well its great that you do, but you shouldn't be so quick to leave them out of such a list.

(By the way, how many Christs do you believe there are to choose from?)

Real ones? Only one. But there are as many fictional ones as people choose to invent.

 

[Katzpur]

None other than seven, just that the list is missing the most important things about Christ.

Nonsense! Nothing is more important than the fact that Jesus Christ is our Savior!

 

[Orontes]

There is only one Christ. It is our perceptions and our understanding of Him that differ. If you were to tell me that George Bush is the greatest President to have ever led this country, the most honest, the most trustworthy, the most intelligent, the most articulate, etc. etc. etc., and I were to tell you pretty much the opposite, would we be speaking of the same George Bush? I think we would be, even though our opionions of him were very different. There are some pretty straightforward things the Bible says about Jesus Christ:

1. He was the Son of God.
2. He as the Creator of our universe.
3. His birth was foretold by the ancient prophets.
4. He was born in Bethelem to a virgin, of the house of David.
5. He led a sinless life.
6. He called twelve to serve as His Apostles.
7. He taught a gospel of love, and encouraged forgiveness and charity.
8. He performed many miracles, including bringing the dead back to life.
9. He was betrayed by one of His friends.
10. He offered Himself up as a sacrifice to atone for the sins of all who would follow Him.
11. He rose again on the third day after His death by crucifixion.
12. He ascended to reign in Heaven where He sits today on the right hand of God.

Now maybe I'm wrong, but I can't think offhand of any Christian denomination that would not accept these twelve essential points about Jesus Christ. Isn't a common belief in those twelve things sufficient to say that we believe in the "same Jesus Christ"?

Of course, I would agree there is only one Christ as far as actual existence and role, but the claims I may make about who that Christ is may not necessarily be the same as other Christians. The distinctions regarding the who and what of Christ do differ based on the theology of the self avowed Christian. The Roman Catholic and Calvinist perspectives I gave are illustrative.

It is also certainly the case that similarities between various sects and denominations can also be pointed out. The issue as it has be lain out here concerns differences and whether those faith differences do in fact mean the devotional object (Christ) is thereby different. 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.

 

[Katzpur]

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]

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]

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

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

 

[Orontes]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[uss_bigd]

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.

I am sorry but the book of mormons and the bible do not have identical teachings, much less identical persons in it.

"two contradicting things can never be both true"

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.

As i said, two contradicting things cannot be both true, the "Christian" denominations you mentioned above has several docrines that contradicts the bible.

Therefore, these "Christian" denominations can never acknowledge the same exact person.

Hence, Matthew warned

Matthew 24:24


For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.


"Are there false Christs?

 

[Katzpur]

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.

Where in the Bible are we told that it is the only source of God's word?

I am sorry but the book of mormons and the bible do not have identical teachings, much less identical persons in it.

You haven't read the Book of Mormon. How do you know what it teaches? The gospel according to Matthew is not identical to the gospel according to Mark, Luke or John. They have much in common but each one mentions things the other doesn't. Do you see them as contradicting each other? The book of Job is not about the same people as the book of Exodus. Does that make one of them true and the other one false?

"two contradicting things can never be both true"

I agree. Would you mind explaining what you believe the word "contradict" to mean?

As i said, two contradicting things cannot be both true, the "Christian" denominations you mentioned above has several docrines that contradicts the bible.

Would you mind giving us some examples?

Hence, Matthew warned

Matthew 24:24

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

"Are there false Christs?

Undoubtedly, but not in my faith.