I am not sure about which scripture you are referring to. When I read the words of Jesus, I find not a trinity.
John 20:25 - 30 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me. But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. I and my Father are one.
Jesus says the Father is greater than all, including himself.
Matt 19:16–17 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
Jesus says he is not Good, only the Father is Good.
Luke 22:41–43 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast, and kneeled down, and prayed, Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done. And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.
Jesus prays to the Father expressing his will, but accepting the Father’s will. This is oneness, not one person.
One of them fails to embrace the creed required by Christians of those wishing to join the followers of Christ. The other refuses that which Christ himself says is required to follow him. I guess it all depends on who you want to hang with?
Perhaps… but you say that like you have to choose. I am not convinced that hanging with Jesus has anything to do with being a Christian either way. Jesus not only seemed fine with being a Jew but also didn’t have any problem with Samaritans and Gentiles. I would certainly give the greater precedence to the words of Jesus, but I don’t think the decisions of the ecumenical councils can be ignored when determining if you honestly fit within the Christian spectrum of belief.
That’s fair. After all I doubt if Jesus ever used the word “Christian”. But seriously the decision about who is or isn’t a Christian is more about who you want to include in a faith community. I suppose Christians choose a community based on shared values and believes, and obviously you have a range of traditions to choose from. I think we all look for that from others to some degree, whether or not we do weekly meetings
The story of the good Samaritan is one of my faves. To me, it seems to be a parable about how useless religion is. Religion divides human from human, but this parapable seems to suggest that righteousness is more important than religiosity.
This could be it’s own thread: “Is the parable of the good Samaritan about how useless religion is?”
Some may object that it is about “outsiders” knowing Christ and not (as I have it) religion being useless. But even if that’s the correct interpretation… it seems to follow that religion is useless.
If people outside your religious sphere have meaningful relationships with Christ, then, like, uh… what is your religion doing in the first place? Introducing people to Christ? Well, apparently, some of them are already introduced.
To me, the parable of the good Samaritan is obviously about religious tolerance. But, I could be wrong on that. If my interpretation were widely accepted as “the valid interpretation” then Christianity would look rather different than it does.
But, if the parable isn’t about religious tolerance, what is it supposed to be about?
I think you would agree that that is a portion of the message, but if you look at it in a positive light, it’s not just what not to do (don’t look down on those with a different creed than you ) but also what theologian NT Wrights out…that the bulk of Jesus’ message was about bringing the Kingdom of Heaven here on earth now, not just in Heaven. George Macdonald wrote that Jesus’ primary goal was to show the Father and how to serve Him in serving our brothers in the book that my wife and I read last night (Curate’s Awakening) as well…interesting to read such things from an influential 19th century author, whose patron was Lady Byron and whose works influenced CS Lewis more than any other. Regarding creed, as James (and Jesus, in his discussion with a Samaritan woman) would say, it helps us to understand, but if we don’t act on it, it’s useless.
I’m not saying this quite right in regard to creed, but I now want to learn more about God, especially if Jesus is His reflection. Does that make a beginning of sense? Macdonald’s books illustrate that well to me. Thanks for your excellent discussion.
I get frustrated with creeds and religions a lot, but it does me some good to be reminded that religions and creeds do a lot of good for a lot of people.
It was Jesus’ response to the question “who is my neighbor?” from a lawyer who had just asked him what he must do to inherit eternal life. When Jesus’ answer to that included “loving your neighbor as yourself”, the lawyer wanted clarification on just how big or inclusive his “neighbor circle” had to be anyway. The Samaritan parable was Jesus’ way of telling the lawyer: wherever it is you like to draw that circle - carefully just so as to exclude those hated [fill in the blank with those you most despise], you better learn to love even them.
To my way of thinking too. That word “tolerance”, though, is a slippery character these days. Classical notions of tolerance would allow for disagreement between us just so long as we continue to respect each other’s rights and worth and (on the Christian understanding) even go beyond that to love each other which is well beyond what any law minimally requires. Today there are many who apparently think that even mere disagreement or a failure/refusal to celebrate something with others represents intolerance towards them. I don’t subscribe to that hyper-sensitive notion of intolerance, but I do embrace the more classical sort. The very definition of the word “tolerate” implies a restraint and an allowance for continued membership in some group and even an obligation to love despite displeasure or disagreement over something.
Absolutely! One example is in a family–you have some folks (ie kids, usually) who do some unwise things–drinking all night, partying–(picture “A River Runs Through It”)–and that doesn’t get rid of your status as a family member. There can be destructive things we don’t agree with in our loved ones, and result in our obligation to even gently, lovingly correct them. When all is said and done, we don’t want only “yes men” in our lives. “Faithful are the wounds of a friend”–and if the friend says, 'I value you so much that I’m risking our relationship to tell you what you are doing to yourself and others," that is a friend (or family member) worth having.
Jesus’ consistent message was that our treatment of others is more important than religious ritual and observance. In the Sermon on the Mount he says,
“Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift."
Jesus was not an innovator in this message. The prophets said the same. Consider how Isaiah started his message to the nation:
Hear me, you heavens! Listen, earth!
For the Lord has spoken:
“I reared children and brought them up,
but they have rebelled against me.
(This is the language of a covenant lawsuit. The Lord is calling heaven and earth to hear his case against Israel.)
“The multitude of your sacrifices—
what are they to me?” says the Lord…
Your New Moon feasts and your appointed festivals
I hate with all my being.
They have become a burden to me;
I am weary of bearing them.
When you spread out your hands in prayer,
I hide my eyes from you;
even when you offer many prayers,
I am not listening. Your hands are full of blood!
Wash and make yourselves clean.
Take your evil deeds out of my sight;
stop doing wrong.
Learn to do right; seek justice.
Defend the oppressed.
Take up the cause of the fatherless;
plead the case of the widow.
Jesus reserved his greatest condemnation for hypocrisy, and so did the prophets.
Back to the Good Samaritan. It’s about more than just religious tolerance. All of Jesus’ interactions with Samaritans also have centuries of racial animosity in the background.To Jews of the first century, Samaritans were racial and religious “half-breeds.” In this story, Jesus obliterates both racial and religious prejudices against Samaritans.
We see the same thing in John 3-4. First, the ultimate “insider” comes to Jesus under cover of darkness. Nicodemus is rich, a member of the Sanhedrin, a Pharisee, and a teacher of Israel. Jesus confuses him and sends him away empty handed. Immediately afterward, Jesus greets the ultimate “outsider” at Jacob’s Well, the very spot where the Jewish king John Hyrcanus had destroyed the Samaritan temple in the second century BC. How does Jesus respond to the woman at the well? Does he send her away empty handed like Nicodemus?
“Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”
“Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”
The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”
Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”
They worship what they do not know. Christ reveals himself to such people; his sheep hear his voice. Occasionally, it is our great privilege to speak his words in our own voices, that others may know him better, as we ourselves strive to know him better.
What sort of religion does God find acceptable? James, the Lord’s brother, puts it simply in his NT letter, “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” The prophet Micah echoes that thought:
With what shall I come before the Lord
and bow down before the exalted God?
Shall I come before him with burnt offerings,
with calves a year old?
Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams,
with ten thousand rivers of olive oil?
Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression,
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.
And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God
I think we all value what we do without knowing entirely why we do. We are all limited by our best lights. If you accept handed down knowledge as authoritative, then by your self chosen standard you may feel you know. But to judge what others value as being inferior by the standard one chooses for oneself seems not right to me. It bespeaks a lack of humility in ones epistemology which is probably harder to see when many gather who profess the same knowing.
Nonetheless I found much of interest in your post which I did not know before. I’m just putting lubricant where I hear the squeak, in addressing that one line.
If that is what the Christian religion is reducible to, isn’t it problematic that there is this whole huge book that (some of the time) convinces people to something other than this?