Originally posted by karoly aczel
Oh,um..I meant Badwater. But you know I word my questions so poorly... glad to have had a response .
Your response seems quite' fluid'.
So can you distance yourself from the teachings of christ when contemplating your personal spirituality? (thats for you vistesd)
It’s not that I thought your question was poorly worded. It’s just that words like “Christian” and phrases like “what Christ taught” have become so loaded that any kind of direct answer is likely to be misconstrued.
For example, when you say “Christ”—do you mean just Jesus? What does it mean (to you, to someone else) to say that Jesus is/was the
Christ? Do you think that the word monogenete
(I think I’ve got the Greek right), conventionally translated as “only begotten”, means unique
? Answer either way, and you’re likely to be somebody’s
When Jesus said “I am the way and the truth and the life”, was he referring to his personal self, Jesus? Or was he making a more expansive statement about the divine “I am” that he had realized was manifest in himself? And all of us? Answer either way, and you’re likely to be somebody’s
When the Siddhartha Gautama is called “the Buddha”, what does that mean? Does it mean the same thing as to call Jesus “the Christ”? (I think not, not exactly. But, I think that they are a lot closer than some Buddhists and a lot of Christians would like to believe.)
Now, of course, you have had the opportunity to see lots
of answers to these kinds of questions on here! You have seen arguments and counter-arguments, denunciations and counter-denunciations. I have been on here for some years, and have seen most of them more than once.
The only real answer I can give to your question is the one I gave in the opening post: I have become a non-formalist non-dualist. The “spiritual” ground that I rest in is before all words, names and forms: Christian, Buddhist, Taoist, Advaita Vedantist, etc. But I might find expression of it in any or all of those forms. (Despite the fact that he uses somewhat different terms, I affirm generally what de Nicolas wrote, that I posted above.)
If I were going to speak “christologically”, I might say that the Christ (ho Christos
) is the logos
expressed, or manifest, as human being—or that ho Christos
is one who realizes such manifestation—and that Jesus may be seen as uniquely realized, in the sense of being an ideal or sacramental eikon
of the logos
so manifest. That’s as far as I’m willing to speak in such terms. I have no interest in arguing over whether or not such a Christological view (sometimes called a “logos christology”, I believe) is “Christian”.