Comments on: God, Guru, or Grapefruit?

By: Robbie

Robbie — Mon, 26 Jun 2006 06:51:04 +0000

It’s been a really long time since I’ve been here. You’re spot on. We’re there. Agreement on stuff, an idea, and it only took some six or seven months.

By: Administrator

Administrator — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 15:19:25 +0000

We fumble with words because there is no accurate way to really describe who Jesus is. My desire is to expand the concept of God to Jesus’ life and teachings — he is the “God become Guru” if you will. When we do it the other way around, we run the risk of forming God (a god) in our own image by elevating something that shouldn’t be elevated. If I look at something (or a person, or the qualities in a person) and say, “I like that. I’ll make that my god,” we are in the golden calf business.

The point of the original post is that this is a potential trap for the Church — emerging or whatnot. We need to have a sound theology about Jesus, or we are just inventing something that sounds good to our own ears.

By: Robbie

Robbie — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:59:08 +0000

My conclusion on this idea of Jesus as Guru, God, or Grapefruit: He is my God and Guru. If he is my God, why should I reject or neglect or even downplay His teachings? Christianity is a waste of my mind (all of my right thinking) if He is only my God, and a waste time (all of my right practices) if He is only my Guru.

By: Administrator

Administrator — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 03:56:55 +0000

You bet. I think this is an area where we can have our cake AND eat it, too. We can strive for pure, undefiled love AND worship the exalted Christ. We can strive to live after the example of Christ in how he lived, loved, and ministered to mankind, AND be like John — that same apostle who casually reclined against Jesus’ breast in the upper room, and fell as though dead at the feet of the glorified Christ. But it has to be both. Too much of one or the other and it isn’t Christianity anymore. It is either a secular humanistic cult, or a dogmatic legalistic cult.

By: Robbie

Robbie — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 01:15:15 +0000

True, the cross of Christ, the Atonement, or the Victory, is the point of the new testement. But I think more is written about relationships: with God, with other beleivers (the church) and with non-believers (the world). The point, is to be in relationship with God, and that can only be done with the cross. Then what? Let’s think practically. Jesus says to love, John says to love, Paul says to love (3rd gospel, 2nd John, 1 Cor. and there’s a great example of how and who to love in the 3rd gospel).

A knowledge of Christ or a belief in Christ or action in the name of Christ imparts no grace. There were people who claimed to know Jesus, did good works, and even preached in His name, but Jesus didn’t know who they were. They were of no relation to Christ.

Christ knew he would die, and thus reconnect himself to people. But what next? Jesus knew we would need help with stuff like prayer, like caring for people, like dealing with money and conflict. That’s what his life was about; teaching us to live in reconnection.

By: Administrator

Administrator — Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:12:26 +0000

True, but keep in mind that the body of scripture in the New Testament all points to the cross, the atonement of Christ for the sins of the world, and the return of Christ in glory. It is the simplest of ideas — that an entire religion would be based on this alone. But that is exactly what Paul talks about in 1 Corinthians chapter 2. We need to make certain that our compassion for the world does not result in us developing a “spirit of the world” (1 Cor. 2:12). There is a very thin line between saying that Christ is our example of how to live and saying that Christ is an example of how to live. I’ve known several people who lost sight of this simple fact.

One in particular has since renounced Christ altogether. He could not come to grips with the fact that although the friends he knew in a particular village were moral, unselfish, loving, caring — more so than any Christian he knew — that they were condemned without Christ. He went from being a leader of Christians to being an enemy of Christ (his own words, not mine) almost overnight. How then could a just God allow such injustice?

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because thay are spiritually discerned.” — 1 Corinthians 2:14

Mark Driscoll, pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, states that the atonement of Christ will be the issue in the church in the coming years. It will be what separates those who see Jesus as just another guru from those who see him as the Exalted Christ. BUT, it does’t mean that we fail to hear the cry of the needy, to befriend the worldly, to love the unlovable, and to work toward righteous justice for the failings of the church past and present.

In essence, we need to know deep in our souls that we are no different than they. It is Christ that makes the difference in us, and we should not boast (1 Cor. 1:28-30) — but remember that we were bought with a price (1 Cor. 6:20).

By: Robbie

Robbie — Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:09:18 +0000

Without the life of Christ, the death of Christ would be unimportant; the death of a sales…I mean carpenter. His sinlessness under temptation and miracles for good made him Christ. If Jesus would have sinned, done miracles to injure people, and was ressurected after three days dead, he would most certainly not be worthy of praise or worship.