Skip to main content

It would be enough

Even if there was no Nicene Creed, I would still be here.
Even if he wasn't of one essence with the Father, I would still be here.
Even if the Bible is not divinely inspired, I would still be here.
Even if there was no Paul, I would still be here.
Even if he didn't rise bodily from the dead, I would still be here.
Even if he didn't bodily ascend into heaven, I would still be here.
Even if he isn't the Only Way, I would still be here.
Even if he didn't walk on water, I would still be here.
Even if he didn't heal anyone, I would still be here.
Even if his mother wasn't a virgin, I would still be here.
Even if he wasn't the Messiah, I would still be here.
Even if he thought he was the Messiah, and was wrong, I would still be here.
Even if he was wrong about a few things, I would still be here.
Even if there was nothing of him but the sermon on the plain, a piece of writing describing a way of life filled with divine love, a way of life so radical and yet so simple. Even if there was only that glimpse of that kind of life, it would still be a life I would want to try to give myself to. It would still impress me enough for me to try to live my life in such a crazy, impractical, romantic, spiritual love-filled way.
It would be enough.

Comments

Anonymous said…
This is a very though provoking and challenging post, because it highlights the tension I'm currently struggling with - that if it wasn't for many of the features of Christianity that I have difficulty with, I probably would never have heard of the radical rabbi Yeshua in the first place.

I worry that by rejecting the way Jesus has been brought to me is either completely liberating and empowering - the essence/message remains intact, or is incredibly selfish and 'faithless' by letting my head rule my heart and somehow 'denying God' on intellectual grounds.

I don't really know how to square this circle.
8:53 pm
Jaume de Marcos Andreu said…
But who is the focus of the Christian religion? Is he the rebel rabbi from Galilee, or the son of God announced by Paul and the gospel writers? And even more intriguing: if we had first-hand experience of the historical Jesus, would we like him? Or do we prefer to create our own Jesus out of the NT stories?
11:30 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Radical?

When I started this blog nearly 4 years and nearly 300 posts ago one of the labels I used for it/me was "radical." Perhaps I used it a little unreflectively. Recently I've been pondering what radical means. A couple of things have made me think of this. Firstly this blog series from my friend Jeremy, which explores a distinction between "radical progressives" and "rational progressives." There is also this definition of radical, liberal and conservative from Terry Eagleton quoted at Young Anabaptist Radicals : “Radicals are those who believe that things are extremely bad with us, but they could feasibly be much improved. Conservatives believe that things are pretty bad, but that’s just the way the human animal is. And liberals believe that there’s a little bit of good and bad in all of us.” What interests me is finding a way to express the tension I feel sometimes between myself and the wider Unitarian movement. One way to express this is to say I tend
3 comments
Read more

What does it mean to be non-creedal?

Steve Caldwell says "The problem here isn't humanism vs. theism for theist Unitarian Universalists -- it's the non-creedal nature of Unitarian Universalism" This is a good point. We need to think much more deeply about what it means to be a non-creedal religion. The first thing I want to say is that there is more than one possible understanding of non-creedalism. The Disciples of Christ are a non-creedal church, they say here : " Freedom of belief. Disciples are called together around one essential of faith: belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Persons are free to follow their consciences guided by the Bible, the Holy Spirit study and prayer, and are expected to extend that freedom to others." Quakers are also non-creedal and say here : Quakers have no set creed or dogma - that means we do not have any declared statements which you have to believe to be a Quaker. There are, however, some commonly held views which unite us. One accepted view is that th
3 comments
Read more

What is Radical Christianity?

Radical Christianity is about encountering the God of love . It is first and foremost rooted in the discovery of a universal and unconditional source of love at the heart of reality and within each person. God is the name we give to this source of love. It is possible to have a direct and real personal encounter with this God through spiritual practice. We encounter God, and are nourished by God, through the regular practice of prayer, or contemplation.  Radical Christianity is about following a man called Jesus . It is rooted in the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish prophet living under occupation of the Roman Empire two thousand years ago. It understands that's Jesus' message was the message of liberation. His message was that when we truly encounter God, and let God's love flow through us, we begin to be liberated from the powers of empire and violence and encounter the  "realm of God" - an alternative spiritual and social reality rooted in love rather th
Post a Comment
Read more