JESUS AND CHRIST: THE DIFFERENCE

For me--- there is the Pre-Easter Jesus, and there is the Post-Easter Christ.

The Pre-Easter Jesus is a historical and human being. He is infused with the Divine. He is largely found in the Synoptic Gospels: Mark, Matthew and Luke. I also believe much of the Gospel of Thomas gives us an insight into this individual.

The Pre-Easter Jesus was a human being, who existed historically. I like the sketch of the Pre-Easter Jesus made by Marcus Borg, Jesus scholar: “spirit person, healer, wisdom teacher, social prophet and movement initiator”.

The Post-Easter Christ was the creation of the Christian community, especially by certain followers: Paul and John, the Evangelist and then the fathers of the early church and theologians down through the ages.

What actually was Easter? What happened on that day?

Did Jesus actually rise from the dead on Easter?

Some believe he arose with the same body he had while living.

Some believe after he left the tomb he possessed a spiritual body.

Some believe he did not return from death but his presence was strongly
felt by some of his followers.

Some believe he died on the cross and never was given a proper burial.

However, even a very meticulous student of the historical Jesus as John Dominic Crossan -- a person who tries in his research not to impose his faith on the interpretation of the historical record --- does admit that something happened --- that there was a different spirit among Jesus’ followers -- after Easter than before it.

For example: they seemed to have more courage, confidence, and solid faith.

“What could not have been predicted and might not have been expected was that the end (Calvary)was not the end. Those who had originally experienced divine power through his vision and his example continued to do so after his death. In fact, even more so, because now this power was no longer confined by time or place.” Crossan

Something happened to the followers of Jesus at and/or after Easter. There may be different ways of explaining the phenomenon---but it needs to be accounted for.

Now, I have to ask myself---why am I making all this fuss and using all these words?

After reading books that examine the historical Jesus, the actual human being that lived in Holy Land------I found a person whom I respected, admired, loved and whose priorities and vision appealed to me.

For me --- at this point in time --- there seems to be the “real” Jesus (Pre-Easter Jesus) and then there is the Christ (Post-Easter Jesus).

Christ is what the early church and the later versions of the early church made out of Jesus. Christ is Divine, Mighty, Powerful, part of the Holy Trinity, etc. He is described in the Apostles’ Creed, The Nicene Creed and the Athanatian Creed.

In other words he has been “deified,” larger than life. And for me -- more difficult to relate to him --- because in the transition from Jesus to Christ in the Christian church down through the ages ---- Jesus has lost his humanity. I think that this was a problem I had with my Roman Catholic education. Jesus was God walking and talking. I wanted a real person like myself to relate to.

Another problem I have with the concept of Christ: It has given the opportunity to many persons, churches, theologians, preachers to create their own Jesus. Since the Christ idea or model gives the opportunity for conjecture, intellectualization, and personal whims and wishes. Christ is what Jesus seems to various believers.

The term Christ seems to have acted as a conceptual step which has broken the link between itself and Jesus of Nazareth.

One result is that we find churches that seem to ignore completely the Jesus that patently visible in the Gospels (including or not including Thomas)

When I read the New Testament I see Jesus as--

• a person who has a special concern and love for the poor, for children,
and for the outcasts

• a person who emphasized the dangers of wealth and the deceit of hypocrisy

• a person who opposed the established powers: church and state

• a person who spoke of the relationship between God and his creation ---
as that of a loving, non-judgmental father -- one that we can trust and rely
on as do the birds of the air and the lilies of the field

• a person just like us but one who had an almost "magical" connection with
the Absolute, and who seemed to be always in communion with the Divine in an intimate manner

• one who has been rightfully described by the rather academic term a --
“radical egalitarian”

• one had no intention of founding a new church, but of describing and living
a more vital and personal spiritual way, a manner of life that did not require
a new institution -- but rather a refinement of Judaism.

• a teacher that as far we know wrote nothing, certainly not a weighty tome of
theology. Instead he offered two commandments -- and one of the most
beautifully transformative “recipes” for living close to God: The Beatitudes
.
• a person who must have known his life’s example and teachings would
lead to an early death, but refused to be dissuaded.

Jesus, as I See Him

I have a certain image of Jesus that undergoes changes as would be expected. I am much more interested and attracted to Jesus of the dusty roads of Galilee than I am to the Christ fashioned by early leaders like Paul and John of the Fourth Gospel.

It seems to me that Jesus never intended to found a new church. He was a Jew--a man filled with divine power, grace and wisdom. He was a radical egalitarian as pointed out by Crossan. He was a healer, whose healing gifts, even more than his spiritual message drew many to him. Probably only a few were capable then and now of absorbing his teaching and his spirit. It may be a "way" better imparted on a one to one. I think he had special followers that he was able to reach. The core message and most profound -- as well as most difficult to accept -- is found in the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus's declaration of the two commandments: love God and love your neighbor as yourself were already part of Jewish tradition in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

Although I consider myself no longer a Catholic, and basically, no longer a Christian in the sense that it is my spiritual path---I am still interested in Jesus, who I do not consider the Son of God. If there is a God, then the Muslims state it well: There is no God --but God.

The reason I like the writings of the Franciscan priest, Fr. Rohr, so much is that he cuts through the hypocrisy of the majority of Christians by pointing out what Jesus really asks of his followers.

Jesus said something like: Not the one who calls out "Father, Father" but he who does the will of my Father.

It is not sufficient, IMO, to have faith in Jesus as a unique and powerful manifestation of the Divine, but do as he says; live as he did. Take the Beatitudes as a rule of life. Swallow them whole.

If we come to believe, to have faith---then our lives begin to be shaped by the example of Jesus. This transformation is propelled by gratitude.

I dislike the bumper sticker: Christians aren't Perfect. We are just Saved.

There are SO MANY Christians who feel good inside, who feel that they are justified because they assent to the Divinely Inspired book , The Bible, and because they have declared their faith in Jesus, as God Himself! However, I have real doubts whether Jesus or God considers many of these people "saved" by what is called "being born again".

Faith is more than assent. Real living, transformational Faith must be radical trust. Faith is a way of seeing what is. Faith is affirmation --- total and heart felt. Faith is surrender. (I give credit for these ideas to Marcus Borg, Jesus scholar.)

Being born again is a big deal. It turns one inside out.

Jesus's way is truly as the Catholic Church teaches: The Way of the Cross. Being a Christian is not easy. It means sacrifice, not being accepted by many. Having to pass up financial opportunities. Being willing to accept everyone in the sense of asking them over to your house for dinner.

Well, I am carried away. But these are my feelings. I know I cannot accept Christianity. I think, essentially, it is a distortion of Jesus's life and message.

However, I have a genuine respect and love for Jesus. I asked respected Tibetan Lama once: “Is it possible for me to start attending a Christian church, and, become a practicing Christian?”

He told me, through a translator, that there would be no problem with that. That there was no need to cease being a Buddhist if I became a Christian. He added: “As for me, Jesus is always in my heart.”

As for me --I am not strong enough, self-less enough to follow Jesus as he requires.

Jesus said that a person had to lose his life to gain eternal life. I believe he meant that this person must become Self-Less. He must not attach himself to his EGO which is only a relative "self". Meister Eckhardt said that the end of the Christian path is to reach the point in which you have emptied your heart and mind of everything. Then, one more step: Empty your heart and mind of God!

Because “our” God is not the true God. If we empty ourselves of our notions/ ideas of God ---we give the Divine an opportunity to flow into ourselves; heart, mind, spirit soul and body.

This reminds me of an often related old story of the important Chinese government official he came to a Ch'an (Zen) master and asked for enlightenment, liberation, the meaning of life, the secret of Zen.

The master said, "Let's have tea."

However, when the master poured tea into the cup of this important civil servant --- he continued pouring and pouring until the tea flowed over the table.

"Master, what are you doing? What is the meaning of this?"

"I can no more pour tea into a cup that is full than I can pour wisdom into a mind --that is NOT empty." the master replied.