|
It is when we turn to the person and purpose of Jesus that there will be a wider range of beliefs amongst Quakers than probably any other subject. There are some Friends who wear the label of Christocentric Quakers whereas others have little of the feelings of awe that many Christians have when thinking of Jesus.
For myself, when I left behind the doctrines of the Salvation Army I felt a freedom to 'start from scratch' thinking and praying and reading things I had never thought of, to see if I could sort out my views about Jesus (there are a couple of books on the links page I found very helpful). It is also difficult to separate this from a similar process with atonement. So here is the position I have reached at the moment. That is not to say that I will receive no further revelation on the matter and I trust I will continue to ' grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.' 2 Peter 3:18
So I can say that I accept Jesus as the son of God, as Lord and as saviour. I cannot believe that he is God. Just as we are ordered to 'become ye perfect even as your father in heaven is perfect' so Jesus showed us that this is possible and we should strive to become more like him.
Secondly the question of the atonement is linked in with this. I believe that Jesus was called forth so that it could be said 'whoever has seen me has seen the Father'. I believe that he showed us how we should be serving God and his crucifixion was a natural outcome of this. I do not believe that God needed Jesus to be a ransom or payment for sin that we have committed. If God is so powerful forgiveness will not depend on a sacrifice. I do not wish to offend those who take the Bible literally on these verses but I would be tempted to use the words of JB Phillips and say 'Your God is too small'.
It would also be a good point to bring in my beliefs on the resurrection. My views were challenged firstly by John Robinson and then by David Jenkins (Bishops of Woolwich and Durham respectively). Some people felt that the latter was saying Jesus did not rise from the dead. What he actually said was that it was not important whether he rose physically as the resurrection was a spiritual event. Hence his claim that if it was proved that the missing body had been a 'conjuring trick with bones' it would not matter--what is important is the fact that Jesus is alive today to us spiritually. This does not seem to me to be out of keeping with the Gospels stories of Jesus appearances--not being recognised by his disciples, walking through walls, being in two places at once. It was clearly a different body than the one on the cross. 'I serve a risen saviour….he lives, he lives, Christ Jesus lives today...you ask me how I know he lives, he lives within my heart.'
For those who insist that Jesus has to be accepted as God I would quote Pierre Ceresole, 1920, who is quoted in Quaker Faith and Practice at 26.47 'If you allow me to have Christ simply as a friend, he may become what you call God; if you force him on me as God, he cannot become a friend.'
|
|
