Radical Jesus 101: What is God?

Radical Jesus 101: What is God? January 14, 2015

Most cultures in human history have had some concept of God, whether it’s one god or many gods, whether these gods are good or evil or a mix of both. What is it that makes the Christian God unique? There are some ways in which the God of Israel described in the Bible’s Old Testament basically behaves the same as the tribal gods of other ancient peoples. It’s not unique for a tribal god to expect his people to worship him alone and not any other gods. Nor is it unique for tribal gods to prescribe elaborate systems of ritual and taboo for their people to follow. It’s not unique for ancient people to explain their military conquests as obedience to the will of their gods. Nor is it unique for ancient people to explain all the natural disasters and military setbacks they encounter as punishment from their gods.

So some of the character traits and behaviors that the Christian Bible attributes to God are predictable tribal god attributes that could also be found in the gods of Israel’s ancient neighbors like the Edomites, Moabites, Philistines, Ammonites, Babylonians, Assyrians, and so forth. I’m not making any claims about the truth or falsity of the Biblical God’s tribal god features. I tend to believe that God allowed the Israelites to depict God with tribal god features in order to meet the ancient Israelites where they were. Nonetheless,  in order to understand God’s nature, I’m more interested in examining the ways in which the Christian depiction of God stands apart from other ancient accounts of God. I see four main distinctions about the Christian God which I would like to elaborate in this post.

1) God is inside of us

While it’s pretty common for ancient cultures to depict their gods with human-like features and give them human-like character traits, I don’t think it’s terribly common for a religion to say that God creates humans with divine qualities the way that Genesis 1:27 describes the creation of humanity: “So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” Notice the way this sentence is constructed: God’s image is both male and female. Due to the limitations of human language, God is often described with male pronouns, but that doesn’t mean that God has a gender. Since Jesus had a human mother, he refers to the one who sent him to Earth as “father,” but this doesn’t detract from the reality that God contains all aspects of masculinity and femininity.

What does it mean that humanity has been created “in the image of God”? It’s a mystery that Christian theologians have argued about for centuries. Some have said that it just means we’re rational creatures like God is rational, but I think there’s more to it than that. I take it to mean that there’s a glimmer of divinity at the core of all of us. It means that each and every human being has infinite worth as an image of God, so that when we disrespect other people’s bodies through doing things like indiscriminately bombing their countries or starving them through unjust economic policies, we are disrespecting God directly.

For me, the other implication of humanity being created in God’s image is that we should expect to see God in other people and we should expect for God to speak to us through other people. We aren’t perfect images of God. We’ve all been corrupted by sin to varying degrees. Jesus Christ was and is the perfect image of God, and as such he is the perfect human archetype. The more that we emulate Jesus’ character, the more we are able to reflect God’s image and gain our full humanity. That’s not to say that God literally looks like a first century Middle Eastern man. God’s image is so infinitely complex that humanity can only reflect it in our entirety through a wide range of human identities, personalities, styles, talents, senses of humor, genders, and so forth.

Since I’m going to cover humanity in my next post in this series, I don’t want to elaborate on this too exhaustively, but the fact that God creates humanity in God’s image means that divinity is something God wants to share with us, not something that God guards selfishly. So the Christian God is utterly unlike the Greek gods who punished the mythic hero Prometheus eternally for bringing the divine gift of fire to humanity. 2 Peter 1:3-4 says, “His divine power has given us everything needed for life and godliness…Thus he has given us, through these things, his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of lust, and may become partakers of the divine nature.” God wants to give us God’s divinity. Now there’s a subtle distinction here that’s important. None of us can become God, but we can participate in God and partake of the divine nature. God wants us to share in God’s divinity.

2) God is part of our family

I totally get that for many people, it’s very problematic that the Christian Bible refers to God as “Father.” This seems like the ultimate affirmation of patriarchy. Indeed, fundamentalist Christians point to the supposed masculinity of God to claim that men are supposed to be in charge of women. But one thing that we overlook when we see the “fatherhood” of the Christian God as solely an expression of patriarchy is that Christianity’s primary metaphor for God makes us part of God’s family. It’s actually an unusual thing to understand humanity to be part of God’s family. The ancient Greeks didn’t see themselves as the children of Zeus, nor did the ancient Babylonians see themselves as the children of Marduk. I don’t know of any other religion that uses familial language to describe a peoples’ relationship to their god.

My favorite Hebrew word chesed gets used a lot in the Old Testament to describe God’s faithfulness to God’s people. It’s sometimes translated as “mercy,” but what it literally means is loving somebody like they’re family. God promises to love the Israelites like they’re family. The reason this is “merciful” is because you don’t throw your family out in the street or take them to court when you have a disagreement. You work it out. Because you’re family. At least that’s the way it’s supposed to work in an ideal world.

What God wants is for all of humanity to recognize their place in God’s family, to enter into the circle of chesed that God has created, which means accepting God’s mercy and showing that same mercy to each other. To be in God’s family requires two things: 1) accepting God’s authority as the head of our family and 2) accepting the fact that God welcomes people we may not get along with into God’s family. We can’t be part of God’s family if we reject other people whom God accepts, because that means rejecting God’s authority as the head of our family.

3) God is a polyamorous love triangle

trinityYes I’ve worded this in a provocative way that will surely generate some angry comments. But the kinkiness of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity needs to be openly acknowledged. Christians believe that the entity we call “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” is one God, not three. The technical language used is three persons in one substance, whatever that means. If three human beings shared the same physical space as intimately as the three persons of God share their God-ness, they would be having an orgy. Obviously God transcends our crude physicality, but the intensity of love shared between the members of the Trinity is infinitely steamier than the hottest sex that any human being has ever had. Part of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is the term perichoresis, which means the absolute interpenetration of all three persons of God at all times. Each person of the Trinity is constantly overlapped and enveloped by the other two persons of the Trinity. If you want to make it G-rated, it’s like a never-ending group hug or the most amazingly choreographed three person dance team pretzel in the history of the universe.

When 1 John 4:8 says “God is love,” it’s not an abstract conceptual statement. That love refers to the explosive exuberant joy at the core of the threesome that is God. Every time that we love, we are experiencing a diluted form of the energy within this mysterious threesome that is the core of everything. It’s like the difference between walking on planet Earth in the warmth of a sunny day and being inside the sun itself. The universe is the byproduct of the infinitely giddy ecstasy that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit generate through their love together. Their love for each other does not exhaust itself or exclude others, but spills over and becomes the love that human beings are capable of having.

Now I respect the fact that some Christians feel the need to give the members of Trinity a new set of gender-neutral names as part of pushing back against centuries of patriarchy. I can’t really explain why I have a hard time giving up the traditional names. Somehow the names lose their sacredness for me when they’re invented by modern academics rather than handed down from ancient times, though I completely understand why people feel compelled to do it. I really love the Trinity icon that I’ve included to the left here which was painted by Russian painter Andrei Rublev in the 15th century. It captures the genderlessness of the Trinity and the adoration of each figure for each other.

In a poem that I wrote a couple of years ago, I did use a different set of names for the Trinity. I referred to the Father as the Source, because basically what’s being conveyed by the word “father” is the one who is the origin of the other two. I referred to the Son as the Light, because the Bible refers to Jesus as the light of the world. Jesus illuminates for us most clearly what God is like. I called the Spirit the Breath because in both Hebrew and Greek, spirit and breath are the same word. The Holy Spirit is the breath that God breathes every day when God breathes life into everything that has life. The dissatisfaction I have with calling God Source, Light, and Breath is that these metaphors are really impersonal since they’re objects rather than people.

In any case, the Christian God is not just one person but a mysterious tightknit community that is somehow just one God, despite being a threesome. And what God wants more than anything is to bring us into the infinitely intimate embrace that the Trinity experiences all the time. This is what Jesus prays in John 17:20-23: “I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

Notice the way that Jesus explains what it means for his disciples to be “one” with him and each other. It’s not just agreeing on a set of doctrines or ideas. It’s not just working toward the same goal. He says, “As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us.” It’s about being so intimate that we are inside of each other. It’s the absolute safety and sense of belonging that physical sex tries to express but can never fully accomplish, especially when it’s engaged in haphazardly. The Trinity have the pure form of what we are desperately seeking when we bring our bodies together physically with other people. So much of our social existence is driven by our innate hunger for the loving embrace of God. Unfortunately we often try to satisfy this hunger in cheap and tacky ways rather than savoring the real nourishment of God’s presence. As broken and messy as our relationships are, every time we experience authentic warmth and intimacy, that is the Trinity drawing us into their embrace through God’s image-bearers in the world.

4) God is crucified

It’s understandable that many Christians feel icky about the cross. It was horrifically violent, and the glib way that so many Christians talk about it as part of a salvation sales pitch is truly disturbing. Some progressive Christians want to push the cross to the side as much as possible and make Christianity only about Jesus’ teachings. I respect the feelings behind this, but I don’t think we can escape the fact that Jesus’ cross is the centerpiece of Christianity. Christian theologians say that Jesus’ suffering on the cross is the most perfect revelation of God’s nature. What does this mean? How can the one who controls everything in the universe become a human being and die a horrible death? Exactly.

Many Christians try to sidestep the scandal of a God who helplessly suffers, bleeds, and dies by saying that Jesus the human being died on the cross, but God didn’t die. Obviously whatever happened, the atoms and molecules in the universe didn’t collapse into themselves when Jesus breathed his last breath. But something about the mystery of God’s relationship to creation is expressed by Jesus’ willingness to be tortured and killed when he presumably had supernatural powers at his disposal to resist his oppressors.

Philippians 2:6-8 says about Jesus that “though he was in the form of God, [he] did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death—even death on a cross.” So what the cross shows us is Jesus’ willingness to “empty himself” and “take the form of a slave.” Why would he do that?

Jesus gives us the answer himself in Matthew 25:31-46 where he says that when people decide whether or not to feed the hungry, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, and visit the prisoner, they are doing it to him. By “taking the form of a slave,” Jesus shows that he takes the side of the slaves. So . I’m going to spell out the many meanings of the cross a lot more thoroughly in a later post, but a significant part of what Jesus’ cross shows is his solidarity with other people who are being crucified, bullied, abused, or otherwise oppressed. Every time we hurt other people, we’re crucifying Jesus.

So here’s the big question: what does the cross say about God if God is a Trinity that includes Jesus and everything about Jesus, including his crucifixion, is “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15)? Many Christians try to say that even though Jesus was helplessly tortured on the cross, the Father part of God was completely in control. Some even go so far as to say that the Father crucified Jesus because he needed to do something violent to get over his anger over humanity’s sin.

But what if Jesus’ cross represents how God always experiences the universe that God has created? What if God chooses not to be a meticulous puppet-master over every single aspect of existence but “empties himself” and “takes the form of a slave” even though God creates everything? What if God is constantly being crucified by a world that God loves too dearly to overpower and destroy?

I believe that God chooses to disempower himself the way that Jesus did on the cross in order to create the space for love to happen. A world in which love can happen is a world in which pain can happen. You cannot have one without the other. A completely choreographed and pre-programmed world where there is no war, disease, poverty, or any other bad thing else might be painless world, but the beautiful agony that is love would be absent from the robot creatures who inhabited that world.

Love requires both freedom and adversity to exist. In fact, it’s often through the most difficult circumstances of our lives that we bond more deeply in love than we ever could otherwise. I don’t know how much power God gives himself to intervene in difficult circumstances. I believe that miracles have happened. I don’t know why they happen sometimes and don’t happen other times. But one thing I do believe is that God chooses not to be in complete control. I believe that God chooses to be crucified by the world so that God can also be loved by the world.

"John Piper is a magdelalene laundries priest in new clothing. Easy to see and easy ..."

How I Would Rewrite Desiring God’s ..."
"I am not a lover of all things, Mr. Piper. That said, I defend the ..."

How I Would Rewrite Desiring God’s ..."
"Good points; I've been thinking exactly the same. How much of the "tainted" American mission ..."

The Bursting Of The Methodist Wineskin
"You write well, and as a non-Methodist ( from Wesley's old Anglican home albeit not ..."

The Bursting Of The Methodist Wineskin

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Josh Magda

    This is the best thing I’ve read on Patheos Progressive in quite some time. I especially Love your first two paragraphs on the Trinity.

    Your thoughts on God’s disempowerment have a small but compellingly industrious pedigree in Jewish and Christian mysticism. My difference here would be that I don’t think God “chose” to disempower Him/Her/Itself- Cosmogenesis is wholly metaphysical and inseparable from the Divine nature. The Cosmos happens because:

    For God so Loved: The World.

    It’s in God’s nature to Create a World, because it is God’s nature to Love. Our Cosmos reveals and subjectively intensifies that “aspect” of the Divine Nature we call Love, and in moments of clarity we creatures can experience that Love really is running the show here. And that “running the show” looks very different than the kind of power humans have typically expected to see.

    • “It’s in God’s nature to Create a World, because it is God’s nature to
      Love. Our Cosmos reveals and subjectively intensifies that ‘aspect’ of
      the Divine Nature we call Love, and in moments of clarity we creatures
      can experience that Love really is running the show here. And that
      ‘running the show’ looks very different than the kind of power humans
      have typically expected to see.”

      Finally something I understand. (y’all must read a lot of books.)

      Not just “running the show”, but IS the show.

      Only God. Through and Through. (to risk being even more “reductive” than Yonah.)

      • Josh Magda

        Well, we can’t say “there is only G-d” too loudly, now can we… even though all the mystics from all the traditions concur. What would we talk about on Patheos? It’s too much fun to setup dominoes on one side of Reality and than topple them/flick them onto the other.

        Besides, we gnostics are always perceived as a threat. The most “threatening” thing about Truth is that everyone and everything is the inheritor of Perfection. If you have a problem with Perfection, you’re right, I can’t really help you there.


        Josh (signed in Elvish)

        • Kevin Osborne

          Perfection as the observer of motion as perfect? I assume.

          • Josh Magda

            I prefer Unmitigated Perfection, also known as G-d. But I’ve said too much already, for these matters are Super Important Mysteries of the Universe, and not for the uninitiated. My realization of *waves arms and pauses for dramatic effect* ALL THIS, is equally arcane and indubitably auspicious. Forgive me while I light a stick of incense. I’ll try not to cough. Or at least I’ll open a window.

            Besides, “all things work together for Good” has quite gone out of fashion. We are Generation Problem Set. There is no solution that we can’t generate an equally impressive series of problems for. One day we might get bored with problems and become interested in solutions, Love, and Creativity again. And then talk of Perfection can return.

            In the meantime, I think I’ll go pray to my goldfish. One Floo Over the Cuckoos Nest is a great place to chillax in the post-human society. And even I didn’t Create this.


            I mean, I did, but we’re not supposed to be on that subject. Onwards and upwards. The peanut gallery awaits!

            Love and Blessings,


            (Signed in Crazy Elvish)

          • Josh Magda

            This is God. Notice the absence of trumpet fanfare.

            Josh’s smoke/incense break as co-driver of the Exodus Bus, is now over.

            We’ve got a bunch of dirty dwarves here waiting to get to the Promised Land.

            Let’s get our priorities in order. Daylight’s burning.

          • I like this guy.

  • Josh Magda

    I just reread your wonderful post through Elvish eyes, the eyes of the transcendent, and am grateful that nothing you say here is literally true. All of it is symbolic language for a Reality that none of us have a prayer of translating into human language. My first readthrough was Dwarvish in nature, or immanentist. Pass me the mug of ale and let’s get drunk on Love and lost in the whorehouse of the Spirit that Creation is, with Father/Mother God at the helm of the family table! My inner Elf is now protesting that, if your post were really the way things were, God would be far too personal, at the expense of transpersonal. As a friend says, using Tillich’s language, the “God beyond God loses something every time a concrete action is taken.”

    Ultimately God is not as concrete and cut and dried as Christian theology makes It out to be. The World, after all, in its entirety, is fiction. Only G-d is nonfiction.

    But Elves have something to learn too, about the nature of Ultimate Reality. Their worldview, like that of the Dwarves, is accurate, but incomplete. The lesson in Love Incarnate we need to learn, goes something like this:


    • sorry didn’t get to respond earlier. You’ve got some fascinating things to say here. I appreciate contemplating them.

      • Josh Magda

        I’m glad you can understand/appreciate them, because most of the time, I can’t!

        I mainly just Love God, the World, and the want the best for us all.

  • Yonah

    On the plus side, I give you credit for taking the Cross seriously.

    The rest is a tour of various speculations in the Deist tradition.

    Jesus is God. Beyond that, speculation on God’s nature is none of our business. The doctrine of the Trinity would never have existed if not for a need of a conceptual icon to articulate how Jesus is God and human and why…the purpose…for the life of the world.

    Why try to be smarter than that?

    • Deist? You’re going to have to do better than just dropping that word if you want me to take you seriously. I may be a lot of other bad things but Deism seems like a very silly accusation. I’m not trying to be smarter than anybody. I just think God prefers juvenile messy water color icons speculating on his beauty to the reductionism you exhibit in your explanation of the trinity. But say more and perhaps I’ll take interest.

      • Yonah

        I don’t have to do anything, and I don’t fill out applications to be taken seriously.

        I like reductionism for its working class pragamatism. My litmus test is what a doctrine/speculation is for. Per Walter Brueggemann, I concur with his paradigm in which I doubt very highly whether those under Pharoah or Caesar much cared how perty God be. Again, I would commend to you the God of the Cross. Not very perty, but scary as shit to Caesar et al, and that’s what counts…for starters…and then that Kingdom thang comes.

        • Working class people aren’t pragmatist. It’s a modern bourgeois predilection as is pretending to be blue collar when you’re not. It sounds like you don’t have much use for aesthetics. Do you worship in one of these modern bourgeois stadium churches or in a building with stained glass? If the latter, then I would say you’re self-contradictory because stained-glass is not pragmatic at all. The doctrine of the Trinity is not “for” just one thing. It’s “for” all the time that gets wasted writing poetry, painting pictures, making stained glass windows, and otherwise bullshitting about the mystery we can’t stop delighting in. That time-wasting is what I would call worship. But you still haven’t explained why you use the word “Deist” to describe what I’m doing.

          • Yonah

            As to how working class view their pragma, you could poll them.

            In my view, an art employed in the serivce of Jesus should aspire to more than aesthetics, and I think it usually does. An icon was always a pragmatic art with a specific purpose: to teach and draw folk deeper into the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Thus, it is said that an icon is “written”. It seems to me that rings true whether the icon be on wood or glass.

            My boyhood pastor was fond of stating (or admitting?) that he only had one job in preaching and that was to preach the very same sermon every sermon, just tweeking the words a bit, but in every case, the reductionist: Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

            Hillel and Jesus were both guilty of the ultimate reduction: The Shema + Golden Rule. But, then in Jesus we learn that the old tribal God really is serious in His ambition of getting out of the desert and going all al quaeda on the Empire to be replaced with the Kingdom. Oy vey: Politics trumps aesthetics.

            Consider how The Trinity is invoked with the sign of the Cross. It’s about Jesus and his project of putting that Cross on those who follow him for the great Project of the Kingdom (see Bonhoeffer). The rest not resident in my pastor’s sermon is Deism..

          • Josh Magda

            Oh shit, that reminds me. I just finished a book that is basically a glorified compilation of my Patheos comments. The longest chapter is all the stuff on social change. That chapter was called “Towards a World Based on Love” but I just remembered you gave me permission to use “exodus bus” once before, so it just became “All Aboard the Exodus Bus!”

            Now, to find a publisher… 😐

            Wish me luck, and let the bus roll on!!!

        • Josh Magda

          Elsewhere you praise the isolated Eastern scholar(s) who link the beauty of the Eastern Church’s mass to the downward mobility of God/political agenda of the Magnificant. Really, I think that’s the way to go. We must have both Heaven and Earth… or else most of us run out of steam for Earth. You and I probably won’t, as God has turned us both into a burning bush, but that’s because you have the privilege of being a Jew and I had/have the privilege of basically being an honorary Jew. That’s a very rare privilege, either way.

          In short, Beauty is nonegotiable. The Beauty we see “there” inspires us to work for Beauty “here.” Transcendent Beauty is osmotic and effortless and pulls us deeper into the mystery of Being. It’s a breath of fresh air, and we don’t need to be spiritual asthmatics when undergoing our practicum in Love Incarnate. For unlike Heaven, the Kingdom of God is the most costly thing in the house of Spirit.

          Powerless people don’t often experience Beauty in stained glass, but they do experience It in Nature and in themselves, all the time. There’s a reason that Negro spirituals were invented… they’re bread for the journey on the long road towards the Kingdom of God.

          • Yonah

            Yes, Schmemann’s “For The Life of the World”. I would also add the often used Orthodox exclamation “Glory To Jesus Christ!”

            My concern: That we forsake the cause of Jesus to see through the long road toward the Kingdom by looking to long at sunsets. Bad stuff is going on in Nigeria….

            …and I still believe in the Exodus Bus.


          • Josh Magda

            That is a legitimate and very real concern. I call this escapist model of spirituality the “Highway to Heaven” after the Michael Landon TV show. The problem with New Age, for example, is not their compassionate and generous view of God, nor their emphasis on the spiritual authority of the individual and G-d’s desire for individuals to be prosperous. The problem is the absence of a sociological imagination. In the current World situation, the Highway to Heaven is a colossal distraction, and unchecked, it will contribute to the death of us all.

            Inner peace and equanimity, New Agers, is not a Good thing aboard a sinking ship! We must be willing to go with the distressing signals we are hearing from the Spirit, and build our way of Life, for now, around those signals- and NOT around our natural predisposition to comfort, security, and a cowardly avoidance of our cosmic responsibility, as we are doing now. Yes, Cain, you are your brother’s keeper. We need to derail the “comfort calvacade” by ramming the Exodus Bus right up into Caesar’s business end, as far and as fast as we dare push down on the gas pedal.

            My hope and desire is that we link our appreciation for and refreshment from Beauty, with God’s downward mobility. Beauty that doesn’t empower us to move in the direction of the Kingdom is not a waste of time, but it isn’t authentic Jewish and Christian spirituality. Politics and the least, do indeed trump aesthetics in the Jesus Tradition. How we relate to the least, and whether or not our art opens our Hearts and further propels us in the direction of the World Based on Love, is the test of the metaphysical transparency of our art to the Spirit. And social change is a kind of art.

            In the modern era, the process tradition links Beauty and social justice very clearly when it says that even God’s desire for justice is a desire for harmonious relationship and increased intensity of experience. That sounds very much like the God of Life to me, and corresponds to what we see happening in evolution, time and again.

          • Josh Magda

            (Morgan, in case you couldn’t tell, this is my Inner Dwarf speaking).

            The Jesus Tradition is a Dwarvish tradition. Here is the Jesus Tradition’s response to Caesar and the Highway to Heaven… though TJT is nonviolent, of course.


          • Josh Magda

            This is ironic because, personally speaking, I am so much more Elvish than Dwarvish. But ever so occasionally you have an Elf like me, who has fallen in Love with Earth and Earthy people. In Tolkien’s lore, Dwarves are literally made from stone/the earth. Where have we heard that one before? (Gen 2:7)

            And once you have Heaven in Love with Earth, watch out, dear friends. Watch out.


          • Yonah

            What I take from what you say there is a call not to compartmentalize the Beauty from the Savior. I will drink to that.

            I like the book of Hebrews, particularly its very beginning where it says that God spoke in many and various ways, but now through a Son…the heir of all things…and the creator. There is so much there. The “nowness” of God in emergency mission.

            Yes, certainly…good luck with the book and its place on the Exodus bus. Peace.

  • Abdelhak Bahi

    You see We muslim we believe That jesus christ was one of the mighest messangers of god, we believe in his miraculous birth etc.. the only thing that we disagree on with the christians is the divinity of Crist , they said he is the begotten son of god we say that god doesn’t beget because begetting is an animal act “sex” and we can not attribute such claim to god.

    The Qur’an which its the last revelation of god to mankind it’s said there Jesus is a messenger of god, abraham is a messenger of god, moses was a messenger of god there are all messengers , you see that its in original one and only religion is to worship God the one and only Mark 12:29 Jesus said “Here, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.”. He is the quranic verses addresses to those who worship Jesus = the Christians

    Allah= God in arabic

    Verse 5:72 :
    They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of
    Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord
    and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid
    him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the
    wrong-doers be no one to help.

    Verse 5:73
    They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a
    Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from
    their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the
    blasphemers among them.

    This is adresses to anyone who worship anyone besides allah god the one and only”

  • Thank you so much for “But what if Jesus’ cross represents how God always experiences the universe that God has created? … I believe that God chooses to disempower himself the way that Jesus did on the cross in order to create the space for love to happen.” It’s rare that one gets a clean, new thought–fresh eyes–but you did that for me.