Hi Edward -- Thanks for your comment. I think that what you are saying and what I am saying are not far apart. It seems that you are concerned with the notion of the unique existence of The Christ, of which people can participate. This is not that different from saying that multiple people can be "christ" (anointed). "Christ" is an adjective, not a proper noun. Other than this nuance, I don't see an operational difference between what you've written and what I've written . I wish you the best.

Expand full comment

There IS only one Christ. The idea that there can be multiple Christs is a woeful misinterpretation of the gospel.

When I began reading the post, I thought: “How refreshing that someone is speaking about the Christ, the second part of the Godhead, rather than Jesus, the man who put his bodily being in service as the bearer of the Christ during the three years.”--For by and large we are losing sight of the Christ as God and reducing the Christ Jesus to the human individuality of Jesus. What we gain in human comfort we are losing in genuine intimacy with the divine.

But then I saw that the thrust of this post is to negate the reality of the Christ by making His appearance an event that can be replicated, potentially by any human being. This diminishes the appearance of the Christ on earth to something that is created by a human being rather than being the unique occurrence of the Godhead walking on the earth. It again places Jesus at the center of the discussion of the Being of the Christ.

It is true that each of us bears the Christ within her- or himself. It is true that each of us can make the choice to let our Christened nature lead us in life. It is true that we can choose to unite our thinking and willing, indeed, our entire being, with the Christ, and become one with Him. But that does not make us into Christs. There is one Christ, that person of the Godhead that descended to earth two thousand years ago. The heart of mysticism is the striving to attain the immanent experience of that unique divine Being.

Expand full comment