The Bible is Father-Centric not Christo-Centric
- Thread starter Mindcruiser
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The God of the Jews / Israel. The God of the Hebrew Bible and the God of the New Testament.
The God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob is Jesus’ God.
Jesus has a God, and there is no other God for him to have besides that one.
bdavidc
Active Member
The claim that the Bible is not Christocentric is problematic from a biblical perspective. While God the Father is absolutely central, the New Testament reveals that Jesus Christ is not secondary in significance but is fully united with the Father in purpose and glory. Jesus said, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30), and Paul teaches that it is through Christ that we even have access to the Father: “For through Him [Christ] we both have access by one Spirit to the Father” (Ephesians 2:18).
The New Testament also emphasizes that the entire plan of salvation culminates in the exaltation of Christ: “Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow...” (Philippians 2:9–10). Furthermore, Colossians 1:15–20 presents Christ as central to all creation and redemption: “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation... For by Him all things were created... and in Him all things consist.”
So, while it is biblically true and important to affirm the Father’s preeminence as the sender, source, and ultimate authority (1 Corinthians 15:24–28), Scripture does not portray this in a way that diminishes Christ’s centrality in redemptive history. The Father glorifies the Son (John 17:1), and the Son glorifies the Father (John 17:4). Their roles are distinct yet deeply intertwined.
The assertion that the Bible is “Father-centric” has scriptural merit, especially in terms of divine origin and authority. However, the idea that this necessarily excludes or overrides a Christocentric view is not fully supported by Scripture. Both the Father and the Son are glorified together in the plan of salvation (John 5:23). Therefore, the biblical pattern presents a harmony of focus—centered on the Father through the Son, by the Spirit (Ephesians 2:18, John 14:6).
Jesus Christ is God. (The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one.) jesus-is-god.org
We can have only one source of truth for scripture, and it's of the Father only. If you add in the Son as well, as being on equal footing in 'all' ways, as another or even the same source then you have confusion, and rightly so you them MUST and are forced to say the Son is the Father and the Father is the Son of a common truth source. And of course that is not biblical at all.
One has to read and understand the implications of what you are saying. It produces a false Son and then a false Father as both sharing from the same cup of truth. So then who owns and gave the this cup of life to the Father and the Son?
It is only the Father who is the source of truth and it's his words of truth we read and interpret.
So now give me some examples of where your Christocentric view holds merit, overriding the original Father-centric view. And please add in the context that will explain it.
Also, as a note, its seem as though your post was generated by an AI application with its general bias for multi-person gods.
ScottA
Well-Known Member
On the surface, one could say that, and many do, even quoting the scriptures. But that is not "all truth"--nor was "all truth" even available when the scriptures were written. "All truth" and the complete "mystery of God as He declared to His servants the prophets"--was "sealed" and under "restraint" until "the seventh angel, when he is about to sound."
In other words--no one can know "all" until it is revealed. What then should we be looking for--a revelation to unfold from that portion of the scriptures that was not sealed? Is that not all that has been brought to the table thus far by so many, and just more of the same, only translated differently?
Were the known scriptures correct? Of course they were, and are--only limited. Again, what then should we alternatively be looking for? And who is actually even willing to press on?
Last edited:
Without Christ there would be no salvation, or a new covenant, or any Christians for that matter. Christ is central to the gospels, the New Testament, and God's plans. If one believes in the Trinity doctrine, then Christ and God are one, though paradoxically distinct. Christ isn't merely serving in a secondary role but is equal to God, and like Him, eternal. The whole reason why Jesus was crucified was because he was claiming to be God. When the High Priest asked if he was the Christ, his response was "I Am," the same thing God called Himself out of the burning bush.
I'm curious how a Christocentric message can become chaotic and confused. Can you give an example?
I'm curious how a Christocentric message can become chaotic and confused. Can you give an example?
Anyone who spends any time listening to me will eventually hear me say: Listen to, believe, obey, and follow Jesus.
His monotheism, Jewish monotheism, is the monotheism of primitive Christianity. That’s where I am.
If others want to go beyond that and anathematize me, let them. I’m secure in the one God and in his Son, the Messiah. They take care of me, and I leave it to them to deal with my enemies.
P.S.
”In later times the church, no longer perceiving the power and decisiveness of the agent-son-representative model, and having among its members men used to a more philosophical analysis, felt it necessary to go further in the direction of metaphysical identity between Jesus and his heavenly Father: released from the constraint of Jewish monotheism, gentile Christians began to think of Jesus as also, in some sense God.”
(A.E. Harvey, Jesus and the Constraints of History, p. 173)
Last edited:
ScottA
Well-Known Member
If you believe as you do, why are you intent on only following Jesus to a point and no further--not to finish?
ScottA
Well-Known Member
Okay, good.
However, that would mean not stopping or taking up residence at some primitive point. It would mean proceeding into the future beyond what is written, to all that was promised and arranged. In other words expecting to be "lead unto all truth", to see history climax with the finish of the mystery of God as He proclaimed to His servants the prophets, and the revealing of what was for so long sealed and restrained; to witness, if living during that time, God working in a way Christ termed as seeing "greater works" than even the miracles of His time revealed among the flesh.
Knowing then that Jesus, whom is God, is the same yesterday, today, and forever--what would you suppose we should be looking for?
Being anathematized isn’t good.
The primitive Christians, having finished their course, are secure in their faith. Their faith is mine and is, in the words of Jude, “the faith delivered once and for all to the saints.”
I believe in the sufficiency of scripture and point everyone to the Messiah and the apostles.
“Now these things, brothers, I have applied to my self and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to go beyond what is written, so that no one of you will become puffed up on behalf of one against another.”
(1 Corinthians 4:6, LSB)
The post-biblical church which departed from the Jewish monotheism of the primitive Christians (see the trinitarian scholar A.E. Harvey, and others) went well beyond what is written.
ScottA
Well-Known Member
One thing at a time perhaps.
Surely, many things can be learned from the past and are a benefit. But what was for those of earlier times, was not for us. As it is written, "there is a time for every purpose under heaven."
As such, we are only faithful to God if we are faithful to the time and purpose in which He has placed us. That is not faith at all, but usury.
You already supplied at least two examples in your post Jericho.
I believe you might not have grasped the Father-centric versus the Christo centric argument views. The Father-centric view is the one where only the Father who is God, is also the only lifetime CEO, the strategic-level source of all things. And since especially, with the arrival of the New Testament, he has taken a more inconspicuous role, by design. He executed a 2nd Genesis of beings starting with the man of our salvation, his Son, Jesus his Messiah and ours.
Since the NT, The Father has used other people (two prophets, apostles, many disciples and other Christians) to act on his behalf, as his executive proxy, especially of course his Son, as you clearly wrote about. The Son is the central and most important person given authority to do many things, and with limitations of course. He is God's right hand man or the central figure on a tactical-level of operations, thus subordinate to his Father.
The Father, and not his Son is the original grand thinker, planner, designer, creator, of all and many things and miracles, using his own will, desire and expressions of his own mind at his own choosing, using his own Spirit to execute them and extend then into this physical realm, and especially on this earth.
Now we can have the Son doing the things of his Father, although it would be very confusing if we were to think erratically and say as a consequence, they are of the same nature. If Jesus was given a nature, it was human nature given directly by God; an unblemished human nature. He also was possessed by his Father's spirit. Making Jesus a very unique and perfect reflection of his Father.
Now when we read scripture, say about Jesus' baptism or his Crucifixion it is obviously Christ centric within the scope of that area of scripture and discussion. Do we then look back and realize how and why these actions were taken by Jesus. Many do not, in fact they go to the extreme and even call him God, as his Father. And then many as a virus spread, go on a crusade and contaminate other scripture to stamp Jesus over his Father's work, in the Old and New Testaments. They force an artificial Christocentric view of the ENTIRE Bible.
They do not reflect on his Father, who is his God who made all this happen to him and for him out of his love for him and us.
So, on a 'tactical' only level Jesus is the reason for our salvation and when he speaks or acts he is centric to that discussion, obviously. On the strategic CEO level however, it is the Father, who is God, that made our salvation possible, as he did the same before Christ, for the generational remnants of his people in the Old Testament.
My caution then for anyone mesmerized by Jesus actions, miracles and acts of selfless giving is know what is Christ's position in the big scheme of things, and to always acknowledge the power behind him, his Father God. And to necessarily always refocus, for the right perspective, onto the Father-Centric view of scripture, as it is designed by the same God.
ScottA
Well-Known Member
What Paul was saying, instructing, was that those of that time should not get ahead of themselves.
Which, again, would mean not being faithful to the time and purpose appointed by God to all in their own time. Meaning, that to get ahead or behind (as you have apparently chose to do), is to be out of alignment with God and His purpose for every time under heaven.
I’m a 1st century primitive Christian living where God placed me, in the 21st century. I’m faithful to God, just as my spiritual ancestors in the church were. Being anathematized by those who went beyond what they believed underscores my faith in our God.
Just as Jesus himself is a Jewish monotheist, so too is Paul - and all of the other apostles - and the earliest members of the church. Jewish monotheists aren’t trinitarians.
I’m faithful to the time and purpose appointed by God to me. I’m right where I’m supposed to be.
Relating this back to the OP, it is natural that my view of scripture (and that of Jewish monotheism) is God-centered.
Last edited:
What is wrong with being a Jewish monotheist who believes that Jesus of Nazareth (himself a Jewish monotheist) is the Messiah, the Son of the living God?
The church of the 4th century answers: It is heresy. The Jewish dogma has been destroyed. Those who refuse to relinquish it are anathematized and cannot be saved.
My response to the church of the 4th century: I‘m saved, I’m being saved, and I will be saved.
Those who took my stand in earlier centuries were persecuted, tormented, tortured and killed by the civil government and by the church. God will deal with it when the time for that comes.
Will that one day happen to me? I don’t know but I’m focused on persevering to the end, no matter what I may have to endure.
The church of the 4th century answers: It is heresy. The Jewish dogma has been destroyed. Those who refuse to relinquish it are anathematized and cannot be saved.
My response to the church of the 4th century: I‘m saved, I’m being saved, and I will be saved.
Those who took my stand in earlier centuries were persecuted, tormented, tortured and killed by the civil government and by the church. God will deal with it when the time for that comes.
Will that one day happen to me? I don’t know but I’m focused on persevering to the end, no matter what I may have to endure.
bdavidc
Active Member
I understand precisely what I say since I speak from Scripture's clear and consistent witness rather than confusion or error. The divinity of Jesus exists as God who shares an eternal unity with the Father while remaining a distinct individual and this truth comes from divine revelation rather than human invention. The Word of God reveals this truth in its entirety. The opening verse of John 1:1 states emphatically, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." This statement represents straightforward divine scripture without any distortion. Jesus Himself said in John 10:30, "I and the Father are one." His statement expressed unity not just in purpose but also in nature and essence. The Jews chose to stone Him because His declaration of equality with God was unacceptable to them (John 10:33).
Your argument claims that equating the Son in every respect causes confusion yet the real confusion arises from dismissing the complete biblical testimony. Verses in Philippians 2:6 declare Christ as God by nature yet did not exploit His divine status for personal gain. And Hebrews 1:3 describes the Son as “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His being,” which reflects full divinity rather than a lesser or derivative form of deity.
You seek examples that center Christ and challenge the notion of a Father-exclusive perspective. Consider John 14: Jesus declares Himself to be the way to reach the Father as well as the truth and life. Jesus does not function as a guide to truth because He embodies truth itself. He functions beyond a simple messenger of holy words because He embodies the Word made flesh as stated in John 1:14. When Thomas asked to see the Father, Jesus responded in John 14: The phrase "Whoever has seen Me has seen the Father" represents not a simple analogy but rather a profound disclosure.
Rejecting this understanding means twisting Scripture rather than preserving it. You accuse me of promoting AI-generated confusion, but I’m proclaiming the eternal truth that Jesus is the visible image of the invisible God (Colossians 1: Colossians 2:9 identifies Him as the bodily dwelling place of the fullness of deity. The biblical teaching reveals to us the triune character of the sole genuine God rather than exhibiting any favor toward concepts of multiple gods.
I declare this from a position of understanding while basing my argument on the Word instead of human tradition or philosophical speculation. Your perspective reduces Jesus to a mere man and establishes a counterfeit Christ figure who lacks saving power. The biblical Jesus stands as Immanuel who reveals God to us while being the exclusive path to understanding the Father.
You must turn away from manipulating Scripture to support a man-centered theology that rejects the complete divinity of Jesus Christ. You are spreading a distorted message which drives people away from God's true revelation in Jesus. Your actions are distorting the truth instead of preserving it. Human logic should not reshape the Word of God because we must accept it in its given form even when it challenges our beliefs. Peter's message in 2 Peter 3:16 warns us about the risks of misinterpreting difficult passages of Scripture. This misinterpretation can lead to destruction for those who are uninformed and unstable. Jesus said in John 8: The phrase “I am” deliberately asserts Jesus’ identity as God. Your disagreement goes beyond theological discussion because you reject the essential nature of Christ. This issue goes beyond minor disputes because it directly impacts salvation. Repent and accept the scriptural witness that declares the Son as fully divine and co-eternal with the Father while being humanity's sole Savior.
Similar threads
