correct me if i'm wrong...

Terry

... but do christians look upon jesus as a god?

if so then christianity is flawed because, according to the first commandment, you're not allowed to worship other gods.

this is something i have noticed recently. it seems to be a growing trend among americans to thank jesus as if he were a god. now the understanding i have is that jesus was gods messenger on earth, sent here to die for our sins. nothing more than that. am i wrong or is christianity wrong or are americans idiots?


disclaimer:
i'm not trying to start an arguement, nor am i trying to put down christianity. each to their own. i don't have religious beliefs, but i don't look at other in a funny way if they do have religious beliefs. i'm just trying to understand the credo of others.

according to christianity, Jesus was the son of god, not just a messenger.
Plus the christian god has the whole trinity thing going on, with the Son as part of it. So it certainly doesn't fall under the "don't have any gods before me" bit.

skye

The trinity consists of - the father, the son and the Holy Ghost - all three being one - therefore Jesus is God but in human form sent to earth, so worship of Jesus is therefore worship of God... Never really got my head around all the trinity stuff...too confusing and doesn't make sense - but part of being a Catholic is that you accept without question - something I could never do...

larryone

You dont have to believe that Jesus=God in order to be a Christian.

samb

bluewolf wrote:

according to christianity, Jesus was the son of god, not just a messenger.
Plus the christian god has the whole trinity thing going on, with the Son as part of it. So it certainly doesn't fall under the "don't have any gods before me" bit.

I don't know if you are a christian that takes the bible literaly or not but anyhow, for those who do.
When they say Jesus is the son of God and god is male. Who is jesus's mother? In what sense is God male, does he have big willy? Jesus is God, and Gods son, and a spirit? is God not a spirit anyway.
Also when religious people talk of spirits or ghosts that people can see. If they exist (not just in the head) then what are they made of, if they are not made of anything material then how do they reflect light and be seen? Its all a mess in my view, I can't even question it coherently.

Michael G

larryone wrote:

You dont have to believe that Jesus=God in order to be a Christian.

Well, actually you do. It's the whole point, really. Of course you could call yourself a Christian if you want to, but equally I could call myself the High King of Ireland.

samb

Michael G wrote:

Well, actually you do. It's the whole point, really. Of course you could call yourself a Christian if you want to, but equally I could call myself the High King of Ireland.

I believe in you:rolleyes:

Terry

do all christian sects believe in the holy trinity or is it just catholicism?

samb

samb wrote:

I don't know if you are a christian that takes the bible literaly or not but anyhow, for those who do.
When they say Jesus is the son of God and god is male. Who is jesus's mother? In what sense is God male, does he have big willy? Jesus is God, and Gods son, and a spirit? is God not a spirit anyway.
Also when religious people talk of spirits or ghosts that people can see. If they exist (not just in the head) then what are they made of, if they are not made of anything material then how do they reflect light and be seen? Its all a mess in my view, I can't even question it coherently.

Heh, I'm not a christian. I argue enough in religion forums that I think I know about it though.
Jesus' mother was Mary o.o
Matthew 1:18

18This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.

As for ghosts and spirits, I'm not sure that even belongs here. And I don't think anyone actually knows the answer to that one, since there's no proof they even exist. So going as far as finding out their properties would possibly have to wait til then

do all christian sects believe in the holy trinity or is it just catholicism?

Ur, all christians believe in christ as the son of god, hence the title christian, so I'm guessing they all go for the holy trinity, yes. Well maybe some don't, but I'd say most.

Excelsior

julep wrote:

... but do christians look upon jesus as a god?

The first record of someone writing that is just 8 years after the resurrection. It is also the first thing we have written by any Christian. So yes, Christians are defined by their belief that Jesus was God.

julep wrote:

if so then christianity is flawed because, according to the first commandment, you're not allowed to worship other gods.

Brilliant point and vital. But Christianity believes that God is a trinity consisting of God the Father, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit. The whole St. Patrick shamrock analogy is as good as any. Christianity believes there is only one God and that the same God who revealed himself to Moses on Sinai revealed himself to many more in Jesus.

julep wrote:

now the understanding i have is that jesus was gods messenger on earth, sent here to die for our sins. nothing more than that.

Christians and Jews believe that only God can forgive sins. When you say "nothing more than that", the Christian or the Jew would respond by saying that there is no greater thing than that. Only God could do it.

julep wrote:

am i wrong or is christianity wrong or are americans idiots?

All 3?

You are wrong about Christianity but it a great, sincere mistake to make. Christianity as a culture happens to be wrong about many things and I have met many idiots with US passports.

julep wrote:

i'm not trying to start an arguement, nor am i trying to put down christianity. each to their own. i don't have religious beliefs, but i don't look at other in a funny way if they do have religious beliefs. i'm just trying to understand the credo of others.

Thanks for the disclaimer. We tend to be a very easy going bunch here and honest questions are welcome on any topic. But something to consider: the absence of an organised belief system does not imply the absence of beliefs.

Excelsior

skye wrote:

The trinity consists of - the father, the son and the Holy Ghost - all three being one - therefore Jesus is God but in human form sent to earth, so worship of Jesus is therefore worship of God... Never really got my head around all the trinity stuff...

Think about them dancing together. You are sitting at the edge of the room. As they circle around, one moment you see the Father, another the Son and then a second later the Spirit is in front of your eyes. They are all doing the same thing: enjoying each other.

The community at the heart of the Trinity is the source of all Christian theology, Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant or Pentecostal. As they love and exalt each other they love us, as they love us we must love each other. As they are complete in community and harmony, we are complete in community and harmoney with others. It is a deep, mysterious and profoundly unique idea.

skye wrote:

too confusing and doesn't make sense

It does make sense, even if it is confusing. It might not make sense to you and we might not be able to systematically explain it, but there is a deep sense to it.

skye wrote:

but part of being a Catholic is that you accept without question - something I could never do...

No part of Catholicism I ever studied when I was doing a Masters at their seminary! Catholicism doesn't teach this. Jesus said we were to love the Lord, Our God, with all our mind. That is his "only commandment". We must bring the full force of the intellect God gave us to the pursuit of answers about life and its purpose.

larryone wrote:

You dont have to believe that Jesus=God in order to be a Christian.

I can only leave that to Jesus to decide. But Christ is not his surname. It is a title meaning the annointed one of God, the promised saviour, the Messiah. If you claim to be a Christian you are implicitly describing yourself as a follower of a man who thinks he was God.

The user on these boards, UU, thinks Jesus is a good moral teacher but not God. Therefore, he does not call himself a Christian and jokes that he should celebrate Jesusmas instead of Christmas. I think he is being honest with himself. If you don't think Jesus is God, then there is very little left in Christianity and nothing that makes any sense.

samb wrote:

When they say Jesus is the son of God and god is male. Who is jesus's mother? In what sense is God male, does he have big willy? Jesus is God, and Gods son, and a spirit? is God not a spirit anyway.

No where does God describe himself as male. He actually defines himself as transcending of gender, as "I AM". He makes humanity in male and female and then asserts that both are made equally in his image. He refers to himself in those opening scenes as "we" reflecting the trinity.

Jesus' mom is Mary. Jesus' dad is Jospeh. Jesus is begotten and not born, fathered by God. Simple really.

God is a spirit in the form of the Holy Spirit, who is the spirit of Jesus.

Now look at that sentence again to see how the Trinity works. Its subject is the Holy Spirit, one of the three persons of the Trinity. But the subject is defined in terms of the other two. They are in harmony and community to a degree we cannot fathom.

Again Samb, your tone is way below the level of respect shown to you here. Please stop trying to insult people.

I just got to echo Bluewolf- all Christian churches believe in the Trinity. It is the cornerstone of the faith.

Excelsior

Excelsior wrote:

I just got to echo Bluewolf- all Christian churches believe in the Trinity. It is the cornerstone of the faith.

*phew*, glad I didn't mess it up horribly

John Doe

Excelsior, I believe that there is a possible third choice as well as accepting Jesus as God and the Son of God and worshipping him as such, and rejecting him as God and the Son of God.
My personal belief is that Jesus was the Son of God, but that all humans are also children of God. I believe that Jesus was God, but I believe that all humans in their most perfect moments are God. A pure and generous act seems to be all that we can aspire to, and so I believe that such an act is an incarnation of God (that's not the right word, but I can't remember a better one at the mo ).
I think that Jesus was different to other humans in that he was a great teacher (I prefer not to use 'prophet') and in that he brought God into his life by doing pure acts far more than probably anyone since. I have no idea whether this makes me a Christian. I doubt it, really.
I don't really understand the Trinity dealio either, but I have some vague notions. Maybe God the Father is the expression of the universe as a whole and that which created the universe, maybe the Holy Spirit is our conscience and that which impels us to do good, maybe Jesus the Son is the best example of humans acting in a godlike fashion (by which I mean being really, really nice not levelling cities with a breath).

samb

Excelsior wrote:

Again Samb, your tone is way below the level of respect shown to you here. Please stop trying to insult people.
.

Yes your right, I apologise. I was in an intolerant mood last night and the comments I made(espeically on the other thread) were not productive. Espiecally since this is in the christianity forum. I am on your turf, after all.

I still find the whole trinity thing a bit crazy and incoherent.
Jesus' mom is Mary. Jesus' dad is Jospeh. Jesus is begotten and not born, fathered by God. Simple really.

God is a spirit in the form of the Holy Spirit, who is the spirit of Jesus.

Now look at that sentence again to see how the Trinity works. Its subject is the Holy Spirit, one of the three persons of the Trinity. But the subject is defined in terms of the other two. They are in harmony and community to a degree we cannot fathom.

His dad was joseph but he was fathered by God. Did he share half of josephs DNA? I think that is a fair question, I'm trying to moderate my tone.

Sorry again

wolfsbane

Excelsior said:

I just got to echo Bluewolf- all Christian churches believe in the Trinity. It is the cornerstone of the faith.

I agree with your whole argument on the nature of the Trinity. Just want to point out that some groups who claim the name of Christian do in fact deny the Trinity: Jehovah witnesses; Unitarians; Oneness Pentecostals, for example.

But if we are working on my definition of Christian, then your above statement is strictly correct,;)

Excelsior

samb wrote:

His dad was joseph but he was fathered by God. Did he share half of josephs DNA?

Totally fair question and thanks for being so decent about my comments on your recent posting.

I believe that Jesus was born of a virgin. Joseph's DNA doesn't come into the equation for Christianity, across all its different flavours, when you take the breadth of 2000 years of history.

And John Doe, while your interpretation is creative and obviously attractive, I think you come up against the same problems that "Jesus as moral teacher" folks come up against- the historical evidence leaves us with 2 consistent answers, and no more. There is no hint anywhere that Jesus saw himself as a son of God in a way that all of us could be sons of God. As a Jew, such an idea would be appalling and certainly the Jews who founded Christianity would have be disgusted by it. What Jesus thought of himself was that he was the Son of God in a way that no one else ever has been or ever will be or ever can be.

UU

wolfsbane wrote:

I agree with your whole argument on the nature of the Trinity. Just want to point out that some groups who claim the name of Christian do in fact deny the Trinity: Jehovah witnesses; Unitarians; Oneness Pentecostals, for example.

But if we are working on my definition of Christian, then your above statement is strictly correct,;)

These groups don't claim themselves as Christians or shouldn't do anyway. Actually the proper word for these groups is known as Monarchianism:

Monarchianism (mono - "one"; arche - "rule") was an alteration concerning the nature of God that developed in the second century A.D. It arose as an attempt to maintain Monotheism and refute tritheism so it also contradicts the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. Monarchianism teaches that there is one God as one person: the Father. The Trinity is that there is one God in three persons: Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity is monotheistic, not polytheistic as some of its critics like to assert. Monarchians were divided into two main groups, the dynamic monarchians and the modal monarchians.

Dynamic Monarchianism teaches that God is the Father and that Jesus is only a man, denied the personal subsistence of the Logos and taught that the Holy Spirit was a force or presence of God the Father. Present day groups in this category are the Jehovah's Witnesses, Christadelphians, and Unitarians. Additionally, some ancient dynamic monarchianists were also known as Adoptionists who taught that Jesus was tested by God and after passing this test and upon His baptism, He was granted supernatural powers by God and adopted as the Son. Ancient teachers of dynamic monarchianism were Theodotians, a Tanner in Byzantium around 190 A.D., and Paul of Samosata a bishop of Antioch in Syria around 260 AD.

Modal monarchianism teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are just modes of the single person who is God. In other words, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not simultaneous and separate persons, but consecutive modes of one person. Praxeas, a priest from Asia Minor, taught this in Rome around 200 AD. Modern groups in this general category are the Oneness Pentecostal groups known as the United Pentecostal and United Apostolic Churches. However, the present day modalists maintain that God's name is Jesus. They also require baptism "in Jesus' name" not "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" for salvation.

Although, Unitarians, Universalists, Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Christadelphians are not Christian even if they say they are and I don't think any of them say they are Christian if they don't believe in Christ but Jesus.

I, as a Unitarian, don't call myself Christian but do hold some beliefs from the Bible. Unitarian means "oneness of God" while Trinitarian means "the Trinity of God" so Judaism, Islam, and Unitarianism are all Unitarian religions while Christianity is a Trinitarian religion. Now, in the Unitarian Church "Unitarianism" means the unity of all people from different classes, races, gender, creeds and sexualities as it got altered somehow when "God" wasn't followed as much. Anyway, Jesus isn't looked upon as a God but as a prophet / wise teacher, etc. Why Christadelphians disbelieve in "Christ" and yet keep it in their title, I can't understand?!

larryone

Excelsior wrote:

I can only leave that to Jesus to decide. But Christ is not his surname. It is a title meaning the annointed one of God, the promised saviour, the Messiah. If you claim to be a Christian you are implicitly describing yourself as a follower of a man who thinks he was God.
The user on these boards, UU, thinks Jesus is a good moral teacher but not God. Therefore, he does not call himself a Christian and jokes that he should celebrate Jesusmas instead of Christmas. I think he is being honest with himself. If you don't think Jesus is God, then there is very little left in Christianity and nothing that makes any sense.

Islam also refers to Jesus as Christ, without implying deification. Jesus can be the annointed one of God without actually being God.
To me, being Christian does not need to mean belief that Christ=God. I believe in the teachings of Christ. The core teachings. Those that are stated in Matthew 22:37-40
But I do not believe that no-one can come to God without going through Jesus.
I do believe that Jesus was a part of God, but more in a pantheist view of God.

Terry

so which church is right then?

just kidding.

thanks for answering my question.

one more question. regarding the mormons. church of jesus christ of the latter day saints
isn't this just basic worship of jesus himself and not of god?
i am aware of how this church was founded. joseph smith and all that. (thank you south park). just not entirely sure of their entire belief structure.

Excelsior wrote:

But something to consider: the absence of an organised belief system does not imply the absence of beliefs.

for one, i don't believe in a higher power. joining any organised religion would be hypocritical of me. i find myself fairly apathetic when it comes to religion. but just a bit curious.

John Doe

Excelsior wrote:

And John Doe, while your interpretation is creative and obviously attractive, I think you come up against the same problems that "Jesus as moral teacher" folks come up against- the historical evidence

I think I'd actually prefer to ignore historical evidence, strange as that may seem, until I know more of the specifics myself. You are in all probability right but I like my opinion cos it makes me feel good and makes it easier for me to be happy and cheerful and so on, thus making other people happy and cheerful! It may be wrong, but I don't see any harm until I know for sure that everything attributed to Jesus was actually said by him.

Excelsior wrote:

As a Jew, such an idea would be appalling and certainly the Jews who founded Christianity would have be disgusted by it.

Really? I was under the impression that according to early (and modern) Christianity everyone was considered to be children of God, if in a different way to Jesus.

Excelsior

larryone wrote:

Islam also refers to Jesus as Christ, without implying deification. Jesus can be the annointed one of God without actually being God.
To me, being Christian does not need to mean belief that Christ=God. I believe in the teachings of Christ. The core teachings. Those that are stated in Matthew 22:37-40
But I do not believe that no-one can come to God without going through Jesus.
I do believe that Jesus was a part of God, but more in a pantheist view of God.

Why Matthew 22:37-40 instead of Matthew 5-7, Luke 6 oe any of the other "core teachings"? What about John 4 or Luke 24? I am aware of the meaning of Christ and the interpretations prevalent in the 2nd Temple era but Jesus cannot be understood to say anything about himself short of "I am God" and his earliest followers are the same.

Now don't misunderstand me. I am not saying that you can't hold to your opinion! I am simply disagreeing with your conclusion and challenging you to take the whole of the Gospel account seriously or explain why the 22nd chapter of Matthew is more important that the 5th?

Excelsior

John Doe wrote:

Really? I was under the impression that according to early (and modern) Christianity everyone was considered to be children of God, if in a different way to Jesus.

They are. But Christianity rose out of a fiercely monotheistic (and nationalistic) Judaism. Jesus' claims of divinity (above and beyond Messiahship) drove the priests and zealots to try and kill him on numerous occassions. For him to then extend that divinity to all people would have been utterly unthinkable, even if there was some kind of historical evidence.

And while I realise you are starting out on this whole quest of yours to find truth (and encourage you in it, I started in Leaving Cert too!), remember to never settle for something cos it feels good. True bliss can't be found in ignorance...

John Doe

Doesn't your previous point mean that even if Jesus had believed us all to be children of God, he mightn't have said it cos he was being radical enough already?
Just teasing! On that other point though, I'll continue to question everything. Thanks for helping!

Excelsior

You're right. He might have ended up dead or something!

John Doe

Ooh, smooth...:cool:

larryone

Excelsior wrote:

Why Matthew 22:37-40 instead of Matthew 5-7, Luke 6 oe any of the other "core teachings"? What about John 4 or Luke 24? I am aware of the meaning of Christ and the interpretations prevalent in the 2nd Temple era but Jesus cannot be understood to say anything about himself short of "I am God" and his earliest followers are the same.

Now don't misunderstand me. I am not saying that you can't hold to your opinion! I am simply disagreeing with your conclusion and challenging you to take the whole of the Gospel account seriously or explain why the 22nd chapter of Matthew is more important that the 5th?

because "On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."
If you follow those two commandments, then you are following (IMHO) the core teaching of Christ.

Dont get me wrong, I hold the sermon on the mount as being a very important part of what Christ taught, I'm just saying: I consider that following those two commandments in Matthew is more important. I even consider it more important than the belief that Jesus and God are equivalent. (then again I'm kinda biased, because I dont think the relationship between Jesus and God is that simple...)

BrianCalgary

larryone wrote:

because "On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."
If you follow those two commandments, then you are following (IMHO) the core teaching of Christ.

Dont get me wrong, I hold the sermon on the mount as being a very important part of what Christ taught, I'm just saying: I consider that following those two commandments in Matthew is more important. I even consider it more important than the belief that Jesus and God are equivalent. (then again I'm kinda biased, because I dont think the relationship between Jesus and God is that simple...)

I agree with you on the importance of the two laws, however if it wasn't God who gave them, then I wouldn't put much stock in them.

I would say that what makes Jesus' teachings so revolutionary and life changing is that He is God and understands human make-up better than anyone, because He is the one who created us.

larryone

I would tend to think of Jesus as human, but one who understood the make-up of God better than anyone.
I would put stock in them because they make infinite ammounts of sense. They have a wisdom and clarity to them that I think cannot be ignored. I think they were inspired by God, but spoken by a godly man. God-inspired wisdom.

Edit:
So If someone had that sort of a view of Christ, does that necessarily make them non-Christian? I'd tend to lean more on the "no" side.

John Doe

larryone wrote:

I would tend to think of Jesus as human, but one who understood the make-up of God better than anyone.
I would put stock in them because they make infinite ammounts of sense. They have a wisdom and clarity to them that I think cannot be ignored. I think they were inspired by God, but spoken by a godly man. God-inspired wisdom.

This makes sense to me. The question remains as to why Jesus claimed Godhood though. Maybe he thought no-one would listen to him otherwise, but people listened to Siddhartha Gautama after all. Also, claiming to be God and the Son of God isn't a very 'godly' thing to do if it's not true.

larryone

I dont think he did claim it. I know that alot of people here believe othewise.

Excelsior

Larry, you hold up Matthew 22 over say Mark 12 (where he says the same thing) and over Deuteronomy 6:4 which he is actually quoting. This is your perogative and I don't want to hassle you over things you believe so please don't understand me as doing that.

But I do want to probe on what basis over subjective approval that you take one of these three comments, which are the exactly the same, to be the core of Jesus' teaching.

In the same way, other than a bias towards non-divinity, how do you explain the dozens of times Jesus says things that are predicated on his belief that he was in very essence the promised Messiah and in some deeper sense actually God. John 4, John 8, Luke 4 and indeed the beginning verses of the Sermon on the Mount would be the obvious, off the top of my head places where he actually does claim to be divine.

I have actually put a fair bit of thought into whether Matthew 22 could serve as a "mission statement" for Jesus (I get all my inspiration from you guys!). It is interesting to me that Paul remixed the Shema (the foundation prayer of Judaism which begins in Deut 6:4, which Jesus is referencing in Matt 22) in the first letter to the Corinthians to redefine the monotheistic God of Judaism in terms of a Trinity with Jesus as a member:

"Hear, 0 Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is One we have
But for us:
One God
the father, from whom are all things and we to him
and one Lord
Jesus the Messiah,
through whom are all things and through whom are we."

Matthew 22 could be a mission statement for Jesus (if the idea of a mission statement is appropriate) and it is interesting to me that Paul, 15 years after the crucifixtion would connect the Shema to Mark 12 and Matthew 22 to declare that Jesus is God.

Once again, I am not trying to force you to justify your beliefs or to start an inquisition of anyone who disagrees with me. But I guess I am trying to show you that there are problems which would tend you to resort to "I don't like to think of Jesus as being divine" as your reasoning.

larryone

Excelsior wrote:

Larry, you hold up Matthew 22 over say Mark 12 (where he says the same thing) and over Deuteronomy 6:4 which he is actually quoting. This is your perogative and I don't want to hassle you over things you believe so please don't understand me as doing that.

I'm not holding Matthew 22:37-40 over Matthew 12:30-31 They are equivalent.

And I've seen loads of threads on this forum where people quote bible verses at each other and debate the divinity. Many people here have debated in threads like that, and I dont really want to start going into it, because it can end up being an endless and pointless argument.

Back to topic:
I think that if you truly take into your life the essence of Christs core teachings (as described in Matthew 22:37-40, Matthew 12:30-31 and possibly elsewhere like in verses of the Quran, etc...) that you can consider yourself a follower of Christ, and hence a Christian.

Excelsior

Well I think that Jesus is clear in the passage you have cited, Mark 12 that to be a Christian is to follow him. You can phrase it in touchy feely manner like "take him into your heart" but what he asks the Rich Young Ruler to do is rid himself of everything because being in Jesus' company is more valuable than wealth, prestige and even family.

Even in the passage you have cited, you come up against the problem that Jesus seems to think he is the Alpha and the Omega, to quote him.

larryone

And I do follow Christ. I just have a different idea of what Christ was than you do.
Back to the origional question by julep: Does that mean I'm not a Christian?

Excelsior

Well imagine I was a church leader and you were attending, wowed amongst other things, by my amazing and compelling preaching. You come to me and ask me how do you become a member. I say that it is a simple process where we meet and run through the core values and aims of the church over a cup of coffee and then some Sunday we'll receive you in. (This is how it would happen in pretty much any church)

The problem you would have then is that among the first things that any church believes is that God is a Trinity composed of God Father, God Son and God Spirit. You'd have to say "Hold up a second, I don't agree". In which case I'd have to say, "Oh well. We'll have to pause membership for now. But let's get another cup of coffee".

See where I'm coming from?

larryone

So if you're not a member of a Christian Church you're not a Christian?

Excelsior

Not what I am saying. (But if you are a Christian, you are a member of a Christian church.)

What I am trying to get at it is that Christianity exists. It isn't monolithic but in its (at last count 32000 denominations) many forms, it is consistent on a number of core issues. The position you have outlined would not find support in the creedal statements of many churches and I think it fair to say that the thing, whether it is a monster or a marvel, that is Christianity, has defined itself and its boundaries outside of where you sit.

Am I just getting myself more mixed up here?

larryone

Excelsior wrote:

many forms

I would also tend to think that there are as many forms of Christianity as there are Christians. Every Christian has a realtionship with Christ, I dont think that any two such relationships can be the same. There are many who consider themselves Christian but do not necessarily believe in the divinity.