The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Judaism and the Mystical Christ

Next post is up - here I meditate on the meaning of the Biblical phrase: the image of God. Who is made in God’s image, and what does that mean? What does it mean to be made in the image of God?

Judaism and the Mystical Christ, Ch. 8: The Image of God

In this post, I explore some of the connections between a mystical view of Christianity and modern science - especially in the area of Quantum Physics.

fatherlearningtolove.blogspot.com/2015/06/judaism-and-mystical-christ-ch-9-let.html

I went ahead and published the last two sections of “Book I” of my series: Judaism and the Mystical Christ, for anyone who is following along.

Judaism and the Mystical Christ, Ch. 10: The Tree of Life

Judaism and the Mystical Christ, Ch. 11: Concluding Thoughts for “Book I”

By the way, I’d love to hear feedback…

.

I think you may be on the right wave-length, there, Eaglesway. I’d love to hear your thoughts as you read other posts, if you do. :smiley:

I will gladly do that, and I intend to read them all :astonished:)…but I would like to know if kabbala is the baseline of your presentation, and what place Jesus has - as the unique Son, in your paradigm. If you prefer to discuss that here or in PM or e-mail, I would like to hear what you have to say. :slight_smile:

Of course that may become apparent to me as I continue to read, but I fgured I would just ask, and engage as I read your pages.

I enjoyed Paradigm Shift. Having started at the end (chpters 9, 10, 11) and now starting from the beginning. I will just share my thoughts as I read further chapters.

The corruption of words in Christianity and the fear of questions and looking outside the locally approved paradigm is definitely the antithesis of true spirituality.

Christians words have been corrupted and then made into “hot buttons” which either shut down conversation and exploration, or enflame negative reactions and threats of damnation, exclusion, etc. This is common in science and religion. Inherent power structure maintenance procedures.

Any discussion can be approprate for someone with nothing to fear, considering however that such a person will have foundations from former paradigms as well, some of which are still valid and part of the new paradigm shift. I am only using those words in keeping with the terminology of the writing.

I see it as simply, “the renewing of the mind”

Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; 7 but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; 8 the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; 9 but just as it is written,

“Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard,
And which have not entered the heart of man,
All that God has prepared for those who love Him.”

For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.

I like the idea that when looking at a tree, fully developed, bearing fruit in season- there is nothing of it that was not fully there in the seed, in the shoot, in the sapling-

At any given point in time it may not look like the same thing, especially if viewed out of context- like your photo analogy of the background versus the context- but everything is there in the seed.

In our case, the seed being Jesus Christ, in whom are hid all the treasures of the wisdom and knowledge of God- we may think something is of the seed that is not.This can restrict or mutate growth. Or we may be unwilling to have the chaff broken in order to experience growth at the cost of a form we are comforatble in- but even so all that is needed is in the seed- all the requisite raw material is there.

So when Peter says, “You were begotten from above unto a fervent love of the brethren by the incorruptible seed of the word(logos) of God”- then the seed within us is Jesus, “The radiance of the Father’s glory and exact representation of His nature”. The true self, the light that lights every person who comes into the world. Thats why I also like the concept of “remembering the divine nature”.

If the seed is allowed to reach maturity, we will have been conformed to the image of Christ the image of God, an emanation of YHWH…but to the seed the full grown tree may look like a space alien or a giant monster so we defer to the comforters who tells us, “There is no need to go under the earth, or to the threshing floor, you may remain a seed forever- and WE PREFER IT THAT WAY”.

But when we look at the Son of God in all His awesome wonder, expressed in such simple splendor of human frailty and humility- we ought to recognize that there is going to have to be something major transpire in us if we are to become anything like He was in the earth- which is what the earth needs and why we are enlisted in priestly service, unless just knowing something as become enough for us(shame, shame :laughing: )

“Until we all attain to the unity of the faith, unto a mature man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ. Then we will no longer be as children, tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine, but speaking the truth in love, the body will be edified through the proper working of each individual part”(something like that in Eph 4)

But first- Eph 3 "strengthened with might by His Spirit in your inner man, that being rooted and grounded in love you might know whith all saints what is the height and breadth and depth of the love of Christ and be filled up to all the fulness of God.

and before that eph 1 “That He would give you a spirit of wisom and revelation in the knowledge of God, that you may kno what is the hope of your calling, the riches of His inheritance in the saints, and the surpassing greatness of His power towards us who believe”

Whole lotta paradigms gotta fall before we get anywhere near there. Whole lotta principality and power gotta, “Let my people go”!

The hope of our calling is that we would be conformed to the image of Jesus the Son (for all who He foreknew He predestined to be conformed to the image of the son of God.)

The riches of His inheritance in the saints is that all of what Jesus is, is in us, in the incorruptible seed- Christ in you the hope of glory.

The surpassing power towards us who believed is that Spirit within us by which, if we are willing, the seed can become the tree, fully formed in the image of Christ, bearing fruit in season.

.

You have some great thoughts in those comments - thank you.

To this:

I am first and foremost a Christian. I cannot get away from this - even if I were to decide to turn my back on Christianity (I tried that once - agnosticism just didn’t work out for me), wherever I went from there, I think it would be obvious to people that I was interpreting their religion through a Christian lens.

As someone who believes that God loves all, intends to save all, can save all, and…and…believes that the Holy Spirit’s communication is not limited to “Christians” (as if God were limited and could not communicate through, say, a Buddhist), I feel that it is helpful to cross borders and to get a look at myself through Kabbalah. I think that Judaism is particularly a good lens look at Christianity through, since Christianity ought to be seen as a Jewish reform movement (Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, etc. were not Christians - they were Jews, and they considered Jesus to be the fulfillment of Jewish values, not someone who had established a new religion).

As to Jesus being the “unique Son” - Jesus is certainly unique. But I think we need to be very careful about how we talk about Jesus. The Evangelical paradigm has far to casually placed a flat equal sign between Jesus and God. But the Bible never equates Jesus with God - rather, it presents Jesus as revelation. Colossians 1:15 says that “[t]he Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.” John 6:46 says “No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.” And perhaps most fascinating of all, Hebrews 1:3 says “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” Note how “flat equal sign” does not work well with these verses - the Hebrews one in particular.

I am not one who believes in the flat = sign. But I do believe God has spoken to us in His son, pre-eminently. While the terminology of kaballah is from early Judaism and the language of the prophets, the schools of the prophets and generations of rabbi’s midrash, and provides some wonderful insights into the processes of truth…“Let there be light”, “Light out of darkness” etc, the conclusions are varied and so they can lead to confusion or delusion even as the scriptures can for be formless and void for those who do not have the Spirit…the veil remains. The veil is taken away in Christ, so the place where all of these early influences diverge from recognizing the pre-eminence of Jesus, not as the flat equal but as the “radiance of the Father’s glory and the exact representation of His nature”, is the place where they begin to slide into deception.

While God can speak through a Buddhist, He is not speaking through Buddhism, per say- because the conclusions reached, even where the processes have truth in them, are not enlightened to the revelation of Jesus Christ. I do agree tho that the revelation of Jesus transcends the religion and biblical miscommunication about “Christianity” that is so rampant today.

I believe the discernment of God towards man, that which divides soul and spirit, bone and marrow, begins with this…

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

and ends with this…

For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

So that individual judgment is by standards to deep for us to comprehend, quantify and codify the way we love to… but the true revelation of Jesus as the “radiance of the father’s glory and the exact representation of His nature” is the light that shines out of darkness to remove all the veils until the “light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” is the only naked truth that remains, all the mists of philosophy, religion, vaporised by the face shining like the sun in its strength- which is knowing Him, which is the universal destiny.

Of course as you have thoroughly and I think correctly pointed out, the current paradigm of Western evangelicalism hasnt entered that, having forsaken most of the mystic reality of Christ in the spirit for a sort of stone tablet 2 dimensional rendering(my opnion). But i think Jesus and Peter and Paul brought much more than a reform movement. They brought a new creation that swallowed up the old and buried it in the one new man, “Behold I am making all things new”.

Of course we take that to mean , “Behold He is making everything like we want to see it” LOLOL, but nevertheless, the roots of the new creation are SO Hebrew because the identity(I AM) of the Messiah transcends all of the former voices, absorbs and fulfills them and reposts them invigorated in a paradigm as new and different as a giant oak tree looks to the acorn that fell to the ground or the three year old sapling that wavered in the wind, so that identity is more in the spirit of the seeking and the direction, as you put it, of the scatter plot of history- seen as a trajectory that begins with subjecting the creation to futility and ends with God becoming all in all, after every veil has been vaporized, and every adversary won by love through the revlation of Christ crucified(Savior) and Christ raised(Lord) and Christ ascended(Messiah).

As do I.

Suggestion: read Jesus and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings. And then, if you enjoy that and want more, check out Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, and Lao Tzu: The Parallel Sayings. It’s really quite amazing - there are these sayings within Christian and Buddhist literature that parallel each other so closely as to almost be a quote. For the longest time, I thought that the theory that Buddhism had influenced Jesus had absolutely no basis in fact, but later on, when I recognized just how closely some of these sayings parallel each other, I wasn’t so sure. And then I read about Buddhist missionary efforts, long before Jesus, and how certain areas of the Roman empire where Christianity seems to have bloomed in the early years were areas where many religious philosophies were present - possibly even Buddhism. So I would have to disagree with you - I think God did speak through Buddhism.

I didnt say God “didn t” speak through Buddhism, which came before Christ, I said He “doesnt”. All truth emanates from the fountain, Jesus the son of man and the son of God. The conclusions that wisdom approaches are the measure of whether God is speaking in them, and there is only one name under heaven whereby men can receive healing and deliverance from sin.

God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. 3 And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.

These four things, incarnation, emmanation, articulation and redemption converge perfectly in Jesus(imo) -from the beginning as the wisdom and power of God.

The idea that Jesus was influenced by Buddhism is (imo)contrary to His being the incarnation of the wisdom of God, it is more likely the Buddha was influenced by observations from the spirit of Wisdom emanating from YHWH throughout creation since the beginning, the logos. Jesus was not in the world and Judaism was limited in reach, so as the ancients meditated on God they received wisdom that cries out in the streets. Someone else made a religion out of those observations later. Buddha was just practising and articulating them, within the limitations of the available light.

I think that where there are parrallels in the wisdom of the ancients, they are explained in Romans 1, which I posted earlier…20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

But since Jesus made purification of sins and sat down at the right hand, their is only one name, to which every knee must bow and every tongue confess- one word(logos) into which all words(wisdom) are being subsumed in this age and the next, so while there is wisdom in certain elements of Buddhism and Hinduism, and parallel statements, the destination of their pathway is in error, as well as, in part the path itself as they seek to achieve a state of grace that can only be received through the blood of Jesus, so their veils remain intact, the same as with the Jews who do not see Messiah, and Christians who only see Him through the stained glass of systematic theology and western cultural expression of religious Christianity.

But I am sure you have had this conversation ad infintum and I am probably not adding anything new to what you have already heard.

In other words, it is not just the parallel sayings that are important, but the contrary ones as well, and the ultimate destinations of their pathway.

Some footnotes here, regarding the dialogue between Father Learning to Love and Eagles Way.

Actually, I read Jesus and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings, many years ago. I find it interesting - for example - that both have teachings involving a mustard seed. But I really like the book by Zen Buddhist Thich Nhat Hanh entitled Living Buddha, Living Christ.

I’m in accord with the Roman Catholic position from Vatican II:

I’ll even go so far to agreed with Catholic writer Wayne Teasdale in The Mystic Heart: Discovering a Universal Spirituality in the World’s Religions. Or the Perennial Tradition points by Roman Catholic priest Father Richard:

Having said all that, Christ to me, is the glue guiding and holding everything together. Now Christ can be the external belief of the exclusive Christian, the Logos in the gospel of John (filling the whole cosmos), the inner light of the Quakers, the Christ consciousness of certain yoga and new through Christian groups, etc. I feel Christ guides and helps people, in all these ways - and much more!

As far as the Judaism goes, the Roman Catholic Church since Vatican II, feels they still have a valid covenant with God. In the ‘Jewish Covenant with God,’ According to Pope Francis, it says:

I can’t really say I disagree with that position.

Buddhism is classified as a religion, but it is also a system of psychology and/or religious psychology. Psychologists and scientists - for example - have taken elements like Insight Meditation, and used it successfully for therapy, stress reduction, etc. We also need to look at the scientific elements and research, deemed from the systematic teachings. Just read the Wiki - Buddhism and psychology article on the topic. So it’s entirely possible, in the case of Buddhism, to extract elements from religion and transpose them to the realm of science.

And regarding created in the image and likeness of God. The Eastern Orthodox position “Image Is Everything” is what I follow.

Speaking of Kabbalah. Did you know there is a Christian Kabbalah tradition?

As far as mysticism goes, my favorite writer on Christian mysticism is Evelyn Underhill. The book Mysticism by Evelyn Underhill is a classic on the subject. Your local US public library, inter-library loan program (and similar programs in other countries), should be able to obtain a copy. I also like The Big Book of Christian Mysticism: The Essential Guide to Contemplative Spirituality by Carl McColman. I was browsing through it in a bookshop a few days ago. It’s really good and easy to read.

I love that book. Right before I discovered Universalism, I had read a book called “Who Is This Man?: The Unpredictable Impact of the Inescapable Jesus” that had a profound impact on me. In one of my favorite chapters of the book, the author (John Ortberg) had emphasized the point that when Jesus said “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind”, the last part (“with all your mind”) was an addition to the original command. Ortberg then draws out through historical examples how - while most cultures would destroy the literature of other competing cultures - Christianity would preserve it. So Ortberg makes the point that Christians are not supposed to ignore and destroy the intellectual efforts of other cultures, but to engage them. And if we find truth, that’s great! As Augustine says: “all truth is God’s truth.”

Shortly after reading this book, I discovered Universalism, and spent months researching that topic. It meshed very well with Ortberg’s point, outlined above. I had a friend from Japan who was a Jōdo Shinshū Buddhist. I decided I should know more about my friend’s beliefs, so I did a little research after asking him about it, and that lead to me writing one of my first blog posts about comparisons between this version of Buddhism and Christianity here. Shortly after this, I found out another one of my friends was a Buddhist, and after talking to him about that, he lent me his copy of “Living Buddha, Living Christ”. You know, I don’t think I ever really understood the Holy Spirit until I read the way Thich Nhat Hanh talked about the subject. It was a profound and moving experience for me, and had a deep impact. I’ll never be the same.

Another book I liked and read is entitled Without Buddha I Could Not Be a Christian by Paul F. Knitter. He is a Roman Catholic, professor of Catholic theology; a former Roman Catholic priest and a practicing Zen Buddhist.

Yup - that’s a good one too! I need to eventually read Introducing Theologies of Religion by the same author.

Quote from Parallel Sayings…

“We know somewhat more about the words of the historical Jesus, but not nearly as much as most Christians think. Jesus and his original followers spoke Aramaic, (the New Testament was written entirely in Greek by Greek–speaking Christians) and they left no writings at all. Many of the words attributed to Jesus were actually the words of the anonymous authors who, unlike Jesus, were Christians. Neither were any of these men eye-witnesses to the life and teachings of Jesus.”

Lots of assumptions are presented in the opening pages of The Parallel Sayings, which I don’t mind if they are presented as theory, but they are presented as settled facts.

It is not known for certain that there were never any Aramaic writings. Their are widespread disagreements among eminent scholars about the statements rendered as definite facts in this introduction, I assume because it furthers the case of the writer. The archeological evidence does not go back that far, but certainly Peter was an eye witness of Jesus’ life and teaching, and John’s gospel is cnsidered by many eminent scholars to have been written by John.

Since the book presents Krisha as an avatar(incarnation of a deity) almost right off and uses the hypothesis of the four major religions as four pathways to the same point- it is clear to me that Jesus as the Only Begotten Son and His virgin birth are considered mythical developements by the devotees of later generations. So this is clealry a universalist presentation, which is not offensive to me… I just think it is easier when people come right out and say where they are coming from, regardless what reactions they anticipate, because it just furthers communication so effectively.

Avatarism is, in my opinion, a teaching that undercuts the unique position of Jesus as having the name above every name. I was a student of metaphysics when I became a Christian through a sovereign revelation of Jesus much like Pauls. For me, Jesus is the only avatar, by virgin birth. I believe in the virgin birth, perfect life, death, burial, resurrection of Jesus Christ, ascended Messiah of earth and Lord of the Universe.

As to avatarism, Jesus said, “I come in my Father’s name and you do not receive me. Another will come in His own name and Him you will receive.”

I believe that the teaching of avatarism will prepare the way for one who will come as an avatar, but will not be an avatar of YHWH. I know, sounds kind of alarmist- but I’d rather just come right up front and say what I believe.

Because teaching that all four major religions are slightly different pathways to the same destination is not the benign simple interpretational presentation it can seem to be at first.

It begins forthwith describing the scriptures as degenerations from the truths of the original teacher, who was one of many such teachers all of whom were mystics who had a claim to experiencing ultimate reality as their mystical pedigree.

The acceptance of the suppositions that are required to go there( I am not condemning them, let every man be convinced in his own heart- it will all come out in the wash) create a substantially(to say the least) different faith, which in my opinion is a mutation not a shoot off the root- but then I see Jesus in that archaic way, as Paul presented Him in these four points as the unique son exalted above all heavens in Colossians 1 and Heb 1, concluding at Phil 2 and Rev5:13

Col 1
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18 He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. 19 For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.

Jesus is before all, over all, and will be in all. He was in the Father before creation and all creation came through Him. He alone is the reconciler of all by His atoning sacrifice- AS WELL AS BEING THE TEACHER AND THE MASTER.

God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in* these last days has spoken to us in His Son, *whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. 3 And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.

5 For to which of the angels did He ever say,

“You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You”?
And again,

“I will be a Father to Him
And He shall be a Son to Me”?
6 And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says,

“And let all the angels of God worship Him.”
7 And of the angels He says,

“Who makes His angels winds,
And His ministers a flame of fire.”
8 But of the Son He says,

“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
And the righteous scepter is the scepter of [h]His kingdom.
9 “You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness above Your companions.”
10 And,

“You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the works of Your hands;
11 They will perish, but You remain;
And they all will become old like a garment,
12 And like a mantle You will roll them up;
Like a garment they will also be changed.
But You are the same,
And Your years will not come to an end.”
13 But to which of the angels has He ever said,

“Sit at My right hand,
Until I make Your enemies
A footstool for Your feet

Jesus is THE radiance of the Father’s glory. He alone possesses that unique triumph over sin. Yes, the cross is a WAY. But it is also the means by which Jesus as the only begotten accomplished a victory no other in history could, and as the result He has been EXALTED AND ENTHRONED OVER ALL, having received a better name and a higher seat- in the bosom of the Father/Creator YHWH.

5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 **For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
**

These statements about Jesus in the scriptures are either myth and hyperbole surrounding the secret message of the way that all four religions espouse(supposedly) in the same way, or else,they are true statements about the exact nature of who Jesus is in character(upon which we agree) but also in His estate within the cosmos of God’s creation(upon which we probably disagree). Right hand of God. Word(expressed thought) of God. Name above every name. Ruler of all until all rule and power and authority are done away. The name of the person unto whom every knee shall bow and which every tongue will confess as the adversaries are rendered advocates is the name of Jesus Christ Lord of lords, King of kings.

Only then will God become all in all. This is an extremely important foundation. Without it what you have left is not the faith of Jesus and the apostles.

Rev 5

11 Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne and the living creatures and the elders; and the number of them was myriads of myriads, and thousands of thousands, 12 saying with a loud voice,

“Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing.”

13 And every created thing which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all things in them, I heard saying,

“To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever.”

14 And the four living creatures kept saying, “Amen.” And the elders fell down and worshiped.

In this vision- the fulfillment of Phil 2 above, we see the prophetic alpha of Christ’s preeminence displayed before the entire universe.

I’d press you to challenge whether or not you’re the one making assumptions. Let me put it another way - many Christians have been taught - quite dogmatically - to make other assumptions. Assumptions which - in the face of the evidence we have - are simply not reasonable to make.

What you will find if you enter into the world of scholarship is that it is nearly unanimous among scholarship that neither 1 and 2 Peter were written by Peter, nor John written by John. Do me a favor and look at the number of references on the wikipedia article that says that the author of John is anonymous. Note also that you’ll find a similar statement about the Petrine epistles in this article.

Since you spent a lot of time talking about the virgin birth, I thought I would pass along something I wrote about that subject.

As to individual statements which seem to be exclusive - we need to put them into their literary and historical context to understand what was being said. We need to understand just how blasphemous Rome was about its Caesars and then see how quite often, phrases that were used to talk about the Caesars were redirected by the Christian authors to talk about Jesus - a poor nobody who was executed by the authorities of his day. And thus, the purpose of these statements is not to change the radically inclusive Jesus into an exclusive bouncer, but to overturn the exclusivity of empire.