To approach God as Father,

[Elijah John]

How does one effectively approach God as "Father"? Is it necessary to have one's sins "paid for" by accepting Jesus death on the cross as an atonement before God will even speak to us or listen to us?

Or is it simply only necessary to approach God with an attitude of faith, humility, contrition and a willingness to forgive others.

After all, aren't these qualities of mind and heart the true mediators, and in effect, the only mediators that Jesus taught?

[Divine Insight]

If Theology, Doctrine and Dogma doesn't need to refer strictly to the Abrahamic God, then my answer to your question would be as follows:

How does one effectively approach God as "Father"?

If there is a God who has created me and I wanted to think of this God as my "Father" the very last thing I would want to do is suggest that the God described by the Abrahamic religions might actually be a true and correct description of this God.

As I see it, the Abrahamic religions make their God out to be jealous, cruel, and wrathful among other traits that I personally consider to be extremely offensive to any decent God. Therefore I would never suggest to any actual God that I thought he might be the God of the Abrahamic religions. As far as I can see that would be the greatest insult I could give to God.

For me, this would be like going up to my human father and suggesting that I think he might be Hitler. I would never do that to my real father. That would be a terrible insult.

I feel the same way when discussing a possible God. If I were going to guess what God might be like there are many other religions that I feel would be far more of a compliment.

So the last thing I would do is suggest to any actual God that they might be the God of the Bible. That would be like suggesting to my dad that he might be Hitler.

In fact, if I thought I could talk to God I would prefer to think of her as the Moon Goddess of Wicca. That's a picture of a very loving compassionate God. Or Goddess if you prefer.

And then if God started screaming back and me shouting, "No! I'm not the Goddess of Wicca! I'm the God of Abraham!".

Then I'd know that I'm in big trouble. Trouble that apparently couldn't have been avoided no matter what I had done anyway.

In short, if there is a real God and he turns out to be the God described by Abrahamic theology, then I wouldn't be very pleased about that. That would be like finding out that my earthly father really is Hitler. Not much I could do about it at that point.

[marco]

How does one effectively approach God as "Father"? Is it necessary to have one's sins "paid for" by accepting Jesus death on the cross as an atonement before God will even speak to us or listen to us?

Intelligence interferes with the happy simplicity of belief. We hold in high regard people like Mother Teresa who did good work rather than compose theological riddles. Paul built a heaven out of Paul's imagination, a theology a thousand miles from the simplicity expressed by Christ. "Be as little children" became in Paul's prayer book: "stop thinking as a child; put such thoughts aside!"


If God wants to find us, he will. If it pleases him to have us wander in atheistic meadows, he will let us wander. If ultimately there is truth and we want to find it, we will.....but it may be a truth far, far removed from anything Paul expounded.

[Elijah John]

How does one effectively approach God as "Father"? Is it necessary to have one's sins "paid for" by accepting Jesus death on the cross as an atonement before God will even speak to us or listen to us?

Intelligence interferes with the happy simplicity of belief. We hold in high regard people like Mother Teresa who did good work rather than compose theological riddles. Paul built a heaven out of Paul's imagination, a theology a thousand miles from the simplicity expressed by Christ. "Be as little children" became in Paul's prayer book: "stop thinking as a child; put such thoughts aside!"


If God wants to find us, he will. If it pleases him to have us wander in atheistic meadows, he will let us wander. If ultimately there is truth and we want to find it, we will.....but it may be a truth far, far removed from anything Paul expounded.

I agree with you regarding Paul's convoluted theology, which has as it's base a mythic Adam. I do however, respect Paul for echoing the ethics of Christ, and at times, the beauty of his soaring rhetoric. (i Corintheians 13 comes to mind.)

But Paul's not the only culprit obscuring Jesus simple message of mercy from the Father, the Good News.. John too, injects Jesus between us and the Father.

Many find that interference an aid to apprehending the Divine. Others, like myself, find it an obstacle.

I don't think Jesus ever intended to usurp the Father, and blame that state of affairs on some of his overzealous disciples..

[Divine Insight]

I don't think Jesus ever intended to usurp the Father, and blame that state of affairs on some of his overzealous disciples..

In that case we couldn't know anything about Jesus at all. Jesus never wrote anything down. All we have are rumors written by possible overzealous disciples. So that's all we have to go by.

In fact, we can't even be sure if any of the writings attributed to "disciples" were even written by actual disciples of Jesus.

[marco]

I don't think Jesus ever intended to usurp the Father, and blame that state of affairs on some of his overzealous disciples..

I cannot disagree. Jesus undoubtedly directs our attention to God and offers himself as a helping hand. He believes he has God's complete authority and so through his agency people can learn. But you are right - he is simply directing attention to God and he expects people to worship one God, certainly not him.

[tam]

Peace to you EJ,

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

Or is it simply only necessary to approach God with an attitude of faith, humility, contrition and a willingness to forgive others.

Of course those are indeed good things with which to approach God. I am not even sure how one would attempt to approach God (as Father) without faith.

BUT...

After all, aren't these qualities of mind and heart the true mediators, and in effect, the only mediators that Jesus taught?

No.


Christ taught that no one comes to the Father except through Him. John 14:6


That makes Him the mediator between man and God.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 7 by tam]

Hi Tam, mediation is certainly what John's Jesus taught. But where did the Synoptic Jesus teach mediation instead of direct access?

Seems the Jesus of Matthew, Mark and Luke taught direct as opposed to Temple-mediated access. He did after all, instruct us to address God as "Father". Does it get any more direct than that?

And John the Baptist also taught non-mediated, direct access. Offering a "baptism of repentance, for the forgiveness of sins, bypassing the Temple.

Seems there is forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood. This in spite of the assertion made by the author of Hebrews.

[tam]

Peace to you EJ,

[Replying to post 7 by tam]

Hi Tam, mediation is certainly what John's Jesus taught. But where did the Synoptic Jesus teach mediation instead of direct access?

I realize that people have invented various versions of "jesus".

But the actual person - the actual Messiah, Jaheshua - is one person. There are not multiple different versions of Him. (Unfortunately, not so many people truly seek Him. The true person that He is, even with all that He has done for us. This is very sad to me.)


Matthew, Mark, Luke and "John" all wrote about the same person, the same Christ. They may have included different details and accounts between them about that person (as one should expect with a real and living person who did and taught many things)... but their testimonies are about the same person.



That being said, the following statement is from Matthew and Luke:

"... and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him." Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22


No one knows the Father except those to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him.

You admit that in "John" Christ taught that He is the mediator, based at least in part on His words that "no one comes to the Father except through me." Those words are not stand alone, we have a second witness to them in the very design of the temple... where one could not enter into the Most Holy Place (representing the Most Holy One: JAH) unless one first passed through the Holy Place (representing the Holy One: Christ). Anyone attempting to get in some other way would have been a thief and a robber.


And of course there are others (Paul, and the author of Hebrews) who understood and wrote about Christ being the mediator between man and God; and of Christ being the high priest who intercedes for us.



And He follows the above verses up (also from Matthew) with:

"Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.�



And of course there is the new covenant, of which Christ is the mediator, and of which Christ said His blood was poured out for the forgiveness of sins. That is not in "John". That is in the synoptics.

Seems the Jesus of Matthew, Mark and Luke taught direct as opposed to Temple-mediated access. He did after all, instruct us to address God as "Father". Does it get any more direct than that?

I am not sure why you connect that teaching prayer with permission to bypass Christ and come directly to God.


If you can understand that there are conditions attached to approaching God as Father (some of which you list in your OP), then I do not see how you can suggest that this prayer means that one can come to the Father, all the while bypassing His Son.

And John the Baptist also taught non-mediated, direct access. Offering a "baptism of repentance, for the forgiveness of sins, bypassing the Temple.

John the Baptist was preparing the way for Christ (whose body is the true Temple).

Seems there is forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood.

Christ Himself was the sacrifice - and HIS blood was poured out for the forgiveness of sins.


Then He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. Matt 26:27, 28



Hope that helps!


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[marco]

I realize that people have invented various versions of "jesus".

I should imagine that it is now impossible to rescue "true Jesus" from the collected impressions over the centuries. We still have people "seeing" the face of Jesus in everyday objects, when they are seeing a Renaissance portrait of an imagined man.

Those who lead a good life and comply with what Jesus is reported to have advised will no doubt see their image as the true one, though among such folk there are surely dozens of varying images. My Catholic boyhood bestowed on me a Jesus I undoubtedly loved, if little boys can love. I devoutly clasped my hands at my First Communion as my lips intoned "Jesus, Jesus come to me; O how much I long for Thee; of all treasures You're the best; take possession of my breast." And someone good and loving undoubtedly did!

No one knows the Father except those to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him.

There is much hyperbole in what the Evangelists wrote on Jesus and his doings. Of course holy corpses did not rise and walk to Jerusalem; this is an imaginative prayer, just as pious as the hymn I quoted. There is no sensible reason why people should be prevented from going directly to God: making Jesus into a high priest, through whom all access to God is made, is a method of showering praise on a much loved leader. Unfortunately it wrongly puts God the Father out of reach and makes no sense of what Jesus himself advised, when he suggested we directly say: "Our Father..."