« A Few Fundamentals | Main | The New Commandment of Love »

October 07, 2007


Jonas Lundström

I have a few questions:
1) How do you interpret the texts that are normally used to promote pre-existence? (Kol 1, Joh 1/8, Hebr 1)
2) What about the virgin-birth friendly texts in Matt and Luke? I can understand and like the main thrust of your theology, but don´t understand why it is necessary to get rid of the virgin conception.
3) Do you belong to some kind of church that accepts your view and/or are living a life in line with your teachings?
4) Do spell out the theology in "ten thesis" seems to me to be a mistake, if that is what you are trying to do. The scriptures contains a story that should be accepted and promoted in its fullness. For example, I miss the ekklesia and the Spirit in your thesis, and also the come-back of Jesus and the coming of God´s kingdom.
/Jonas Lundström, Sweden


Jonas, thanks for your comment.

To answer your questions -

1) I have posted a four-part series on Pre-existence under the category "Divinity on Trial." It begins here - http://raceisrun.typepad.com/weblog/2007/07/pre-existence-p.html

2) You ask why it is necessary to "get rid of the virgin conception?" The answer is that it is unscriptural. The virgin conception distorts the New Testament view that Jesus was a man with whom we can all identify, with whom we can share suffering, with whom we can empathise. Who can identify with the remoteness of a God-man, born of a virgin? Who could be expected to?

You can find an exhaustive analysis of the infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke under the category "Virgin Birth on Trial."

Unfortunately, the limitations of Typepad mean that the oldest post is found at the bottom of each category index page - one must read from bottom to top.

If you go here - http://raceisrun.typepad.com/weblog/virgin_birth_on_trial/index.html
- you will find the first post in the series at the bottom of the page.

3) You asked: "Do you belong to some kind of church that accepts your view and/or are living a life in line with your teachings?"

I have a group of friends, like-minded individuals with whom I am in contact. But neither geography, nor time, should limit our view of 'ekklesia,' which is the Septuagint term for the Old Testament's 'congregation of the Lord.' I consider that every like-minded individual, living or dead, who aspired/aspires to the same goals as did Jesus, belongs to the same 'congregation.'

It is evident that Jesus of Nazareth saw his role as the pursuit of truth, as is evidenced by his words to Pilate in John 18:38. I consider the pursuit of truth the primary goal for would-be followers of Jesus and established this blog to expose the many unscriptural lies told about the man who lived and died for truth. So, yes, I hope I live a life in line with my teachings.

4) The "ten teachings" are the propositions which form the foundation of my "theology" as you call it. Before building up a total and truthful view of scripture, its 'fullness,' we must first lay down a firm and sure foundation. You will notice that in "teaching" number 4, I briefly referred to the Kingdom of God and the return of Jesus when I said: "That this Jesus of Nazareth...would one day sit upon the earthly throne of his father David..."

Subjects such as the "ekklesia and the Spirit...and also the come-back of Jesus and the coming of God´s kingdom" will be explored more fully in future posts.

Jonas Lundström

I have now read mosts of the texts you referred to.

-As to pre-existence, I am roughly on your side.

-As to the virgin birth, I have to look into this again. But I think you put a lot of energy into proving something that has, at the best, a very weak scriptural basis. It is acceptable to me to not believe in the virgin birth, but I must admit (even being a "free thinker"), that I get a little offended by your proposal. It seems that you might have some alternative christian groups on your side though, like maybe the ebionites and some 1600-century italian "rationalists"/anabaptists.

-I think you might have to "spiritual" a view of ekklesia. An ekklesia is just people gathering, body and all.

-I also mistrust your view of knowledge, which to me seems to me too modern. I always become a little frustrated when people speak as if there is only one "obvious" view out there, and when people seems to believe that it is possible to have an exact picture of "reality". I am too post (or late-)-modern for this.


Interesting beliefs. Very similar to Islam, yet very different. Anyways I was just wondering what sect of Christanity you adhere to, since this is my first time to this blog (via BlogRush).




Thanks for your comment.

Most, if not all, the denominations and sects of Christendom are united in proclaiming the 'divinity' of Jesus of Nazareth. I, therefore, belong to none of them, as I am a 'heretic' in their view.


I find it interesting that people are concerned about what "sect" Vynette belongs. It would seem to me that the important thing is what Vynette has to say.
Maybe Vynette is just a very intelligent person who can actually read and write, think for herself and make judgments in these matters based upon her own dilligent reasearch and not rely on the collective thinking of a "sect".

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • "For that ye strove in neighbour love, it shall be written fair, But now ye wait at Heaven's Gate and not in Berkeley Square, Though we called your friend from his bed this night, he could not speak for you, For the race is run by one and one and never by two and two." Rudyard Kipling


  • For Deborah 1963-2003
    "full of grace and truth"
  • And for T.M.Wixted 1889-1958
  • Certain material on this weblog has been adapted from works by E.P.Wixted, including The Race is Run.