I have to wonder how many folks studying the history of Christianity and the variety and plasticity of its emerging ideas are able to continue to be content with any of them, having in mind that in fact there is ultimately one set of sentences that come in a final form we’ll eventually all speak as Christians, because I certainly can’t.
It seems the best we can say is there’s a reason in scripture, if interpreted just so, or a reason from tradition, or from some epiphany to think about Jesus one way versus another. However, neither scriptural interpretation, nor tradition, nor revelation can be what matter unless and only in the case that any of these push us into an experience of life. If it is only for the reason and the sake of exegesis, tradition, or of revelation, exactly into what should it be pushing us but themselves?
When we speak of God or Jesus then, we are necessarily speaking about human well-being and then subsequently asking ourselves, and answering, how God and Christ are concerned about the very same thing.
If there’s more to the conversation than this — that there is but one way to have the conversation at all — such as the entire affair of Christianity is instead a dozen, specific, particular propositions that must be believed, assailablity irrelevant, then such a theology has little to do with a seemingly universal Jesus of Nazareth and more and more to do with the utterly inconsequential.
Just a thought.