Confused? You will be

"I know people who subscribe to the view that the whole thing can, indeed, be summed up in the the two commandments which you reference. And I also know people who believe that the whole thing depends not on how you live out those commandments but in what you believe about who Jesus was. This does not seem like details to me."

Fair comment. But these two approaches come down to what it means to 'believe' - is a credal approach, 'ticking the orthodox boxes' so as to score enough points and win the quiz? In that case, the whole thing is in a mess - the World Church consists of Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox Chalcedonian Christians, and lots of Miaphysite and Dyophysite non-Calcedonian Christians, all of whose roots go back to the beginnings. These are historic denominations, not sects. They all believe quite different things about Jesus, but all believe he is the Son of God. So if you take a credal approach, where do you draw the line? Who do you accept as Christian, and which Christians do you reject? Be very careful, because I'm pretty sure heaven will be full of those we've rejected as heretics over the centuries!

The Greek word "pisteuo" means both "to believe" (in a credal sense) and "to trust" - "to believe about" and "to believe in". Of course, it is difficult to believe in Jesus without believing certain things about him, but I reckon the NT puts the central emphasis on "believe in".

"Perhaps Jesus had an unambiguous message, but it didn't seem to take very long after he was gone for substantial disagreements to arise."

Any simple and unambiguous message begins to get confused when it is heard by different people. The NT illustrates the tensions when the gospel was received by conservative Jews, liberal Hellenistic Jews, or Gentiles. The next few centuries seem to me to illustrate the folly of depending on "it comes down to what you believe about Jesus." I'm not saying such things don't matter it's a question of where the centre lies, and I'm increasingly convinced it's in doing what he said, rather than arguing about the details.

"The confusion and argument usually happen when people can't see the wood for the trees, and argue about little details."

Tony

You may well be right. But I know people who subscribe to the view that the whole thing can, indeed, be summed up in the the two commandments which you reference. And I also know people who believe that the whole thing depends not on how you live out those commandments but in what you believe about who Jesus was. This does not seem like details to me.

Are you really saying that there is an official version of Christianity today which is as unambiguous as the offside rule? That the confusion comes because people get muddled over it? In any case, isn't a large part of religion what religious people believe? I mean, if there were no religious people, there wouldn't really be religion.

Perhaps Jesus had an unambiguous message, but it didn't seem to take very long after he was gone for substantial disagreements to arise.

"In contrast, people of the same religion and same denomination and who worship in the same building at the same time frequently fail to agree on what they believe."

That's not religion - that's religious people. People are usually confusing, because they're usually confused - or perhaps the other way round. Or not. See? - I'm even confused about being confused!

The confusion and argument usually happen when people can't see the wood for the trees, and argue about little details. When we boil it down to the essentials, it becomes a bit clearer. Look for the irreducible minimum, and you'll discover that most of us who argue with each other are actually on the same side. For Jesus, the whole thing could be summed up in just two commandments: love God (Dt.6:4) and love your neighbour (Lev.19:18). Oh, yes, of course there is more than that when you get down to the details, but it generally tends to be the working out of that simple message. And many of the details people argue about tend to be about the "how does that work?" variety - like a load of people with their heads under the bonnet worrying about the widgets sticking off the doodah. Just put the bonnet down, and drive - and you'll discover that it works.

I have two theology degrees. I like trying to figure out the widgets. But we're not commanded to understand - we're commanded to love. Let's not confuse the two, and keep them in the right order of priority.

Simples!

Yes, it is confusing that God can destroy a whole town and save a lamb in the same book.

It is also surprising that the offside rule comes in as more confusing than religion. Compared to the thinkings of almost any religion, the offside rule offers very little to master. More importantly, competent referees the world over have the same understanding of the offside rule and apply this rule identically when they are doing their jobs competently.

In contrast, people of the same religion and same denomination and who worship in the same building at the same time frequently fail to agree on what they believe.

That is confusing.

It isn't religion that's confusing, it is people's attitude to it.

Religion is a system of human thought which usually includes a set of narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices that give meaning to the practitioner's experiences of life through reference to a higher power, deity or deities, or ultimate truth.[1] Religion is commonly identified by the practitioner's prayer, ritual, meditation, music and art, among other things, but more generally is interwoven with society and politics. It may focus on specific supernatural, metaphysical, and moral claims about reality (the cosmos and human nature) which may yield a set of religious laws, ethics, and a particular lifestyle. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and religious experience.

The term "religion" refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction. "Religion" is sometimes used interchangeably with "faith" or "belief system,"[2] but it is more socially defined than personal convictions, and it entails specific behaviours, respectively.
The development of religion has taken many forms in various cultures. It considers psychological and social roots, along with origins and historical development.

In the frame of western religious thought,[3] religions present a common quality, the "hallmark of patriarchal religious thought": the division of the world in two comprehensive domains, one sacred, the other profane.[4] Religion is often described as a communal system for the coherence of belief focusing on a system of thought, unseen being, person, or object, that is considered to be supernatural, sacred, divine, or of the highest truth. Moral codes, practices, values, institutions, tradition, rituals, and scriptures are often traditionally associated with the core belief, and these may have some overlap with concepts in secular philosophy. Religion is also often described as a "way of life" or a life stance.

Well,we spend long enough on here and many other websites/house groups/bible studies debating the various ways religion impacts on our lives,and most of the time we disagree......that could be confusing to some people.........
PS: Russell Brand is funny,edgy and cute!