If someone only believes in God, and not Jesus, what does that make him if he's not of the Jewish faith?

Question

I was a devout Christian all my life. Until I started to listen and
learn that there is truth known from research to establish who was the real leader of Christianity and how the Catholic church began. And how the early Hebrew leaders, becoming Catholics, put together a religion that now has the largest
following world wide. All accepting the passages we know
as the New Testiment. I cannot believe in Christ after knowing
the real truth, as it was written of in the Dead Sea Scrolls and
other religious parchments found. I took everything on faith,
and was let down by ministers in the past. All churches continue to perpetuate this falseness for fear of losing their parisheners and their incomes.
The Catholic church, the richest religious order in the world, is sitting on the valuable parchments under the Vatican in tombs with all their other valuables stored since the beginning of their
religious order.
I can't consider myself to be an Atheist. So what am I?

Answer 1

I call myself an agnostic. I think the way that Christianity is practiced and taught is a farce. But, I think there are some ideas within it that point toward many of the truths that I think must be universal. Christianity isn't true, but it does contain some truth. Likewise with other religions I've studied. There are common themes among them, but they're often buried under thousands of years of propaganda and lies.

Answer 2

You are a Spiritualist. Plain and simple. If you want to tie yourself into a religion, then by all means go ahead... but the questions that you probably should ask are "What are my beliefs and is there anybody that feels the same way?"

We should all question our faith and our religion. I was baptized into the Catholic form of Christianity, but when I was denied answers to questions that I had about the religion, I sought answers on my own. I became a spiritualist. The fact that there is a God never went away, but the way that I looked at God became increasingly different. The path that I ended up on kind of Found me. It allows me to ask the questions and not fear the answers.

I encourage you to seek answers to your questions and find the path that is right for you.

Answer 3

Joh:3:15: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Joh:3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh:3:17: For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Joh:3:18: He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Joh:3:19: And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh:3:20: For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
AS WE HAVE BREATH WE CAN BE SAVED.GODS WORD

Answer 4

The truth in the Dead Sea Scrolls? The Dead Sea Scrolls mention nothing about Jesus.They are collections of copies of books from the Hebrew Bible as well as texts relating to the religious community (the Essenes).

Answer 5

God the Father gave a way for salvation and that is through His Son only...

Acts 4:12
Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Answer 6

You have obviously not read the Dead Sea Scrolls. I have, and there is certainly NOTHING in them which would 'disprove Christ.'

Somebody has been lying to you, dear one, but the liar is surely NOT the Bible.

"You believe in God? You do well. However even the demons believe in God, and tremble. "

Answer 7

I can certainly relate to your dissatisfaction with christianity, but why take it out on Jesus. Jesus could very well have been a true messenger sent from God without being God or dying on a cross.

Answer 8

The Catholic Church was started after Jesus' death so when he was alive it wasn't Christianity yet.

Jesus started a movement that is now known as Christianity.

I guess you would be Agnostic, I'm not sure.

Answer 9

"Monotheist" if you're strictly not a polytheist. At the very least you're definitely a "Theist".

EDIT: I really must second the guy above me. There ARE more than two religions in the world. Try reading up on them.

Answer 10

You're a theist. A theist believes in a personal God. The problem is that believing in a personal does not get you heaven. Having your sins paid for does. God is a perfectly Holy and Righteous God. No person with any sin will ever get into Gods heaven. But we all sin. That's why Jesus had to go to the cross and pay for everyones sins to open the door to those who want to take advantage of what Christ did for them.
No other person can help us because I know of no other person, other than Jesus, who ever even claimed to die for our sins. Jesus opened the door to heaven. But we must walk through it. We walk through it by repenting of our sins and turning our lives over to Christ. But you say you don't believe in Jesus. Better hope you are right. You can't afford to be wrong.
I'm not a Catholic so I'm not going to waste time defending a Catholic version of church history which I don't agree with anyhow. But the evidence for the New Testament is primary source(eye-witnesses) or secondary(got it from an eye-witness) evidence. These guys saw what happened. They'll always be debate about it because the critics of the bible know they have to discredit the eye-witnesses. But the idea that the books of the new testament were written 150 years later is mostly the 19th century scholarship of the german rational higher critics such as Wellhausen and Graf and that crowd. I think most of the scholarship nowadays is conservative due to archeological discoveries and many other things. The liberal crowd is still around(the Jesus Seminar and others) and they always will be but they don't rule the roost anymore. Historians have a rule called ‘Aristotles Dictum’. It’s a rule for handling ancient documents used by historians. It says one must listen to the claims of the document under analysis and not assumme fraud or error unless the author disqualifies himself by contradiction or known fraud or factual inaccuracies. In other words, when you find an ancient document that claims to be written by a person, you give the benefit of doubt to the document and if you want to discard it as a fraud or whatever, the burden of proof is on you to show why it should be discarded. The writers all said they were either primary sources(eyewitnesses) or secondary sources(they got it from an eyewitness). There is no reason to not believe them. The real question is not whether they saw what they saw. The real question is ........did they lie?
I don't know if you've ever seen the movie 'the passion of Christ'. That movie was given an 'R' rating, mostly because of the violence and the blood. It was very graffic. The scourging scene was especially bloody although I still don't think it accurately depicts what happened to Christ. You just couldn't
show that on screen. But Christ was only scourged once. The apostle Paul was scourged 5 times. He was also beaten with rods 3 times, stoned, the jews always had a contract out on his head(he lived with that threat) and they almost killed him a few times and finally he was beheaded by the romans. All the apostles and disciples and all christians, in general, lived that way. After 66AD, to be a christian was to have a target on your chest. The writers of the New Testament all lived persecuted lives and then died martyrs. The only exception was John. He was sort of like the Steven Segall movie 'Hard to Kill'. They boiled him in oil but he survived. They stuck him into a brass bull which they would heat up until it was red hot and somehow he survived that too. The romans banished him to the Island of Patmos which was a volcanic rock island with no food and most prisoners starved to death. There he got the vision and wrote the 'Book of Revelation'. But he survived that too. The rest died martyrs after being persecuted all their lives. Andrew died in greece, crucified on an X-shaped cross. Phillip was crucified in Asia. Bartholomew was flawed to death in Albanapolis in Armenia. Thomas was martyred in Madras India. Simon was martyred in Persia. Jude was also martyred in Persia. James was beheaded. Mark was drawn and quartered(literally pulled into 4 pieces by 4 horses). Peter was crucified upside down by the Romans. He requested to be crucified that way because he didn't feel worthy to be crucified like his Lord. But before he was crucified the romans made him watch as they crucified his wife of 50 years. Surely, if they were making all this up, Peter would have said when they started to crucify his wife "that's enough......this lie has gone far enough....we made it up". But he didn't, neither did all the other apostles. They went to their death preaching the gospel. I don't think they lied and I'm not willing to reject what they said just because the miraculous is involved. If there is a God you can't rule out the miraculous.
As far as the dead sea scrolls is concerned......The dead sea scrolls doesn't disprove Jesus. The dead sea scrolls was the death knell to a certain criticism of the bible that was circulating up until the scrolls were discovered. The idea was that the scriptures were changed as they were copied and therefore today we have no idea what they actually said. Thanks to the dead sea scrolls we now know that that idea is bogus. The dead sea scrolls proved that. Before we found the dead sea scrolls in 1947 the oldest copy of the book of Isaiah was from about 1100AD. In the dead sea scrolls we found a copy of Isaiah that was copied in the year 100BC(1200 years earlier). Now we could compare the 2 scrolls and see how many errors were made in 1200 years of copying. The 2 scrolls were 99.5% the same. In 1200 years of copying there was only 19 letters(not words) that were different. Remember, the book of Isaiah was a big book that had 66 chapters and it had only 19 letters different after 1200 years of copying. None of those letters changed the meaning of the book in any way. These guys didn't make errors. This was not just any book. In their eyes, it was the word of God. There were curses attached to people who changed it in any way. Besides, the guys who copied it were professional scribes. They did this for a living.