The way the religion is set up, one may only know Christ through ministers such as evangelists, pastors, teachers. Therefore, I find it impossible separate Christ from His earthly representatives. The only way to do so, would be to posit a "Christ Consciousness" which does not depend upon Bible, apostles or even Christianity itself, which can be experienced in all religions even if they don't recognize it as "Jesus". That is the only way to get around the notions of authority and obedience that are set forth in Scripture, Ecclesiastic structures and evangelical ministries. The Christ is no better than the messenger representing the Christ. If the authoritative messenger is a fallible book, Christ is subordinate to an interpretation of the Bible. If the authoritative messenger is found in apostolic succession, the Bishops decide how Christ is to be revealed. If it is through a Protestant revival, Christ is accepted according to the constraints and definitions placed upon the seeker by the evangelist. The message of Jesus is subject to the Sunday School teacher, the Pope, the KJV, NIV, NASB, etc. Each transmitter of the message fancies themselves to be the authoritative filter of truth or at least the representative of some hierarchy. When it comes to sourcing the understanding of Christs message, the distinction is so blurred between Jesus and his representatives that His message is their message and their message is His message. I cannot find a way to divorce the two so that Christ stands part from the mode of His oral and written transmission. Again, the problem is that whoever or whatever is responsible for that transmission becomes an authority in Christs stead. Revealed truth is not necessary the problem itself, but rather Christianitys historic insistence that it alone represents the source of absolute truth which must be universally applied and assented to. If this were not so from the very beginning, guys like Justin Martyr would not have been arguing with others about how Christianity supersedes and is better than Judaism and paganism. How is it possible to find out what is in Christ, without first digging through the polemics and politics of Christianity? If one comes to the conclusion that Christ is a concept which is not the sole possession of Christianity, but may be found under other names besides Jesus, then Christianity kicks that person out or shuns them, just like they did to Carlton Pearson. If I ever see evidence that people around the world are coming to believe on the Jesus of the Bible without reading a Bible or hearing a sermon, then I will suspect that Christianity is indeed a universal religion revealed supernaturally by a specifically named God who wants humanity to accept Jesus as the embodiment of Absolute Truth. Otherwise, I have no choice but to recognize there are multiple and often contradictory Christ(s) revealed by various preachers, teachers, evangelists, patriarchs and Bible translators. Of course, according to the Bible, there is a Christ and an Anti-Christ. This dualism forces the real Christians to become heresy hunters. Therefore, perhaps the authoritative version of Christianity finds its source rooted in one little prefix in Scripture which defines and shapes its entire worldview, message and attitude. That four-letter prefix is anti. Whoever came up with a non-reconcilable dichotomous concept of Christ versus anti-Christ is to blame for the whole fragmented, argumentative, heresy hunting, dominionist, apocalyptic mess.
.
.