I've discovered that, for me, there is a difference between believing in Christianity and believing in Jesus. It is also possible to believe that one can have a relationship with God, and Jesus, through Christianity without believing that it is only through Christianity that one can do these things.

I was raised to believe in Jesus -- which, for much of my life, consisted in believing a list of teachings about Him. As I see it, this is a very poor substitute for faith. Believing things about Jesus is a stepping stone to believing in Him, but they are not the same thing.

I neglected Jesus for a number of years because I was making an attempt to see if God could be encountered in other religions. I didn't reject Him, but I neglected our relationship. When He finally re-entered my life, I was surprised to find that my love of Him was as strong as it ever was, if not stronger.

I have concluded that, despite my upbringing, I believe in Jesus because I love Him, not the other way around. I think many Christians today have the concept of faith turned around. "Faith" means "trust," not in a list of doctrines but in a person. Belief in doctrine follows trust in the person, not, ultimately, the other way around; and, if you believe the New Testament, this comes from the Spirit, not the mind.

Does this mean someone should neglect doctrine, or Scripture? Certainly not! But one should regard these as stepping stones to faith (trust), not faith itself. What does it mean for Scripture to be inspired? Many think it means that God dictated the text. He may have done; but the power cannot rest in the words. I think Scripture lives only because the Spirit vivifies it. "The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."