Thanks for your candid response. As much as I respect your viewpoint, I disagree with it. It's admirable how you seek to take a both/and approach to reconciling some of the points I made with traditional beliefs.

Again, I respectfully disagree with your statement, "You cannot with integrity call yourself believing in Jesus, yet deny His own words. It takes more effort to rationalize dis-belief than it does to have faith." What you call rationalizing disbelief I see as being intellectually honest. If we're being honest, it's a stretch to argue the verses you quoted are "Jesus's own words." The truth is that very few 'red letters' are the literal words of Christ. Within each gospel are two voices: one is the voice of Jesus, and the other is the voice of the author who is writing with a specific perspective and agenda in mind. The two voices are so intertwined that it's nearly impossible to differentiate between what are Jesus's literal words and what the author is claiming Jesus said to make their point. It was actually a very common practice in the first and second centuries for authors to claim to be speaking the words of someone without those words being direct quotes or literal words. We even see this in the OT in Ecclesiastes when Qoheleth, "the teacher," writes as if they are King Solomon.

Finally, there is no reason to share what you did with tears. As I said at the end of my article, the core of what has changed in my perspective of Jesus is not that he's become smaller but bigger. Unless you see greater intimacy with Christ post dogma as a negative, I don't understand what would lead you to tears. What you see as a light dimming, I experience as a light being able to shine in its full brightness. Thank you again for commenting.