Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Gospel, Christians and Acts
Bikerman
Member (Idle past 4955 days)
Posts: 276
From: Frodsham, Chester
Joined: 07-30-2010


Message 31 of 36 (574002)
08-13-2010 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Bailey
08-12-2010 7:08 PM


Re: In Regards to Carrying a Cross
Bailey,
interesting argument and well supported. I have to say that I find little to argue with in this. I would extend it, though.
Yes, I agree that the crucifiction is a, if not the, focus of many early Christians. What is equally clear to me is that the resurrection played no part at all, and I actually don't think it happened in anything other than a symbolic sense.
What is slighly perplexing, however, is that the gospels, and indeed the whole NT, makes no reference to personal sacrifice for one's beliefs in the form of martyrdom, aside from Stephen, who was stoned on a trumped-up charge and therefore didn't die for his beliefs, and James, who's death we are told very little about.
There is no consistent, or even apparent, theme of dying for beliefs anywhere in the NT which makes it rather strange that this should become such a focus of Christianity in later centuries.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Bailey, posted 08-12-2010 7:08 PM Bailey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Bailey, posted 08-14-2010 11:14 PM Bikerman has not replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 32 of 36 (574214)
08-14-2010 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by nwr
08-12-2010 8:42 PM


Re: In Regards to Carrying a Cross
Thanks for the comment nwr. That bit of encouragement is quite meaningful to my family. Stay bless'd ..
One Love

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.
Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by nwr, posted 08-12-2010 8:42 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 33 of 36 (574234)
08-14-2010 10:09 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Bikerman
08-13-2010 1:32 PM


The Doctrine of the Divine Outhouse
Thank you for the comments Bikerman and I hope things are well with you and yours ..
I haven't seen Bri in a while, so I thought I might introduce an alternative perspective ..
You have taught potential ministers so I'm sure you know this, or maybe you disagree, but your reference to love thy neighbour in Leviticus needs deconstructing.
The Old Testament - or certainly the parts like leviticus that are from the Tanakh - need to be read in context of the intended audience - the Jews. 'People' is a concept reserved for other Jews, this is made clear in many places in the Tanakh. Thus when reference is made, such as not killing, and loving thy neighbour, one has to read that as meaning 'fellow Jew', not 'fellow man'. There is much slaughtering of non Jews, with either the tacit approval of God or the active participation of same.
This line of reasoning appears to struggle a bit when one takes note that the ToRaH was not polemically, much less historically, dictated, nor delivered, strictly to Yuhdeans or any other singular tribe - but rather was created for a grouping of numerous clans comprising what was then referred to as Yisrael, with the Yuhdeans representing but only one of those clans. Matter of factly, one will not find mention of their specific tribe before the booklet of 2nd Kings.
One could argue there is no monolithic Hebraic, Yisraeli, Yuhdean, nor Christian tradition - as history would likely not perjure itself, instead gladly testifying. It is worth noting here that not all the practitioners within the variant Yuhdean traditions were racists, as the radical school of Yisraeli prophets will testify. Connecting that racism and the arrogance that must go along with it to the booklets which nurtured it can be as easy as connecting dots with a ruler.
After all, nurture creates racists, and in this case it is indisputable that the racism of these Yuhdean elites, and those who joined to them, was created as a direct consequence of sucking on the teat of the ToRaH, then developed and nurtured by the TaNaHk, as was their belief in the innate superiority of the pure Yuhdean race; a doctrine which, as you mention, some attempt to promote repeatedly in various places throughout the canon upon which they rest.
However, the prophets critiqued conventional religious practices, dogma and traditional manuscripts, attacked the conventional religious interpretation of certain events as described in the canon and were also critics of the written - yet, ever-changing - ToRaH code; alleging that 'the lying pen of the scribes has worked falsley' and finally referencing it as 'sheer dung'. Bound up within their writings were statements of faith involving belief in a future justice ..
And they were often statements of faith, plain and simple; an expression of the justice of God prevailing, rather than any sort of specific ‘fortune telling'.
This, in spite of the belief and claim among a certain sect of very bigoted - and wealthy, Yudeans that the law books they came to possess were somehow ‘infallible' and thus one would assume, consistent as well. What came to evolve into the various Yuhdean traditions is actually a kind of quilt, made of many different patches of cloth, some of which - quite frankly, may prove more useful in the service of a divine outhouse where they could be employed for the remainder of their days in the wiping of holy backsides, rather than turning up in a book of supposedly ‘Divine Wisdom' such as the allegedly 'Holy' TaNaKh.
Again, racism is a matter of nurture, not nature. A little white baby will play quite happily with a little black baby, as will lil' arab and yuhdean babies.
You see, some of those patches of cloth that were sewn into that crazy quilt are some of the most harmfully, virulently racist, obscene, genocidal pieces of literature ever written. The world may very well have been the worse for wear having read them, and even more so for having read them in the context of a hoary old myth that would have us believe they're at the core of a divine book, a 'Holy Bible' (not to mention a supposed ‘gift of God'). However, regardless what one might think of all the serious flaws, the ToRaH, the TaNaHk, and indeed the Bible, are nonetheless some of the most important books ever written.
After all, it is nearly impossible to understand the propaganda used to justify the slaughtering you mention in your above post - the slavery and brutish racism of monarchial colonialism, or the imperialist religious ideology that was the well spring of dynastic colonialism, not to mention the rigid patriarchal society that was feudalism, without first understanding the imperialist streams of racism that flow ever so turbulently through those various documents.
As well, it may prove insurmountable to understand the religious intolerance practiced by the likes of the Aaronic priestcraft or the Yuhdean pharisees, as well as colonial priests and preachers who share their recipe - Catholic and Protestant alike, without first understanding the religious racism and violent intolerance boldly advocated, preached and promoted on the pages of those good ol' books renowned as ‘the Holy Word o' God'.
And if you still have doubts, you could ask an Anabaptist or consult Michael Servetus, but hey, that's just my 2 cents, and so, may peace rest upon you ..
One Love

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.
Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Bikerman, posted 08-13-2010 1:32 PM Bikerman has not replied

  
Bailey
Member (Idle past 4369 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 34 of 36 (574247)
08-14-2010 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Bikerman
08-13-2010 1:51 PM


A Prophet's Inheritance
interesting argument and well supported. I have to say that I find little to argue with in this ..
The sentiment is well appreciated - thank you for taking the time to post this.
What is .. perplexing .. is .. the gospels, and .. the whole NT, makes no reference to personal sacrifice for one's beliefs in the form of martyrdom ..
There is no consistent, or even apparent, theme of dying for beliefs anywhere in the NT which makes it rather strange ..
When one learns of the controversy surrounding the OT protest movements of biblical prophets and then considers that christianity - at its roots, is a form of yuhdean messianism which revolved around the prophetic Yisraeli traditions, the ever looming threat of a heretics inheritance may then become clearer ..
One Love
quote:
Matisyahu
5:12
~ Rejoice and be glad because your reward is great in heaven, for they persecuted the prophets before you in the same way.
23:31 ~ By saying this you testify against yourselves that you are descendants of those who murdered the prophets.
23:37 ~ O' Yerusalem, Yerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to her!
How often I have longed to gather your children together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!
Acts o' the Apostles
7:52
~ Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute?
And they killed those who foretold long ago the coming of the Righteous One, whose betrayers and murderers you have now become!

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have murdered the innocent; why trust what I say, when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.
Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Bikerman, posted 08-13-2010 1:51 PM Bikerman has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 35 of 36 (681428)
11-25-2012 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Bailey
01-03-2009 9:15 AM


Acts Unplugged
Do you feel if a disposed soul, open to repentance and Love, was given the book of Acts, alone, they could be 'saved'?
Yes. Though I will agree that this whole "salvation" thing may be a bit overrated, and I DO believe that the next big move of the Holy Spirit on the earth will incorporate non-believers receiving it as well as believers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Bailey, posted 01-03-2009 9:15 AM Bailey has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 36 of 36 (681435)
11-25-2012 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Bailey
01-03-2009 9:15 AM


Book Of Acts Explored
Bailey writes:
A lot of energy is spent by Christians trying to tell one another what a real christian is. Chances are, this is not a new phenomenon - lol. However, it is eerily similar to political mouthpieces trying to say who really represents the beliefs of one party or another....Some common essential properties of being a Christian you might hear are ...
A. Believes the Bible (Or some variation on in what way someone 'Believes the Bible.')
B. Goes to Church (For Catholics, we could enlarge this to include certain practices like eating fish on Fridays, etc.)
C. Believes "Jesus died for my sins."
D. Believes Jesus was/is God
E. Believes only Christians go to Heaven
F. Believes "You cannot make it to Heaven on your own."
G. Believes in the Resurrection
H. Is a member of my denomination
I. Believes God created the world in 6 days
What answer would people you know give ?
The following chart has been assembled to illustrate what teachings you find in Acts regarding Christianity. The book of Acts was chosen because that is the only book where the focus is on 'evangelism' to non-believers and new believers.
Passage
in Acts
Jesus is
Messiah
Jesus
Arose
Jesus
is Lord
Jesus will
Judge All
Repent!Believers go
to Heaven
Heathens
go to Hell
2: 14-41xxx
x

3: 12-26
x
x
x

x


4: 8-12
x
x





5: 30-32
x
x
x




5: 42
x






7: 1-53
x






9: 22
x






10: 34-43
x
x
x
x



13: 16-41
x
x
x

x


14: 14-17



x



17: 2-4
x
x





17: 18-31

x

x
x


18: 5
x






18: 28
x






20: 20-22


x

x


22: 1-21
x
x





26: 1-29
x
x






Note here that "Jesus is Lord" refers to His being Universally elevated to head o' household status (over Heaven and Earth).
It seems, at least if Paul, James, Peter, and Stephen are good sources, that a christian is someone who has chosen to follow Jesus the Christs' practices, repenting of unloving acts that destroy relationships, and believes Jesus is the Christ (as shown by his Resurrection) who has been given power over Heaven and Earth, including the office of a lovingkindness Judge.
It seems to the present opinion, Christians in general do not like the idea that repentance is an absolute requirement as opposed to a goal.
And yet repentance is a basic and useful practice for keeping oneself in check.
We would further say that merely believing Jesus is the Christ who sits in power over Heaven and Earth would strike many as "too easy," allowing too many fringe groups in.
I dont care how many people get "in" as long as my behavior plus their behavior allows us all to love each other. God can allow as many people into Heaven as he wants...
One wonders what that says about modern day evangelists and missionaries who start off their message with "Do you know where you are going when you die?"
I agree that this is an outdated and unnecessary concept.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Bailey, posted 01-03-2009 9:15 AM Bailey has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024