|
|
Post by nsync on May 21, 2010 13:49:30 GMT -5
Are you serious. Jesus followed the law of moses. He instructed "taught" in the law of Moses. He requested that his disciples do the same. He believe in "the Kingdom of God...being at hand" which was and still is lingo from Jewish Messianic talk (they just don't be HE was the Messiah)....there is so much more. They called him Rabbi for crying out loud. lol
Did he say... don't call me that?
That's like my child calling me Ummi...and I'm not Muslim. lol
However he felt the religion over all needed tweaking. Less tradition more love and humility.
Therefore Jesus was reformed Jew, but he was a Jew.
Mary was his mother. Mary was Jewish. Jesus was Jewish by culture and by religious basis.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oren Ishii on May 21, 2010 13:57:48 GMT -5
Couple things (at work so I wont go into great detail):
The claim that we believe only in the power of deeds to save is not quite accurate.
We believe that we are no longer under the law, but are saved by grace - just like you do. We also believe that deeds/works are our responsibility as believers. "By their fruits ye shall know them."
We have a moral responsibilty toward social justice for all people, and you'll see most Catholics doing service/participating in philanthropy (Catholic Social Services, etc) because of that.
Catholics in line with doctrine do NOT pray to saints. This is a HUGE source of confusion between us & Protestants. Some choose to ask the saints to pray for them, in an intercessory manner - juat like some of you may choose to ask people to pray for you.
The same with Mary; we honor her as the Blessed Virgin chosen by God to bring the Savior into the world, not as God. If you know the Rosary, a part of it states:
"Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now & at the hour of our death."
This is not a prayer to her- it is a request that SHE pray for US.
I'll try to come back & talk about confession, etc. a little later today.
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 21, 2010 14:03:47 GMT -5
Penance is very important in Roman Catholic practices.
Penance=forgiveness through deeds like confession....
Also the fact that you can be excommunicated by the church. Not God, but the church.
These are no goes for me.
SOrry if I did not explain this well. Please understand I am SOOO not anti catholic like many folks are these days. I agree with several things. It the salvation and church authority issues that I disagree with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oren Ishii on May 21, 2010 14:07:19 GMT -5
@outtie: I wasn't addressing your entire post just yet. I was mostly responding to a post on Pg.1 where Julie asked me some questions. Your deeds/works part just got caught up in the mix.
I'll try to get to penance later today.
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 21, 2010 14:07:40 GMT -5
Well actually I don't believe in purgatory or asking aka praying to saint to ask for protection.
Well I guess there are many things, but I have a meeting I will explain in detail later.
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 21, 2010 15:18:37 GMT -5
Ok @outtie: I wasn't addressing your entire post just yet. I was mostly responding to a post on Pg.1 where Julie asked me some questions. Your deeds/works part just got caught up in the mix. I'll try to get to penance later today. |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on May 21, 2010 16:14:13 GMT -5
Couple things (at work so I wont go into great detail): The claim that we believe only in the power of deeds to save is not quite accurate. We believe that we are no longer under the law, but are saved by grace - just like you do. We also believe that deeds/works are our responsibility as believers. "By their fruits ye shall know them." We have a moral responsibilty toward social justice for all people, and you'll see most Catholics doing service/participating in philanthropy (Catholic Social Services, etc) because of that. Catholics in line with doctrine do NOT pray to saints. This is a HUGE source of confusion between us & Protestants. Some choose to ask the saints to pray for them, in an intercessory manner - juat like some of you may choose to ask people to pray for you. The same with Mary; we honor her as the Blessed Virgin chosen by God to bring the Savior into the world, not as God. If you know the Rosary, a part of it states: "Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now & at the hour of our death." This is not a prayer to her- it is a request that SHE pray for US. I'll try to come back & talk about confession, etc. a little later today. But, they're all dead. I guess that is where I'm confused. Mother Mary and all the other Saints. |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on May 21, 2010 16:16:16 GMT -5
Penance is very important in Roman Catholic practices. Penance=forgiveness through deeds like confession.... Also the fact that you can be excommunicated by the church. Not God, but the church.These are no goes for me. SOrry if I did not explain this well. Please understand I am SOOO not anti catholic like many folks are these days. I agree with several things. It the salvation and church authority issues that I disagree with. Underlined part. Could you also explain that as well Logical? Thanks! @ Outtie, Baptist believe that only the LORD is over the church and religion as well. I guess I'm trying to see where it differs from Baptist, Presbryterian, Protestant, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on May 21, 2010 16:36:41 GMT -5
Are you serious. Jesus followed the law of moses. He instructed "taught" in the law of Moses. He requested that his disciples do the same. He believe in "the Kingdom of God...being at hand" which was and still is lingo from Jewish Messianic talk (they just don't be HE was the Messiah)....there is so much more. They called him Rabbi for crying out loud. lol Did he say... don't call me that? That's like my child calling me Ummi...and I'm not Muslim. lol Mentioning the Laws of Moses means NOTHING. Islam follows them too... Are they Jewish? lol Jesus replaced everything with himself. How is that following the laws of Moses...? Jesus worked and healed on the Sabbath. Jesus contradicts himself or shall I say the writers. For every verse you can show me jesus saying he is not destroying the law I can show you 4 when he does just that. Go read your bible for yourself. Don't take it from me. Thats your interpretation. Thats like me being raised as a christian but I speak out against the entire religion. Saying its false. Deriding the preachers and the followers but yet and still after my death mofo say " Yeah VP was a Christian" lol Hell Naw. That doesn't make sense. Further mentioning Mary is of NO consequence. She isn't mentioned in the lineage. Jesus lineage is traced back through Joseph. THIS is against Jewish custom. Finally Jesus being called Rabbi does not denote he was Jewish. Rabbi isn't a denotation of ones Jewishness but only the Hebrew word for religious teacher. Again look it up. Here are the facts.. Jesus styles himself as the Passover Lamb.... BUT in Jewish custom the passover lamb has nothing to do with absolving one of their sin. Furthermore male lambs are only used for offerings by leaders to the "Lord" for their sins. When offerings are done by common people who Jesus reached... Female Lambs are used for offerings. Look it up. Jesus works (Heals) on the Sabbath... What would Moses think of that? look it up Jesus states circumcision means nothing... What would Moses think of that? look it up Furthermore to this thread there is no evidence of Jesus being apart of the Essenes. Look it up for yourselves. Or as we say in conscious circles... DO YOUR RESEARCH. |
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 21, 2010 17:34:32 GMT -5
Okay. So like I was saying...Jesus in the man form was Jewish by practice and religion. He came to be THE REFORMATION of the Jewish religion. He came to give life to both Jew and Gentile. He came through Jewish bloodline as salvation for God's chosen people---the Jews. He was and is the Messiah spoken of in the Jewish religion.
John 1:11
He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 22, 2010 10:05:07 GMT -5
Um this is a good question. Off the top I can say this about Baptist...baptismal is very important to the Baptist thus the name. So more so that other denoms Baptist are very detailed about when why and how someone should be baptized into christianity. A key issues surrounding baptismal amongst all denoms is the idea of immersion. Some believe that the body should go full into the water to be considered baptized. Others do not. So this is a main thing that separates denoms into a huge grouping. Lutheran like Catholics believe that one can be baptized at anytime but most often it occurs in infancy. Baptist believes that a person should be of a certain age. Also Lutherans believe that it doesn't matter how much water is on the person because it's symbolic. (wait let me back up to say that there are two major divides in the Lutheran church the one I am leaning towards more and more is ELCA (Evangelical Lutherans) the other Missouri Synod (which are the traditionalist---most closest to Catholics) It really become detail so it's best to really delve into the difference on your own personal times. I just post the main things I know of. Also in my search I found a very useful web site which I only consider a starting point. I will post it when I find it so you can look up the main differences of all the denoms you listed. For the record I just consider myself Christian right now. I am at a non denom church. But I am leaning towards practicing as an Evangelical Lutheran. Penance is very important in Roman Catholic practices. Penance=forgiveness through deeds like confession.... Also the fact that you can be excommunicated by the church. Not God, but the church.These are no goes for me. SOrry if I did not explain this well. Please understand I am SOOO not anti catholic like many folks are these days. I agree with several things. It the salvation and church authority issues that I disagree with. Underlined part. Could you also explain that as well Logical? Thanks! @ Outtie, Baptist believe that only the LORD is over the church and religion as well. I guess I'm trying to see where it differs from Baptist, Presbryterian, Protestant, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on May 22, 2010 10:14:32 GMT -5
At the part of Baptist believing you have to be a certain age to be baptised, not true. I was baptised at 5 or 6 (can't remember exact age but I was really young) and I did it on my own accord. I've seen other young children baptised too. Just thought I'd throw that out there. Um this is a good question. Off the top I can say this about Baptist...baptismal is very important to the Baptist thus the name. So more so that other denoms Baptist are very detailed about when why and how someone should be baptized into christianity. A key issues surrounding baptismal amongst all denoms is the idea of immersion. Some believe that the body should go full into the water to be considered baptized. Others do not. So this is a main thing that separates denoms into a huge grouping. Lutheran like Catholics believe that one can be baptized at anytime. Baptist believes that a person should be of a certain age. Also Lutherans believe that it doesn't matter how much water is on the person because it's symbolic. (wait let me back up to say that there are two major divides in the Lutheran church the one I am leaning towards more and more is ELCA (Evangelical Lutherans) the other Missouri Synod (which are the traditionalist---most closest to Catholics) It really become detail so it's best to really delve into the difference on your own personal times. I just post the main things I know of. Also in my search I found a very useful web site which I only consider a starting point. I will post it when I find it so you can look up the main differences of all the denoms you listed. For the record I just consider myself Christian right now. I am at a non denom church. But I am leaning towards practicing as an Evangelical Lutheran. Underlined part. Could you also explain that as well Logical? Thanks! @ Outtie, Baptist believe that only the LORD is over the church and religion as well. I guess I'm trying to see where it differs from Baptist, Presbryterian, Protestant, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by peppermint on May 22, 2010 10:17:09 GMT -5
JA, I think what Outtie is referring to is Baptist typically will not baptize infants or toddlers. They believe the child must be old enough to have at least a basic understanding of the baptism. Some churches will baptize, not dedicate infants/toddlers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on May 22, 2010 10:17:52 GMT -5
Wait, let me ask. Are you saying that Baptist don't baptise babies, like infancy as you stated?
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 22, 2010 10:17:57 GMT -5
So was I at 8. However the doctrine specifically states that the person must be old enough to confess Christ. So that's at least talking age, right? That still puts a limit on when the person can be baptized. Also, I know many churches who will not let you do it that young. I was even told, because I was baptized at 8 I had to be baptized again.  But with that being said I totally understand this perspective. If you believe one must be baptized to receive salvation then it only makes sense for the person to be baptized when they are aware of God and salvation. At the part of Baptist believing you have to be a certain age to be baptised, not true. I was baptised at 5 or 6 (can't remember exact age but I was really young) and I did it on my own accord. I've seen other young children baptised too. Just thought I'd throw that out there. Um this is a good question. Off the top I can say this about Baptist...baptismal is very important to the Baptist thus the name. So more so that other denoms Baptist are very detailed about when why and how someone should be baptized into christianity. A key issues surrounding baptismal amongst all denoms is the idea of immersion. Some believe that the body should go full into the water to be considered baptized. Others do not. So this is a main thing that separates denoms into a huge grouping. Lutheran like Catholics believe that one can be baptized at anytime. Baptist believes that a person should be of a certain age. Also Lutherans believe that it doesn't matter how much water is on the person because it's symbolic. (wait let me back up to say that there are two major divides in the Lutheran church the one I am leaning towards more and more is ELCA (Evangelical Lutherans) the other Missouri Synod (which are the traditionalist---most closest to Catholics) It really become detail so it's best to really delve into the difference on your own personal times. I just post the main things I know of. Also in my search I found a very useful web site which I only consider a starting point. I will post it when I find it so you can look up the main differences of all the denoms you listed. For the record I just consider myself Christian right now. I am at a non denom church. But I am leaning towards practicing as an Evangelical Lutheran. |
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 22, 2010 10:21:03 GMT -5
Yes thanks!  I was dedicated in a baptist church. I dressed up in all white just like if I was to be baptized but there was no water present. See I don't believe baptism is necessary for salvation. To me dedication...baptism at infacy...all the same thing. The child is not aware, so it's the parents wanting a covering for the child until they can make the decision for themselves. In my view it's more symbolic than anything. JA, I think what Outtie is referring to is Baptist typically will not baptize infants or toddlers. They believe the child must be old enough to have at least a basic understanding of the baptism. Some churches will baptize, not dedicate infants/toddlers. |
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 22, 2010 10:21:58 GMT -5
Excuse me, when I say bapstism in regards to salvation I mean WATER baptism. I do believe one needs to be spiritually baptized...
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on May 22, 2010 10:22:56 GMT -5
Yea I get what you are saying now. You do have to be able to confess with your own mouth.
Wow @ whoever told you you had to be baptised again. SMH
I get it!
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on May 22, 2010 10:23:52 GMT -5
Yea I get what you are saying now. You do have to be able to confess with your own mouth.
Wow @ whoever told you you had to be baptised again. SMH
I get it!
|
|
|
|
Post by peppermint on May 22, 2010 10:25:33 GMT -5
I went to a baptism at my church and the pastor would not baptize this one child because when asked if he understood what he was doing, he said no. The church is non-denominational but has baptist roots. The boy was about 4 or 5.
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 22, 2010 10:39:43 GMT -5
^^^ yep. Actually at my current church one has to be in the Teen years to get baptized. (Actually they say this is not true, but they persuade the children to wait.)
See this is what I am talking about in reference to what the doctrine/book may say and what actually goes on.
The thought is coming to Christ is a serious decision---one that should be maturely decided upon. I don't feel comfortable with that most likely based on my own experiences.
Also, in the bible Jesus specifically states that folks should not forbid the children to come to Him.
I don't like the age requirement/steering things at all.
But I totally respect that Pastor not baptizing the one child that specifically stated he did not understand. However, who's to say another one will not.
Children mature at different ages.
|
|
|
|
Post by peppermint on May 22, 2010 10:52:35 GMT -5
I agree that children mature at different ages. He has baptized other chilren that age. The boy's mother tried to coax the child into. The pastor let the child "assist" him with other people by holding note cards so he didn't feel like he did something wrong. His mom was NOT happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by frozenmenace on May 26, 2010 15:05:34 GMT -5
This is interesting. I haven't read every post so if I restate what someone else has already stated, please forgive me. Jesus was indeed a Jew, however, he was sent by God because Judaism had become corrupted and it was his mission to teach about the true "Way". It was prophesied that the Messiah would come from the house of David. Joseph was a direct descendant of David. I questioned this myself. If Jesus was not Joseph's blood child, then how could he be of the house of David? However, Jesus himself clarifies this when he states that those who follow him and believe as he did were his true brothers and sisters. So he made it clear that familial ties are not just about blood relation. Furthermore, there are those who argue that when the Spirit came upon Mary, it also came upon Joseph and they conceived Jesus. As they were being controlled by the Spirit, neither of them remembered the sexual encounter. At any rate, many believe that Mary was conveniently made a "virgin" in an attempt to focus more on Jesus' divinity rather than his humanity.
I am not a Jew, however, I cannot deny that Christianity was born from Judaism. Jesus did not come to form a new religion. He came to remove the corruption and to fulfill the ancient promises that God had made to Abraham. The followers of Jesus were considered a sect of Judaism during Jesus' life and immediately following his death. Christianity did not separate from Judaism until some years after Jesus' crucifixion.
At any rate, if Jesus was a part of a "secret" society, what difference does it make? And what exactly makes an organization a "secret"? Seeing as people knew about this order and that he was a member, it doesn't appear that this Order was a secret. Maybe they had rituals, etc that they didn't share with the general public, but that wouldn't make it a secret society. That would just be an organization that has information that only members was privy to. It's no different from most of the organizations in existence today. KFC doesn't divulge the Colonel's secret recipe...does that make it a secret society?
|
|
|
|
Post by frozenmenace on May 26, 2010 15:26:17 GMT -5
Um this is a good question. Off the top I can say this about Baptist...baptismal is very important to the Baptist thus the name. So more so that other denoms Baptist are very detailed about when why and how someone should be baptized into christianity. A key issues surrounding baptismal amongst all denoms is the idea of immersion. Some believe that the body should go full into the water to be considered baptized. Others do not. So this is a main thing that separates denoms into a huge grouping. Lutheran like Catholics believe that one can be baptized at anytime but most often it occurs in infancy. Baptist believes that a person should be of a certain age. Also Lutherans believe that it doesn't matter how much water is on the person because it's symbolic. (wait let me back up to say that there are two major divides in the Lutheran church the one I am leaning towards more and more is ELCA (Evangelical Lutherans) the other Missouri Synod (which are the traditionalist---most closest to Catholics) It really become detail so it's best to really delve into the difference on your own personal times. I just post the main things I know of. Also in my search I found a very useful web site which I only consider a starting point. I will post it when I find it so you can look up the main differences of all the denoms you listed. For the record I just consider myself Christian right now. I am at a non denom church. But I am leaning towards practicing as an Evangelical Lutheran. Underlined part. Could you also explain that as well Logical? Thanks! @ Outtie, Baptist believe that only the LORD is over the church and religion as well. I guess I'm trying to see where it differs from Baptist, Presbryterian, Protestant, etc. I am a Baptist who is studying at a Lutheran Seminary (what a combination!) and it is interesting just how many people call themselves Baptist but don't really know what the true Baptist doctrines are. My school has a Baptist Studies program, and I have learned a lot about the Baptist faith. Baptist doctrine is that a person should not be baptized until they are mature enough to know what it means, and they have accepted Christ as their savior. I was baptized as a child because I wanted to be baptized. Did I understand what it really meant? No. I was baptized again at the age of 22. Still it was just a ritual for me. I left the church and became a Muslim. There were just too many things in Christianity that didn't make sense to me. At any rate, now I am a true Christian and I have fully accepted Christ as my savior. I asked the Director of the Baptist Studies program, who is also an Ordained Baptist minister, if I should be baptized again. She advised that it would not be necessary as baptism is a ritual that symbolizes the washing away of the old life and a rebirth into a life with Christ. So, if I want to I can, but it's not necessary. As for the ELCA, they have some interesting ways of doing things. I'll leave it at that unless asked to expound. |
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 27, 2010 3:28:29 GMT -5
It's true Frozen. And I find it to be true of MANY denoms. Folks were raised in the denom. They think they know it all, but they have no idea. Now my original pastor had a Ph.D. So he was big on educating ourselves on doctrine and the word even from childhood. We had youth bible school, youth sunday school and youth church. We were learned in what we were believe! That was such a blessing I did not com eto understand until adulthood. Many churches do not encourage their members to study fully on their own. In regards to ECLA you can expound Frozen. I have not joined them yet. My hubby was raised ELCA and left the church. lol So I have heard ALOT about their ways. I've seen some with my own eyes (wee got married in ELCA and under an ELCA pastor's leadership). I have done much studying. There is one or two things I am not totally comfortable with which is why I have not made the official move forward. NOW IS THE TIME FROZEN! Share please. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by nsync on May 27, 2010 3:36:27 GMT -5
FOR AKAD as promised...and anyone else who is interestedwww.religionfacts.com/christianity/charts/denominations_beliefs.htmOnce again this is just a starting point ^^^^ I encourage to look elsewhere also. Also you can google(or book research) non-liturgical vs liturgical. This is the major split between christian church. You may have heard of High church and/or low church. That refers to the above. High church/liturgical usually have a prescribed order of worship--Catholics, Lutheran, Episcoplas. Low church/non-liturgical do not----Anabaptist, Baptist, Pentecostal... Your local christian bookstore should have MUCH info on this. You also should google (or book research) Christian denomination history charts. It will show the origins and splits of all major Christian denoms.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on May 27, 2010 9:15:44 GMT -5
This is interesting. I haven't read every post so if I restate what someone else has already stated, please forgive me. Jesus was indeed a Jew, however, he was sent by God because Judaism had become corrupted and it was his mission to teach about the true "Way". It was prophesied that the Messiah would come from the house of David. Joseph was a direct descendant of David. I questioned this myself. If Jesus was not Joseph's blood child, then how could he be of the house of David? However, Jesus himself clarifies this when he states that those who follow him and believe as he did were his true brothers and sisters. So he made it clear that familial ties are not just about blood relation. Okay lets stop right here. The writers of the "new testament" did this for legitimation reasons. The Son of David claims by the followers of Jesus and Jesus himself were because of the covenant that David per the story had with Jehovah. So it was imagery at best. Furthermore if Jesus was born of a virgin then why not use his mother's lineage? Mary's mother was in the line of David as well. This would have been proper Jewish custom with lineage going through the female not the male. Jesus continues to invoke people of the old testament and replaces them with himself. We see titles such as Son of Man (Ezekiel) Son of David (Solomon) see where I'm going with this right? You mean Gabriel right? I'm sure you know that though. The teachings of Jesus separated from Judaism off break. Ever custom that was done before was replaced with Jesus. That's not Judaism brother. You can't say Jesus was a Jew but he say ye not be circumcised it means nothing. You can't say Jesus was a Jew when the old testament God forbade any work on the Sabbath as even the creator rested but Jesus broke that too not because it was right but because of Jewish leaders who did not abide by the rules as well. You can't say Jesus is Jewish when he replaces the passover lamb with himself. The very customs that makes someone Jewish he shunned. So ministry had to do with having a oneness with the creator. He basically viewed the religion is many regards as paganism. Furthermore in the Quran it states
Sura Al-An'am 6:83And this was Our argument which we gave to Ibrahim(ABRAHAM) against his people; We exalt in dignity whom We please; surely your Lord is Wise, Knowing.
84 And We gave to him Ishaq(ISSAC) and Yaqoub(JACOB); each did We guide, and Nuh did We guide before, and of his descendants, Dawood(DAVID) and Sulaiman(SOLOMON) and Ayub(JOB) and Yusuf(MOSES) and Haroun(AARON); and thus do We reward those who do good (to others). 85 and Zakariya and Yahya(JOHN) and Isa(JESUS) and Ilyas(ELIAS); every one was of the good; 86 And Ismail and Al-Yasha(ELISHA) and Yunus(JONAS) and Lut(LOT); and every one We made to excel (in) the worlds:
87And from among their fathers and their descendants and their brethren, and We chose them and guided them into the right way. So using your method I gather Muslims are Jewish and Christian but ushered in a new way too right ? |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on May 27, 2010 9:41:19 GMT -5
This is interesting. I haven't read every post so if I restate what someone else has already stated, please forgive me. Jesus was indeed a Jew, however, he was sent by God because Judaism had become corrupted and it was his mission to teach about the true "Way". It was prophesied that the Messiah would come from the house of David. Joseph was a direct descendant of David. I questioned this myself. If Jesus was not Joseph's blood child, then how could he be of the house of David? However, Jesus himself clarifies this when he states that those who follow him and believe as he did were his true brothers and sisters. So he made it clear that familial ties are not just about blood relation. Furthermore, there are those who argue that when the Spirit came upon Mary, it also came upon Joseph and they conceived Jesus. As they were being controlled by the Spirit, neither of them remembered the sexual encounter. At any rate, many believe that Mary was conveniently made a "virgin" in an attempt to focus more on Jesus' divinity rather than his humanity. I am not a Jew, however, I cannot deny that Christianity was born from Judaism. Jesus did not come to form a new religion. He came to remove the corruption and to fulfill the ancient promises that God had made to Abraham. The followers of Jesus were considered a sect of Judaism during Jesus' life and immediately following his death. Christianity did not separate from Judaism until some years after Jesus' crucifixion. At any rate, if Jesus was a part of a "secret" society, what difference does it make? And what exactly makes an organization a "secret"? Seeing as people knew about this order and that he was a member, it doesn't appear that this Order was a secret. Maybe they had rituals, etc that they didn't share with the general public, but that wouldn't make it a secret society. That would just be an organization that has information that only members was privy to. It's no different from most of the organizations in existence today. KFC doesn't divulge the Colonel's secret recipe...does that make it a secret society? ha! Exhalt. |
|
|
|
Post by frozenmenace on May 27, 2010 13:51:09 GMT -5
This is interesting. I haven't read every post so if I restate what someone else has already stated, please forgive me. Jesus was indeed a Jew, however, he was sent by God because Judaism had become corrupted and it was his mission to teach about the true "Way". It was prophesied that the Messiah would come from the house of David. Joseph was a direct descendant of David. I questioned this myself. If Jesus was not Joseph's blood child, then how could he be of the house of David? However, Jesus himself clarifies this when he states that those who follow him and believe as he did were his true brothers and sisters. So he made it clear that familial ties are not just about blood relation. Okay lets stop right here. The writers of the "new testament" did this for legitimation reasons. The Son of David claims by the followers of Jesus and Jesus himself were because of the covenant that David per the story had with Jehovah. So it was imagery at best. Furthermore if Jesus was born of a virgin then why not use his mother's lineage? Mary's mother was in the line of David as well. This would have been proper Jewish custom with lineage going through the female not the male. Jesus continues to invoke people of the old testament and replaces them with himself. We see titles such as Son of Man (Ezekiel) Son of David (Solomon) see where I'm going with this right? You mean Gabriel right? I'm sure you know that though. The teachings of Jesus separated from Judaism off break. Ever custom that was done before was replaced with Jesus. That's not Judaism brother. You can't say Jesus was a Jew but he say ye not be circumcised it means nothing. You can't say Jesus was a Jew when the old testament God forbade any work on the Sabbath as even the creator rested but Jesus broke that too not because it was right but because of Jewish leaders who did not abide by the rules as well. You can't say Jesus is Jewish when he replaces the passover lamb with himself. The very customs that makes someone Jewish he shunned. So ministry had to do with having a oneness with the creator. He basically viewed the religion is many regards as paganism. Furthermore in the Quran it states
Sura Al-An'am 6:83And this was Our argument which we gave to Ibrahim(ABRAHAM) against his people; We exalt in dignity whom We please; surely your Lord is Wise, Knowing.
84 And We gave to him Ishaq(ISSAC) and Yaqoub(JACOB); each did We guide, and Nuh did We guide before, and of his descendants, Dawood(DAVID) and Sulaiman(SOLOMON) and Ayub(JOB) and Yusuf(MOSES) and Haroun(AARON); and thus do We reward those who do good (to others). 85 and Zakariya and Yahya(JOHN) and Isa(JESUS) and Ilyas(ELIAS); every one was of the good; 86 And Ismail and Al-Yasha(ELISHA) and Yunus(JONAS) and Lut(LOT); and every one We made to excel (in) the worlds:
87And from among their fathers and their descendants and their brethren, and We chose them and guided them into the right way. So using your method I gather Muslims are Jewish and Christian but ushered in a new way too right ? Using the Quran as the basis of defending an argument you have made to a Christian is a waste of time. As I am not a Muslim, the words of the Quran mean nothing to me. The same would hold true for someone who is not a Christian. I would not expect you to agree with my beliefs or interpretations because it's already quite evident that you don't or else you would be a Christian. However, many Muslims do claim that the Quran was given to the world through Muhammad because the other religions were corrupt, and they feel that Islam is the truth. Jesus was a Jew from birth, however, as I stated he was sent by God because the religion had become corrupt. The Jews were so caught up in tradition and their so-called laws that they were not focused on the true work of God. Therefore, Jesus was sent to teach them the error of their ways. Pointing out flaws in traditions/customs does not mean that he was not a Jew. There are certain traditions in Christianity that I do not agree with or abide by, but I am still a Christian. Jesus' intention was not to form a new religion, it was to open the eyes of his fellow Jews (the leaders, specifically) to the errors in their interpretations of law. Much as there are different denominations within Christianity, and even in Islam, Jesus was introducing a new form of Judaism. It was not until later, after the crucifixion, that it became a completely separate religion altogether. |
|
|
|
Post by frozenmenace on May 27, 2010 14:00:08 GMT -5
It's true Frozen. And I find it to be true of MANY denoms. Folks were raised in the denom. They think they know it all, but they have no idea. Now my original pastor had a Ph.D. So he was big on educating ourselves on doctrine and the word even from childhood. We had youth bible school, youth sunday school and youth church. We were learned in what we were believe! That was such a blessing I did not com eto understand until adulthood. Many churches do not encourage their members to study fully on their own. In regards to ECLA you can expound Frozen. I have not joined them yet. My hubby was raised ELCA and left the church. lol So I have heard ALOT about their ways. I've seen some with my own eyes (wee got married in ELCA and under an ELCA pastor's leadership). I have done much studying. There is one or two things I am not totally comfortable with which is why I have not made the official move forward. NOW IS THE TIME FROZEN! Share please. Thanks. I have just noticed that they seem to see themselves as the true Christians and that the other denominations are way off. They seem to be very steeped in tradition and ritual. I do, however, like that they require seminary education (Master of Divinity degree) as a prerequisite for ordination. If a person has been called to ministry by God, then they should not mind having to go to school and Study. After all, the Bible does say "Study to show thyself approved." |
|
{=}http://s2.images.proboards.com/cool.gif{/=}
