Thread: Some of my recent observations on Christianity

okay, jesus isn't contradicting moses. the law was given to point out that we all fall short of what GOD expects and that we all deserve to be cast away from his presence. that's why jesus was sent. to fulfill the requirements that we cannot. if you break one little part of the law...you are guilty. however, jesus did what GOD required of us to reach him and by having faith in him we are declared innocent and spotless before GOD. what he means by these are the two greatest commandments is that if you follow those two....you won't break any of the rest.
as far as religious people....they are the ones who crucified him. it was the religious leaders that had changed and manipulated the laws of GOD and put heavy burdens on people's backs that they themselves didn't follow. so yes, many of the people who are religious today or are the religious leaders of today would be the first to crucify him if he had come now instead of 2000 years ago.
if you read...the only people he condemned were the pharisees (religious leaders) and he embraced the sinners. he didn't tell sinners to keep on sinning...but he didn't call them a brood of vipers either. he went after the corrupt high priest and all who were in his circle of power. i could go on and on....

Originally Posted by johnny861

and I'd have to say, Jesus would be appalled over church goers and churches today...

Let me tell you why this is overbroad and presumptuous to say.

1) You collectivize all church goers into this monolithic group that is amorphously "bad" (or rather appalling)

2) You claim to know what Jesus would think

I think you have an innaccruate view of Christianity that may stem from a variety of sources - I'm not saying you've misread what you've seen. I'm saying that if you've accurately reported what you've seen then you've not seen real faith organizations. And secondly, I'm sure we've no debate that none of us know catagorically what Christ would find appaling.

Originally Posted by johnny861

It's interesting what Christians and non-Christians mis-quote. People seem to reference the old testament when they either poke fun at Christianity or use it for their ideological initiatives.

Surely people reference scripture to support their point (whatever that point may be). Whether they've interpretted the text correctly or not is subject to debate.

Originally Posted by johnny861

But in the new testament, Jesus is quoted in all the gospel books as making the distinctions between the laws of moses (the old testament) and what his philoshophy is, making statements such as "moses says this, but I say this..." etc...

Like the 10 commandments for example. Moses says all 10 commandments are equally important, but Jesus says there are two commandments that are more important than the rest.

The decalogue was not invalidated by the NT.

If anything, Jesus asked more. He asked that we not only obey the law of Moses but do it with love in our hearts and do it in the face of those who would oppress, ridicule and humiliate us. Pretty high standard. I can't do it. Not even close. I'd like to think I try - and sometimes have successes but - generally - like everybody else - I'm pretty bad at it.

So, what was your point again?

It's interesting what Christians and non-Christians mis-quote. People seem to reference the old testament when they either poke fun at Christianity or use it for their ideological initiatives.

That is interesting isn't it? I find far too much importance being placed on the old testament in certain denominations. Let us not forget we are "CHRISTIANS." I'm not saying Jews are wrong but the people of the time certainly felt there was a need to make a distinction. A great number of early Christians rejected the old testament while embracing the teachings of the Christo. Were they right in doing this? I don't know if its my place to say. Nontheless there were great flaws in Jewish law, the early Christians saw this. This is one of the many problems that arises when interpreting the bible as a literalist. There's a great deal of allegory to be taken out of the old testament but that will almost always be hidden to the literalist. How many more contradictions must continually arise in the christian faith? It takes far more than paying attention on sunday to embrace christ.

okay, jesus isn't contradicting moses

Christ was the pinacle of a new ideology that countered the old. I'm not saying that its right to dismiss the 10 commandments because of this or he's telling you to do so. He did contradict Moses in MANY accounts though.

the law was given to point out that we all fall short of what GOD expects and that we all deserve to be cast away from his presence.

Doesn't sound very inspiring to me nor a very hopefull way for the father to view his children. In fact to deny a race who carry the seed of the divine their potential, sounds more like selfishness or fear.

Originally Posted by Xian

If anything, Jesus asked more. He asked that we not only obey the law of Moses but do it with love in our hearts and do it in the face of those who would oppress, ridicule and humiliate us.

I'm much happier with this answer. Thanks Xian

Originally Posted by Keith P

Nontheless there were great flaws in Jewish law, the early Christians saw this. This is one of the many problems that arises when interpreting the bible as a literalist.

I'll say it for you if you don't mind. Literalists, especially Christians with no background in Hebrew or Jewish scholarship are just plain stupid if they're literalists and worthy of being disregarded... regardless of the intensity of their incorrect convictions. (If I mispoke for you - apologies)

Originally Posted by Keith P

It takes far more than paying attention on sunday to embrace christ.

Indeed - attendance on Sunday may be the least of those things. However, community is important.

Originally Posted by Keith P

In many ways he was. Christ was the pinacle of a new ideology that countered the old.

He was a new covenant - a new deal - a new agreement - - that doesn't abrogate the old - it supplements - many of us believe that it was merely an addition but where there are contradictions... the new stuff holds.

Originally Posted by Keith P

I'm much happier with this answer. Thanks Xian

always happy to accept a compliment - and - quite happy discussing this topic with you Keith - I always take new and intereting things away from them..... so - thank you Keith

Originally Posted by Xian

He was a new covenant - a new deal - a new agreement - - that doesn't abrogate the old - it supplements - many of us believe that it was merely an addition but where there are contradictions... the new stuff holds.

To accept those contradictions rather than formulate an apologetic answer seems to be far more logical. Nor am I saying there is anything wrong in accepting Christian thought as "an addition" to Jewish theology. But to not make the distinction, to seek loopholes for every argument that might prove the word of God infallable....

I just don't get that. How then does one distinguish themselves as a Christian?
This Jesus character was certainly a revolutionary. Why try to tame him?

*These are general questions. I agree with what you wrote given the context to which we're discussing this matter.

Keith I promise I have wonderful response being held up and killed in another browser window about to crash....arrgghh maddening I tells ya!

Originally Posted by Keith P

To accept those contradictions rather than formulate an apologetic answer seems to be far more logical. Nor am I saying there is anything wrong in accepting Christian thought as "an addition" to Jewish theology. But to not make the distinction, to seek loopholes for every argument that might prove the word of God infallable....

I just don't get that. How then does one distinguish themselves as a Christian?
This Jesus character was certainly a revolutionary. Why try to tame him?

First, there are no loopholes. Though we do try to create them.... sometimes we convince ourselves that we;ve done so successfully.... we're unaware of those. (god knows better)

Christian thought is an addition. I am a Christian. Where Christian rules and Jewish rules are in conflict - I adhere to Christian rules. That's a matter of faith. I believe it.

There are many more opportunities for rules to fall next to one another - rather than against one another. Which, I think, may be what you were talking about in acceptng contradiction.

Contradiction is a necessary element to accept if one accepts Christianity. Contradiction not necessarily becuase that is ultimately true - but more likely because we can't figure out the distinction or have done so in error.

The fact is that uncertainty pervails Christianity. There are few things certain. It is simply those remarkable few that are, that count. It is enough to believe in them.

The rest - well - that's us getting greedy and demanding that satisfaction of our intellects - an unfair demand - but some do acheive greater elements of clarity... become closer to fine

Originally Posted by Xian

Christian thought is an addition. I am a Christian. Where Christian rules and Jewish rules are in conflict - I adhere to Christian rules. That's a matter of faith. I believe it.

Ah, we're back to our old discussion. I'm very much in agreeance with you on this, but is it merely an addition to Judaism or a conglomerate of ancient wisdom? There are certain parts in the link I'm going to provide I take great issue with. But just to add some fuel to the fire...

http://jewishencyclopedia.com/view.j...rch=gnosticism

Originally Posted by xian

The rest - well - that's us getting greedy and demanding that satisfaction of our intellects - an unfair demand - but some do acheive greater elements of clarity... become closer to fine

You'll get a lukewarm response from me on that point. As you know I feel knowledge and our search for the divine go hand in hand. I will agree with you that certain things must ultimately be taken in "faith", but those greater moments of clarity can be reached by a larger number than the few.

Originally Posted by Keith P

Ah, we're back to our old discussion. I'm very much in agreeance with you on this, but is it merely an addition to Judaism or a conglomerate of ancient wisdom? There are certain parts in the link I'm going to provide I take great issue with. But just to add some fuel to the fire...

http://jewishencyclopedia.com/view.j...rch=gnosticism



You'll get a lukewarm response from me on that point. As you know I feel knowledge and our search for the divine go hand in hand. I will agree with you that certain things must ultimately be taken in "faith", but those greater moments of clarity can be reached by a larger number than the few.

as for the last part - didn't mean that the struggle wasn't worth it

far from it - greed in that sense it ok - its in expecting satisfaction for our purposes that we'll go wanting

seeking more, greater understanding is important and to be encouraged

Originally Posted by xian

as for the last part - didn't mean that the struggle wasn't worth it

far from it - greed in that sense it ok - its in expecting satisfaction for our purposes that we'll go wanting

seeking more, greater understanding is important and to be encouraged

What denomination do you belong to again Xian? Could u provide a link with info if possible?

Originally Posted by E-Nice

what are the two commandments you speak of?

love the LORD your GOD with all your heart, mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself. he says all the laws are summed up in those two commandments.

Originally Posted by Keith P

What denomination do you belong to again Xian? Could u provide a link with info if possible?

I'm Lutheran


this is generally accurate (I didn't read it with a fine tootherd comb - but it seemed clear and accurate)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutheran

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther%27s_Large_Catechism

essentially - "catholic light" - but there are 3 main branches or Synods.... Wisconsin, MIssouri and ELCA - I'm ELCA the most liberal. WI is like catholicism... only stricter