29 May 09
Originally posted by BadwaterYeah, but ancient Jews were also quite fond of slavery, and very few modern Christians endorse slavery.
It had better be ok by them - the ancient Jews were quite fond of numerology so an understanding of that is essential in trying to read passages of the Old Testament exegetically.
30 May 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasthat term-'christianity'...its just going to cause more problems
Isn't numerology a belief that there are magical interpretation of numbers? Isn't this against the essence of christianity?
i like jesus an all but i dont profess to be a christian.
too many problems.
good question but what sort of christians are you referring to?
30 May 09
Originally posted by karoly aczelI am in the same boat you are. "christians","christianity" are such broad terms. So many sects and denominations w/varying degrees of belief. They have one central belief ,Jesus the Christ. After that its a mess of religiosity . Laws,by-laws, restrictions,etc. Some,its ok to drink in moderation,others its not.With some,dancing,rock music,playing cards,dice,movies,is all of the devil. Others its not. Speaking in tongues,faith healing,etc is for today,others no.Rapture,no rapture.Confess sins to a priest for some. Others, absolutely not. Literal belief in all what the Bible says verbatim for some. They all are classified or claim to be "christian" I am sure some would say numerology is evil. LOL. The big problem started when they made a religion out of what was never intended to be a new religion.
that term-'christianity'...its just going to cause more problems
i like jesus an all but i dont profess to be a christian.
too many problems.
good question but what sort of christians are you referring to?
30 May 09
Originally posted by utherpendragonwhy was it never intended to be a new religion? have you never read the passages
I am in the same boat you are. "christians","christianity" are such broad terms. So many sects and denominations w/varying degrees of belief. They have one central belief ,Jesus the Christ. After that its a mess of religiosity . Laws,by-laws, restrictions,etc. Some,its ok to drink in moderation,others its not.With some,dancing,rock music,playing card ...[text shortened]... lem started when they made a religion out of what was never intended to be a new religion.
But days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day. Nobody sews a patch of unshrunk cloth upon an old outer garment; if he does, its full strength pulls from it, the new from the old, and the tear becomes worse. Also, nobody puts new wine into old wineskins; if he does, the wine bursts the skins, and the wine is lost as well as the skins. But people put new wine into new wineskins.”
also
The woman said to him: “Sir, I perceive you are a prophet. Our forefathers worshiped in this mountain; but you people say that in Jerusalem is the place where persons ought to worship.” Jesus said to her: “Believe me, woman, The hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you people worship the Father ...........Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshipers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for, indeed, the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him. God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth.
and finally
Do not think I came to put peace upon the earth; I came to put, not peace, but a sword. For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a young wife against her mother-in-law. Indeed, a mans enemies will be persons of his own household.
therefore do you not think that it is apparent that Christ really did mean to start something entirely knew form the aforementioned passages?
30 May 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieA brief study of the etymology of our English word "religion" will reveal that we might not want to allow the word "religion" to be associated with Christianity. There are several Latin words which may have served as the origin of our English word "religion." The Latin word religo meant "to tie or fasten."18 A similar word, religio, was used to refer to "respect, devotion or superstition."19 Religio was a recognition that men are often tied or bound to God in reverence or devotion. It can also convey the meaning of being bound or tied to a set of rules and regulations, to rituals of devotion, to a creedal belief-system, or to a cause, ideology, or routine. Some have suggested that "religion" may be derived from the Latin word relegere, which refers to re-reading. There is no doubt that "religion" is often associated with repetitious rites of liturgy and litany, and the reproduction of creedal formulas and expressions. Most etymologists, however, regard the English word "religion" to be derived from the Latin word religare which is closely aligned with the root word religo. 20 The prefix re- means "back" or "again," and the word ligare refers to "binding, tying or attaching." Other English words such as "ligature," referring to "something that is used to bind," and "ligament" which "binds things together," evidence the same root in the Latin word ligare. The Latin word religare, from which our English word "religion" is most likely derived, meant "to tie back" or "to bind up."
why was it never intended to be a new religion? have you never read the passages
But days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in that day. Nobody sews a patch of unshrunk cloth upon an old outer garment; if he does, its full strength pulls from it, the new from the old, and the tear becomes worse. ...[text shortened]... t that Christ really did mean to start something entirely knew form the aforementioned passages?
The purpose of Jesus' coming was not to "bind us" or "tie us" to anything or anyone, though it might be argued that in the reception of Jesus Christ by faith there is a spiritual attachment of our identity with Him. Jesus clearly indicates that He came to set us free free to be functional humanity in the fullest sense, by allowing God to function through us to His glory. To some believing Jews, Jesus explained that "you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32). Further explanation of the personification of that "truth" in Himself was then made when Jesus said, "If therefore the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed." To the Galatians Paul affirms that, "It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery" by reverting back to the bondage of Jewish religion (Gal. 5:1). "You were called to freedom, brethren" (Gal. 5:13), Paul exclaims. "Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (II Cor. 3:17).
Jesus did not say, "I came that you might have religion, and practice it more faithfully," or "I came that you might have religion, and adhere to it more commitedly," or "I came that you might have religion, and define it more dogmatically," or "I came that you might have religion, and defend it more vehemently," or "I came that you might have religion, and thus behave more morally." What Jesus said was, "I came that you might have life, and have it more abundantly" (John 10:10). The life that He came to bring and express within us and through us is His life. "I AM the way, the truth and the life," declared Jesus to His disciples (John 14:6). The apostle John wrote that "He that has the Son has life; he that does not have the Son does not have life" (I John 5:12). "Christ is our life," is the phrase Paul uses in writing to the Colossians (Col. 3:4), for Christianity is not "religion," but the life of Jesus Christ expressed in receptive humanity.
30 May 09
Originally posted by utherpendragonyes quite, but you have still not explained why he was not developing anything knew, but simply imply that, because of certain connotations of the word religion and its etymological values (if that is not proper phrase it should be!), that he may have had something else in mind, which , to be honest, is tenuous to say the least. i was just interested in what basis you have for asserting that he was not intent, on starting something entirely knew, for from his own teachings, its seems apparent, that he evidently had something much more far reaching and profound in mind, than a mere formality of worship.
A brief study of the etymology of our English word "religion" will reveal that we might not want to allow the word "religion" to be associated with Christianity. There are several Latin words which may have served as the origin of our English word "religion." The Latin word religo meant "to tie or fasten."18 A similar word, religio, was used to refer ...[text shortened]... in receptive humanity.
30 May 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobiein a nut shell ,not to start a new religion as I said. But, to free "us" from that in order to truly know God.It is a new way of life a new way of thinking, of being. It was his "followers" decades then centuries later formed the religion of christianity . At first these christians were still jewish but a sect of judeism.Paul started bringing it to the gentiles . In the first century especially ,there was fierce competition among these groups of followers.A great division. Who was right or wrong .What Jesus said or didnt say. There were many gospels as I am sure you are aware of and "apoostles" w/differnt slants on what the Lord meant and said.Eventually a need arose to consolidate these epistles and teachings that were in line w/the way the powers that be felt .Hence,the new testament. The new religion of christianity was well on its way now. Sorry for rambling on a bit there.But,thats how the religion came to be.Not Jesus saying to himself 'I think I will start a new religion" In his teachings you will see very clearly his disdain for the religiosity of the day
yes quite, but you have still not explained why he was not developing anything knew, but simply imply that, because of certain connotations of the word religion and its etymological values (if that is not proper phrase it should be!), that he may have had something else in mind, which , to be honest, is tenuous to say the least. i was just interes ...[text shortened]... tly had something much more far reaching and profound in mind, than a mere formality of worship.
31 May 09
Originally posted by utherpendragonok, yes, now i understand.
in a nut shell ,not to start a new religion as I said. But, to free "us" from that in order to truly know God.It is a new way of life a new way of thinking, of being. It was his "followers" decades then centuries later formed the religion of christianity . At first these christians were still jewish but a sect of judeism.Paul started bringing it to th ...[text shortened]... n" In his teachings you will see very clearly his disdain for the religiosity of the day