Zone1 Sir Lionel Luckhoo

[ding]

Ebionites are one example.

When were they a thing? Do you know?

 

[alang1216]

When were they a thing? Do you know?

The dates are fuzzy but I'd say from a few decades after Jesus to 400 AD.

 

[ding]

The dates are fuzzy but I'd say from a few decades after Jesus to 400 AD.

So not the ones who worshipped Jesus as God immediately after his resurrection?

 

[alang1216]

So not the ones who worshipped Jesus as God immediately after his resurrection?

No, the Christians who didn't worship Jesus as God immediately after his resurrection.

From your link:

While some accounts suggest that early Christians didn't directly worship Jesus as God in the same way they worshiped the Father, the concept of Jesus as God, or the divine Son of God, was a developing understanding that emerged and solidified over time. The New Testament contains passages that show Jesus being honored and worshiped, alongside the Father, and the idea of Jesus as God, as part of the Trinity, became more widespread with the development of Christian theology.​

 

[ding]

No, the Christians who didn't worship Jesus as God immediately after his resurrection.

From your link:

While some accounts suggest that early Christians didn't directly worship Jesus as God in the same way they worshiped the Father, the concept of Jesus as God, or the divine Son of God, was a developing understanding that emerged and solidified over time. The New Testament contains passages that show Jesus being honored and worshiped, alongside the Father, and the idea of Jesus as God, as part of the Trinity, became more widespread with the development of Christian theology.​

This is pretty simple. Christians worship Jesus as God. That began immediately after the resurrection of Christ and was related to what they witnessed first hand. Anyone who didn't worship Jesus as God isn't a Christian. Christianity arose organically and began with the resurrection of Christ.

 

[alang1216]

This is pretty simple. Christians worship Jesus as God. That began immediately after the resurrection of Christ and was related to what they witnessed first hand. Anyone who didn't worship Jesus as God isn't a Christian. Christianity arose organically and began with the resurrection of Christ.

You can ignore the Christians that did not worship Jesus as God but you can't explain them. Cognitive dissonance writ large.

 

[ding]

You can ignore the Christians that did not worship Jesus as God but you can't explain them. Cognitive dissonance writ large.

They weren't Christians. Christians worship Jesus as God.

 

[Meriweather]

I still have my doubts.

1. Any resurrection would be a miraculous/supernatural event, something that neither I nor anyone I know has ever experienced.
2. Bringing demigods and mortals back from the dead was a staple of the pagan religions that Christians endeavored to convert.
3. The only sources are Christian sources which support the Christian narrative.
4. The Christian sources don't agree on the events either before or after Jesus' death.
5. The Gospels have been altered as they have been copied and recopied. The most significant addition to Mark's Gospel is the longer ending in verses 16:9-20. Most scholars believe this section was not originally part of the gospel, but was added later by scribes to provide a more complete and satisfying ending. The shorter ending, ending at verse 8, is considered the more authentic and original conclusion to Mark's story.

One of CS Lewis' books starts with the idea all humans intrinsically have the same basic morality. Everyone knows what he and others ought to do. No one does what he should do perfectly, and most of us want to be that exception to the rule. We excuse ourselves, and either take offense or shrug off when others break the rule of what we should all be following. This has been a staple of all religions, even pagan religions.

Only humans have this innate command of right and wrong, of fairness. From the beginning of time, while we know fairness, right, and wrong we have not been able to live it. Lewis compares this to a fleet of boats. We know how to treat others, and when we do this well, the entire fleet moves towards its goals. If we are quarrelsome, the fleet is in disarray. If, individually, one does not keep his own boat in the best running condition, it burdens others.

We have to behave rightly to one another; we also have to maintain our personal integrity. Third, what is our goal? That is our relationship to God and eternal life.

I know I have a book stored somewhere that explained the theory that the ending of Mark's gospel was misplace into another gospel. If you're interested, I can try to dig it up.

 

[alang1216]

One of CS Lewis' books starts with the idea all humans intrinsically have the same basic morality.

We don't as evidenced by the enormous differences between cultures. Christians generally help the poor, Hindus consider the poor are being punished for past lives and are much less helpful.

We have to behave rightly to one another; we also have to maintain our personal integrity.

Only as far as our family/kinship/tribe is concerned. In many cultures it is wrong to kill a fellow tribesman but heroic to kill a member of another tribe.

I know I have a book stored somewhere that explained the theory that the ending of Mark's gospel was misplace into another gospel. If you're interested, I can try to dig it up.

Color me skeptical since scholars wouldn't agree.

 

[Meriweather]

I have no doubts that God the the Holy Spirit are real and, by virtue of the strong sense that I have and am experiencing a profound relationship with the Divine, I believe that relationship has never steered me into doing or believing wrongly or caused me to think that I am sinning with my beliefs in what the Bible teaches us.

I do believe many of our interpretations of the Bible are likely not exactly the way it actually was and, when we meet in Heaven, we'll likely be having a good laugh at how much of all that we got wrong.

But nothing made it into the Bible unless it was written by somebody who had witnessed the events or personally knew somebody who had witnessed the events.

We also have several non-Christian sources that confirm many of the events recorded in the Bible.

The essence/principles of the Bible I have to believe have been divinely inspired and protected even if every fact and/or belief we have cannot in the end be confirmed.

Those who do not want to believe Jesus was God/Son of God/Divine, who do not want to believe in the miracles or the fulfilled prophecies or accounts of various people's response to the Christian message have written their own histories and theories and sets of facts and put out their own doctrines that they want to believe instead.

That is their right. But I pray that they come to understand how wrong that is.

Yesterday's Gospel reading was from John 14:

Jesus said to his disciples:
“Whoever loves me will keep my word,
and my Father will love him,
and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him.

We were reminded that God had a dwelling place in the Temple, in the Holy of holies, where once a year one priest was allowed to enter. With Jesus that changed and he taught us that God (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) will dwell in all who loves and keeps the words of Jesus.

I agree with you that many interpretations have differed throughout the centuries. I enjoy reading and contemplating as many of these as I can unearth. Most of them, I believe, contain an element of truth which is enlightening to the whole biblical story.

Our minds and intelligence came from a greater mind. One awe inspiring thought I picked up somewhere along the way is that God, seeing how mankind struggled with achieving goodness, sent his son to give us a human example of someone who could attain that goodness through obedience to the Father, obedience despite horrible times. Jesus showed humans that being fully obedient is possible for mankind. I think in our present day we have lost the beauty of practicing obedience.

 

[Meriweather]

We don't as evidenced by the enormous differences between cultures. Christians generally help the poor, Hindus consider the poor are being punished for past lives and are much less helpful.

You may wish to do further research on the Hinduism and how helping the poor is valued. Some of this may be related to Karma.

Only as far as our family/kinship/tribe is concerned. In many cultures it is wrong to kill a fellow tribesman but heroic to kill a member of another tribe.

You are describing honor killings when a tribe, culture feels threatened by another. I believe you get the point that killing a member of a community is wrong. Some of us feel we live in a greater community, while some see their community as more tight-knit.

Color me skeptical since scholars wouldn't agree.

Except...the book was written by a scholar, and other scholars have come up with similar conclusions. This is based on the idea that many scrolls have both beginning and ending on a page that is wrapped around the entire scroll.

 

[Foxfyre]

Yesterday's Gospel reading was from John 14:

Jesus said to his disciples:
“Whoever loves me will keep my word,
and my Father will love him,
and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him.

We were reminded that God had a dwelling place in the Temple, in the Holy of holies, where once a year one priest was allowed to enter. With Jesus that changed and he taught us that God (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) will dwell in all who loves and keeps the words of Jesus.

I agree with you that many interpretations have differed throughout the centuries. I enjoy reading and contemplating as many of these as I can unearth. Most of them, I believe, contain an element of truth which is enlightening to the whole biblical story.

Our minds and intelligence came from a greater mind. One awe inspiring thought I picked up somewhere along the way is that God, seeing how mankind struggled with achieving goodness, sent his son to give us a human example of someone who could attain that goodness through obedience to the Father, obedience despite horrible times. Jesus showed humans that being fully obedient is possible for mankind. I think in our present day we have lost the beauty of practicing obedience.

But then again, the difficulty comes in what constitutes obedience. Some classify that as say, "Wives, submit to your husbands" (even though they beat you within an inch of your lives from time to time.) There is the dichotomy of give to the one who asks you vs whoever is unwilling to work shall not eat. Etc.

Jesus was very big on critical thinking and common sense and I think by word and example he expected us to utilize both in determining what is 'obedience.'

One of the best Easter sermon's ever was in the movie "Chocolat." Following a tumultuous time in their small village in which the townspeople struggled to keep the Lenten fast while trying to make visiting gypsies perceived as Godless corruptors unwelcome, Pe're Henri had to deliver an unprepared, extemporaneous sermon on Easter morning.

This was it:

 

[Meriweather]

But then again, the difficulty comes in what constitutes obedience. Some classify that as say, "Wives, submit to your husbands" (even though they beat you within an inch of your lives from time to time.) There is the dichotomy of give to the one who asks you vs whoever is unwilling to work shall not eat. Etc.

I was speaking of obedience to God.

 

[Foxfyre]

I was speaking of obedience to God.

So was I.

 

[Foxfyre]

I was speaking of obedience to God.

Let me give you an example.

I was once tasked to be a catalyst/supporter/promoter to put together a Domestic Violence Association for our area. Until we could complete our charter and get the funding for a permanent shelter, we worked with the local police to house battered wives and their children in private homes.

Upon advice of the police, I went with the woman who would be the first director of our association to the local hospital to visit with a woman who had been beaten to a pulp by her husband. Her injuries were quite severe.

She belonged to a fundamentalist church that taught that obedience to God meant that wives must submit to their husbands. For that reason she did not want to file charges.

We managed to convince her that the best way for her to serve God was to get herself and her children away from the monster who beat and terrorized them all. We arranged for a good attorney to meet with her to draw up the official separation papers and we would arrange for her and her children to go to a safe place where he couldn't find them.

Before the attorney got there, her pastor did. And told her that God required her to submit to her husband. She went back to him when she left the hospital.

The following year he put their oldest child in the hospital and beat her to death. He was charged and went to prison. But it was too late for her.

Following rules put down and/or interpreted by humans is sometimes not the way to demonstrate obedience to God.

 

[alang1216]

You may wish to do further research on the Hinduism and how helping the poor is valued. Some of this may be related to Karma.

You are describing honor killings when a tribe, culture feels threatened by another. I believe you get the point that killing a member of a community is wrong. Some of us feel we live in a greater community, while some see their community as more tight-knit.

Except...the book was written by a scholar, and other scholars have come up with similar conclusions. This is based on the idea that many scrolls have both beginning and ending on a page that is wrapped around the entire scroll.

I don't think I have any issues with what you wrote. I am curious about Mark, any information on this issue would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Meriweather]

Let me give you an example.

I was once tasked to be a catalyst/supporter/promoter to put together a Domestic Violence Association for our area. Until we could complete our charter and get the funding for a permanent shelter, we worked with the local police to house battered wives and their children in private homes.

Upon advice of the police, I went with the woman who would be the first director of our association to the local hospital to visit with a woman who had been beaten to a pulp by her husband. Her injuries were quite severe.

She belonged to a fundamentalist church that taught that obedience to God meant that wives must submit to their husbands. For that reason she did not want to file charges.

We managed to convince her that the best way for her to serve God was to get herself and her children away from the monster who beat and terrorized them all. We arranged for a good attorney to meet with her to draw up the official separation papers and we would arrange for her and her children to go to a safe place where he couldn't find them.

Before the attorney got there, her pastor did. And told her that God required her to submit to her husband. She went back to him when she left the hospital.

The following year he put their oldest child in the hospital and beat her to death. He was charged and went to prison. But it was too late for her.

Following rules put down and/or interpreted by humans is sometimes not the way to demonstrate obedience to God.

Two things:

First, was the husband being obedient to God? (No scripture supports this, and one verse tells husbands to love their wives as Christ loves his church.) Second, Paul's community in Ephesus were primarily Greek, and the etymology for the Greek word translated as 'submissive' has the connotation of rank order, denoting greater and lesser responsibilities. Further, as a rule, those in the ranks of greater responsibilities did not beat their troops who had lesser responsibilities.

Finally, violence in any form, towards anyone is a sin. For better and for worse denotes health, income, and family/community relationships each are involved with. It does not include violence against each other.

As for her pastor....I wonder if he often advocated that his parishioners submit to sinful acts, or was that just for wife-beating.

 

[Foxfyre]

Two things:

First, was the husband being obedient to God? (No scripture supports this, and one verse tells husbands to love their wives as Christ loves his church.) Second, Paul's community in Ephesus were primarily Greek, and the etymology for the Greek word translated as 'submissive' has the connotation of rank order, denoting greater and lesser responsibilities. Further, as a rule, those in the ranks of greater responsibilities did not beat their troops who had lesser responsibilities.

Finally, violence in any form, towards anyone is a sin. For better and for worse denotes health, income, and family/community relationships each are involved with. It does not include violence against each other.

As for her pastor....I wonder if he often advocated that his parishioners submit to sinful acts, or was that just for wife-beating.

My point is that however wrong we think somebody might be, he/she may have a very different definition of obedience than we do. Any two of us might disagree on what obedience is. What sin is for that matter. What the scriptures are actually saying and/or how they should be interpreted, etc.

You've heard the old joke that the drought was so bad, the Baptists were baptizing by pouring,
The Catholics were sprinkling
And the Methodists were using a damp rag.

But seriously no Christians believe they are sinning by the form of baptism they use, by the way they observe the elements of communion, by what constitutes a tithe or any number of concepts we might think of as obedience as Christians.

My own view is that if a Christian can love God with all his/her heart, soul and mind and treat others as he/she wants to be treated, we'll probably obey a lot more than we will if we don't do that.

 

[Meriweather]

I don't think I have any issues with what you wrote. I am curious about Mark, any information on this issue would be greatly appreciated.

Grrrr. I can't locate the book I mentioned, having moved around so much over the years. As I recall (hopefully correctly) that the author was arguing that Matthew's concluding verses (16-20) were more in line with Mark's style. Mark's story begins with Jesus commissioning the Apostles and the ending of Matthew's Gospel (15-20) concludes with Jesus again commissioning the Apostles.