A question on the hypocricies of religion

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by kerc:
You can be short but do not have to look puny and weak, or pale. See what I mean? It degrades him in a certain way.

I agree, Kerc. However, I personally don't mind representing him as a baby at Christmas, because that futher symbolizes the human aspect of him.

 

[melon]

Degradation is in the eye of the beholder. While you may call it "puny" or "weak," I see it as humanized, and I often think that is why it was done to begin with.

But you can't please everyone. The Pharisees were looking for a strong warrior to vanquish their enemies and to elevate them to a powerful kingdom, but Jesus was very much a disappointment to them. That, however, doesn't negate His magnificence.

Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[]{arao]{e]

Has everyone noticed MELON'S homepage??? Just click on the question mark by the date and time of his messages.

I totally get your point, kerc

 

[melon]

Originally posted by ]{arao]{e:
Has everyone noticed MELON'S homepage??? Just click on the question mark by the date and time of his messages.

It's an SNL reference, BTW.

Melon



------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[Spiral_Staircase]

Originally posted by melon:
Of course, without Jesus, in my opinion, the cross is meaningless.

Originally posted by melon:
The Pharisees were looking for a strong warrior to vanquish their enemies and to elevate them to a powerful kingdom, but Jesus was very much a disappointment to them. That, however, doesn't negate His magnificence.

good answer....melon, like it or not, I think you're bordering on evangelism!


[This message has been edited by Spiral_Staircase (edited 09-06-2001).]

 

[Trash Can]

ok... "Jesus-like" was probably the wrong way to put it.
"Good and holy" life???????

See, I'm not a scholar. They deacon that I've learned this from IS. I'll have to get back with him and get the details.

Oh! As for the "cross vs. crucifix" deal. I agree... The cross SHOULD be displayed!
After all... THAT IS the "Good News".
The Resurrection! The empty cross symbolizes it.
You know, MANY changes were made during "Vatican II" , THIRTY years ago... Thing is, many of these changes have NOT been followed ( Its like pulling teeth, with these stubborn old-time Catholics, I tells ya!... At least we got rid of the Latin)
The cross to replace the crucifix WAS suggested. So was the absense of all statues from churches (to take care of the whole "idolitry" issue, I guess), plus many other changes... that I cant remember right now

We Catholics ARE behind in the times. NO doubt about that! You can find MANY priests and Church folk who are not "ashamed" to say so. We are trying to catch up... We even admit now that, in fact, the sun DOES NOT revolve around the earth!

AND, there is the whole other issue of "salvation". What constitutes it. "How do I get to Heaven!?"

Catholics have been stuck on the "good works" deal for ages. We even seem to neglect the TRUE fact that salvation can only come from accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour.
See, I believe that "accepting" is much much more than just saying, "ok, Jesus... I'm in!"
Actions speak louder than words.
As St. Francis of Assisi said "Preach the Gospel at all times. If necessary... use words."
By saying Yes to Jesus, I also say Yes to good works, because it IS all entwined in the whole deal! Heck, I can't help but want to help!
For me, salvation is an every day process. God saves me... every single day!

I AM truely blessed and oh soooo thankful!

Can I get an "Amen!"???

Peace

------------------
My love for you
It's in the things I do and say
If I wanna live I gotta
Die to myself someday.
Surrender.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by Trash Can:
I AM truely blessed and oh soooo thankful!

Can I get an "Amen!"???

Peace

TC, I'll AMEN ya!!!
I am truly blessed, also. In fact, I have dubbed myself the most blessed man in the world. And that of course, is not a boast, but a testimony to the grace and mercy of God!
I'll AMEN ya bout the works things, also. The Bible says that Christians will show fruit. So, good works is a natural output of being a Christian. I think that if a person truly believes in the Lord, those good works will come as a result of being a "new creation" in God, not that we have to force ourselves to be good, in order to please God. When we accept him, and his spirit takes residence in us, he kicks the old man out, and we have a new nature, the nature of Christ, and with that nature comes another gift, the holiness of God, for "our righteousness is as dirty rags".

 

[]{arao]{e]

Jesus called the Jewish spiritual leaders hypocrites because they were more concerned with money and notoriety than people (poor people especially). That was their job, to help people spiritually by teaching them the law and living by it (Leviticus).

So, if you are using the bible (i.e. Jesus Christ) to determine hypocrisy in today's religious bodies, then it's easy to see who are hyprocrites. It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a deacon of a church to determine hyprocrisy. Even a 5 year old can see that his/her parents don't always do as they say. Therefore the churches have warped the Bible's meaning/teaching to fit their own actions.

The cross has symbolized many things besides the sacrifice of Jesus. Before Jesus came along the cross was a religious symbol in Egypt (the ankh). So, the cross is associated with pagan worship and not really Jesus.

Another fact being that Jesus didn't even die on a literal cross. According to the King James Bible, Jesus was "impaled" by the Romans on a "tree". NOWHERE in the bible does it say that Jesus was crucified on a cross. You don't have to take my word for it. Go look in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John yourself and see.

Oh, one more thing about idol worship. It's carving or making things to represent God. According to Exodus 20:4, God's law stated exactly what His worshippers should NOT do.
Jesus never went along with any idol worship.

 

[melon]

Originally posted by ]{arao]{e:
Jesus called the Jewish spiritual leaders hypocrites because they were more concerned with money and notoriety than people (poor people especially). That was their job, to help people spiritually by teaching them the law and living by it (Leviticus).

Well, that surely reminds me of a lot of Christians today. All you have to see are televangelists, the fundamentalist revivals of the 1920s and 1980s (with a belief that poverty is predestined and wealth is a sign of God 'blessing you'). However, it was not just that that Jesus condemned; it was their very essentialist, restrictive, and exclusionist nature regarding people around them. Jesus constantly flaunted the Mosaic Law, hanging with lepers and prostitutes, protecting adulterers from getting executed, and even rejecting a contentious issue even today: the idea of "an eye for an eye." But it's funny. Conservative Christians tend to overlook all this.

St. Paul very much took notice of this part of Jesus, and at the Council of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 fought against the Church of Jerusalem, led by St. Peter and St. James traditionally, to abolish the Mosaic Law, as he saw Jesus as the replacement of the Mosaic Law. The gospel of Matthew, which conservatives often use to support continued use of oppressive Mosaic Law, was a direct book from the Jewish-minded Church of Jerusalem, and was part of a sect that believed you had to become Jewish before Christian. As Christianity is very much the actualization of the St. Paul's Church of Antioch, you have to take Matthew with caution.

So, if you are using the bible (i.e. Jesus Christ) to determine hypocrisy in today's religious bodies, then it's easy to see who are hyprocrites. It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a deacon of a church to determine hyprocrisy. Even a 5 year old can see that his/her parents don't always do as they say. Therefore the churches have warped the Bible's meaning/teaching to fit their own actions.

Yes, it is very easy to see who the hypocrites are.

The cross has symbolized many things besides the sacrifice of Jesus. Before Jesus came along the cross was a religious symbol in Egypt (the ankh). So, the cross is associated with pagan worship and not really Jesus.

Another fact being that Jesus didn't even die on a literal cross. According to the King James Bible, Jesus was "impaled" by the Romans on a "tree". NOWHERE in the bible does it say that Jesus was crucified on a cross. You don't have to take my word for it. Go look in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John yourself and see.

Once again, this is a classic case of essentialism. Does it matter after all? So Jesus dies on a cross and resurrects or Jesus dies on a tree and resurrects. Big whoop. The importance is on the resurrection and salvation, not the method of his death. Also, I take the KJV with a grain of salt. The mistranslations are so deep and there are so many that it makes many Hebrew/ancient Greek scholars cringe.

Once again, even if the origins of the cross were pagan (which I disagree with), so what? In the early Church, they often built churches on top of pagan temples almost as a symbol of conquest; that Jesus triumphs over "evil." Of course, conservative Christians, as usual, have now flip-flopped, acting as if paganism is infiltrating Christianity. Once again, it is an unintended meaning.

Oh, one more thing about idol worship. It's carving or making things to represent God. According to Exodus 20:4, God's law stated exactly what His worshippers should NOT do.
Jesus never went along with any idol worship.

You treat God as a dim-witted blind-deaf-mute. God knows the intentions of his followers, and he will know that it is not "idol worship." Once again, I don't care what Exodus says. The writers of Exodus did not write this to apply to today, but rather to people creating statues of false gods. Not once is anyone in the Bible condemned for making an image of God or any Judeo-Christian figure. You are putting in meaning that it not intended.

And speaking of meanings put into the Bible that were unintended, most of the books written make no claim of being divine or being written by God. They make no claim of being intended to be put in a collection of books we call the "Bible." Yet, man decided to put this divinity into this book, and say it came from God.

You won't want me to get started on the "hypocrisy" of Jehovah's Witnesses, but the difference is that I don't think that the semantical differences matter as much as they seem to affect you. And I have read up on Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs, knowing full well that most of the statements you have made are beliefs pretty much exclusive to Jehovah's Witnesses. I will be kind, however, and not attack a specific religion, as that is not my nature.

No offense, but I think you have the focus all wrong.

Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

[This message has been edited by melon (edited 09-08-2001).]

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by ]{arao]{e:
The cross has symbolized many things besides the sacrifice of Jesus. Before Jesus came along the cross was a religious symbol in Egypt (the ankh). So, the cross is associated with pagan worship and not really Jesus.

Another fact being that Jesus didn't even die on a literal cross. According to the King James Bible, Jesus was "impaled" by the Romans on a "tree". NOWHERE in the bible does it say that Jesus was crucified on a cross. You don't have to take my word for it. Go look in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John yourself and see.

The Ankh is not the same shape as the Christian cross.

Not only was crucifixion on trees AND crosses the "execution of choice" for Romans in those days, the Bible does indeed specifically use the word "cross" many times in referring to the cruicifixion of Christ. And indeed, several are even from the Gospels.
Matt 27:32 (Simon of Cyrene carrying Jesus' cross. He didn't carry a "tree")
Matt 27:40 ("...If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross...")
John 19:17,25
1 Cor. 1:17, 18
Gal 6:14
Phil 2:8
Phil 3:18
Heb 12:2

And these are not all of them. The places it refers to it as a "tree", it does so because crosses are made from trees.

 

[melon]

80s, be aware that Jehovah's Witnesses carry beliefs that are widely different from mainstream Christianity, including the belief that Jesus did not die on a cross. I figured this out after writing what I wrote, which does make what karaoke said a lot of sense from that perspective.

I will not get into a discussion regarding a particular denomination in this thread, as I do not wish to pass judgment on a particular sect here, and if you wish to learn more about their specific beliefs, there are plenty of websites--both positive and negative to JW's--that can help you out if you so wish.

Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by melon:
80s, be aware that Jehovah's Witnesses carry beliefs that are widely different from mainstream Christianity, including the belief that Jesus did not die on a cross. I figured this out after writing what I wrote, which does make what karaoke said a lot of sense from that perspective.
Melon

Thanks for cluing me in, Melon. I didn't know karaoke was a JW. I also didn't know that JWs don't believe Jesus died on a cross, even though that's one of the 3 religions (besides my own, of course) that I spent the most time studying (Islam and Mormonism were the others.) I guess we can learn something new each day, eh?
Oh well, that was the first time that I had ever heard anyone claim that the Bible doesn't mention the word "cross".

 

[]{arao]{e]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
Matt 27:32
Matt 27:40 ("...If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross...")
John 19:17,25
1 Cor. 1:17, 18
Gal 6:14
Phil 2:8
Phil 3:18
Heb 12:2

The Greek word rendered "cross" in many modern Bible versions ("torture stake" in NW) is stau?ros'. In classical Greek, this word meant merely an upright stake, or pale. Later it also came to be used for an execution stake having a crosspiece. The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: "The Greek word for cross, [stau?ros'], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. . . . Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole."-Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376.
Was that the case in connection with the execution of God's Son? It is noteworthy that the Bible also uses the word xy'lon to identify the device used. A Greek-English Lexicon, by Liddell and Scott, defines this as meaning: "Wood cut and ready for use, firewood, timber, etc. . . . piece of wood, log, beam, post . . . cudgel, club . . . stake on which criminals were impaled . . . of live wood, tree." It also says "in NT, of the cross," and cites Acts 5:30 and <G<?>G>Ac <G<?>G>10:39 as examples. (Oxford, 1968, pp. 1191, 1192) However, in those verses KJ, RS, JB, and Dy translate xy'lon as "tree." (Compare this rendering with Galatians 3:13; Deuteronomy 21:22, 23.)
The book The Non-Christian Cross, by J. D. Parsons (London, 1896), says: "There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . It is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as 'cross' when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting 'cross' in our lexicons as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles, did not become its primary signification till long afterwards, and became so then, if at all, only because, despite the absence of corroborative evidence, it was for some reason or other assumed that the particular stauros upon which Jesus was executed had that particular shape."-Pp. 23, 24; see also The Companion Bible (London, 1885), Appendix No. 162.
Thus the weight of the evidence indicates that Jesus died on an upright stake and not on the traditional cross.**

**These words were taken from the book ?Reasoning from the Scriptures? Published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, INC., International Bible Students Associaton, Brooklyn, New York, U.S.A.

When I found this out for myself, it made me feel that the Bible can be trusted when it is properly translated. Therefore, I have more trust in the Bible as a whole and I enjoy reading more now that I understand how people lived when it was written.

80su2isbest, I hope this helps clarify my blunt statement.
Thank you Melon for your previous words.




[This message has been edited by ]{arao]{e (edited 09-12-2001).]