Ask anyone today what they believe and inevitably the response given is: "I'm a Catholic. I'm a Baptist. I'm a Charismatic. Or, I attend such and such church."
Interesting enough, this same division among the Christians surfaced in Paul's time. In I Corinthians 3:4-7 JKV - 'For while one sayeth, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollous; are ye not carnal?' (fleshly) Ouch! Right off the bat he tells the believers they're wrong to divide themselves this way.
'Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but the ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man.' Meaning, we're just the messengers.
'I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.'
'So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.'
Again, the messengers are nothing. It's all God. Also, notice how Paul twice says it's God who gives the increase. Anytime the Bible says something twice, it means Pay attention! This is important!
Now, let's got to Acts 2, where it talks about the beginning of Christianity.
Notice some interesting things here.
vs 44 'And all that believed were together, and had all things common;'
Okay, there were not disagreements on what they should believe.
45 'And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, as every man had need'
They made sure no one in their church with needs was ignored. They didn't set up special ministries, as is done today, they sold their own stuff and cared for each other.
46 'And they, continuing daily with one accord (like minded), in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house,(they ate together) did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart.'(happy and united)
Do the Baptists agree with the Catholics? Do the Catholics agree with the Charismatics? And so forth - notice the huge difference here.
47 'Praising God, and having favour with all the people, And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.'
Notice something very important here. Christians had favor with ALL men - meaning the Romans, Jews, and everyone else. Not like today when Christian is dirty word due to intolerance, being unforgiving, thinking the government should concede to religious demands, very visual leaders who get greedy, fall and make God look bad, and in general, a very unloving, self righteous people - who in NO WAY reflect the love of God. No wonder people run from Christianity with such poor examples.
And notice the last - isn't this also what Paul said?
God, not the people, added to the church. Note here it says - daily - not every once in while as it is today.
End conclusion, labels of Chatholic, Baptist, charismatic, need to vanish and be replaced by, "I'm a Christian. I believe in God. Jesus Christ saved me."
Also the 'church' needs to return to the basics as shown in Acts, show God's love, and maybe then, there can be a revival such as has not been seen since those first days.
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Why Not Question: Wiseman and the Star at Christ's birth : Tradition or fact?
There are several things good things about the movie 'The Nativity Story'. One of them is the giving the 'western mind' a better understanding from a cultural standpoint, why Mary's life was in danger because she was pregnant BEFORE she and Joseph were married. Also her visit to her cousin Elizabeth. Something usually left out from pageants and other films.
What is not to like about the film, is the continued support of a couple of traditions that have no historical or Biblical fact.
What are those?
First off, the big bright star in the sky. Experts agree this is not what happened.
In 'The Witness of the Stars' by E.W. Bullinger and the 'The Star' a special presented during the Christmas season on TBN, it is put forth and supported by 'turning back the astronomical sky', that a series of planetary/constellation conjunctions occurred. Something the Magi, who were both astronomers and astrologers would have noticed. They knew, because Daniel and others had been captives in their land and had been told the stories, which must have been passed down, about the coming Christ child God promised to send.
When the Magi reached Herod's palace, the ruler had to have the religious leaders do research to find out what his visitors were talking about. A huge bright star in the sky would have been very easy to spot and no doubt Herod would have acted then and there knowing something was up. The man was clueless.
There's more here historically, but watching 'The Star' will explain several things that will not be covered in the this blog.
Second, the wise men were not at the stable during Christ's birth nor were there just three of them.
The tradition of three no doubt comes from the three gifts given Jesus. The Bible says Magi but does not give any indication on how many there actually were.
The Bible also says the Magi visited Mary and Joseph in a house - not a stable. Therefore, their visit happened sometime after the birth of Christ, and given Herod ordered the killing of all male babies two and under, their visit occurred within one to two years after Jesus' birth.
Though the pretty picture at the end of the film follows TRADITON - Mary and Joseph at the stable, Jesus in the manager, the shepherds, the animals, the wisemen, and the big bright star - it is not all accurate according to Biblical, historical or astronomical records.
What is not to like about the film, is the continued support of a couple of traditions that have no historical or Biblical fact.
What are those?
First off, the big bright star in the sky. Experts agree this is not what happened.
In 'The Witness of the Stars' by E.W. Bullinger and the 'The Star' a special presented during the Christmas season on TBN, it is put forth and supported by 'turning back the astronomical sky', that a series of planetary/constellation conjunctions occurred. Something the Magi, who were both astronomers and astrologers would have noticed. They knew, because Daniel and others had been captives in their land and had been told the stories, which must have been passed down, about the coming Christ child God promised to send.
When the Magi reached Herod's palace, the ruler had to have the religious leaders do research to find out what his visitors were talking about. A huge bright star in the sky would have been very easy to spot and no doubt Herod would have acted then and there knowing something was up. The man was clueless.
There's more here historically, but watching 'The Star' will explain several things that will not be covered in the this blog.
Second, the wise men were not at the stable during Christ's birth nor were there just three of them.
The tradition of three no doubt comes from the three gifts given Jesus. The Bible says Magi but does not give any indication on how many there actually were.
The Bible also says the Magi visited Mary and Joseph in a house - not a stable. Therefore, their visit happened sometime after the birth of Christ, and given Herod ordered the killing of all male babies two and under, their visit occurred within one to two years after Jesus' birth.
Though the pretty picture at the end of the film follows TRADITON - Mary and Joseph at the stable, Jesus in the manager, the shepherds, the animals, the wisemen, and the big bright star - it is not all accurate according to Biblical, historical or astronomical records.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Why Not Question : Why study God's word?
In all the tools and questions being asked, the 'reason' for all this has not been explained from a Biblical perspective.
2 Timothy 2:15 JKV 'Study (to use diligence, make speed)to shew (to set or place near)thyself approved(tested, tried)unto God, a workman (toiler, worker, teacher, labourer)that needth not be ashamed (irreprehensible (meaning implied)), rightly dividing (to cut straight or right) the word (speech, manner, reason, question, intent, of doctrine) of truth (not concealing).'
Basically translated, Read your Bible, do word studies and anything else you need to do to understand God's word, ask questions,and find out yourself what it means. Question the intent of your teacher or pastor, even the writer of this blog, and find the truth under the tradition and myths that have entered Christianity.
2 Timothy 2:15 JKV 'Study (to use diligence, make speed)to shew (to set or place near)thyself approved(tested, tried)unto God, a workman (toiler, worker, teacher, labourer)that needth not be ashamed (irreprehensible (meaning implied)), rightly dividing (to cut straight or right) the word (speech, manner, reason, question, intent, of doctrine) of truth (not concealing).'
Basically translated, Read your Bible, do word studies and anything else you need to do to understand God's word, ask questions,and find out yourself what it means. Question the intent of your teacher or pastor, even the writer of this blog, and find the truth under the tradition and myths that have entered Christianity.
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Why Not Question : Abortion. Is it really murder?
One of the most ignored verses in the Bible deals with the death of an unborn child. There is no doubt that pro lifers quote many others, including one in Psalms by King David and how God knew him in his mother's womb.
However, in Exodus 21:22-23(KJV) another picture is painted under Old Testament Law.
If men strive (quarrel, fight) and hurt (hit) a woman with child, so that her fruit (child) depart (to go out) from her, and yet no mischief (injury) follow: he shall be surely punished (to be avenged), according as the woman's husband will lay (to set) upon him; and he shall pay(to give) as the judges determine.
And if any mischief (injury) follow, then thou shalt give life (breath) for life (breath).
Now, everyone agrees the penalty for murder in those days was death by stoning. Yet note something interesting here. It says 'if her fruit depart from her' meaning, the baby dies, then the offender(s) pays a price as the husband and the judges decide. But if the woman herself dies from whatever injury she incurs, then the offenders are killed themselves. They are not killed for the death of the unborn child, therefore, under Old Testament Law, it was not murder.
However, in Exodus 21:22-23(KJV) another picture is painted under Old Testament Law.
If men strive (quarrel, fight) and hurt (hit) a woman with child, so that her fruit (child) depart (to go out) from her, and yet no mischief (injury) follow: he shall be surely punished (to be avenged), according as the woman's husband will lay (to set) upon him; and he shall pay(to give) as the judges determine.
And if any mischief (injury) follow, then thou shalt give life (breath) for life (breath).
Now, everyone agrees the penalty for murder in those days was death by stoning. Yet note something interesting here. It says 'if her fruit depart from her' meaning, the baby dies, then the offender(s) pays a price as the husband and the judges decide. But if the woman herself dies from whatever injury she incurs, then the offenders are killed themselves. They are not killed for the death of the unborn child, therefore, under Old Testament Law, it was not murder.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Why Not Question : Garlands
Several years ago a very popular Celtic singer had a hit song where it spoke of placing garlands. Oddly enough, this custom is also mentioned in the Bible in Acts 14:13.
Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people. (KJV)
According to 'Manners and Customer of the Bible' by James M. Freeman, it was normal for the cities to build temples to the various God in the suburbs of the cities. The unfortunates who were sacrificed to the god were crowned with garlands of cypress, pine, leaves or flowers. Sometimes they were put on the alters or the priests themselves.
It is also interesting to note that during the Greek Olympics, which is the origins of our current ones, the winners were crowned with a garland of leaves or flowers.
The tradition of garlands is extended into today. Although not publicly used as they were in Paul's day in the city streets for sacrifices, they are used for pagan rituals and handfastings, local Renaissance Fairs, weddings using the theme of the latter often worn by the bride and even the wreaths of pine boughs hung at Christmas on doors or even over the fireplace.
Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people. (KJV)
According to 'Manners and Customer of the Bible' by James M. Freeman, it was normal for the cities to build temples to the various God in the suburbs of the cities. The unfortunates who were sacrificed to the god were crowned with garlands of cypress, pine, leaves or flowers. Sometimes they were put on the alters or the priests themselves.
It is also interesting to note that during the Greek Olympics, which is the origins of our current ones, the winners were crowned with a garland of leaves or flowers.
The tradition of garlands is extended into today. Although not publicly used as they were in Paul's day in the city streets for sacrifices, they are used for pagan rituals and handfastings, local Renaissance Fairs, weddings using the theme of the latter often worn by the bride and even the wreaths of pine boughs hung at Christmas on doors or even over the fireplace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)