|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 11:37:57 AM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
Benelchi,
Thanks for that clarification.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 11:41:10 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3631
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
Benelchi,
Thanks for that clarification.
You welcome.
Note: you were too quick to reply. I think you may have missed the note about my pastor (that I added). It is a good example I think.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 11:46:08 AM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
I went back an read it. I used to attend a Messianic congregation in the 80s. There was a lot more mixture back then than I think there is now. Is that your observation?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 11:48:54 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3631
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
I went back an read it. I used to attend a Messianic congregation in the 80s. There was a lot more mixture back then than I think there is now. Is that your observation?
I still think there is a lot of mixture. but I do see many more non Jews involved today.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 11:59:58 AM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
Is it true that Messianist congregations discourage membership from Gentiles?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 12:07:38 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3631
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
Is it true that Messianist congregations discourage membership from Gentiles?
Many do not, some very extreme ones do, but those are the ones to avoid anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 1:29:32 PM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 4166
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
BTW, Bluethread. Are you a Messianist? If so, would you consider Messianism to be Christianity. 100% of all Messianists I know do not, but consider it a part of Judaism. That's my understanding. You err in believing christianity to be something completly different than Judiasm. It is not. The "sect of the Nazarenes" (Acts 24.5) was a sect of what? From the writings of the day, it was considered a sect of Pharasaic Judaism. That changed in 135ad with the Bar Kochba revolt.
_____________________________
Avatar is DW holding Saphira at her first birthday party and myself holding Louvena at 30 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 1:39:47 PM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 4166
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
This statement is on the verge of being completely heretical... it is completely out of line to suggest that non Messianic Christianity is somehow inferior to Messianic Judaism. I do not say "inferior" at all. That would be like me saying that a Methodist church is inferior to a Presbyterian one. Christianity is the gentile expression of the Messianic faith (belief in Messiah). You DO believe in the Messiah, do you not?
The original church in Jerusalem was VERY Jewish. Read Acts 21.20-26 to see just HOW Jewish they were. Everything else grew out of that. Many went to the Temple daily. (Acts 2.46)quote:
Most Christians do not accept the doctrines of Messianics, And most Methodists do not accept the doctrines of Presbyterians. (the whole Calvinist - Arminianist thing)
Please get off the idea that one is superior to the rest. That is just arrogant.
_____________________________
Avatar is DW holding Saphira at her first birthday party and myself holding Louvena at 30 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 1:51:18 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3631
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DaveW
quote:
This statement is on the verge of being completely heretical... it is completely out of line to suggest that non Messianic Christianity is somehow inferior to Messianic Judaism. I do not say "inferior" at all. That would be like me saying that a Methodist church is inferior to a Presbyterian one. Christianity is the gentile expression of the Messianic faith (belief in Messiah). You DO believe in the Messiah, do you not?
The original church in Jerusalem was VERY Jewish. Read Acts 21.20-26 to see just HOW Jewish they were. Everything else grew out of that. Many went to the Temple daily. (Acts 2.46)quote:
Most Christians do not accept the doctrines of Messianics, And most Methodists do not accept the doctrines of Presbyterians. (the whole Calvinist - Arminianist thing)
I agree with what you said above, it just did not come across that way in your previous post. I went back and looked again at your post, and realized I had misread "gentile" for "gentle", sorry.
quote:
Please get off the idea that one is superior to the rest. That is just arrogant.
The entire point of my post was that one was not superior to the other.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 2:22:25 PM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DaveW
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
BTW, Bluethread. Are you a Messianist? If so, would you consider Messianism to be Christianity. 100% of all Messianists I know do not, but consider it a part of Judaism. That's my understanding. You err in believing christianity to be something completly different than Judiasm. It is not. The "sect of the Nazarenes" (Acts 24.5) was a sect of what? From the writings of the day, it was considered a sect of Pharasaic Judaism. That changed in 135ad with the Bar Kochba revolt.
Never said they were completely different. I said they were not the same thing. Identity, friend, not relativity. Sounds like you've got an ax to grind here. Sorry. I've just made observations, I wasn't trying to stamp on your button... I didn't even know you had a button.
Did you ever come up with any reason why "body" should not mean "body" instead of "church", which is the actual subject of this thread?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 5:13:31 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1668
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
BTW, Bluethread. Are you a Messianist? If so, would you consider Messianism to be Christianity. 100% of all Messianists I know do not, but consider it a part of Judaism. That's my understanding.
If you will pardon the similarity, I am who I am. Well before I understood Ha Torah, when I attended evangelical churches, I called myself a proselyte messianc jew. At that time I received no grief from anybody, in fact most people were more than willing to accept the connection between the Messiah and judaism. However, as I studied the Scriptures and began asking questions, people became more and more uncomfortable. As I became a man I put away childish things like denomination.
Therefore, I do not categorize myself as "Christian" or "Jewish". If you wish to bring up what you believe defines each group, I would be willing to address those issues based on my understanding of the Scriptures and you can draw your own conclusion. Never the less, any label you would prefer to use would be for your purposes only. I consider such attempts to group people to be detrimental to serious discourse.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/20/2008 6:38:30 PM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
I asked and you answered. 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/21/2008 6:33:13 AM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 4166
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
Did you ever come up with any reason why "body" should not mean "body" instead of "church", which is the actual subject of this thread? Yes. Paul's use of the word in the surrounding chapters.
Instances of body (somah) in 1 Corinthians:
9.27 - physical body
10.16 - debated
10.17 - congregation
11.24 - debated
11.27 - congregation
11.29 - debated
12.12 - congregation
12.13 - congregation
12.14 - congregation
12.15 - congregation
12.16 - congregation
12.17 - congregation
12.18 - congregation
There are other instances before and after this list where the use is the physical body. But because of the proximity of the debated usage connected with communion to the use clearly meaning congregation, it is not clear that it means the physical body. Having it mean congregation in these passages makes sense from a Hebraic viewpoint; something lost when the church became majority gentile and edged out believing Jews in the 2nd and 3rd centuries.
< Message edited by DaveW -- 11/21/2008 6:48:09 AM >
_____________________________
Avatar is DW holding Saphira at her first birthday party and myself holding Louvena at 30 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/21/2008 12:17:34 PM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
DaveW,
A-ah. Now, we can talk. Definitely chapter 12 is dealing with the church, no doubt about that. But since it is a subsequent chapter, either the subject has changed or another aspect of what was first laid out in 10:17 is being brought out in fuller relief. I believe chapter 12 is anticipated in 10:17, but, then, the theme of “church” is not only a theme of 1 Corinthians, it is a theme of all the New Testament. But a list does not a context make.
10:16-17 is interesting: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.” In 16 “body” means the “body of Christ”, i.e. the flesh of Christ torn and burned in the sacrifice. In 17 “body” means the church. It isn’t either or, but how the church is related to the sacrifice of Christ, by communion. The sacrament is pointing to the cross and this is the basis of union in the church. Believers are united to one another through the cross. The Lord’s Supper is a sign of the cross practiced together like a creed in which all voices attest to the same realities. Notice, “for we are all partakers of that one bread.” The word “bread” is ambiguous (in a good way); it means that because we partake in the Bread (Jesus) we are one bread (Church). We are what we eat.
Chapter 11 deals with the sacrament first. Chapter 12 turns to the unity of the Church, its members and their gifts uniting them.
Chapter 11 is clearly tied to the Institution. It is drawn from the Last Supper (prob. Luke 22 account since the phrase “this do in remembrance of me” is only used there.) The Last Supper, in which the Passover is transferred to the New Covenant, was instituted by Christ. The bread directs our faith toward his flesh in the sacrifice, the blood toward his shed blood. When Jesus says “my body” he is referring to “his body, Incarnate flesh”. Jesus prefigures the Institution in John 6:54-56, “Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.” The chapter 11 references to eating and drinking are clearly drawn from Christ’s revelation of the initial and ongoing life we draw from the sacrifice of Christ. The sacrament is like the peace offerings in which the flesh of the sacrifice was shared between the priest and the one who brought the sacrifice to the Temple. The sacrifice (the cross) is our food and drink: our life is drawn from it.
There is another aspect in the sacrament, the assurance that through the torn body of Christ we have access to the Most Holy presence of God through the New Covenant, as the writer of Hebrews says, “By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;” (Hebrews 10:20). It is the New Covenant in his body and blood. This is the very heart throb of Christian unity, for, notice that in verse 25, the writer of Hebrews caps off “not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.” We have been drawn near to God through the body of Christ. We have been drawn together through the body of Christ, to become the body of Christ.
quote:
Having it mean congregation in these passages makes sense from a Hebraic viewpoint; something lost when the church became majority gentile and edged out believing Jews in the 2nd and 3rd centuries.
I wouldn’t hide behind that lark. The same God of the Hebrews is the God of the gentiles. Trust in his teaching of his people. God defines culture, culture does not define God.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/21/2008 3:35:34 PM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 4166
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
Paul was a Jew - writing to people familiar with the synagogue. The pattern Paul used for evangelism always started a the synagogue, making Jews and "God Fearers" (gentiles who attended synagogues and lived as Jews but had yet to formally convert) the oldest believers in a locality, i.e. the leaders. The cultural inference should not be discounted.
_____________________________
Avatar is DW holding Saphira at her first birthday party and myself holding Louvena at 30 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/24/2008 10:14:06 AM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DaveW
Paul was a Jew - writing to people familiar with the synagogue. The pattern Paul used for evangelism always started a the synagogue, making Jews and "God Fearers" (gentiles who attended synagogues and lived as Jews but had yet to formally convert) the oldest believers in a locality, i.e. the leaders. The cultural inference should not be discounted.
That's because he was commanded, "to the Jew first, then to the Greek." He was following orders. No, Cultural inference should not be discounted, but thinking "Hebraically" is a more difficult concept than just bunching people into a group rather than dealing with all aspects of redemption on the whole of man. God does deal with congregations, but congregations are made up of individuals and God deals with both.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/24/2008 4:39:39 PM
|
|
|
markvh
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
Well, what a bit of interesting chat! I haven't been convinced yet that most every reference to body or blood is more literal and less about the church. I fail to see the great leaps that are necessary to cut out the possibility that Paul was putting a strong emphasis on how we treat each other (in 1 Cor 11). I would be curious to see how one would marry the text of Mark 10 with this discussion.
My perception is that on the one hand, Paul is talking (years later) about how we interpret what Jesus intended and put it into every day practice, and in Mark 10, Jesus mentions whether we know what it means to "drink of His cup" which again would indicate to me that it is His divine plan that each of us is held to a particular walk, and is therefore accountable to how we respond to scripture. Something about generalizing the interpretation into a sort of reference that has "held up for 2,000 years" would seem to lead us away from accountability, and more toward a head-knowledge that allows for a "judgmentalist's view".
[I apologize in advance if my tone is in any way inflammatory, my intent is to encourage us toward the most accurate interpretation.]
P.S. I wanted to also bring to bear Acts 2, which talks about latter days, and children prophesying, which would seem as well to suggest that His Spirit affects people differently, or specifically, and perhaps in "seasons".
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/24/2008 6:07:28 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1668
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: markvh
Well, what a bit of interesting chat! I haven't been convinced yet that most every reference to body or blood is more literal and less about the church. I fail to see the great leaps that are necessary to cut out the possibility that Paul was putting a strong emphasis on how we treat each other (in 1 Cor 11). I would be curious to see how one would marry the text of Mark 10 with this discussion.
My perception is that on the one hand, Paul is talking (years later) about how we interpret what Jesus intended and put it into every day practice, and in Mark 10, Jesus mentions whether we know what it means to "drink of His cup" which again would indicate to me that it is His divine plan that each of us is held to a particular walk, and is therefore accountable to how we respond to scripture. Something about generalizing the interpretation into a sort of reference that has "held up for 2,000 years" would seem to lead us away from accountability, and more toward a head-knowledge that allows for a "judgmentalist's view".
[I apologize in advance if my tone is in any way inflammatory, my intent is to encourage us toward the most accurate interpretation.]
P.S. I wanted to also bring to bear Acts 2, which talks about latter days, and children prophesying, which would seem as well to suggest that His Spirit affects people differently, or specifically, and perhaps in "seasons".
Thanks
The cup has special significance in the Scriptures. There are five "cups" of which the people of the time of Yeshua's(Jesus') incarnation partook. The cup that is blessed at every meal and the four cups of Pesach(Passover). These all have special significance and they are all associated with family and community. As far as I know, he standard blessing presumes a family meal, though one would say it if one were eating alone. However, we could get into a discussion about the biblical implication that it is not good for a man to be alone. The other four are relation to Pesach and we are commanded to gather with enough neighbors to necessitate a substancial meal. Therefore, even if one were to recognize one's personal resposibility to practice the blessing of "the cup", it carries with it the ideas of family and community.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/25/2008 9:46:54 AM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Something about generalizing the interpretation into a sort of reference that has "held up for 2,000 years" would seem to lead us away from accountability, and more toward a head-knowledge that allows for a "judgmentalist's view".
It might, or it might not. How we respond to truth does not effect the truthfulness of truth, though. That is an invalid reason for rejecting an interpretation.
quote:
[I apologize in advance if my tone is in any way inflammatory, my intent is to encourage us toward the most accurate interpretation.]
The above assertion does not.
However, seeing that I have stumbled into a discourse on religion based on human relationships, I’ll bow out. I’ll leave you this, with regard to 1 Cor. 11. No union can possibly take place without union to Christ first and that is the basic meaning of the sacrament. We don’t come to union with Christ through each other. We come to each other through union to him. That is the meaning behind “communion with his blood”. Not our communion together with one another. The grammar will not allow it. We commune with the blood.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/25/2008 1:28:53 PM
|
|
|
twincities
Posts: 95
Joined: 10/15/2007
Status: offline
|
1 Peter 4:16
However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name.
Acts 11:26
and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. So for a whole year Barnabas and Saul met with the church and taught great numbers of people. The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/25/2008 2:32:25 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1668
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
However, seeing that I have stumbled into a discourse on religion based on human relationships, I’ll bow out. I’ll leave you this, with regard to 1 Cor. 11. No union can possibly take place without union to Christ first and that is the basic meaning of the sacrament. We don’t come to union with Christ through each other. We come to each other through union to him. That is the meaning behind “communion with his blood”. Not our communion together with one another. The grammar will not allow it. We commune with the blood.
It appears that 1 Cor 11 also talks about "the sacrament" in a social setting. So, without further clarification, I'm not sure what you are saying. “communion with his blood” is a phrase with a couple of loaded words in it. Therefore, it might be good if you elaberated.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/25/2008 2:51:58 PM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
John 6:56 in case anybody's interested. Seems minds are pretty well made up, though.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/25/2008 4:09:20 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1668
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
John 6:56 in case anybody's interested. Seems minds are pretty well made up, though.
As Yeshua's(Jesus') disciples said, "This is a hard teaching . . ." So, as I said before, to drop a loaded phrase or passage and not explain one's view is not very helpful. He begins this passage by talking about His providing meals for them. He then appears to elaberate on the Spiritual blessings using the blessings of the "fruit of the vine" and "bread of the earth", the blessing at each meal, as an analogy.
Now these are images that have a lot of significance to the people He is talking to. So, without a more extenxsive explaination, it is difficult to see where you wish to go with this.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Judgmental Christians - 11/28/2008 7:22:59 PM
|
|
|
markvh
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
quote:
Something about generalizing the interpretation into a sort of reference that has "held up for 2,000 years" would seem to lead us away from accountability, and more toward a head-knowledge that allows for a "judgmentalist's view".
quote:
[HardKnox] It might, or it might not. How we respond to truth does not effect the truthfulness of truth, though. That is an invalid reason for rejecting an interpretation.
I state this not as the reason to reject your interpretation, rather to point out that this is a wonderful opportunity for us to pause and decide whether we are following the Spirit's leading in our discussion. I accept your response.
quote:
I’ll leave you this, with regard to 1 Cor. 11. No union can possibly take place without union to Christ first .... We don’t come to union with Christ through each other. We come to each other through union to him.
I agree. Thank you for your participation.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
