What's the point of clergy?

[nrg]

These disclaimers never work, but I want to know I did what I could: This discussion only refers to omnipotent, perfect and all loving gods. And, obviously, I'm only discussing organized religions with clergy in them, like imams, priests or the like. If your religion is not about omnipotent beings and there's no clergy, this discussion doesn't concern your faith.

Ok, so let's get busy. Why do religions need clergy? God is omnipotent, omnipresent and loves us so why does he put people in charge of organizing the believers and preach his word? This is kind of a big job, and doing it wrong means people are going to miss out on salvation (unless there is absolutely no technique or talent involved in preaching, in which case clergy really becomes useless) so why doesn't he do it himself? Why does he require people do sacrifice their time and resources to build churches to house congregations, keep priests on the pay roll and handle all the financial problems and what not? I mean, he's omnipotent and perfect, he won't just do a better job, he'll do a perfect job. Nothing can or will go wrong if he's handling it, and since his powers are infinite, he sacrifices no resources (no matter how much you take out of an infinite power reserve, there will still be an infinite amount left) and his effectiveness is infinite too so it would take him no time to complete these tasks either.

I am aware of the benifits of being involed in a church. It gives the satisfaction of work and it teaches you alot of things, not to mention the satisfaction when you reach new people and prove what you're capable of. But are these things really more important than all the billions of people that won't find salvation, simply because clergy can't preach to absolutely everyone everywhere? They can't even reach every person who has an open mind about their religion.

And, I think it's worth adressing; there would be absolutely no abuses of the power clergy possesses if God simply handles the job. No Crusades, no Islamic terrorists and no misuse of his name to reach human goals.

So, this is basically what I'm asking; if the work of clergy matters, why doesn't God do it?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Why not as him your self, if he wants the job?

Omnipotent means all powerful, not that you chose to do everything yourself.

Priest and religious administrators of various kinds are necessary because religions function in the real world and have real world people problems.
People need teaching, organising, leading. Their churches and faiths appoint " trained people" to take on these rolls.

 

[nrg]

Why not as him your self, if he wants the job?

Wait, I'm supposed ask him about it? Did everyone else do that too, like "you know, this is your word and all, are you comfortable with me preaching it?"?

Omnipotent means all powerful, not that you chose to do everything yourself.

Absolutely, there could be a reason he takes a sub-optimal route. I want to hear it.

Priest and religious administrators of various kinds are necessary because religions function in the real world and have real world people problems.
People need teaching, organising, leading. Their churches and faiths appoint " trained people" to take on these rolls.

And they do a far, far worse job than God would do and can (and have) abused the power that comes with that position. I should've added that this thread primarily adresses gods that can project his power on to the real world, such as performing miracles.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

We do not even know what any human thinks, let alone what God thinks.
We do not know why God would chose to do anything, Optimal or not.

It is clearly a mistake to think God has ever chosen to make our decisions or live our lives for us.

In our own lives, an employer does not do the work of an employee for them. It would be stupid in the extreme for him to do so.

We live our own lives and are responsible for the outcomes.

 

[sojourner]

God is omnipotent, omnipresent and loves us so why does he put people in charge of organizing the believers and preach his word?

God chooses to work through human agency.

This is kind of a big job, and doing it wrong means people are going to miss out on salvation

No it doesn't. You're making an assumption here that you can't back up.

I mean, he's omnipotent and perfect, he won't just do a better job, he'll do a perfect job.

It isn't about "doing a job perfectly," it's about building relationship.

so it would take him no time to complete these tasks either.

Time isn't the issue, since God is eternal. This isn't an event. It's a process -- and it's the process that's important, no matter how long it takes.

I am aware of the benifits of being involed in a church.

Given your statements here, I doubt that you are.

But are these things really more important than all the billions of people that won't find salvation, simply because clergy can't preach to absolutely everyone everywhere?

Who says people won't "find salvation?"

there would be absolutely no abuses of the power clergy possesses if God simply handles the job. No Crusades, no Islamic terrorists and no misuse of his name to reach human goals.

It would also lack the involvement of human beings in Divine processes.

So, this is basically what I'm asking; if the work of clergy matters, why doesn't God do it?

Because it's "the work of the clergy," and not "the work of God."

Worship -- leiturgia, in the Greek texts of the Bible -- is "the work of the people." If God did that work, it wouldn't be worship. It would be something ... else. Worship and ministry are our responsibility -- not God's. It's interesting that you seem to want to abrogate culpability here.

 

[BruceDLimber]

Present-day religions don't need clergy, which is precisely why the Baha'i Faith has none!

Humanity has now matured to the point where each individual can be responsible for his or her own spiritual well-being.

Peace,

Buce

 

[sojourner]

Present-day religions don't need clergy, which is precisely why the Baha'i Faith has none!

Humanity has now matured to the poitn where each individual can be responsible for his or her own spiritual well-being.

Peace,

Buce

I disagree. Xy is also a "present day religion." Xy has clergy.

 

[Levite]

These disclaimers never work, but I want to know I did what I could: This discussion only refers to omnipotent, perfect and all loving gods. And, obviously, I'm only discussing organized religions with clergy in them, like imams, priests or the like. If your religion is not about omnipotent beings and there's no clergy, this discussion doesn't concern your faith.

Ok, so let's get busy. Why do religions need clergy? God is omnipotent, omnipresent and loves us so why does he put people in charge of organizing the believers and preach his word? This is kind of a big job, and doing it wrong means people are going to miss out on salvation (unless there is absolutely no technique or talent involved in preaching, in which case clergy really becomes useless) so why doesn't he do it himself? Why does he require people do sacrifice their time and resources to build churches to house congregations, keep priests on the pay roll and handle all the financial problems and what not? I mean, he's omnipotent and perfect, he won't just do a better job, he'll do a perfect job. Nothing can or will go wrong if he's handling it, and since his powers are infinite, he sacrifices no resources (no matter how much you take out of an infinite power reserve, there will still be an infinite amount left) and his effectiveness is infinite too so it would take him no time to complete these tasks either.

I am aware of the benifits of being involed in a church. It gives the satisfaction of work and it teaches you alot of things, not to mention the satisfaction when you reach new people and prove what you're capable of. But are these things really more important than all the billions of people that won't find salvation, simply because clergy can't preach to absolutely everyone everywhere? They can't even reach every person who has an open mind about their religion.

And, I think it's worth adressing; there would be absolutely no abuses of the power clergy possesses if God simply handles the job. No Crusades, no Islamic terrorists and no misuse of his name to reach human goals.

So, this is basically what I'm asking; if the work of clergy matters, why doesn't God do it?

Well, I can't speak for other religions-- and technically, perhaps Judaism ought not to count in your directed list of responders, since we don't really believe God is omnibenevolent, not to mention that we don't believe in salvation or Hell-- but our clergy are primarily supposed to be teachers and legal arbiters.

Rabbis become expert in Torah, Talmud, midrash, liturgy, theology, and other complex works of our tradition, so that we can teach other Jews, and help them to master such texts for themselves. We are here as facilitators, in order to help Jews perform rituals that they may be unable or feel unwilling to perform on their own. And we are here as halachic judges: that is to say, we are the arbiters and decisors of Jewish Law.

God doesn't demand the building of synagogues or houses of worship-- we do that for our own benefits. And for rabbis, at least, our aims cannot be proselytizing, since Jews are forbidden to proselytize.

But ultimately, we require clergy and other community leaders because we have free will, and make our own choices: God may have given our ancestors teachings for our improvement, even directions for things He'd like us to be doing, but how we implement them, how we organize our communities, how we conduct our affairs, is for us to decide and to arrange, not for God.

 

[Jainarayan]

Hinduism has no clergy to speak of either. Acharyas, gurus, rishis, swamis, and pujaris (the priests who perform liturgical services, and teach) are men (and a good number of women) learned in scriptures and in their interpretations, which are often diametrically opposed.

 

[nrg]

We do not even know what any human thinks, let alone what God thinks.
We do not know why God would chose to do anything, Optimal or not.

This is actually an answer, but you just need to remember that you can't call yourself critical and questioning if you stick to it.

It is clearly a mistake to think God has ever chosen to make our decisions or live our lives for us.

He decided my entire, genetic make up. He decided I would get born in a First World country. He decided I should not have the ability to travel through time. Why is the way his word is preached such a controversial choice?

In our own lives, an employer does not do the work of an employee for them. It would be stupid in the extreme for him to do so.

Yes, because he hired that person for a reason; he couldn't do it himself. And he hired that particular person because he thought he was best suited among the applicants. If he did have the time, the skills and was better suited than any applicant, he wouldn't waste company resources to keep an employee on the pay roll. That would be stupid in the extreme.

We live our own lives and are responsible for the outcomes.

What does that have to do with anything?

God chooses to work through human agency.

Yes, and I wonder why. So far, it seems it requires absolute blind faith that flies right in the face of reason to accept that answer. If that is the answer, fine.

No it doesn't. You're making an assumption here that you can't back up.

Ok, so the work the clergy does doesn't matter? The fact that some countries are visited by missionaries, and others aren't, means nothing?

It isn't about "doing a job perfectly," it's about building relationship.

Again, can't that be done without all the priests and the churches? What is the point? What difference do they make?

Time isn't the issue, since God is eternal. This isn't an event. It's a process -- and it's the process that's important, no matter how long it takes.

But, wouldn't God want to have this process done, like, yesterday? I mean, if this relationship with God improves the World or individuals life in anyway?

Given your statements here, I doubt that you are.

My ex-girlfriend was heavily invested in her church, so is one of my best friends.

What about my statements makes you doubt I know the value of relationships, community, tradition and all the other things churches stand for? I'm simply saying that if these churches actually make a difference, why doesn't God do the job instead?

Who says people won't "find salvation?"

My great-grandmother died without ever believing in God and was perfectly content with her life, didn't feel she had anything to forgive and told me a few months before she died to never be afraid of questioning things you take on pure faith, and that it keeps you humble till the end. She never found salvation, and it was mostly because her father was a priest and she loathed him.

It would also lack the involvement of human beings in Divine processes.

Explain how that's worse than genocide.

Worship -- leiturgia, in the Greek texts of the Bible -- is "the work of the people." If God did that work, it wouldn't be worship. It would be something ... else. Worship and ministry are our responsibility -- not God's. It's interesting that you seem to want to abrogate culpability here.

So, what difference does it make? Why not worship him on an individual level? Does the preaching and the congregations really do any difference at all, or is it possible for a person living by himself his whole life on a space station, without any communication with either priests, churches or publishing companies that dish out the Bible to find God, understand his word and form a relationship just as strong as anyone in the Southern United States?

Rabbis become expert in Torah, Talmud, midrash, liturgy, theology, and other complex works of our tradition, so that we can teach other Jews, and help them to master such texts for themselves.

is there any skill involed in teaching the texts? If there is, why doesn't God do it himself?

We are here as facilitators, in order to help Jews perform rituals that they may be unable or feel unwilling to perform on their own. And we are here as halachic judges: that is to say, we are the arbiters and decisors of Jewish Law.

That sounds like alot of power. Why is God comfortable with that power in men who don't know everything and can make mistakes?

But ultimately, we require clergy and other community leaders because we have free will, and make our own choices: God may have given our ancestors teachings for our improvement, even directions for things He'd like us to be doing, but how we implement them, how we organize our communities, how we conduct our affairs, is for us to decide and to arrange, not for God.

How does this infringe free will? If God infringes the believers free will by organizing the faith, doesn't the clergy infringe the worshippers free will too?

 

[sojourner]

Ok, so the work the clergy does doesn't matter? The fact that some countries are visited by missionaries, and others aren't, means nothing?

The work of the clergy isn't to save people. That's God's job.
Nah. The days of colonialism are over.

Again, can't that be done without all the priests and the churches? What is the point? What difference do they make?

It could be, but probably not as well. People have a need for community. The church provides that. The clergy, being well versed in theology, biblical exegesis, teaching and counseling, provide the vision and the focus, so that relationships can be built from a spiritual base.

But, wouldn't God want to have this process done, like, yesterday? I mean, if this relationship with God improves the World or individuals life in anyway?

Yes, but the transformation comes from within -- not from without. And that takes time.

What about my statements makes you doubt I know the value of relationships, community, tradition and all the other things churches stand for? I'm simply saying that if these churches actually make a difference, why doesn't God do the job instead?

Because part of the work of transformation is taking responsibility for the way things are and also for working toward the way things ought to be. That's part of our purpose as human beings: To grow and improve. By your saying, "Why doesn't God do the job instead," it's obvious that you don't understand or haven't come to grips with the process of spiritual formation. It's that work that the clergy and churches facilitate.

My great-grandmother died without ever believing in God and was perfectly content with her life, didn't feel she had anything to forgive and told me a few months before she died to never be afraid of questioning things you take on pure faith, and that it keeps you humble till the end. She never found salvation, and it was mostly because her father was a priest and she loathed him.

I'd be willing to bet that Great-Grandma is just fine. God saves whom God will save, and she sounds like a lovely lady.

Explain how that's worse than genocide.

It's the lack of spiritual process that leads to violence.

So, what difference does it make? Why not worship him on an individual level?

Because we're not finally individuals. We are a human family. One can't worship by oneself. Worship is a corporate process, because worship is transformational, and when we are transformed, it changes all our relationships.

Does the preaching and the congregations really do any difference at all, or is it possible for a person living by himself his whole life on a space station, without any communication with either priests, churches or publishing companies that dish out the Bible to find God, understand his word and form a relationship just as strong as anyone in the Southern United States?

I suppose it's possible, but unlikely, since human beings are the imago Dei; we need other people to reflect God to us, because God lives most especially in the relationships we form.

 

[nrg]

The work of the clergy isn't to save people. That's God's job.
Nah. The days of colonialism are over.

Ok, so what difference do clergy make? What differences can we expect to emerge between a congregation and a constellation of christians living alone, never ever congregating?

It could be, but probably not as well. People have a need for community. The church provides that. The clergy, being well versed in theology, biblical exegesis, teaching and counseling, provide the vision and the focus, so that relationships can be built from a spiritual base.

Ok, so it just provides the comfort of a community and that's it?

What do the priests teach? How does one benefit from learning it?

Yes, but the transformation comes from within -- not from without. And that takes time.

This sounds like a perfect time for God to use his fancy powers, assuming he wants to be sure that every person who start that process will end it within their life time.

Because part of the work of transformation is taking responsibility for the way things are and also for working toward the way things ought to be. That's part of our purpose as human beings: To grow and improve. By your saying, "Why doesn't God do the job instead," it's obvious that you don't understand or haven't come to grips with the process of spiritual formation. It's that work that the clergy and churches facilitate.

I understand your claim, I just don't understand why it needs to take any time at all. We don't have an infinite amount of time, some people will not reach their goal.

I'd be willing to bet that Great-Grandma is just fine. God saves whom God will save, and she sounds like a lovely lady.

Well that's the thing, she quit the church when she was in her 20s (allready not a believer). Was she missing out on anything by not believing in God and not attending church?

It's the lack of spiritual process that leads to violence.

I understand that modern worshippers don't want genocide. And throughout history, churches have used their power for alot of good too, such as education and helping refugees in pretty much every major war. But that power and influence community builds have been abused by people, who convinced other people that they were going through a spiritual process. In other words, when imperfect, easily deceived people shoulder this responsibility there is an unnecessary potential for disaster. Why wouldn't a purely individual relationship to God be just as good, and we can keep the human communities like family, work colleagues and snowboarding teams?

Because we're not finally individuals. We are a human family. One can't worship by oneself. Worship is a corporate process, because worship is transformational, and when we are transformed, it changes all our relationships.

Could you give a clearer explanation, please? Why does it transform our relationships? What difference does it make if you're in a church in that case, what the about the other millions of people in your city, aren't those relationships transforming too?

 

[sojourner]

What differences can we expect to emerge between a congregation and a constellation of christians living alone, never ever congregating?

Greater ministry to the poor, hungry, naked, lonely, disenfranchised, and oppressed. That is, after all, our main duty as Xtians: Sacrificial love for others.

Ok, so it just provides the comfort of a community and that's it?

That, in and of itself, is a great thing and not to be taken lightly. But no. On a spiritual level, it embodies Christ in the world, and is thus able to engage the ministry Christ asked us to engage.

What do the priests teach? How does one benefit from learning it?

Spiritual formation with a solid basis in biblical Tradition. How is spiritual formation not of benefit?

This sounds like a perfect time for God to use his fancy powers, assuming he wants to be sure that every person who start that process will end it within their life time.

You're abrogating responsibility again. This isn't about God -- it's about us growing into God. Think of it this way: Skills aren't instantaneously acquired. They have to be learned and practiced. Spirituality and the Xtian way is a skill.

Why does the process have to end in our lifetime? God searches until God finds us.

I understand your claim, I just don't understand why it needs to take any time at all. We don't have an infinite amount of time, some people will not reach their goal.

It isn't about reaching a goal. it's about taking a journey.

Well that's the thing, she quit the church when she was in her 20s (allready not a believer). Was she missing out on anything by not believing in God and not attending church?

People come to terms with God in their own way. Some Xtians never come to terms. Some atheists do -- in their own way, of course. Since I didn't know your Gt. Grandmother, I couldn't say whether she did or not.

I understand that modern worshippers don't want genocide. And throughout history, churches have used their power for alot of good too, such as education and helping refugees in pretty much every major war. But that power and influence community builds have been abused by people, who convinced other people that they were going through a spiritual process. In other words, when imperfect, easily deceived people shoulder this responsibility there is an unnecessary potential for disaster. Why wouldn't a purely individual relationship to God be just as good, and we can keep the human communities like family, work colleagues and snowboarding teams?

Because God lives in the spaces between us.

Why does it transform our relationships?

If you and I have a friendship, and I change, that changes affects how we interact, and that ultimately changes you, too. We don't live in a vacuum. We live in relationship, because we reflect people to themselves as we interact. It's that "otherness" that lends perspective.

What difference does it make if you're in a church in that case, what the about the other millions of people in your city, aren't those relationships transforming too?

Yes, but they'd transform more deeply, if everyone was actively engaged in the transformational process, rather than some active and some passive.

 

[nrg]

Greater ministry to the poor, hungry, naked, lonely, disenfranchised, and oppressed. That is, after all, our main duty as Xtians: Sacrificial love for others.

In Sweden, church going is really, really rare (less than 10% of the population) and we have more people who practice christianity then attend church (as weird as that sounds). They claim that understanding of the Bible and God can be achieved on an individual level. I can't say anything about us swedes feeling disenfranchised and lonely (I'm not comfortable speculating how you or anyone else feels in comparison to me) but Sweden is one of the wealthiest and healthiest countries in the World, we give more to charity than our US counterparts and we are well below Hungary and Poland in suicide rates, and those two countries have church attendance rates of more than 50%. When looking at both the political and the economic system as a whole, we nearly top the list in democracy index too, losing only to other Nordic countries with similiar church attendance rates.

So, unless I misunderstood you, are we really missing out that much?

That, in and of itself, is a great thing and not to be taken lightly. But no. On a spiritual level, it embodies Christ in the world, and is thus able to engage the ministry Christ asked us to engage.

But what effect does it have? The satisfaction of knowing you've done what Christ told you too? I mean, I don't want to look obnoxious or anything, but Christ did ask us to do this for a reason, right?

Spiritual formation with a solid basis in biblical Tradition. How is spiritual formation not of benefit?

I've never really gotten my head around what it is. Is it about learning how you can reconcile the reason God created you with your own desires? Enlighten me.

You're abrogating responsibility again. This isn't about God -- it's about us growing into God. Think of it this way: Skills aren't instantaneously acquired. They have to be learned and practiced. Spirituality and the Xtian way is a skill.

They don't have to be learned if they're just a reflex, like breathing and eating. Why didn't God make them that way, if they're vital to our lives?

Why does the process have to end in our lifetime? God searches until God finds us.

But if it doesn't matter if wether or not we learn them during our lifetime, why not do it in the after life when we have infinite time (assuming you do believe in the after life)?

It isn't about reaching a goal. it's about taking a journey.

A journey is nothing more than the progress from one state to the other (even a vacation has a continuous amount of relaxing moments you progress through). That's at least the definition I have of a journey, a trip from A to B. You can, of course, look at the scenery but you could very well divide the journey into many, smaller journeys and it remains goal oriented.

People come to terms with God in their own way. Some Xtians never come to terms. Some atheists do -- in their own way, of course. Since I didn't know your Gt. Grandmother, I couldn't say whether she did or not.

I have great respect for people suggesting that a relationship an individual has with God is not something other people should judge.

Because God lives in the spaces between us.

I hate to be that guy, but what's the reason of that? Why would he limit himself for no reason?

If you and I have a friendship, and I change, that changes affects how we interact, and that ultimately changes you, too. We don't live in a vacuum. We live in relationship, because we reflect people to themselves as we interact. It's that "otherness" that lends perspective.

Ok, that makes sense, but I still don't see how a church makes it easier. Could you explain how it eases the transofmration process?

Yes, but they'd transform more deeply, if everyone was actively engaged in the transformational process, rather than some active and some passive.

Wait, are you saying that the relationship among church members is different to other relationships? How, on a practical level?

 

[sojourner]

In Sweden, church going is really, really rare (less than 10% of the population) and we have more people who practice christianity then attend church (as weird as that sounds). They claim that understanding of the Bible and God can be achieved on an individual level. I can't say anything about us swedes feeling disenfranchised and lonely (I'm not comfortable speculating how you or anyone else feels in comparison to me) but Sweden is one of the wealthiest and healthiest countries in the World, we give more to charity than our US counterparts and we are well below Hungary and Poland in suicide rates, and those two countries have church attendance rates of more than 50%. When looking at both the political and the economic system as a whole, we nearly top the list in democracy index too, losing only to other Nordic countries with similiar church attendance rates.

So, unless I misunderstood you, are we really missing out that much?

I think Xy is, primarily, a religion of liberation. It is designed to set people free from that which binds them. it has always thrived in cultures where such liberation is most necessary. Sounds as if in Sweden, it's not that necessary.

When I was in college, we had an exchange program with a folkshogskola in Mullsjo. I knew bunches of Swedish students, and I knew lots of students who did the exchange program for a semester. I'm impressed with Sweden's attitude and values.

But what effect does it have? The satisfaction of knowing you've done what Christ told you too? I mean, I don't want to look obnoxious or anything, but Christ did ask us to do this for a reason, right?

It lifts humanity. First of all, from poverty of body - second, from poverty of spirit. It serves to heighten our awareness of and need for true community. Look what happened in El Savladore and South Africa. If it hadn't been for the church, people would still be in bondage there. If it hadn't been for the church, I'm convinced the violence would have been much, much worse. An example is what happened in Cosovo and Serbia. In those places, the church had been suppressed.

I've never really gotten my head around what it is. Is it about learning how you can reconcile the reason God created you with your own desires? Enlighten me.

Very basically, it's learning to notice God. It's learning that there's more to life than simply atoms stuck together in various combinations. It's learning to take theological positions with regard, not just to yourself and the obvious religious stuff, but also with regard to the world around you.

They don't have to be learned if they're just a reflex, like breathing and eating. Why didn't God make them that way, if they're vital to our lives?

I think God did. I think our job is to peel back the layers we cover ourselves with and relearn those reflexes we've forgotten. We spend a lot of time ************ ourselves (and others) about who we are. We have to relearn to be vulnerable. We have to relearn to be interdependent. We have to relearn to be honest. The church ought to help us do that. It often fails.

But if it doesn't matter if wether or not we learn them during our lifetime, why not do it in the after life when we have infinite time (assuming you do believe in the after life)?

Because Xtians are called to the present, not the future. Salvation plans usually have it all wrong. We're not looking for a future utopia, we're striving to live fully right now.

A journey is nothing more than the progress from one state to the other (even a vacation has a continuous amount of relaxing moments you progress through). That's at least the definition I have of a journey, a trip from A to B. You can, of course, look at the scenery but you could very well divide the journey into many, smaller journeys and it remains goal oriented.

When I was a kid, I used to ride bikes with my friends. Mom always wanted to know "where we were going." I always said, "We're not going anywhere... we're just riding around." Sometimes there isn't a specific destination. Sometimes it's just walkabout.

I have great respect for people suggesting that a relationship an individual has with God is not something other people should judge.

The whole point of Matthew's gospel -- wheat and tares, sheep and goats, making disciples out of nations -- is that we all have to live together. Wheat isn't separated from tares. Sheep aren't separated from goats. The line of demarcation between "us" and "them" is false. God will take care of things in God's time.

I hate to be that guy, but what's the reason of that? Why would he limit himself for no reason?

God limits God's Self so that we can be expanded. It's the crux of the gospel message (the parable of the leaven -- the Kingdom of God is like a woman who hid leaven in a lump of dough. Leaven in those days wasn't yeast. It was, basically poison. In order for the bread to expand, leaven was used. God became Incarnate, became human -- gave up Divinity for humanity -- became as dirt (we are dust, you know) for us, because we cannot become clean on our own. Therefore, God lives most especially in our relationships, because relationships expand who we are.

Ok, that makes sense, but I still don't see how a church makes it easier. Could you explain how it eases the transofmration process?

Worship isn't a perfunctory set of activities that "make us righteous." Worship is a shape of events in which God enters the creative process with us to transform us. It is a set of specific, intentional, ordered events that serve to point us toward the transformation process. Intentional programs are usually better than independent study.
Worship is also a shape of events that intentionally does this as a group process (remember, God lives in the spaces between us).

Wait, are you saying that the relationship among church members is different to other relationships? How, on a practical level?

Ideally, it is. We often, however, miss that mark.

 

[BruceDLimber]

Xy is also a "present day religion." Xy has clergy.

Hardly!

Christianity is over 2,000 years old!

And the Baha'i Faith is only about a century and a half old (this being the year 169 BE).

So there's really little comparison in terms of age. . . .

Peace,

Bruce

 

[sojourner]

Hardly!

Christianity is over 2,000 years old!

And the Baha'i Faith is only about a century and a half old (this being the year 169 BE).

So there's really little comparison in terms of age. . . .

Peace,

Bruce

I look around and I see God present in the Church. Right now. Today. And the Xy of today is different from the Xy of 2000 years ago. Xy changes to meet the needs of the folks of the time. Sometimes we don't do that very well, but change happens, nevertheless. In my studies and in my ministry I have seen leaders and followers struggle to maintain relevancy in an increasingly fast-paced and diverse society. Xy may be old, but it is also current in many respects. If it weren't I wouldn't be part of it.

 

[rusra02]

These disclaimers never work, but I want to know I did what I could: This discussion only refers to omnipotent, perfect and all loving gods. And, obviously, I'm only discussing organized religions with clergy in them, like imams, priests or the like. If your religion is not about omnipotent beings and there's no clergy, this discussion doesn't concern your faith.

Ok, so let's get busy. Why do religions need clergy? God is omnipotent, omnipresent and loves us so why does he put people in charge of organizing the believers and preach his word? This is kind of a big job, and doing it wrong means people are going to miss out on salvation (unless there is absolutely no technique or talent involved in preaching, in which case clergy really becomes useless) so why doesn't he do it himself? Why does he require people do sacrifice their time and resources to build churches to house congregations, keep priests on the pay roll and handle all the financial problems and what not? I mean, he's omnipotent and perfect, he won't just do a better job, he'll do a perfect job. Nothing can or will go wrong if he's handling it, and since his powers are infinite, he sacrifices no resources (no matter how much you take out of an infinite power reserve, there will still be an infinite amount left) and his effectiveness is infinite too so it would take him no time to complete these tasks either.

I am aware of the benifits of being involed in a church. It gives the satisfaction of work and it teaches you alot of things, not to mention the satisfaction when you reach new people and prove what you're capable of. But are these things really more important than all the billions of people that won't find salvation, simply because clergy can't preach to absolutely everyone everywhere? They can't even reach every person who has an open mind about their religion.

And, I think it's worth adressing; there would be absolutely no abuses of the power clergy possesses if God simply handles the job. No Crusades, no Islamic terrorists and no misuse of his name to reach human goals.

So, this is basically what I'm asking; if the work of clergy matters, why doesn't God do it?

Among early Christians there were no clergy/laity distinctions. Jesus taught his followers that they were all brothers. They were not to use titles such as Rabbi or Father.(Matthew 23:8-12) The rising of a clergy class signaled an apostasy from true Christianity, with a titled and privileged class of men who usurped authority and power not due them. Today, the clergy are a heavy financial burden on their respective churches. True Christians do not have a clergy class. Jesus roundly condemned the clergy of his day, the scribes and Pharisees. (Matthew 23)

​

​

 

[sojourner]

Among early Christians there were no clergy/laity distinctions. Jesus taught his followers that they were all brothers. They were not to use titles such as Rabbi or Father.(Matthew 23:8-12) The rising of a clergy class signaled an apostasy from true Christianity, with a titled and privileged class of men who usurped authority and power not due them. Today, the clergy are a heavy financial burden on their respective churches. True Christians do not have a clergy class. Jesus roundly condemned the clergy of his day, the scribes and Pharisees. (Matthew 23)

This is patently untrue. And I resent the false witness. The apostles were sent out to plant churches, to preach, to teach, to bear witness, to heal, to lead -- in other words, to do what clergy do. The "rise of the clergy class" was there from the very beginning, with Peter, James, Thomas, Paul, and the rest. They were the clergy class. Soon others, such as Phoebe, were called to be leaders.

In fact, the scribes and Pharisees were not "clergy." The Levites and priests were clergy.

Geez!

 

[Hispriest]

Very smart question nrg! I can read that you are atheist, so probably some of this things are going to be strange things for you, but here it is.​

In very old times like in times of Adam and Eve God use to talk you them face to face, after the sin this happened less and less; But the ultimate sacrifice was Jesus giving His life for the whole world, this was not only His sacrifice, but the sacrifice of the Father and all the angels in heaven. Anyway, while Jesus was here with us been lower than the angels (Heb. 2: 7, 9) He said in John 9:5 "As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world." ​

​

See, “light” has ever been a symbol of the divine presence (Gen. 1:3; 3:24). John refers to Jesus as “the light of men” shining forth amid the darkness of this world (Matt. 1:4–9). Toward the close of His ministry Jesus referred to Himself as “the light of the world” (John 8:12; 9:5). Having accepted Jesus as the light of the world, a Christian, if true to his calling, becomes a reflector of that light. In Messianic prophecy Jesus is referred to as “a great light” (Isa. 9:2), and as the “Sun of righteousness” (Mal. 4:2; see on Luke 1:79). When the true Light illumines men, they are admonished to “arise, shine” (Isa. 60:1–3). ​

​

Jesus said in: Matthew 5:14 "You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden.​

And He also give us the “Great Commission” please read: Luke 24: 46-48. Then He said to them, "Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, "and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. "And you are witnesses of these things.​

In a similar way the Twelve, and all future citizens of the kingdom as well, were to go forth and let their light shine abroad in the world, dispelling the darkness of sin and ignorance of the will and ways of God. John 1:4, 7, 9.​

​

This is the only way that we can exercise our FAITH.​