1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Call No Man Your Father

Discussion in 'Scriptural Debates' started by Vouthon, Feb 5, 2019.

  1. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    3,811
    Ratings:
    +1,040
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    These kinds of responses don't faze me metis.
    To me they as just uncivil distractions, designed to draw attention to oneself, while trying to belittle another user. I consider it a show of weakness, demonstrating the inability to defend an argument which one cannot support with any data, or evidence.
    So that you know, I haven't taken it to heart. Besides, it has no merit.

    You say it has been shown to me the different foundations of the word "father".
    Surely you can't be referring to your post here.
    First to my knowledge, presbyteros means elder, as in older man, not father.
    Perhaps the ones responsible for the religion you are affiliated with, are the ones that say what you are repeating. I don't find it anywhere else.

    Presbyter - Wikipedia
    In the New Testament, a presbyter (Greek πρεσβύτερος: "elder") is a leader of a local Christian congregation. The word derives from the Greek presbyteros, which means elder or senior. The Greek word episkopos literally means overseer; it refers exclusively to the office of bishop. Many understand presbyteros to refer to the bishop functioning as overseer. In modern Catholic and Orthodox usage, presbyter is distinct from bishop and synonymous with priest. In predominant Protestant usage, presbyter does not refer to a member of a distinctive priesthood called priests, but rather to a minister, pastor, or elder.

    1 Timothy 5:1, uses both elder, and father, in the same verse. Both expressions are different.
    Strong's Greek: 4245. πρεσβύτερος (presbuteros) -- elder
    Rebuke not an elder Πρεσβυτέρῳ, but entreat him as a father πατήρ; and the younger men as brethren;
    NAS Exhaustive Concordance
    Word Origin
    a cptv. of presbus (an old man)
    Definition: elder
    NASB Translation
    elder (3), elders (57), men of old (1), old men (1), older (1), older man (1), older ones (1), older women (1), women (1)

    Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
    eldest, old.
    Comparative of presbus (elderly); older; as noun, a senior; specially, an Israelite Sanhedrist (also figuratively, member of the celestial council) or Christian "presbyter" -- elder(-est), old.

    Second, according to the scriptures, the Lord Jesus appointed, apostles elders, teachers, etc. for a purpose. So to say that all should be apostles, is to miss the point of why Jesus selected 12 apostles.

    Ephesians 4:11 American Standard Version (ASV)
    And he gave some to be apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

    Third, you provided no information for which one can verify what you claim, and I find no support at all for anything you said except one single phrase.

    Jesus did not use the word Abba, at Matthew 23:9. It is however used in Mark 14:36, and two other places.
    ...he was saying᾿Αββά Abba ὁ the πατήρ, Father,

    The Arabic and Aramaic word is evidently used in a relationship Ab (Semitic) - Wikipedia
    A transliteration of the Aramaic term abba also appears three times in the Greek New Testament of The Bible. Each time the term appears in transliteration it is followed immediately by the translation ho pater in Greek, which literally means “the father.” In each case it is used with reference to God.

    So it would be helpful, and in the spirit of proper discussion / debate, if you would provide some supporting data... if you can. Regardless, that's entirely up to you.

    I suggest that you are just trying to make an excuse for your religious leaders fitting the description of people Jesus condemns as "seeking glory of men".
    Anything to say regarding that? Or is that a nonsensical question? :smirk:
     
  2. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli What's your stoyle?

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,881
    Ratings:
    +1,199
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Then you must know what blood-type Jesus is, where heaven is located, how many stars there are and all the cures to all the diseases... Cause the bible.
     
  3. Kelly of the Phoenix

    Kelly of the Phoenix Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,927
    Ratings:
    +2,642
    Religion:
    "Post" Christian, likely Deist
    I'm sure Freud could've spent a good chunk of his career just going through Jesus' issues.
     
  4. Shaul

    Shaul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2016
    Messages:
    2,313
    Ratings:
    +815
    Religion:
    Judaism
    To paraphrase Jesus, anyone that is ashamed of their father has no part with that father. All the material kindness to one’s father loses its meaning if you can’t even recognize and acknowledge him.
     
  5. 2ndpillar

    2ndpillar Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,432
    Ratings:
    +173
    To quote Yeshua with respect to fathers (Matthew 10:36) To quote the false prophet Paul's/Shaul's supposed associate Luke, with respect to fathers (Luke 14:26). As for honoring your parents, Yeshua said (Matthew15:3-8). It would be helpful if you referenced your "paraphrasing".

    Matthew 10:36 A man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’ 37Anyone who loves his father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me; 38and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me.…

    Luke 14:26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters-yes, even their own life-such a person cannot be my disciple.

    1. Matthew 15:3-8 3Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.' 5But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is 'devoted to God,' 6they are not to 'honor their father or mother' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: 8"'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.
     
    #45 2ndpillar, Feb 7, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2019
  6. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    3,811
    Ratings:
    +1,040
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    Do the Catholics use the Bible at all, or do they just concern themselves with teaching things outside of the Bible? Is that the reason we don't find their teachings in the Bible?
    The scriptures I mentioned were related to Biblical knowledge.
    I was not aware that you were speaking about things not taught in the Bible. Apparently I misunderstood you.

    You are well aware aren't you, that if we didn't have the Bible, we would not be talking about Jesus, right? So why are you even thinking about his blood type? Where did you read that knowledge of that is important?
    Are these the things you guys talk about during mass?
     
  7. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli What's your stoyle?

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,881
    Ratings:
    +1,199
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Point is, the bible obviously does not hold the fullness of truth. It never will, and was never intended to.
     
    #47 Landon Caeli, Feb 7, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2019
  8. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli What's your stoyle?

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,881
    Ratings:
    +1,199
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Well, I said Jesus could have made all his disciples Apostles... But he didn't. You asked why, and I don't know. Again, do you??

    I'd like to hear your reasoning on that using the bible. :)

    ...My response is that the bible does not make that specifically clear. But it might hint towards the establishment of a priesthood -at least it seems to. What do you say?
     
  9. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli What's your stoyle?

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,881
    Ratings:
    +1,199
    Religion:
    Catholic
    After all, the Apostles did set guidelines regarding circumcision, and other 'Canon' type laws and rules. So it seems they fulfilled the duties of "Bishops".
     
    #49 Landon Caeli, Feb 7, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2019
  10. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    3,811
    Ratings:
    +1,040
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    fullness of truth?
    The Bible does claim to hold the fullness of truth, about the most important things in life... 1) about God, 2) about his purpose for mankind and the earth, 3) about man's overall happiness and wellbeing, and future... (Isaiah 48:17, 18; John 17:3, 17; Ephesians 4:13; 2 Timothy 3:16, 17)

    The reason for choosing the twelve, is stated in the Bible by Mark.
    Mark 3:14-19 American Standard Version (ASV)
    14 And he appointed twelve, that they might be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach, 15 and to have authority to cast out demons: 16 and Simon he surnamed Peter; 17 and James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and them he surnamed Boanerges, which is, Sons of thunder: 18 and Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Cananaean, 19 and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.

    To my knowledge the priesthood was not part of Jesus' ministry, nor the Christian congregation, established on Nisan 14.
    The priestly arrangement was part of the Mosaic Law (those priest became extremely corrupt), which served it's purpose, and was nailed to the torture stake at Jesus' death - done away with.
    (Exodus 28:1-3; Colossians 2:13-15; Galatians 3:13; Romans 10:4)

    According to the Bible, the only priesthood existing at present, is the one mentioned in the Bible. Jesus Christ as high priest, ant those who will be priest after their resurrection to heaven.
    (Hebrews 3:1; 4:14-5:10; 7:21-8:6; 9:6-15; 10:19-22; Revelation 1:5, 6; 5:9, 10; 20:6)
    I should have said, the only priesthood which scripture says is approved by God.
     
  11. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    40,208
    Ratings:
    +3,161
    likely for the application of it
    an authority on earth?.....as if is absolute?

    and give a man absolute over anything and he will enslave it

    and again....who can serve two masters?

    if you serve God.....you will find yourself in contention with
    anyone trying to have sway over you
     
  12. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    40,208
    Ratings:
    +3,161
    it is written....
    Do not conform to this world
    Be.....transformed by it
     
  13. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    3,811
    Ratings:
    +1,040
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    The apostles and selected older men, were appointed to carry out the preaching work, which evidently was the primary duty of the Christian congregation. They were doing the master's work, and just as Jesus sent them forth to preach, and set the example of preaching the message of the kingdom, in every village, town, and city, from house to house, and door to door, the apostles arranged for men to carry the message throughout the lands.
    Luke 8:1 Shortly afterward he traveled from city to city and from village to village, preaching and declaring the good news of the Kingdom of God. And the Twelve were with him,
    (Luke 9:1-6; 10:1, 2; Acts 1:8; Acts 6:7)
    What I find noteworthy, is that Jesus the Lord and master, set the example, and gave instructions, regarding his work. Yet person professing to be Christian, seem not to be following his example and instructions.
    Why do you suppose that is true of the Catholic religion?
     
  14. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli What's your stoyle?

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,881
    Ratings:
    +1,199
    Religion:
    Catholic
    But why didn't he let everyone be Apostles? Were the rest of his followers lacking in something?

    ...The others were not selected to preach or to "be with him"... Why..?
     
  15. Landon Caeli

    Landon Caeli What's your stoyle?

    Joined:
    May 12, 2018
    Messages:
    3,881
    Ratings:
    +1,199
    Religion:
    Catholic
    So why does the bible signify that there are both Disciples and Apostles..? The scriptural purpose for declaring the dichotomy is what?
     
  16. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,255
    Ratings:
    +11,814
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    Now you are just being dishonest as you put thoughts and motives into my mind that simply ain't there.

    Since I'd rather discuss matter with those who don't make such rash accusations, you can go ahead and have the last word here because I'm no longer interested in trying to have a discussion with one who acts in such a depraved manner. You do not know what's in my mind, I asked you to clarify what you were trying to say but you just kept repeated the sale ol' same ol', and then all you can do with the above is to come up with the above piece of dishonest trash.
     
  17. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,255
    Ratings:
    +11,814
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    BTW, just let me add the above to just another example of your dishonesty as "My Faith Statement" at the bottom of each of my posts should tell anyone, including you, that I'm hardly a parrot of anyone's "religious leaders".
     
  18. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    3,811
    Ratings:
    +1,040
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    You post is clear. Your words are clear.
    If my questions were nonsensical to you, perhaps you should have asked me, what I meant.
    By the way, where did you ever ask me to clarify anything?
    Goodbye. [​IMG]
     
    #58 nPeace, Feb 8, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2019
  19. nPeace

    nPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2018
    Messages:
    3,811
    Ratings:
    +1,040
    Religion:
    Follower of Christ
    What does apostle mean?

    ...and please, let this be a discussion, not a one-sided drill.
    So while I answer your questions, which I am doing, please, I am also asking questions to hear your explanations also.
    One of those questions is here. Call No Man Your Father
     
  20. Windwalker

    Windwalker Integralist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    7,887
    Ratings:
    +3,902
    Religion:
    Love, Light, and Life
    The Nag Hammadi texts for one. This shows the level diversity of thought in the early Christian communities. Rather than being some monolithic line from Jesus to Orthodoxy with later aberrations coming in corrupting the one pure message, as the myth attempts to create, you begin to see that the proto orthodox line was one of these branches of Christianity's evolution.

    This makes a lot more sense considering the nature of evolution itself. It never follows one straight, clean line. We impose linearity on it, and our origin myths like to reflect that.

    This is all part of the evolution of the proto orthodox group consolidating its position as the "official" strain chosen upon at a later date, crafting and choosing what to include that supported the preferred views over other views, which were subsequently culled out and literally burned in fire. Fortunately for us, lovers of knowledge hid these away from the righteous one's, and we have them today by pure luck to be able to re-examine our assumptions provided to us by the myth of the "Great Story", as Bauer called it.

    There is a difference between truth and factity. It's a relationship between the subject and the object of belief. There is a dynamic between these which creates truth to us. For instance, someone assumes that if they can just get to the facts of what Jesus said, then you can get to the truth and you will know it. However, the reality of this is quite different. I take a very different approach with this.

    It doesn't matter if Jesus was a completely different animal than what you or I might assume based upon what we read, or have been taught. The real Jesus on the ground is less important than the "Jesus" that we see. That's what matters. That's what is the truth to us. And in reality, the facts have a way of diminishing the truth of it to us, changing a symbol into a mere sign, taking transcendence and making it mundane. So yes, throwing out the baby is exactly what happens when you have literalists trying to find out the "facts" about God and such. The baby is the transcendent nature of symbolism.

    In the words of Carl Jung, "the mechanism that transforms energy is the symbol", which he named his later work, "Symbols of Transformation". That energy, is spirit, and it is spirit that hears truth and responds. The rational mind is a bit of a dullard when it comes to that, so "facts" are really only an exercise of the rational mind seeking to satisfy itself, but the relationship between the truth and facticity, is the eye of Spirit. It's what is held in one's own degree of Consciousness, or spiritual awareness. Truth resides in the heart, ornaments of the Spirit hung on the structures of the mind to be beheld and marveled at with wonder.

    A dove is just a bird. But when it becomes the Holy Spirit to us, we transcend ourselves through its symbolic reality. That is what the Christ is. Our transcendent Self.

    And this right here is exactly what I just said is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The myth of the Great Story, while factually untrue, has symbolic truth and meaning to people. Even if not factually true, it holds a certain symbolic value.

    I got the pleasure of being asked to go out for coffee by one of the NT scholars who was part of the Jesus Seminar work, as she wanted to discuss further some of my thoughts I had shared with her as the speaker. We talked for a couple hours or so, and one of the things she said really stuck true for me. She was talking about the story of the Nativity, and how someone had asked her if she thought it was historically true. Her response was, "If it didn't really happen, it should have."

    What she meant by that, which I got right away, was that is a timeless story of human truth. "If it didn't happen, it should have". This is what a good mythology is. It captures a deep, timeless truth of the human spirit expressed through symbol, creating a transcendent reality which both draws us to itself, and transforms us into itself through its symbolic vision. Does it really matter if a virgin girl biologically became pregnant without having sex? Is that what the story is actually about? Does it matter if it wasn't historically true?

    Is symbolic truth dependent on facts? If it is, then how is it still symbolic, if it's factual? It serves a different function, and operates at a different level. If it is not symbolic, then it's just a sign of something mundane.

    This is good. I too have spent literally thousands of hours studying these things from different angles and have come to understand things in a more complementary way for me. I agree with you about how "sola scriptura" makes little sense. As a religion a traditional line of teachings has a cumulative knowledge and wisdom to its followers. Contrast this with the Protestant strains and you have all manner of pop-up truth churches centered around some charismatic preacher who creates a certain following which branches off hither and yon. Hardly anything one could consider as a vehicle for inherited Wisdom! :)

    In this sense, the Catholic church as an institution bringing in the wisdom of tradition of early saints and others within its particular lineage (recall I see this as one strain of Christianity which gained prominence and later taught history through its eyes as the 'original' church), has in fact a greater claim to "historical Christianity" than any one of these little upstart churches. But that still does not make it historically factual. It means it's the oldest surviving Christian voice in the world, of what became Christianity to us.

    Where I come to in my thinking here, to attempt to share that with you, is that however the means a person, or story is transformed from scant historical facts, into symbolic truth, it becomes Truth to those who believe in it. It represents the Truth of God on earth to them. It doesn't matter if its claimed origin is factually true or not true, or if it is the natural product of evolution through of social and cultural pressures, and the whole range of considerations in those entire areas. Rather, it's how it is held symbolically that becomes the truth to the followers.

    The important thing is what is inspired in the heart. It's the truth of the heart, not to be confused with the facts on the ground. The facts on the ground is mundane. It's functional and curious. But it's not symbolic truth. It does not transform from within by opening the soul beyond its own sense of self in this world. The same Truth, can be found in anything, if the heart and the will imbue it with intentions and meanings.

    It's occurring to me at this moment that this is somewhat akin to the issue one runs into with Creationism. There is an enormous resistance to the idea of Evolution for them, because they see that these "facts on the ground" don't match how they have envisioned the facts based upon their inherited mythologies. They cannot separate out the meaning of the symbol, from the symbol. "It it wasn't as I have believed, then it's false". And that is what is throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

    In other words, so what if the Great Story is myth. "If it didn't really happen, it should have". :) Once one can hold these things lightly, then that real Truth begins to be seen and the rest is just window dressing. Ornaments of the Spirit.
     
Loading...