How did Jesus fight the tradition and made the religion more relational?
|
How did Jesus fight the tradition and made the religion more relational?
Jesus fought religion and religious tradition, he also said the pharisees and sadducees father was the devil. That only people who were not blind could see this. So basically I would say he left the false religions to their own path and only the true believers to see the light.
Jesus was never angry with the thieves or prostitutes. His righteous anger was directed solely at the "good church folk" who "acted" pious but cared little for their fellow man. The leaders saw the people as sheep they could use and take advantage of - which they did. Jesus saw the thieves, prostitutes etc. as at least being honest about the lack of God in their life. The leaders professed to know God but did not.
itsmemaths,
Jesus opposed the traditions of men who added to the law such as no work of any kind on the Sabbath.
But the traditions of God He kept and started or added to His own such as holy baptism and the Holy Eucharist.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Really Fred?
It's recorded that Jesus never baptized anybody Though John the Baptizer and others obviously did before Jesus ministry. And I've read all through 16 versions of the bible and don't even know what "Eucharist" is.
Which religion are you referring to? Jesus was a Jew so are you asking if he was trying to make Judiasm more relational? As far as I'm aware, Jesus did not set out to or try to establish a new religion, that was done by his disciples after his death and alleged resurrection.Quote:
Originally Posted by itsmemaths
By what is written in (Matthew 28:18 ) Jesus was given all power on earth and heaven. And Christ told His disciples in (Matthew 28:19-20) go teach and baptize. Plus Christ said teach all, to observe all, that I have commanded.Quote:
Originally Posted by homesell
However, my faith and trust in baptism would rest in what Christ said, and how Christ was shown as the path to follow. Hearing HIS voice as sheep that follow HIM.
We are called to obtain the gospel of Jesus Christ. (2 Th 2:14) That would be in the calling of salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth that is written.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
It does not mean by any man's doctrine that is corruptable. We are told to stand fast, and hold the traditions which the disciples, and apostles were taught, by reveal truth of God. Noting all as being whether by the word, or their epistle. Peter himself was said by Christ, to hold that reveal truth when Peter confirmed to Christ 3 times that he loved Christ and was told to follow as Christ himself had followed HIS Father in glory. (John 21)(Matthew 16:17)
Fred, I don't see where Christ added to baptism, because it is noted in scripture being John and Christ, both suffered it as fulfilled in righteousness. (Matthew 3:15)
As for the Holy Communion we acknowledge that Christ brought us a way through the veil. That what was once by priests alone once a year through gifts and sacrifices of blood at the altar (Hebrew 9:6-9)
Christ brought a new and living way, which HE consecrated for us. That His body takes us through the veil (Hebrews 10:20), and His blood is the blood of the New Testament that finished it(Matthew 26:28) (John 19:30)
sndbay,
I agree.
But please note that Jesus commanded his followers to go out and baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Prior to that Jews used baptism as a cleaning ritual.
So Jesus made it a sacrament by adding the authority of the triune God to it.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
No it is not recorded that Jesus did not do any Baptisms. It merely does not list any he did. But no where do I remember it saying he never did.
Paul speaks of not doing many.
But in fact Jesus actually did follow many of the important church traditions. He went to the temple, taugh followed passover traditions, and since he entered the temple he would have also went though the rites of purification to be allowed to enter.
Fr_Chuck,
Very good point and the bible does tell us that Jesus went with His Disciples to where there was water and baptized, though it does not say which ones did the baptizing.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
What I find different from what John was doing, we today are told in following, that before we are baptized, we are to confess faith in Christ Jesus as the Son of God.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
This is written in Acts 8:37-38 that Philip said "If thou believest with all thine heart" thou mayest. Confession of ONE FAITH " I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. "
When you say it was a cleaning ritual, it is true that by the command of God, John went as the forerunner, baptizing in forgiveness for sin.
However today according to scripture baptism now SAVES us (REFER: 1 Peter 3:21) by the answer of a good conscience toward God. And in (REFER: Hebrews 10:22) we are told of the body being wash with pure water.
The 3 in ONE is included by each sufficient act commanded by God. Baptism of the Holy Spirit, and by the body of Christ that takes us through the veil, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus written in (REF:Hebrews 10:19)
The 3 in ONE delivers us, and we are chase virgins as Paul teaches. Paul's teaching is that he fears we can be beguiled like Eve was in the garden. Beguiled from the simiplity of Christ Jesus. (REF: 2 Cr 11:3)
chase meaning pure from every fault, immaculate
virgin meaning abstained from all uncleanness
REFER: 2 Cr 11:2For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.
Faith set you free... walk in Christ as a child of God
One LORD One BAPTISM One FAITH
sndbay,
That was not what I was pointing out.
It is that Jesus started His own traditions.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Fred, Then where or what was Christ's own traditions? .. where in scripture did Christ start HIS own traditions?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
In Faith, I believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are ONE. Christ's walk was not separated from the Father or the Holy Spirit..
Even today I sometimes meet people that "brag" about who baptized them or what church they attend, who their preacher or priest is, or what family member is a priest or preacher as if any of that, has anything to do with the person's current relationship to God. People tend to put their trust in THINGS outide of the spiritual for whatever reason. It doesn't make it right. I believe that Jesus did NOT personally baptize for this reason and that Paul followed his example. If you or I were PERSONALLY baptized in water by Jesus, wouldn't we start to trust in that fact rather than trusting in being personally Baptized by Jesus in the Spirit? Our flesh is weak and we have a tendency to rely on the physical things we have done rather than give TRUE worship that Jesus says is "In Spirit and Truth and concentrate on ongoing relationship with Him.
sndbay,
I already mentioned that here on this thread.
Fred
??? Why would you call them His Own?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Truth is known by what is written.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
1 Corinthians 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
John 14:10-11 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
2 John 1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
John 1 :18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
In the bosom of the Father means in front of the body between the arms.
Yes many today place themselves and others on a scale. And they show favoritism, which God would never do. People see by their own measure of scale in everything that surrounds them. Truth is there is only "ONE" above us all, and God sustains us by HIS power, and mercy. The dominance between weak and strong, allows the destruction of what the weak have to offer. The evil in the destruction of the weak for example (abortion, child abuse, ect..) . That is why those chosen to the position of authority should use causion in their decisions, and listen for their heart of love to walk in Christ.Quote:
Originally Posted by homesell
The example you brought forward of Paul and his reason behind not doing baptism is a good one. Paul clearly did not want people to think Christ was divided. (REFER: 1 Cr 1:13) And Christ would never speak of division from the Father or the Holy Spirit.
Paul did baptize the house of Stephanas which was a Christian convert of Corinth. But Paul was thankful to God not to baptize any others because he did not want people to think they were baptized in his name. (causing division) We are to be baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Confessing our faith in Christ who is (ONE) with the Father and Holy Spirit.
The teaching of Christ is to walk in HIM, follow HIM, hear HIS voice. It is Not to follow man, and traditions of man, which have been scaled by man's will and pride of themselves.
If you follow man, you have arrived to division from Christ. Division exists between anything that is not done following the doctrine of Christ by the Word of God, and in what Christ gave testomony in doing himself. And as Christ said many will come in my name, and shall deceive .
We are foretold to watch in discernment of good and evil, and giving up all to follow HIM.
2 John 1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
~in Christ
Right. And we are not to go beyond what is writtenQuote:
Originally Posted by sndbay
1 Cor 4:6
6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other.
NKJV
Why would Christ 'fight' tradition? Do you recall God's revelation of Truth to Jacob, Abraham, and Mosses; was the truth revealed by God in Jacob's day any less true in antiquity, any less true than God's truth today? How else would the chosen people convey that truth from generation to generation but by tradition? Yet, you argue that the New Testament did away with the 'law'. Well it didn't. In fact, in order to believe this we'd need to put aside Christ's own words, words not given to the Jew (the Jew already knew the traditions of their faith) rather those words were spoken to the gentile, and not just any Gentile, but the procurator from Rome (Pontius Pilate). His entire mission on earth was wrapped around truth, He didn't just teach, He didn't just reveal, He gave “testimony to the truth”. (Cf. John 18:37)Quote:
Originally Posted by itsmemaths
Christ's faith affirmed God's Truth; His authority attests to the validity of the Truth giving hope; and in Love He submitted to the Truth. And He acclaimed the God of Jacob, the God of Abraham, and the God of Mosses. A knowledge gained by the tradition of the faith of His people. We know this without a showdown of doubt Christ said, “Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” (Matt 5: 17). And to think some people would replace the entirety of faith with a book alone, instead of Scripture and Tradition.
JoeT
p.s. God is truth. You cannot replace God or Truth with a book alone.
Because the tradition of man does not compare to the word of God.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
And the oral tradition was carefully passed down from generation to generation (not corrupted by additions of men) until such time as it was written down. Not - it was written down. Just as we are told that the revelation in the NT was written down.Quote:
Do you recall God's revelation of Truth to Jacob, Abraham, and Mosses; was the truth revealed by God in Jacob's day any less true in antiquity, any less true than God's truth today? How else would the chosen people convey that truth from generation to generation but by tradition?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
And when did Christ turn on Mosses and say, "And Mosses has no book".
Huh?? English translation please? Do you have a problem with Jesus? Please clarify.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
Joe,
You are right.
Well said.
Fred
Finally some dialouge I can relate to. From what I understand we can't please GOD with tradition. We can get caught up in the way things have been done and not step out side the box. GOD is so large and amazing we can't begin to understand how much so. I think tradition keeps you in the box and GOD wants us to step out side the box and not focus so much on the rules but building a relationship with him to become more like him. Bottom line the things that christ asked us to keep in remembrance were thing to help the generations to come remember the great things god has done in the past so their faith would be build up. Baptism is just symbolic to the cleansing and rebirth of your new life in christ. Pass over is remembering god passing over the Israelites homes in egypt. And communion is symbolic to christs body, and blood and him giving it for us. Jesus broke a lot of traditions.
flayvur,
So you believe, but I don't.
I believe that Jesus made baptism a sacrament.
A sacrament is something that has been set for a special purpose.
Long ago it cleaned away sins for the Jews and a Christian Baptism does indeed remove sins if done according to how Jesus instructed.
Peace and kidness,
Fred
Fred,Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Even for the Jews it was said to be symbolic.
Heb 9:9-10
9 It was symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience-- 10 concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.
NKJV
The term "various washings" refers to the Jewish mikveh and the word here in Greek is baptismos, elsewhere translated as baptism.
Further, scripture is clear that it is believing in Jesus that saves, and it is the blood on the cross that washed our sins, not water.
Rev 1:4-6
5 and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood,
NKJV
Paul said in Romans that the water of baptism was symbolic.
Rom 6:4-7
4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.
NKJV
Notice the word "likeness"? It means a comparison, or a symbolism.
I'm totally not disagreeing with any thing that's being said. I f there's any questions within you I would direct you fred or arcura to ask the holy spirit to reveal it to you. I myself am not questioning you. I'm simply stating what has been revealed to me.
Tj3,
Believe as you wish.
I will believe as I do.
OK?
Fred
Fred,Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
You are always welcome to believe as you wish, and no doubt you will, but that will not stop me from posting what scripture has to say on this or any other topic.
Tom
Mosses did, didn't he? -- you might recall 'The Law of Mosses'Quote:
Originally Posted by flayvur
But, are you suggesting that you can do one up on God with the 'thinking out of the box'?Quote:
Originally Posted by flayvur
As we keep the daily tradition of communion, “He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life” (John 6:55)Quote:
Originally Posted by flayvur
Baptism is an absolute necessity to enter into the Kingdom of God. It is the real remission of actual and original sin and removes temporal punishment accrued for sin. Baptism infuses a real and permanent supernatural gift of grace and virtue. It confers special graces of an inheritance of God's promises for mercy. Did Christ not say, “unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God”? (John 3)Quote:
Originally Posted by flayvur
Christ himself celebrated Passover in the tradition of the Jewish faith. “Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” (Matt 5: 17).Quote:
Originally Posted by flayvur
JoeT
I think the answear to the OP's question is.. ''you have turned the house of my Father into a house of thieves''.
Selling birds and animals outside the Temple was a manmade tradition that man invented to gain profit.
Man used the Word of God(sacrifises), for his own benefit(gain money). That's tradition!
Also man used the Word of God(stoning whores and adulteres) for their benefit(self justification).That's tradition!
So many things that man still does , manipulating God's Word for his own benefit... that's Tradition!
Heb 9:9-10 is not about baptism but about sacrifise.The sacrifise of animals was symbolic but of course those people could not understand that because they simply were ''newborns'' since Jesus Christ was not revealed yet.
Baptism is something that He Himself instructed His desciples to do and of course there are so many symbolisms in it but that does not mean that we can say that it is just symbolic and not be baptized.Also participating in the Lord's Body by bread and wine is symbolic to eat His flesh and drink His blood.This was also insrtucted by Him!
Everything we do is symbolic, but that does not mean that we could rest in a symbolism.That would be tradition!
The Tradition of the Church is that Tradition given it b Christ and the Holy Sperit. No man can corrupt it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Tradition was passed down from generation to generation so that man could be made adopted sons of God. New Testament Scripture was later developed as a special form of Roman Catholic Tradition.
JoeT
Did he? No references, I see.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
As always, reading in context is important. To stop there without reading the full context would not be using sound Biblical exegesis, so lets continue on.Quote:
As we keep the daily tradition of communion, “He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life” (John 6:55)
John 6:60-64
61 When Jesus knew in Himself that His disciples complained about this, He said to them, "Does this offend you? 62 What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.
NKJV
Now Jesus now says that the flesh profits nothing. This appears contrary to verses 53-4 that state that we need to eat his flesh and drink his blood, and if we do, we receive eternal life, but then Jesus clarifies by stating that Jesus says that the words are the spirit and the life. This is why it is important to continue on and read the full context because Jesus has just struck to the very heart of the doctrine of transubstantiation by saying that the flesh does not profit us at all. Rather He says, that the life comes from the spirit, not the flesh and it is the words that bring the spirit.
Words = spirit = life, Flesh does not profit anything.
This is in harmony with what Jesus said in Matthew chapter 4:
Matt 4:3-4
3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. 4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
KJV
It is God's word that brings life and the spirit, not eating the flesh. Therefore, even if the bread were changed to flesh, there would be no benefit from eating it. Now, remember earlier in this document, it was noted that human flesh and blood do perish and yet the bread that Jesus offered did not perish? Here is the explanation. Jesus was not speaking of bread, or of blood or of flesh but was speaking of the words of God which bring life. God word and the life which comes from God's word (the Gospel) are eternal. Bread, flesh and blood are perishable, but God's word and salvation which comes from receiving the gospel are eternal.
64a But there are some of you who do not believe.
Some do not believe that the flesh profits nothing rather and thus do not believe that it is His words that give the spirit and life. If they do not believe that the flesh profits nothing, then they must believe that it is the flesh rather than His words that He is speaking about.
64b For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him.
And some as a result, they will betray him.
Then you are telling us that the thief on the cross and every saint in the OT went to hell?Quote:
Baptism is an absolute necessity to enter into the Kingdom of God.
Let's see that in context:Quote:
Did Christ not say, “unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God”? (John 3)
John 3:5-7
5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.'
NKJV
Note that he equates the water with the flesh, being born in the flesh, and being born again with being born in the spirit. This is not speaking about water baptism. Different topic. Jesus here is using the Jewish figure of speech known as parallelism, equating the two items mentioned first with the same two mentioned the second time, respectively. Thus:
Water = flesh
Spirit = Spirit.
The tradition given to the church in the 1st century was all written down so that man could not corrupt it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT777
Let's not start that again. As you know that denomination started centuries later than the NT was written down. For it to have been a denominational tradition, it would have to have been written down after the 4th century, and it would not be the word of God but a tradition of men.Quote:
New Testament Scripture was later developed as a special form of Roman Catholic Tradition.
Tj3,
SO you still insist on a false idea that The Church did not become The Church until centuries later.
History and Scripture prove that to be false.
When are you going to start believing in reality?
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Yeah it's called sin. Just because there is unpleasant gritty sand on the beach doesn't mean you deny the existence of a place where the land meets the ocean.Quote:
Originally Posted by adam7gur
Its true sacrificed gifts could never atone for sin. Nor by the eating of certain foods or drinking certain drinks can satisfy the conscience. And carnal ordinances requiring various washings can never blot away sin. However, touching of the dead requires special purification with water, so too the touching of faith without works (dead faith) outlined verse 13 & 14 is to become unclean. (Cf. James 2:17). Thus, how can one serve a living God with a dead fait? How then do you become holy without the Sacramental Traditions taught by the Church? What does it profit you to memorize every word of in the bible any you still can't wash the naked sin from your brother. It's the mediator's New Testament who traded his life for redemption, a promise of eternal inheritance as adopted sons of God. And until you eat of the body of Christ and drink of the blood of Christ will you have life (John 6:54). Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. And in this spilt blood we find the fulfillment of the Old Testament and the ratification of the New Testament. Christ has affirmed our redemption in the waters of baptism and the blood of redemption.Quote:
Originally Posted by adam7gur
JoeT
And in which of the 72 books of the bible does it say that it was written down "so that man couuld not corrupt it". And which of the 72 books of the bible did Christ say, "and so it was said, so let it be written"? I don't remember that part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
Let's not start that again. As you know that denomination started centuries later than the NT was written down. For it to have been a denominational tradition, it would have to have been written down after the 4th century, and it would not be the word of God but a tradition of men.[/QUOTE]
I know that the Catholic Church was born when Christ said, "Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church," (Matt 15:17-18)
In english, doesn't Christ say I WILL and UPON THIS ROCK and BUILD MY CHURCH?
JoeT
Boy, John 6 really irks you. Why don't you remove it from the bible along with James?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tj3
What is it about, "eat this, this is my body" and "drink this, this is my blood" that you don't under stand. (Cf. Matt 26:26-27)
JoeT
[QUOTE=JoeT777;1813531]Yeah it’s called sin. Just because there is unpleasant gritty sand on the beach doesn’t mean you deny the existence of a place where the land meets the ocean.QUOTE]
I did not say that tradition is out of the question.All I said is that tradition that is not in agreement with the Word should not be taken as God's will! Jesus said that he who is not against us is with us.
It takes two witnesses to testify the word so that the word becomes certain.Tradition should be backed up somehow by the Word, I think it is clear that every word that is against the Word somehow, is not God's!
Again I am not saying that we should forget everything else and just focus and study the Bible, but I am saying examine every word, every tradition if it is God's or not!
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:14 AM. |