What's at stake?

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Tue Sep 30, 2014 11:47 pm

Assuming that Jesus is not God, there seems to be a clear violation of the first commandment, that we are to have "no other gods before me (YHVH)".

What is at stake here, how serious an infraction of God's primary law is worshiping Jesus?

Does the gravity of this situation make those who worship Jesus more biased in favor of keeping Jesus as their God and the object of their worship, rather than opening themselves to evidence of the contrary?

Two or three things occur to me, that I will share after some replies.

I think that most Evangelicals swear that those who DO NOT worship Jesus spend eternity in hell...pretty high stakes.

But what if they are wrong, what if the reverse is true, what if there is punishment FOR worshiping Jesus, if he is NOT God? What then are the stakes, if worshiping Jesus is indeed a form of idolatry?

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 11:03 pm

YahDough wrote:
Danmark wrote:
YahDough wrote: [Replying to post 53 by Elijah John]

You have an interesting but distorted perception of Paul (as well as Christ Jesus Himself.)

Do you suppose you might have made Paul blush by giving him credit for starting Christianity?
This post makes no argument. It is merely a very general opinion. Do you have an actual argument, with facts to back up your remark?
I hate to even respond to this accusation. My argument, which I think I conveyed with humor, was that it is ridiculous to attribute Christianity to Paul.

Paul, just like John, James, Jude, Peter, Luke and others all wrote letters to promote Christ and Christianity. It just seems Paul worked harder and gets ridiculed more by unbelievers.

You call my response a "general opinion". So what? I was responding to an opinion.

I am putting you on ignore. I think you deliberately harass me sometimes. Sorry.
I suppose as a moderator now you will be gunning for me.

Moderator Warning

If you have a problem with Danmark or anyone else, work it out via PM.
If you intend to put someone on "ignore" just do it, don't announce it.
Also, publicly questioning someone's integrity as a moderator, or as a general poster for that matter, can be regarded as a personal attack.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

DanieltheDragon · Post by **DanieltheDragon** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 11:04 pm

[Replying to YahDough]

Perhaps instead of trying to be a comedian you could instead say what you mean? You can't blame someone for misunderstanding you when you are not saying what you mean or mean what you are saying.

As to the point about Paul starting Christianity that might be a bit of a stretch but his doctrines are the foundational principles of modern christianity(non orthodox) So there is some truth to this statement.

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 11:26 pm

[Replying to post 62 by DanieltheDragon]

Not so much a stretch. Not with regard to Trinitarian Christianity anyway. Conventional Christianity as we know it today is mostly based on Paul's teaching.

He and John had budding ideas of Jesus' supposed Divinity. (Though not as fully developed as they became a few centuries later, under RCC councils)

And the central doctrine of conventional Christianity? The substitionary atonement/appeasement.

PAUL's contribution...his theological interpretation of the significance of the death of Christ.

Judaic Christian groups such as the Ebionites or the apostles who wrote the Didache did not subscribe to these ideas, James, brother of Jesus also seems unfamiliar with such Pauline notions, or he and his community rejected them, according to historical Jesus scholars.

As Z has pointed out, Jesus did not seem intent on founding a "church" but rather reforming (small "r" ) Judaism, and ushering in God's kingdom as an apocalyptic prophet.

YahDough · Post by **YahDough** » Thu Oct 02, 2014 11:36 pm

DanieltheDragon wrote: [Replying to YahDough]

Perhaps instead of trying to be a comedian you could instead say what you mean?
I'm not "trying" to be a comedian. It comes naturally. And I say what I mean. Laughter does the heart good, like a medicine. I enjoy medicine that is good for the heart. And giving it is one of my gifts....seriously.
You can't blame someone for misunderstanding you when you are not saying what you mean or mean what you are saying.
Again...I say what I mean and I mean what I say. And I can blame people for jumping on my case for no good reason except they don't understand and/or believe what I say.

As to the point about Paul starting Christianity that might be a bit of a stretch but his doctrines are the foundational principles of modern christianity(non orthodox) So there is some truth to this statement.
Paul's letters survived and He has a high place in the Kingdom of God. So what? It was Christ Jesus IN him that produced those letters.

But thanks for trying to console me with your wisdom.
Is that what you were trying to do?

Danmark · Post by **Danmark** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:10 am

YahDough wrote: Paul's letters survived and He has a high place in the Kingdom of God. So what? It was Christ Jesus IN him that produced those letters.

I disagree and many Christians disagree. When I was a Christian I saw what I thought was a complete disconnect between the essence of Jesus as portrayed in the synoptic gospels and the stuff Paul was peddling.

As I wrote very recently in a private message:

"I can honestly say that I still love the Jesus I came to know as a very young child and as a young adult. Despite what others say about him, either pro or con, to me he represents an extraordinary person with an extraordinary message we can all benefit from. I am not making an argument, but a confession of believe when I say, 'Tho' we may never know the real Jesus, he represents a figure that perhaps has no parallel in history."

Tho' I believe Paul caught some of this message, too much of what he writes undermines what Jesus taught. For me, we see the real Jesus in his parables. Particularly the one about the two men who went forward to pray; the one about he who is without sin throwing the first stone; the Good Samaritan; the Prodigal Son; the Canaanite women he jokes with when he appreciates her witty come back.

This Jesus was a real man, a man with humor and compassion. Paul strikes me as completely humorless, a pedagogue with delusions of grandeur who insinuates himself into a position of leadership and control while claiming to be a disciple of Jesus after the fact.

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:53 am

To get back to the OP, Yahdough or anyone else who worships Jesus, again:

What is at Stake??

One's eternal destiny?

What if you are wrong, how serious a sin is Jesus worship, is it idolatry? Something YHVH would send a person to hell for?

Or is that just the destination for those who do not worship Jesus in your world view?

Or do you think YHVH would understand your error, if your beliefs ARE in error.

Theist to theist, in the final analysis, GOD is the judge, not you or I, correct?

DanieltheDragon · Post by **DanieltheDragon** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:05 am

[Replying to post 65 by Danmark]

Although to be fair with Paul, there seem to be some false attributions to his name. Ephesians titus and timothy come to mind. When it is unclear who or whom authored what it seems pretty hard to know what one really meant.

I think Paul was a pretty popular figure in the early church and without any real way to combat forgery at the time, he would have been an easy target to ascribe your ideas to, too get them heard.

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:17 am

More "what's at stake". Great article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mick-moon ... lp00000592

Are the legalistic* Pharisee's of today the Fundamentalists?

Both, it seems to me, used their beliefs as spiritual weapons.

*(certainly not all Pharisees were legalistic, judgemental, and hypocritical, mostly the ones who argued with Jesus, and some scholars believe that Jesus HIMSELF was a Pharisee, Pharisees were considered reformers of ancient Judaism too.)

Danmark · Post by **Danmark** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:49 am

Elijah John wrote: More "what's at stake". Great article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mick-moon ... lp00000592

Are the legalistic* Pharisee's of today the Fundamentalists?

Both, it seems to me, used their beliefs as spiritual weapons.

*(certainly not all Pharisees were legalistic, judgemental, and hypocritical, mostly the ones who argued with Jesus, and some scholars believe that Jesus HIMSELF was a Pharisee, Pharisees were considered reformers of ancient Judaism too.)

Yes. Whatever name one wants to give them, Jesus argued against the same kind of literalism that characterises the fundamentalism of today. Battling against the hypocrisy of the religious leaders of his day was a hallmark of his teaching.

Zzyzx · Post by **Zzyzx** » Fri Oct 03, 2014 4:19 am

.

Danmark wrote: Jesus argued against the same kind of literalism that characterises the fundamentalism of today. Battling against the hypocrisy of the religious leaders of his day was a hallmark of his teaching.

It seems as though a great deal of modern Christianity is what Jesus is said to have preached against -- accumulation (or adoration) of wealth, ostentatious public displays of prayer and "charity", church heirarchy, etc.