This Christianity thread will just not leave me alone…
At the office cooler, the discussion turned to religion, Christianity that is. It started with a discussion of the Republican presidential candidates’ debate Sunday morning, specifically about Mitt Romney and his Mormon faith.
A remark was made that under no circumstances would Evangelicals vote for a Mormon. The Evangelicals consider the Mormons as a “cult” close to something Satanic. I don’t really know much about Mormonism but the little I do know shows the religion has some pretty big differences with mainline Christianity.
The bigger question raised at the cooler was how does anyone really know what is the “correct” or “true” form of Christianity which prompted someone else to bring up the recent remarks of Pope Benedict which proclaimed that Catholic Christianity is the only true Christianity which if you remember is what got me started on my religious blogs of the last two weeks.
This was a mixed Catholic and Protestant group and I was not surprised by the comments.
The Catholics, true to form, brainwashed by the Church from a very young age to listen and obey and to never question; I was one of them, view the Pope as the only one that knows for sure what the “truth” is since he is God’s representative on earth.
The Protestants, trained early on to distrust the Catholics and avoid them at all costs, hold “Scripture” as the ultimate truth recognizing also that scripture can be interpreted in many ways.
The Catholics are commanded never to read the Bible alone; the Church will teach them everything they need to know about the Bible. The Protestants obviously are urged to “study” the Bible. I ask you how are the Catholics and Protestants to converse about Christianity; they come from such different traditions.
An example of the difficulty of communication between the two groups was when the discussion turned to the fact that Peter was not really in charge of the Apostles; James, the brother of Jesus, was. The Catholics said, we didn’t know Jesus had brothers and sisters, what about Mary’s virginity? Do you see what I mean?
Now let me throw in an email I received from the Biblical Archaeology Society that same day. It was an invite to a series of lectures in San Antonio, Texas titled: Do recently Discovered Manuscripts Tell Us Anything New about Jesus and Early Christianity.
The lectures included topics such as what can we learn from Christian scripture not included in the new testament canon or what can we learn about Jewish Christians from Arabic sources, etc.
My point is that the academic world is all atwitter about the new discoveries that point to a myriad of Christianities in the first 300 years after the death of Jesus and about the concerted effort by the Roman Christians of that time to eliminate all challenges to their dominance- as I mentioned in the previous blogs on this subject. And most importantly that Jesus and his apostles were in direct opposition to what later became Pauline Christianity and then Roman Christianity; eliminating the belief base for both Catholics and Protestants.
And yet in August 2007 we have Catholics who keep going to church and reciting their Hail Marys’ and having not the slightest idea about their religion’s history; accepting anything and everything they are fed by their clergy.
On the other hand, you have the Protestants, great students of the Bible able to quote Biblical verses at the drop of a hat, able to explain the meaning or significance of every Biblical passage but yet oblivious to the fact that the words of the New Testament Bible may have nothing to do with historical reality but are just propaganda pieces written by people that wanted to win the Christianity wars.
I guess I am disappointed that what academics are discovering and talking about is not filtering down to the common religious folk. But then they may not want to hear something that would put their belief system in question, why would they, why should they?
Does truth really matter? In my studies of the Papacy, I have read many times where intellectuals would challenge the Church saying its teachings are based on legend and not fact but to no avail; no one seemed to care.
I don’t usually go around wanting to burst people’s bubbles but when I hear religious people speak with such conviction and assurance that they are right with God and have a duty to help everyone else “know” Jesus like they do to be saved, I actually do want to prick their balloon. I tried it once but did not get the satisfaction I was expecting; they just looked at me as if I was insane for daring to question their religious beliefs which are obviously, unquestionably right.
At the office cooler, the discussion turned to religion, Christianity that is. It started with a discussion of the Republican presidential candidates’ debate Sunday morning, specifically about Mitt Romney and his Mormon faith.
A remark was made that under no circumstances would Evangelicals vote for a Mormon. The Evangelicals consider the Mormons as a “cult” close to something Satanic. I don’t really know much about Mormonism but the little I do know shows the religion has some pretty big differences with mainline Christianity.
The bigger question raised at the cooler was how does anyone really know what is the “correct” or “true” form of Christianity which prompted someone else to bring up the recent remarks of Pope Benedict which proclaimed that Catholic Christianity is the only true Christianity which if you remember is what got me started on my religious blogs of the last two weeks.
This was a mixed Catholic and Protestant group and I was not surprised by the comments.
The Catholics, true to form, brainwashed by the Church from a very young age to listen and obey and to never question; I was one of them, view the Pope as the only one that knows for sure what the “truth” is since he is God’s representative on earth.
The Protestants, trained early on to distrust the Catholics and avoid them at all costs, hold “Scripture” as the ultimate truth recognizing also that scripture can be interpreted in many ways.
The Catholics are commanded never to read the Bible alone; the Church will teach them everything they need to know about the Bible. The Protestants obviously are urged to “study” the Bible. I ask you how are the Catholics and Protestants to converse about Christianity; they come from such different traditions.
An example of the difficulty of communication between the two groups was when the discussion turned to the fact that Peter was not really in charge of the Apostles; James, the brother of Jesus, was. The Catholics said, we didn’t know Jesus had brothers and sisters, what about Mary’s virginity? Do you see what I mean?
Now let me throw in an email I received from the Biblical Archaeology Society that same day. It was an invite to a series of lectures in San Antonio, Texas titled: Do recently Discovered Manuscripts Tell Us Anything New about Jesus and Early Christianity.
The lectures included topics such as what can we learn from Christian scripture not included in the new testament canon or what can we learn about Jewish Christians from Arabic sources, etc.
My point is that the academic world is all atwitter about the new discoveries that point to a myriad of Christianities in the first 300 years after the death of Jesus and about the concerted effort by the Roman Christians of that time to eliminate all challenges to their dominance- as I mentioned in the previous blogs on this subject. And most importantly that Jesus and his apostles were in direct opposition to what later became Pauline Christianity and then Roman Christianity; eliminating the belief base for both Catholics and Protestants.
And yet in August 2007 we have Catholics who keep going to church and reciting their Hail Marys’ and having not the slightest idea about their religion’s history; accepting anything and everything they are fed by their clergy.
On the other hand, you have the Protestants, great students of the Bible able to quote Biblical verses at the drop of a hat, able to explain the meaning or significance of every Biblical passage but yet oblivious to the fact that the words of the New Testament Bible may have nothing to do with historical reality but are just propaganda pieces written by people that wanted to win the Christianity wars.
I guess I am disappointed that what academics are discovering and talking about is not filtering down to the common religious folk. But then they may not want to hear something that would put their belief system in question, why would they, why should they?
Does truth really matter? In my studies of the Papacy, I have read many times where intellectuals would challenge the Church saying its teachings are based on legend and not fact but to no avail; no one seemed to care.
I don’t usually go around wanting to burst people’s bubbles but when I hear religious people speak with such conviction and assurance that they are right with God and have a duty to help everyone else “know” Jesus like they do to be saved, I actually do want to prick their balloon. I tried it once but did not get the satisfaction I was expecting; they just looked at me as if I was insane for daring to question their religious beliefs which are obviously, unquestionably right.
Greetings!
ReplyDeleteEnjoyed reading your three Christianity posts. Its so rare to find original writing on blogs these days.
I do disagree with many of the comments on Catholicism. Catholics are encouraged to read the Bible and Catholic doctrine is found 100% in the Bible.
Much of the writings you mention were known well before Nag Hammadi. Many of these books have long been included in the Bibles used by the Eastern Churches, particularly the Copts. Catholics have long recognized the truths contained in writings like the Didache and the epistles of Ignatius and Polycarp.
Regarding the paring down of scriptures starting about 313, Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon, late 1st/early 2nd century, was the driving force in reducing the number of Gospels read in Church from about 30 to just 4.
As you mentioned that you were raised Catholic, I would encourage you to research what Catholics really and truely believe and the scriptural basis for such. For example, Peter being the Chief Steward based on Christ's quoting Isaiah 22:22 in Matthew 16:18-19. Yes, James was the Bishop of the Church at Jerusalem, but only Peter was given the ancient Davidic keys of the Chief Steward once entrusted to Eliakim.
God bless...