Sasun Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 (edited) 1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Rousas, a quick answer: this passage is not clear to me. I am not all that sure that Jesus said "kill". "Let him die the death" doesn't seem to call for any action to cause the death. It maybe a metaphorical reference, maybe something else, maybe just and incorrect record of what he said. I don't know.I am not trying to nullify any of Bible - just trying to understand clearly. It makes no sense that (for Jesus) killing God's son doesn't require death penalty or any form of earthly punishment, but just cursing ones parents is definitely subject to death penalty. Maybe you can reconcile these two conflicting ideas, but I am unable to do so. And how do you explain this? "And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free." Nothing reminding a death penalty. More later (I need to double check in the Armenian Bible) ... Edited August 25, 2003 by Sasun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arpa Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 Besides the fact that I am extremely reluctant to participate in theological and political debates may be mainly because I am extremely unqualified , not because religion and politics are two subjects that will create as many opinions as there are human beings on this earth. The fact that I find it very difficult to participate in this particular subject is the topic subject of the thread.HUH??!! "(Armenian) Biblical Law and Politics?"Firstly Biblical law and politics are contradictions in term at best, but even more so ; What is Armenian Biblical Law ? Do you guys know something that I don't? Is someone saying that the Armenians wrote A Bible and they set A Biblical Laws? When I have written about, or rather against comparing us with those who claim to have written the Bible I have brought this point, among many: When is the last time we have or claim to have written a book (of lies) that is the all time best seller in the history of mankind?How can we compare us to them?But above all why are we the idiots are promoting a book that even the so called purported writers of it all but ignore it?Who assigned us the champions of Christianity? Who assigned us the conscience of the world? :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gamavor Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 Arpa I'm with you on this one. How about Gamavorian Biblical Law, or President Bush and apostle Blear biblical law.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 HUH??!! "(Armenian) Biblical Law and Politics?" Lol. Sorry, this is the best I could come up with, judging from the first few posts. I haven't followed this thread in detail. I'm sure you know that by Armenian Biblical Law I meant the interpretation of biblical law by the Armenian Church, something people seemed to be discussing here. Should I change the topic title? If so, pls give me a more appropriate title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
America-Hye Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 I am yet to understand how these "Christians" can consider Armenian blood to be so cheap. I wonder why the "black blood" of Iraq (oil) is so much more valuabe to them. Is it because they do not have the spirit of Jesus within them?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 I am yet to understand how these "Christians" can consider Armenian blood to be so cheap. I wonder why the "black blood" of Iraq (oil) is so much more valuabe to them. Is it because they do not have the spirit of Jesus within them?? What Armenians are you talking about ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
America-Hye Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 Kevork Poosheryan and Antranig Peleryan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
America-Hye Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 Sasun, Please allow me to clarify my latest post: Gevorg Bush-er-yan oo An-tony Bleryan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
America-Hye Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 This all has to do with US and Britain not acknowledging the Armenian Genocide.It is powerful business interests that take precedence over the TRUTH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted August 25, 2003 Report Share Posted August 25, 2003 This all has to do with US and Britain not acknowledging the Armenian Genocide.It is powerful business interests that take precedence over the TRUTH. How do you know it's the truth? Oh crap, if this becomes a discussion the thread will have to be split again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
America-Hye Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Of the 11 children of my grandmother, 10 disappeared in the Spring and Summer of 1915 along with the mother and father. Wasn't it normal for my grandmother to write often to her niece on the other side of the world. She never wrote to the other 10 children of her sister because they were not around. According to the Turks these 10 children and there parents went off on vacation to some island in the Mediterranean or to some other resort. That is the LIE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Sorry, I know, it was a bit of a strange question. I've just been having these doubts for some time now, whether we can indeed call it a genocide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Sorry, I know, it was a bit of a strange question. I've just been having these doubts for some time now, whether we can indeed call it a genocide. ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Kevork Poosheryan and Antranig Peleryan LOL Hagarag, you are always full of surprises. I thought those are real people having to do with the administration or perhaps military people occupying Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Am I getting through here? Not entirely. What I am saying is also very simple. Someone is either Christian or not. A Christian is one who believes in Christ (as God, but not believing Jesus as a mere prophet like the Muslims do). And if someone doesn't believe in Christ in such manner, is not a Christian. Very often such people do not call themselves Christian. I belong to the first category, I am a Christian albeit different from other Christians. What you are saying is the fine differences. But that doesn't matter. If this is about the name, OK, call me not a Christian, let's say a Christ-follower or Christ-worshipper. The name is not that important. I was thinking today, Christians very often pray to the cross or the sculpture of the Christ, or Mary, etc. All of these are not God, but just stone, wood, clay or whatever. If it is sculpture or picture of Jesus, it is usually in all likelihood a different persons picture, not what Jesus actually looked. At any rate, my point is the object of our worship is not God, but we pray to God. Likewise, Hindus regard cow a sacred creature, not because a cow is a god or God, but because they see God in it. If you think about it, at least cow is a living being and ranked higher than minerals. So why does it seem so strange and unacceptable to a Christian westerner to see divinity in a cow but to pray to a stone is OK? It is all about the thought behind it, no matter what is the object of our attention, the spirit is always with the highest reality which we call God. Having said this, Knight, animals are not sacred for me per se, I am not a Hindu but a Christian who is trying to understand and accept the merits and spiritual benefits of other religions. But I do believe in soul reincarnation like I said. And as far as I am aware, not only Jesus made no mention of reincarnation being true or false, but also there is not even a dogma to say that reincarnation is wrong. It is simply outside of Christianity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Sasun...well bless you...LOL. Your (seemingly simple/straightforeward) claims may not save you from hell (ie persuction by otherd claiming that their version of Christianity id right and yours wrong/heretical...and while what you are claiming as simple truth is still really very far from simple...as debates about just who/what was Christ and what does this concept/being stand for etc are still potentially very debatable (but please spare us...LOL)... And as for reincarnation...well I believe that it is counter to Christian concept of (temporary etc) life on earth and everlasting life in heaven...I mean whats the point - go back to live on earth as a snail? etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousas Posted August 26, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 And how do you explain this? "And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free." Nothing reminding a death penalty.That is Christ's point. Look at the whole sentence. It starts with "But ye say..." Christ explains God's command in Verse 4 "For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death."Christ explains the scribes and Pharisees traditions in Verse 5 and 6a"But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free."Christ then concludes in verse 6b, "Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
America-Hye Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Nairia, Just for clarfication , I meant to say the 10 children of my grandmother's SISTER. I was rushing off to work, so I did not proofread. All this talk about Biblical Law, as if Jesus' message can be discerned as a legal code of conduct. I repeat, what of the apocryphal texts and the non-orthodox texts? Are we to believe that only the versions of Christ's teaching enforced by the canonical leaders are correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousas Posted August 26, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 "(Armenian) Biblical Law and Politics?"Yes, I don't like the title either, and supposedly I started it. ???It has nothing to do with things 'Armenian'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousas Posted August 26, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 American-Hye, Everything that Christ said is a legal code of conduct. Do you believe in the Creed of Chalcedon? Because it is apparent to me that you do not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousas Posted August 26, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Correction: "Do you agree with the fathers position at the Council of Chalcedon?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nairi Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 "(Armenian) Biblical Law and Politics?"Yes, I don't like the title either, and supposedly I started it. ???It has nothing to do with things 'Armenian'? Rousas, I split the topic where you began to talk about biblical law, which had little to do with America-Hye's original thread. This then turned into the discussion which you see before you. Once again, as I said, if anyone objects this move or title, please let me know and I can change it. I haven't followed this thread in detail, also because I barely understand half of what you guys are talking about. I doubt any of the other moderators do either. So please give me a more appropriate title, and I'll change it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
America-Hye Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 The Council of Chalcedon was held in 451, some 400 years after Jesus' human form left this earth, and at least 350 years after the last of his close disciples left this earth. I prefer the archaelogical texts which have surfaced in the last 50-odd years. There is no reason that Christendom need be monolithic. I would prefer that every effort be made to get back to the essence of Jesus' teachings, not muddled by mortal men jockeying for power. I hope that this answers your question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
axel Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 (edited) I would prefer that every effort be made to get back to the essence of Jesus' teachings America-Hye, you have one point in common with Rousas and that is the fact you are denying (or forgetting) apostolic succession. This protestant and essentially secular point of view makes no sense from an authentically christian perspective. How can you pretend that the Apostolic Church (I say the Church, the union of the faithful, not a particular individual who as any human may err) doesn't follow the essence of Jesus' teachings? Edited August 26, 2003 by axel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasun Posted August 26, 2003 Report Share Posted August 26, 2003 Sasun...well bless you...LOL. Your (seemingly simple/straightforeward) claims may not save you from hell (ie persuction by otherd claiming that their version of Christianity id right and yours wrong/heretical...and while what you are claiming as simple truth is still really very far from simple...as debates about just who/what was Christ and what does this concept/being stand for etc are still potentially very debatable (but please spare us...LOL)... And as for reincarnation...well I believe that it is counter to Christian concept of (temporary etc) life on earth and everlasting life in heaven...I mean whats the point - go back to live on earth as a snail? etc THOTH, thanks and welcome back. The version of reincarnation that I believe (most likely) doesn't assume that a soul will take an animal body after taking a human body earlier. But it is up to the soul, perhaps some human souls will long for a snail life, who knows there are so many different humans. I have no direct knowledge of reincarnation or afterlife whatsoever. I just pick up from available versions what makes most sense to me. Here is my source on reincarnation, http://www.srichinmoy.org/html/library/que...arnation_qa.htm . He has more stuff but I couldn't readily find them online.I understand the Christian version of resurrection as repeating (with modifications) throughout the reincarnation, until a God-realization happens. After that souls have no need to come back to earth and take a form, but they still could come. When all souls have realized God, that is the point when the end of the world is reached, and the Christian idea of Kingdom of Heaven is established on earth. Jesus has not given any details of resurrection, but when he was asked a question, he indicated that God is not for the dead people but alive people. That means that there is no death. This runs contrary to the view that souls sleep until resurrection. That 'sleep' is essentially death.At any rate, we are here on earth now and that's what matters most at this point, whether or not we believe in renicarnation. Debates about Christ will never end, I see no point in engaging in such debates or depending on them. I have found my principle, that whatever one believes could be wrong or right, we just don't have the means to verify. So in order to avoid confusion, one should find his truth as best as he can, and clear out contradictions for himself. Surely there will be many not to believe your version, but at least your version itself will not have internal contradictions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.