In 2008, after the passage of Proposition 8 in California, I blogged about my support for gay and lesbian persons and their right to be married. If there’s one thing I’ve noticed in the time since, it’s been how few people paid attention to the nuances of my position. So I thought I’d take the opportunity to write a bit more about it now.
It is very odd to me that in the U.S., clergy act as agents of the government at weddings. In my state, for instance, the bride and groom apply for the marriage license at the county court house, but they don’t actually sign the license. Instead, it’s signed by a member of the clergy and by two witnesses. And, of course, without the clergy signature, it is invalid.
When I talk to pastors and priests about this, almost all of them express extreme discomfort at this situation, for it actually requires the clergyperson to act as an extension of the state. And that conflicts with the theology held by many pastors, Calvinist and Arminian, Protestant and Catholic.
The reason for their discomfort, of course, is that in both the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures, those in the roles of priests and prophets have used their position to challenge the governing bodies. But once you are an agent of that body — which you are when you legally marry two people — you lose some integrity in that prophetic role.
Further, the clergyperson is potentially at the beck and call of the government in this role.
And most problematic, from my perspective, is that the clergyperson, with the stroke of a pen, makes legal a contract that s/he has no ability or potential to end. And, having gone through a divorce, I can tell you that extricating oneself from the legal contract that is marriage in our society is no mean feat. And the clergyman who married us was, understandably, not around to help unravel what he had helped establish.
I say all this to underscore what a strange thing it is in our culture that pastors, priests, and rabbis, who would otherwise proudly proclaim their independence from the government, regularly act as agents of the government at wedding ceremonies.
Were we to separate legal and sacramental marriage, it would solve all sorts of problems, not the least of which is the growing discomfort that many of us have that legal marriage is available only to some responsible adults who are in monogamous relationships. To recapitulate in short what I’ve written in the past:
- There is no “historic” institution of marriage; it has been a fluid concept for thousands of years, changing with time and across cultures
- Our society has determined that monogamy is good, so we incentivize it in various ways
- It’s a plain reality that gay and lesbian couples are among us, and they’re not going away
- So let’s afford them similar incentives toward monogamy by allowing them to enter the binding contract that we call “legal marriage”
- This will not implicate what any congregation or denomination considers a “sacramental marriage”
Here’s an analogy: As Christians, we don’t agree with the production of pornography, for it generally degrades women and debases the beauty of human sexuality. But we don’t continually protest against it, and we surely don’t legislatively fight to have it banned. Why? Because we consider the First Amendment right to free speech to be more important. When we put it in the scales, we believe so strongly in the First Amendment that we are willing to live with pornography.
I say the same goes for same sex marriage. Many Christians may not like it, but our desire for people to live chaste, monogamous lives should outweigh our distaste for homosexual sex (which, quite honestly, is what most Christians disagree with). In other words, I’m asking Christians more conservative than I on this issue to consider living with legal same sex marriage in order to encourage monogamy among gay and lesbian persons.
And, to reiterate, this will not implicate any church’s position on whom they sacramentally marry, if clergy stop performing legal marriages.
So, what do you say pastors (and priests and rabbis)? Will you join me and refuse to legally marry people?
Related posts:
{ 5 trackbacks }
{ 84 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
P.S. I would love, as I am sure many would, to sit down with you Tony and truly understand where you are coming from. I am not a “know all” bratty Christian girl who grew up in a typical sub urban, “Leave it to Beaver”, believe whatever I am told about the Bible home. My background would be quite the surprise to most. I get the hermeneutics argument, but you lose me everywhere else. *sigh* Perhaps we’ll end up on the same plane one day. Bless you!
I took this action with my colleague in March when things were charged in Maine with the No on 1 campaign. We found that most of our members (in our mostly but certainly not all progressive congregation) supported us even if they didn’t agree. We continue to talk about why we don’t sign state documents — even though my colleague and I share different reasons as to why we do this.
I find more of a backlash among my clergy friends who think… well, I don’t know what they think. This is certainly an excellent point though. Thanks Tony.
Good for you, Rev. Elsa.
I find more of a backlash among my clergy friends who think… well, I don’t know what they think.
Perhaps it’s because your very action is a challenge to your clergy friends, Elsa.
Hey Heather,
Are you cool with plural marriage? Because, you know, that was the vibe in “God’s culture” for a long time.
Zach, surely you understand that the Bible is a record of God speaking into human life & society as it was, not prescribing it to be so. So there is a line of progress, a learning curve, to be seen from “Where is your brother?” to, “walk in love one toward another” as described in the Epistles. Yes, “Love your neighbor as yourself” appears in Deuteronomy, the how, the why, and even the who becomes more specific as time progresses.
As to my earlier post, Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote from his prison cell to a young couple, “Just as it is the crown, and not merely the will to rule, that makes the king, so it is marriage, and not merely your love for each other, that joins you together in the sight of God and man. . . . It is not your love that sustains the marriage, but from now on, the marriage that sustains your love.”
Yeah, I get that, Robert. Maybe you missed it when Paul, in the NT, doesn’t forbid plural marriage for non-elders/church leaders.
But I digress. I do understand what you’re getting at. We shouldn’t take everything in scripture at face value. I’m thinking Heather would benefit from that insight as well.
Zach, I personally have more of a problem justifying an intercultural ban on polygamy. In many cultures, that is the only “life insurance” a woman has in case she loses her husband, and often the only way for a family not to lose its farmland for the next generations. It could be that the “husband of one wife” stipulation for Church leadership was more concerned with whether the candidate would have sufficient time to tend to his duties rather than to use this as a subtle way to introduce a new mos into Greek culture.
Taking the Bible at face value? Much better to enter into a conversation with it as with a much wiser friend: If something is said I don’t understand, it is the better choice to acknowledge my own limited understanding than to presume I “know better” before asking any questions. Too many times the Bible has been faulted for its “uninformed presumptions” only to have those presumptions proven true by closer looks into associated fields.
Tony
Like the way you’re thinking…
“A Call to Clergy: Stop Performing (Legal) Marriages!”
Sounds good to me. After all…
Any “Clergy” marrying folks in the Bible?
No?
Hmmm? Those pesky “Traditions of Men” at work again.
If we can’t get the “Clergy” to stop performing marriages;
Why not just get rid of “the Clergy?”
Can’t seem to find “Clergy” in my trusty Bible anyway.
And their divorce rate, of those they marry, is at 50% anyway,
and the “Clergy” have no say in who gets the kids.
All they are are glorified town clerks or justices of the peace.
You ask…
“So, what do you say pastors (and priests and rabbis)?
Will you join me and refuse to legally marry people?”
Now you’re addressing pastors. Why?
Am I free to ask such questions? Am I being a Berean?
Jesus loves me and forgives me all my sin.
Can’t seem to find today’s “Pastor/Reverend” in my Bible either.
Oy Vey!!! So many questions…
In the Bible, How many people… have the title pastor?
In the Bible, How many people are… referred to as pastor?
In the Bible, How many people are… ordained as a pastor?
In the Bible, How many congregations are… led by a pastor?
When did pastor become a “paid position,” a profession,
connected, as an arm, to the government?
Oh, and when/where did God say the IRS has the right
to determine what could be called “The Church of God.”
Seems “The Church of God” is no longer “The Body of Christ.”
The IRS says, “The Church” is now a 501 (c) 3, non profit,
tax deductible, religious corporation. Huh?
And who complains? Who cares? Do you just go along with it?
We do love those tax deductions. $$$$$
When it’s never about the money… It’s about the money.
So what if we turn “the Bride of Christ” into a tax deductible corp?
Where is that in the scriptures?
Fire them all.
Be blessed in your search for truth… Jesus
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice;
and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
John 10:16
One Fold – One Shepherd – One Voice.
If Not Now, When?
Amos, from your questions, I wonder what Bible version you’ve been reading. To avoid confusion, though, as you do seem to know your way around the Scriptures, look into your Greek NT. Byzantine or UBS, either one. Now, consider the way the words, επισκοπς, πρεσβυτερος, and διακονς are used, and tell me those are not clerical offices. Take a look at Acts 11, in which Peter, speaking for the Apostles (αποστολοι, messengers, in this case messengers of Christ), says, ‘we shall continue to devote ourselves to the word of God, and to prayer.’ Is he saying that’s what they hope to do in between fishing, marketing, and maintaining nets, boats, and hired help?
FYI, the rhetoric you so proudly defend did not originate with the Apostles, or the early Church, but with a skirt-chasing humanist of the 16th century, named Ulrich Zwingli. The three key elements you will find if you research his life are lust, pride, and hatred for those with whom he chose to disagree. Hardly an “apostle” for us to follow! (I Corin 4:16)
Tony:
Other than your acceptance of gay and lesbian marriage, this is EXACTLY what I’ve been saying for a couple of years now. I stopped signing civil marriage licenses after Prop 8, because my feeling was that the Bible defines marriage (or at least the terms of marriage and that God’s elders/emissaries were to adjudicate), and I could not be a part of any system that could define and re-define marriage by a vote, either of a secular court or a populace. I perform religious wedding ceremonies (without charging a fee, BTW, if people want to donate to my ministry they can determine what to give me; I also require that they have pre-marital counseling with me and I determine if it’s a proper union under God), but I tell people if they REALLY want the State to be a covenantal authority over them, that’s what the County Clerk’s office is for.
Robert
Still using my old, antiquated, KJV.
Most of my study books are keyed to it.
And some verses just don’t sound the same in the modern versions.
Sorry, you have me on the Greek words.
I used to know a little Greek…
but he moved away.
I’ll take your word for it that they mean clerical offices.
What ever that means?
You write about Acts 11…
I like Acts 11:26
…And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
You write…
“Take a look at Acts 11, in which Peter, speaking for the Apostles
(αποστολοι, messengers, in this case messengers of Christ), says,
‘we shall continue to devote ourselves to the word of God, and to prayer.’
Is he saying that’s what they hope to do in between fishing, marketing,
and maintaining nets, boats, and hired help?”
But the verse I think you meant is found in…
Acts 6:4
But we will give ourselves continually
to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.
Gee, that’s what I do now,
(and I’m not a “Clergy” or “Reverend” or “Pastor” or “paid.”)
well maybe not continually.
Wow – Are you saying that Peter was speaking for you, now?
and you’re an Apostle? a messenger of Christ?
and have forsaken all other earthly chores and pleasures?
and you do that continually?
giving your self continually to prayer?
and to the ministry of the word?
I just can’t find today’s “Clergy” or “Reverend” or “Pastor.” in the scriptures.
Are those made up words? “Tradition of Men” Jesus warned about?
“Titles” used to lord it over others? And exercise authority?
The “Clergy” that I have known always
dressed differently then us common folks
and took “Titles” (not found in my old KJV.)
that caused separation and division.
In my experience…
Titles become idols.
Pastors become masters.
Titles say,
I am – You’re not.
We are – They’re not.
And cause separation and division.
Jesus said, we are all brethren.
We are all one in Christ.
Pastor = Exercise Authority = Lord it over = abuse = always
Yes, thanks for the address correction. However,
Pastor = Exercise Authority = Lord it over = abuse = always
in your experience, maybe. Not entirely uncommon.
Pastor=Shepherd=Be among, give live to & for=protect=or else
is God’s plan, as Peter makes plain.
Pastor, Bishop, and Deacon are not in the NT, because it’s in Greek. The words we correctly translate into those English words are. Also for Minister, etc. Your argument that this modern English word was not used in a translation finished some 400 years ago is misleading at best, but to say that no offices should be used which are distinct from others goes against everything we read about the Body having many members with many different functions, etc., and apparently finds its own way to read Eph. 4:11, ff.
What a long, spirited, and civil discussion! How often online discussions, which include disagreements, result in incivility and name-calling.
Pastor = Exercise Authority = Lord it over = abuse = always
A. Amos Love, I can’t say I agree with your statement. I’ve known a number of good pastors in my long life, along with others who fit your description.
I used to know a little Greek…
but he moved away.
Love that, Amos Love.
Mimi
How about if a definition of “Abuse” is given?
1- treat (a person or an animal) with cruelty or violence.
In this case, often, the “Abused” defends the “Abuser.” Yes?
But many times “Abuse” is subtle, not noticed until pointed out.
If the “Abuse” is subtle, is constant, over a long period of time,
passed on from one generation to another,
people don’t know it as “Abuse.” Yes?
Abuse also means…
2 – use (something) to bad effect, misuse.
Hmmm? Bad effect? Misuse? Subtile? Generations?
No one in the Bible had the “Title” Pastor. “Title” Reverend.
What does that do to people
after generations of thinking that’s okay?
Oh yea, Jesus warned us about “The Traditions of Men.”
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition…
Mr 7:13
So by calling someone pastor when no one in the Bible
had the “Title” pastor makes the word of God of none effect.
Now that’s “Abuse” to me.
In the Bible, there are no spectators watching
Pastors in pulpits, preaching to people in pews.
In the Bible everyone participates.
Everyone has a living Christ within.
Everyone can hear “the Voice” of the shepherd.
1Co 14:26
How is it then, brethren? when ye come together,
every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine,
hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation.
Let all things be done unto edifying.
By not allowing “The Body of Christ” to operate under
the headship of Jesus whenever you come together…
There is a “Bad Effect” and “Misuse” of the gifts
that God wants to work through in every believer.
All they do is sit in the pew.
It’s like locking up a child in a closet.
They get no exercise. (using spiritual gifts)
They get no light. (revelation directly from Jesus.)
Now that’s “Abuse” to me.
People now think it’s the pastors job to teach.
Jesus told “His Disciples” Not to be called Rabbi, teacher,
for you have one master the Christ.
Jesus taught “His disciples” then and He does so now.
John 6:45
It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God.
Deuteronomy 4:36
Out of heaven he made thee to hear his voice,
that he might instruct thee:
Psalms 32:8
I will instruct thee and teach thee
in the way which thou shalt go: I will guide thee with mine eye.
By not telling people that Jesus will teach you all truth,
they look to man. How has that worked for 1700 years. Oy Vey!
Now that’s “Abuse” to me.
And He warned them about religious leaders. Yes?
Matthew 23:6-8
And love the uppermost rooms at feasts,
and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7 And greetings in the markets,
and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8* But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ;
and all ye are brethren.
Pastor = Exercise Authority = Lord it over = abuse = always
Jesus loves me and forgives me all my sins.
Amos, I don’t know if you have some history of abuse that feeds such an anger as you seem to be expressing, or if some “liberating” teaching has you convinced that there is no other way of looking at things. Please, let me ask you,
Does every pastor squelch the godly exercise of spiritual gifts? In my experience, some do, some don’t, and some advocate an ungodly use of them.
Do we have records of the actual conversations in the early churches? If any, we have accounts of what was said in this or that case, but not the exact words. So how can we say that the Christians in Antioch, Corinth, or Thessalonica did not address the apostles or their own pastors with terms of respect? After all, the term, “Abba” before a pastor’s name in personal conversation is extremely old in that region. How can we be so certain that the leaders were not addressed as Abba Paul, Peter, or Philip?
Also, you go on against “tradition:” Is every tradition, and every use of the word in the New Testament always only negative? If not, then it may be worthwhile to learn how it can be a positive thing, and make use of it as the Lord would have it. I would hate to see you wind up “wrong” before the Lord in your efforts to be “right” before men, and the anti-clergy (therefore anti spiritual gifts!) traditions you have received.
If you want to refresh your perspective, what did the early teachers, those who learned at the Apostles’ feet, say about all this? What did Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Ireneus, Ignatius, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, his brother Basil, Maximos, Macarius, and Efreem the Syrian have to say? If you want “Primitive Christianity,” those are the ones to ask. If, however, you prefer to hold to your own opinion because, after all, it’s yours and that makes it right, then you will be the object lesson for the Proverb that says (26:12) “Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him.” and you will have discovered the root meaning of the word, “idiot.” Please, don’t go there!
From a pastor in Russia:
Here in Russia, an actual agent of the government (a judge) is required first to solemnize all legal marriages at a courthouse. The afterwards, we perform a church ceremony as a witness of the church of this marriage.
In the U.S., couples or curches CAN do the exact same thing if they choose.
The difference in the U.S. is the government allows the clergy to act as a judge or legal witness instead of a real govt. judge.
That’s all. So this argument about clergy being forced to act as an agent of the State is mute.
Robert
Thanks for the concern.
And yes, I have suffered through “spiritual abuse.”
And yes, I have been deceived and “wrong” before.
Jer 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things,
and desperately wicked: who can know it?
And yes, I have been “liberated” by the Spirit of the Lord.
…Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
I have seen the dangers of “Titles,” of “Pastors,” and of “leaders.”
“Spiritual abuse” for both the “leader” and those “being led.”
The word “pastor/leader” is very, very dangerous for both.
Along with the “Title” and “Position” of “Pastor/Leader”
Comes something a little bit extra…
Power, profit, prestige, recognition, reputation, etc…
All those things that Jesus spoke against. Yes?
Those things that are hard to walk away from. Yes?
Jesus humbled Himself, made Himself of “no reputation,”
and took on the form of a servant. Phil 2:7
“Titles” give you a reputation whether you want it or not.
In my experience…
No matter how loving, eventually…
No matter how humble, eventually…
No matter how much of a servant, eventually…
Pastor = Exercise Authority = Lord it over = Abuse = Always
I’m not not new to “ministering healing” to those who
have been “Spiritually abused” by “Pastor/Leaders.”
Folks who’ve been *burnt,* * burnt out,* *kicked out,*
or *crawled out* of “the religious system.”
With it’s leaders, submission to authority, tithes and offerings,
and other “heavy weights” put on folks shoulders.
I also spend a fair amount of time with pastors,
“so called leaders,” who can’t do it anymore.
Trying to please the denominational leaders,
the congregation, and it’s leaders, his family,
and of course Jesus.
Who is often relegated to last place. Hmmm?
So many masters, that’s tough; Yes?
Preaching every week… and it better be good, being the CEO,
the team leader, counciling, marrying, burying, smiley face. etc. etc.
If “pastors” (as we see them today) are of God?
He’s not taking very good care of His shepherds; Is He?
This is info from a website helping burned out Pastors.
PastorCare offers support and encouragement
for pastors and their families.
At PastorCare we care about YOU and we want to help.
http://www.pastorcare.org/PastorCare/About_Us.html
According to the Francis A. Schaeffer
Institute of Church Leadership (2007)
• 77% say they do “not” have a good marriage.
• 71% have felt burned out or depressed.
• 70% do not have someone they consider a close friend.
• 40% report a serious conflict with a parishioner once a month.
• 38% are divorced or seriously considering divorce.
According to the Ministering to Ministers Foundation…
• Over 1600 pastors in the U.S.
are forced out of their positions each month.
• Nearly 1 in 4 pastors experience a forced termination
at least once during their ministry.
•Only 54% of pastors go back into full-time church related positions.
Think we might have a problem here Robert?
77% do NOT have a good marriage.
70% of pastors are depressed or burnt out.
Don’t have a close friend. Hmmm?
That’s who is running the show. “Pastors” who have been “Abused.”
That’s who is “Spiritually Abusing” God’s sheep.
Hurt people Hurt people…
Healed people Heal people…
1600 pastors a month, that’s 19,000 a year, are pushed out. Wow!!!
That’s a lot of broken hearts, disappointments, feelings of failure, pain, and abuse.
Hmmm? Today’s “Pastor/leader,”
is this a “Title” or “position” in the scriptures?
Be blessed in your search for truth… Jesus.
Amos, I’m aware of the problems you cited, though not the stats- thanks! Yes, pastoral ministry is hazardous, and often as not pastors, priests, rectors, teaching elders, whatever name we happen to use for them, learn first hand what it means to be slave to all, caught between the “board” and the bishop as they try to build the Body. Changes do need to happen, and these changes need to come not from one more political re-organisation but from revival of the hearts and lives. However, to springboard from a difficult situation in daily life to asserting the Bible does not say what we choose not to notice crosses some very dangerous lines. We can’t just toss Romans 12, 1st Corin. 12, Eph. 4, 1st Pet. 5, the Pastoral Epistles, and countless other sections of Holy Scripture in the bin to justify our personal preferences. By whatever term we choose to use for the office, the office of pastor and teacher is ordained by Christ from the beginning, and it is He who puts people into it. If we resist the gift, do we not in fact resist the Giver?
Robert
“Changes do need to happen, and these changes need to come
not from one more political re-organization
but from revival of the hearts and lives.”
Much agreement – need Jesus’ life and fire in peoples hearts.
You write…
“If we resist the gift, do we not in fact resist the Giver?”
If the office of pastor/teacher is of God? (Debatable)
Who said you have to use “God’s gift”
in a “Man made” organization?
Jesus didn’t reform “the religious system” of His day.
He left it.
And took a bunch with Him. Yes?
Jesus taught “His disciples” in the streets.
Jesus is doing the same today.
I know pastors have an impossible, heart breaking job
if they love Jesus (truth) and remain in “the religious system.”
Too many compromises, too much fear of man,
and the compromises get easier and easier as time goes by.
Pastors are taught to play the game and not make waves.
And the “Title” becomes an idol (Of the heart) with it’s
Power, profit, prestige, recognition, and reputation.
And God now talks to you according to your idols.
Ezekiel 14:3
Son of man, these men have set up their idols in their heart,
and put the stumblingblock of their iniquity before their face:
should I be enquired of at all by them?
4* Therefore speak unto them, and say unto them,
Thus saith the Lord GOD; Every man of the house of Israel
that setteth up his idols in his heart,
and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face,
and cometh to the prophet; “I the LORD will answer him
that cometh according to the multitude of his idols; “
5* That I may take the house of Israel in their own heart,
because they are all estranged from me through their idols.
6 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD;
Repent, and turn yourselves from your idols;
and turn away your faces from all your abominations.
Doesn’t the Bible warn us about, and exhort us to,
“hew down “the graven images” of their (our) gods.”
Don’t we make the “Title“ Pastor a “graven image?”
“Engraven” on dipomas, that are hung on office walls,
“Engraven”on business cards, that are handed out,
on the Sunday morning bulletin, on the street sign,
and anyone who reads them knows who “the Pastor” is. Yes?
Is that “self-honoring” and “seeking glory?”
Seems Jesus warned “His disciples” about those things. Yes?
Has the “Title Pastor” become a “graven image?”
Micah 1:7
And all the “graven images” shall be beaten to pieces…
Isa 42:8
I am the LORD: that is my name:
and my glory will I not give to another,
neither my praise to “graven images.”
Jer 50:38
A drought is upon her waters;
and they shall be dried up:
for it is the land of “graven images,”
and they are mad upon their idols.
A land of “Titles and idols” in the heart. Ezek 14:3-7
Senior Pastors, Associate Pastors, Youth Pastors,
Single Pastors, Reverands, Right Reverends,
Most Right Reverands, Fathers, Priests, Clergy,
and the list goes on…
Are any of those Titles/idols in the Bible?
Didn’t Jesus make Himself of no reputation,
take on the form of a servant,
and humble Himself? Phl 2:7”
Titles become idols.
Pastors become masters.
What is popular is not always truth.
What is truth is not always popular.
Jesus didn’t reform “the religious system” of His day.
He left it.
Amos, that’s not at all what I see in the Scriptures. Jesus was born a Jew, and he died a Jew. Where does the Bible say that Jesus left his Jewish “religious system”? He castigated those within the system who followed the letter of the law. He rebuked hypocrites. His anger was directed to those who perverted the practice of Judaism, those who strayed from the path of what God asks of Jews and Christians, which is to “do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly before your God”. The split between Christianity and Judaism came after Jesus’ death.
You write…
“If we resist the gift, do we not in fact resist the Giver?”
If the office of pastor/teacher is of God? (Debatable)
I’m glad you’re open to the debate.
Who said you have to use “God’s gift”
in a “Man made” organization?
I guess I could say God did. His word does say that Christ “gave gifts unto men, (including) pastors and teachers.” (Eph. 4)
In a man-made organisation? Not entirely. Incarnation is not just an event at Christmas, but a principle which pervades all of Scripture, and all of Church history as well.
Jesus didn’t reform “the religious system” of His day… He left it.
Actually, He pointed out that elements of that system had left Him. But this is not grounds for assuming that He did not continue His plan through human community. The Disciples stayed within the Jewish religious system until the Romans destroyed it in AD 70, and the cultural split happened after AD 90 when certain surviving Pharisees co-opted Jewish religion through the “Council of Jamnia.”
Very true, when the community becomes the more organised there is a risk; but refusing to organise is like if the human body were to grow without structure. Communication (nervous systems, etc), ministry within the body (blood flow, endocrines, filtration, digestion…) would cease, the bones would have no particular place to connect, etc.
In my reading of history, the Church took a bad detour when the Roman bishop was allowed to set up his jurisdiction over his brother bishops outside his own field of ministry, and establish a military “chain of command” with himself as Christ’s sole representative. This is either traceable to or parallels Augustine’s departure from certain foundational truths universally recognised before him, but generally communicated in the common Greek language which Augustine did not read. At the risk of over-simplify it, Aug. built his theology on human guilt and inadequacy toward, while the Church before him had focused more on God’s grace and abundant generosity toward us.
Amos, take a break- Get back into that Book, asking God anew to show you whatever in the world He has to show you there (setting pre-existing opinions on the shelf), and read what you can of early Church history, Eastern as well as Western, and see if there might be some details there to answer some questions, soothe some hurts, and enable more effectual ministry to others.
Et, merci, Grandmére!
Hi again Mimi. Nice to hear from you.
“Jesus was born a Jew, and he died a Jew.”
Yes. You’re correct.
“Where does the Bible say that Jesus left his Jewish “religious system”?”
Didn’t the “Religious System” of Jesus’ day have
Priests, High Priests, Rabbi’s and animal sacrifice?
Did Jesus have that in His band of followers? Or was He different?
Did He sacrifice animals? Wasn’t He a high priest? Any Rabbi’s?
Jesus taught “His Disciples” NOT to be called Rabbi/teacher.
For there is one master the Christ. And you are all bretren.
Call NO man father, for you have one father in heaven.
Be NOT called master/leader for you have one master, the Christ.
Mt 23:8-10
“Disciple of Christ” simply means, a learner, a student of Christ.
Someone who learns directly from Jesus for himself.
So, no more “Rabbi’s/teachers” as in “The Religious system.” Yes?
No more “hierarchy” as in “The Religious system.”
All are brethren, all are equal, all can go directly to God. Yes?
I’ll try to explain what I’m seeing.
I’m not talking about the split between Christianity and Judaism.
“The Religious System” was full of rules and regulations.
I’m talking about how Jesus lived His life.
Jesus, as man, totally dependent on the Father.
NOT dependant on “The Religious System” of the day.
Not dependant on Priests, Rabbi’s and animal sacrifice. Yes?
Jesus told people, Come unto me all that labor…
Not come to a “Religious System” with animal sacrifice.
Jesus said, “If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me.” Yes?
I’m seeing the relationship that Jesus had with the Father.
And how “His disciples” learned about that relationship
by watching Jesus doing “nothing of Himself,” and only doing
what He saw the Father doing.
It does take a step of faith to believe and trust
that Jesus “can speak to you” and teach you “all truth.”
Isn’t Jesus the best teacher?
Why get things second hand from man?
And we do have some examples; Jesus, Peter, Paul.
Jesus, as man, delclared, “He” could do nothing of Himself.
Jesus, as God, delared, apart from Him “we” can do nothing.
John 8:28
…I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me,
I speak these things.
John 5:30
I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge:
and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will,
but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
John 5:19
…The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do:
for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
Jesus declared that Peter was blessed because;
1 – Flesh and blood “didn’t” reveal it to him.
2 – God, who dwelled with in him, “did” reveal it.
Mt 16:17
Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona:
for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee,
but my Father which is in heaven.
Paul declared that “his gospel” was not of man
and he received it from God.
Paul conferred NOT with flesh and blood.
Ga 1:11-16
…the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it,
but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
16-To reveal his Son in me,
that I might preach him among the heathen;
immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
Just a thought.
Do you really want a book, or a teacher, with words about God?
Or, do you want Jesus to teach you,
“The Word of God,” who wrote “The Book?”
John 6:45
It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God.
Deuteronomy 4:36
Out of heaven he made thee to hear his voice,
that he might instruct thee:
Isn’t this leaving “The Religious System” of the day
and depending directly on Jesus to teach us and lead us.
Rom 8:14
As many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
NOT “led” by man.
Jesus, My Lord and My God.
It does take a step of faith to believe and trust that Jesus “can speak to you”….
Amos, I believe that Jesus speaks to me often. You know, I truly do read the Bible. I’ve read it all through, more than once, and I’m aware of all quotes that you mention. I don’t speak from total ignorance. It’s in the interpretation of the quotes that we differ. “Aye, there’s the rub.”
So, Amos, if you hear Jesus speaking to you, but you denigrate the testimony of the Bible which exists as a testimony to Him (implying that it is of merely human origin), then why is this “Jesus” of yours denying the very basis upon which we can know him, and how can you say, really, who if anyone is speaking to you?
Robert
You lost me.
“denigrate the testimony of the Bible” Help me here.
“(implying that it is of merely human origin),” Huh?
“why is this “Jesus” of yours denying
the very basis upon which we can know him,” What does that mean?
Mimi
“It’s in the interpretation of the quotes that we differ.”
“Aye, there’s the rub.”
Yes, and a big rub it is.
I do wish God would have done it differently.
Many things are hard to be understood.
As you said (below*), implying we should be “taught of God” apart from the His Word, as if there were some kind of dichotomy between the two, or that God really didn’t like the Bible too awful much to start with.
You seem to be harboring an anger, or grudge, against the “System” to the point that you can’t see the Body. How the Church, the “Mission of God,” is supposed to succeed if has no teaching or leadership functions whatever is beyond me. Who can take the time to learn, much less to teach? Do we presume that we already know everything, and have no need to learn? No, you can’t answer from 1 John 2, because the “‘you” there is plural, speaking to the Church and not to any presumptuous individual. In fact, as Paul wrote, “..if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.” The Church does exist, as Christ’s Body here on Earth. As a Body, it must have structure to define its existence, purpose, and life. And, the Body has different members, gifted to serve different functions. One of the most prominent, and often most demeaning, functions is that of the pastor and teacher, as best pointed out in such passages as Eph. 4, and others I have already cited.
If you wish to continue this conversation, please take the time to read the passages I have mentioned above, and respond accordingly. This present business of general accusations and, sorry, rants, on your part is not rational discussion but an unbecoming temper fit to which there is no better reply but closing the door.
* Just a thought.
Do you really want a book, or a teacher, with words about God?
Or, do you want Jesus to teach you,
“The Word of God,” who wrote “The Book?”
John 6:45
It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God.
Deuteronomy 4:36
Out of heaven he made thee to hear his voice,
that he might instruct thee:
Isn’t this leaving “The Religious System” of the day
and depending directly on Jesus to teach us and lead us.
Robert
Sorry, I guess I didn’t explain myself properly.
You write…
“As you said (below*), implying we should be
“taught of God” apart from the His Word,
as if there were some kind of
dichotomy between the two,
or that God really didn’t like the Bible
too awful much to start with.”
Being “”taught of God” apart from the His Word, “
is certainly NOT my intention or understanding.
The Bible is the “Word of God” and
Jesus is the “Word of God.”
When I wrote…
Just a thought.
Do you really want a book, or a teacher, with words about God?
Or, do you want Jesus to teach you,
“The Word of God,” who wrote “The Book?”
I was trying to say that Jesus can interpret “His word”
“The Bible” much better then us mere humans.
Many folks turn to books written by man to learn about God.
What I see the scriptures saying is we can go directly to Jesus
and Jesus will teach us what the Bible says.
Jesus Himself taught “His disciples,” All would be taught of God.
John 6:45
It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God.
John 14:26
But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost,
whom the Father will send in my name,
he shall teach you all things…
John 16:13
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come,
he will guide you into all truth…
Matthew 23:8
But be not ye called *Rabbi: for one is your *Master, [even] Christ;
*Rabbi – Dictionary – an ordained teacher.
*Rabbi – Strongs #4461 rhabbi {hrab-bee’}
Rabbi, a “title” used by the Jews to address their teachers.
*Master – Strongs – a guide, teacher, master.
Seems Jesus would like to be our guide and teacher.
The Apostle John taught “we” need “NOT man” teach us…
The “ye” might be plural but is “man” plural? Man is the object.
The body of Christ (The Ekklesia, The called out one’s) The Church,
ministers to the Body from what the Lord has taught them.
Hath a revelation…
1Co 14:26*
How is it then, brethren? when ye come together,
every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine,
hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation.
Let all things be done unto edifying.
1 John 2:26-27
These [things] have I written unto you
concerning them that seduce you.
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you,
and ye need NOT that any man teach you:
but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things…
1 John 2:20
Ye have an *unction from the Holy One, and ye *know all things.
*unction = anointing. *know = perceive, discern, discover.
Paul says we have been taught by Him, Jesus.
Just the way Paul learned the Gospel.
He conferred NOT with flesh and blood. Yes?
Ephesians 4:20-21
But ye have not so learned Christ;
If so be that ye have heard him,
and have been taught by him,
as the truth is in Jesus:
1Thessalonians 4:9
But as touching brotherly love
ye need not that I write unto you:
for ye yourselves are taught of God
to love one another.
“please take the time to read the passages I have mentioned above, and respond accordingly.”
Can you be more specific please. Which passages?
Peace…
You might like to see Winter views of Churches from Newbridge, County Kildare, Ireland:
http://catholicheritage.blogspot.com/2010/01/sixteenth-monthly-mass-in-diocese-of.html
Since our president has just married his fifth wife, I can’t agree with you about polygamy, but I do agree with you that clergy should not be state marriage officers. I got out of that more than 30 years ago. Notes from underground: The State should get out of the marriage business. See also The theology of Christian marriage: Khanya.
“legal marriage is available only to some responsible adults who are in monogamous relationships. ”
Say what? Neither responsibility nor monogamy is currently a legal requirement for marriage in this country. In fact, we tend to be rather bad at both. The only three things that are required to get married are a penis, a vagina, and fifty bucks for the registrar.
Heather, I realize I’m late to this discussion, but according to Jesus, there is no marriage in the kingdom of heaven. This is actually one of the few things he is explicit about concerning marriage — that and his prohibition on divorce. See Matthew 22:30, Mark 12:25, Luke 2o:35.
Thanks be to God you are correct in one thing: that your views are of no effect as to the eternal state of anyone’s soul — except perhaps your own. If you are wrong, and are guilty of placing a stumbling block in the way of those who accept Christ, well, as you say, a scary day may await… Take your own advice, and stop “swinging swords” and “fighting.” Love your neighbor as yourself, for this fulfills the Law.
Sir, I do not often agree with you on many things, but on this I fully agree and commend someone to put into words what many evangelicals have been thinking for a while.
← Previous Comments