|
slavegirljoy -> RE: For those of a christian bent.... (6/9/2007 10:07:05 PM)
|
The Bible i use is the New King James Version, "Translated out of the Original Tongues and with Previous Translations Diligently Compared and Revised", published in 1977 by Thomas Nelson INC, Nashville, TN.
What i stated about the Book of Revelation is taken from my Bible. All the words in quotations are attributed to be direct quotes from Jesus.
Of course, there are many different translations and versions of the Bible and, in the end, each person decides for themself what they believe or doubt. i have cited the Bible and quoted from my Bible in response to questions about Christian Domestic Discipline and to state what my beliefs are with regard to Christian Domestic Discipline for those who have questions about it.
slave joy
Owned property of Master David
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aswad
quote:
ORIGINAL: slavegirljoy
The Book of Revelation was written by the apostle John. It documents what Jesus revealed to John.
The Apocalypse of John (ΑΠΟΚΑΛΥΨΙΣ ΙΩΑΝΝΟΥ) relates a vision that John had, which was supposedly given to him by an angel, sent by G*d. As such, it does not in any way document the life and teachings of Jesus, although it does claim that the vision sees him bear witness to what G*d is saying.
It appears that the first vision is little more than a message to the Turkish communities of Christians, specifically the churches in Epheseus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatria, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea; given that the Third Ecumenical Council took place in the church by Epheseus, it could well be that this is a warning to the churches that they are straying from the path (which historical evidence tends to bear out).
Either way, the book is fairly controversial, and several argued against including it in the canonical books of the New Testament. Of course, it has also been suggested, even by many Christians, that it may well have been a sign of mental illness, rather than divine inspiration.
If you wish to include the Revelations in the Bible, why do you not count the Apocalypse of Peter and the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter, for instance?
Also, there have been serious contentions that John of Patmos, the author, may not be the apostle John.
If one is to include the apocalypses, one might as well include the Apocalypses of Abraham, Baruch, Daniel, Elijah, Ezra, Hezekiah, Mary, Paul, Peter (both versions), Thomas, Sedrach, Stephen, Zephaniah, and so forth, along with the Assumption of Moses, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Iudas, the Gospel of Peter, the Book of Enoch, the Book of Noah, and more.
Or even start including the original sources from the Zoroastrian faiths...
In short: Inclusion of the Apocalypse of John of Patmos is entirely arbitrary, and it does not deal with the life or teachings of Jesus.
quote:
This book was written by the apostle John when he was a captive on the island of Patmos
Been a while since I studied the revelations, but WP notes that he was exiled, not a captive.
quote:
Christ says about this congregation: "[...]Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols[...]"
Idolatry and adultery were among the three unforgivable "sins" of the Jewish faith, and Jesus was a Jew, let's not forget. It does, however, seem that he's taken on more of an Old Testament G*d personality if these are his words, for in life he was not as violent.
Or, of course, you could just view it in the straightforward manner: he's saying that she'll get STDs and die, which is a huge part of the reason for the sex-related laws in the Bible.
Eating the remains of sacrifices might not be too healthy, either.
In short, it could very well be seen as him saying: "this woman isn't a prophetess, but a madwoman, and she's messing herself up while leading others astray; this will kill her in the end, and probably her children, too, along with whoever is stupid enough to follow her. do something about it."
Note also that the idolatry could be the dawning practice of using the cross as a form of worship, in effect making the cross an idol. It may not have taken the same form as the modern cross, especially given that Jesus appears to have been crucified on a pole, and that the cross has been regarded as an intersection of the physical and spiritual worlds long before that time (the earliest I know of being the ☥), and was featured in the Coptic churches.
quote:
The gospels and the letters of the apostles were all written after Jesus' death. They are written as firsthand accounts of what each saw during their time as a discipline of Christ and they quote what they heard Jesus say. Jesus often taught using parables.
Indeed, Jesus often taught using parables.
And trying to read anything literal into parables is missing the point.
As for the gospels, they weren't writing them down along the way, so this is essentially the story of the part of his life that they find relevant, to the extent they are familiar with it, and going by memory alone. They are rather divergent, as you probably noticed.
One would also point out that one of the main themes of the Gospel of Mark- the first one recorded according to Brown, and the source for much of the other Gospels- has profound implications:
The disciples don't "get" it.
Given human history, I'm not surprised that the ones who didn't "get" the message are the ones who went on to shape mainstream perception of what the faith is about, and that they suppressed the views of those who did.
|
|
|
|
