It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why did Jesus set out to found a new church?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 09:09 AM
link   
The Jewish Messiah was supposed to bring all Jews into full observance of the Lord's word. So why would Jesus set out to create a new church based upon a new word and claim that word was from God? When in the bible did God decide to change his mind and the prophecies and yet still have people think that the old prophecies apply to Jesus?

"And Jesus answered him, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven'" (Mt 16:17-19)

Another odd tidbit, why would Jesus ask God why he had foresaken him if Jesus is thought to be God incarnate? In essence, why would God ask himself why he himself had foresaken himself?

"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?" (Psalms 22)

It would make no sense to me atleast as for why God incarnate in Jesus' body, to be asking himself such silly question's. It all seem's odd that Jesus would say such a thing if he "knew" the master plan, seeing as how he is believed to be God in the flesh.




posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0nWhy did Jesus set out to found a new church?


He didn't. Man did that.


The Jewish Messiah was supposed to bring all Jews into full observance of the Lord's word.

'The Jewish Messiah' is a concept invented by man, as well...


External source: KJV, public domain:
And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel:
I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

... and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;

That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth;
to them that are in darkness, Shew yourselves.

...for he that hath mercy on them shall lead them, even by the springs of water shall he guide them.
(excerpted from Isaiah 49:6-10 KJV)


Jesus came as God's servant (the branch). He came out of the people of Israel--who were chosen not as favorites but as servants and emissaries which God provided with experiences of proof of both His perfect rule and His generosity and love...

He came to save the world, literally. Not just a certain group of people, condemning the rest--as it is written, we were all already condemned. Why? Because we are mortal--we die because we live a mortal life. But that was never a permanent situation, and all throughout the history of the world, God's plan has not changed one little bit. Mankind has sure mangled and spindled the part of the blueprint he got his hands on--but God knew this would happen and the part that we got was given for that very purpose. Kind of like giving your kids something that you can spare--they can play with it and even ruin it and it is perfectly fine (because you knew they would, they are kids!)

The OT may make it seem like God was a tyrant and set a group of people up for a fall to ruin--but the 'set up' was a learning experience for all people. And none will be ruined. God knew that Israel (being human) could not fulfill their destiny--their destiny was to not fulfill their destiny--if that makes sense. Their 'failure' provided the setting for God to then demonstrate what He had prepared for us, all along. He let us see imperfection and the futility of a losing battle--and what would happen if we were on our own--only so that we could learn and recognize just how excellent the outcome would be (when it comes to complete fruition).

Israel was to be an exemplary example for the surrounding nations (gentiles) and from the very start--immediately after the Exodus, God's laws included specific details on 'adopting' gentiles into Israel--all anyone ever had to do (after ideally observing how great God was to those under His wing) was to abide by one induction rule (circumcision) and they were then Isreal, too. No less a rightful citizen than one born into one of the 12 tribes. They were truly adopted. Of course, this didn't work, because of pride. That's another story--going back to Genesis... but anyway, maybe it's a little clearer.


So why would Jesus set out to create a new church based upon a new word and claim that word was from God?

By new 'word' do you mean the word 'church?' Or perhaps 'christian' instead of Israel?
Again--that's manmade nonsense. The word 'ekklesia,' in the NT Greek has been pruned and trained into a whole new word with an invented significance by the religious force that has ruled the world since Christ finished His work...

The word 'church' is actually a word of some sort of other derivation, such as Welsh, Nordic, something like that. It means 'circe' and is a more fitting description of a place like Stonehenge. It does not mean 'temple', it means 'circular altar' or holy place....you get my drift.

'Ekklesia' is basically the same word as the Hebrew word that is translated 'assembly' in the Old Testament:


External source: KJV, public domain:
Let them exalt him also in the congregation of the people, and praise him in the assembly of the elders.
(Psalms 107:32 KJV)


The word 'congregation' is not the same word, but is used in the same sense all through the OT. The 'assembly' are those which God calls to serve Him in demonstrating His true nature to the rest of the world--so that others will be encouraged to seek Him out. Israel means 'who prevails with God.' Israel are God's servants--but we are all His concern.

No where does it say that a person can only get to God through the 'assembly' (or 'church.') It says Christ is the door, not the assembly that He is the 'Head' of.

The thing to remember is that when the OT was translated into Greek a couple of centuries before Christ lived and died--it was because it was the common language of most of the world. And in studying the Hebrew and Greek I have learned one crucial thing that makes all the difference in the world in regard to understanding the continuity of God's plan. Every word in Hebrew (that is, the main concept words, such as 'assembly') directly corresponds to a Greek word in the NT that means the same thing. Just as you'd translate english into spanish--you'd use the word 'mujer' everytime you translated the word 'woman.' Nothing at all is lost in the translation--at the time. But as time goes on, compounded by the religious agendas et al, it now appears (assisted by the Church of Rome) that God shifted gears, made
drastic revisions--even created a new jargon to go by for His 'chosen' people.

In the Hebrew, there are three words for 'life'--basically corresponding to 'spirit, soul, and body' in English. And there are three just as precise words in Greek that are used in the NT. The consistency is proof enough, after doing my homework. There are three different words in Greek that have been arbitrarily all translated into one English word, which is 'world.' The Greek words are more fittingly translated as 'the earth,' 'the age,' and 'the world population.' A place, a time span, and a group of people! All just now represented as 'world.' The 'world' isn't going to end! This 'age' will come to an end--but that's expected. It makes a HUGE difference.



"And Jesus answered him, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven'" (Mt 16:17-19)

What Christ is saying to Peter is that the 'assembly'-- that God is going to call out of the redeemed population, in order to serve the truth far and wide of the redemption and promise of life that we all have--would be built not on the
what men say and determine but rather on direct revelation from God the Father.

How did Peter know Christ was the Son of the Living God? He knew from within--God revealed this to Him. The outsiders, the Pharisees and what not--they remained constantly confused and contentious about who Jesus was---God did not reveal it to them. The exact same thing is just as true today for any of us as it was for Peter and the others... The church will tell us that they are the designated ambassadors for God--and if allow them such authority to tell us what is and what isn't--instead of listening to our hearts, where God has given us all the ability to know the truth--then it is real convincing what they say. But think about it--the strife and contention has not let up one bit in 2000 years. Jesus said that the truth would set us free and that we would never be confused. Obviously the tangled and often guilt or fear driven allegiance that supports religion is not the 'truth.' It sets no one free nor is it harmonious or unified. It doesn't come by direct revelation from the Father but rather by the word of man.


Another odd tidbit, why would Jesus ask God why he had foresaken him if Jesus is thought to be God incarnate? In essence, why would God ask himself why he himself had foresaken himself?

I can answer this, but I don't think now is the right time. It's rather deep and
it's along a different line of understanding that isn't the same as the other questions you asked, so I don't want to muddy my already too long reply. Maybe another thread?



It would make no sense to me atleast as for why God incarnate in Jesus' body, to be asking himself such silly question's. It all seem's odd that Jesus would say such a thing if he "knew" the master plan, seeing as how he is believed to be God in the flesh.


I will say this, just to give you something to think about on your own: remember Jesus said to Peter, in the Garden: 'the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.' Jesus was not 'god incarnate'--He was the Son of God--and more truly, He was the intersection where flesh (man) and spirit (God) would be reunited after all that time since the initial separation in the Garden of Eden. The 'cross' is where God and man meet and they first met in Jesus--making Him the Christ. And God was fully in Christ--but not all of God was Christ--and it wasn't a one-time thing--we are all going to be melded in that same fashion, eventually--that is why we are all destined to be 'sons of God,' too.... Christ was the Son of God--He opened the 'matrix' and was the first born of the dead (that would be us, actually! Mortals are actually the 'dead' mentioned in Genesis and Revelation)

And because of His faith in doing what He was prepared by God to do (redeem the world and show God to the world through light, love, and truth)--resisting 'sin' (the mortal, egoistic state of mind we are all born into) to the point of allowing his own execution (think of Jesus the man) just as a lamb to the slaughter--loving those who cruelly put him to death and humliated him (think again of the man Jesus)--when He rose triumphant He was given the position of being 'God's right arm.' You know, the long arm of the law? God is spirit, man is material--we did not know God because we could not. Only by presenting Himself in the form of a human could we know Him... But only by overcoming material existence could Jesus become the Christ--He had to obey the Father.

He was destined, but yet He still chose.

And that is the mystery and the love that we are to aspire to, ourselves.

I hope that helped answer your questions (probably brought some more up, though, but that's good.)



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Ok, so... this is my basic understanding after reading your reply...

The entire Jewish prophecies that were used to "prove" Jesus was the prophecied Messiah are all basically void because Jesus said so and yet people still use them to prove he was the Jewish Messiah?

Eh, that made no sense...

So everything in the OT is void, right? Or, only the part's that don't agree with the NT?



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Jesus didn't want to found a new church. He wanted to clean up the old Jewish church, which he felt had "sold out" to the Romans and had forgotten their roots. That was the whole point of his going mental and beating up on those (Jewish) moneylenders in the Temple.




posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0n
Ok, so... this is my basic understanding after reading your reply...

The entire Jewish prophecies that were used to "prove" Jesus was the prophecied Messiah are all basically void because Jesus said so and yet people still use them to prove he was the Jewish Messiah?

No, He wasn't the 'Jewish' Messiah. He was anointed (chosen) which means Messiah. But he was anointed for the sake of the whole world--besides that--the Jews don't even say He was the Messiah. It's kind of a dead-end concept, in that fashion.


Eh, that made no sense...

So everything in the OT is void, right? Or, only the part's that don't agree with the NT?


No, not at all. There is nothing in the OT that doesn't agree with the NT.

Read my post again, but forget anything you might already think you know. And forget about anything 'jewish' as well as christian ideologies. They're both one-sided--opposite sides but still only incomplete halves that have basically made it into something that doesn't seem to make sense. But it does. Jewish wasn't even a concept until much later--the OT is about Israel--the tribe of Judah is but one tribe and since the rest was scattered by the time Jesus was born, they had basically become the 'Jews.' But that's a distraction.



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Enkidu
Jesus didn't want to found a new church. He wanted to clean up the old Jewish church, which he felt had "sold out" to the Romans and had forgotten their roots. That was the whole point of his going mental and beating up on those (Jewish) moneylenders in the Temple.



Why would he want to clean up the 'old jewish church' (temple?)

It was basically a 'condemned' building, even when he threw out the money lenders--set to be destroyed 40 years after Jesus died on the cross. There was never any reason to think He came here to have anything to do with any sort of religion. Religion is for men and created by men.



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 07:47 PM
link   
You guy's should read this ... it's kinda good!

www.dpjs.co.uk...

Have you ever thought that maybe some evil force pretending to be 'good' was behind your religion? It's posible, and you wouldn't even know.

[edit on 28-3-2006 by Prot0n]



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 07:54 PM
link   
It's a fact. Going on even now.



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38
It's a fact. Going on even now.


Huh? Can you explain more then a one line response?



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0n
Huh? Can you explain more then a one line response?


Yes, in fact, I've written more lines about this than you probably want to read. But here are some links that you can pick and choose from at your leisure:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.belowtopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join