?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 

Controversy....here we go! - Random babblings of a fiber-obsessed nutcase

About Controversy....here we go!

Previous Entry Controversy....here we go! Jul. 7th, 2014 @ 08:08 am Next Entry
I do a LOT of thinking while milking. Sometimes it's heavy, sometimes it's fluff....lately, it's been heavy.

It was sparked by something I read - I *think* in TorahClass, but I'm not sure - that said, basically, that the New Testament letters were never meant for publication, let alone being raised to the same level as the Tanakh (Old Testament). I read that, and paused, because...that's a heavy thought.

Then I read something else that said the NT letters were arranged longest to shortest, *just like the Prophets*. Um. No. In the Tanakh, the Prophets - heck the whole thing except for Torah! - is arranged *differently*. I think it's by date - which makes a heck of a lot of sense. The NT was arranged by the Catholic Church.......

So I've been thinking. And.....my thoughts are going to be very controversial to most. Comments WILL be welcomed - I don't delete anything except spam, so feel free! - but please keep it civil, OK? If you wouldn't say it in my physical living room, don't say it in my virtual one, OK?

:Deep breath:

What is Scripture? That's an easy one: Scripture is the Tanakh. It's what Christ meant when he said Scripture, it's what the Disciples meant. It's what is quoted in the NT, it sets up God's laws and explains how humans can meet with and have a relationship with God. It IS Holy.

The NT? The first 4 books are accounts of how Yeshua fulfilled the Scriptures, written by people contemporary with Him, and people who actually KNEW Him. Acts is the history of the early church, and shows that God didn't change between the OT and NT (Sapphira and Ananias, for example.) The rest? Personal letters from the Disciples and Paul to the early churches. Human advice......and I have come to the conclusion that they should NOT be raised to the same level as Scripture. Oh, and Revelation, which is from John, the LAST Disciple who actually walked with Yeshua...it's regulated to the end of the Bible. I kinda get that, as it's the last prophecy to a Disciple, and it's about the End Times....but it's dismissed in the modern church and not taught, while Romans is THE most important part of the NT (or seems to be.)

And Paul.....why is he so revered in the Christian world? He never met Yeshua - in fact he persecuted His followers! - and (and this is where I think most of the "worship" comes from) he was a Pharisee - a renowned Talmud scholar. Talmud is NOT Scripture, even though a lot of Jews hold it on the same level. Talmud is basically commentary (calling it Oral Torah doesn't cut it...Scripture doesn't mention Oral Torah, and what I've read of it (honestly not much)...it's just human commentary.)

I have the feeling that when Paul converted, he was immediately given "rock star" status...because of all his education. He was well versed in every aspect of Jewish law - and he quickly became the leader of the fledgling Christian church (and the Catholic Roman Church claims he was the first Pope (I think - I know they claim he was Christ's heir to the leadership of the church.)

Um. I have a MAJOR problem with this. Paul didn't KNOW Christ, some of what he wrote is in opposition to Torah (his view on circumcision, for example. Circumcision is a perpetual commandment per Torah. Paul says, no....you don't need the physical sign anymore, even though Torah says it's forever. I just....nevermind.)

Also - WHO arranged the Christian Bible? KJV, NIV - all of them are arranged the same way, which is different from the way the Jews have it. Ask yourself.....why? And again - who? (hint: the Catholic Roman Church, again.) Why did they choose THESE letters out of all the ones they had? And why did they cut those that they did? (There's at least 1 more Gospel out there that humans considered Not "Real".) Why is Paul given so much weight, and the Disciples that actually walked WITH Yeshua are given 2nd billing? And how much of what Paul wrote comes from Talmud instead of God?

Paul seems to add to Scripture an awful lot......and his words are taken to be - pardon the phrasing - Gospel Truth. I have a problem with that - and have for years.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this...but this is what I've been ruminating on lately. There's still a lot of stuff floating around...but I *needed* to get this out. Scripture is what we should be going by and studying; the NT is good reading, but I don't think it should be placed above Scripture. And, really - without Torah, you really don't understand the NT. You NEED that foundation before moving on...and most Christians don't have a good foundation. I have to ask myself why that is.....(I have a feeling I know, but......without anything to back it up, I won't mention it.)

This entry was originally posted at http://fiberaddict.dreamwidth.org/803475.html. Please comment there using OpenID.
Current Location: sofa
Current Mood: contemplativecontemplative
Tags:
spin a yarn
[User Picture Icon]
From:hugh_mannity
Date:July 7th, 2014 03:16 pm (UTC)
(Link)
It's not really fair to blame the Catholic Church for the arrangement of the books of the Bible. At the time the Bible was arranged, there was really only the one church, although the Eastern branch was starting to move away from the Latin branch. The Latin branch which became the Catholic Church, was the only game in town up till the Reformation.

It was a long time from the 3rd century organisation of the Bible to the Reformation in the 15th/16th centuries -- over a millenium. And it's been another 500 years or so since then. The modern Catholic Church bears very little similarity to the Catholic Church of the pre-Reformation era, and a whole lot less to that of the 3rd century.

There's a fascinating book, written in 1983 and now out of print, called The First Christian St Paul's Impact on Christianity by a woman called Karen Anderson. She puts forward an interesting case for Christianity as we know it having been created by Paul, rather than being the actual teachings of Jesus. I read it when it was first published. If you ever find a used copy, it's worth a read. But not the price Amazon has it at.

http://www.amazon.com/First-Christian-Saint-Impact-Christianity/dp/0330281615/ref=la_B000AQ72VE_1_20?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1404746106&sr=1-20
[User Picture Icon]
From:fiberaddict
Date:July 7th, 2014 06:49 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Yeah, I should have said Roman church instead of Catholic....my bad. I'll go in and edit it - because you're right.

And I'll go on e hunt for that book! Thanks for the tip!
(spin a yarn)
Top of Page Powered by LiveJournal.com