Simple Early Days

[XinMinny]

I have been doing lots of thinking for a few years. There were a few comments a recent thread that sparked this one into existence. My wondering has gone something like this:
In the gospels, we read about people who followed Jesus. It seems that some of our 'issues’or ‘subjects of discussion’ here might not have been things they even thought of. For example, while it is true that the correlationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is vital to our life, those who followed Jesus would likely not have discussed it the same way we often do here on CAF. There are many other things that would also fall into that category.
It also seems that the teaching of Jesus himself was quite simple: Blessed are the poor in spirit, love your enemy, love the Lord with all your heart, let the seed be sown into your heart,etc.
So, a question? In all of our discussion about what I will call doctrine, are we neglecting to apply the simple teaching? And, further, would God be more pleased if we really focused on getting those into our lives, and didn’t spend so much time on ‘doctrinal issues?’
Discussion??

Thanks.
Full disclosure. Although my stated religion has been ‘unaffiliated’, I am part of a fellowship without a name trying to stick to the simple things. I am interested in your comments about this idea, and your reaction. I don’t intend to argue about it, I really am simply interested in your thoughts. Thanks again.

 

[benidict]

I have been doing lots of thinking for a few years. There were a few comments a recent thread that sparked this one into existence. My wondering has gone something like this:
In the gospels, we read about people who followed Jesus. It seems that some of our 'issues’or ‘subjects of discussion’ here might not have been things they even thought of. For example, while it is true that the correlationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is vital to our life, those who followed Jesus would likely not have discussed it the same way we often do here on CAF. There are many other things that would also fall into that category.
It also seems that the teaching of Jesus himself was quite simple: Blessed are the poor in spirit, love your enemy, love the Lord with all your heart, let the seed be sown into your heart,etc.
So, a question? In all of our discussion about what I will call doctrine, are we neglecting to apply the simple teaching? And, further, would God be more pleased if we really focused on getting those into our lives, and didn’t spend so much time on ‘doctrinal issues?’
Discussion??

Thanks.
Full disclosure. Although my stated religion has been ‘unaffiliated’, I am part of a fellowship without a name trying to stick to the simple things. I am interested in your comments about this idea, and your reaction. I don’t intend to argue about it, I really am simply interested in your thoughts. Thanks again.

love the Lord thy God with all your hear soul and mind. and love your neigbor as yourself. by so doing you fufill the Law of Christ.paraphrase mine. be that as it may, doctrine is important. how can you have fellowship, if there is no set belief system. it would be like the time of the judges. and every man did what was right in his own eyes. what if someone in your fellowship denies the trinity? thats doctrinal. do you say, oh well we dont want to offend? but yes, love is the highest law. Peace to you and yours

 

[XinMinny]

Benidict,
Thanks for responding. I am hoping for more (name removed by moderator)ut from others as well.
It’s an interesting question you raise: What if someone denies the trinity?
I would say that many people I know have an interest in God and His work in their lives, without really wanting to know the theological fine points. Does that mean they deny the trinity? I don’t think so. Rather, that ‘facts’ side of the discussion is not what they want/need. They want/need the living work of God in their heart.
I am getting more and more that way myself.

Oh, BTW, I have noticed that here at CAF, Trinity comes up in almost every thread one way or another. How detailed is your thought about the Three? I see the Father, then the Son who has always wanted to be subject to and in agreement with the Father, and a Holy Spirit who was sent to the world at the behest of the Father and Son, and so is somehow subject to them as well.

What do you think?

Minny

 

[ralphinal]

I have been doing lots of thinking for a few years. There were a few comments a recent thread that sparked this one into existence. My wondering has gone something like this:
In the gospels, we read about people who followed Jesus. It seems that some of our 'issues’or ‘subjects of discussion’ here might not have been things they even thought of. For example, while it is true that the correlationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is vital to our life, those who followed Jesus would likely not have discussed it the same way we often do here on CAF. There are many other things that would also fall into that category.
It also seems that the teaching of Jesus himself was quite simple: Blessed are the poor in spirit, love your enemy, love the Lord with all your heart, let the seed be sown into your heart,etc.
So, a question? In all of our discussion about what I will call doctrine, are we neglecting to apply the simple teaching? And, further, would God be more pleased if we really focused on getting those into our lives, and didn’t spend so much time on ‘doctrinal issues?’
Discussion??

Thanks.
Full disclosure. Although my stated religion has been ‘unaffiliated’, I am part of a fellowship without a name trying to stick to the simple things. I am interested in your comments about this idea, and your reaction. I don’t intend to argue about it, I really am simply interested in your thoughts. Thanks again.

What you are basing your position on is that everything that Jesus said or did, or even that which is crucial to the faith, is in the Bible. Scripture themselves says that this is not true.

Jesus’s followers did discuss these things. Sacred Tradition tells us so. You can also see warnings in the NT to various groups that were no longer teaching the proper faith. Some of these were written before the Gospels.

The reasons doctrines and dogmas exist is because people started to deny them, even though they have been taught since day one

 

[Mark77]

Simple things are pure & beautiful!

Often, we must approach the more complex, in order to speak to those who live complex lives.

An inspired follower of Jesus Christ, our Lord & Savior, once wrote;

**"With all our energy we ought to lead back all men to Our most merciful Redeemer. He is the Divine Consoler of the afflicted. To rulers & subjects alike He teaches lessons of true holiness, unimpeachable justice & generous charity. He alone can be the stable foundation & support of peace & tranquility. ‘For other foundation no man can lay but that which is laid: which is Christ Jesus.’ "

His Holiness Papa Pius XII urges the study of Sacred Scripture in his encyclical “DIVINO AFFLANTE SPIRITU”**

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

 

[benidict]

Benidict,
Thanks for responding. I am hoping for more (name removed by moderator)ut from others as well.
It’s an interesting question you raise: What if someone denies the trinity?
I would say that many people I know have an interest in God and His work in their lives, without really wanting to know the theological fine points. Does that mean they deny the trinity? I don’t think so. Rather, that ‘facts’ side of the discussion is not what they want/need. They want/need the living work of God in their heart.
I am getting more and more that way myself.

Oh, BTW, I have noticed that here at CAF, Trinity comes up in almost every thread one way or another. How detailed is your thought about the Three? I see the Father, then the Son who has always wanted to be subject to and in agreement with the Father, and a Holy Spirit who was sent to the world at the behest of the Father and Son, and so is somehow subject to them as well.

What do you think?

Minny

hi minny. the doctrine of the trinity is so complex that if you ever figure it out, then it isnt the trinity. st. augustine while contemplating this came across a child attempting to fill up the ocean with sand. i dont remember the story very well. but when he asked the child why he would attempt such a thing, the child responded, why would you attempt to grasp the trinity. our finite minds cannot grasp this or simplify it. while i agree that we need the work of the living God in our hearts, it is also written " study to show yourselves approved." also it is written to abide in the teachings and doctrine of the apostles. we need the whole council of God. where we get into trouble is when we attempt to elevate one teaching at the expense of others. this is why there are so many denominations and errors taught today. people are not abiding sound doctrine, and their ears are itching…hmmm. peace

 

[Libertarian_FL]

Acts 2:42-47

The Believers Form a Community
42 All the believers devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, and to fellowship, and to sharing in meals (including the Lord’s Supper*), and to prayer.
43 A deep sense of awe came over them all, and the apostles performed many miraculous signs and wonders. 44 And all the believers met together in one place and shared everything they had. 45 They sold their property and possessions and shared the money with those in need. 46 They worshiped together at the Temple each day, met in homes for the Lord’s Supper, and shared their meals with great joy and generosity[j]—47 all the while praising God and enjoying the goodwill of all the people. And each day the Lord added to their fellowship those who were being saved. {NLT]

You want simple this is a church founded on the teachings of Jesus. You will note they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teachings, shared meals and to prayer. They gave away EVERYTHING ,note not tithing that is a full commitment, worshiped each day and gave to those in need. Now what happened I think a combination of fear of the Romans and Jewish authorities to force them to organize more as you would consider it and garner more power. And secondly a desire for power maybe for goals they saw as just to eliminate movements in the Way that would challenge them and split up the faith, a threat as I’m sure they saw it.

Now is any Church now like this? It didn’t even last in their time if one studied the rise of the central faith over the Gnostics and those groups outside the Apostles’ only club.

I would like to make the case that Jesus wanted a simple modest expressions of faith and the Apostles failed to be teachers to being leaders of a slowly corrupted Church what would lead to the Roman Catholics. I may support the succession of Peter in theory but what Jesus taught and what evils were done by the RCC proves to me that Satan was quick to defile the Apostles and corrupt the Christian community. Protestants were later no better in most cases.*

 

[CMatt25]

I have been doing lots of thinking for a few years. There were a few comments a recent thread that sparked this one into existence. My wondering has gone something like this:
In the gospels, we read about people who followed Jesus. It seems that some of our 'issues’or ‘subjects of discussion’ here might not have been things they even thought of. For example, while it is true that the correlationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is vital to our life, those who followed Jesus would likely not have discussed it the same way we often do here on CAF. There are many other things that would also fall into that category.
It also seems that the teaching of Jesus himself was quite simple: Blessed are the poor in spirit, love your enemy, love the Lord with all your heart, let the seed be sown into your heart,etc.
So, a question? In all of our discussion about what I will call doctrine, are we neglecting to apply the simple teaching? And, further, would God be more pleased if we really focused on getting those into our lives, and didn’t spend so much time on ‘doctrinal issues?’

I think so yes to both. And I agree many have an interest in God and His living work in their hearts and not so much the fine points of rules. I read about Christ and I don’t see Him all that complicated really. But the rules sometimes can be a yolk around a person’s neck. It’s possible to get so wrapped up in every rule and you can miss the bigger picture Christ painted for us.

 

[CMatt25]

how can you have fellowship, if there is no set belief system. it would be like the time of the judges. and every man did what was right in his own eyes. what if someone in your fellowship denies the trinity? thats doctrinal. do you say, oh well we dont want to offend? but yes, love is the highest law. Peace to you and yours

Fellowship in Christ. Believe it or not I know a denomination or two which do it that way. Peace.

 

[XinMinny]

Interesting to me what Libertarian wrote, especially about selling everything. It seems to me that the apostles did this as well (they forsook all, and followed Him. Go and sell that thou hast… and come follow me.) I know some people who have done that, and and are sharing the word of God with others, and I am trying to see how to do it myself. It is interesting to read the (name removed by moderator)ut of others here. Keep sharing…
Minny

 

[benidict]

Fellowship in Christ. Believe it or not I know a denomination or two which do it that way. Peace.

i agree, fellowship in Christ. but who is Christ? is it the Mormon Christ? the jehova witness Christ? you need to have some set doctrines. there can only be fellowship is there is a unity of ideology. otherwise the whole thing falls apart. you cannot even have a secular organization, such as the masons or rotary club, without some set of beliefs that draw people together. the teaching that we do not need doctrine is unbiblical and against the tradition handed down by the apostles. Peace

 

[CMatt25]

i agree, fellowship in Christ. but who is Christ? is it the Mormon Christ? the jehova witness Christ? you need to have some set doctrines. there can only be fellowship is there is a unity of ideology. otherwise the whole thing falls apart. you cannot even have a secular organization, such as the masons or rotary club, without some set of beliefs that draw people together. the teaching that we do not need doctrine is unbiblical and against the tradition handed down by the apostles. Peace

Christ is Christ. I know a denomination in which if a believer has been baptized anywhere all one needs to join is to profess Christ. They don’t sweat the details as much as Catholics but it seems to work for them. They haven’t fallen apart.

 

[SteveVH]

Acts 2:42-47

Now is any Church now like this? It didn’t even last in their time if one studied the rise of the central faith over the Gnostics and those groups outside the Apostles’ only club.

I would like to make the case that Jesus wanted a simple modest expressions of faith and the Apostles failed to be teachers to being leaders of a slowly corrupted Church what would lead to the Roman Catholics. I may support the succession of Peter in theory but what Jesus taught and what evils were done by the RCC proves to me that Satan was quick to defile the Apostles and corrupt the Christian community. Protestants were later no better in most cases.

Good thing the holiness of our Church is not dependant upon men, but rather Christ, its head. These “failed” Apostles were willing to die, excruciating deaths, for their faith. What evidence do you have that the Apostles failed to be teachers? As to the evils committed by the RCC, make sure you know your historians. Many of them have an axe to grind and have given extremely exagerated accounts. Understand that I am not denying sinfulness and sometimes outrageous behavior on the part of members of our Church. The Lutherans burned over 80,000 women accused of witchcraft. People are sinful, which is why we need a Savior. You must also look at what the RCC has given to the world; higher education, the hospital system, scientific method, and so on. Most importantly, it has given the world Jesus Christ, both in his word (the bible), its charitable acts and, greates of all, the Eucharist. But, as I said, the Church is holy because Christ, its head, is holy. It is a divine institution made up of sinners.

 

[benidict]

Christ is Christ. I know a denomination in which if a believer has been baptized anywhere all one needs to join is to profess Christ. They don’t sweat the details as much as Catholics but it seems to work for them. They haven’t fallen apart.

no. again that is unbiblical and goes against Church tradition. even the apostle state there are false Christ. its not just Catholics that are concerned with this. so if a sikh come to your congregation and wants to join you will let him? they are a hindu sect that does believe in Jesus. but they do not believe they need the blood of the Cross. they do not believe Jesus was God the son. so since Christ is Christ,( and your view seems pretty shallow and weak to me.) you would allow him adimittance? joel van olsteen teaches this kind of watered down heresy! cmon! you know better. peace

 

[benidict]

Acts 2:42-47

The Believers Form a Community
42 All the believers devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, and to fellowship, and to sharing in meals (including the Lord’s Supper*), and to prayer.
43 A deep sense of awe came over them all, and the apostles performed many miraculous signs and wonders. 44 And all the believers met together in one place and shared everything they had. 45 They sold their property and possessions and shared the money with those in need. 46 They worshiped together at the Temple each day, met in homes for the Lord’s Supper, and shared their meals with great joy and generosity[j]—47 all the while praising God and enjoying the goodwill of all the people. And each day the Lord added to their fellowship those who were being saved. {NLT]

You want simple this is a church founded on the teachings of Jesus. You will note they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teachings, shared meals and to prayer. They gave away EVERYTHING ,note not tithing that is a full commitment, worshiped each day and gave to those in need. Now what happened I think a combination of fear of the Romans and Jewish authorities to force them to organize more as you would consider it and garner more power. And secondly a desire for power maybe for goals they saw as just to eliminate movements in the Way that would challenge them and split up the faith, a threat as I’m sure they saw it.

Now is any Church now like this? It didn’t even last in their time if one studied the rise of the central faith over the Gnostics and those groups outside the Apostles’ only club.

I would like to make the case that Jesus wanted a simple modest expressions of faith and the Apostles failed to be teachers to being leaders of a slowly corrupted Church what would lead to the Roman Catholics. I may support the succession of Peter in theory but what Jesus taught and what evils were done by the RCC proves to me that Satan was quick to defile the Apostles and corrupt the Christian community. Protestants were later no better in most cases.*what about the evils commited by the reformation leaders, such as john calvin and martin luther. im not gonna go there. we could go tit for tat on that score. it would get us nowhere. also if you were a prophet, you would uphold the doctrine of the apostles, and not accuse them of negligence or being leaders of a corrupt movement. we are told to test the spirits. can you withstand the test of a true prophet?

 

[ralphinal]

Acts 2:42-47

The Believers Form a Community
42 All the believers devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching, and to fellowship, and to sharing in meals (including the Lord’s Supper*), and to prayer.
43 A deep sense of awe came over them all, and the apostles performed many miraculous signs and wonders. 44 And all the believers met together in one place and shared everything they had. 45 They sold their property and possessions and shared the money with those in need. 46 They worshiped together at the Temple each day, met in homes for the Lord’s Supper, and shared their meals with great joy and generosity[j]—47 all the while praising God and enjoying the goodwill of all the people. And each day the Lord added to their fellowship those who were being saved. {NLT]

You want simple this is a church founded on the teachings of Jesus. You will note they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teachings, shared meals and to prayer. They gave away EVERYTHING ,note not tithing that is a full commitment, worshiped each day and gave to those in need. Now what happened I think a combination of fear of the Romans and Jewish authorities to force them to organize more as you would consider it and garner more power. And secondly a desire for power maybe for goals they saw as just to eliminate movements in the Way that would challenge them and split up the faith, a threat as I’m sure they saw it.

Now is any Church now like this? It didn’t even last in their time if one studied the rise of the central faith over the Gnostics and those groups outside the Apostles’ only club.

I would like to make the case that Jesus wanted a simple modest expressions of faith and the Apostles failed to be teachers to being leaders of a slowly corrupted Church what would lead to the Roman Catholics. I may support the succession of Peter in theory but what Jesus taught and what evils were done by the RCC proves to me that Satan was quick to defile the Apostles and corrupt the Christian community. Protestants were later no better in most cases.*
Silly question. If the corruption grew so fast, how do you know that the Bible that you have is valid?

 

[XinMinny]

“I would like to make the case that Jesus wanted a simple modest expressions of faith”

I have quoted a portion of what Libertarian wrote here. This is the piece that I am really wondering about. I appreciate what Ralph wrote about corruption growing so fast. However, what I think I am noticing is that there is a spirit (I don’t mean the HolySpirit here) or a sense, or an attitude or an overall impression that one gets when reading the gospels that Jesus spoke about simple things easy for people to understand. And, I think that Libertarian is suggesting that Jesus wanted His followers to continue that. Ralph, I would answer your question about the Bible by saying that when I read the New Testament, I notice that the same simple ideas about love, about not letting worship become habit, about understanding inside of ourselves what we really should be; all those simple things are there as well, and that gives me confidence that it is of the same Author.

Just a thought,
Minny

 

[benidict]

“I would like to make the case that Jesus wanted a simple modest expressions of faith”

I have quoted a portion of what Libertarian wrote here. This is the piece that I am really wondering about. I appreciate what Ralph wrote about corruption growing so fast. However, what I think I am noticing is that there is a spirit (I don’t mean the HolySpirit here) or a sense, or an attitude or an overall impression that one gets when reading the gospels that Jesus spoke about simple things easy for people to understand. And, I think that Libertarian is suggesting that Jesus wanted His followers to continue that. Ralph, I would answer your question about the Bible by saying that when I read the New Testament, I notice that the same simple ideas about love, about not letting worship become habit, about understanding inside of ourselves what we really should be; all those simple things are there as well, and that gives me confidence that it is of the same Author.

Just a thought,
Minny

hi minny. i appreciate your views, i really do. but if what Jesus taught was so simple, then how come there are so many different views about what he said and taught throughout protestantism? shouldnt we have 1 protestant church, instead of the vast number we have? also Jesus taught some very complex and deep things. how would we explain these? we cannot just sweep these things under the rug, because they are not simple. also for many Catholics like myself, worship does not become habit for us. we do it, because we love and honor our Lord. when i was a civilian, i was able to go to mass, 7 days a week. sometimes i went 2 times a day. why? out of habit? no. because i love the house of the Lord, and understand that we are working with Him to redeem a fallen world. if you and other protestants truly understood what all the mass entailed, you would be stampedeing the Church to gain admittance. Peace

 

[Libertarian_FL]

ralphinal >>> It isn’t in fact the NT is largely in error of the truth and the core problem is the gospels, although the letters and the like are accurate and Revelation should not be in there. My gospel written under the will of God will correct this. For now I suggest read the Jefferson Bible its at least true to His teachings.

XinMinny >>> Jesus was a simple preacher and lived a modest life who happened to be an instrument of God to free us from all Sin. A Son of God and prophet much like we are all blessed with God’s Grace as His Sons and Daughters under the New Covenant.

 

[ralphinal]

ralphinal >>> It isn’t in fact the NT is largely in error of the truth and the core problem is the gospels, although the letters and the like are accurate and Revelation should not be in there. My gospel written under the will of God will correct this. For now I suggest read the Jefferson Bible its at least true to His teachings.

XinMinny >>> Jesus was a simple preacher and lived a modest life who happened to be an instrument of God to free us from all Sin. A Son of God and prophet much like we are all blessed with God’s Grace as His Sons and Daughters under the New Covenant.

I was not expecting that answer. Thanks. You are one of the first to say that on this forum.