More reasons why people resist
reforming the church with a better priesthood of believers structure. I recently encountered a new idea about why some ministers are the
essential obstructionists. Consider 1 Timothy 2King James Version
(KJV)
“2 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.”
A defrocked Baptist minister in expostulating on the theme of intercession and authority said that Paul put Kings first of all men of whom we should pray. The good man was apparently blind to the first stanza wherein all men are to be the object of prayer. The minister was a firm believer in ranks, and of course hierarchical church ranks and offices as of greatest value. He could not either differentiate between aristocratic social structures of the first century and feudal era and democracy today. That is he believed all men are under political authority in the United States as in the same respect as citizens of ancient feudal and monarchic realms were subjects; and of course he was dead wrong.
There was great value in encountering the issue for me. Paul was more of a democrat than an aristocrat and places the common man and women before rulers and 'authorities'.
Today in the United States authorities are public servants with special tasks they are allowed to enact; commissioned officers as it were, yet they are of no higher social class and are just commoners like everyone else; America has no royals and if it did they should be hung by the neck until dead.
For those that highly desire to live as priestly aristocrats or petty bourgeois the structure of hierarchical priesthoods are vital interest. They even develop theological hermeneutics to explain how it is that only through men can God act in the world-in response to intercessory prayers with support or reproof. I think that plainly silly.
In the United States men and women and certain legally defined roles and areas they are allowed to work in or even own in order to allow people to exist freely with minimum interference with each other. Nobody is legally superior though; not policemen, politicians, doctors, lawyers, sports celebrities and so forth; no one. There are no inherited rights to political office; not the Bushes, the Clintons or George Washington's great grandson-in-law Robert E. Lee.
In aristocracy and ancient monarchies though, authorities actually were superior beings socially. A prince had the power to put people to death because they displeased him for whatever reason including simply existing. The authorities had royal military and constabularies too, and those represented the power of the crown. They were quite unlike American authority figures such as the school custodian authorized to take whatever litter he finds on the school grounds, or a President that may be tried for intern molestation if she is under 18.
It is important for Sanhedrin wanna bes to have verisimilitude to having the keys of the kingdom authorization to bring the word of God to the lost. I think they can get people saved through the power of the Lord, yet the priestly exclusive method that inevitably exceeds the old testament tithing rate of one-third of one-tenth of a mans produce ever third year also defends bad theology on several issues because most are not theologians, require dominant relations in order to have authority and just don't do peer theology examination.
Many of these souls stress personalized and charismatic, more emotional and less rational approach to the ministry. They tend to make promises and imply that being saved entitles one to power and privilege and representatives of Christ on Earth. Sound- is associated with the Logos of John (that was actually a theological idea of Heraclitus), and through the word of authorized ministers all things on Earth will be subject in some senses though Satan still seeks to devour. That is a powerful message to the powerless and lost. If one is charismatic enough at learning the ropes one may also prosper in ministering with a ten percent tithe from all seeking of course 'sacrificial' tithing at higher rates.
While the right wing charismatic ministry supports tax cuts for the rich and everyone else, they do not support tithe cuts or a flat tithing rate of 1% for non-working priests that was the Old Testament rate.
There are many reasons why charismatic ministries work to convert the uneducated well. Though it is effective for a while eventually as people are educated they tend to drift away for few ministries today support either a priesthood of believers reinforced by high-quality reformed theology.
There are a couple of opinions about speaking in tongues. One is that at Pentecost everyone spoke in a language that wasn't there own yet that others understood. Another is that people spoke gibberish in a form of primitive rave. Each may be true at various times, yet I think neither were intended to show that one is holier-than-thou as it may be used in charismatic ministries.
I did wonder about the speaking in tongues though. There are several good reasons for its existence in ancient times that are interesting to consider. I will mention a couple.
Imagine you live in ancient Israel conquered first by Greeks than Romans in comparatively modern times, there have been Egyptian and Babylonian captivities and a number of other foreign elements of oppression. The ancient languages are all over and one's own Hebrew language is occasionally eclipsed with Aramaic and such. Raving in tongues may have been a emotional way to break the morphological bonds binding one to an inferior social class or outright comparative meaninglessness.
Speaking in tongues thus seems to be a deep thing than many are willing to consider today. It could also be that existing in a mono-language culture without subconsciously repressed alternative languages than one knows with varying depth supports enunciation of a synthetic new language without fully developed rules of grammar. Of course it could be that the Holy Spirit puts words in the mouth of a Christian occasionally-he made Balaam's ass speak at one point when Numbers 22:28 she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?”, yet God can pre-determine anything including language.
Some hierarchical and charismatic ministers deny that anything is substantively pre-determined...they are not Calvinists logically, yet most would agree with pre-tribulationist hermeneutic of the Revelation. In short, its all sort of a mess.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EhadtonBYw
“2 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.”
A defrocked Baptist minister in expostulating on the theme of intercession and authority said that Paul put Kings first of all men of whom we should pray. The good man was apparently blind to the first stanza wherein all men are to be the object of prayer. The minister was a firm believer in ranks, and of course hierarchical church ranks and offices as of greatest value. He could not either differentiate between aristocratic social structures of the first century and feudal era and democracy today. That is he believed all men are under political authority in the United States as in the same respect as citizens of ancient feudal and monarchic realms were subjects; and of course he was dead wrong.
There was great value in encountering the issue for me. Paul was more of a democrat than an aristocrat and places the common man and women before rulers and 'authorities'.
Today in the United States authorities are public servants with special tasks they are allowed to enact; commissioned officers as it were, yet they are of no higher social class and are just commoners like everyone else; America has no royals and if it did they should be hung by the neck until dead.
For those that highly desire to live as priestly aristocrats or petty bourgeois the structure of hierarchical priesthoods are vital interest. They even develop theological hermeneutics to explain how it is that only through men can God act in the world-in response to intercessory prayers with support or reproof. I think that plainly silly.
In the United States men and women and certain legally defined roles and areas they are allowed to work in or even own in order to allow people to exist freely with minimum interference with each other. Nobody is legally superior though; not policemen, politicians, doctors, lawyers, sports celebrities and so forth; no one. There are no inherited rights to political office; not the Bushes, the Clintons or George Washington's great grandson-in-law Robert E. Lee.
In aristocracy and ancient monarchies though, authorities actually were superior beings socially. A prince had the power to put people to death because they displeased him for whatever reason including simply existing. The authorities had royal military and constabularies too, and those represented the power of the crown. They were quite unlike American authority figures such as the school custodian authorized to take whatever litter he finds on the school grounds, or a President that may be tried for intern molestation if she is under 18.
It is important for Sanhedrin wanna bes to have verisimilitude to having the keys of the kingdom authorization to bring the word of God to the lost. I think they can get people saved through the power of the Lord, yet the priestly exclusive method that inevitably exceeds the old testament tithing rate of one-third of one-tenth of a mans produce ever third year also defends bad theology on several issues because most are not theologians, require dominant relations in order to have authority and just don't do peer theology examination.
Many of these souls stress personalized and charismatic, more emotional and less rational approach to the ministry. They tend to make promises and imply that being saved entitles one to power and privilege and representatives of Christ on Earth. Sound- is associated with the Logos of John (that was actually a theological idea of Heraclitus), and through the word of authorized ministers all things on Earth will be subject in some senses though Satan still seeks to devour. That is a powerful message to the powerless and lost. If one is charismatic enough at learning the ropes one may also prosper in ministering with a ten percent tithe from all seeking of course 'sacrificial' tithing at higher rates.
While the right wing charismatic ministry supports tax cuts for the rich and everyone else, they do not support tithe cuts or a flat tithing rate of 1% for non-working priests that was the Old Testament rate.
There are many reasons why charismatic ministries work to convert the uneducated well. Though it is effective for a while eventually as people are educated they tend to drift away for few ministries today support either a priesthood of believers reinforced by high-quality reformed theology.
There are a couple of opinions about speaking in tongues. One is that at Pentecost everyone spoke in a language that wasn't there own yet that others understood. Another is that people spoke gibberish in a form of primitive rave. Each may be true at various times, yet I think neither were intended to show that one is holier-than-thou as it may be used in charismatic ministries.
I did wonder about the speaking in tongues though. There are several good reasons for its existence in ancient times that are interesting to consider. I will mention a couple.
Imagine you live in ancient Israel conquered first by Greeks than Romans in comparatively modern times, there have been Egyptian and Babylonian captivities and a number of other foreign elements of oppression. The ancient languages are all over and one's own Hebrew language is occasionally eclipsed with Aramaic and such. Raving in tongues may have been a emotional way to break the morphological bonds binding one to an inferior social class or outright comparative meaninglessness.
Speaking in tongues thus seems to be a deep thing than many are willing to consider today. It could also be that existing in a mono-language culture without subconsciously repressed alternative languages than one knows with varying depth supports enunciation of a synthetic new language without fully developed rules of grammar. Of course it could be that the Holy Spirit puts words in the mouth of a Christian occasionally-he made Balaam's ass speak at one point when Numbers 22:28 she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?”, yet God can pre-determine anything including language.
Some hierarchical and charismatic ministers deny that anything is substantively pre-determined...they are not Calvinists logically, yet most would agree with pre-tribulationist hermeneutic of the Revelation. In short, its all sort of a mess.
No comments:
Post a Comment