Jesus was the first apostate

by JustTickledPink 16 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  JustTickledPink

  Think about it. He was a real rebel, he called the religious leaders out, he walked into the temple and actually overturned tables, he exposed their hypocrisy, he hung out with sinners, he didn't buy into the "organization" he basically walked around and talked to whoever whenever. He never built a chuch, he never collected donations, he just preached what he believed to be the truth in a time when the religious leaders were more concerned with status and tradtitions.

  If you look up apostacy in the dictionary the definition is: "renunciation of a religious faith, abandonment of a previous loyalty" It never says you automatically become a Devil worshipper or anything scary or evil... just reject a teaching or a loyalty (to an organization.)

  Jesus did exactly that. He was the first apostate.
• 

  Billygoat

  JTP,

  I've always thought that too! Great minds think alike!

  Andi
• 

  Satanus

  8 If cases come before your courts that are too difficult for you to judge-whether bloodshed, lawsuits or assaults-take them to the place the LORD your God will choose. 9 Go to the priests, who are Levites, and to the judge who is in office at that time. Inquire of them and they will give you the verdict. 10 You must act according to the decisions they give you at the place the LORD will choose. Be careful to do everything they direct you to do. 11 Act according to the law they teach you and the decisions they give you. Do not turn aside from what they tell you, to the right or to the left. 12 The man who shows contempt for the judge or for the priest who stands ministering there to the LORD your God must be put to death. You must purge the evil from Israel. 13 All the people will hear and be afraid, and will not be contemptuous again.
• 

  jaffacake

  
  To non-JWs like me the word 'apostate' is just another word. People of all religions acnowledge that all religions change, evolve etc, and that all progressive humans have to renounce former beliefs when they learn new, more enlightened ones.

  It is only in the past year or so, that I discovered that JWs have brain washed negative connotations about this word. I find it ironic because JWs are responsible for more apostasy than any other modern religion I can think of. The last BIG example of apostacy was the change in the "this generation" doctrine.

  They call apostacy "new light" and twist the true meaning of 'apostacy' to mean anything contrary to JW latest teachings.

  They have re-written some of the Bible, so they may as well re-write the dictionary too, starting with words like:

  • apostate
  • truth
• 

  heathen

  I disagree . It was the jewish religious leaders that refused to acknowledge their corruption that were the apostates . Jesus was sent by God to pronounce judgement against them for their hypocrisy and lack of faith in him . As what John the baptist said " prepare the way of jehovah and make his path straight " .
• 

  Satanus

  Heathen

  It was the jewish religious leaders that refused to acknowledge their corruption that were the apostates .

  When did the corruption in israel's religious leaders begin to occur, thus rendering them apostate?

  S
• 

  heathen

  Satanus --- That is a very good question . I don't know exactly when , I don't know that anyone does . At some point there became divisions among the jews with the pharisees and saducees . It probly happened sometime during the roman occupation . If anyone does have info feel free to post .
• 

  Narkissos

  
  I think it's a very good question.

  Leaving aside the (probably insoluble) problem of the "historical Jesus," there is no doubt that much of the Gospels' force to this day relies on what we would term "rebellious" or "subversive" traits in their main character (hero or anti-hero). This is true also of the Pauline antinomian (or antilegalist) diatribe which most probably lies in the background (especially through Mark). The revolutionary, or even libertarian overtones, certainly appeal to many, especially in oppressive circumstances, and have not lost their subversive power.

  On the other hand, I think Christianity was never satisfied with a purely rebellious figure. The "rebel" had to be pictured as the official representative of some higher authority or order -- making his rebellion only apparent, and the authorities he rebelled against the real rebels against "God". In that perspective, order, not rebellion, has the first and last word.

  This is a deep contradiction in Christianity. The Son of God is not Prometheus, for Prometheus is not the Son of God. No theological synthesis can do true justice to the moment of rebellion.
• 

  jaffacake

  I don't know when the divisions started, but believe it was at least 200 years before Christ. It may have been related to the dispersion and the pressure to conform to the manners of the surrounding society.

  In Graeco-Roman society thy were a race apart, refusing to participate in the imperial cult. Yet they offered daily sacrifice on behalf of the emperor in the temple at Jerusalem, and were ready to dedicate synagogues 'to God in honour of the Emperor'

  The Septuagint (Greek translation) of Hebrew scriptures was produced in Alexandria in 3rd century BC. This was widely used by Jews, but when Christians began to use it, some Rabbis denounced the making of the Septuagint as a sin like worship of the golden calf.

  By the first century there were many divisions, most notably the Pharisees, Saduces and Essenes. But even that is an extreme simplification. Even long before Christ the Jews were not a single group who all believed alike, they were as diverse as Christians are now, although this does not fit in with how JWs like to view the world in terms of God's 'organisations' in unity.
• 

  Narkissos

  "When did divisions start?" is usually a wrong question. In most cases, so-called "original unity" is a myth successfully promoted by one sect when it becomes dominant. The Deuteronomistic party and its successors were responsible for rewriting the whole history of Israel, making the ancient diversity appear as a deviation from an original unity, which is actually nothing but the present dominant doctrine retrojected into the remote and unverifiable past. As a result, all the heirs of the ancient traditions appear as heretics or apostates (such as the Samaritans or the Elephantine Jewish colony in Egypt who still worshipped Yhwh with a consort goddess).

  What the Deuteronomistic historiographs did to the history of Israel, the Acts of the Apostles did to the early Christian movements: making them appear as deriving from one common start (Pentecost).