[GCFL-discuss] Poygamy

[Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies List]

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 23:21:56 -0700 "Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies
List" <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net> writes:
Uh, Siarlys, what the heck?  Why would he never have been a Christian? 
It wasn't possible, of course, because he was the Christ, and thus could
not follow himself, but what do you mean?
Jeaneneb

Of course that comment is partly just a snappy phrase. It comes from a
poem in Ambrose Bierce's Devil's Dictionary. But there are many ways to
put some substance on it.

For one thing, Christians have never been able to agree with each other
on what a Christian is. This goes a lot farther back than the
Reformation. Therefore, it is a good bet that every Christian church has
some doctrines that Christ would not accept, or at least that Christ
would not consider essential. People do things in the name of whoever
they follow, that the original person would not have done. This is even
true of God, or of Yehoshua, who called himself Ben-Adam (Son of Man).
Which heretics would Jesus have burned at the stake? (I know, he
shriveled up a fig tree that didn't have any fruit available for him, if
THAT apocryphal little tale is to be given any significance or credence,
but name one heretic Jesus put to death.)

I have been amused at all the attention paid to The Gospel of Judas for
two reasons. One, it really doesn't mean anything spiritually, it has
never been introduced as the newly revealed Truth to supplant the four
accepted gospels. Its just another scroll. Second, the real significance
of the writing has been totally missed. Once upon a time, there were
people who called themselves Christians who read and wrote and believed
this stuff. Why? Because for the first 300 years, Christianity was a
bubbling inter-cultural ferment of gospels and syncretisms and doctrines,
out of which what we call orthodox Christianity emerged, only to split
again.

Personally, I believe that Matthew 22: 37-40 provides a comprehensive
definition of Christianity. All else is mere detail. Micah 6:8 will serve
equally well. (Actually, there is nothing in either that every Jew and
Muslim could not subscribe to -- especially as they are all are contained
in the Torah or the Prophets -- but Jews and Muslims would have a few
other obligations also). That could provide a basic unity for all
Christians, or even monotheists, but there are also some Christians who
would say no, in addition, or instead... You know, grace vs. good works,
or nobody is a Christian unless they have prayed a specific prayer for
forgiveness, etc. Those are all good things, but not essential. And what
would Jesus say? Who knows... he doesn't appear to have anticipated all
the stuff we argue over, split over, or wrap ourselves up in.

Siarlys

P.S. It is a matter of definition whether there are only 4 Shakers.
Different Shaker communities disagree over whether the membership rolls
were closed to new additions (which would inevitably make the community
extinct, since celibate practitioners have no children) or not. So, some
new members have been admitted by some communities, while others say
those are not true Shakers. There are some substantial financial assets
at issue in all of this too.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://gcfl.net/pipermail/gcfl-discuss/attachments/20061111/e696fb1a/attachment.htm