Hi,
We have had a similar discussion before on this text referring to Caes·a·re´a Phi·lip´pi. I think it was with Willa.
As Iso said, personally, my opinion (and it's nothing more than that, of course) is that he was employing a teaching technique which i call "compare and contrast."
When one realises Jesus was in the area of an actual rockmass and pagan shrine, it is quite possible Jesus was leading up to a further layer of teaching and his main objective which they would never forgot.
He, perhaps, finally, is actually contrasting and comparing the pagan shrine and rock mass in their view, with himself, as the True Rock Mass of the Church of God.
regards
Derek
Did we already have this conversation? Seems vaguely familiar... :huh:
I so agree Derek, with yours and Iso's replies - Jesus was a master teacher. He asked questions to make people think - it's not like he didn't already know the answers!
I'm also thinking there may have been a bit of superstition concerning these things and he wanted to reinforce the truth of who he was, Who sent him, and what he was to accomplish. At times even those closest to him didn't fully understand until what he'd said had come to pass.
:peace:
I put this in the controversy room for obvious reasons. My purpose here is not to corrupt or teach or pervert or cause an upheaval. I know what this forum believes. What I'm trying to do is shed light on the most important time of Christianity to analyze to get to the truth, the BEGINNING, particularly the first five centuries. My hope is that we can have a rational discussion among Christians with the ultimate purpose of getting to the truth, not necessarily at this time to determine WHAT is true, but to simply find out what was commonly believed and taught at the time of Christ, when was it changed, and why.
I found it very interesting when I learned that, besides philosophers like Plato and Socrates, almost every one of the most influential early church fathers believed in and taught the doctrine of rebirth. Among them are St. Augustine, Clement of Alexandria, St. Gregory of Nyssa, Justin Martyr, and St. Jerome.
But a brief look at the most prominent church father, Origen, is the one that I think sheds the most light on what went on during this period. Wikipedia says of him:
Origen was an early Christian scholar and theologian, and one of the most distinguished writers of the early Christian Church despite not being considered a Church father by some..... The patriarch of Alexandria at first supported Origen but later expelled him for being ordained without the patriarch's permission. He relocated to Caesarea Maritima and died there after being tortured during a persecution.
Using his knowledge of Hebrew, he produced Hexapla and corrected Septuagint. He wrote commentaries on most of the books of the Bible. In "De Principiis" (On First Principles), he articulated one of the first philosophical expositions of Christian doctrine. He interpreted scripture allegorically and showed himself to be a Neo-Pythagorean, and Neo-Platonist. Like Plotinus, he wrote that the soul passes through successive stages of incarnation before eventually reaching God. He imagined even demons being reunited with God. For Origen, God was the First Principle, and Christ, the Logos, was subordinate to him. His views of a hierarchical structure in the Trinity, the temporality of matter, "the fabulous preexistence of souls," and "the monstrous restoration which follows from it" were declared anathema in the 6th century.
"If it can be shown that an incorporeal and reasonable being has life in itself independently of the body and that it is worse off in the body than out of it, then beyond a doubt bodies are only of secondary importance and arise from time to time to meet the varying conditions of reasonable creatures. Those who require bodies are clothed with them, and contrawise, when fallen souls have lifted themselves up to better things their bodies are once more annihilated. They are thus ever vanishing and ever reappearing." ~Origen, from "A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church", P. Schaff and H. Wace editors.
"By some inclination toward evil, certain spirit souls come into bodies, first of men; then, due to their association with the irrational passions after the allotted span of human life, they are changed into beasts, from which they sink to the level of plants. From this condition they rise again through the same stages and are restored to their heavenly place." ~Origen, On First Principles, B. W. Butterworth, translator.
Origen's supporters were passionate in heralding his views, but his detractors were even more passionate in pursuing his destruction. He was banished from official church recognition at the Second Council of Constantinople (the Fifth Ecumenical Council) amidst swirling political intrigue and dissension that was so severe, it leaves myself and many others analyzing the event to question whether or not Christians are bound by the edicts and anathemas that were adopted there.
Emperor Justinian wrote a letter to the Patriarch of Constantinople naming Origen as one of the pernicious heretics. To be a heretic is bad enough but pernicious means "1. insidious harm or ruin; 2. deadly or fatal." In other words, there are no human beings worse than this. Justinian then convened a synod at Constantinople in 543 C.E. which issued an edict refuting Origen. Pope Vigilius opposed the edict and promptly suspended all communication with the Patriarch of Constantinople. When the Pope arrived in Constantinople he reversed himself issuing a document supporting the Justinian edict. Many speculate that this document was issued at the gunpoint of intense political pressure. These speculations are confirmed by the fact that Pope Vigilius withdrew the document seven years later in 550 C.E. After much rancorous discussion and many maneuvers, Justinian called for a meeting of the entire Church in 553 C.E. known as the Fifth Ecumenical Council or the Second Council of Constantinople. The Church was geographically divided into East and West with these lines of division also extending into religious and philosophical matters. In general, the West was supportive of Origen while the East was not. Justinian himself presided over the meeting because Pope Vigilius had boycotted the gathering as an act of protest over irregularities such as stacking the arrangements for attendance against the West. It was highly irregular for Justinian and not the Pope to preside over this conclave. Of the 165 bishops who signed the acts of the Council not more than six were from the West because they were not in attendance. Let us recap for emphasis. The Pope refused to attend, Justinian ran the meeting and half of the bishops, the ones most likely to support Origen, did not attend the Council meeting.
In the long run, Pope Vigilius accepted the Council but the West did not recognize the Council as legitimate for some time. Several Western dioceses even broke off communication with Rome. Milan was so righteously indignant over this blatant skewering of propriety that they did not rejoin Rome until the end of the sixth century. To add to the vagary of Origen's demise, it should be noted that in the end of the Fifth Ecumenical Council's fourteen anathemas, Origen's name is mentioned in only one of them nestled in a list of heretics. There is some evidence that even this was an error. The truth is that Christians have been led to believe that the doctrine of rebirth has never been part of Christian faith. Others have supposed that the question of rebirth and/or reincarnation was forever closed at the Fifth Ecumenical Council.
To further clarify the picture of Origen's crucifixion, it is important to understand his principle antagonist, emperor Justinian. The Encyclopedia Britannica has interesting things to say about him.
The truth seems to be that Justinian was not a great ruler in the higher sense of the word, that is to say, a man of large views, deep insight...
Justinian was quick rather than strong or profound; his policy does not strike one as the result of deliberate and well-considered views, but dictated by the hopes and fancies of the moment.
Among the Jews, there are three learned Jewish philosophers appearing just before or at the time of Jesus who also taught the doctrine of rebirth. They were Philo Judaeus, aka Philo of Alexandria, C. 20 B.C.E.- C. 50 C.E., who was the greatest Jewish philosopher and theologian of the Greco-Roman period whose writings have survived; the Jewish sage Hillel, the Chaldean teacher who was the leading Pharisee in Jerusalem during the late 1st century B.C.E. and early years of the present era; and the Jewish sage Jehoshuah ben Pandira. Down till today, these three are household names in Judaism and are enormously respected by all orthodox Jews regardless of sect.
Isaiah 26:19 “Your dead ones will live. A corpse of mine—they will rise up. Awake and cry out joyfully, YOU residents in the dust! For your dew is as the dew of mallows, and the earth itself will let even those impotent in death drop [in birth]."
hi, jimmy :hibye: i have a slightly different take on what you mentioned regarding these early "church fathers." buddhism and hinduism (even older) were both extant centuries before christianity; and both -- especially buddhism -- spread far and wide. so, it is no surprise to me that these men were familiar with (and perhaps quite enamored by) fundamental tenets of these two systems of worship. obviously, reincarnation is one of the most basic beliefs/teachings of both.
jesus never said, "i am the reincarnation and the life." he did say, however, "i am the resurrection and the life." as recorded for us in the eleventh chapter of john's gospel, when he went to the home of mary and martha to resurrect lazarus, who had died days before, martha said, "lord, i know that he will rise in the resurrection on the last day." to me, ressurection and reincarnation connote (and denote) two very different concepts. i believe jesus was emphatic in teaching resurrection (not reincarnation) as the hope of all mankind. clearly that was the lesson martha had learned by listening to him.
personally, i don't believe the fact that many men generally associated with the early christian church endorsed belief in reincarnation carries too much weight insofar as legitimizing the doctrine. as paul said, "after my going away, oppressive wolves will enter in among you."
i don't see the matter as any reason for either one of us to get our underwear all knotted up :D as all truth will be revealed -- unambiguously -- when the due time arrives. :thumbup:
take care, jimmy ... your friend and brother, ... iso...