Log in

No account? Create an account

March 2018



Powered by LiveJournal.com

bible study

I Googled King James Bible Matthew 6 and the first site that came up was on Real Magick the Occult Library. \:/

Matthew 6 is entirely "red letter". That means it is supposedly the actual words of the incarnate God, no inspiration necessary. Do Christian actually read the Bible?


Pray like Yeshua bar Yosef did

I was reading somewhere that there is no record in the Bible of Jesus praying in public. He taught in public but he went aside to be alone when he prayed

As for your missed church attendance.

23 And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn. 24 And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful? 25 And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him? 26 How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him? 27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: 28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

mistaken genes

A great quote from the Christian Answers Network site...talking about who Cain's wife was, the decent of mane, etc.:
"Today, brothers and sisters (and half-brothers and half-sisters, etc.) are not permitted by law to marry because their children have an unacceptably high risk of being deformed. The more closely the parents are related, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed.

There is a very sound genetic reason for such laws that is easy to understand. Every person has two sets of genes, there being some 130,000 pairs that specify how a person is put together and functions. Each person inherits one gene of each pair from each parent. Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways."

Re: mistaken genes

I ran across this a while back and was simply amazed - amazed both at the time and energy that it took to come up with an explanation of where "The Other People" came from and how incest was OK back in the REAL old days... and amazed that anyone actually accepts this explanation.

Then again, the fact that people SO believe that explanation... and that they don't practice what's in the Book they preach... yeah, I guess those mistakes DO show up in a variety of ways!
Some of us do. And we find remarkable things in there, that nobody believes when we tell them it's in there.

What Jesus was mostly fussing about, in this particular passage, was people who cared more about being seen to be faithful than about actually being faithful. It wasn't about practicing Judaism, or about really living a godly life; it was about the prestige they got from the people who saw them praying floridly on the street corners.

It looks on the surface like he's after praying in public, but what he's really after is hypocrisy, instead. He's denouncing the practice of one's religion for any reason other than to worship. Using it to gain approval from others, using it to shock and scare people, using it to abuse or intimidate people - these were all his targets.

In most cases, when Jesus is denouncing some practice or other, he's really calling out for true devotion, for true and right relationship between the Divine and humans, and between humans themselves, and decrying all manner of falseness and pretense.

This is, of course, my two cents' worth, and I am no kind of authority on biblical interpretation. But I thought it might add some interest to the discussion.


I have encountered that claim.

Of course it would be better supported if there was any evidence that Jesus prayed in public. No where in the Bible does it say that he did, and it frequently says he went off alone to pray.

But even so, I have no problem with people quitely bowing their head before they eat (or do anything else), even when they are a public official. And I have no problem with like minded people gathering together to share their faith and practice together. It is when they do it on a street corner with a bull horn that I doubt their sincerity. There is no law that could stop any individual from paying in school or at work, and there are none in America that even try. Which makes me think the people who want "prayer in school", the tenn commandment in the court house, or the press at their prayer meetings, are more concerned with being seen to pray then tending to their souls.

Re: Apoligetics

Depends heavily on what you mean by "public." For example, there certainly is mention that he "said the blessing" and broke the bread at the seder the night before he was crucified - that was public in that he was not entirely by himself, but private in that he was alone in the upper room with the disciples.

And in general, it certainly appears from the gospel accounts that Jesus attended synagogue worship and temple worship as a faithful Jew. So - does that count as praying in public? (Really what it offers is a model of worshipping within one's chosen faith path, in the customs that path observes, without making a big deal about it.)

Also depends somewhat on what you mean by "praying." In at least one of the gospel accounts of the crucifixion, as he is being nailed to the cross, he says, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing" - which certainly seems like a prayer to me, and one could not possibly argue that the crucifixion was conducted in private.

And I will, of course, now have to be even more attentive to the gospel readings for the day, simply because it seems to me such an odd thing not to be in there that now I have to look closer and notice.

And I'm pretty much heartily in agreement with you - anybody who needs to pray in public on a street corner with a bullhorn is about being seen praying, or so it seems to me. Likewise having press at a prayer meeting.

On the other hand, I will say that I particularly understand the public gatherings to pray in the wake of 9-11 (as an example, and I think somewhere in there that was particularly mentioned). Regardless of one's individual faith path, it clearly seemed that as humans many people felt some need to come together somehow in united commemoration, acknowledgement, sharing even of what had happened and what was happening. I think that "coming together and sharing," in whatever form it took, was a form of prayer - both public and corporate, in a very moving and spiritual way, and for the most part not for show at all.

The chamber choir I sing with threw together a concert in a week - literally. It was all old music for the long-timers, but all brand new to learn for me; I joined them in 2001 and attended my first rehearsal on Sept. 10. And that, in its way, was also prayer. It wasn't really about the performance - although we were pretty amazing, considering we had exactly one rehearsal and also considering we were trying to cry and sing at the same time. It was about responding in some meaningful way to what was happening in the world and the city and our lives.

Re: Apoligetics

You bring up many good points.

This article on Jesus and Prayer sites chapter and verse.

As a Pagan I am in favor of: cathartic communal ritual, public prayer, spontanious shrine building, idols, talismans, ritual sacrifice, ritual sex, magic, meditation, yoga, and dancing around bonfires with hundreds of semi-nude Pagans to the beat of tribal drums.

There are many paths to the divine. :-)

Re: Apoligetics

Indeed there are (many paths to the divine). I'm finding myself sitting on my hands not to leap with all ten fingers into the debate about "true" Wicca, because I'm finding myself very much on your side, and I keep thinking to myself "these guys are behaving just like the fundamentalists who try to tell me I'm not a "real" Christian because of the way I practice." I mean, geez!

Re: Apoligetics

I went back and skimmed the article, and I honestly can't quite figure out what the writer's point is supposed to be. I'm just not sure whether he's saying that corporate prayer doesn't exist, or isn't biblical, or that it is biblical but only under certain circumstances...

And I think in some ways it's a pointless argument. I really do. I think prayer - out loud or silent, alone or in a group - is a response to the Divine, both within and without. I think what I'm most in favor of is humans making a connection - some kind of genuine connection, whatever it looks like - with the Divine (by whatever name, by whatever form).

And for other people not getting in the way of that. And for the people making a particular connection not deciding that theirs is the only true connection, and everybody who doesn't do it their way is doomed.