The cry for understanding and compatibility between andwithin different religions is not an innovation of the 21stcentury. The modern effort is reminiscent of otherecumenical surges. The following is a reconstruction of suchan attempt which may have developed.
The need for a united movement to insure a harmoniousreligious climate was evident in the 1st century. Theproposed choice to administer the new unity push was thepre-established Mediterranean Ministerial Association. TheAssociation, having wheels already in motion, seemed thelogical choice for such a movement. The primary problem wasthat of selecting a leader to unite the various religiousentities. A special meeting was called for that selection.
The first man recommended was a Christian evangelistnamed Paul. The objections commenced immediately! TheReverend from the United Epicurean and Stoic PhilosopherChurch, charged that Paul was a babbler, and setter forth ofstrange gods, because he preached unto them Jesus, andthe resurrection.
Then the Right Reverend Elymas, representing the FirstOccult Church of Paphos, added that this same Paul hadpublicly slandered him. He quoted Paul: "O full of all subtletyand mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou cease to pervert the right way ofthe Lord?
The Jewish Rabbis followed with complaints of Paul'sreasoning in their synagogues, teaching that Jesus was the Christ and persuading men to worship God contrary to theirlaw.
Next, the Pastor and founder of Jerusalem Judaizers forChrist stated that Paul was divisive. It seems Paul causeddissension and disputation with him and his brethren, evencharging them with perverting the gospel, and condemningthem to eternal punishment in hell.
An elder, representing an Ephesian church of Christ, pointed out how narrow-minded Paul was, citing his previous comment, "There is one body,and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all."
The only positive statement came from the elders of the Berean church of Christ. They commented that after having searched the Scriptures daily, they found Paul's actions, preaching, and teaching to be in accordance with God's word, and therefore their choice to lead a genuine Unity Movement.
Sadly, after no small deliberation, the general consensus of the Mediterranean Ministerial Association was that Paul was not the type of
leader they were seeking. After all, was he not judgmental, divisive, rude, argumentative, a slanderer, and
narrow-minded? And had he not proselytized members from virtually every Association church?
The Question: Could Paul be accepted as a leader for the ecumenical and unity movements we are experiencing today?
Jesus prayed for unity in truth; not a union of compromise ,which retains the religious errors and traditions of men.
The need for a united movement to insure a harmoniousreligious climate was evident in the 1st century. Theproposed choice to administer the new unity push was thepre-established Mediterranean Ministerial Association. TheAssociation, having wheels already in motion, seemed thelogical choice for such a movement. The primary problem wasthat of selecting a leader to unite the various religiousentities. A special meeting was called for that selection.
The first man recommended was a Christian evangelistnamed Paul. The objections commenced immediately! TheReverend from the United Epicurean and Stoic PhilosopherChurch, charged that Paul was a babbler, and setter forth ofstrange gods, because he preached unto them Jesus, andthe resurrection.
Then the Right Reverend Elymas, representing the FirstOccult Church of Paphos, added that this same Paul hadpublicly slandered him. He quoted Paul: "O full of all subtletyand mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou cease to pervert the right way ofthe Lord?
The Jewish Rabbis followed with complaints of Paul'sreasoning in their synagogues, teaching that Jesus was the Christ and persuading men to worship God contrary to theirlaw.
Next, the Pastor and founder of Jerusalem Judaizers forChrist stated that Paul was divisive. It seems Paul causeddissension and disputation with him and his brethren, evencharging them with perverting the gospel, and condemningthem to eternal punishment in hell.
An elder, representing an Ephesian church of Christ, pointed out how narrow-minded Paul was, citing his previous comment, "There is one body,and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all."
The only positive statement came from the elders of the Berean church of Christ. They commented that after having searched the Scriptures daily, they found Paul's actions, preaching, and teaching to be in accordance with God's word, and therefore their choice to lead a genuine Unity Movement.
Sadly, after no small deliberation, the general consensus of the Mediterranean Ministerial Association was that Paul was not the type of
leader they were seeking. After all, was he not judgmental, divisive, rude, argumentative, a slanderer, and
narrow-minded? And had he not proselytized members from virtually every Association church?
The Question: Could Paul be accepted as a leader for the ecumenical and unity movements we are experiencing today?
Jesus prayed for unity in truth; not a union of compromise ,which retains the religious errors and traditions of men.
No comments:
Post a Comment