jgilberAZ wrote:aaron wrote:The other view was that they had a hierarchy of authority that placed the power of God in the hands of a few, taking it out of the body. I lean towards the second view, as this practice would give ultimate power to speak on God's behalf to one man, and to his 'generals' under him, lording it over the people.
That is my understanding, as well. Which, is exactly the authority structure of the institutional church.
We should all read
Pagan Christianity by Viola.
- Jeff
I need to correct myself.
I still believe Pagan Christianity is an accurate portrayal of the historical aspects of certain church practices.
However, I have come to a greater understanding of Mr. Viola over the last week, or two. His handling of scripture is questionable, at best. For instance, if you go to his site and read a paper he wrote called "
Reimagining a Woman's Role in the Church," you will see that he takes the position that the new covenant makes the old covenant
obsolete. Yes, he says obsolete.
Frank Viola wrote: When Jesus Christ entered the scene, all of this radically changed. Our Lord inaugurated a New Covenant which made the old one obsolete.
There are other questionable positions in that article. Please don't start a debate about the role of women on this thread. There are other threads for that already. I just pointed to that one since it was the one that got me to re-think my position on Mr. Viola.
Once I looked at his site some more, I found this:
A Jesus Manifesto by Len Sweet and Frank ViolaDo you know who Leonard Sweet is?
Apprising.org Leonard SweetLeonard read Revelation 3:16 from the Message “translation” of the Bible. That was all the scripture that he said he needed to “prove his point” and then began to talk about God’s vomiting of the lukewarm in judgment, here it how he described those individuals. He began to talk about a New Age coming (no kidding he did not try to hide his language) and how one day there’ll be no need for the scriptures or any type of church because everything is united in spirit. “The same energy, the same ‘god’, who works in you exists in nature, exists in all creation in everything” he continued with the idea that everything has a spiritual content and that it all inherently good, then he really seemed to show a pantheistic streak. Leonard Sweet elaborated on his spirit in everything point “in many ways god is the earth and so are the pews you sit in and your pets and everything that has life, they are not ‘god’ but they are”.
I tried to read Mr. Viola's book "
From Eternity to Here."
I couldn't get past the first chapter or two. He makes so many assumptions, and frankly, blatantly twists scripture to make a foundation for a case he will later build upon. Yet, with such a poor foundation, what good is the resulting conclusion?
I am about ready to throw every Viola book I own in the garbage.
There are issues in the institutional church ... no one would (I think) argue against that. But, I don't think Mr. Viola's exegesis/hermeneutics are such that we should place much emphasis (if any) in his proposed solutions.
Just my two cents ... take it for what it's worth.
- Jeff