Pastor John,
Could not perhaps the law of Moses and the OT priesthood be the most influential “pagan” influence to shape Christianity? Is not the Eucharist a reoccurring sacrifice offered to God? And because of the need to sacrifice there became again the need for a priest, one similar to the Levitical priests who had authority to administer His ceremonies?
=============
What a remarkable insight, Michael! Yes, that is exactly the case. When God finished with and abandoned the works of the law of Moses, those works became as empty of value and, therefore, as “pagan” as any religious rite that the Greeks, Romans, and other pagans performed.
=============
Did perhaps the Judaizers in fact overcome Paul’s doctrine? Not so much on circumcision but in denying the hope and promise we received with The Holy Ghost thanks to Jesus’s FINAL sacrificial offering.
=============
Yes, Paul lost that battle, according to his own words: “All they of Asia have forsaken me.” The whole book of Galatians was written because those Gentile saints had been persuaded to forsake the gospel that Paul preached and to follow Peter’s gospel of the circumcision instead. There is hardly a letter Paul wrote which does not deal in some way with that issue; it is a main topic of most of them.
In time, those Gentile believers even twisted those works of he law and devised their own form of them; hence, “Christian baptism”, Christian “holy days”, etc. But the root of all those pagan works among NT believers is that in the beginning, Gentile believers in Christ were persuaded by Judaizers to add the ceremonies of the law to their faith.
I would not say that the Judaizers overcame Paul’s doctrine, however. I wouldn’t phrase it that way. It seems more correct to say, as Paul did in one case (2Tim. 2:18) that the Judaizers overthrew the faith of Gentile believers. Paul’s doctrine still stands, and it will meet them all in the Judgment, both the Judaizers and those who were deceived by them.
=============
If so, my only question is, is not Hebrews so explicitly clear on this subject that it can’t possibly be denied? Is the book of Hebrews not in the Catholic Bible?
=============
Ha! Yes, it is in there. But it is not understood. Had Churchmen understood Hebrews, they would have declared it non-canonical long ago. In fact, I am persuaded that if Churchmen of the past had understood any of the the NT books, they would have done away with all of it, in order to keep their status secure.
=============
And the more and more I read about the meaning behind the Eucharist, plus knowing what I know growing up Protestant, I truly wonder why Protestants even bother with it, even if it is only monthly in most cases. It’s like drinking a cup of tea that was made from a ten times already used tea bag.
MD
=============
Practically all Protestant ceremonies are watered-down versions of Catholic ceremonies, just as Catholic ceremonies are watered-down versions of the OT law’s ceremonies. This is evidence as to why Protestant denominations are called “daughters” of the “great whore” in Revelation. Every Christian sect has the fundamental nature of the Mother of them all: Catholicism.
Keep up the good work, and may the Lord give you understanding in all things.
jdc
=============
I seem to recall that the canonicity of Hebrews was (and still is by some) doubted.
djc
=============
Hi pastor John,
This was very good I enjoyed reading it. While I was reading it, it reminded me of why king Jeroboam’s sin was so bad. He took the way that God had given his children to worship him and perverted it to fit what he thought would make it safer for him, because of the fear that he had in his heart that the people would turn back to David’s son Rehoboam as their king. So, John, would what the early Jewish believers did in the beginning, by trying to get the Gentiles to take on the old covenant, be the same as the sin of Jeroboam?
Stuart
=============
It would be close, but not quite the same. Jeroboam’s religion was a lot like the rituals of Christianity; that is, it’s ceremonies and holy days never were of God. Both were wrong, though.
jdc
=============
From: Bekah C.
I wonder if by the time the Catholic Church was advanced enough to be completely opposed to what is really said in the book of Hebrews, etc., it had also already become too superstitious to dare touch the NT canon. Maybe that’s why they translated it into Latin and REFUSED to let the common person read it for centuries…? Maybe they did, to some extent, see the condemnation of their rituals in books like Hebrews, and therefore they did not want the book to be in the hands of the people — while at the same time, they were already too superstitious to eliminate certain passages, books, or the Bible altogether.
===========
Well, that is certainly food for thought.
jdc