Posted on 12/26/2009 6:09:29 AM PST by markomalley
Each Christmas, Christians tell stories about the poor baby Jesus born in a lowly manger because there was no room in the inn.
But the Rev. C. Thomas Anderson, senior pastor of the Living Word Bible Church in Mesa, Arizona, preaches a version of the Christmas story that says baby Jesus wasn't so poor after all.
Anderson says Jesus couldn't have been poor because he received lucrative gifts -- gold, frankincense and myrrh -- at birth. Jesus had to be wealthy because the Roman soldiers who crucified him gambled for his expensive undergarments. Even Jesus' parents, Mary and Joseph, lived and traveled in style, he says.
"Mary and Joseph took a Cadillac to get to Bethlehem because the finest transportation of their day was a donkey," says Anderson. "Poor people ate their donkey. Only the wealthy used it as transportation."
Many Christians see Jesus as the poor, itinerant preacher who had "no place to lay his head." But as Christians gather around the globe this year to celebrate the birth of Jesus, another group of Christians are insisting that Jesus' beginnings weren't so humble.
They say that Jesus was never poor -- and neither should his followers be. Their claim is embedded in the doctrine known as the prosperity gospel, which holds that God rewards the faithful with financial prosperity and spiritual gifts.
A clash of gospels?
The prosperity gospel has attracted plenty of critics. But popular televangelists such as the late Oral Roberts, Kenneth Hagin and, today, Creflo Dollar have built megachurches and a global audience by equating piety with prosperity.
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
Certainly not white supremist. Besides never being one my whole life...studying the bible, God showed Peter everyone was equal when Peter didn't want to minister to the non-Israelites with the blanket-of-food vision. He made Peter minister to them. In two years of posts here you'll never find a single post where I said one thing that could be considered racially prejudiced. Not against Obama or anyone else. I'm a big supporter of the the present day country of Israel and it's prime Minister Netanyahu and every other Jew in Israel and America with conservative values. Anglo-Israeli means England-Israel...we started as a daughter of England and the US has the largest number of Jews besides Israel so if God says he's going to give Israel the victory that can only be good for us.
I find it hard to believe he wouldn't have done anything to further his minstry for that long a period of time.
BTW, cite Tertullian's specific writing this is stated in
He stated that "the haunts of the Britons, inaccessible to the Romans, subjugated to Christ". He was a Carthage Catholic I think, so I refer to him just as a historical marker.
Thank you.
You don't believe he spoke before being baptised?
Thanks for replying. I went back over this thread and saw where I spread my aggravation with one poster to others. I’ll try not to do that.
Extra biblical information over the bible is hardly considered Christian. Go back and study the NT again.
He stated that "the haunts of the Britons, inaccessible to the Romans, subjugated to Christ". He was a Carthage Catholic I think, so I refer to him just as a historical marker.
Then you haven't read Tertullian and can only cite quote-mined materials.
BTW, do you believe the serpent seed doctrine?
What happened at his baptism - absent prior?
Do you believe -" . . . the White, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic and kindred people to be God’s true, literal Children of Israel… This chosen seedline making up the "Christian Nations"…of the earth stands far superior to all other peoples in their call as God’s servant race….and are the "Christians" opposed by the Satanic Anti-Christ forces of this world…"?
Nothing I have said is "over" the bible. Revelation was written over a thousand years ago...we're not to discuss anything that happened after Revelation was written?
Then you haven't read Tertullian and can only cite quote-mined materials.
Wiki says he wrote about a hundred books and was a Catholic. No I certainly haven't read a hundred Catholic books. I cited him because he's the earliest in the timeline of latin scholars and he confirms that Christianity was spread in Britain beyond the reach of the Romans.
BTW, do you believe the serpent seed doctrine?
Of the white supremist movement...certainly not. Do you? Changing subjects, I see. The subject of this thread is Jesus and his wealthy family...If you want to discuss white supremism, start a thread on it.
LOL, so a forger in the middle ages has a 'revelation' that supercedes the bible.
I cited him because he's the earliest in the timeline of latin scholars and he confirms that Christianity was spread in Britain beyond the reach of the Romans.
Yet you can't cite which of his writings he made this statement for evaluate the context hmmmmm?
What are you asking? You're going to have to rephrase it.
Do you believe -" . . . the White, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic and kindred people to be God’s true, literal Children of Israel… This chosen seedline making up the "Christian Nations"…of the earth stands far superior to all other peoples in their call as God’s servant race….and are the "Christians" opposed by the Satanic Anti-Christ forces of this world…"?
Certainly not. Do you? If you're bored with the subject of Jesus and his wealthy family and would rather discuss white supremism, start a thread on it. You're straying from the subject of this thread. If you look at my posting history, you'll see that there is very few religious doctrinal threads I post on, I don't see the point of arguing with people of others faiths or sects to criticize them on what they believe...whether it be Mormon bashing, Catholic bashing, Pentacost bashing,...whatever. I believe in the King James bible and enjoy discussing the nuts-and-bolts history of exactly what was going on in antiquity. I'm not interested in bashing sects or personalities whether it be Joseph Smith, the pope, or whoever. So if you want to discuss something other than the nuts-and-bolts history of the subject of this thread, start a new thread. Your theory that Jesus did nothing prior to the age of thirty is looking less and less likely as we go along but I'm not interested in the sect stuff that you keep changing the subject to. It has nothing to do with my original post. My original post on this thread involves Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea, tin, and wealth.
How does the historical accounts of Jesus boyhood supercede the bible? The bible doesn't cover most of Jesus' youth.
“Yet you can’t cite which of his writings he made this statement for evaluate the context hmmmmm?”
I’ll list them from Wiki and you pick it out.
Apologetic [”apologetic” means “in support of”]
1 Apologeticus pro Christianis.
2 Dissertatio Mosheim in Apol.
3 Libri duo ad Nationes.
4 De Testimonio animae.
5 Ad Martyres.
6 De Spectaculis.
7 De Idololatria.
8 Accedit ad Scapulam liber.
9 Dissertatio D. Le Nourry in Apologet. libr. II ad Nat. et libr. ad Scapulam.
Polemical
10 De Oratione.
11 De Baptismo.
12 De Poenitentia.
13 De Patientia.
14 Ad Uxorem libri duo.
15 De Cultu Feminarum lib. II.
Dogmatic
16 De Corona Militis.
17 De Fuga in Persecutione.
18 Adversus Gnosticos Scorpiace. [”Adversus” means “disagreements with”}
19 Adversus Praxeam.
20 Adversus Hermogenem.
21 Adversus Marcionem libri V.
22 Adversus Valentinianos.
23 Adversus Judaeos.
24 De Anima.
25 De Carne Christi.
26 De Resurrectione Carnis.
On morality
27 De velandis Virginibus.
28 De Exhortatione Castitatis.
29 De Monogamia.
30 De Jejuniis.
31 De Pudicitia.
32 De Pallio
Agreed. Jesus was a business owner who inherited his father Joseph's business. He had a house in Capernaum. And when it came to feeding the 5,000, his disciples asked if they should go and get food. Obviously, they had enough money to purchase food for 5,000 plus their families.
Jesus was a marketplace minister. He did not teach about poverty, but instead about the Kingdom. And in His Kingdom, there is no lack.
You could not possibly be more wrong. As a co-heir with Christ, what kind of inheritance do you believe God has to offer?
An obsession with the JoA myth pervades in two realms - those studying the myths associated with King Author (whom JoA is associated) / holy grail OR Anglo-Israeli groups, many also hold to tenants of CI.
So if you want to discuss something other than the nuts-and-bolts history of the subject of this thread, start a new thread.
Historians have dismissed JoA myth. Other historical writings I've already cited do not include JoA myth - even those from the Cornwall area.
Your theory that Jesus did nothing prior to the age of thirty is looking less and less likely as we go along but I'm not interested in the sect stuff that you keep changing the subject to.
No, my 'theory' is based in the Bible and understanding Hebrew culture. It is also supported by biblical scholars over the past 2000 years. That is much more than wild speculations based upon fiction from the middle ages used to support Anglo-Israeli doctrine.
Ah, yes, fictional accounts now jump and become history. You now have a problem - ancient scrolls reveal that Jesus spent seventeen years in India and Tibet. Perhaps you can reconcile these competing claims, as he can't be both places at the same time.
Wow, for one who claims to evaluate the ‘history’, this is disappointing (but not expected). Cannot even figure out the source documents you need to use. Sorry, reproducing lists doesn’t count, only shows the shallowness of the position.
Obsession? I post a two line phrase on a thread and that's an "obsession"?
...with the JoA myth pervades in two realms - those studying the myths associated with King Author (whom JoA is associated) / holy grail OR Anglo-Israeli groups, many also hold to tenants of CI.
Don't include me in those generalities.
Historians have dismissed JoA myth.
So. Historians also dismiss Jesus. Ever watch the history channel? You'd think Jesus was just an intelligent orator and nothing else.
Other historical writings I've already cited do not include JoA myth - even those from the Cornwall area.
And we all know all historians agree on everything.
No, my 'theory' is based in the Bible and understanding Hebrew culture.
Then you should know that only relatives claim expired bodies.
It is also supported by biblical scholars over the past 2000 years.
And we all know they all agree on everything also.
That is much more than wild speculations based upon fiction from the middle ages used to support Anglo-Israeli doctrine.
If those monks were making up fiction about Jesus and Joseph, why didn't monks from all other areas also make up stories about Jesus' youth? Why is it that British monks are the only ones that can come up with good forgeries? What is your evidence that they are forgeries in the first place?
Strong evidence shows He and Joseph were visting Joseph's mining operations. The rise of Christianity in Britain and it's environs is also strong evidence of that. No such rise of Christianity in India.
I'm not a Catholic scholar...sorry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.