Category: Religion 1596

Introduction

In no doubt, one will never understand Theology, the idea about God, without mentioning the character of Jesus. Christology then comes in, as among the many branches of Christian theology that purely addresses the mystery behind Jesus Christ: his nature, actions, and person, as it appears in the New Testament as well as in the canonical gospels. Among the issues considered in this field is the affiliation of God the Father and Jesus in terms of their nature and person. Christology too seeks to clarify the works as well as the words of Jesus enabling the reader to tell who Jesus is in person and the position he holds in salvation. In addition, Christology is a combination of two words, Christos and Logos, meaning Christ and Word respectively. The combination of the two portrays Christology as simply the study of Jesus Christ. The issue of, not only humanity but also the divinity of Jesus Christ, was, is and continues to attract discussions from different people ranging from theologians to psychologists. As a result, the subject of Christology comes in handy as a way out of the debate because it clarifies the connection between Christs deity and humanity. In addition, it answers the ever-burning question of how possible it is for the simultaneous existence of God and man. Among the issues highlighted in this paper is the historical account of the development of Christology.

Development of Christology

To understand this subject, it suffices to check in details how the Christological thought was developed right from the early church. The doctrine of Christology dates back to the ancient Apostolic Father Age as well as the Apostles Age. In the very early views about Christology, the issue of whether Jesus is God or man appeared nowhere in the thoughts of the then people. In fact, records have it that the early church did not view Jesus as God until the 3^rd and 4^th centuries when Tertullian and Origen resolved to give the Christology belief. However, during the apostles age, there existed apostles whose messages addressed the dual nature of Jesus. Apostle John and Paul are believed to be the source of the debate about Jesus following the way they pictured him in their preaching. For instance, John, the apostle asserts, Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God (NIV 1 John 4:1-6). Paul and Peter concur with the issue of Jesus divinity and Humanity. According to these teachings, the apostles held that Jesus was both divines as well as humane, a claim that fueled the debate in some various schools that saw their dawn in the aforementioned centuries.

The Alexandrian and the Antiochene schools are among the early schools whose understanding of the Christological doctrine differed, calling for a more and thorough investigation of the doctrine. According to the school of Alexandria, Jesus has one nature. The scholars of this school argued, Divinity and humanity of Savior&are united so close that they cannot be distinguished in the union (Simon 2003, 15). Therefore, according to this school, both the human and the divine natures must be one and not separated in order to accomplish the famous salvation and the suffering of Jesus. The school too claimed that the transformation of Christ could not be possible unless both his divine and human nature united. Another aspect of Christology, an improvement of the above, followed from the Antiochene scholars.

The Antiochene School on the other hand opposed the above claims asserting that Christ has two natures, divine and human. According to this school, the death and resurrection of Christ are not possible for a divine being. Moreover, for Christ to save, he must have won all the temptations and suffered for the people. He must have suffered hunger, sadness as well as pain that made him cry. Therefore, he qualifies to be a complete man. However, on dying, Christ reunites with God and resurrects as a savior, another nature independent of the previous. These two natures agree and operate as partners.

Christology in the reformation period took a slight change from the previous in the sense that Christ appeared as God and a son of God at the same time. He possesses both the divine nature, by the virtue of his being God, and the human nature, by the virtue of his being a son of God, just as people claim to be Gods sons. Addressing the issue of Christology in the modern world, Murray (1934) said, &we should think of the origin of that life of Christ in the Father&they were ONE  one in life and one in love (27). Therefore, as per modern Christology, though Christ is 100% man and God, the two are ever together. However, one may need to know the importance of the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

Importance of Incarnation

Incarnation is the belief that Jesus Christ, initially God, became man through birth by the Virgin Mary. This belief is mentioned in the New Testament is of paramount importance and more so to the early church. The belief is what fueled the preaching of the early church, whose then the message is even preached today. The subject of the incarnation of Christ, as taught in the early church, came at a time when the then people did not know what it meant by Jesus assuming two natures. The early church realized that it was a way used by God to unite heaven and the earth. Therefore, the early church taught how Jesus had to be born as a man to reveal the nature of heaven. In addition, the incarnation of Jesus revealed the way to heaven. In fact, Jesus says, I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one goes to the Father except by me (NIV John 14:6). The early church too learned that if Jesus could overcome all the temptations, then any man could also overcome and since the early church reigned at a time when everything seemed amiss, it could use this claim to draw people together in the service and praise of one, who despite the same challenges, became a victor and united with God. This subject, therefore, helped the early church know that they too can unite with God, just like Jesus, the total man did. Moreover, the incarnation of Jesus helped in addressing the issue of sin. Just as it came through the transgression of a single man, another single righteous man also ought to come to remove them. Therefore, Jesus had to assume human nature to accomplish this mission. However, one can ask, How is it possible for one man to have two natures?

One Man-Two Nature

The issue of the two natures of Jesus still rages. Critics and adherents alike have come out to address their stand. However, To say that Jesus is fully God and full manthat is, that in Jesus the two natures of deity and humanity are united in one person (Ken 2003, 10). The one person addressed here is Jesus but how he is divine as well as human is what triggers the minds of people. However, the bible qualifies in explaining these two natures. For instance, the bible addresses God as the creator of the heavens and earth. In addition, it reveals Jesus as one through whom everything was made, qualifying him as God, the creator. Through this ability, the divine nature of Jesus stands out. However, the bible to reveals the birth of Jesus by the Virgin Mary. In his manhood, Jesus experiences everything that people encounter. For instance, he suffers hunger in the wilderness. He also cries of sorrow following the death of Lazarus as well as after seeing the wickedness of Jerusalem. In addition, he cries in pain when he is on the cross. All these experiences depict the human nature of the same Jesus because he goes through what people encounter, passing for a 100% man. These expositions, therefore, depict the issue of one man and two natures of Jesus. However, some figures received the issue of Jesus and God differently, for instance, Irenaeus of Lyon opposes the idea of Jesus being both human and God.

Key Figures

Critics and adherents alike had their say about the puzzle behind Jesus and God. Irenaeus of Lyon, a bishop and a critic of the then preaching believed fully in the existence of Jesus but opposed the claim that he could be God and human at the same time because according to him, there could be no possibility of the existence of two Gods but one: God the father. Therefore, according to him, the issue of mediation, as claimed to be the work of Jesus does not exist. However, St. Athanasius the great, a religious Catholic figure born in 296 AD believed in the dual nature of Jesus, a stand that induced enmity between him and Irenaeus. Following the controversy behind this dual nature of Jesus, there were councils, whose sole purpose was to help settle down the dispute. These included the council of Nicene-Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon to mention a few.

Councils and their Significance

The council of Nicene-Constantinople believed in both the divinity and the humanity of Jesus. It held that Jesus was the son of God and one who became man through birth by the Virgin Mary. The council of Ephesus that reigned in 431 A.D concurred with the one man and two natures of Jesus. The second council of Ephesus that existed in 451 AD concurred with the one nature of Jesus as addressed in the Alexandria school. The council of Chalcedon claimed that Jesus is both divine and human. Worth noting is that this councils rulings became of great use to the Catholic Church as it appears among its principles of Christology. In addition, this doctrine seems so sufficient that since its inception, the church has never reported any more disputes concerning the issue of Christology. However, Jesus demands to hear from his disciples about who he actually is.

Who Do Men Say I Am?

Jesus posed this question to his disciples in need of knowing whether they had recognized his two natures. However, many seemed not to recognize his deity as many associated him with other people like the prophets, Elijah, or even John the Baptist, all of whom are human in nature. It is only Peter, who identified Jesus as son of God. The varied answers given bring a very crucial lesson to Christians: that few people, even today do not believe that Jesus was God. It is the reason why only one, out of a crowd, believed in Jesus deity. Christians too can infer that Jesus knew that he is God but could not say it until people saw it through his actions. He wanted to show that actions matter more than the words.

Reference List

Ken, Jean C. 2003. Jesus Humanity and Deity. New York: Penguin Press.

Murray, Braxton H. 1934. Christology in Modern World. Britain: Rutledge Publishers.

Simon, Andrew A. 2003. Jesus: His Human and Divine Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

The New International Version Bible: Containing the Old and New Testaments With Apocrypha. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.

Introduction

Atheism entails the belief that there are no deities or supreme beings. It is the opposite of theism which is the belief in the existence of at least one Supreme Being or deity. In simple terms, it can be said to be the belief that there is no God or gods. Religion is a very broad and controversial aspect as it entails the inner belief in regard to the existence, nature and power of God. Different people have different stands in relation to religion and what they believe in and hence the existence of a variety of religions all with different doctrines and beliefs.

The most common religions are Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Judaism (Baggini, 2009). This piece of work discusses the various aspects associated with Atheism with much emphasis being given to the misconceptions that exist about Atheism, the way the misconceptions people have on religions that they do not belong to could be minimized as well as what should be of essence to people in a particular religion.

Common misconceptions about Atheism

Atheism is not very common or well known among people and hence the presence of a lot of misconceptions. It has some variations for instance the strong, positive, critical and explicit atheism which refers to the individuals who assert the non existence of God positively. Weak, negative or implicit atheism on the other hand involves the individuals who lack a belief in God basing their argument that the existence of God has not been proven to them and meaning that in the event of being proven they would change their mind. Militant atheism also known as antitheism constitute of atheists who view the belief in God to be wrong and superstitious hence find ways of do away with it (Baggini, 2009).

Some of the basic principles underlying the belief of atheism include the fact that there is neither the existence of God nor that of the devil, there is no sin that can be accrued to the violation of Gods will and teachings, there exist no supernatural realm, that the universe is generally materialistic and measurable and so should God be, that evolution is entirely scientific with no any spiritual aspect, that man is material and also that the idea of ethics and morals is relative and therefore they should not be adhered to strictly among other life perceptions

Lack of the understanding of the various issues that underlie Atheism is the leading contributor towards the increase in misconceptions about Atheism. Negative criticism has been received from different angles with people seeing Atheists to be very evil based on the single fact that they do not believe on the existence of a Supreme Being, God (Solomon and Higgins, 2009).

People, those who are not Atheists, have the believe that atheists not only believe in the absence of God but also that there is no morality; no meaning to life but rather takes it to be absurd and also that there is no human goodness. This is however not true as some atheists only have a problem in the existence of God and other gods but are usually positive in regard to other aspects of life for instance upholding ethics.

Atheists belief of the non existence of God is followed closely by the rejection of any transcendental or supernatural belief or reality. Some of the issues that the atheists differ with most of the other religions include, the belief in life after death, that there is no atonement, no resurrection, no deity, no virgin birth, no existence of miracles, the inexistence of immortal souls and supernatural powers, that man is not made in the image of God and ghosts among other aspects

Other common misconceptions about atheism include the idea that atheism has no regard or motivation to be good due to the lack of conception of the existence of heaven or hell and that atheism is an impossible doctrine. There is also the issue of considering atheists and other non believers to be an insignificant portion of the whole population and hence the belief that their interests and opinions can easily be ignored without major damage.

Another misconception is that atheists are bigoted and hence a tendency to be prejudiced by other religious people. Atheists are also considered to be against civilization based on the fact that they do not uphold patriotism and good citizenship. Atheists are as well considered to be guilty of the aspect of scientism where they differ with most scientific related ideologies. Despite the presence of these misconceptions, there are some deviations where not all people hold them, for instance, through education some people have been able to refute some of the misconceptions (Parsons, 1998).

Minimizing Misconceptions People Have About Religions Not Their Own

The fact that a lot of misconceptions have been witnessed in regard to religious beliefs is enough justification that there is need to come up with ways that are aimed at minimizing the misconceptions in an effort to make the world a better place where different religious members are able to live in harmony while appreciating each other.

It is evident that the main cause of misconceptions in religions is ignorance or lack of knowledge of what transpires in other religions. The belief that ones religion is the best is also a contributing factor towards misconceptions where all other religions are regarded to be negative and wrong. Education is therefore an appropriate step towards minimizing misconceptions about religions especially in respect to atheism. Simple issues that underlie religion should first be informed to people so that they may be able to understand the other concepts involved in particular religions. It is the understanding of these concepts that some of the above named misconceptions will be cleared (Cline, 2009).

What Is Important To People inside the Religion?

Religion is a relatively complex aspect. This is so because of the many concepts that are contained therein. For this reason, there is dire need for people to realize the important aspects inside their religion and also in others in respect to what they do, what they profess, how they behave, what they adore and value as well as what they talk about. The realization of all this will lead to a better understanding of what religion entails and hence reduce the number of misconceptions and blames people have on religions that are different from their own.

Some of the issues that can be discussed in regard atheism and what it believes include abortion, gay marriages, church and state separation, the teaching of creationism, justification of war, provision of health care, the issue of taxation and environmental regulation. In all the above situations, there are no clearly defined distinctions on how the atheists and the rest of the populations take life based on religion.

For example, when it comes to gay marriages, the disbelief in gods has nothing to do in regard to gay or straight marriages. However, atheists are less likely to oppose gay marriages. In regard to abortion, different atheists have different views, some supporting it and others opposing it since there is nothing about atheism that mandates a particular ruling on abortion. On the aspect of separation of the church and state, there is a disagreement on how strict the separation should be. Atheists oppose the issue of teaching creationism in public schools. War is another issue of contention where different atheists have varying views in regard to whether war should be justified or not (Ustream, 2011).

Conclusion

It is evident that there are various religions in the world all of them professing different beliefs as stipulated by their doctrines. There however appear to be a very great difference between Atheism and other religions due to the conflicting beliefs that exist especially in stating that there is no God.

For this reason there have been a variety of misconceptions about Atheism since people generally argue on the belief that there is no God without basing their arguments on other issues that are associated with Atheism. There is therefore a dire need of informing people on different aspects in regard to different religions in an effort to reduce the misconceptions that they have about other religions that they dont belong to. The understanding of the crucial aspects contained in different religions is important in bringing about unity among people from different religions.

Reference List

Baggini, J. (2009). Atheism. New York: Sterling Publishing Company, Inc.

Cline, A. (2009). Dealing with Misconceptions: How Do We Deal with Deep Ignorance? Web.

Parsons, M.K. (1998). Seven Common Misconceptions about Atheism. Web.

Solomon, R. and Higgins, M.K. (2009). The Big Questions: A Short Introduction to Philosophy.8th Ed. New York: Cengage Learning.

Ustream. (2011). The Atheist Experience. Web.

The Gospel of John uniquely differs from the three Synoptic Gospels (Mark, Matthew, Luke) in terms of its literary style, setting and time sequence, portrayal of Jesus, dualistic imagery, and theological concepts. A deviation is observed between Johns Gospel and the Synoptic Gospel because John takes readers back to Genesis 1:1. However, Mark focuses on Jesus ministry, Matthew presents stories of Jesus, and Luke covers the birth of Jesus and John the Baptist. The Synoptic Gospels concentrate on the human aspect of Jesus. However, Johns Gospel reverts to the beginning and describes Jesus as the word and God. Dualistic imagery is another difference observed through Johns language, illustrated in contrasts, such as truth and lie and light and darkness. Finally, John links the Ministry of Jesus to the Jewish civilization and their celebrations. This is different from the one-time occasion (Palm Sunday) explained in the Synoptic Gospels.

The major themes established in the Gospel of John are eternal life, Messiah, and signs. Under these themes, Johns message was that the Judgement of God was forthcoming. Hence, repentance of sins through baptism of the Holy Spirit was inevitable for all people. According to the Gospel of John chapters 13-21, the genuine declaration of Jesus as the coming Messiah and son of God is well expounded. Further, Jesus challenges the disciples by telling them that one of them will betray Him, which brings about the issue of crucifixion. Johns Gospel narrates the story of Jesus in a symbolic manner, which is different from the three Gospels. The Gospel of John was written during a period when group divisions (Judaism, Christianity) were on the rise due to the identification and the divine status of Christ.

Introduction

Blasphemy refers to an act of striping a consecrated character out of something. In religion, blasphemy refers to a show of irreverence towards holy individuals or things. Blasphemy in Judaism is considered an act of cursing and showing contempt for God. Blasphemy may take different forms depending on the relevance of the words used to express it. It can be rebellious if it involves an allegation that departs from accepted beliefs. In addition, it can be imprecatory if it invokes evil upon God and disobedient if it generates righteous anger towards God. Any expression of curse or accusation used against God is rightfully considered blasphemy.

Discussion

Blasphemy can be direct or indirect. Recognized intention to discredit holiness is direct blasphemy while using blasphemous words without such intention is considered indirect. It is sinful in the context of religion as we give honor to God as the alpha and omega and highly condemned in Christian divinity where it is defined as an eternal sin that is unforgivable. There are detailed prayers and devotions on blasphemy recited in the Catholic Church. However, the Islamic holy book does not talk about blasphemy as anything within Islam ropes blasphemy regulation.

The laws of Noah, which in Judaism are applicable to everyone, prohibit blasphemy. United Nations considered blasphemy a criminal doing in one of their general meetings. United Nations approved a number of resolutions that asked the world to act against the denouncement of religions. Common law considers blasphemy to be defiance of Gods existence and mockery of the bible. Therefore, it is punishable by common law. Punitive statutes in opposition to blasphemy once contained in the laws of the United States were constitutional. These statues were not revolutionary of the freedom of speech because recognition of Christianity by law means that blasphemy is punishable at common law.

Current blasphemy laws look at Christianity as neglecting other religious groups thus generating a debate on whether they need improvement. Blasphemy is a crime against God that calls into question the ethical integrity of the world as its consequences echo in the course of God and humanity. In the recent past, a distasteful movie made by an Egyptian Coptic in the United States that derogates Prophet Muhammad has infuriated Islamic community. This film has initiated a succession of protests on American discreet missions in Muslim countries. This shows how much blasphemy laws need improvement to protect other religions. Islamic religion has flourished over time and Muslim countries have a record of religious broadmindedness. Islam provides crucial distinctiveness to many countries where the constitution identifies it as the state religion. However, these countries protect the interests of non-Muslim community, which show respect to other religions.

Conclusion

As underlined in religious teaching, liberty is one of the many ways God demonstrates himself to humankind. However, it is not appropriate to use this liberty in blaspheming the creator and his deeds. Blasphemy causes difficulties in repentance among people as well as deforming the nature of human individuality. It ruins the aptitude of humankind to feel affection for God thus altering their image of him. Blasphemy is seldom caused by a low level of religious culture and ignorance of God in individuals. Religion plays a crucial position in the lives of most people and laws related to religious issues should be expressed to control arguments and proceedings about religious viewpoint.

Introduction

Even in the age of secularity and diversity, religion permeates essential aspects of human society, such as law, morality, ethics, and economy. The power of faith can either unite or cause severe divisions. Examples of unifying potential can be found in universal values upheld by the followers of different religions. Religion can inspire powerful calls for addressing the global challenges of the modern era, including economic inequality and the protection of the environment. However, faith can also ignite strong tensions between religious and secular worldviews. In the most extreme cases, religion can be used to justify violence against other people.

Morality and Ethics

Regarding morality and ethics, religion offers divine laws and values associated directly with the deities. These laws can be surprisingly similar in their representation of universal moral values. For instance, monotheistic faiths, such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, have substantial parallels  both the Ten Commandments and Islamic law strictly condemn murder, theft, and adultery (Duties and Law, n.d.). Therefore, the followers of different religions have a common moral ground, which can be used for mitigating the differences.

Furthermore, various religions share a respect for Earth as a cradle of humanity and dominion of our kind. In practice, many Christian organizations are involved in environmentalism, conservation, and education on the subject. Likewise, Quran urges Muslims to be attentive and responsive to the needs of the Earth (The Environment, n.d.). Therefore, the belief in the dominant role of humankind is not associated with the wasteful use of the planets resources. On the contrary, major religions see humanity as a steward and caretaker of nature.

The divisive aspect of religion regarding morality and ethics can be seen on the subject of war and peace. In particular, major religions contain theories crafted for justifying wars (War and Peace). For example, Christianity has a just war theory, and Islam has a concept of jihad, which can be used as a convenient excuse for violence. Whereas peace is preferable from the moral foundations of religion, war can be perceived by authorities as a political necessity. Consequently, religion may be used for sowing hatred and increase war support.

Religion in Global Affairs

In terms of global affairs, religion can serve as a potent force that unites and protects disenfranchised people worldwide. For instance, Christian liberation theology worked for achieving a greater degree of social justice and equality (Liberation Theology, Economic Inequality, and Social Justice, n.d.). Jesus gave to the poor and helped those in need; in this regard, Christianity can use his example to initiate a push for a more just society.

However, a divisive potential lies in the problem of balancing between the secular and religious paradigms. The United Nations  a secular institution, is responsible for maintaining and respecting religious diversity worldwide (Many Worlds in One, n.d.). This task may become problematic in cases when secular freedom of speech collides with accusations of religious blasphemy. As a result, a desire to defend religion can lead to anti-secularism, anti-modernism, and deep social conflicts.

Conclusion

Religion holds significant power in various aspects of human life. This power may either unite or divide within the same area of influence. On the one hand, major faiths create common grounds, such as moral laws, social justice, and respect for the environment. On the other hand, religion may be misused for justifying violence and disrupting progress. As such, maintaining the balance between religious and secular worldviews is difficult but crucial for the future of humanity.

References

Duties and Law [MOOC]. In Approaches to Studying Religions. Sophia Learning. Web.

Liberation Theology, Economic Inequality, and Social Justice [MOOC]. In Approaches to Studying Religions. Sophia Learning. Web.

Many Worlds in One [MOOC]. In Approaches to Studying Religions. Sophia Learning. Web.

The Environment [MOOC]. In Approaches to Studying Religions. Sophia Learning. Web.

War and Peace [MOOC]. In Approaches to Studying Religions. Sophia Learning. Web.

Introduction

The word symbol is derived from a Greek word which is related to the word compare whereas rituals can be defined as actions which have a deeper implication than what we perceive at first instant. Rituals can be as simple as a blinking of an eye or as complex as the opening of the inauguration ceremony of the American president.

There are various rituals and symbols found in the church; some carry similar meaning to those found in the world. For example, the initiation rituals performed in the church as well as in the world are meant to initiate the new member to the new environment in which he/she finds him/herself in.

Discussion

In the Catholic Church, the three sacraments associated with initiation are the baptism, confirmation and the Eucharist. These are necessary for new members as they serve to initiate them into the congregation and strength people faith and show their appreciation for the ransom sacrifice offered by Jesus Christ. Baptism signifies death and life; it means the person Baptist dies to all that is sinful and rise to live in Christ. The anointing with oil during confirmation signifies that the Holy Spirit has been imparted to the person in question whereas participating in the Eucharist means that one accepts Christ as his/her redeemer.

Initiation rites are important as they help us to adapt to the new environment. It thus becomes imperative for new members to participate in initiations rituals a way of learning how to behave in the new community, the church. It is impossible to proceed with our daily Christian practices without symbols and rituals. Rituals reinforce our spiritual common beliefs. Similarly as people go through the initiations rites as found in the world which may range from circumcision to removal of teeth, they are educated by their seniors on means and ways of lives which can help them survive in the world.

Sacrament is another mostly observed church ritual. Sacrament mostly denotes divine grace and so people believe that they receive grace by simply participating in it. The Eucharist is a public symbol. It is believed that the community develops a sense of inner peace and of public identity by participating in the Eucharist. The body of Christ is taken to signify the presence of Christ and that He is with his people all through. The bread represents Jesus body. The bread and wine are symbols which are a sign of Christ presence. Breaking of the loaf is a symbol of faith that we are in unity with Christ. The liturgical prayers offered during this period talk of sharing the bread and the cup of blood which is a symbol of our unity in the one Christ. And so the one bread is broken so that we can share it. The Eucharist also reminds us of Jesus sacrifice to deliver us from sins.

The symbol of Mary, Jesus mother is of great importance to the Catholics. She is greatly honored and adored because of who she is, the mother of Jesus. As a result, she is mentioned in the opening prayers of most liturgies. She has been given the title Mother of the Church, which signifies that she is a mother to all. Mary is also considered as a model of faith to us as she believed in the angel message that she was going to get pregnant by means of the Holy Spirit and be the mother of Jesus who was going to be the messiah.

Rituals and symbols are fundamental to our everyday endeavors. They are not just mere symbols as some have tried to postulates but rather they are very powerful and effective in helping us to lead a good life. The symbol of faith helps us to continue believing in God promises even if we have never seen Him and also remain focused to our future live with God in heaven. The practice of sacrament is important especially for young people as it fosters the spirit of praying in them. Prayers are equally important as they encourage the youths to participate in liturgy. The ministry of prayer helps promote unity as it brings people of different ethnic groups together in worship.

Rituals are vital to almost all religions as they play an important role that of shaping ones religiosity. Rituals as symbols help us to converse with God and fellow Christians. Their significance cannot be underplayed as they perform specific functions in the society. Sacramental symbols signify Gods manifestation of justice towards all. The sharing of wine, bread, water and the use of oil means that we are all equal in gods eyes. Sacramental practices challenge us as individuals to be present to Gods presence. It also challenges the baptized to continue following the perfect example of our Model Jesus Christ.

Sacramental symbols seek to humanize and hence are more dangerous than the rituals. For example the symbol of grace requires us to scrutinize our perceptions and how we perceive others. Sacramental symbols suggest that we become new individuals committed to Gods kingdom. This is more serious because it involve seeking Gods kingdom first them the other things to follow which include material possession. It is becoming very difficult to live up to this principle in a world dominated by material possessions. Being a new creation we are supposed to interpret things differently from the others and from the humanness point of view, be able to respond to Gods presence. On the other hand, rituals deal with explaining our response: whether we want to benefit from the presence of Gods for example by going to church and participating in all the activities, and spreading the kingdom message.

Symbols and Rituals can be dangerous activities especially when extremely codified as they are reduced only to representative function and its expressive function is lost. This can result to imposition of abstract doctrines to Christians rather than reinforcing the religious truths emanating from such symbols. This can lead to ritualism, where symbols and rituals become objects of manipulation of an unfriendly authority. This can result to obsessive-compulsive disorder.

The relationship between the symbols and rituals of the world and the symbols and rituals of the church is that they both call for active participation from the members. As a country, we engage in rituals that strengthen our identity as citizen of that country.

Some culture and things of the world cannot help us to see the holy where as some culture reinforces the importance of being Christianity. A culture emphasizing on material wealth and property possession make it difficult for us to remain focused on the importance of seeking first the kingdom of God just as is a culture dominated by sorcery and witchcraft. A culture that rejects God does not offer us an opportunity to worship and glorify God. On the other hand, a culture that emphasizes on the importance of being honesty, loyalty, faithfulness, respect and generally being a good person will make it easier for us to conform to Christian values. A democratic country will provide us with a conducive environment to worship God.

Conclusion

In conclusion, rituals and symbols shape our everyday life and hence we cannot do without them. There are the only ways in which we can able to communicate with God and with our brother and sister in the church and world. There are fundamental parts of our life.

Works Cited

CHAUVET, Louis-Marie. Rituals and Sacrament Symbols. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1994.

Introduction

Synoptic gospel is the term used in reference to the books in the bible whose content and explanations are almost similar. In this case, the four books of the New Testament that constitute the synoptic gospel are those written by Mathew, Luke, and Mark. The book of Mark is believed to be the earliest written gospel in the Bible. Other gospel authors include Mathew and Luke, who both wrote their books after the gospel of Mark. Mathew began his Christianity walk soon after he quit his tax collecting job. He dedicated himself to serve and follow Jesus who was spreading the good news. Later, he became a gospel writer who wrote extensive passages in his book.

Noticeably the writings in these three books have similarities although with different wordings. In his book, Luke focuses in the life of Jesus from the time of his baptism until the time of his temptation. Out of what Mark wrote, Mathew and Luke must have borrowed information from his gospel work. Ideally, this is because Mathew and Luke address some issues in their gospels which are similar to Mark. The distinction between the three books is that each author has a different interpretation to similar situations. Within the three books, there are some passages that contradict each other. In this case, some versions have similarities while others are completely different. The objective of this paper is to address any three passages in the gospel of Mark that have corresponding passages in the gospels of Luke and Matthew. This paper also compares the three versions of the passage, analyzing each and explaining how the differences reflect each authors perspective and support (or detract) the authors theological message.

The Betrayal of Jesus

The betrayal of Jesus Christ is an event which was interpreted differently by Mark, Mathew and Luke. According to Marks interpretation, Judas, who was one of Jesus disciples had betrayed his master to the chief priests (Mark, 14:43-45). When Judas arrived from the high priest with a multitude of people carrying swords and clubs, Jesus was addressing his disciples. Prior to their arrival, Judas had instructed the crowd to arrest the person whom he would kiss. The crowd did not know how Jesus looked like, and so, Judas was to come up with a signal which would lead to the identification of Jesus (Mark, 14:46-49).

After the arrival, Judas courageously called Jesus Rabbi and then kissed him. It was during that time that Jesus was arrested by the crowd. Upon his arrest, one of his disciples did not hesitate, but took out his sword and struck one person from the crowd. Using the sword, the disciple had cut one ear of the man who was also from the high priest. Jesus then asked the crowd if they were after a robber because they were carrying swords. He also asked them why they had never arrested him before while He was preaching in the temple. It is stated in the book of Mathew that Judas went before the high priests and asked them what he would get in case he betrayed Jesus.

Luke says that the devil had entered into Judas and made him go before the chief priests and officers (Luke 22:47-49). Judas inquired how he would betray Jesus to them. He did this deliberately. The priests were glad since Judas was ready to betray his master. They agreed to give Judas money if he went ahead and carried out the plan. Judas accepted to betray Jesus in the absence of a crowd. Later, Judas went with a crowd to his master Jesus, who was speaking to his disciples. Judas was supposed to kiss his master although Jesus realized his bad motives before he could do so. At that time, Jesus disciples reacted by asking their master if they would strike with a sword. Jesus cured the man whose ear had been chopped off by one of his disciples. After healing the man, Jesus inquired if the crowd was after a thief. He also asked why he had never been torched while preaching in the temple. At last, he said that the hour had come.

Comparing the three books, it is evident that Mark, Mathew and Luke had diverse versions about Jesus betrayal. According to Mark and Mathew, Judas was accompanied by a crowd when he went to betray Jesus. On the other hand, the gospel of Luke says that Judas went with a crowd but does not mention if they were from the priests, scribes and elders. In his version, Luke says that the chief priests, officers and elders were present when Judas went to betray Jesus (Luke 22:52). Apparently, the chief priests, officers and elders were part of the crowd which accompanied Judas. This is different from what is written in the gospel of Mark and Mathew. As evident in both gospels, the elders, scribes, as well as the chief priests, were not present in the multitude. Instead, they remained behind as they sent Judas to go and betray Jesus. According to the gospel of Mark and Mathew, Judas kissed Jesus in order to identify him to the crowd. In the gospel of Luke, Judas intended to kiss his master although Jesus confronted him before he could do that (Luke, 22:48). This indicates that Jesus noticed what Judas wanted to do before he actually kissed him. The other gospels however show that Judas managed to kiss his master before he could raise any question to him. Looking at the gospel of Mark and Mathew, Jesus was arrested after Judas had kissed him. Using the kiss as a signal indicates that Judas wanted to betray Jesus without him noticing. Unfortunately, in the book of Luke, Jesus realized his intention earlier before he could do it. Judas was only able to accomplish his mission in the gospels of Mathew and Mark. Basically, Luke as an author had different perceptions from his counterparts, Mark and Mathew.

Jesus on the cross with the two thieves

Mark mentions about the two thieves although he does not talk about any conversation between them. Mark only says that Jesus was with two robbers, one on his right part and the other one on his left (Mark 15:27). According to Mathew, Jesus crucification happened alongside two burglars who were on his right and left sides. Mathew says that the two robbers mocked Jesus although he does not mention what they talked about (Mathew 27:44). Luke, on the other hand, specifies that it was only one thief who mocked Jesus but not both of them. He says that one thief mocked Jesus while the other one criticized his counterpart for what he had done to Jesus (Luke, 23:39- 42). This was the thief who criticized the other thief for mocking Jesus. Clearly, these three authors, Mark, Mathew and Luke had different perceptions about what happened between Jesus and the two thieves. Surprisingly, Mark was the first one to write about the gospel yet he did not talk much about Jesus and the two thieves. Mathew and Luke wrote their books according to what was already written by Mark, and yet they seem to have more information than the former. In his book, Mark does not say whether Jesus was mocked or not mocked. He only says that he was crucified alongside two thieves. Unlike Mark and Mathew, Luke gives more information about the two thieves. He does not just mention that the thieves mocked Jesus like in the book of Mathew and Mark. He even specifies that it was only one thief who mocked Jesus and was criticized by his counterpart.

The Conspiracy

The three authors, Mathew Mark and Luke postulate that, Judas had plotted with the chief priests before the Passover. This shows that all of them agree with the fact that Judas started his betrayal mission before the Passover. Contrary to Luke, Mark and Mathew believe that Judas went alone to the chief priests. To them, he was not accompanied by anyone while he was going to his evil mission. Luke on his side believes that Judas was not alone since he was accompanied by the devil. He mentions how the devil entered Judas although Mark and Mathew do not mention this issue. According to Luke, it was after the devil had entered Judas that he decided to betray Jesus. This means that Judas did not make his own choice as he was going before the chief priests. Mark and Matthew believe that Judas was entirely on his own and was not influenced by the devil. In their books, both Mark and Luke say that Judas was assured money if he betrayed his master. According to Mark, Judas accepted the offer he was given by the high priests. Judas went ahead and betrayed Jesus because he was paid for it (Mark, 14:10-11). In the book of Mathew, it is stated that Judas went to the high priests and asked them what he would receive incase he betrayed Jesus. In order to be disloyal to Jesus, Judas was given thirty pieces of silver. It was after the payment that Judas accepted to do what the priests wanted. Both Mark and Luke only mention that the chief priests gave Judas money but they do not specify how much it was. On the other hand, this is different from what is written in the book of Mathew. While Mark and Luke state that Judas was offered money, Matthew declares that he was given thirty pieces of silver.

Conclusion

Basically, most passages in the books of Luke, Matthew and Mark are similar. This is because; Luke and Mathew had borrowed some information from Mark who was the initial writer of the gospel. Although most passages are similar, each of the three authors has his own version. As such, they used different wordings to express themselves. Their distinctions are based on how each one of them interprets the various passages.

Works Cited

Bible Societies. The Holly Bible. English Standard Version. US: Crossway Bibles. 2001.

Introduction

Jawn bin Huwai is a significant personality in the history of Islam. Being one of those martyred at Karbala, he had undergone the reality of slavery since he was in servitude to several masters. However, his last master freed him and urged him to abandon his service and his Imam; yet, bin Huwai and sixteen other slaves refused to leave. Consequently, during his journey, old bin Huwai discovered the wisdom of Islam and became Hafiz, having memorized the entire Koran by heart. Jawn bin Huwai comprehended the greatness of Allah, breathed, and perished for him in the battle of Karbala, sacrificing himself for a righteous cause.

Main body

Before the fight, bin Huwai was preparing his moral and physical strength to reveal them in combat. Namely, he was sharpening his sword, praying, and communicating with his Imam on the matters of the future encounter. The flame of faith burned in his heart, and with the politeness for which he was famous, bin Huwai asked his commander for permission to join the campaign. Unmistakably, he had accepted the possible end of his life. Thus, the man was unhesitant facing death because he realized he was to complete a glorious, heroic deed on behalf of his novel belief.

However, as was mentioned earlier, his opponents did not spare him in the battle of Karbala. Entering the clash, bin Huwai smiled and experienced unshakable confidence. He stabbed the enemies with his sword, recited poems, and stood arm in arm with his Muslim brothers. As a result, having received severe wounds, he was close to death and fell from his horse, yet he was beating his enemies with words similar to a sword. Finally, he took his last breath, probably praising Allah while hostile horsemen charged him to death. Therefore, bin Huwai warred willingly and courageously until his end.

Conclusion

To conclude, Jawn bin Huwai lived without fear and ceased existing, faithful to Islam, the Prophet, and Allah. As a slave, he underwent the path of not just a devout Muslim but a hero-martyr who died for a noble purpose. He was loyal to his companions, commander, and faith, and, with a sword in his hand and verses in his mind, he finally fell. Bin Huwai apprehended the value of word, deed, and belief, which strengthened his spirit, despite his venerable age. He was fearless in the face of mortality and faithful to the end in his thought and action.

Maramoas was the priest of Zeus in Lystra, a city in the Roman Empire, which was situated on the territory of modern Turkey. He was mentioned in the New Testament in verses describing the idolatry in Lystra: Then the priest of Zeus, whose temple was in front of their city, brought oxen and garlands to the gates, intending to sacrifice with the multitudes (New King James Version, 1982, Acts 14:13). This paper will try to uncover some details of Maramoass biography, including his place and time of birth, how he became a priest, and what his life as the priest of Zeus looked like.

Maramoas was born in Lystra in about AD 1-2. The reason for this estimate is that the events described in the Bible take place in AD 46-47 (Acts 14 commentary, 2021). By that time, Maramoas had already served as the priest of Zeus, which implies that he possessed a thorough knowledge of Roman rituals and traditions (Rüpke, 2015). He must have spent much time of his life learning the religious practices, which allows one to assume that, by the time of the events described in the Bible, he was not a young man. As for the place where he lived, Lystra was a city located in the Roman province of Galatia, and it was used as a bastion of Roman authority in the area (Acts 14 commentary, 2021). Lystra was colonized by the Roman Empire shortly before the beginning of Anno Domini dating, which implies that Maramoas lived all his life under Roman authority.

Becoming the priest of Zeus was a difficult task for Maramoas, but it was possible for him as he came from a family of patricians  the Roman ruling class. The priest of Zeus was one of the fifteen flames, i.e., priests appointed to each of the Roman gods. Among the fifteen flamines, the main one was Flamen Dialis, the priest representing Zeus (Rüpke, 2015). He was appointed by the Pontifex Maximus, the highest priest in the Roman College of Pontiffs. Thus, Maramoas was selected to be the priest of Zeus due to his noble origin and extreme devotion to serving the gods.

The position of the priest of Zeus granted Maramoas both significant advantages and disadvantages. For example, he was considered the animate embodiment and sacred image of the god (Rüpke, 2015, p. 79). As such, he was vested with considerable power: anyone who fell to his knees was free from punishment, even if that person was a fled prisoner (Rüpke, 2015). At the same time, he had many restrictions; for example, he had to wear festival garments when appearing in public and was prohibited from touching or naming a dog or a goat (Rüpke, 2015).

The event described in the Bible reveals the core religious values of Maramoas. The Bible narrates a story in which Paul healed the sick man who had never walked (New King James Version, 1982, Acts 14:8). Maramoas was grateful for this miracle, and he expressed his gratitude in the way familiar to him and his culture: by offering a sacrifice. He brought oxen and garlands to the gates, intending to sacrifice with the multitudes (New King James Version, 1982, Acts 14:13).

Garlands were designed for decorating the bulls, thus emphasizing the importance of the ritual. Sacrifice was an important ceremony in the Roman religion because it was the way that people could relate to the gods (Freedman, 2011, p. 51). Therefore, by offering a sacrifice, Maramoas seemed to be willing to thank god for the healing of the cripple but made it in a way acceptable in his religion instead of Christianity. Given the priests high devotion to Zeus and the Roman religion, one may assume that he never adopted Christianity and died firm in his faith in Roman gods.

References

Acts 14 commentary. (2021). Precept Austin. Web.

New King James Version. (1982). BibleGateway. Web.

Freedman, D. N. (2011). The Anchor Yale Bible dictionary. Yale University Press.

Rüpke, J. (2015). The role of priests in constructing the divine in ancient Rome. In N. Belayche & V. Pirenne-Delforge (Eds.), Fabriquer du divin: Constructions et ajustements de la représentation des dieux dans lAntiquité (pp. 79-92). Presses Universitaires de Liège.

The history of the religious education of the person I interviewed confirmed that every believer has their own path to faith. My neighbor and I often meet on the street and in the church that I have attended since childhood, so I have always been interested in the reasons why he goes to the Catholic Church. According to the young man, his faith is very much connected not only with the religion of his parents, but also with his personal religious experience.

According to him, being an obedient child with calm and balanced parents, he attended church on Sundays. Faith seemed to be an unshakable reality in his mind precisely because it was not a subject of discussion. The Catholic faith pervaded much of family behavior and decision making. From time to time, the life of the family was associated with Catholic rituals, sometimes together in prayer. However, this did not mean that as a child, the boy understood the meaning of Christs sacrifice and realized the essence of his faith. Prayers and going to church seemed more like a fun game to the boy, which seems logical at a young age.

It was only when he started asking his parents questions that my neighbor began to understand the ethical and spiritual value of Christian teaching. His parents gave him the New Testament, a story that deeply influenced the child as a story of the great power of human and divine self-sacrifice. After that, visiting a Catholic school only strengthened his interest in studying the Bible, which he perceived as a text capable of giving the necessary life and spiritual guidelines. After graduating from the Catholic school, he, however, did not continue to study religion, but began to live according to Christian values. The concept of generosity, described in the Bible as inherent in people of pure faith, greatly influenced his career decisions (Fleming, 2018). At the moment, as I found out, my interlocutor is working as a volunteer, raising funds to feed the homeless and needy.

Reference

Fleming, J. B. (2018). Spiritual generosity: Biblical hospitality in the story of Lydia (Acts 16:1416, 40). Missiology: An International Review, 47(1).