Human Imperfection - Teboho Kibe (read novels website TXT) 📗

the following questions: Can God have ‘kids’ or groups of ‘kids’ that can all do the same things? Can God expect all his earthly children or groups of earthly to do the same thing or follow a common path, especially in the presence of a Fiendish Foe? If, in the spiritual realm God does not have an all co-operating heavenly beings in terms of reverence, would it be of logic for him to expect an uninterrupted, undivided or unblemished religious system or systems here on earth?, Should God expect to see both compact and fractured religious systems here on earth, or just one catholic or universal?

 

Well, well, well? Friends, the simple truth is: If there is apostasy in the spirit world, then there ought to be apostasy here on earth. If the Devious One opposed true religion in heaven, and stood up against God’s righteousness, then there ought to be opposition to a clean religion belonging to God that was laid or founded by Christ himself when he came to earth to redeem the fallen flesh or imperfect mankind. The noun “apostasy” (Gr., a·po·sta·si′a) has the sense of desertion, abandonment or rebellion. It primarily has reference to religious defection; a withdrawal from or abandonment of true worship. So, the true religion belonging to God can only be identified after exposing the apostate or opposing religion of Satan. We don’t doubt that it is both existent and operational here on earth today.

 

You see friend, earlier you may have pointed out to the Satanists as being the direct and foremost group of Satan, to which I quickly agreed. But hey friend, the string is long, it goes further than that. At its height, apostasy began to manifest itself after the death of Jesus’ disciples, the last being the apostle John in the 98th year of our common era. What happened after his death? Well, little by little, a clergy class began to appear. In the early second century C.E., Ignatius, “bishop” of Antioch, wrote about a three-grade hierarchy of bishops, presbyters (priests) and deacons. “The man of lawlessness” was beginning to take shape. But the “church father” who really got the clergy class organized into a hierarchy system was Cyprian, “bishop” of Carthage, North Africa, who died in 258 C.E. The authoritative Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique states that Cyprian outlined a monarchical seven-grade hierarchy, the supreme position being occupied by the bishop. Under him were priests, deacons, subdeacons, acolytes (servers), lectors (readers) and exorcists. An eighth grade—porter, or doorkeeper—was later added in the Western, Latin, or Roman, Church, whereas the Eastern, or Greek, Church settled for a five-grade hierarchy. Thus, by the third century C.E. the composite “man of lawlessness,” the apostate Christian clergy class, was fully revealed. It has continued on down through the centuries in all the churches and sects of Christendom that have a special ministry or clerical class.

 

Well, Jesus once told his disciples that anyone who wanted to be great among them ought to be the small one, or be like a child. In-fact he once told them that they were all brothers. He further told them that their leader was one, and that leader was he himself, i.e. Jesus. So there was no clergy class within Christian congregations of the first century. As spirit-anointed brothers of Christ, all the early Christians had the prospect of being heavenly priests with Christ. As to organization, each congregation was supervised by a body of overseers, or spiritual elders. All the elders had equal authority, and not one of them was authorized to lord it over the flock in their care. However, as the apostasy unfolded, things began to change—quickly.

 

Among the earliest deviations was a separation between the terms “overseer” (Gr., e·pi′sko·pos) and “older man,” or “elder” (Gr., pre·sby′te·ros), so that they were no longer used to refer to the same position of responsibility. The English word “bishop” derives from the Greek term e·pi′sko·pos(“overseer”) as follows: from Middle English bisshop, from Old English bisceop, from Vulgar Latin biscopus, variant of Late Latin episcopus, from Greek e·pi′sko·pos. The English word “priest” derives from pre·sby′te·ros (“older man,” or “elder”) as follows: from Middle English pre(e)st, from Old English prēost, from Vulgar Latin prester, contracted from Late Latin presbyter, from Greek pre·sby′te·ros. Just a decade or so after the death of the apostle John, Ignatius, “bishop” of Antioch, in his letter to the Smyrnaeans, wrote: “See that you all follow the bishop [overseer], as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery [body of older men] as if it were the Apostles.” Ignatius thus advocated that each congregation be supervised by one bishop, or overseer, who was to be recognized as distinct from, and having greater authority than, the presbyters, or older men.

 

How, though, did this separation come about? Augustus Neander, in his book The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries, explains what happened: “In the second century . . . , the standing office of president of the presbyters must have been formed, to whom, inasmuch as he had especially the oversight of every thing, was the name of [e·pi′sko·pos] given, and he was thereby distinguished from the rest of the presbyters.” Fine, let’s pause this church history here for now, we’ll touch it sporadically as we go by.

 

Okay, from here, where to? Fine, let’s add more fuel by bringing another ‘argument’ or deep observation, by so doing we’ll be running two arguments or topics concurrently. Right, now here is another bones containing banana. Friend, tell me, in your honest observation, which religious book, in the entire history, has at some time been barred from the general public, stifled from translation, had its translators tortured by antagonists, and had its contents tampered with? Out of all the religious books you may know, what would, in its history, such a holy book receive unique threats, a somewhat deliberate ‘distortion’ of some elements of its contents and be a cause of undue death to some innocent souls? Undoubtedly you seem to be having an answer. Or rather let’s put it this way: Which is the best selling religious book of all time that has reached 90% of the world’s population? Okay I see you are fuming with critical analysis!

 

Okay, let’s make an example here. All body members are important, with each playing a unique and vital role. But, what do all these parts need in common irrespective of their varied operations? Someone might say: They need water and oxygen. Fine! That’s true. But, you see, that’s exactly what the blood contains, isn’t it friends! Right, now blood is the ‘common denominator’ to all these body parts. You see friends, I have observed that in most religious or ‘holy’ books, the common thing they bear is the teachings on morals, ethics, motivation and so forth. Very few religions or ‘holy’ books would teach their adherents to practice lying, gamble, steal, curse and so forth. So, if the many varied religions share the ‘same’ moral or ethical teachings, then where are the lines of divisions among them? Okay, friend, if such many religions can bear similar ethical beliefs, could their destinations or hopes of the ‘life to come’ also be the same? Could the teachings of the immortality of the soul and hellfire somewhat be the same, even though they may be using different religious books?

 

Okay friends, to try and answer or clarify the somewhat two arguments interchangeably, we need to go back to the first one and ask ourselves this question: The apostasy that rose after the death of the apostle John was mainly due to a misconstruing of which religious book? The clergy class that was formed based their beliefs on which book? Okay, which religious book seems to be the most common in the courts around the world for the making of oaths? Okay friend, it’s quite clear now, we shall argue no more. Case closed. Thank you.

 

From now on we shall endeavour to base our findings or proofs from that book, cause it seems to be the most reliable, as is even used in the putting into office or inaugurating presidents of many cases. Likewise also, when I want to attest or prove by ‘law’ something, it wouldn’t be out of law for me to refer to such a book as it serves as a ‘stamp’ of many court or legal matters.

 

Right, for us to try to answer the questions pertaining to the ‘difference’ in beliefs of the many religions or their ‘commonality,’ we shall, think of the following: If all body parts wanted oxygen and water independently, i.e. without the aid of the blood, how would such a body sustain itself! Shoo! That would be virtually impossible. So, water and oxygen are available to these only through the sole means of the blood. So, in this vein, if God were to enter into the religious field of the world would he adventitiously, juxtapositionally or loosely introduce Himself? Hardly! He would follow a course of a common substance or liquid. Also, if the true God is only one, not many, why would he seek to form ‘many’ religions? Can’t he have a solid, common and harmonious one group of worshippers?

 

So, it goes to say that God cannot have various sects of religion, all claiming to worship him favourably. The Bible book of Malachi 3:18 and Matthews 7:21-23 attests to this. Therefore, the oxygen and the water contained in the blood would here illustratively come in the form of the holy spirit and the bible to the members of the one common, united or harmonious group of worshippers, and not necessarily the diverse, varied or many religious groups.

 

So, I see this puts you to much haste, and makes you to impetuously and impulsively ask the question: Which is that solid, united and harmonious religious group the true God must be using today to commonly represent him here on earth today? I think before trying to answer such a question we need to ask ourselves these questions: Why should I identify such a group? Will identifying such a group help me see the real difference in organizational imperfection that has plagued the earth, and thereby help me to seek proper refuge and sound reliance?

 

How would you want to try and identify such a group of worshippers today? If water made your child sick, wouldn’t you want to examine the source of the water? So, if the God approved group exists today and are spiritually healthy, wouldn’t you want to examine their source of water and the water composition itself? Right, their water is the Bible, and the source is God, or Jehovah himself.

 

Yes, it’s true that true followers of Jesus today must be international and ubiquitous. Also, the way they run their headquarters and branches, should matter. Also, the must be ancient roots, far back than Jesus himself! Also their reputation should matter greatly! They shouldn’t be notorious. They should be popular and famous, if you may so like. Yet, not many may agree to the latter statement, I understand and somewhat agree. Since Jesus, did not literally engage in war, so should his true disciples today or followers. Neither should they harbour animosity against their neighbour or fellow international citizens. They should love each other deeply as pointed out in John13:34-35.

 

They should actively want to share the truth they received from the Bible with others. Jesus set such a pattern when he here on earth, he wasn’t selfish about the truth, instead he was liberal, ready to share and always wanted to impart the knowledge of good to others. He set such example in Luke 8:1 and later commanded Matthew 28:19-20 to be performed world-wide, i.e. the preaching and disciple making in a large scale ever! So the common trademark besides that of love and peace among true Christians should also be that of the declaring or the fervent preaching of the good news of God’s kingdom. This is part of the works or fruitage to be found in their identity basket.

 

Obviously,