Should every leader of the church have a masters degree or higher?

[dzheremi]

Unsettling and demoralizing. You want to believe someone's genuine. But in every turn we see otherwise. Is it impossible to be in a position of influence and honor God? I'm beginning to wonder.

~bella

I think recognizing this is a step towards guarding against it, though. It won't in itself stop a bad person from being elevated on occasion, or stop a good person from "going bad" under the influence of their own ego, but if we are always mindful of our own sins, and keep them before us at all times, then it is a kind of barrier against being carried away by dark forces that are always seeking a weakness to exploit. The devils can't succeed in making you think you're great if you already know better and, more importantly, call upon the Lord in your fight against them and your own sinfulness from a place of true humility and wishing to make metanoia.

 

[dzheremi]

The Enochian literature (what we call "The Book of Enoch" isn't one book, but a composition of several texts written over several hundred years) doesn't clarify Genesis. The earliest dated portion of Enoch, the Book of the Watchers, offers a creative elaboration; but to say it clarifies anything in Genesis presumes that the Book of the Watchers should be taken reliably. A presumption which is hardly a given.

The Book of the Watchers is a fantastical fiction that is creatively inspired by Genesis; but that's about all that can be said.

-CryptoLutheran

Unless you're Ethiopian or Eritrean Orthodox, in which case Enoch is just part of the Bible.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Yes, and many of those were taught by the Apostles - eye witnesses of events; people who had been with Jesus.

No, their Scripture was the OT.
Paul's letters were passed around the various churches, Colossians 4:16. Mark's Gospel was written while Peter was still alive - probably in the 60's. Other Gospels followed later, so all these manuscripts existed.
It was only years later that it was decided to put them all into one book, along with the OT.


It meant the OT.
Jesus quoted from Deuteronomy in the wilderness, often quoted OT prophets and referred to OT characters. He explained to the couple on the road to Emmaus why the Messiah had to die - starting with Moses and the prophets.


I wouldn't say that it is MORE useful - as useful, maybe.
God has revealed himself in the Bible; what could be more valuable than that?


I'm not doubting that. But dozens of cult leaders, and many others, have said "God told me ..." and come up with something completely anti Scriptural - e.g. God "told" Rev Moon that he was the 2nd Messiah because Jesus had failed. God "told" Mary Baker Eddy that her philosophy was correct. God "told" Peter Sutcliff to kill prostitutes.
How do we discover whether these people really received messages from God? We compare the message with Scripture. "Rev" Moon said that Jesus failed; Jesus said that he had come to do his Father's will and said, on the cross, "it is finished". There are far too many other "voices" around - those of our own thoughts/feelings and ideas, other people and the devil, who is against God and may tempt and try to trip us up. Any of these may seem to be good and from God, but if they oppose Scripture, they aren't.


That's a shame.
The Bible tells us to pray and gives us examples, and models, of prayer. I wouldn't throw either out.


I don't think I said that it was the word of God. Jesus is THE Word.
Yes, the Bible contains God's word - the prophets often said, "thus sayeth the Lord". And Jesus quoted from it. In fact Jesus said that he was only saying what his Father told him to say - and his words are recorded in the NT.


Absolutely.

We are on the same page regarding the OT. My point is that the OT at the time in their culture was the Septuagint. That's why the Greek Septuagint was quoted word for word in the NT books. That's the point I am trying to make. It's why I finally purchased an english translation of the Septuagint - so I can read what the bible authors were reading and quoting.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Because they were all writing for different people and for different reasons.
Matthew was writing for Jews - that's why he quotes so many OT prophecies and shows how Jesus fulfilled them.
Mark's main source of information was the apostle Peter, who was escaping persecution. That's why his account is so brief, uses the words "at once", "immediately" so often and misses out some details.
Luke was a historian and doctor and was also writing for Gentiles, and women.
John was an Apostle. He was an old man when he was writing and is reflecting on who Jesus was and what he said, rather than describing all his miracles and parables. Some have said that John's Gospel was a sermon to one of his churches.

We completely agree there. I'm actually doing research to teach a class on the gospels, their differences, why they were written, and their sources. But my point was that they are very different from the writings of the man made religions, like Islam, Mormonism, etc. Where a single author comes up with their own scripture. Christianity is a bit more complex - and divine. And though it is still the writings of men, it is inspired by God, but in their own words.

I've used this example: Four men see the same thing.
joe: I saw a beautiful woman in a corvette.
Tim: I saw a young woman driving a convertible
Sam: I saw a blonde woman in a blue jump suit driving a red chevy.
Pete: I saw a classic American sports car from the 50's.

What we know from the statements: A beautiful young blonde woman woman in a blue jump suit was driving a 1950's red corvette convertible. And Sam is into color, while Pete seems to be into classic American cars.

This is how I think we get a more complete picture of Jesus from the Gospels.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

The Enochian literature (what we call "The Book of Enoch" isn't one book, but a composition of several texts written over several hundred years) doesn't clarify Genesis. The earliest dated portion of Enoch, the Book of the Watchers, offers a creative elaboration; but to say it clarifies anything in Genesis presumes that the Book of the Watchers should be taken reliably. A presumption which is hardly a given.

The Book of the Watchers is a fantastical fiction that is creatively inspired by Genesis; but that's about all that can be said.

-CryptoLutheran

Yeah. I should have been more precise. What I should have said is that it clarifies how people at the time perceived the information.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Could you clarify? If by this you mean Jesus and His Apostles are a good argument in favor of training and education, I'd certainly agree. The Apostles received the best seminary training in the world, right at Christ's feet.

-CryptoLutheran

Actually, you've just destroyed my point. I stand corrected! Nicely done. I confess that I've not spent too much time in deep contemplation on the subject, and I got my butt handed to me. Again, nicely done.

 

[ViaCrucis]

With all due respect, gaslighting, projection, and false accusation doesn’t change the fact that verse and all the others I mentioned mean exactly what they say. You can’t churchsplain 1 John 2:27 to support manmade traditions, business models, and the control mechanisms of the Baal system.

Ignoring the ridiculous and hyperbolic slander involved here. Let's do something simple, let's examine the context of 1 John 2:27.

"Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us, for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they are not of us. But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you have all knowledge. I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it, and because no lie is of the truth. Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you too will abide in the Son and in the Father. And this is the promise that He made to us--eternal life.

I write these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you. But the anointing that you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as His anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie--just as it has taught you, abide in Him." - 1 John 2:18-27

Here are some things we learn from this passage:

There are heretics who claim authority, they are outside of the Church as heretics teaching false teaching. They deny Christ, it is not here altogether clear in what way they are denying Jesus is the Christ; but given other things John says (e.g. 2 John 1:7) this is probably some early form of Docetism, probably the Cerinthian variety (See Cerinthianism and Docetism if you are unfamiliar with these).

John is not concerned with his audience being deceived, but trusts that his readers, having already received true teaching, abide in it, and thus are anointed; having already received the truth of the Gospel in what they have heard, and abided in, from the beginning--when they first heard and believed.

Compare this with St. Paul in Ephesians,

"In Him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation, and believed in Him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of His glory." - Ephesians 1:13-14

The one who, having heard and believed the Gospel, has been sealed--anointed--with the Holy Spirit. Abiding in the truth received from the beginning; speaking of which, the same Apostle Paul writes to the Corinthians what that teaching from the beginning is:

"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures," - 1 Corinthians 15:3-4

Which is also why the same Apostle can say to the Thessalonians:

"But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth. To this He called you through our Gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter." - 2 Thessalonians 2:13-15

On this foundation of truth, on account of true and faithful teaching, St. John says:

"I write this about those trying to deceive you" that is, these antichrists, these heretics, are out trying to deceive; but John is not worried, because his readers have received the truth already, they are abiding in faithful and good teaching which they already received; and their faith in Christ shall protect them. They, therefore, do not need anyone to teach them--they do not need to receive new teachings and new teachers, because they have already received solid teaching; and if they simply abide in that, they will continue to abide in Christ, "But as His anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie--just as it has taught you, abide in Him."

You can slander, you can make false accusations all you like. But you can't ignore the context of the passage, you can't just make up whatever meaning you want.

You can fight against the word of God if you so wish, but it's a losing battle.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Unless you're Ethiopian or Eritrean Orthodox, in which case Enoch is just part of the Bible.

I've always been a bit perplexed by this, or rather, somewhat uncertain to what degree of importance is placed on Enoch or Jubilees, or the unique books of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Churches. Is Enoch simply something read and used with the same importance, authority, and regarded of the same relevance to ordinary Christian life as, say, Proverbs, Matthew, or Ephesians?

Ethiopian Christianity is something that, admittedly, as much as I've tried to study it, leaves me with many questions given its peculiarity when compared to every other historic expression of Christianity. On the one hand, I have no desire to deny the legitimacy; but on the other there are aspects about it which seem difficult for me to reconcile with the rest of catholic and apostolic Christianity. I admit that I probably do filter things through a set of biases which are Western and Lutheran; but I have also had an affection and interest in Eastern Christianity since prior to becoming Lutheran. So while I don't wish to deny or ignore that I have a bias, I also would like to think I am not so biased as to be unable to look at things from other perspectives.

So if you have any insights as as a Coptic Orthodox Christian--and the historic relationship between the Copts and Ethiopians--I would be in your debt.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Technically there’s only one gospel but I understand what you’re saying. We have four different perspectives but they’re all still the same gospel and they’re all correct. They record different events that took place but they don’t contradict each other.

The book of Enoch isn’t recognized even by the Jews as being scripture. No one knows who the author was and it’s believed to be written 200-300 years before Jesus was born. So I’m not sure where this unknown author got this information about what took place 3,700 years before he was born. There are a lot of false gospels and forgeries pertaining to the scriptures so when we read books from this category they really can’t teach us anything because we have no way of knowing if they’re authentic or not. So after reading the book of Enoch you have to ask yourself did this really take place and the only truthful answer you can give to that question is, I don’t know. So you really haven’t learned anything from reading it.

All very good points. Just a couple of nits, though.
1. The ethiopian church does consider 1 Enoch to be canon.
2. I do see it as "scripture", but only in that all things written down are, by definition, scripture. Of course the word was more powerful when 2 Timothy was written, since there was very little "scripture" to be found. No printing presses. But still...
3. regarding when 1 Enoch was written, just a couple of things. First, the Jews were really good at handing down information verbally. I believe that is where most of our modern OT came from, being translated from the Masoretic text. Second, the early chapters of Genesis predate the author by a very, very long time, but we still accept it as canon. Personally, I see it as ancient poetry. It's points are valid, even though a literal translation may get one in trouble. Just like literally reading the gospels one will find that the rooster crowed once according to one, and twice according to another. But it's not about roosters crowing. It's about it being very early in the morning. Both make the same root point. I see the same thing in genesis. After all, the first three words beg the question, "the beginning of what?" I see it as not the beginning of all creation, but the beginning of the creation of the environment in which God placed man. i.e. the beginning of the age of man, and it was created on the surface of a planet that is billions of years old. And who knows how many iterations this surface has gone through? We've even found evidence of them in OOP artifacts and dinosaur bones. The bible is silent on such things for the same reason that a Chevy repair manual does not cover how to frame a house.

 

[dzheremi]

I've always been a bit perplexed by this, or rather, somewhat uncertain to what degree of importance is placed on Enoch or Jubilees, or the unique books of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Churches. Is Enoch simply something read and used with the same importance, authority, and regarded of the same relevance to ordinary Christian life as, say, Proverbs, Matthew, or Ephesians?

Ethiopian Christianity is something that, admittedly, as much as I've tried to study it, leaves me with many questions given its peculiarity when compared to every other historic expression of Christianity. On the one hand, I have no desire to deny the legitimacy; but on the other there are aspects about it which seem difficult for me to reconcile with the rest of catholic and apostolic Christianity. I admit that I probably do filter things through a set of biases which are Western and Lutheran; but I have also had an affection and interest in Eastern Christianity since prior to becoming Lutheran. So while I don't wish to deny or ignore that I have a bias, I also would like to think I am not so biased as to be unable to look at things from other perspectives.

So if you have any insights as as a Coptic Orthodox Christian--and the historic relationship between the Copts and Ethiopians--I would be in your debt.

-CryptoLutheran

I cannot answer your specific questions on the importance or use of Enoch of Jubilees in the Ethiopic tradition (for obvious reasons), and we do not have these books in the Coptic canon, but here is a page from the EOTC in English concerning what is considered canonical in their tradition: The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church

 

[BNR32FAN]

Second, the early chapters of Genesis predate the author by a very, very long time, but we still accept it as canon.

Genesis is widely attributed to Moses whom we know conversed directly with God on several occasions. Enoch on the other hand no one knows who wrote it, it’s not attributed as a writing of any known prophets.

 

[TPop]

Are they?

The massive amounts of misinformation, often easily debunkable misinformation, would suggest that while more and more people are believing in conspiracy theories there doesn't seem to exist a whole lot of evidence that such conspiracy theories are true.

What seems more likely is that many people are increasingly less critical of the information they digest. That kind of critical thought and analysis, while not requiring higher education, is something higher education can help foster. I don't have a degree of any kind, never finished college, but even the little bit of study I did at a local community college helped me; in conjunction with all the years I've spent having conversations on discussion forums such as this one where I've found hunting down sources and doing critical thinking necessary.

While certainly only anecdotal: For the majority of my life I never had to concern myself with having to defend vaccination or the roundness of the earth from people claiming vaccines are demonic or people claiming the earth is flat.

Back when Dan Brown's infamous novel came out I spent a lot of time having to explain, and inform, lots of people about how, in spite of Dan Brown's claims that the historical information as is presented in the novel is rooted in fact; that it isn't. Brown's novel relied heavily on conspiracy theory (and plagiarism, but that's another story). The same is true with the Zeitgeist film from years back.

But, at least from my personal experience and observation, it seems to be getting worse. While I don't see people concerned with a novel about Leonardo da Vinci and his code, or people bringing up the Zeitgeist movie anymore; I do see a lot more related to other things. In my estimation a major turning point, at least in an American context, was during Obama's presidency, and it's only intensified; and become so commonplace that it's nearly impossible to keep up.

So conspiracy theories aren't coming true, but there certainly are a lot of people seemingly more willing to believe in them. Speaking personally, my own sanity has benefited greatly from getting rid of FaceBook and most social media. Social Media is brain rot. Not that long ago there was, apparently, a trend in people claiming the Roman Empire never existed. Just yesterday I saw a teacher complaining that more than half the students in his class thought Helen Keller was a fictional character. And as generation that liberated Jews from Nazi death camps passes away, there is a growth in Holocaust denial.

Things are getting worse--because people are less interested in facts and misinformation spreads fast. Anyone can say anything on the internet, and there is a high probability that at least some people will believe it, and just repeat what they heard without criticism or second thought.

That's the danger in our world today; and why we need critical thinking more now than ever.

-CryptoLutheran

I am a Conservative Christian. Not sure what your concerns for conspiracy theories are related to. Mine are not related to flat earth, UFOs, no holocost, or Rome never existed.

Mine are around modern-day conspiracies: Covid/Vaccines, Big Pharma, Deep State, Western Elites, Ukraine, Middle East, Russia, all those things that point to the destruction of the USA by certain groups that are never covered by the Mainstream Marxist News sources, even when they are demonstrated as truth. You may be looking at different topics than I.

Peace and Blessings

 

[ViaCrucis]

I am a Conservative Christian. Not sure what your concerns for conspiracy theories are related to. Mine are not related to flat earth, UFOs, no holocost, or Rome never existed.

Mine are around modern-day conspiracies: Covid/Vaccines, Big Pharma, Deep State, Western Elites, Ukraine, Middle East, Russia, all those things that point to the destruction of the USA by certain groups that are never covered by the Mainstream Marxist News sources, even when they are demonstrated as truth. You may be looking at different topics than I.

Peace and Blessings

Yep, those things are in the same group as UFOs, flat earth, lizard people, and Jewish bankers.

You identifying as a "Conservative Christian" doesn't really mean anything here. Christians, conservative or otherwise, are just as easily duped into believing nonsense as non-Christians. It's a consequence of churches failing to properly guard the flock against such nonsense.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[timothyu]

Social Media is brain rot.

So is all media

 

[timothyu]

the destruction of the USA by certain groups that are never covered by the Mainstream Marxist News sources

Because it is not a political matter but simply one of Corporatism.

 

[TPop]

Yep, those things are in the same group as UFOs, flat earth, lizard people, and Jewish bankers.

You identifying as a "Conservative Christian" doesn't really mean anything here. Christians, conservative or otherwise, are just as easily duped into believing nonsense as non-Christians. It's a consequence of churches failing to properly guard the flock against such nonsense.

-CryptoLutheran

OK Kid. You have a good day. I don't waste time with your kind of people.

Peace and Blessings.

 

[TPop]

Because it is not a political matter but simply one of Corporatism.

Its a party that hates Jesus, but so many 'christians' are a part of it, Marxism, and elitism.

Peace and Blessings

 

[ViaCrucis]

Its a party that hates Jesus, but so many 'christians' are a part of it, Marxism, and elitism.

Peace and Blessings

If you attach a political party to the Son of God, you're Christian-ing wrong.

Jesus is above everything. Period.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Stephen3141]

Many of the responses that I have read in this thread, have nothing to do with
a college degree, for pastors/teachers.

Some of the posts, associate having a degree, with being arrogant.

I do not find this thread, to be useful.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Genesis is widely attributed to Moses whom we know conversed directly with God on several occasions. Enoch on the other hand no one knows who wrote it, it’s not attributed as a writing of any known prophets.

And that is why Enoch is not canon, IMO.