Jesus, the bachelor

Post Reply
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 2152
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 7:03 pm

Post by admin » Sat Nov 20, 2004 10:45 am

[quote]Though Martha was angry at Mary who went to sit at Jesus' feet while she was busy cooking, instead of telling Mary to go help Martha, Jesus told Martha that Mary was in the right place ( lan fouk li).[/quote]
O, ou kwè se pa yon sakrilèj sa, Nekita??? Depi ki lè nou te gen dwa mansyone f... nonm sa? Ou fè m sezi! :-)

Antouka, mwen te konn mande tèt mwen si Jezi te gason tout bon. Nan ti pasaj sa, ou demontre mwen se gason li te ye tout bon vre! Paske depi se gason, pa gen lòt jan yo tap reyaji.

E ki moun ki va lave pye m pou mwen epi siye yo ak chive l? Fòk mwen fè madanm mwen li ti pasaj nouvo testaman sa.

[quote]In Luke 8:2,3, Jesus by travelling with Susanna, Joanna, Mary Magdalene and the other women, He showed his love for women.[/quote]
Tande koze! Bon, mwen te sonje Mary ak Martha, men mwen pa te menm konnen te gen yon Susanna ak Joanna
tou. Sanble Jezi te bèl gason vre papa!

"He loved women..." Monchè Jezi, nan chapit sa mwen fè youn avèk ou!

[quote]Guy, I don't know if I went too much into scriptural texts, but this is part of the quest of understanding spirituality in the Haitian life.[/quote]
Do you mean to say that his love for women is the source of Haitian spirituality? Machè, se yon pakèt koze ou di la wi. Mwen kòmanse konprann tout bagay!


Post by T-dodo » Sun Nov 21, 2004 10:29 am


Thank you very much for this post. I think that posts like this one are reasons not only to be a member of this message board but also to be open to all types of knowledge even when they are not high in one's agenda. I really enjoyed the knowledge you provided, and that is before I see words like "Lafreche" "gwo Zouzoun" just to name a few concepts discussed in the post that bring so much memory. It made me feel to want to rush and read the bible from cover to cover.

Nekita, I have been reading the exchanges with a lot of interest without participating. But I was struck by something in it that has always created discomfort in me. That is the behavior of church leaders in the catholic faith, particularly in the US, as opposed to the moral values of the catholic religion. I abhor the former while I have the utmost respect, admiration, and adoration etc. for the latter. Personally, I have been able to dissociate the two to be
peaceful with myself. To me, the leaders of the church are the messengers, while the value of the faith is the message. Regardless of the recklessness of the messengers sometimes, I want to believe that the message remains beyond reproach. But I am concerned that the behavior of the messengers is having an effect on the reputation of the message causing me the discomfort mentioned above. I also believe that competing denominations are using the abuses to get some kind of competitive edge against the catholic faith and putting it in question. This is the purpose of my post and I would like to know your view on that.

Please note that this discomfort mentioned above refers to the catholic church only (Jimmy Swaggart caught with a prostitute is not a surprise to me). I don't have the same adoration for the non-catholic church message, particularly the protestants and more precisely the Christian Fundamentalists. I think theirs is too tainted by money and it is too self-serving. As imperfect as the pries
ts and cohorts are, they are people who sacrificed themselves. No children and no sex are for the most talented than me, as far as I am concerned! My question and that of many others: "Is the sacrifice too big to adequately serve the cause."

I realize that Guy might find the subject drifting away from the original topic of discussion. If so, let's make it a separate one. For you, Nekita, seem to be the kind of authority on the subject that may teach me and other people on this forum an interesting thing or two about it like you did in your previous post.

Granted I recognize the existence of abuses by church leaders. My typical reaction is how to avoid it rather than blaming the faith. In other words, rather than condemning the message why not looking for way to find better messengers. The big obstacle is sex and children in my opinion. Another trend of thought is to shape the message so that people do not identify it with the messenger. I think the pope and cohorts, if they continue to
insist on celibacy, they would have to provide that as an alternative, with one caveat. That alternative will not help solving their shortage of messengers. To me the choice is clear to them. They can save face and watch the church gradually shrinking, or admit they were wrong about their interpretation of celibacy and sexism - allow women more leadership roles - and let the church blossom.

Now going back to inappropriate sexual advances by church leaders, priests, to their women parishoners. Are we reacting to them the same way we do for sexual harassment in the workplace? There seems to be a double standard applying here, even though the power in the workplace comes from money and in the church from faith. I think the catholic church is getting a bad rap on that, and I am not talking here about pedophilia (by the way, I could not find this word in my dictionnary. Does anybody know why?). By that I mean people with power using it to obtain sexual favors. They both are coercive powers. Correct me
if I am wrong, my impression is that people, or the press in general, tend to separate the corporation and their sexual abusers for sexual harassment purposes. But, when it comes to the church that distinction has been blurred.

By the way Nekita, I got very confused when you say Mary. His mother was the first thought that came to mind. After a while, I realized you may have been talking about who we called in Haitian Catholicism, Marie Madeleine (Mary Magdalena). Is that right?


N.B. Sorry, guys, I mixed too many topics in this post. I could not help it! It is too emotional for me!


Post by Gelin_ » Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:06 am

Can I jump in...?

Before he left, Jesus told his disciples to preach, teach and make other disciples of all nations, but they had to teach EXACTLY what he himself has taught them for 3 years:

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.</B>" (Mat 28:19).

We have his teachings in the 4 gospels, and in the book of acts we can see how the first disciples lived and what they taught others. In my opinion, any preacher, minister or church that departs from the apostolic teaching and model is to be corrected or simply abandoned if necessary.



Post by T-dodo » Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:25 pm

English is fine by me. It started in English. Otherwise, when I get tired of trying to read Kreyol, I would give up and go to another subject. I enjoy the exchange and the learning.



Post by Gelin_ » Thu Nov 25, 2004 11:58 am


Jesus was both a preacher and a teacher - the two are not necessarily the same:

<I>Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching</B> in their synagogues, preaching</B> the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people</I>. (Mat 4:23)

<I>But he said, "I must preach</B> the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns also, because that is why I was sent."</I> (Luke 4:43).

He sent the disciples to do both:

<I>He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach</B> the good news to all creation</I> (Mark 16:15).

Believers today must fulfill both functions, but it's much easier to preach than to teach. For to teach, one must study and know; and more importantly one must teach exactly what the master himself taught. Otherwise, we have a false teacher or a false prophet (in sheep's clothings).


Post Reply