[ Homepage ] [ Up ] [ Heaven ] [ Debates and Speeches ]

The Great Commission Does Not Apply

Mark Smith   1974, 2002

 

*****************

Responses_to___The_Great_Commission_Does_Not_Apply

 

 

*****************

 

At the end of three Gospels can be found what is commonly called “The Great Commission.” In this, Jesus commanded his Apostles to “go into all the world” and bother people by sticking their noses into the business of others. And it is because of this “Great Commission” that many modern Christians have an almost obsessive compulsion to shove their religion down your throat, your objections notwithstanding. That Jehovah’s Witness at your door Saturday morning, dressed in the finest suit he could find at Goodwill, is not lugging around that overweight worn-out briefcase because he wants to exercise, or because he really cares about you. What he really cares about, what motivates him, is his belief that he has to fulfill “The Great Commission” or he’ll get his ass kicked by Joe Hovah, the god of the JW’s. He, like many Christians,  believes he’s on a “mission from god” (my apologies to The Blues Brothers) and that over-rides your right to not be bothered or sleep in on Saturday’s. He believes “The Great Commission” was directed to him, and so he obeys.

 

The fact is, “The Great Commission” was never meant for anyone other than a few Apostles in the First Century. This is obvious from the very New Testament these door knockers try to shove down your throat, but don’t seem to have the time to read. They assume that “The Great Commission” was a generic command, equally binding upon all Christians for all time. But following this assumption to its logical conclusions shows the assumption itself to be absurd.

 

For if Biblegod, via “The Great Commission”, has indeed sent every Christian man, woman and child “into all the world” to preach the gospel, then it follows that all Christian men, women and children are also  Apostles, as per definition the word Apostle means “one sent”:

 

Apostolos (Greek) is, lit., one sent forth (apo, from, stello, to send).¹

 

So, if the Door Knockers and the obsessively compelled motor-mouths for Jesus are correct, then all are Apostles, for all would fit the definition.  But what is the problem with this? Their own New Testament, that’s what! They have walked head on into a blatant contradiction:

 

 

Thus it appears that these Fundies, once again, are sooooo busy trying to shove their New Testament’s down everyone else’s throats that they don’t have the time to actually sit down and read the damn book for themselves! Once again, we have the case of hypocritical Christians trying to force beliefs upon others that they themselves reject. For if they want us to believe their New Testament, then they themselves had damn well better believe it first when it says that all are NOT Apostles, and therefore they should stop going out and pretending they’ve been sent by Biblegod when indeed they haven't. If they've been sent by anybody, they’ve been sent by their own church leaders, who are eager to use these worker bees to pump up the Sunday attendance numbers and offering amount$, to enable these Pastors to pad their resumes so that they can move on to bigger and better churches. What they want to be telling future employers is:  "See how that church grew in attendance and offerings while I was in charge?"

 

Some other theological problems occur if one believes that all are Apostles. These are a few of them.

IF ALL CHRISTIANS ARE APOSTLES, THEN... 

·        All are appointed by Biblegod.  (Mk 3:13,14 / Philip. 1:16)

·        All are witnesses of the supposed resurrection. (Lk 24:45-49 / Jn 15:27 / Acts 1:8, 13:31, 4:33, 10:39-42, 22:14,15)

·        All have been sent.  (Jn 17:18)

·        All can appoint Elders in the churches.  (Acts 14:23)

·        All must not “serve tables” at church dinners. (Acts 6:2-4)

·        All are entitled to be paid for their preaching. (1 Thess 2:6)

·        All are inspired by Biblegod. (1 Cor. 7:25)

·        All can give orders in the church.  (Philemon 8&9 / 2 Cor 13:10)

·        All can serve as direct ambassadors for Jesus.  (2 Cor. 5:20)

·        All can perform miracles.  (2 Cor. 12:12)

·        All are the foundation of The New Jerusalem.  (Rev. 21:14)

 

Another point to be made (and this one will really drive the Fundamentalist Taliban Christians into a tizzy), and that is if ALL are Apostles- if ALL Christians are to be out teaching and preaching the gospel, THEN this “all” would include women too!!! You just hear the Fundies now-   “Ouch! Hold up! Maybe that damned Atheist has a point after all…” 

 

And last but not least, these Door Knockers would have to reconcile yet another contradiction- their belief that EVERYONE should be out yapping about Jesus  -vs-   all the places where Jesus himself told people to keep their damn mouths SHUT!!!

 

 

In conclusion, if every Christian man, woman and child, on the face of the Earth, is under divine obligation to spend their entire lives traveling to every remote nook and cranny on this planet, to fulfill “go ye into ALL the world”  to “preach the gospel”, then every Christian man, woman and child needs to be a full-time Apostle,  Preacher, and Teacher. They should all quit their jobs, abandon their families, drop out of school, and do their duty till the day they drop dead. But this is absurd. And what is more absurd, is that since 99.9999% of all Christians on the Earth are NOT doing this, then according to the Door Knockers, 99.9999% of all Christians are therefore going to go straight to hell for disobeying Biblegod. What is even MORE absurd is the expectation that every individual Christian is somehow going to even be able to in-person, in the flesh, visit all six billion Earthlings face-to-face, in order to fulfill Jesus’ impossible demands. Even the best Door Knocker, given this criteria, falls far short of what JeJuice demanded in The Great Commission, and as a result, will be sent to “burn in hell” for all eternity by their loving and kind Biblegod (and be sure to kiss his holy ass as you exit the judgment hall on your way to hell, Christian!!! ha ha ha).  In other words dear obnoxious door-knocking, bother-people-at-work Christian, The Great Commission does NOT apply to you, so keep your damn mouth shut and your religion to yourself and leave us all the hell alone!!!

 

 

---

 

 

Responses to   The Great Commission Does Not Apply 

 

 

Table of Contents

Marc___12-27-05

Marc__12-28-05

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marc   12-27-05

Subject: The Great Commission does not apply 
Date: 12/27/2005 4:23:48 P.M. Pacific Standard Time 
From: lechowit@peleliu.navy.mil  

 

First off, let me say that your site is very well done.  As a former Christian myself, I personally was shocked when I started actually reading what the bible said compared to what I was told it said.  Of special interest was the section on pastors not being allowed to be paid for their preaching.  Specifically, though, I wanted to ask for some clarification on the essay about the Great Commission (http://www.jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/The%20Great%20Commission%20Does%20Not%20Apply.htm) Towards the end of your essay, you mention the contradiction that Jesus said not everyone should tell what he did versus the 'Door Knocker' view that everyone should, and you include some scriptures to back it up.  Two things:

1) It seems to me that these verses don't fit with your assertion that only apostles should spread the gospel-as these are specific instructions to specific people regarding specific events-from the content, they obviously only apply to the people they're directed at.  To take your first verse as an example:

Matt. 8
According to the NIV, in verses 1-3 a leper comes to Jesus and asks to be healed.  Jesus heals him, and then in verse 4 tells him (and only him) not to tell anyone that Jesus healed him, but instead to follow the procedures in Leviticus 13, dealing with infectious diseases, as a testimony to the priests (of what I don't know). 

From your article, however, it seems like you're saying that this verse (as well as the others) claim that no one but the apostles can spread the word.  (Matthew 16:20 comes close, but since he's speaking to Peter as well as the others, it contradicts the notion of apostles spreading the word at all).  Am I missing a connection here?

Mark Smith here}     According to the New Testament, no one but the Apostles were ORDERED to spread the word, and because they were ordered, they were provided with the tools to do so: the gift of languages they hadn't learned, miracles to back up their claim of representing the supernatural, and a direct commission from Jesus.

Now, the cases were Jesus told people to keep it all on the down-low:  I use these as an example to show modern Christians that they don't have to have diarrhea of the mouth when it comes to Jesus. It IS ok to keep your mouth shut sometimes, and not only that, Jesus himself actually ORDERED people to do that sometimes.

 

2) The use of Matthew 17:9 seems irrelevant to your point at all.  Jesus is speaking directly to his apostles and telling them not to speak of the Transfiguration until after he is raised from the dead.  It's a conditional command, and, according to the myth, the condition has already been met. 

Again, you've done a great job on this site, and I hope you continue your work.  Good luck.

Marc

 

 

 

 

Marc  12-28-05 

 

 

Sorry to email you twice in a row, when you probably haven't even had a chance to look at my first email yet.  Since I sent it to you, however, I did some thinking and some looking.  As I said yesterday, I don't, personally, think that the verses you chose prove your point (that only apostles can preach the gospel), so I did a quick search on Bible.com to see if there's any mention of other people preaching besides the apostles.

Mark Smith here}     It's not just the verses that I put in. About half of the short essay deals with the logical implications of the modern Christian theory that we are ALL Apostles- sent from God to preach to the world. I noticed you totally ignored all these questions and problems. Why is that? For example, IF everyone is commanded to preach Jesus, THEN that would mean the women too. But then you have Paul telling women to keep their mouths SHUT. All these questions of mine you ignored.

 

 

 

This is what I found:

1 Timothy 5:17 "The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching." (NIV) (As an aside, some of the translations, like the New Living, include paying them).  One could argue that the 'preaching' that Paul is talking about is only to the church itself, but that's usually included under teaching, which is mentioned separately.

Mark Smith here}     I think you need to go back and read my short essay. I was talking about "The Great Commission", wherein many Christians believe they themselves have been sent on a worldwide mission to save every person on this planet. You seem to be talking about "look, here's someone who preached to someone who wasn't an Apostle". You are arguing a point, but not any point that I made. Yes, people other than Apostles preached the gospel. That's why Paul mentioned Preaching as one of the gifts. But being a local preacher is a BIG difference from thinking you're on a worldwide mission from God to "go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature".

 

Also of note is Romans 10:14-15, "How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?  And how can they preach unless they are sent?" (Which really doesn't clearly support either position, in my opinion).  

Another possibility is in Mark 9:38-40 "Teacher," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us." 

"Do not stop him," Jesus said. "No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us."

This man was clearly performing signs (a requirement of being an apostle, according to 2 Corinthians 12:12-18), but had not been commissioned by Jesus as one of the original Apostles. 

Mark Smith here}     First of all, this was before The Great Commission was even given, so I don't see the relevance of it. Second, the "casting out of demons" was not a monopoly of the Christians. According to the New Testament and ancient history, it was a common practice. Remember the story Jesus told, of some Rabbi casting out a demon and the demon then went straight into the Rabbi???

In Acts 18:24-25, we have a Jew named Apollos, who is preaching about Jesus accurately, even though he knows only John's baptism.  Clearly, this man had not been appointed by either Jesus or the current apostles, but when he goes to see the apostles in verse 27, they don't tell him to stop, and mention that he was a great help to them.  Also, this man is not performing signs, or ever mentioned as an apostle by Paul when he (if it's the same guy) is referred to in Paul's letters (Granted, from the context, one can assume he was an apostle, but an assumption is not proof).

Mark Smith here}     Apollos is mentioned as being an Apostle. It's found in 1st Corinthians 4:9-- in the term, "us Apostles," trace the plurals back to who the "us Apostles" refers to- "myself (Paul) and Apollos" verse 6, chapter 4.

As for Apollos preaching Jesus, he was a disciple of John the Baptist and was preaching the Baptism of John. He was NOT a Christian at this time, so so what if he preached or not?

 

From what I can see, there is no limitation on who can spread the word.  There is no evidence that the Great Commission was limited just to the First Century Apostles, even if we argue that Jesus was speaking directly to the 11, and therefore, his words were meant for them and them alone.  From further evidence, such as Paul and a slew of others mentioned in the NT, people other than the original 11 are charged with preaching.  As annoying as it sounds, non-apostles have as much 'right' as apostles to spread the gospel.

Mark Smith here}     Then it's time for you to deal with all my questions and implications that you have conveniently ignored. YOU believe that EVERYONE   was commanded to "go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature"??? Then you've got to come up with an answer to each and every of these objections:

IF ALL CHRISTIANS ARE APOSTLES, THEN... 

·        All are appointed by Biblegod.  (Mk 3:13,14 / Philip. 1:16)

·        All are witnesses of the supposed resurrection. (Lk 24:45-49 / Jn 15:27 / Acts 1:8, 13:31, 4:33, 10:39-42, 22:14,15)

·        All have been sent.  (Jn 17:18)

·        All can appoint Elders in the churches.  (Acts 14:23)

·        All must not “serve tables” at church dinners. (Acts 6:2-4)

·        All are entitled to be paid for their preaching. (1 Thess 2:6)

·        All are inspired by Biblegod. (1 Cor. 7:25)

·        All can give orders in the church.  (Philemon 8&9 / 2 Cor 13:10)

·        All can serve as direct ambassadors for Jesus.  (2 Cor. 5:20)

·        All can perform miracles.  (2 Cor. 12:12)

·        All are the foundation of The New Jerusalem.  (Rev. 21:14)

 

Another point to be made (and this one will really drive the Fundamentalist Taliban Christians into a tizzy), and that is if ALL are Apostles- if ALL Christians are to be out teaching and preaching the gospel, THEN this “all” would include women too!!! You just hear the Fundies now-   “Ouch! Hold up! Maybe that damned Atheist has a point after all…” 

 

As for "people other than the original 11..." there WERE more than 11 Apostles. I have a whole list at the end of  my essay}

Authority in Church Government
http://jcnot4me.com/Items/theology/authority_in_church_government/Authority%20in%20Church%20Government-1.htm
 

 

 

 

-----------------------------------
Another point you mention on your website is that God raped Mary in order to impregnate her (you need a search engine on your site.  I can't remember the exact page you had it on, and I'm not about to re-read your entire site to find it).  I'd like to know on what you base your assumption.  Since we're assuming for the sake of argument that Christian myth is accurate in this case (otherwise there'd be no claiming that God raped anyone), we can use Christian myth to critique it. 

For this discussion, rape is defined as: "The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse" (from dictionary.com, the first definition)

According to Luke 1:26-38, the angel Gabriel visited Mary to let her know she would be carrying the Christ.  Note that this is before Mary suddenly turned up pregnant.  Gabriel himself comments that this event is in the future "You will be with child and give birth to a son," (verse 31, emphasis added).  He even warns her how it's going to occur "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you."  (verse 35)

As you can see, Mary is fully aware of what's going to happen.  Further, she consents to it:  "'I am the Lord's servant,' Mary answered. 'May it be to me as you have said.'" (verse 38)  Note, she is consenting to the arrangement before it occurs, not after she mysteriously turns up pregnant and is wondering what the hell happened.

Please note, also, that Mary was not under age by the standards of 1st century Israel.  She was legally an adult (or she wouldn't be engaged to be married), and thus able to make her own decisions.  She willingly agreed to the arrangement, and thus, was not raped.

Granted, we can argue that bad things happen to those whom Biblegod chooses that don't do what he wants (cf: Jonah), and as such, Mary could have agreed out of fear of the consequences of disobedience, but later on in the same chapter, when Mary's visiting Elizabeth, she doesn't seem at all resentful.  In fact, she calls herself blessed, and comments that the Lord has done great things for her (Luke 1:48-49). 

Again, we can argue that she's lying to keep up appearances, but there's no evidence of that.  That's an assumption, and assumptions aren't proof.

Neither coercion nor straight out rape seem to foot the bill here.  From all appearances, Mary willingly and with full knowledge of what she was getting herself into, agreed to Biblegod's proposal.  While we could argue adultery, (which would make Joseph a cuckold), we can't argue rape.

Mark Smith here}     Mary's rape is still rape, at least according to our laws, which is the society in which I live. Mary was underage. Her consent means nothing. For example, there has been a string of recent cases in which horndog women teachers in their 30's have been sent to jail for raping their male 12 year old students. Why is that? You know and I know that those boys probably jumped at the chance, especially as I've seen pictures of those teachers- those teachers were hot. So let's assume those boys did so willinging. Guess what? It's still rape, and those teachers still went to jail. Why? The consent of the underage to an illegal act does not make it legal.

Mary was also never asked- she was not even given a choice. She was TOLD by a big scary spooky angel that she was going to get "fucked" by her god- her approval or disapproval was never sought. If I were to dress up in a giant scary chicken costume, and go to my 12 year old neighbor girl, and tell her that I'd be back tomorrow and that then I would fuck her, rape is still rape. Just because I "warned" her doesn't make it any better. If I warned a neighbor that I was going to shoot him, and then I shot him, would that somehow make it right? Of course not. So it was still rape.

As for it being "OK" in her culture, so was slavery, and so was mass murder, and so was alot of shit. I would hope you would expect better from supposed gods than what the local barbaric culture expected or approved.

 

Not only was it rape, it was a disgusting thing to do. Mary was already ENGAGED, for Christ's sake! Talk about not respecting the institution of marriage!!!

 

 

 

Sincerely,
Marc

 

 

---

Contact Information
8	JCnot4me@aol.com
Web Page	http://www.JCnot4me.com

 

 

 

1)  An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, W.E. Vine, Revell Co, Old Tappan, NJ, 1966

2)  1^st Corinthians 12:29

3)  Matt. 8:4, 9:30, 16:20, 17:9  /  Mark 1:44, 5:43)