Thoughts on Evangelical Proselytism

The word evangelical was derived from the Greek eu, meaning “good,” and angelos, meaning “messenger.”  The early Christian cult movement that developed in Rome thus assimilated the Greek-flavored euangelos to mean one who is sent out to bring good news.  The characters associated with the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were awarded that distinction by the corporate-minded organizers of the “faith” cult in 382 as evangelists, the messengers of “Gospel,” or the bearers of good news.  Until that time a considerable number of literary works had been used in various outlying cult groups, so for the sake of uniformity the Council of Rome accepted only these four named books as coming closest to Paul’s theory and doctrines to be followed in Peter’s church.  All other literary works were then rejected as not sufficiently supportive of the plotted church corporation structure.

The term “evangelist” was used in the late books of the New Testament–Ephesians 4:11, written c. 94-100; Acts 21:8, written c. 84-90; and 2 Timothy, written c. 103-105.  The term was used in these books to designate those auxiliary workers in the Christian cult movement who traveled to distant places to announce the “Gospels” orally to thus prepare the way for future extensive missionary forays in order to establish churches.

As presented in the Christian movement prior to the fourth century Council of Rome manipulation, evangelical pertained to or was based upon only the earliest literature and properly focused upon the spirit of the teachings attributed to Jesus, not upon the manner or alleged “salvation” reason for his death.  Unfortunately, as the cult moved to take on worldly power, the teachings became secondary as the hierarchical system became gradually imposed upon the followers and the doctrine was hammered out for catholic (wide-ranging) control.

 Around the fourth century the term evangelistary (from Greek evangelistarion) became employed meaning the lectionary or service book containing the church-approved “Gospel” passages assigned to be read at Mass on each day of the liturgical year.  Such service-book manuscripts dating from the sixth century have been valuable in textural criticism of the Bible.

Curiosity hovers over the evangelists’ emblematic figures used to represent the alleged writers of the four accepted “Gospels,” which are claimed to have been derived from the “prophetic” visions of Ezekiel and which were utilized in the Apocalypse of “St” John.  After much shuffling of Gospel story elements, the church “fathers” revealed that Matthew was to be represented with a human head because he started his book’s narrative with the genealogy of Jesus.  Mark was to be represented with the emblem of the lion, for Mark had begun his Gospel account with the mission of John the Baptist, and the lion was the dominant inhabitant of the desert.  The  book of Luke began with the story of the priest Zachary, and so it was deemed appropriate that Luke should be represented with the sacrificial ox.  And finally, “St” John, who began his text with the words, “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God…” was given the attribute of an eagle, for eagles were widely accepted as symbolic of the higher God in Heaven.

All this required a great deal of reshuffling of more ancient presentations in order to thus emblemize the saintly wordsmiths, for the emblems were actually “borrowed” from figures used from time out of mind to define the four quarters of the charted heavens.  Cult frenzy, in  thus decreeing the emblem for Matthew to be Man, had appropriated the emblem from the constellation Aquarius.  Mark became symbolized with the figure of the lion, which, not so coincidently, everyone knows to be the symbol for the constellation Leo.  Luke is passed off as being represented by the ox, a subtle disguise of Taurus the Bull constellation.  And “St” John was given the representation of the eagle, which in Hebrew astronomy charts represented the constellation Scorpius.

Today in the United States much dispute has grown over hard-pressure (radical) evangelical faith groups seeking to forcefully impose their version of religious doctrine into government policies.  Perhaps they would better serve themselves and Heaven if they would take time out to study how the teacher’s words became so perverted with materialism.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: