Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your post was not confusing, I just took the opportunity to explain how the early Christian texts when read on their own appear to show a different form of Christianity than the one we know now.
What do we really know about the early Christians and early Christianity?
Of course there are disputes about when Roman Catholicism actually started, and whether it is the true original church.
The 1st Century Christians are a mysterious group, that nobody really knows about.
The 1st Century Christians are a mysterious group, that nobody really knows about.
Because there IS no 1st century Christians in the sense that most people imagine it: the exact same orthodoxy we now have, perhaps with a few heresies buzzing around like annoying mosquitoes; or perhaps a porto-catholicism with Peter in charge. Erhman and others have documented this well.
There were the porto-orthodox who eventually won the dogma wars and wrote history, of course, but that was still evolving into what it eventually became.
There were groups like the Marcionites, the Gnostics (itself a group of several similar but not entirely compatible beliefs), and many, many more, all calling each others heretics and claiming to be the True Faith.
During the first century, it was unclear which would eventually dominate. Christian belief was Balkanized, basically. You can see a distinctly gnostic leaning in Paul, who often speaks of Jesus as a celestial being, "seated in the heavenlies". The gospels, of much later authorship, flesh out all sorts of details of Jesus' life and ministry that Paul's earlier writings appear not to be acquainted with as he never mentions them. If you read the NT chronologically with all these competing sects in mind, you can almost see the evolution and churn.
Even within the NT canon, controversies play out. In the Acts of the Apostles, Peter and Paul (but not Mary, lol) got into a touche-kicking contest about whether gentiles could be Christians without essentially adopting the Jewish rules and rituals. If that argument had a different "winner" the Christian world might still be keeping kosher to this day.
Because there IS no 1st century Christians in the sense that most people imagine it: the exact same orthodoxy we now have, perhaps with a few heresies buzzing around like annoying mosquitoes; or perhaps a porto-catholicism with Peter in charge. Erhman and others have documented this well.
There were the porto-orthodox who eventually won the dogma wars and wrote history, of course, but that was still evolving into what it eventually became.
There were groups like the Marcionites, the Gnostics (itself a group of several similar but not entirely compatible beliefs), and many, many more, all calling each others heretics and claiming to be the True Faith.
During the first century, it was unclear which would eventually dominate. Christian belief was Balkanized, basically. You can see a distinctly gnostic leaning in Paul, who often speaks of Jesus as a celestial being, "seated in the heavenlies". The gospels, of much later authorship, flesh out all sorts of details of Jesus' life and ministry that Paul's earlier writings appear not to be acquainted with as he never mentions them. If you read the NT chronologically with all these competing sects in mind, you can almost see the evolution and churn.
Even within the NT canon, controversies play out. In the Acts of the Apostles, Peter and Paul (but not Mary, lol) got into a touche-kicking contest about whether gentiles could be Christians without essentially adopting the Jewish rules and rituals. If that argument had a different "winner" the Christian world might still be keeping kosher to this day.
Yet, the fundies will claim that the scriptures that survived that political and religious turmoil are the inerrant and infallible word of God!!! The best that can be said about it is that Jesus must have been something quite special to have instigated it. The descriptions of Him in the biblical narrative matched the consciousness of God I encountered, so I am not remotely surprised that He had such an impact and has endured to this day.
Yet, the fundies will claim that the scriptures that survived that political and religious turmoil are the inerrant and infallible word of God!!! The best that can be said about it is that Jesus must have been something quite special to have instigated it. The descriptions of Him in the biblical narrative matched the consciousness of God I encountered, so I am not remotely surprised that He had such an impact and has endured to this day.
Once we become " anointed " with The Holy Spirit" or as you prefer " The mind of Christ " ,
as I believe you were,...
To make a long story short, a disgruntled ex-employee has filed a complaint that she was let go because of her Christian faith. No further explanation. I don't have a religious background, but I was surprised by the complaint since everyone in the place is some kind of Christian. I was told no, not Mrs. R, she's Catholic. I was confused by this answer and tried asking another employee who said no, they're different. I agree there are differences between the denominations, but there's no way I can accept that Catholics aren't Christians. What am I missing?
“Everyone in the place” needs to take 4 semesters of world history and western civilization college courses. What ignorance!
Leaving Marcionites aside, Catholicism is the first Christian denomination.
All these Protestants denominations that call themselves “Christians” are nothing but heresies and spin offs of the Roman Catholic Church. These holier than thou, self righteous, ignorant fools are pieces of work. I wouldn’t doubt they belittled, mocked and mortified your disgruntled employee.
There ought to be a law that says politics and religion will not be spoken of while on the clock.
What about Buddha suggests he reached ultimate enlightenment and indifference to the vicissitudes of this world? Jesus endured brutal savagery with agape love and forgiveness (Maitri). The closest any Buddhists have come is self-immolation but since that is suicide (self-murder), it is counterproductive to true enlightenment.
What about Buddha suggests he reached ultimate enlightenment and indifference to the vicissitudes of this world? Jesus endured brutal savagery with agape love and forgiveness (Maitri). The closest any Buddhists have come is self-immolation but since that is suicide (self-murder), it is counterproductive to true enlightenment.
Well, you have to remember that I had visions and the all powerful spoke to me and only me...oh wait...that's you.
To make a long story short, a disgruntled ex-employee has filed a complaint that she was let go because of her Christian faith.
So why did you fire her if wasn't because of her religious beliefs?
(Don't try that excuse that you had to lay her off since anyone can see that you are just making the story up.)
Man, of all Christians to persecute, why did you pick a Catholic to persecute, especially since they taken over the legal system-so good luck with the lawsuit.
So why did you fire her if wasn't because of her religious beliefs?
(Don't try that excuse that you had to lay her off since anyone can see that you are just making the story up.)
No, we can not see the story is made up, as many of us realize people are layed off for many different reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadwood
Man, of all Christians to persecute, why did you pick a Catholic to persecute, especially since they taken over the legal system-so good luck with the lawsuit.
Presuming it is persecution.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.