....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
- Reaction score
- up to my arse in alligators
Have any of our British members taken the time to research the early Christians in Cornwall? Specifically, at Glastonbury?I mean not as a Yeshuan minor (Jewish) sect, taken up by Constantine and enobled as a tool of empire. It's myth busted, imo
Tacitus writes of ‘mischievous superstition … hideous and shameful’ most probably referring to the misconceived idea that early Christians in Rome in the 60’s (before the destruction of the Temple) practiced cannibalism.So the Pagan Christians got to write the rules pretty much from the time of the destruction of the Temple, and absolutely after the diaspora brought on by Bar Kochba. And just like the party game where a phrase is whispered in the next person's ear and makes its way around the room and by the time of the last person the phrase is changed, often so much as to be unrecognizable...the further Christianity got from its roots the more the "phrase" was distorted by time, culture, and pedigree. There were serious efforts to limit that, and I want to believe that helped a lot, but even by the time of Nicea what was practiced as Christianity was pretty far removed from what took place in the Upper Room and at Pentecost.
I feel it is too easy to selectively glean soundbites from Wikipedia in order to dismantle Christian belief without a decent working knowledge of Christianity or its scripture or appreciation of its mysteries..
Nonsense...but I thought that ALL parties we are talking about are/were Christians?
ie. not just your "Roman" flavour
Yes .. I know "the Romans" just won the football
What came first .. the chicken or the egg?
What came first .. Jesus or the Roman Empire !?
Take politics out of it .. and you are left with Jesus the Palestinian.
..You dispute them simply because they are Roman and do not fit with your own religious belief, but without offering any other actual historical evidence in their place..
"Roman" Christianity did not emerge until the schism between East and West, so this is way off the mark...but I thought that ALL parties we are talking about are/were Christians?
ie. not just your "Roman" flavour
Did someone pee in your cereal brother?I don't have to "offer" anything. Jesus was not a Roman and didn't speak English
If you are have confidence in detailed Roman history on the subject of the Divinity of Christ, bully for you.
Perhaps you would like to give us the political history of other empires?
No, I thought not .. just the Roman one.
Agreed.The OP, even the title, opines whether or not *most* Christians believed in the Divinity of Christ. Going as far back as the original "band of Apostles," I think Christ's Divinity is pretty much a given...so the answer would be a definitive YES. The debate between Arius and Athanasius was about the nature of that Divinity, but neither side questioned the actual Divinity.
Do you have some.actual info for me to read, to add to the discussion?
Not if someone believes scripture over history. If someone comes into a subject with the inbuilt knowledge their scripture trumps all fact and history, then all the evidence they have to offer is their scripture -- which as Gods direct word obviously CANNOT be at fault.One can quote as much history as they like. At the end of the day, it doesn't solve anything in this regards.
As the man/prophet Jesus son of Mary who deceived everyone by not actually dying on the cross, instead allowing another to die a horrible death in his place, then ascended alive into heaven, and will return to break the cross and kill the pigs and make sure everybody has enough money, and then go on to die properly and be buried in the grave already prepared for him beside that of Muhammad (pbuh) in Mecca.I think he gets more mention than most tho..
Yes, we all know that ... we're discussing the question at a certain point in its history.The bottom line is that the Divinity of Christ was, is and has been always in question.
Yes, this is the issue ...i.e. Does Jesus speak for the Father [ God ], or is he a begotten relative of God [ or God himself ] etc. etc.
It's a starting point, and it does provide significant pointers.One can quote as much history as they like. At the end of the day, it doesn't solve anything in this regards.
That's the question, in a nutshell!What did the Early Christians believe?
We all have our own thoughts.
But we're not doing that. It's just that English is the lingua franca of the forum.Limiting one's self to the English language and its perspective and culture cannot
enlighten us to "the whole truth and nothing but the truth".
Yes, we do, and for the most part, we are.We need to see things from EVERYBODY'S point of view.
As the man/prophet Jesus son of Mary who deceived everyone by not actually dying on the cross..
Jesus was a deceiver? Jesus inclined towards the devil? He deliberately lied to everybody?There has always been deception. The devil and those who incline towards him are deceivers by their very nature.
Rambling on about Jesus not being God will solve them?Rambling on about Jesus being God will not solve these very important issues.