Celebration of our Christian history

[alang1216]

All Bible writers were Jewish, btw.

But the first schism in the second century CE was between antisemitic western churches under the leadership of Victor, while Polycarp, a quartodeciman, and the second century eastern churches followed apostolic teachings.

Sorry but I don't believe either is true.

The Bible writers were highly educated, Greek speakers who took their Judaism from the Septuagint. It seems more likely that they were converted gentiles since their understanding of Judaism is limited. Also, conversions from Judaism were always small in number.

The first schism occured in the decades after Jesus' death and concerned the question of if Christians had to first become Jews. Paul said no while James said yes. The matter was likely decided by the Romans when they sacked Jerusalem. If James' faction had won, Christianity would still be a minor cult within the minor religion of Judaism.

 

[Votto]

Perhaps this is why Jesus is the ONLY figure in human history that all religions believe was a man of God.

This seems a bold statement and totally with a basis. Jews don't consider him a prophet. I doubt if Hindus or Buddhists do either (just a guess, I don't know much about either). Aside from Christians, it seems only Muslims revere him, just not so much as Muhammad.

Yes, the Jews are hesitant in considering him to be a prophet for obvious reasons. You generally don't anoint someone a saint after condemning them to death.

But yea, everyone else pretty much does consider him a man of God. As Ghandi once famously said, I like your Jesus but don't much like Christians, that is, his dealings with those who called themselves Christian.

But if you are honest, you will take account of how other prophets of God were treated by Jews, men who were murdered and oppressed for what God had to say to them that they did not like. If you ask me, the treatment of Jesus is pretty much the same as to how they treated prophets like Jeremiah

So since you reject Jesus as a prophet of God, let alone the Son of God, was his crucifix Ian and treatment justified in your opinion?

And this is not to dump on the Jews, rather, it is the mere fact that the vast majority of humans seem to take offense at a Holy God, which is why millions of Christians have been slaughtered throughout time for their faith. In fact, why does no one ever talk about the Armenian Genocide of Christians that slaughtered millions? Why did the UN not act when Christians in the Sudan were being slaughtered or act when Christians in Syria, but only seem to act when oil rich tyrants like Qaddafi get out of line?

Yes, the Jews are hesitant in considering him to be a prophet for obvious reasons, but not for the reason you gave. The Jews were expecting a messiah but not one that would suffer and die. The wanted a liberator, a great general or priest, not a criminal who died on a 'tree'.

"was his crucifix Ian and treatment justified in your opinion?" No such torture is justified. He ran afoul of the Jewish authorities but the Romans wouldn't care about a religious disagreement. He was likely condemned because he preached that the end times were near and he and his followers would then rule. As the "king of the Jews" he was a political threat to Rome and they would not abide that.

So you are left with rejecting the gospel account of Christ and making up your own.

So be it. Anyone can do that.

 

[Votto]

All Bible writers were Jewish, btw.

But the first schism in the second century CE was between antisemitic western churches under the leadership of Victor, while Polycarp, a quartodeciman, and the second century eastern churches followed apostolic teachings.

Sorry but I don't believe either is true.

The Bible writers were highly educated, Greek speakers who took their Judaism from the Septuagint. It seems more likely that they were converted gentiles since their understanding of Judaism is limited. Also, conversions from Judaism were always small in number.

The first schism occured in the decades after Jesus' death and concerned the question of if Christians had to first become Jews. Paul said no while James said yes. The matter was likely decided by the Romans when they sacked Jerusalem. If James' faction had won, Christianity would still be a minor cult within the minor religion of Judaism.

Why do you get caught up as to whether they were Jewish or not?

Isaiah 49:6 Indeed He says, `It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, that You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.'"

 

[alang1216]

All Bible writers were Jewish, btw.

The Bible writers were highly educated, Greek speakers who took their Judaism from the Septuagint. It seems more likely that they were converted gentiles since their understanding of Judaism is limited. Also, conversions from Judaism were always small in number.

Why do you get caught up as to whether they were Jewish or not?

Caught up? No. An historical fact? Yes.

 

[alang1216]

So you are left with rejecting the gospel account of Christ and making up your own.

So be it. Anyone can do that.

I'm not a Christian so I neither accept nor reject the Gospels. My only interest is the history of Christianity so making up my own Gospel would be the last thing I want to do. It fascinates me and like all human endeavors it has its highs and lows, good guys and bad guys.

It is also fascinating that so many Christians know so little about the book they say is the word of God. I doubt a majority have read the Bible and fewer still have studied it. Most just accept its theology without questioning where that theology came from and its context.

 

[james bond]

My arguments about Charles Darwin, Frances Galton, evolution, eugenics, and Hitler are what really happened. It even carried on to genocide of blacks in America. I can't help you when you are brainwashed and believe in lies that you spew. In fact, I have more than a mountain facts and history backing me up than your putrid opinions of hate towards Christians.

First, I don't love or hate Christians or Christianity. What I do love is history and facts. I find it telling that the only way you seem to be able to defend Christianity is to attack everything and everyone else. That seems a very poor defense.

Jews had the authority from Pontius Pilate. You were the one who pointed it out, you liar and hypocrite. You just relish in your hypocrisy like a pig in slop by saying it:

The 'toss away line' comes from Matthew 27:
24 When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but that instead a riot was breaking out, he took water and washed his hands before the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “You bear the responsibility.”
25 All the people answered, “His blood be on us and on our children!”

Sorry but it is a documented fact of history (feel free to look it up) that only the Roman authorities were able to condemn someone to death. Matthew's account contradicts what the other Gospels say so maybe it's not history but theology?

What do you call it then when the Jews said what they did? Who were their children? I doubt you know much about Judaism either, Mr. Relish.

Finally, you commit blasphemy by saying antisemitism is actually in the Bible. That is the lowest of the low.

You are entitled to you hateful opinions, but it is disgusting and a horrible reflection on you as a person. You've really have turned to the dark side.

The accounts of this are different in the different Gospels. Why? It seems the later Gospels place more blame on the Jews than the earlier ones. Maybe they are not historically accurate? I guess that is the dark side of history.

I've asked several times already and made my point. It's your opinion. To rebut, I provided what you posted about Pontius Pilate and what the Jews said. Pilate had the authority to wash his hands of the matter and leave it to the Jews. What if they said, he's our Messiah let him go? Then Pilate would've let him go. Thus, I am correct in you being a hypocrite because now you're backing down and moving the goal posts.

Second, if you are using the Bible, then you would produce the chapter and verse. You can't even do that.

Thus, just admit you are wrong once more and then I won't call you a hypocrite. Hitler rebelled and ignored his mother's Catholicism. Instead, he formulated his politics when he was a young man around college age. You don't even mention his Mein Kampf.

I can easily back up what I just said.

'Adolf Hitler was born on 20 April 1889 in the small Austrian town of Braunau to Alois Hitler who later became a senior customs official and his wife Klara, who was from a poor peasant family.

Hitler did not do particularly well in school, leaving formal education in 1905. Unable to settle into a regular job, he drifted. He wished to become an artist but was rejected from the Academy in Vienna.

At primary school, Hitler showed great intellectual potential and was extremely popular with fellow pupils as well as being admired for his leadership qualities. However, competition at secondary school was tougher and Hitler stopped trying as a result.

He also lost his popularity among his fellow students and instead preferred to re-enact battles from the Boer war with younger children. At the age of 15, he failed his exams and was told to repeat the year but he left without a formal education instead.

At the age of 18, he moved to Vienna with money inherited after his father's death in 1903, in order to pursue a career in art, as this was his best subject at school. However his applications for both the Vienna Academy of Art and the School of Architecture were rejected.

It was supposedly at this time that Hitler first became interested in politics and how the masses could be made to respond to certain themes. He was particularly impressed with the anti-Semitic, nationalist Christian-Socialist party."'

Adolf Hitler: Biography

Adolf Hitler, the leader of the Nazi Party, the architect of the Holocaust and the embodiment of evil.

www.history.co.uk

 

[alang1216]

My arguments about Charles Darwin, Frances Galton, evolution, eugenics, and Hitler are what really happened. It even carried on to genocide of blacks in America. I can't help you when you are brainwashed and believe in lies that you spew. In fact, I have more than a mountain facts and history backing me up than your putrid opinions of hate towards Christians.

First, I don't love or hate Christians or Christianity. What I do love is history and facts. I find it telling that the only way you seem to be able to defend Christianity is to attack everything and everyone else. That seems a very poor defense.

Jews had the authority from Pontius Pilate. You were the one who pointed it out, you liar and hypocrite. You just relish in your hypocrisy like a pig in slop by saying it:

The 'toss away line' comes from Matthew 27:
24 When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but that instead a riot was breaking out, he took water and washed his hands before the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “You bear the responsibility.”
25 All the people answered, “His blood be on us and on our children!”

Sorry but it is a documented fact of history (feel free to look it up) that only the Roman authorities were able to condemn someone to death. Matthew's account contradicts what the other Gospels say so maybe it's not history but theology?

What do you call it then when the Jews said what they did? Who were their children? I doubt you know much about Judaism either, Mr. Relish.

Finally, you commit blasphemy by saying antisemitism is actually in the Bible. That is the lowest of the low.

You are entitled to you hateful opinions, but it is disgusting and a horrible reflection on you as a person. You've really have turned to the dark side.

The accounts of this are different in the different Gospels. Why? It seems the later Gospels place more blame on the Jews than the earlier ones. Maybe they are not historically accurate? I guess that is the dark side of history.

I've asked several times already and made my point. It's your opinion. To rebut, I provided what you posted about Pontius Pilate and what the Jews said. Pilate had the authority to wash his hands of the matter and leave it to the Jews. What if they said, he's our Messiah let him go? Then Pilate would've let him go. Thus, I am correct in you being a hypocrite because now you're backing down and moving the goal posts.

Second, if you are using the Bible, then you would produce the chapter and verse. You can't even do that.

Thus, just admit you are wrong once more and then I won't call you a hypocrite. Hitler rebelled and ignored his mother's Catholicism. Instead, he formulated his politics when he was a young man around college age. You don't even mention his Mein Kampf.

I can easily back up what I just said.

'Adolf Hitler was born on 20 April 1889 in the small Austrian town of Braunau to Alois Hitler who later became a senior customs official and his wife Klara, who was from a poor peasant family.

Hitler did not do particularly well in school, leaving formal education in 1905. Unable to settle into a regular job, he drifted. He wished to become an artist but was rejected from the Academy in Vienna.

At primary school, Hitler showed great intellectual potential and was extremely popular with fellow pupils as well as being admired for his leadership qualities. However, competition at secondary school was tougher and Hitler stopped trying as a result.

He also lost his popularity among his fellow students and instead preferred to re-enact battles from the Boer war with younger children. At the age of 15, he failed his exams and was told to repeat the year but he left without a formal education instead.

At the age of 18, he moved to Vienna with money inherited after his father's death in 1903, in order to pursue a career in art, as this was his best subject at school. However his applications for both the Vienna Academy of Art and the School of Architecture were rejected.

It was supposedly at this time that Hitler first became interested in politics and how the masses could be made to respond to certain themes. He was particularly impressed with the anti-Semitic, nationalist Christian-Socialist party."'

Adolf Hitler: Biography

Adolf Hitler, the leader of the Nazi Party, the architect of the Holocaust and the embodiment of evil.

www.history.co.uk

The subject is anti-Semitism in the Gospels and you provide a biography of Hitler? I talk about what is in the Gospels and you want a link and chapter and verse? What you didn't get is that the Pilate story, which I did provide chapter and verse for, is not historical, it is an example of the anti-Semitism in the Gospels. It you take it literally, maybe you can explain why each Gospel has a different account of Jesus' trial?

 

[james bond]

The subject is anti-Semitism in the Gospels and you provide a biography of Hitler?

. This is a POSITIVE thread about Christianity and "how Christ has helped change the world when it comes to health care," you . You're the stinkface who brought up Hitler you atheist Christian hater. Talk about prejudiced. Sheesh. Just GTFO .

 

[BreezeWood]

It is expected that you would say the atheist groups were the most violent and killed the most people but of course, you would be wrong. Religious extremists are usually wrong.

View attachment 319089
Facts not fake beliefs.

Actually, the arguments about Charles Darwin, Frances Galton, evolution, eugenics, and Hitler you copy and paste from extremist websites are not at all what really happened.

What do you have to rebut it? alang1216 just made it up from his warped brain. None of it was from extremist websites. It's historical.

It's historical.

there has not been a century since the 4th christianity has not been at the forefront of persecution and victimization of the innocent ...

those leaders you chose did not act alone, it was payback time and the desert religions learned their own lesson they relished performing unabated till they got what they deserved.

 

[james bond]

there has not been a century since the 4th christianity has not been at the forefront of persecution and victimization of the innocent ...

Christians didn't cause the COVID-19. The state atheist and communist Chinese did. Shall we see how much persecution and victimization of the innocent happens?

However, that's not what we should think of. We should honor the brave Christian men and women out on the front lines trying to save lives and battle the coronavirus first hand. Not one of you atheists mentioned that innocent people are suffering. Churches will be trying to help those who lost their jobs and have monetary problems first. After that, it is to get masks and help get medical supplies to the medical staff and those in need. What are the atheists doing?

 

[Alexandre Fedorovski]

Excude me

It is expected that you would say the atheist groups were the most violent and killed the most people but of course, you would be wrong. Religious extremists are usually wrong.

View attachment 319089
Facts not fake beliefs.

Actually, the arguments about Charles Darwin, Frances Galton, evolution, eugenics, and Hitler you copy and paste from extremist websites are not at all what really happened.

What do you have to rebut it? alang1216 just made it up from his warped brain. None of it was from extremist websites. It's historical.

Excuse me but where is the USA the pioneers of which terminated 100 million of Native Americans???
What about the US foreign wars: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Suria, Lybia???

Don't you know an arithmetic addition to put the monstrous amount of deaths caused by our country, against which Hitler, as the author of the book "American Genocide" writes, "was a "jerk" who learned a lot from the Americans..."

 

[alang1216]

. This is a POSITIVE thread about Christianity and "how Christ has helped change the world when it comes to health care," you . You're the stinkface who brought up Hitler you atheist Christian hater. Talk about prejudiced. Sheesh. Just GTFO .

"Just GTFO" Nice POSITIVE message there. Between your ignorance, arrogance, and hostility, you seem to need a refresher course in what it means to be a Christian. I'm probably a better follower of Jesus than you are.

 

[SweetSue92]

I really cannot afford to read through this entire thread, as the hate for Christians and Christianity has magnified even worse since the pandemic.

It will only be when Christianity has receded even more that people will look around and say, man, people really suck, what is wrong?

Oh well, you get tired of it after a while. Not long now at any rate.

 

[SweetSue92]

So you are left with rejecting the gospel account of Christ and making up your own.

So be it. Anyone can do that.

I'm not a Christian so I neither accept nor reject the Gospels. My only interest is the history of Christianity so making up my own Gospel would be the last thing I want to do. It fascinates me and like all human endeavors it has its highs and lows, good guys and bad guys.

It is also fascinating that so many Christians know so little about the book they say is the word of God. I doubt a majority have read the Bible and fewer still have studied it. Most just accept its theology without questioning where that theology came from and its context.

I'm am reading the Bible for the third or fourth time through entire, I forget. And that's just ENTIRE. The Gospels I have read probably dozens of times each; it's only the most "obscure" books, you might say, I have only read on my entire read throughs.

 

[irosie91]

for the record, Galen was not a christian

 

[james bond]

"Just GTFO" Nice POSITIVE message there. Between your ignorance, arrogance, and hostility, you seem to need a refresher course in what it means to be a Christian. I'm probably a better follower of Jesus than you are.

You're welcome. I thought I was more scolding than hostile since you took it to a tangent and made the thread negative by accusing Christians of the being Hitler's main influence. I didn't think it was ignorance on my part as I did accept that it was your opinion. I just wanted to see if you had a more expert source to back it up such as mine:

Was Hitler Influenced by Darwinism? | California State University Stanislaus

Take a look! Read more on Richard Weikart's response to Robert Richards' essays.

www.csustan.edu

Or:

"Quotable Quote by Sir Arthur Keith

Sir Arthur Keith was a British anthropologist, an atheistic evolutionist and an anti-Nazi, but he drew this chilling conclusion:
The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.

Reference

Keith, Sir Arthur, Evolution and Ethics (New York, NY: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1947), 230."

As for being Christian, I don't think you have any idea. You've clearly taken the path of the metaphorical wide gate. Maybe that's why you think the way you do of me. However, that doesn't matter. What you should've focused on was celebrating being a Christian and being positive in these troubled times if you wanted to be more Christian as the OP intended.

 

[Votto]

Excude me

It is expected that you would say the atheist groups were the most violent and killed the most people but of course, you would be wrong. Religious extremists are usually wrong.

View attachment 319089
Facts not fake beliefs.

Actually, the arguments about Charles Darwin, Frances Galton, evolution, eugenics, and Hitler you copy and paste from extremist websites are not at all what really happened.

What do you have to rebut it? alang1216 just made it up from his warped brain. None of it was from extremist websites. It's historical.

Excuse me but where is the USA the pioneers of which terminated 100 million of Native Americans???
What about the US foreign wars: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Suria, Lybia???

Don't you know an arithmetic addition to put the monstrous amount of deaths caused by our country, against which Hitler, as the author of the book "American Genocide" writes, "was a "jerk" who learned a lot from the Americans..."

View attachment 319378

I did not realize that the American government was Christian.

If so, maybe they should bring back prayer and the Bible to the schools. If not, then what are you going on about?

As I keep saying, the state has been responsible for more murders/genocides than any other human institution, yet Left wingers insist on giving the state more and more power.

Again, Christ did not work through the government nor advocated for it because his kingdom is not of this world.

And no, the US was not fighting those wars to turn people Christian. It's all over oil and treasure and worldly power.

 

[Votto]

I really cannot afford to read through this entire thread, as the hate for Christians and Christianity has magnified even worse since the pandemic.

It will only be when Christianity has receded even more that people will look around and say, man, people really suck, what is wrong?

Oh well, you get tired of it after a while. Not long now at any rate.

If you think the hate is bad now, read Revelation.

The sad part is, everyone who reads the account of Christ realizes that this is a man of God and does God's work, yet the response to him and his followers is always to nail it to a cross.

 

[alang1216]

So you are left with rejecting the gospel account of Christ and making up your own.

So be it. Anyone can do that.

I'm not a Christian so I neither accept nor reject the Gospels. My only interest is the history of Christianity so making up my own Gospel would be the last thing I want to do. It fascinates me and like all human endeavors it has its highs and lows, good guys and bad guys.

It is also fascinating that so many Christians know so little about the book they say is the word of God. I doubt a majority have read the Bible and fewer still have studied it. Most just accept its theology without questioning where that theology came from and its context.

I'm am reading the Bible for the third or fourth time through entire, I forget. And that's just ENTIRE. The Gospels I have read probably dozens of times each; it's only the most "obscure" books, you might say, I have only read on my entire read throughs.

Reading the Bible is easy, understanding the Bible is a much bigger challenge. For instance, if you don't know what the Q source is, you can't understand the synoptic Gospels.

 

[SweetSue92]

So you are left with rejecting the gospel account of Christ and making up your own.

So be it. Anyone can do that.

I'm not a Christian so I neither accept nor reject the Gospels. My only interest is the history of Christianity so making up my own Gospel would be the last thing I want to do. It fascinates me and like all human endeavors it has its highs and lows, good guys and bad guys.

It is also fascinating that so many Christians know so little about the book they say is the word of God. I doubt a majority have read the Bible and fewer still have studied it. Most just accept its theology without questioning where that theology came from and its context.

I'm am reading the Bible for the third or fourth time through entire, I forget. And that's just ENTIRE. The Gospels I have read probably dozens of times each; it's only the most "obscure" books, you might say, I have only read on my entire read throughs.

Reading the Bible is easy, understanding the Bible is a much bigger challenge. For instance, if you don't know what the Q source is, you can't understand the synoptic Gospels.

Yeah....no. Jesus seminar stuff, no evidence, looking for blades of grass in a whole forest. Uh uh