|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Jesus and his sacrifice is Satan’s test of man’s morality. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Aussie Member Posts: 275 From: FL USA Joined: |
Then you are insisting on maintaining the same false thinking that would dispatch me with your own hands. No Faith! What I actually said was I do not wish you hurt..not ever! Your stated position is you feel it is sometimes good to hurt and kill children for things done by their ancestors before they were born.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
NO! That is NOT my "stated position." NEVER did I STATE any such thing. Go find it and prove it. That is YOUR interpretation of what I've said. It's your bogus equation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: I think historians consider the start of frh or early Catholicism around the time of Clement of Rome (or 1 Clement) which is universally dated to 96 to 97 AD. Right after that, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus were written (and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 was inserted into Paul's writings). Then Ignatius of Antioch. Then Polycarp. There is no historian that connects Jesus and Paul to the above writings. There is a discontinuity. Faith is in agreement with the historians on this one. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1472 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I think historians consider the start of frh or early Catholicism around the time of Clement of Rome (or 1 Clement) which is universally dated to 96 to 97 AD. Right after that, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus were written (and 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 was inserted into Paul's writings). Then Ignatius of Antioch. Then Polycarp. The Protestant Reformers agreed on the year 606 as the start of the Roman Church, when the papacy was officialized by I-forget-who. However, Constantine's conversion is another relevant date. But although there were some doctrinal romanisms in some of the early fathers such as Clement, I've never heard anyone date the RCC to that period.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Marcion (the person who put together the first Christian Bible) had a "radical Pauline" theology which was essentially that 1 Corinthians 12:28 backed up a charismatic type of church "order" (if there was any order) and he felt that 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 was added by the Roman Catholics.
The Catholics had the institutional Pauline theology of the Pastoral Epistles, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement himself where the church was modeled after Roman government. Women were demoted and weren't allowed to lead worship or even speak in church.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2159 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined:
|
Faith writes:
As I recall, the church history text that I studied from (Justo Gonzalez) argued that the Roman Catholic Church as we know it didn't really start till Pope Gregory (about the time that Faith said). I believe Gregory was the first to really claim and exert papal authority. The Protestant Reformers agreed on the year 606 as the start of the Roman Church, when the papacy was officialized by I-forget-who. However, Constantine's conversion is another relevant date. But although there were some doctrinal romanisms in some of the early fathers such as Clement, I've never heard anyone date the RCC to that period.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Females often led house churches until after the writing of Clement, then the Pastoral Epistles were written and Ignatius was written after.
Ignatius demoted females. The conservative evangelical Interpreters Commentary of the Bible by Zondervan in the 1950s dated the Pastoral Epistles around 150 AD (so did the Southern Baptist Broadman Bible Commentary), but now they are dated before Ignatius. (even though he didn't quote them, but he had their theology) Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2159 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
LamarkNewAge writes: Marcion (the person who put together the first Christian Bible) had a "radical Pauline" theology which was essentially that 1 Corinthians 12:28 backed up a charismatic type of church "order" (if there was any order) and he felt that 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 was added by the Roman Catholics. Marcion was a heretic who held to quasi-gnostic beliefs and to "docetism" (Jesus only appeared to be human, but really wasn't). Interestingly, like some in this thread, he had difficulty reconciling the OT God with the NT Jesus, so he decided that there were two different gods. Marcion's heretical, stripped-down biblical canon was a major impetus to the Church formally declaring an "official" canon. (Until this time the canon had been generally accepted without being formalized.)"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greatest I am Member (Idle past 302 days) Posts: 1676 Joined: |
kbertsche
Marcion's beliefs were one set of many circulating in those days. The impetus you speak of was created by the many gospels and not any particular one. There were many mystery schools in that day and Constantine wanted just the one belief system where Jesus was both man and God so that Constantine, like many Emperors before him, could claim God status for himself. He died before he could firm all that up. RegardsDL Edited by Greatest I am, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: The Roman Mysteries were interesting because they were an example of the Romans adopting the Old Indo-Iranian God (though previously demoted to an angel type in Iran) Mitra/ Mithra and it seemed to be an avatar religion (it had prophet Zoroaster possibly being reincarnated, though Zoroastrianism doesn't have reincarnation and avatars). My Oxford Dictionary of World's Ancient Religions has 3 different Mithras , since he is in three different religions as different roles. It talks about how strange it is that the Romans took the religion of their enemy. The same dictionary says Marcionites mostly became Manicheans. Manicheans are a Christian/ Zoroastrian hybrid with reincarnation and avatars (though orthodox Christians, Zoroastrians don't have reincarnation), but Marcion was more like orthodox Christians. This is the best dictionary for learning about far eastern religions and middle eastern religions both. It's cheap too.Amazon.com Many feel that the Roman Mysteries were a missing link between Hinduism and Christianity (it had a base where Paul was born), and they see evidence from the missionary king of the 3rd century BCE (spread the Indian religion all the way to Palestine and beyond) Asouka. Ashoka - Wikipedia
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greatest I am Member (Idle past 302 days) Posts: 1676 Joined: |
LamarkNewAge
Thanks for this. We have no argument but I did laugh when I read this. "it had a base where Paul was born" You do know that all the biblical writers were Jews and that they are anonymous to us. Right? I mean, Peter, Paul and Mary are not Middle Eastern names. They are English. RegardsDL
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Mithra was named "Sol Invictus" (the unconquerable sun or invincible sun) and his birth date was December 25?
Guess who Constantine worshipped? Yup. (That is a late development and a side issue, and doesn't mean Jesus is Mithra but it is interesting) Malachi chapter 4 (the last Old Testament chapter in the Christian Bible) talks about the "sun of righteousness" rising and many Christians see that as a prophecy for Jesus. Historians think the wings on a sun disc reference in Malachi might have something to do with the Zoroastrian God Mazda but Mithra was seen as the sun. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kbertsche Member (Idle past 2159 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: |
LamarkNewAge writes:
Yes, Mithra was worshipped before Christ was born. Yes, Mithraism has many striking parallels to Christianity. But be careful; Mithraism morphed significantly over time. Carefully check the dates of the versions of Mithraism that you are looking at. You will find that the versions of Mithraism that are closest to Christianity date from AFTER Christ. Mithraism incorporated elements of Christianity as it morphed over time. Mithra was named "Sol Invictus" (the unconquerable sun or invincible sun) and his birth date was December 25?Guess who Constantine worshipped? Yup. (That is a late development and a side issue, and doesn't mean Jesus is Mithra but it is interesting) Malachi chapter 4 (the last Old Testament chapter in the Christian Bible) talks about the "sun of righteousness" rising and many Christians see that as a prophecy for Jesus. Historians think the wings on a sun disc reference in Malachi might have something to do with the Zoroastrian God Mazda but Mithra was seen as the sun. I'm curious about the Dec 25 date (which wasn't Jesus' real birthday anyway, of course); did this date appear in the Mithra tradition BEFORE or AFTER Christ?"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Same with the more-distant Hindu Mithra.
Justin Martyr (c. 150) said the Mithraic Roman Mystery religion imitated the Eucharist. I Corinthians 11 or 12 (where the last supper is mentioned) is dated around 55 AD by historians. There is evidence (in art) of the Mithra religion being in Rome as far back as 49 or 50 BC I think. David Ulansey (sp?) says the Roman Mystery religion got the Lord's Super from Christianity. There might have some sort of sacred drink (the old Indo-Iranian religion has the Soma/Haoma drink) in the Roman Mystery religion. Here is the Zoroastrian branch of the old Soma sacred drinkHaoma - Wikipedia quote: And the IndianSoma - Wikipedia Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Greatest I am Member (Idle past 302 days) Posts: 1676 Joined: |
LamarkNewAge
Theories abound. Jesus is also said to be the Serpent and Dragon of scriptures. You can find just about any theory to justify any belief these days and it will just get worse over time. That is why all these theories are all becoming useless unless followed by actual evidence, logic or reason. RegardsDL
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024