History And Christianity

[Pete]

I found a four hour history of christianity told by a number of theological historians. You need adobe flash player to view it. I was not sure where to put this on the forum but having seen all the clips I feel it fits well with the forum title. It tells of the diversity of early Christianity and Judaism and how they were both changed by adversity. I found it interesting.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/watch/?utm_campaign=viewpage&utm_medium=grid&utm_source=grid

[Fawzo]

That sounds very interesting Pete, THANKS!

I'll check it out tomorrow after work.

[mark 45]

i don't have the time to watch 4 hours of clips,but if your talking about it pete,then it has to be interesting.

if you can give a brief rundown as to what it says,that would help.and i wonder,does it include the story of mithra in it,along with some others?

[Fawzo]

I just finished watching all 4 hours and some of the perspectives and info was refreshing.

Thanks again for the link Pete!

[Pete]

i don't have the time to watch 4 hours of clips,but if your talking about it pete,then it has to be interesting.

if you can give a brief rundown as to what it says,that would help.and i wonder,does it include the story of mithra in it,along with some others?

The only mention of Mithra was inrelation to the celebrations on the 25th of December.

The clips portray the development of the gospels in relationship to the histrical events of the time.

It gives weight to many of the things I have believed for some time now. Such as:-

Paul was at odds with the disciples that knew Jesus. No one who had met Jesus, wrote any of the Gospels in the Bible. There was diversity both within Judaism and the early Christians. Roman bloodshed was the force that made them both to become narrow in what they believed and brought about the eventual split. Stories like Jesus' opposition to the Pharisees was unlikely to have happened as the Pharisees were a small group of little significance during the time of Jesus. The Pharisees came into their own after the slaughter and the invasions of Jerusalem by Rome. They (the Pharisees) were the main opposition to the Christians and therefore the Gospel teller invented an opposition section between Jesus and the Pharisees.

There are many more things discussed and I can only recommend seeing for ones self. It also gives weight to the Gnostics, Orthrodox, Fundamentalists, and Judeo Christians as having roots from the very beginning Of Christianity. So, it appears to me, that true Christianity was and is diverse. Paul was just one voice and it just so happens his writtings remained longer in circulatrion (again more to do with the power of Rome than their acceptance at the time or by Jesus' disciples).

Edited December 11, 2009 by Pete

[Bro. Hex]

The only mention of Mithra was in relation to the celebrations on the 25th of December.

The clips portray the development of the gospels in relationship to the historical events of the time.

It gives weight to many of the things I have believed for some time now. Such as:-

Paul was at odds with the disciples that knew Jesus. No one who had met Jesus, wrote any of the Gospels in the Bible. There was diversity both within Judaism and the early Christians. Roman bloodshed was the force that made them both to become narrow in what they believed and brought about the eventual split. Stories like Jesus' opposition to the Pharisees was unlikely to have happened as the Pharisees were a small group of little significance during the time of Jesus. The Pharisees came into their own after the slaughter and the invasions of Jerusalem by Rome. They (the Pharisees) were the main opposition to the Christians and therefore the Gospel teller invented an opposition section between Jesus and the Pharisees.

There are many more things discussed and I can only recommend seeing for ones self. It also gives weight to the Gnostics, Orthodox, Fundamentalists, and Judeo-Christians as having roots from the very beginning Of Christianity. So, it appears to me, that true Christianity was and is diverse. Paul was just one voice and it just so happens his writings remained longer in circulation (again more to do with the power of Rome than their acceptance at the time or by Jesus' disciples).

This is a FASCINATING summary, Pete. I will definitely have to find the +/- 4 hours to check it out for myself. Of particular interest to me are those portions of your post that I have placed in bolded text.

Thanks for introducing this material!

Hex

P.S. Wasn't the direct quote (from Jesus, as translated by King James) as follows:

"Thou shalt make up THINE own mind"

Edited December 11, 2009 by Hexalpa

[Fawzo]

Heres one portion of text from the show which I enjoyed: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/first/diversity.html

L. Michael White:

Professor of Classics and Director of the Religious Studies Program University of Texas at Austin REGIONAL DIVERSITY

We tend to think of the success of Christianity in the second and third centuries just on the eve on really when it becomes the prominent religion in the Roman Empire as if it were just one form of religiosity, when in fact the opposite is true. Christianity was extremely diverse during this period, and we probably ought to think of it as a kind of regional diversity; that is, the Christianity of Rome was different than Christianity in North Africa in certain ways, and that was different from what we find in Egypt, and that different from what we find in Syria or back in Palestine. We have, in effect, different brands of Christianity living often side by side, even in the same city. So, it's a great deal of diversity.

At one point in Rome,... Justin Martyr has his Christian school in one part of the city, and the gnostic teacher Valentinus is in another school in Rome, and another so-called heretic by the name of Marcion is also in Rome just down the street somewhere. All of these along side of the official papal tradition that developed as part of St. Peter's See in Rome, all there together. So, even within one city, we can have great diversity.

Now, what's significant about this diversity is the fact that each form of Christian tradition tended to tell the story of Jesus in different ways. The image of Jesus for Justin Martyr is rather different than that that we see for Valentinus or Marcion or others as well. And this is especially true even in other parts of the empire. This is where we start to see a kind of proliferation of gospels ... all over the empire, and by the third and early fourth century [more] than you can actually count, and certainly more than you can easily read within a bible.

[mark 45]

thanks for the summery pete.some of it i have seen in other programs,but it sounds like the one you linked pulls it all together.

some of what you reference makes sense and explains alot of things i found when i studied the bible.

[Etherman]

I recommend reading Galatians if you want first hand evidence for what Paul thought of the Apostles. Loathing is the word that comes to my mind.

[Pete]

I recommend reading Galatians if you want first hand evidence for what Paul thought of the Apostles. Loathing is the word that comes to my mind.

Just the first two chapters explains his difference (his argument with Peter and his early learning taking place away from those who knew Jesus first hand).

However, I do love some parts that point out that Paul felt there is no difference between men and women in Christ (Galatians 3:28). Shame he ruined this statement in other writings (1 Corinthians 14:34), & (1 Timothy 2:12).

Edited December 16, 2009 by Pete

[Brother Michael Sky]

for further clarification of the world early christians lived in - and a very interesting chronology of the papel throne from the reign of Marozia ( the model for the fable of "pope Joan" - the only woman to ever have control of the supreme sacredotal office )in 926 as Senatrix of Rome, all the way to the sack of Rome and the death of Clement VII in 1534.

Fascinating, fascinating,fascinating stuff.... the bibliography of this book is flat-out drool inspiring...

check out:

The Bad Popes by E.R. Chamberlin

guarantee it will inform and definitely entertain you.....

[RevMaillet]

I actually watched this on PBS. It was very good. It is sad though how the gnostic side of Christianity has been denied and purged as well as some of the books of the bible.

[Pete]

I actually watched this on PBS. It was very good. It is sad though how the gnostic side of Christianity has been denied and purged as well as some of the books of the bible.

I agree. The Popes have a lot to answer for (IMO). So many differing Christianities were put to the knife and some popes had little faith themselves and were more interested in power than Christianity. As this following quote shows (IMO):- "This myth of Jesus has served us well!" Pope Leo X

Edited January 2, 2010 by Pete