The real book on Christianity.

Mickiel

New member
Christians are about 1/3 of humanity; that's , more or less, about 2. 3 billion people. That's a whole lot of people! Christianity is a giant, its NOT the small church that satan is chasing in the book of Revelations. Christians are all over the place; I disagree with the Atheist who love to claim that Christianity is shrinking; when your that big, the number of people who leave is insignificant.

Catholics are different from many other forms of Christianity, but they are still Christian. And I think they were the first brand of Christianity that evolved from the first church after Christ left the earth. In Acts 11:26, " The disciples were " Called" Christians " First" in Antioch." They were called that by other people, not themselves. And the only other people around at that time , were Romans, Pagans, Philosophers and more Pagans. They used to call themselves " The Way." But more or less, Christianity was born here; right here in history. In Rome. After that, the Genesis of this great church began.

I believe that original first church, that first century church, was the church in its purest form; never to be that pure again! That was the church before it was tainted and corrupted. That church was an organic church, an organism that breathed in and out the truth; and that truth today, looks nothing like it did back then.

The DNA of the Christian church has changed; and this is perhaps best told by someone " outside" of the church, because religious self evaluation is the worse kind; its far too selfish, too self sacrosanct.

The real historical story of Christianity is one of God's people absorbing foreign elements into their bloodstream, and historically never exhaling those elements. The incredible traditions that were tacked on to Christianity over the years, would fill volumes in books, and the incredible self absorbed mentality of all of Christianity to never even notice their true history and how off course it has become, is simply stunning! The way the religion protects itself is astounding; and yet no one is safe from true history. It will tell the truth, no matter who is unable to absorb it.

"After the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in AD 70, Judaic Christianity waned in numbers and power. Gentile Christianity dominated, and that " New Faith" began to absorb Greco-Roman philosophy and ritual. It was a period of pagan culture, and much of what Christianity does today, was lifted directly out of pagan culture. Paganism dominated the Roman Empire up until the 4th century, and many of its elements were absorbed by Christians in the first half of the first millennium." ( Pagan Christianity, pg.6, by Frank Viola and George Barna).

Not that paganism or philosophy are wrong in and of themselves, they are not; but these two concepts obviously molded and shaped Christianity, like no other element has shaped this incredible giant of a church.

Lets take a closer look at how.
 

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Moses was a Christian and the ecclesia (church) began in the wilderness east of Egypt.

The Most High sent Christ to become his Son and to restore truth and to redeem Jacob's people who had lost their way, i.e., the lost sheep of Israel.
 

Mickiel

New member
Moses was a Christian and the ecclesia (church) began in the wilderness east of Egypt.

The Most High sent Christ to become his Son and to restore truth and to redeem Jacob's people who had lost their way, i.e., the lost sheep of Israel.



I totally disagree, there was no Christianity in the Old Testament, they were FIRST called Christians in Antioch, Acts 11:26 is solid biblical proof of that; no Old testament biblical figure was a Christian, your religion cannot usurp and own the past that is not theirs to own; but your claim that Moses was a Christian, reveals how much biblical ego exist in Christianity; your trying to make Christians out of biblical people who clearly were not. Which requires a lot of pride and ego, you know, to place your religion into a history where they did not historically exist.

And that ego is powerful and interesting; in example, many Christians think that Christianity wrote the bible, and that the bible is uniquely for Christians. A stunning display of ego and historical arrogance, the bible is not owned by any group, no copy rights exist on it. And out of its 66 authors, one could argue that only 10 of those could possibly be considered Christian. Yet still, most Christians think the bible is for them, instead of being for all of humanity.
 

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
"...[T]he number of people who leave is insignificant."
It's significant (2 Thess 2:3).

"Catholics are different from many other forms of Christianity, but they are still Christian."
The Roman Catholic Church is the Great Whore (Re 17:5). :eek:linger: Her daughter harlots are returning home to her (Re 17:2, 18:4).
[Catholics] "...[T]he only other people around at that time , were Romans, Pagans..."
They are still Romans (Dan 9:26). :plain: They're still enemies of God (Ezek. 35:5–7).
"...[T]his great church..."
They will be judged soon (Dan 11:21-23). :burnlib:

See:

What is free grace? What is Free Grace Theology?

What is Unitarian Universalism?

What is the emerging / emergent church movement?

As a reminder is Mickiel number 47 on Satan, Inc. (TOL Heretics list) in "The 'Jesus is not God' people (Non-trinitarians) category. :burnlib:
 
Last edited:

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
...no Old testament biblical figure was a Christian...

What if we define a Christian as a person who has the Spirit of Christ?

...esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt, for he looked to the reward. (Hebrews 11:26 NKJV)

Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. (1 Corinthians 10:1-4 NKJV)​
 

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
.....
I believe that original first church, that first century church, was the church in its purest form; never to be that pure again! That was the church before it was tainted and corrupted. That church was an organic church, an organism that breathed in and out the truth; and that truth today, looks nothing like it did back then.

The DNA of the Christian church has changed; and this is perhaps best told by someone " outside" of the church, because religious self evaluation is the worse kind; its far too selfish, too self sacrosanct.

.....
Lets take a closer look at how.

I think you are a bit wacky.
 

Mickiel

New member
What if we define a Christian as a person who has the Spirit of Christ?
]


You can do that, but you cannot reverse real history and go backwards and give people titles that did not exist at the time. Your religion may want to control how a believer is defined in the future, but you cannot control the past. You can't stamp Christian where it did not exist.
 

Mickiel

New member
I think you are a bit wacky.

Well I think I am too, to even attempt to do a thread like this is risky, knowing the pride of Christianity. They will call you names, gang up on you, threaten you, condemn you; do all that and more, but yet think you are wacky?

Never even considering themselves as they rip you apart. As if their religion is untouchable.
 

fzappa13

Well-known member
I think you could exchange the terms "Christian" and "Jew" and be on pretty solid ground if you believe Paul. Then again, nobody gives people spiritual gas quite like Paul ... and the poor guy isn't here to defend himself anymore ... well, except for his words which is what started all the fuss in the first place.
 

Mickiel

New member
I think you could exchange the terms "Christian" and "Jew" and be on pretty solid ground if you believe Paul. Then again, nobody gives people spiritual gas quite like Paul ... and the poor guy isn't here to defend himself anymore ... well, except for his words which is what started all the fuss in the first place.

Well Paul was quite different; I think he was quite something, but I don't think he considered himself a Christian. I don't think he put much weight on that, not like the current Christians place so much weight and authority of just a simple title. You would think just the title, " Christian", is holy or something. Almost none of them would have the title seriously and historically examined; because " Its above that', in their view. Yet Christianity began to evolve after Paul, it was the first " Non-Temple- based religion ever to emerge."
 

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Well I think I am too, to even attempt to do a thread like this is risky, knowing the pride of Christianity. They will call you names, gang up on you, threaten you, condemn you; do all that and more, but yet think you are wacky?

Never even considering themselves as they rip you apart. As if their religion is untouchable.

On a web forum yes, personally, no.
 

Mickiel

New member
On a web forum yes, personally, no.

Well I do certainly agree that often what people do in person, differs from what they do or say online. And in this thread, I want to show that Christianity in the first century, is far different than what it is now. Just show the real book on it.

In example, Christians used to meet in houses, now they meet in buildings. These are two completely differing dynamics, which have created dynamics of their own.
 

Mickiel

New member
Well I do certainly agree that often what people do in person, differs from what they do or say online. And in this thread, I want to show that Christianity in the first century, is far different than what it is now. Just show the real book on it.

In example, Christians used to meet in houses, now they meet in buildings. These are two completely differing dynamics, which have created dynamics of their own.



Do you know the difference Christianity has suffered , just because of its incredible growth? See we can't remember what it was like for a small group to meet in a small home; the unity and closeness it had to offer. Everyone knew everyone back then and everyone had a part to play in the services. It was a group thing, naturally close knit. Today, we have " Mega churches", giant congregations, one can get lost in a sea of humanity. Now, instead of that close knit unity, your just a place on a pew; an ear listening to a big mouth on the stage, a pastor who may not even know you.

This has had an effect on Christianity.
 

Mickiel

New member
Did Paul suffer as a Christian?

In my view, Paul suffered because he was an Apostle, but I think its within reason to say some of his suffering was because he was Christian, yes. Rome showed no prejudice in their lust to punish the believers in God, no matter what you would label those believers. The followers of " The Way" suffered before they switched their name to Christian, and suffered after.

Does the term " Christianity' deserved to be lifted up like the term " Christ?" Well because they are so closely related, the term Christian has become just as holy as Christ; to the Christians that is. That is one of the reasons " Christmas" is so revered, because it contains within it" Christ."

One could separate Paul's suffering from Christianity, or include it with it; and either way, in my view, be correct.
 

fzappa13

Well-known member
Well Paul was quite different; I think he was quite something, but I don't think he considered himself a Christian. I don't think he put much weight on that, not like the current Christians place so much weight and authority of just a simple title. You would think just the title, " Christian", is holy or something. Almost none of them would have the title seriously and historically examined; because " Its above that', in their view. Yet Christianity began to evolve after Paul, it was the first " Non-Temple- based religion ever to emerge."

Well, speaking for myself, when people ask I say I am a Christian aspirant but I understand that too is just another label. I guess that, we humans being ever on the lookout for a short cut, we tend to engage in a verbal shorthand that leaves much to be desired in the way of detail. But, then again, there are those that find great comfort in this sort of shorthand and are down right aggravated when you don't allow them to put you in some sort of intellectual box for the purpose of satisfying their own personal filing system. To each their own I suppose.
 

Mickiel

New member
In the minds of early Christianity , the people, not the architecture, constituted a sacred place. They did not even call themselves a church, or a temple or anything used to refer to a building. They worshiped in private homes, history did not see a " Church building" until the year 300. When Roman Catholicism evolved in the fourth to the sixth centuries, it absorbed many of the religious practices of both paganism and Judaism. It set up the professional priesthood. It erected sacred buildings.

Building churches would now change forever.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
And out of its 66 authors, one could argue that only 10 of those could possibly be considered Christian. Yet still, most Christians think the bible is for them, instead of being for all of humanity.

Less than 66. Several authors wrote more than 1.
Paul wrote 70% of the NT
 

Mickiel

New member
The advent of the church building brought significant changes to church worship, along with increased membership. Constantine introduced candles and the burning of incense as part of the church service. Under Constantine's reign, the clergy, who had first worn every day clothes, began dressing in special garments.

The Roman custom of beginning a service with professional music was adopted. Choirs were developed ; worship became more professional, dramatic and ceremonial. These things affected Christianity in dramatic historical ways. There was a loss of intimacy and open participation. The clergy became professional performers who performed during the act of worship, while the members were now reduced to mere spectators.

This all was in the fourth century, and to this day, much of it remains intact.
 

fzappa13

Well-known member
In the minds of early Christianity , the people, not the architecture, constituted a sacred place. They did not even call themselves a church, or a temple or anything used to refer to a building. They worshiped in private homes, history did not see a " Church building" until the year 300. When Roman Catholicism evolved in the fourth to the sixth centuries, it absorbed many of the religious practices of both paganism and Judaism. It set up the professional priesthood. It erected sacred buildings.

Building churches would now change forever.

I am somewhat familiar with the history of the Christian religion and I have noted the transition of "the church" going from being people to being a building. I have sought to avoid that innovation.
 
Top