|
Post by amyghost on Mar 17, 2023 13:16:01 GMT
However, there are still schisms in The One True Church. I know you are not, but anyone who uses this phrase about any church is more telling us how insecure they are rather than talking about the benefit of any religion. I was using the phrase in its purely ironic sense. Not, as some believers do, a quite straight-faced and serious one. But you knew that already .
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Mar 17, 2023 15:22:47 GMT
Okay, I already shot this down earlier, but people kept whining. Actually, Paul himself shot this down earlier. There's no possible way he was responsible for the spread of Christianity. It's impossibe. He's the one who told people to welcome the persecution even unto death. He preached this. He had anyone embracing the belief in Christ dying for it. And the Roman empire obliged them. When you read that an emperor was "kinder" towards Christians than other emperors, it only means that particular emperor didn't send people out to search for Christians to kill. In Nature, it's impossible to keep alive when you're dead. Christians were being wiped out, and there were plenty of incentives for people to turn Christians in to authorities. Read the letters of Paul himself. Christianity survived DESPITE Paul, and anyone who says it survived because of Paul is either lying or totally ignorant of History. Only a supernatural principality (probably the Holy Ghost) could possibly have kept it going. I've got news for you. If you start a religion and have a thousand followers, and all thousand of you jump off a 1000 foot cliff into jagged rocks, that religion dies unless you have some supernatural force to keep it going. Seems like the only person who is whining here is you. Because people have an opinion you disagree with. But please go on and whine like a baby, because people don`t agree with you. Thanks for proving my points by saying that your whining that you don't like the historical record is "people don't agree with you"
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 17, 2023 18:58:57 GMT
I would say that there are 3 people responsible for it, Jesus is not one of them Paul for spreading Christianity Okay, I already shot this down earlier, but people kept whining. Actually, Paul himself shot this down earlier. There's no possible way he was responsible for the spread of Christianity. It's impossibe. He's the one who told people to welcome the persecution even unto death. He preached this. He had anyone embracing the belief in Christ dying for it. And the Roman empire obliged them. When you read that an emperor was "kinder" towards Christians than other emperors, it only means that particular emperor didn't send people out to search for Christians to kill. In Nature, it's impossible to keep alive when you're dead. Christians were being wiped out, and there were plenty of incentives for people to turn Christians in to authorities. Read the letters of Paul himself. Christianity survived DESPITE Paul, and anyone who says it survived because of Paul is either lying or totally ignorant of History. Only a supernatural principality (probably the Holy Ghost) could possibly have kept it going. I've got news for you. If you start a religion and have a thousand followers, and all thousand of you jump off a 1000 foot cliff into jagged rocks, that religion dies unless you have some supernatural force to keep it going. The only people persecuting Christians in Paul’s day were Jews. They were not on the Roman radar as anything as just another sect of Jews. Nero blamed the fire on Christians as an easy target, not because of their barely formed religion. Paul preached righteous in preparation for Jesus’ imminent return when Christ would lead those who believed in him into the New Kingdom.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Mar 17, 2023 19:44:52 GMT
Just as there are in all religions (the divisions within Christianity must receive the most emphasis, when it comes to discussing world religions). No one has denied this. Not to belabor it, but you are the one who initially denied any type of schism within Catholicism, which is certainly readily shown as otherwise. And only in the Western tradition does Christianity need receive first emphasis in this context. In the rest of the world, where Christianity plays a considerably minuter part, it's a tempest in a teacup which the overwhelming majority of the rest of humanity could not care less about. Catholicism, no; there wasn't. However, there was a schism between Catholicism & Orthodoxy. Yes, there is Roman (Western) Catholicism, & then there is Eastern-Rite Catholicism. However, Eastern-Rite Catholicism are actually Churches that were originally part of Orthodox Christian Churches, but, broke away to return to the Authority of the Papacy.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Mar 17, 2023 20:42:22 GMT
Okay, I already shot this down earlier, but people kept whining. Actually, Paul himself shot this down earlier. There's no possible way he was responsible for the spread of Christianity. It's impossibe. He's the one who told people to welcome the persecution even unto death. He preached this. He had anyone embracing the belief in Christ dying for it. And the Roman empire obliged them. When you read that an emperor was "kinder" towards Christians than other emperors, it only means that particular emperor didn't send people out to search for Christians to kill. In Nature, it's impossible to keep alive when you're dead. Christians were being wiped out, and there were plenty of incentives for people to turn Christians in to authorities. Read the letters of Paul himself. Christianity survived DESPITE Paul, and anyone who says it survived because of Paul is either lying or totally ignorant of History. Only a supernatural principality (probably the Holy Ghost) could possibly have kept it going. I've got news for you. If you start a religion and have a thousand followers, and all thousand of you jump off a 1000 foot cliff into jagged rocks, that religion dies unless you have some supernatural force to keep it going. The only people persecuting Christians in Paul’s day were Jews. They were not on the Roman radar as anything as just another sect of Jews. Nero blamed the fire on Christians as an easy target, not because of their barely formed religion. Paul preached righteous in preparation for Jesus’ imminent return when Christ would lead those who believed in him into the New Kingdom. Good grief. Now you whiners are whining that Nero didn't exist. biblehub.com/library/pamphilius/church_history/chapter_xxv_the_persecution_under_nero.htm
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 17, 2023 20:52:20 GMT
The only people persecuting Christians in Paul’s day were Jews. They were not on the Roman radar as anything as just another sect of Jews. Nero blamed the fire on Christians as an easy target, not because of their barely formed religion. Paul preached righteous in preparation for Jesus’ imminent return when Christ would lead those who believed in him into the New Kingdom. Good grief. Now you whiners are whining that Nero didn't exist. biblehub.com/library/pamphilius/church_history/chapter_xxv_the_persecution_under_nero.htm Nero blamed the fire on Christians as an easy target, not because of their barely formed religion. Say what again?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Mar 17, 2023 20:59:57 GMT
Nero blamed the fire on Christians as an easy target, not because of their barely formed religion. Say what again? You heard him, and he's right.
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 17, 2023 21:01:37 GMT
The only people persecuting Christians in Paul’s day were Jews. They were not on the Roman radar as anything as just another sect of Jews. Nero blamed the fire on Christians as an easy target, not because of their barely formed religion. Paul preached righteous in preparation for Jesus’ imminent return when Christ would lead those who believed in him into the New Kingdom. Good grief. Now you whiners are whining that Nero didn't exist. biblehub.com/library/pamphilius/church_history/chapter_xxv_the_persecution_under_nero.htmEusebius wrote that in 313 CE. Tacitus wrote this a few decades after the event.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Mar 17, 2023 23:15:19 GMT
No one has denied this. Not to belabor it, but you are the one who initially denied any type of schism within Catholicism, which is certainly readily shown as otherwise. And only in the Western tradition does Christianity need receive first emphasis in this context. In the rest of the world, where Christianity plays a considerably minuter part, it's a tempest in a teacup which the overwhelming majority of the rest of humanity could not care less about. Catholicism, no; there wasn't. However, there was a schism between Catholicism & Orthodoxy. Yes, there is Roman (Western) Catholicism, & then there is Eastern-Rite Catholicism. However, Eastern-Rite Catholicism are actually Churches that were originally part of Orthodox Christian Churches, but, broke away to return to the Authority of the Papacy. And created schisms in the process.
|
|