Introduction to Christianity

At least he actually contributed for once.

He quoted a bible verse, like what most theologians do. However, if you put that quote within it's proper historical and sociological context, it becomes a little clearer on why Christianity was able to spread the way it did.

Again, do you want to look at half a painting, or the entire painting. Get the whole picture; it's more rewarding.

>Question #1: What are the connections between Christianity and Judaism?
An Aramaic-speaking rabbi starts a movement which attracts Greek-speaking Hellenistic Jews who spread the teachings all over the Roman Empire.

We have two different religions by the time the Second Temple is destroyed, and again when Marcion comes up with the idea of a new canon and a New Testament (originally called New Covenant).

>Question #2: Is Jesus really the "Pacifist Hippie" that everyone portrays him as?
Jesus is an apocalyptic preacher that speaks more about hell than heaven.

The last time somebody did and say the things he did and say, he got crucified.

A 1st Century rabbi is not hippie.

>Question #3: In a rough percentage, how much of the Bible (excluding Genesis and Revelations) are historically accurate?
The Bible is not a historical treatise, ancient Jews are a stiff-necked, unreliable people according to their very own god.

>Question #4: Why did Christianity gain popularity and not just stay a Jewish mystery cult?
It never was. Jesus's target audience was all manner of lowlives and outcasts: widows, adulterers, prostitutes, tax collectors, thieves, murderers, etc.

When the Temple was around, the earliest Christians in Jerusalem performed the sacrifices.

The mystery cults that were attracted to Jesus were pre-existent, and "picked his teachings up."

>Question #5: On a scale of "no man's land" to "landmine field", approximately how many interpolations are possibly still left in the Bible?
Mainstream historians speak of 4 different sources for the Torah, it's a constant process of ancient Jews rewriting their own history.

>Question #6: In your own opinion, how good (in terms of morality) is Christianity compared to other religions?
Christians invented, or at least caused, secular morality as I experience it.

>a good starting point for me to learn
A History of God by Armstrong
Jewish Annotated New Testament
The Origins of Biblical Monotheism
Jewish Study Bible

2: there is no single version of jesus, its whatever the writer of that part needed him to be, from hippie to apocalyptic nutjob to rebellion leader
3: there is good evidence that jesus, just like moses, is made up completely from previous jewish myths about an archangel who got crucified by the devil
4: thats like asking why justin bieber is famous, its not necessarily on its own merits, there were a multitude of similar cults around (pic related) one was bound to make it
5: isnt no-man's land usually a minefield? but yeah, its a few
6: better than old testament but not great, its still about "do this or else", claims universal human emotions like empathy and wonder for itself telling you that if you feel them you owe that to this particular cult etc, and a bunch of tribal nonsense; it gets better the farther its divorced from the actual text, like redefining god to mean love or similar wordgames

I'm not saying the post was good or bad, just he didn't shitpost about Islam for once.

Indeed.

1. Judaism is the faith that introduced man to his essential relationship to his Creator, laying the foundations for what would come later in history in the person of Jesus Christ, in Whom man beholds himself as being essentially one with this Being, and Who calls us to live a life that will result in our being as close as possible to this Being.
2. The hippies used violence more than Jesus did. Jesus had a few outbursts of righteous violence, but He wasn't a violent revolutionary.
3. Going by the archaeological record, not much of the Old Testament. There are historical testimonies that a man named Jesus was executed in 33 A.D.
4. The obvious answer is that it's the one true faith. The better answer is that mystery cults were kind of dying out and the ancient world was looking for something new. Neoplatonism and Mithraism were contenders, for a while, but neither had the staying power of Christianity, which had much greater mass appeal than the others did. The Catholic Church made a point of finding continuity between old theologies and the new revealed religion in most places, too, which helped make it appealing.
5. I don't understand this question. There's one true interpretation, and one true process of induction into the denominations which subscribe to that interpretation, but there are as many individual interpretations as there are readers or hearers of the Word.
6. It's the best.

>The obvious answer is that it's the one true faith.
>It's the best.

Are we here to history? Or are we here to proselytize?

#1 Old Testament(Hebrew Books of the bible) is filled with several prophecies for the upcoming messiah. Jesus claims to be him. Jews denie it to this day.
#2 Yes
#3 Most events are exagerated or didn't even happened. There are several historically acurated cities and characters tou.
#4 Christianity was the perfect tool to unify roman population.
In century 3CE when Rome adopted Christianity as it's official religion just 5% of the entire population were christians.
#5 Hell ins't a place of torment. The heaven is not above in the clouds. The name Lucifer doens't appear in the bible. The dead cannot interact with us.
"landmine field" I say
#6 I can't get into faith (no-theist here). But Christianity was pretty useful to build our beloved western civilization and it deserves our protection.

Do these two verses make it sound like Christianity was meant to remain a "Jewish mystery cult"?

>And the gospel must first be preached to all nations.
Mark 13:10

>He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.''
Mark 16:15

What "historical and sociological context" has to be taken into account? It seems to me, from your OP and your reply to that user, that you're implying that it "spread by accident".

>In century 3CE when Rome adopted Christianity as it's official religion just 5% of the entire population were christians
[citation needed]
>The name Lucifer doens't appear in the bible
It is taken from the Latin Vulgate (Isaiah 14:12).

Interesting you ran into those conclusions when I said nothing of the sort. I was pointing out that Pauline Theology was one of the greatest catalyst for spreading Christianity to gentiles, because Paul himself was a gentile.

We know for a fact when reading James apostle and Paul's letters that Paul's theology clashed with the Mother Assemble in Jerusalem. In short, they did not get along. But in the end of the day, Paul's neglect to follow Mosianic Law won out over James' promotion to follow it fully. It was a this point, Christianity became more of a gentile religion than a Jewish sect.

And with the spread of the gentile religion through the Romans, it was only a matter of influence and time. The rest is indeed history.

*Epistle of James*

- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_4th_century#cite_note-5

- There is no doubt about it that Isaiah 14, which speaks of "Lucifer," is referring to the king of Babylon. In fact, the name "Lucifer" does not even appear in the Hebrew text. The Hebrew behind this translation consists of three words meaning "Helel son of Shachar", which is probably a name for the morning star (Venus), and thus is translated as "son of the morning star" by most translations. The translation of "Lucifer" was carried over from the reading in Jerome's Latin Vulgate, not the Hebrew text.

Hey OP, were you raised religiously?

Raised in a Protestant family and basically tried to leave it since I was 12, when I, just as any other teenager, discovered atheism.

read this for a theologically god-tier introduction
bookzz.org/book/2468541/667eb8

Will do, user!

>Question #1: What are the connections between Christianity and Judaism?
Jewish apocalyptic preacher gets the worst death penality for whatever reason (according to the gospel, his extravagant interpretation of the Torah pissed off some Jews who begged the Roman government to give him the death penality). People believe he was the Messiah announced in the OT by several prophets. Some guy called Paul claims he was oppressing this cult, until he had a divine vision and immediately joined said cult. Paul went around preaching this cult and warning of gnostic interpretations. However, he was at odds with the apostles of Jesus himself: Paul believed that Jesus was God, that the gospel should be announced to all gentiles, and that Jewish rules should not apply to them (circumcision for instance), while the elder apostles believed the contrary (James in particular, Jesus' brother, who didn't believe he was God incarnated).
Paul's cult eventually spreads faster because the univeralism of it impresses many people, and eventually Christianity was born. The Bible itself was compilated about 2-3 centuries later.

Question #2: Is Jesus really the "Pacifist Hippie" that everyone portrays him as?
Pacifist? Yes. Preached love & tolerance for everybody, treated everyone with equal respect (rich or poor, man or woman...) and let himself get arrested (and healed a soldier who was stabbed by one of his apostles). But he was an apocalyptic teacher warning people, not some relaxed guy being chillax. (cont)

Also, the reason given in the Bible for his execution is unlikely. It's more likely that he was thought to be stirring up rebellion against the Roman empire (although the gospel specifically points to it not being the case).

>Question #3: In a rough percentage, how much of the Bible (excluding Genesis and Revelations) are historically accurate?
Torah: I'd say ~20%. It is a bunch of different sources put together, some more recent than others. There is no way to prove somebody like Moses is not just a symbolic character if not an idealized interpretation of a more ancient person. There is no concrete proof that the Israelites were ever enslaved by Egypt. There is no proof that they ever left Canaan, really. There is nothing that indicates a bunch of soldiers suddenly drowning in the Red Sea at the same time. However, because the different sources can be made out separately and some have a very different intent from the others (see: YHWH being called El early on, and the implications that there are multiple gods but YHWH is just the one who chose Israel), we can assume that at least most of it is genuine, but in the end there is no real way to know how much of it is an oral tradition that retells events that did happen (although less ideally) and how much of it is WE WUZ SLAVES.

>Question #4: Why did Christianity gain popularity and not just stay a Jewish mystery cult?
Paul did a good job. And eventually it would end up becoming the main religion because of Constantine.

>Question #5: On a scale of "no man's land" to "landmine field", approximately how many interpolations are possibly still left in the Bible?
Not that many. Besides modern fringe cults (like Mormonism), the interpretations are:
>Catholic
>Orthodox
>"Jesus just wants us to be happy" Protestant
>"Fear the wrath of God you infidels" Protestant

cont.

>Question #6: In your own opinion, how good (in terms of morality) is Christianity compared to other religions?

This is going off the main interpretation of the religions (Catholic for Christianity, Sunni for Islam, etc) because otherwise this question makes no sense.
I'd say it's alright. But this has more to do with Western society and standards growing alongside Christianity than Christianity being ultimately all-good and all-superior. Jesus' call for nonviolence and loving everyone is nice but that's not what Christianity is all about. Questions such as homosexuality, for instance, are still a major issue.

>A mayor issue

Well, it was a huge step forwards during a time were human live was not much worth (human sacrifiece, brutal kinds of slavery and harsh ingroup-outgroup relations.)
Expecting to include homofaggotry acceptance makes only sense in very affluent societies were such a behaviour doesnt take away vital offspring that is needed.

Besides that, other people like ancient germanics threw their fags in bogs, with catholicism it could depend on the goodwill of the local priest who would often just demand that the offender would be shamed and be penant for a year. (As Pope Gregory III decreed in the 8th century.)

The dismemberment and killing returned during the 13th-16th century and therefore was probably a result of the people of that time and not only the religion itself.

So, the thing is that the non-Christian historical opinion of Christianity's origin was that Jesus was essentially preaching Judaism. You see, Jews believe that the reason the Second Temple was destroyed was because of, "baseless hatred." Basically, in Second Temple Judea, Jews treated each other like shit for no reason. Essentially what was happening was that Jesus was saying that, "Naw, Judaism teaches that people shouldn't act like that." The phrase, "Do unto others as you would do unto yourself," was quoted from the Rabbi Hillel, who basically said the statement describes the whole Torah. Now, you see, there was also the issue of the Samaritans. What you have to understand is that Samaritans believe in a religion that is very close to Judaism, but with a few key differences. They reject the Talmud and most of the Tanach, (the Tanach being the Old Testament,) and only accept the five books of Moses as their entire biblical canon. However, their version of the Torah is a different version than the usual Judeo-Christian one that basically replaces Mt. Sinai, Mt. Ararat, and Mt. Moriah with Mt. Gerizim. This means that they believe the place people are supposed to do sacrifices is on Mt. Gerizim near Shechem/Nablus, as opposed to Mt. Moriah in Jerusalem. The thing is, there was this whole story where the Samaritans wanted to have something to do with the Second Temple but the Jews refused because it wasn't the same religion and because of this the Samaritans went to the Persian emperor falsely claiming that the Jews were gonna rebel or something and so Persia decreed that they couldn't continue building the Second Temple anymore, (although obviously much later on it would be completed,) and this made Jews resent Samaritans. Basically, during Jesus' era, Samaritans were probably discriminated against, and the thing is, if Jews wouldn't even treat each other with respect, imagine how they would treat people they were historically in conflict with. cont.

But, Jesus said that goes against the whole, "Do unto others as you would do unto yourself," thing, and fought against it. Also, the thing is that various institutions had their members replaced with corrupt officials appointed by the Roman government. You know how the New Testament says that the High Priest was Jesus' worst enemy or something? Well, basically the position of High Priest, which was previously based on bloodline succession. was sold out to the highest bidder. Also, all of the good rabbis in the Sanhedrin had been replaced with people who were more willing to do whatever the Roman government asked. You see, the concept of a, "messiah," in Judaism implies an independent Jewish kingdom in Israel, and Israel was at the time under Roman occupation. Rome couldn't tolerate anyone whom people were claiming to be the messiah because it would mean he would kick the Romans out of the country. Also, the thing is that because the good rabbis were replaced by corrupt officials, Jesus was basically saying that what they were doing goes against everything the rabbis taught, and this offended them.

Now, about Christianity itself. The thing is that historians believe Christianity was initially just a sect of Jews who believed in everything Judaism taught, plus the idea that Jesus was the messiah. Now, the thing is that over time it was edging towards the Jewish-Christians actually worshiping Jesus, as opposed to just simply believing he was the messiah and not a god, and in Judaism that's considered idolatry, so that's sort of how the conflict between the mainstream Jewish and Judeo-Christian communities started.

The reason they were kicked out of synagogues was probably because they added something to the prayer-set that the Jewish congregations couldn't tolerate. You can actually see this with the messianic sect of the Chabad sect of Judaism, which has added things to prayers that are kinda blasphemous in Judaism. Now, you have to understand, most Jews consider there to be nothing wrong with the mainstream Chabad branch, and actually consider their dead leader Menachem Mendel Schneerson to have been one of the greatest Rabbis to have ever lived, but the thing is that there are a relatively small amount of people within Chabad that actually believe he will be resurrected as the messiah, to the point of almost worshiping him, that has spawned a sect that is eerily similar to the earliest forms of Christianity. So, if you ever wanted to see what that's like, you can look there.

Hope I informed you and didn't mess up any details.

I've never heard of a biblical event being definitively discredited by archaeological evidence, though, the good book does put its own spin on things. For example, there is evidence for exodus in Egypt, but, the Hebrews were not all slaves and it did not take place during the reign of Ramses II, it was just in the city that would come to be known as the city of Ramses.

Jesus was no hippie, it's even a common theory that ancient Judea only used the right hand in public so turning the other cheek would force the enemy to bring you in front of himself.

Read psalms 21

Check my facts if you're gonna use this info, but I hope it'll help.

youtu.be/7Ufce2P2NM4
youtu.be/hz3BLgCV-DQ

Ryan Reeves' lectures are pretty informative.
youtube.com/channel/UCrI5U0R293u9uveijefKyAA/videos

Also a glance at wikipedia would help.

Rotherham's seems to be the most accurate translation of the bible.
archive.org/details/emphasisedbible00rothgoog

Septuagint
archive.org/details/septuagintversio1900bren

Samaritan Pentateuch
sites.google.com/site/interlinearpentateuch/

>Christianity is the new hat, the thing better thing
>No he wasn't
>A lot of it
>Rome
>A good portion, which is why you have faggot "protestants" split from there churches like a cell and spreading what they believe is correct
>Better than others.

Would also recommend Ratzinger. The man's a treasure

>Is Jesus really the "Pacifist Hippie" that everyone portrays him as?
Well he's more that than the militant retributer that bible thumbing amerifats portray him to be.
This comes from taking revelation and the legality of the Torah too literally and overlooking the core of the Christian message; the gospel.

>Question #1: What are the connections between Christianity and Judaism?
Fulfillment of the old covenant and is a direct continuation of the pre-Christian judaic faith through faith in the messiah
>Question #2: Is Jesus really the "Pacifist Hippie" that everyone portrays him as?
No.
The first time I read the gospels I was surprised at how mean Jesus seemed. He's very much the stern leader that Christianity claims he his. Completely unwavering to sin, but absolutely merciful to those who repentant.
>Question #3: In a rough percentage, how much of the Bible (excluding Genesis and Revelations) are historically accurate?
From a secular or Christian perspective?
If you just want me to throw out a guess 70-80%? Even just a rough estimate of how much doesn't tell you what though
>Question #4: Why did Christianity gain popularity and not just stay a Jewish mystery cult?
Spread through the lower classes primarily (with exceptions of course) offering a message of hope and redemption
Later Constantine converted and his successors stamped paganism out with Roman force
>Question #5: On a scale of "no man's land" to "landmine field", approximately how many interpolations are possibly still left in the Bible?
None
>Question #6: In your own opinion, how good (in terms of morality) is Christianity compared to other religions?
Perfect

>1
The old testament which is in many parts mostly jewish holy books. The two faiths are linked through judaic massaniac traditions although the jews claim jesus fulfilled none of the messianic prophecies.
>2
Jesus literally beat bankers with sticks and blew up buildings
>3
Thats not the point of the bible, its about revelation and how one experiances faith. But historically speaking its around 30% history with embellishment, 30% reference historical fact, and 30% interpretation of historical peoples lives with 10% being things we can say are more theological and philosophical in nature.
>4
It provides for the poor as part of the doctrine and says all men are the same under god. In roman societies where 98% of the people are below the poverty line it clicks. That and constantines madman campaign.
>5
Millions. You can draw conclusions from scripture as you can draw conclusions from any book. Through the use of language and philosphy in people like Aquinas you can be monastic for 50 years and still be left with millions of questions.
>6
Depends on which christianity. That is ultimatly up to you to decide but some christians are way worse when it comes to keeping to their views than others. For instance im catholic but at this moment the pope is a traitor so im on a theological cliff atm looking for an anti-papist catholic institution.

*repent

The Gospel of Mark is the earliest form of the gospel and Mathew after that. Luke seems to embellish the story a bit.
The epistles are like a commentary of Jesus's preaching.
Modern scholars consider that six epistles; Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus; are of questionable authorship.
The authenticity of Revelations was disputed by the early church.

ntcanon.org/index.shtml

Jesus seemed to be less concerned with overly strict observance of Judaic law and the gospels quote more from later parts of the Old Testament.

>What are the connections between Christianity and Judaism?

Jesus and his early followers were all Jewish. Paul and the Gentiles he converted worked to distance the concepts from Judaism or portray the concepts as inferior

>Is Jesus really the "Pacifist Hippie" that everyone portrays him as?
It depends who is writing him. I do not think the Jesus discussing who speaks of revenge in the form of celestial punishment is the same Jesus as the one who is giving the Sermon on the mount or is willing to be killed with no Resistance (he does resist in John's Gospel I think though)

>In a rough percentage, how much of the Bible (excluding Genesis and Revelations) are historically accurate?
The Old Testament has major events which either never happened like the Exodus or are extremely exaggerated such as the success of the Jewish kingdoms. The New Testament is very hard to judge historically because it's pretty much the only source about what Jesus taught or did from the 1st century. The fact that each Gospel has contradictions means at least some of it is not accurate.

>Why did Christianity gain popularity and not just stay a Jewish mystery cult?
Paul

>approximately how many interpolations are possibly still left in the Bible
Old Testament: Unknown since we do not have an real old copies, textual analysis suggests it had major revision to point where old Judaism was a different religion entirely. Also the entire book of Deutrony is supposed to be a later addition, which alone is nearly 25% of the books of Moses.

New Testament shows signs of literal copy paste from other documents, like up Q source. The question is how accurate were these documents and what was the motive?

Christfags GET OUT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

No but seriously go to your board on infinity chan. Christians have a warped understanding of the world, thus they cannot know true history or humanities because they will always look through a Christian lense never objectively.

>Saying this while benefiting from a society ultimately derived from Wester Christian principles

*Western

>Saying this while benefiting from a society ultimately derived from Wester Christian principles
most of the Enlightenment thinkers were deists though

What's that, is that what I think it is?

Actual intelligent commentary upon the christian religion instead of endless apologist horseshit and nonsense wrapped in fire and brimstone tinged fearmongering?

Not bad user, not bad at all.

> Still based most of thir principles on Christian principles

*their

not really. the enlightenment is fundamentally different earlier christian ruled periods of europe. just because the ideas came about in societies dominated by christianity doesn't mean the ideas are fundamentally christian, especially if a lot of the thinkers weren't even christian

Question #1: What are the connections between Christianity and Judaism?

There's a lot, but the main one has to do with covenants. The first covenant in the bible is God's covenant with abraham, basically saying that his descendants will outnumber the stars if he follows him. This covenant is the basis for the jewish faith more or less. Then, jesus comes along and creates a new covenant with god, basically saying that "whosoever believes in me will not die, but have eternal life". So therefore Christianity is, very basically, Judaism 2, equality boogaloo.

Question #2: Is Jesus really the "Pacifist Hippie" that everyone portrays him as?

Kind of, I wouldn't go as far to say he was a socialist, but he was very reactionary to the material wealth and debauchery the Romans brought with them to Palestine. He was also pretty egalitarian, especially towards women and people of lower class. So he was kind of a hippie.

Question #3: In a rough percentage, how much of the Bible (excluding Genesis and Revelations) are historically accurate?

A lot of the old testament is handed-down oral tradition dating back thousands of years. But hey, myth is the smoke of history.

New testament is a bit more complicated, since it's pretty much literally the only source on early christianity from the time of early christianity, so it's pretty much up in the air whether that shit happened or not.

(Cont.)

Question #4: Why did Christianity gain popularity and not just stay a Jewish mystery cult?
Paul.
Basically very early on Christianity started out as a Jewish-specific Jesus cult, they still circumcised their babies, still worshiped in a synagogue, still called their priests rabbis and shit. Then Gentile christians start appearing, and the early christian church starts having an identity crisis. Does it remain a jewish messianic cult, or does it become more inclusive? The answer was basically both, and gentile christian communities formed and grew alongside jewish christian communities. Gentile christians obviously quickly outgrew the Jewish christian communities, as the jewish christians were also being ostracized by mainline jewish sects, but Messianic Jews still exist.

Question #5: On a scale of "no man's land" to "landmine field", approximately how many interpolations are possibly still left in the Bible?

An user above interpreted this question as in a question of historical authenticity, but I think you mean contested meanings of verses. Now, there aren't a lot of them, because most of the time people don't result to violence to solve theological crises, in protestantism we just schism, and the catholics just fall in line with the pope nowadays. but still the "this is the rock(or peter) on which i build my church" is a pretty heated verse, but really people don't get all ruffled over that stuff much anymore.

(cont again.)

Thanks, user! It feels kinda weird having this sort of niceness in Veeky Forums of all places, but I'll take what I can. Again, thank you!

Will do!

Dude, I'm just trying to learn here. No proselytizing, m8. Just good ol' discussions.

Take the bread pill.

2. No, this is an attempt by cultural marxists to convince people that 'free love' and liberalism is ok. In fact Christianity asks of its followers discipline.
3. There are different theories and in my opinion none of them good. Historians agree that most of the New Testament is true in some form.

The historical FACTS are as follows:
1. Jesus was a person
2. Jesus was baptized
3. Jesus performed exorcisms (or was percieved to by his contemporaries)
4. Jesus called disciples
5. Jesus made a big scene at the temple
6. Jesus was killed on a cross
7. His followers believed him to reserrected

The rest all has varying degrees of 'historical value' depending on which scholar you ask. Of course by definition a miracle isn't historical because miracles by defintion have a low probability of occuring and historical facts are defined as events that have a high probabability of occuring. Thus the issue will require faith at some point.

4. Great question there were a lot of other Jewish mystery cults at the time and only Christianity exploded like wildfire across the Roman Empire. The christians obviously have their answer, if you come up with an explanation without appealing to the Holy Spirit you'll have a name for yourself in the academic world.

5. I don't know what that means

6. Christian morality is the dominant and true morality. Islam is an obvious copy but with a twist in that Muhammed would make up the rules as he needed the r ules to change in his lifetime, see his child bride, his rules on conquest, and killing. Each made up conveniently as he needed a bride, and to conquest.

Buddhism has a very very similiar ethic to christianity. In fact Buddhist monks and Christian Monks practice in almost the exact same way. The only difference is of course the vegetarianism of buddhist. MAYBE there is something going on there or maybe its just proof of the superiority of those moral systems as they were developed independantly.

Some of them were but they still developed their minds in a Christian worldview.

Not to mention look how fucked things have been since the enlightenment.

>Buddhism has a very very similiar ethic to christianity. In fact Buddhist monks and Christian Monks practice in almost the exact same way. The only difference is of course the vegetarianism of buddhist. MAYBE there is something going on there or maybe its just proof of the superiority of those moral systems as they were developed independantly.

No. Buddhist meditation is very different from Christian prayer.

The fact that you are attempting to say the two are compatible is so outrageously faulty I almost feel bad for you. The "practice" is VERY different.

One tries to fill their cup, the other is trying to empty it. One is pouring their energy into a single point, the other is dissolving thought.

>king james

Droped.

>Question #1: What are the connections between Christianity and Judaism?
Jesus is the promised Messiah, the Anointed One, spoken of by Moses and the prophets. Those who believed became Christians; those who did not remained Jews.

>Question #2: Is Jesus really the "Pacifist Hippie" that everyone portrays him as?
Not in the slightest. He killed 185,000 of Sennacharib's soldiers overnight when they besieged Jerusalem; He killed the first born of every Egyptian during the Exodus, and then killed the pharoah and their entire army; He is indeed the Lord of Hosts.

>Question #3: In a rough percentage, how much of the Bible (excluding Genesis and Revelations) are historically accurate?
100%.

>Question #4: Why did Christianity gain popularity and not just stay a Jewish mystery cult?
The power of God manifested in the lives of the believers.

>Question #5: On a scale of "no man's land" to "landmine field", approximately how many interpolations are possibly still left in the Bible?
The bible is as God, infinite and unknowable. Paul said we see things as through a glass, darkly.

>Question #6: In your own opinion, how good (in terms of morality) is Christianity compared to other religions?
Without God, there is no objective basis for morality. With the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob there is not only an objective basis, but 613 commandments by which a man can attempt to live.

Christianity is not something you can stick your toe into and see if you like it. It's a permanent transformation from a spiritually dead human being into a spiritually living new creation in Christ Jesus.

If you want to become a Christian, you must do what God says you must do; you must confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead. Do this, and you will be saved. (Rom. 10:9-10)

Holy shit, the proselytizing in this thread is out of control.

>Boy do I love lies!

Get high and attend a latin rite liturgy.

Not that user, but what about it was lies?
Historically, that post is accurate.

>Jesus and his early followers were all Jewish. False. Many Gentiles also followed Jesus. The woman who was cured of a bleeding disorder; the Samaritan woman; several Roman centurions, likely dozens if not hundreds more. The 12 were just the inner circle.

>Paul..worked to distance the concepts from Judaism,...inferior
The New Covenant is inherently superior to the Old Covenant. Paul did not make up something on his own. He did as Jesus told him.

>It depends who is writing him. I do not think the Jesus discussing who speaks of revenge ...is the same Jesus
Same Jesus. He'll save you, or He will kill you and cast you into hellfire.

>The Old Testament has major events which either never happened ... Exodus
That's a lie right there. And from a Jew!

>or are extremely exaggerated such as the success of the Jewish kingdoms.
The world trembled with Israel marched. Just ask Jericho.

>The fact that each Gospel has contradictions
NONE. ZERO. LIAR.

>>Why did Christianity gain popularity and not just stay a Jewish mystery cult?
>Paul
Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Paul is the greatest apostle, but he's just the messenger.

>>approximately how many interpolations are possibly still left in the Bible
>Old Testament: Unknown since we do not have an real old copies
Qumran is pretty frickin' old, and 99.8% intact.

>New Testament shows signs of literal copy paste from other documents, like up Q source.
There is no Q. It's a hypothetical construct

All lies. All Jewish lies.

>He did as Jesus told him.
I don't need to read anymore of your post. You are clearly approaching this from an theological perspective and NOT a historical perspective.

Nevermind. I just read the rest of your post, you are clearly a /pol/tard troll.

Move along.

And you CLEARLY rule the supernatural events out of history based on your own NORMALCY BIAS, even though every single country's history is replete with supernatural events!

>NORMALCY BIAS

I am normal because I don't believe in supernatural shit. The most hilarious thing is, you actually are trying to insult me, but this is an enormous compliment in academic circles. You are clearly not an academic.

Normalcy bias. lol. That is too good user.

>Please introduce me to Christianity

Sure.

Listening to people that preach God while taking good care not to do as they preach and whose results aren't the ones they claim you would get is akin to listening to a bunch lunatics that want to hurt you and suggest you "wash" your hands with a flamethrower instead of with soap and water like it should be done and like they seem to be doing, even if they happen to have a hygiene manualdetailing the use of a flamethrower for hands cleaning.
Yet, if you go, use the flamethrower and your hands hurt and seem to be worse off than they were before, all they will claim is: you must have faith.
Of course, if you had a brain, you would observe how they clean themselves with clean water and soap so you would stop doing it with a flamethrower, and you would already start trying to figure out who these people are, why do they lie so much and who can fix your hands. And if you do call the doctor, sooner or later he will tend your wounds.
And yes, not much imagination is required to deduce what kind of being would want you to have for a religion a flamethrower for your soul. They are incapable of demonstrating their allegiance to God for a reason.
And yes, those who haven't been given a law yet, aren't liale to a law yet, which doesn't mean you should ignore God, as this is not wise and you will fall in their hands and they will force that flamethrower.

---------------------------

And if somebody pretends to present a book as sole evidence for what God would want, I present you here this instruciton manual for modern policemen, pic related.

user, I asked for historians, not proselytizers.

Yes, that's why you're an idiot, and I'm not.

D-did you just hit keys at random?

Oh, my bad. I thought you wanted answers. Carry on with your ignorant self. Keep thinking losers with lol liberal arts degrees know anything worth knowing.

T. Proddie

>>And you CLEARLY rule the supernatural events out of history based on your own NORMALCY BIAS,
You are one assmad little moron.

>>herp derp normalcy bias
lol

>>even though every single country's history is replete with supernatural events!
I'd make some sort of smartass comment here asking if you believe in various other religions too but you'd probably just say that they are all deceived by the devil and worshipping demons and other such stupid shit.

Ah well, it was a nice thread while it lasted.

Pic related, only replace religious people with religious apologists for the actual truth of the matter.

The Normalcy Bias condition is well known to psychologists and sociologists. It refers to a mental state of denial in which individuals enter into when facing a disaster or pending danger. Normalcy Bias leads people to underestimate and minimize both the possibility of a catastrophe actually happening, as well as its possible consequences to their health and safety.
The Normalcy Bias often results in situations where people fail to prepare for a likely and impending disaster. The Normalcy Bias leads people believe that since something has never happened before, that it never will happen. Therefore, like an infant with a security blanket we cling to our habitual, repetitive, and normal way of life, despite overwhelming proof that serious danger lies ahead.

The only people with a warped understanding of the world are ones like you

>Paul himself was a gentile.
I thought he was a pharisee?

And I'm sure you would start complaining if I started talking about Prometheus gifting fire to Mankind and Zeus getting eternally butthurt, you stupid Chaos Worshiper.

Since I have a write up in another thread I will post here about Jesus and Capitalism:

*sigh* Its like you people don't even read your own Bible.

Matthew 19:24

Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” 25When the disciples heard this they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”…

The New Testament contains references to usury, notably in the Parable of the talents:

"Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.."
—Matthew 25:27

"…Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow. Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?"
—Luke 19:22-23

The following scriptures teach about lending:

"Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."
—Matthew 5:42

"And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked."
—Luke 6:34-35

"Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

So yeah... The Orthodox still adhear to Jesus's teachings about wealth. Usury is a big nono and its a the cornerstone of capitalism.

The day you will see "supernatural shit" you may get a heart attack. I truly hope you'll have accepted Jesus' divinity by then.

>He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am He you will die in your sins.”
John 8:23-24

Too spooky bro

>The sea became rough because a strong wind was blowing. When they had rowed about three or four miles, they saw Jesus walking on the sea and coming near the boat, and they were frightened. But He said to them, “It is I; do not be afraid.”
John 6:18-20

The basic problem with religions is that they have failed to evolve. Most of them rely on foundations that are hundreds or thousands of years old. Mostly devised for illiterate peasants living short and brutish lives in poverty and scraping an existence in an otherwise lawless, unhygienic, and violent insecure environment.

I have a degree in it pussy. Also the Dalai Llama himself says this, its not my thesis. Back to undergraduate for you.

get a job user
You're on these /christ/ threads 24/7.
It's obvious you don't work. Move out of parents house and get a job. Your parents will thank you.

I'm on vacation.

Cute, but you are a fucking idiot, because I'm the one with a degree in Religious Studies with an emphasis in Comparative Religion.

The Dalai Llama is but one of thousands of Buddhist leaders, He's not the fucking Pope of Buddhism, retard. The fact that you brought up the Dalai Llama just proves you are some liberal douche kid who acts like he fucking knows what buddhism is because he watched a documentary at some point.

You probably have never even fucking read the Lotus Sutra.

Also, pic related

This is just what I have out currently on my desk.
I'm the grad student here son, you are the obvious undergrad.

Why the fuck are you here if you don't want to discuss shit like this?

Exactly, it's the current year guys. Time to get rid of everything.

Wait, what did my questions have with capitalism?

reading a couple of books titled "buddhism" makes you an expert of buddhism hahaha

Those books are all primary sources. You're more of a god damn idiot than I previously imagined.

>he doesn't even have Griffiths or Collins in his collection
>he has a bunch of zen books instead

kek. Fuck off. First rule of rel. studies is to listen to those who practice it. Dalai Llama is a buddhist religious authority unless your riding the dinky vehicle like an indian pleb.

Also all the Zen buddhism. Might as well kill yourself you wiiabu.
zen isnt even buddhism
t. matsumoto

ps i have red the lotus sutra

I'd add Paul Tillich's "The courage to be".