The Gospel According To .... Thomas?

[Octavianus]

If early Christianity survived because it was more attractive than the other religions of the time, what had seeming disappeared by the 19th century that it was dubbed a slave religion?

I appreciate your illustration of the decline around the 3rd century onward. I also appreciate your descriptions of the refusal of early Christians to pay tribute to the emporer and the reasons for the Roman's intolerance to this. These matters are emphasised by historical record and fit well into what can be expected of human behaviour.

But there remains the question, what was so attractive with early Christianity that so many were prepared to identify with it and not any other cult, of which there were many?

There were many rebellions against Roman rule. In almost every case, the sources of these died out. I appreciate Judaism didn't but there are many other factors.

Yet this single cult survived. Not only survived, but was eventually nationalised by the Romans and adopted in place of all others.

I am not really familiar with 19th and 20th century phylosophy because I just started to look into it. So you will have to forgive my ignorance in this field. I think religion as a whole lost its appeal due to the advance of science. In the last few ages we have made such progress in understanding nature that we don't grasp to supernatural explanations to fill the unknown. What we don't understand today will be explained tomorrow. The Greek physician Hippocrates saw this early on. He wrote: "Men think of epilepsy as divine because they do not understand it. One day we will know what causes it and we will stop calling it divine"
I think that with the rise of logic empiricism with the Wiener Kreis the separation between belief and science was complete

Whey you look at the Roman Empire, I don't  think there was that much resistance against it. The brave tales of resistance to the Roman oppressors are mostly exaggarated due nationalism.  This is because the "conquered" tribes were slowly assimilated. The Romans respected their way of life: they could keep their gods and customs and the locals were mostly eager to romanize. One of the few interventions of Roman rule on local tribes was for example the ban on human sacrifice in Britania.
Parts of Gaul were so peaceful that many never saw a soldier in their entire life. This peace was called the "Pax Romana" ("Roman peace", the 200 year peace created by Augustus), and was maintained by use of propaganda. This peace ended by the rule of emperor Commodus (You may know him from the movie Gladiator). The most unruly parts were the German border and Judea. At the German border it was due to cruel oppression by general Varus, In Judea it was because of the oppression of Christians and Jews.

If we are to believe Roman historians, early Christianity was identified by true fanaticism. They were standing on the streets offering passing men to cut their throats. It reminds one of some Islamic cults today. This willingness to sacrifice themselves, this martyrdom made a great impression on the common people. The reason Christianity had an appeal to the common people was because of this fanaticism, and because it offered a great reward in the afterlife for the common people. A slave would be free in heaven. This was in contradiction with the Roman belief that the afterlife would be a reflection of daily life: a nobody would still be a nobody. Only by climbing the social ladder or by acts of braveness on the battle field could a Roman achieve a better afterlife.
Christianity was never used to unify the Empire. At the time of Constantine the empire was carved up in 4 regions with their own rulers as an attempt to create a better management to combat the political and economical crisis. But instead this resulted in the 4 "emperors" fighting each other for power. Constantine was 1 of them. According to legend Constantine saw a cross in the sky and recieved a dream in which Christ appeared telling Constantine to fight in his sign just before the battle Maxentius. He ordered his legionaires to paint the Chi-Rho sign on their shield. Constantine won the battle, effectively converting him and his army to Christianity. Eventually he became the emperor of the entire empire making Christianity the state religion and forcing it on the people. But this came with a lot of resistance.
I think it is safe to say that the conversion to Christianity was due to luck. No one knows what would happen if Constantine would have lost the battle against Maxentius.

[Suzy]

I think it is safe to say that the conversion to Christianity was due to luck...

Well, bad luck I would say then.  In the main, the church did not thrive after it became "official."  The institution perhaps became much more powerful, but that is a far cry from saying that the church thrived.

This conversation has run a lot of different courses, but I think the secondary question asked was why the church survived and grew in the environment of the Roman empire.  And no, the persecution of the church at the hands of both the Jews and the Romans was not some kind of fanciful invention.  If you really believe that, then I suggest you read the excellent work Martyrs Mirror by Thieleman J. van Braght which is the story of Christian martyrdom from the time of Christ through approximately 1660.  (I am also sure that another volume could fill the time to the present.)  It is just shy of 1200 pages and is very revealing.  Each page contains approximately 3 different martyrdom accounts, and each account may be an individual or an entire group.  To make a long story short, persecution was very real and gruesome according to actual eyewitness accounts.

What would possibly make people attracted to follow something like Christianity in those early days?

Before I give my answer, I want to make it very clear that people's willingness to follow a certain ideal, or perhaps even die for it, does not, in and of itself, make it a truth.  Observe things such as Adolph Hitler, Heaven's Gate, Jim Jones, etc.   All of their leaders, and most of their followers even gave their lives to follow that belief. 

Nor can we assume that just because an organization grows, it is the truth.  I think of many of the holiness hucksters out there with megafollowings who are into little beside megabucks and manipulation in the name of their religion.  These are, IMHO, charlatans of the worst kind.

However, it cannot be denied that, despite all of the persecution and  attempts to eradicate the church, it has continued to grow.  Most notably, it has always grown in times and places of persecution.  What would make 11 disciples give their lives as martyrs?  What would make Paul give up his position of power and wealth to serve this risen Jesus, enduring immeasurable hardships along the way?  In our own day, what would make people in countries such as Iraq, China, Colombia, Iran, Pakistan, Cyprus, Algeria, Sudan, North Korea, (and many more) follow Christ at the risk of being killed?  In fact, an average of 171,000 Christians worldwide are martyred for their faith per year.   So why follow this way of life?

For me the answer has always been the same.  And it is quite simple actually.  The early church father Tertullian quotes an investigation into the faith by those outside trying to figure out just this question:
"Vide", inquiunt, "ut invicem se diligant"  "et ut pro alteruto mori sint parati"
"Look," they say, "how they love one another" "and how they are ready to die for each other"
(Text is CSEL 69; translation is Glover, Loeb edition.)

Jesus told his followers, according to John 15:9-11,  "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you; abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love. These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full."

Loving one another?  Giving up of ourselves for one another?  Being willing to lay down our very lives to love another, and to testify to this love?  Forgiving one another and being forgiven?  Yes, it is a radical way of life, the way exemplified by Jesus.  And in a time of persecution, it seems that this need is so powerful that the legalism is stripped away from Christianity, and this amazing core remains.  Moreover, this core truth is so strong that it attracts people to it.

How would the world be different if we really took to heart the things Jesus said, rather than some kind of cultural religion?  For example,
"But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you." Matthew 5:44

Who would want to follow such a practice even in the face of persecution? ? ? ?

Obviously the early Christians did.  Obviously, some of still do today.

[spacial]

Thank you Octavianus. That is begining to make a lot more sense now.

Your point:

This was in contradiction with the Roman belief that the afterlife would be a reflection of daily life: a nobody would still be a nobody.

I feel I should have noticed. The pieces are now fitting together.

The philosophy of the 19th and 20th centuaries is marked by its enormous diversity. Like most other fields, there was a huge amount of work done by so many.

I know you to be a pretty studious person so I have a feeling you will probably take a much more catholic approach to it. I tended to treat it as I treat most areas I've looked at, by finding those which have the information I need for the objectives I have.

As you can imagine, its a bit of a ragged approach to study, but I convince myself that, since I'm pnly trying to satisfy myself, I can break rules. Kinda like cheating at patience. 

I don't generally recommend books. When people do so to me, I usually respond by saying I already have a book.

But Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosphy is an excellent taster. He was a long time pacifist activist and was consequently imprisoned during WW1. Then, with the logic only Russell could manage, found a way to come to some sort of terms with WW2.

As a result, his name is frequently held in some disdain her in the UK. If you ask people why, they rarely know. My mother threw out a copy of a Russell book I had when I was in my teens. She said she wouldn't have it in the house.

Anyway. Thanks for the insights. It's given me enough to look into the matter more carefully

[spacial]

Thank you so much for your post Kristy.

I personal find one of the problems in discussing Christianity in a mixed group is that the essential notions are frequently jaded by repitition. I actively avoid quoting from the Gospels for this reason, for this reason, insisting they can only be read in context.

This statement does neatly sum up early Christian practice.

"Look," they say, "how they love one another" "and how they are ready to die for each other"

[Octavianus]

Thank you very much for your comments Kristi and Spacial, I will take a look at the lecture you have recommended as soon as I can find the time. It looks promising as this is a very interesting subject. It explains how whe have come to this point and why we believe what we believe. But there are too many things going on right now which I need to understand and have the absolute priority that I have to save it for later. So please forgive my limited understanding of the subjects covered in this discussion.

[Julie Marie]

History tells us Christians were persecuted, tortured and killed.  History also tells us Christians persecuted, tortured and killed.  History is also filled with stories of Christians "saving" the savages, pagans and anyone else who practiced a religion they didn't believe in or accept, by brute force if necessary.  Many people who refused to accept the Christian faith were executed.  How many other religious faiths can claim campaigns like the Crusades, the Inquisitions or Holy Wars created to stomp out apostacy and heresy or whatever else got in the way of their religious beliefs?

Christianity was often "spread" by the sword, forcing people to accept, or else.  Is it any wonder people didn't feel so loving toward Christians?  It was their way or the highway.  What about MYOB!?!

Today, at least in the US, Christians (many, not all) continue to persecute, discriminate and torture those who don't accept their beliefs.  And we are on that list.  I don't think Jesus Christ ever envisioned that for his "followers".

[Tammy Hope]

History tells us Christians were persecuted, tortured and killed.  History also tells us Christians persecuted, tortured and killed.  History is also filled with stories of Christians "saving" the savages, pagans and anyone else who practiced a religion they didn't believe in or accept, by brute force if necessary.  Many people who refused to accept the Christian faith were executed.  How many other religious faiths can claim campaigns like the Crusades, the Inquisitions or Holy Wars created to stomp out apostacy and heresy or whatever else got in the way of their religious beliefs?

Christianity was often "spread" by the sword, forcing people to accept, or else.  Is it any wonder people didn't feel so loving toward Christians?  It was their way or the highway.  What about MYOB!?!

Today, at least in the US, Christians (many, not all) continue to persecute, discriminate and torture those who don't accept their beliefs.  And we are on that list.  I don't think Jesus Christ ever envisioned that for his "followers".

while there is a sordid history, i think it is often too easy for people to mix the failings of human lust for power with the failings of a belief system

there is no legitimate way to read the words of the new Testament and find there the philosophy "take up the sword and conquer in my name"

THAT is not true Christianity, nor what powerless Christians practiced.

What happened once the church had state power was FAR more a function of human power-lust, not religion. Organized Religion is prey, just as any other human organization, to the baser instincts of the men who make it up. "power corrupts" and all that.

It is true that after hundreds of years of false indoctrination by church leaders, there was a culture created which we (in particular) still suffer from, because the powerless all too often trusted those who held power over them until it became a situation in which no one could remember a time when anyone thought anything other than, for instance, that god hates gays.

But i still maintain that the problems that are "caused by religion" in our society are not in fact caused by religion, they are caused by "power corrupts"

the faith itself, true or not, doesn't contain the hatefulness that is often manifest in some of the faithful.

[spacial]

History tells us Christians were persecuted, tortured and killed.  History also tells us Christians persecuted, tortured and killed.  History is also filled with stories of Christians "saving" the savages, pagans and anyone else who practiced a religion they didn't believe in or accept, by brute force if necessary.  Many people who refused to accept the Christian faith were executed.  How many other religious faiths can claim campaigns like the Crusades, the Inquisitions or Holy Wars created to stomp out apostacy and heresy or whatever else got in the way of their religious beliefs?

Christianity was often "spread" by the sword, forcing people to accept, or else.  Is it any wonder people didn't feel so loving toward Christians?  It was their way or the highway.  What about MYOB!?!

Today, at least in the US, Christians (many, not all) continue to persecute, discriminate and torture those who don't accept their beliefs.  And we are on that list.  I don't think Jesus Christ ever envisioned that for his "followers".

Backing up Tammy's point, sadly, people misuse many terms and distort many things to gain power.

N Korea calls itself democratic for example.

It's significant that, from around the time of Constantine until the reformation the Gospels were kept from almost everyone. Partly by the insistance of them being distributed in Latin but also restrictions on their distribution.

We should also remember that the issue that brought about the reformation was the sale of indulgencies, which the corrupt leaders claimed, along with almost everything else, was justified by scripture.

Even following the reformation and even today, there remains enormous misunderstanding and corruption of the teachings of Jesus. Both Bush and Blair claimed to be inspired by the Bible to order the mass murder in Iraq and Afghanistan!

But those that misuse the Gospels for their own ends are on the same level as those in N Korea who claim to be democratic.

In recent years, expecially in the last 50 or so years, there seems to be an increasing number of claims seeking to pour doubt on the authenticity of the Gospels especailly, but much of the Bible as well.

When I was a child I recall the claims that none of the texts had been written at the time of Jesus, the earliest being written some 70s years after He died.

The reality, of course, is that that is simply the oldest surving text, not the same thing at all.

Another was the Secret Vatican Archives and what they might contain. In the late 60s, that caused quite a stirr.

The so call rejected texts conjour up notions of a cover up.

Yet, those who take the trouble to actually read the texts can find little to really object to.

[Suzy]

History tells us Christians were persecuted, tortured and killed.  History also tells us Christians persecuted, tortured and killed.  History is also filled with stories of Christians "saving" the savages, pagans and anyone else who practiced a religion they didn't believe in or accept, by brute force if necessary.  Many people who refused to accept the Christian faith were executed.  How many other religious faiths can claim campaigns like the Crusades, the Inquisitions or Holy Wars created to stomp out apostacy and heresy or whatever else got in the way of their religious beliefs?

Christianity was often "spread" by the sword, forcing people to accept, or else.  Is it any wonder people didn't feel so loving toward Christians?  It was their way or the highway.  What about MYOB!?!

Today, at least in the US, Christians (many, not all) continue to persecute, discriminate and torture those who don't accept their beliefs.  And we are on that list.  I don't think Jesus Christ ever envisioned that for his "followers".

Which is precisely what I mean by saying that Constantine did the church and the world no favors by giving it legal standing.   Forced conversions are no more conversions than what Constantine did when he marched his army through the river and supposedly baptized them, making them Christians.  I have never tried to justify those things, nor did I in my post, Julie.  I know the crusades are a major point with you, and I agree that they are one of the major blights on history.    They had zilch to do with Christianity and everything to do with the thirst for power.  The vestiges of that still live on in subtle ways, but that is another discussion.

I also know you also have major disagreements with one segment of the population of American Christians, including the segment of your origin.  I share those disagreements, of course.  But I do not see this as the view that what most Christians believe, only some of the well funded big mouths and the Roman church.  That is just not my world.  Nor is it the essence of Christianity.

I do have a question for you:  Where in the US are Christians engaged in torturing people?

[Julie Marie]

I do have a question for you:  Where in the US are Christians engaged in torturing people?

It's all around us my friend.  Every time someone abuses the Bible or makes the claim. "It's God's will!" when promoting bigotry, denying people their civil rights or pressuring people to cave to their beliefs, that's torture because there's a punishment that follows.  It may be emotional at first but it can become physical through social punishment and the subsequent affects it has on one physicaly.

There are good Christians and bad christians.  I know many here have stated bad christians aren't real Christians and I understand that.  Unfortunately, many of the bad christians are also Christian leaders, the ones in power, the ones initiating campaigns against civil rights, the ones pouring millions into keeping their particular beliefs on the forefront and an integral part of politics.  And innocent people are hurt, most times intentionally.

Sure, Christians don't engage in beheadings, public stonings or murder today but many organized Christian religions are engaged in a modern form of a Holy War, the war against gays, the war against teaching evolution, the war against separation of church and state, the war against other beliefs, to name a few.  And the primary reason is to force their beliefs on everyone else by pressure and social punishment. 

Pity the politician who says he/she is not Christian.  They will be punished by not being elected, no matter how well they would have done their job.  And all politicians know that.  Go on national TV and speak out against Christianity and you will be persecuted.

I feel the Bible needs a total revamping.  Include the gospels that were thrown out.  Include the gnostics and tell the truth about their beliefs and faith.  Add the things we have discovered along the way about Christianity, Jesus Christ and his belief system.  Make it a complete history, without prejudice.

I did what I could and stopped supporting the bad christians, I stopped going to church and donating money.  And while good Christians could be hurt by this, if it was done en masse, maybe eventually the bad christians would be removed from power.  Until then those of us who refuse to tolerate the abuse have only science and the facts they present to fall back on in an effort to stop the bigotry and hatred and expose the hypocrisy.

Make the Bible current and it could change the world, for the better.

"Today's reading will be from the Gospel of Mary Magdalene."

Peter said to Mary, "Sister, we know that the Savior loved you more than other women. Tell us the words of the Savior which you have in mind since you know them; and we do not, nor have we heard of them."

Wouldn't that be something?

[spacial]

Pity the politician who says he/she is not Christian.  They will be punished by not being elected, no matter how well they would have done their job.  And all politicians know that.  Go on national TV and speak out against Christianity and you will be persecuted.

That's the point though. If Bush and Blair had told the real reasons they ordered mass murder, or some southern politician said the reason he hates gays and transgendered people is because he's a biggot, who would listen and follow?

As for revamping the Bible, you can do that.

I and I know many others have done it by taking the Gospels and treating the rest as padding.

[Suzy]

It's all around us my friend...   Sure, Christians don't engage in beheadings, public stonings or murder today but many organized Christian religions are engaged in a modern form of a Holy War, the war against gays, the war against teaching evolution, the war against separation of church and state, the war against other beliefs, to name a few.  And the primary reason is to force their beliefs on everyone else by pressure and social punishment. 

I guess we have a very different definition of torture.  In fact, the physical things you mention are being done to Christians in many parts of the world as we speak.  Do you consider this right, or are you glad to see the Christians paid back for their wrongdoings?  Mostly today these are Christians who are simply wishing the right to worship as they please without interference and are standing up for human rights.    But I simply say that if it is wrong, it is wrong, no matter who is doing it.  Ethically, it cannot be any other way.

I know that in our society we have the freedom to advocate for what we believe.  When someone disagrees with me and works very hard at something I oppose, I do not consider it a holy war.  If either side does wrong, then we are usually treated to a version of  "the end justifies the means" which is, of course, ethically bankrupt. 

True, my sweet Julie, you do not run in the circles I do, nor do we share much in the way of our backgrounds, but I have seen things done so badly by both sides of this argument that I cringe when either side tries to look holy and begins to cast stones.  I suggest that a better way is to exemplify what we believe and use nonviolent methods to call attention to just causes.  A better way is to attempt to build bridges and begin dialog.  A better way is to put actual faces and lives with those we seek to vilify and begin to build trust between those with diverging opinions.  A better way is to realize that we are not responsible for other people's wrong actions, but we sure are responsible for our own, even when they are in reaction to a perceived wrong done to us.  A better way is to seek to form relationships, which is always the beginning of any real change.

I am not saying that this way is easy.  It may not be quick.  But I believe that if we want a real shot at justice this is the only one we have.   And those who scoff at such ideas only want a victory at any cost.  But such a victory is temporary at best.  It is like knocking a hornet's nest out of a tree.  Defensiveness is automatically called for, reprisals happen, and the angry pendulum will shift back and forth and back and forth.

So you want to change the Bible?  Is that the basis for where this is going?  Tell me, what specifically is there in the Gospel of Thomas or of Mary Magdalene that you think would so revolutionize things?  Personally, I see very little, if any, that would change.  The chance for veracity of either of the texts you mention is practically nil, though I have covered that earlier.  I think the better answer is to go ahead and open the Bible and read it.  Really read it.  Strip off the cultural bias you have heard before and really read it.  As Marcus Borg said, it is like meeting Jesus again for the first time.  I personally think you would be amazed at things you never knew were there.

However, if you want to believe the gospel of Mary or of Peter, or of Bozo the Clown, for that matter, it is certainly your right to do so and you know I will support you in doing it, so long as you know I have a right to expect you to respect my beliefs as well.

Peace,
Kristi

[Julie Marie]

However, if you want to believe the gospel of Mary or of Peter, or of Bozo the Clown...

That, my dear friend, was a bit condescending.  Don't ya think?

[Sarah Louise]

I agree with Kristi, read the Bible for what it says, not for what demoninations want you to see in the words.

The Bible is perfectly capable of speaking for itself and does not need the "enlightened" interpretaions of scholars (who all have their own axes to grind).

I have read some, not all, of the books that were left out of the "official" version of the Bible and don't feel they really have anything to add to my beliefs.

My faith isn't between me and a denomination or a "great christian scholar/teacher" but between me and God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Sarah L.

[Suzy]

That, my dear friend, was a bit condescending.  Don't ya think?

Oh dear, no it wasn't supposed to sound condescending.  It means that even if I do not agree with you, I will still love you and accept you.  Sorry if it came out all wrong.