The influence of Christianity

  • Thread starter Thread starter WmJackP
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WmJackP

Guest
I find the history and growth of christianity over the last 2 millinium to be fascinating… Most historians believe Christ was an actual person and an apocalyptic preacher. Paul is significant I gather as he developed certain doctinal teachings. These teaching about Christ then, to greater or lesser extent were incorporated into certain gospels or stories, of which there were many (later pared down to the familiar four as a result of certain councils held following Constantine’s conversion) . But unless there had been the conquests by Alexander three or four centuries earlier, I doubt that Christianity could have spread as it did to Europe where it actually planted its roots. Alexander created the necessary connections within the ancient world sufficiently to allow the kind of commerce for Christianity to spread.Once Constantine adopted it in the fourth century C.E., it gradually replaced pagan religions over the next several decades.

After the collaspe of Rome, it was adopted by the barbaric tribes of Western and eastern Europe. It appears to be the case that–the superior culture of Rome was subsumed by the lower culture of the barbaric heirs, and, in the process the surviving (non-heridical version) form of christianity became that of the Roman church. Christianity then held sway for centururies afterwards, influencing european civilization and affecting the rule of Europeans. Much good was accomplished by the Church as it kept civilization alive during the dark ages. It inspired many of the great expeditions during the 15th and 16th centuries. It provided a cohesive force when Europe was in various states of disarray. But it certainly has had it darker periods and as much as the church sponsored learning in its monestaries, particularly during the dark ages after Rome’s collaspe, it also stymied science and advancement, freedom of thought in other periods, and, practiced profound cruelity during periods when it exercised the most control within european politics. It is a mixed bag, indeed.

My impression is that christianity is probably the product of Paul, aided of course by Constantine and made possible by Alexander.
Any other thoughts?I would be interested in different views as to how others see the origins of Christianity and what Christian influence on Europe has been.
 
I don’t mean to sound nitpicky or argumentative but I have a few problems with what you’re saying.
These teaching about Christ then, to greater or lesser extent were incorporated into certain gospels or stories, of which there were many (later pared down to the familiar four as a result of certain councils held following Constantine’s conversion).
I thought the familiar four were already settled at least a century before Constantine, because Irenaeus in his book *Against Heresies *(3.11.8) says “the Gospel is quadriform”, and this was written around the year 180. Constantine was born in 272, converted in 312, and the first council after his conversion was in 325.
But unless there had been the conquests by Alexander three or four centuries earlier, I doubt that Christianity could have spread as it did to Europe where it actually planted its roots. Alexander created the necessary connections within the ancient world sufficiently to allow the kind of commerce for Christianity to spread.
Actually the Roman Empire did a pretty good job of connecting the Middle East to Europe on its own. But Christianity had roots from Iraq to Morocco at the same time it was expanding into Europe. Those roots were uprooted by the expansion of Islam.
But it certainly has had it darker periods and as much as the church sponsored learning in its monestaries, particularly during the dark ages after Rome’s collaspe, it also stymied science and advancement, freedom of thought in other periods, and, practiced profound cruelity during periods when it exercised the most control within european politics.
Like what? Irreligious people today are stymieing science, advancement, and freedom of thought, and practicing profound cruelty as they exercise nearly absolute control within European politics.
My impression is that christianity is probably the product of Paul, aided of course by Constantine and made possible by Alexander.
I’m not so sure about Paul. Is it just because he wrote roughly a third of the New Testament? Because from what I’ve heard about the early history of Christianity, most Christians got their teachings from the other apostles and their disciples. I don’t think Paul ever stayed in one place long enough to modify what people were hearing from their bishops, and he deliberately avoided Christian communities that were founded by others.
 
WmJackP
  1. teaching about Christ then, to greater or lesser extent were incorporated into certain gospels or stories, of which there were many…
  2. But it certainly has had it darker periods and as much as the church sponsored learning in its monestaries, particularly during the dark ages after Rome’s collaspe, it also stymied science and advancement, freedom of thought in other periods, and, practiced profound cruelity during periods when it exercised the most control within european politics. It is a mixed bag, indeed.
  3. My impression is that christianity is probably the product of Paul,
You are certainly impressionable and have no idea of the Church Christ founded.
You are yet to respond to the facts in the thread on *Observations of by a non believer *-- you wouldn’t want to be compared to a flibbertigibbet would you?

Two good books for you would be *How The Catholic Church Built Western Civilization *by Dr Thomas E Woods, Regnery 2005, and *The Victory of Reason *by Dr Rodney Stark, Random House 2005.
  1. The four Gospels were written before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70., and the whole set of writings forming the Sacred Scriptures were declared by Pope Damasus in 382 A.D. Pope Damasus I published the complete list of books of the OT and NT decreeing: “what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what it must avoid.” Councils at Hippo, Carthage, Florence and Trent confirmed what Pope Damasus had decreed. (The Catholic Catechism, Fr John A Hardon, S.J., Doubleday, 1975, p 46).
  2. “The rise of science was not an extension of classical learning. It was the natural outgrowth of Christian doctrine: nature exists because it was created by God. In order to love and honor God, it is necessary to fully appreciate his handiwork. Because God is perfect, his handiwork functions in accord with immutable principles. By the full use of our God-given powers of reason and observation, it ought to be possible to discover these principles.
“These were the crucial ideas that explain why science arose in Christian Europe and nowhere else.” The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 22-23].
  1. Jesus instituted His Church with Peter as the head as the Scriptures affirm. The Apostles learnt from Jesus and Paul taught what Jesus had given them.
 
You are certainly impressionable and have no idea of the Church Christ founded.
You are yet to respond to the facts in the thread on *Observations of by a non believer *-- you wouldn’t want to be compared to a flibbertigibbet would you?

Two good books for you would be *How The Catholic Church Built Western Civilization *by Dr Thomas E Woods, Regnery 2005, and *The Victory of Reason *by Dr Rodney Stark, Random House 2005.
  1. The four Gospels were written before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70., and the whole set of writings forming the Sacred Scriptures were declared by Pope Damasus in 382 A.D. Pope Damasus I published the complete list of books of the OT and NT decreeing: “what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what it must avoid.” Councils at Hippo, Carthage, Florence and Trent confirmed what Pope Damasus had decreed. (The Catholic Catechism, Fr John A Hardon, S.J., Doubleday, 1975, p 46).
  2. “The rise of science was not an extension of classical learning. It was the natural outgrowth of Christian doctrine: nature exists because it was created by God. In order to love and honor God, it is necessary to fully appreciate his handiwork. Because God is perfect, his handiwork functions in accord with immutable principles. By the full use of our God-given powers of reason and observation, it ought to be possible to discover these principles.
“These were the crucial ideas that explain why science arose in Christian Europe and nowhere else.” The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 22-23].
  1. Jesus instituted His Church with Peter as the head as the Scriptures affirm. The Apostles learnt from Jesus and Paul taught what Jesus had given them.
You had me at flibbergibbet.

You are perhaps right that I have no idea of the church founded by Christ. I actually think he founded no church. The church you subscribe to, in my flibbergibbet-esque opinion, was founded by Paul, as morphed into what would be palatable to the Roman world after Constantine found it useful to do and as it trickeled down to that amazing bastion of tolerance we know today.

Sorry if I overlooked (or maybe I even ignored ) what I am sure is brilliant exegesis on some other thread. I’ll look for it and I am certain we will continue to have scintillating discourse, even if infected with traces of fillergibberish.
 
WmJackP
I actually think he founded no church…was founded by Paul,
Perhaps you are on the wrong DB – this is Catholic Answers. Christ’s Church gave us the Canon of the Sacred Scriptures which is known as the Bible – you might care to consult this history.

Jesus founded His Church on Peter:
All four promises to Peter alone:
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19)

Sole authority:
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).

Already, Peter had exercised his supreme authority in the upper room before Pentecost to have Judas’ place filled. At the first Apostolic Council of Jerusalem Peter settled the heated discussion over circumcising the gentiles and “the whole assembly fell silent” (Acts 15:7-12). Paul made sure that his ministry to the gentiles was recognised by, Peter (Gal 1:I8).

Tradition shows Pope St Clement exercising his primacy in about 96, on a matter of schism in the Church of Corinth. Of the same generation as Saints Peter and Paul and when St John the Apostle was probably still living in Ephesus, Pope Clement wrote as one commanding to the Church of Corinth in Greece: “If any disobey what He (Christ) says through us, let them know that they will be involved in no small offence and danger, but we shall be innocent of this sin.” (I Clem. ad Cor. 59,1).
 
I actually think he founded no church.
Now that’s just silly.
The church you subscribe to, in my flibbergibbet-esque opinion, was founded by Paul, as morphed into what would be palatable to the Roman world after Constantine found it useful to do and as it trickeled down to that amazing bastion of tolerance we know today.
I am ready to agree with you if you give me a little evidence.
 
No offense, but I think you’re just pontificating on a huge subject with a couple of facts. I’m not sure where you get this idea of Saint Paul inventing all of Christianity. First of all, Paul did not write any of the gospels. Secondly, he did not write all of the other New Testament writings contained in the Bible. Thirdly, Paul did not write the prophesies that were fulfilled in Christ throughout the Old Testament. Fourthly, if Paul were just inventing all this, I have no reason to understand why he (and a bunch of other apostles) would make these huge claims, only to be eaten by lions. Fifthly, all of the doctrines of the Catholic Church were essentially believed way before Constantine, as can be attested to by the earliest Church Fathers.
 
Well, I am afraid I have no evidence of it being a bastion of tolerance.
Tolerance is another word for the acceptance of error. Error is the denial of truth. Truth is directly related to being, in that truth is the objective picture of what is. All that is derives its being from God, whose essence is to be. A denial of truth is in a certain sense denial of God.
 
Tolerance is another word for the acceptance of error. Error is the denial of truth. Truth is directly related to being, in that truth is the objective picture of what is. All that is derives its being from God, whose essence is to be. A denial of truth is in a certain sense denial of God.
Yes, tolerance is a slippery slope leading us all to perdition.
 
Perhaps you are on the wrong DB – this is Catholic Answers. Christ’s Church gave us the Canon of the Sacred Scriptures which is known as the Bible – you might care to consult this history.

Jesus founded His Church on Peter:
All four promises to Peter alone:
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19)

Sole authority:
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).

Already, Peter had exercised his supreme authority in the upper room before Pentecost to have Judas’ place filled. At the first Apostolic Council of Jerusalem Peter settled the heated discussion over circumcising the gentiles and “the whole assembly fell silent” (Acts 15:7-12). Paul made sure that his ministry to the gentiles was recognised by, Peter (Gal 1:I8).

Tradition shows Pope St Clement exercising his primacy in about 96, on a matter of schism in the Church of Corinth. Of the same generation as Saints Peter and Paul and when St John the Apostle was probably still living in Ephesus, Pope Clement wrote as one commanding to the Church of Corinth in Greece: “If any disobey what He (Christ) says through us, let them know that they will be involved in no small offence and danger, but we shall be innocent of this sin.” (I Clem. ad Cor. 59,1).
The earliest copies–we don’t have the originals, do we—of the gospels are how far removed from the crucifixion? At least a couple of centuries, and, how many revisions and and how much editing did the copies of copies undergo before the printing press arrived in the 16th century? By whom were these gospels originally written? and why these 4 instead of the over 200 that were in circulation? We don’t really know any of this, do we? In fact, wasn’t the whole virgin birth, god/man, death and reserrection a slightly updated version of the Mithra legend? So how can you expect me to adopt this fantasized view of reality on the basis of tradition and the mythologies perpetuated by religion? you cite these passages like they somehow are imbued with distinct earmarkings of authority. Why not the writings of the ansian philosophers many centuries earlier, wouldn’t thay have as much authoratative backing, to someone like me? Why should I accept one version of “God-speak” over another?

Tradition says that a bag of asafoetida tied about the neck will cure the common cold, and, if I told you that angel appeared to me with that same wisdom, I hope you wouldn’t accept that in lieu of going to the doctor for a cure. How then can you expect rational people to accept the same genre of lore to support your belief system?
 
WmJackP
The earliest copies–we don’t have the originals, do we—of the gospels are how far removed from the crucifixion? At least a couple of centuries…
The NT books were written prior to A.D. 70 and by the men to whom they traditionally have been ascribed, (See the works of Jacques Carmignac, John A. T. Robinson, and Claude Tresmontant, with some of them written in the 30’s.) The different translations made all teach the same truths

You now know that Christ established His Church with His authority to teach His truth, She is the only authority to declare which writings are the inspired Word of God. The originals have been faithfully copied by hand until after the invention of the printing press. You now have no reason to believe that Paul founded a religion.
Why should I accept one version of “God-speak” over another?
No other ancient writings hold any similar authority for belief simply because no other man claimed to be God and proved it by His Resurrection, witnessed by many, and attested to by their deaths for the sake of spreading His teaching.
I’m sorry that you are so bewildered, but you have the opportunity here to listen, learn and love.

There is no equivalence of the teaching of Christ’s Church with any other religion.
Science consists of an organized effort to explain natural phenomena. Why did this effort take root in Europe and nowhere else? Because Christianity depicted God as a rational, responsive, dependable, and omnipotent being, and the universe as his personal creation. The natural world was thus understood to have a rational, lawful, stable structure, awaiting (indeed, inviting) human comprehension.

Christians developed science because they believed it could—and should—be done. Alfred North Whitehead, the great philosopher and mathematician, co-author with Bertrand Russell of the landmark Principia Mathematica, credited “medieval theology” for the rise of science. He pointed to the “insistence on the rationality of God,” which produced the belief that “the search into nature could only result in the vindication of the faith.”

Whitehead ended with the remark that the images of God found in other religions, especially in Asia, are too impersonal or too irrational to have sustained science. A God who is capricious or unknowable gives no incentive for humans to dig deeply into his essence. Moreover, most non-Christian religions don’t posit a creation. If the universe is without beginning or purpose, has no Creator, is an inconsistent, unpredictable, and arbitrary mystery, there is little reason to explore it. Under those religious premises, the path to wisdom is through meditation and mystical insights, and there is no occasion to celebrate reason.
See catholicleague.org/research/catholicism_and_science.htm
Rodney Stark is professor of sociology at the University of Washington. This piece is excerpted from a longer piece, False Conflict: Christianity Is Not Only Compatible with Science—It Created It, which appeared in the October-November 2003 issue of The American Enterprise.
 
Regardless of our take on the Church’s history-with the good and the bad-I believe that the Church made immense strides towards making altruism an authentic human value. Hospitals, orphanages, schools, hours and hours of charitable work and piles of money given by people who took the best ideals the Church offered and put them into practice. Ideals rarely heard of, such as loving ones enemy rather than conquering him, the usual way of doing things.
 
I find the history and growth of christianity over the last 2 millinium to be fascinating… Most historians believe Christ was an actual person and an apocalyptic preacher. Paul is significant I gather as he developed certain doctinal teachings. These teaching about Christ then, to greater or lesser extent were incorporated into certain gospels or stories, of which there were many (later pared down to the familiar four as a result of certain councils held following Constantine’s conversion) . But unless there had been the conquests by Alexander three or four centuries earlier, I doubt that Christianity could have spread as it did to Europe where it actually planted its roots. Alexander created the necessary connections within the ancient world sufficiently to allow the kind of commerce for Christianity to spread.Once Constantine adopted it in the fourth century C.E., it gradually replaced pagan religions over the next several decades.

After the collaspe of Rome, it was adopted by the barbaric tribes of Western and eastern Europe. It appears to be the case that–the superior culture of Rome was subsumed by the lower culture of the barbaric heirs, and, in the process the surviving (non-heridical version) form of christianity became that of the Roman church. Christianity then held sway for centururies afterwards, influencing european civilization and affecting the rule of Europeans. Much good was accomplished by the Church as it kept civilization alive during the dark ages. It inspired many of the great expeditions during the 15th and 16th centuries. It provided a cohesive force when Europe was in various states of disarray. But it certainly has had it darker periods and as much as the church sponsored learning in its monestaries, particularly during the dark ages after Rome’s collaspe, it also stymied science and advancement, freedom of thought in other periods, and, practiced profound cruelity during periods when it exercised the most control within european politics. It is a mixed bag, indeed.

My impression is that christianity is probably the product of Paul, aided of course by Constantine and made possible by Alexander.
Any other thoughts?I would be interested in different views as to how others see the origins of Christianity and what Christian influence on Europe has been.
Ahhh, the timing of God, excellent:thumbsup:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top