Were the first Christians really Monotheists?
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 pensteel |
Were the first Christians really Monotheists? |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 92 (11/13/07 14:17:01) Moderator |
|
||
|
Sigmund Ivarsson |
|||
|
Posts: 11 (04/13/08 05:47:56) |
Unless you want to call sun worship monotheism
|
||
|
ProfBenTziyyon |
|||
|
Posts: 318 (04/13/08 10:29:20) |
Sigmund Ivarsson wrote: Don't you mean son worship? LOL! http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל |
||
|
RabbiEzriel |
|||
|
Posts: 136 (04/13/08 15:45:19) Moderator |
This was, of course, mentioned in an episode of Star Trek (TOS).
|
||
|
Sophiee1 |
|||
|
Posts: 10415 (04/13/08 16:39:09) Moderator |
ProfBenTziyyon wrote: "The Chrstians are idolaters, and Sunday is their holiday..." (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Avodah Zorah, 9;4) 
And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Genesis, 21:12
|
||
|
ProfBenTziyyon |
|||
|
Posts: 324 (04/13/08 19:23:21) |
Sophiee1 wrote: The context of this statement of the Rambam is that it occurs in a chapter dealing with the prohibition against doing
any business with idol-worshippers in Eretz Yisrael for the three days leading up to any of their אֵידִים (festivals), and on the festivals themselves
anywhere outside Eretz Yisrael - note that the word אֵיד is cognate with the Arabic word Id, as for example in Id ul-Fit'r, the
great festival marking the end of the fast-month of Ram'adan.
The language used by the Rambam, unequivocally branding christians עֹבְדֵּי עֲבֹדָה זָרָה (idolaters), is very strong, and it is interesting that he doesn't talk about Moslems that way, even though he just as scathing about Mohammed as he is about Yéshu, referring to him disparagingly in Hilchot M'lachim §11:11 as זֶה הַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִי שֶׁעָמַד אַחֲרָיו "that Yishm'éli who arose after him..." (i.e. after Yéshu). http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל |
||
|
ProfBenTziyyon |
|||
|
Posts: 333 (04/14/08 09:25:13) |
Were the first christians really monotheists? - Not if they considered that their Yéshu was a "god" in any sense.... consider Matthew 26:39--- και προελθων μικρον επεσεν εμπ προσωπον αυτου προσευχομενος και λεγων.....What kind of a god "falls onto its face" and "prays"..... TO ITSELF??? It is quite obvious that this author - at least - saw "Papa" and "Junior" as two distinct entities and, if he thought they were both "gods", he was thus NOT a monotheist. http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל
Last Edited By: ProfBenTziyyon
04/14/08 09:37:41.
Edited 3 times.
|
||
|
pensteel |
Monotheism to Idolatry | ||
|
Posts: 25 (04/28/08 11:24:47) Moderator |
It is hard to say exactly what the first Christian believed because we do not have any reliable texts that tell us. However, from what I've read and
puzzled out it seems likely that Christians were originally monotheists. However, when Christianity became a gentile religion it began incorporating pagan
elements. Or maybe because the early Christians started incorporating pagan elements it became a gentile religion. I've wondered if the change from
monotheism to idolatry in Christianity happened with similar reasoning (by its leaders) as the idolatry that developed in the time of Enosh as the Rambam
discusses it in Hilchot Avodah Zarah.
AP |
||
|
ChibiBug |
|||
|
Posts: 2 (05/18/08 11:34:40) |
If you mean first Christians by way of the Apostles, then yes, they were monotheists...but if you mean Christians by way of the first organized religion (RCC)
then absolutely NOT! Once the RCC gained "control" of Nazarene believers, true "Christianity" ceased to exist. Protestants have tried to
purge the idolatry from their belief system as much as they could after being indoctrinated with it for some 1,600 years.
[ChibiBug, we do not allow proselytizing on our boards, and that is the reason the rest of your post was removed. Also, your signature contains language that is inappropriate for our Jewish discussion boards; it disappears when your posts are edited by a moderator, but you are requested to remove the Christian portions (yes, "messianic judaism" IS a form of Christianity, regardless of the fact you gave the god of Christianity a Hebrew name and use a Hebrew title for the Greek Text) if you plan to post here again. (UY)]
Last Edited By: UriYosef
05/18/08 12:34:49.
Edited 3 times.
|
||
|
ChibiBug |
|||
|
Posts: 3 (05/18/08 12:58:44) |
oooook? Not sure how I was proselytizing by stating what I believed vs the typical Christian belief but that's fine. Maybe if you can PM me and show me how
what I said was proselytizing, I will be careful not to repeat that same mistake. I will also be careful to turn my signature off in the future.
|
||
|
UriYosef |
|||
|
Posts: 1484 (05/18/08 13:43:41) Director of Education |
ChibiBug wrote: There's no need for me to PM you. The topic is "Were the first Christians really Monotheists?", not "What is ChibiBug's statement of
faith?". Your stating what YOU believe is a form of proselytizing here.
Our raison d'être:
WHOSOEVER DESTROYS A SINGLE SOUL OF ISRAEL, SCRIPTURE IMPUTES [GUILT] TO HIM AS THOUGH HE HAD DESTROYED A COMPLETE WORLD; AND WHOSOEVER PRESERVES A SINGLE SOUL OF ISRAEL, SCRIPTURE ASCRIBES [MERIT] TO HIM AS THOUGH HE HAD PRESERVED A COMPLETE WORLD. (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, 37a) The fruits of our effort: The battle against spiritual terrorism is being won, one soul at a time!!! |
||
|
ChibiBug |
|||
|
Posts: 4 (05/18/08 13:58:45) |
well, considering I am a Messianic believer who has denounced false Christian doctrine, I thought it was relevant to state what "first Christians"
believed and how they worshiped and what the man *we* call Rabbi actually taught.
Christianity of today does not even resemble the Nazarene Christians of yesteryear and, dare I say, has turned occultic in many areas. |
||
|
UriYosef |
|||
|
Posts: 1485 (05/18/08 14:20:28) Director of Education |
ChibiBug wrote: You do accept the Greek Text as part of your bible, do you not? You do realize that the RCC handed you the GT, do you not? You do believe that yeshu
existed and is your messiah? You do believe that he died for your sins and will return, do you not? You do believe that he is the son of "the
Father", do you not? Should I go on?
Our raison d'être:
WHOSOEVER DESTROYS A SINGLE SOUL OF ISRAEL, SCRIPTURE IMPUTES [GUILT] TO HIM AS THOUGH HE HAD DESTROYED A COMPLETE WORLD; AND WHOSOEVER PRESERVES A SINGLE SOUL OF ISRAEL, SCRIPTURE ASCRIBES [MERIT] TO HIM AS THOUGH HE HAD PRESERVED A COMPLETE WORLD. (Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin, 37a) The fruits of our effort: The battle against spiritual terrorism is being won, one soul at a time!!! |
||
|
vikkilyn |
|||
|
Posts: 85 (05/18/08 16:04:06) |
ChibiBug, the little ones in your avatar are adorable.
to the original lead question, if the first christians were monotheists, I wonder how to fit into the monotheistic picture the GT stories of the followers of Jsus saying that he was the "son of G=d", "son of the living G=d" or even calling him "my L=rd and my G=d", during his lifetime and shortly thereafter. Perhaps these were added later in retrospect, after the pagan influences that pensteel mentions? I am referring to, respectively: John 11:27 (Mary, sister of Martha and Lazarus) John 6:69 (Peter) John 20:28 (Thomas) |
||
|
Sophiee1 |
|||
|
Posts: 10670 (05/18/08 16:37:40) Moderator |
So called Hebrew Xians or Messyanic Judaism is a fairly recent iteration of Xianity (less than 100 years old). As UriYosef pointed out you accept the Greek
Text which came down from various church synods -- and you either worship a man as a god which is most definitely idolatry, not Judaism or you pray THROUGH a
man to G-d, which is idolatry for a Jew. Most so called Messyanics aren't Jews -- but to those who are they are apostates and endangering their immortal
souls.
Messyanic Xianity is just the wolf in a new set of sheep's clothing. New being the very operative word here, and made up.
And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Genesis, 21:12
|
||
|
ProfBenTziyyon |
|||
|
Posts: 752 (05/19/08 00:58:04) |
ChibiBug wrote: That is a contradicto in terminis - a self-contradicting proposition. For your information, "messianic believer" MEANS a christian... you mean "REnounced" not "DEnounced"... so it turns out that you are a CHR-STIAN who has renounced (i.e. given up) false CHR-STIAN doctrine. Now that REALLY makes sense... ChibiBug wrote: Nobody knows what "first christians" believed or how they worshipped. ChibiBug wrote: You insult Jews everywhere by your misuse and ABuse of the term Rabbi, of which it is clear you have no clue of the meaning. What gives you the right to insult our Rabbanim? Learn what words MEAN before you abuse them. ChibiBug wrote: Enough of this garbage - "nazarene christians" is an oxymoron: you do not impress anyone here by using long words.
Last Edited By: UriYosef
05/19/08 10:45:20.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
ProfBenTziyyon |
|||
|
Posts: 767 (05/20/08 00:59:56) |
Actually, I meant to say "nazarene christians" is a tautology - or a pleonasm - not an oxymoron. http://mordochai.tripod.com - פרופ' מָרְדֳּכַי בֶּן-צִיּוֹן, יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל |
||
|
JohnySkeptic |
|||
|
Posts: 112 (06/03/08 04:07:12) |
Here is what the early "true"TM Jewish Christians believed
From Catholic Encyclopedia Ebionites By this name were designated one or more early Christian sects infected with Judaistic errors. ............... The doctrines of this sect are said by Irenaeus to be like those of Cerinthus and Carpocrates. They denied the Divinity and the virginal birth of Christ; they clung to the observance of the Jewish Law; they regarded St. Paul as an apostate, and used only a Gospel according to St. Matthew ................... Those who accepted the virginal birth seem to have had more exalted views concerning Christ and, besides observing the Sabbath, to have kept the Sunday as a memorial of His Resurrection. The milder sort of Ebionites were probably fewer and less important than their stricter brethren, because the denial of the virgin birth was commonly attributed to all. Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites Does your belief resembles to the early Ebionites, who were declared as heretic by the "evil" RCC |
||
|
Sophiee1 |
|||
|
Posts: 10822 (06/03/08 06:29:17) Moderator |
Last I looked we don't use the gospel according to the mythical Matthew.
And everything that Sarah tells you, listen to her voice. Genesis, 21:12
|
||
|
ProfBenTziyyon |
|||
|
Posts: 877 (06/04/08 02:07:01) |
What the heck are "Ebionites"? Is that ANOTHER made-up word that some christian or christians invented to LOOK LIKE a
Hebrew word? Because it ISN'T Hebrew - there is no such word as אֶבְיוֹנִי
"evyoni".
|
||
|
GammaWaif |
|||
|
Posts: 37 (06/05/08 00:55:03) |
ProfBenTziyyon wrote: No, Reb Professor, it is not a Hebrew-esque term derived to confuse, so far as I can tell. It is the name of a group of ancient people, who date to the time of jebus and were early followers. They left some less than supportive writings about Paul, that architect of xianity. The scholar, Hyam Maccoby, mentions them in "The Problem of Paul, " excerpted from: The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity, here.5 A source of information about Paul that has never been taken seriously enough is a group called the Ebionites. Their writings were suppressed by the Church, but some of their views and traditions were preserved in the writings of their opponents, particularly in the huge treatise on Heresies by Epiphanius. From this it appears that the Ebionites had a very different account to give of Paul's background and early life from that found in the New Testament and fostered by Paul himself. The Ebionites testified that Paul had no Pharisaic background or training; he was the son of Gentiles, converted to Judaism in Tarsus, came to Jerusalem when an adult, and attached himself to the High Priest as a henchman. Disappointed in his hopes of advancement, he broke with the High Priest and sought fame by founding a new religion. This account, while not reliable in all its details, is substantially correct. It makes far more sense of all the puzzling and contradictory features of the story of Paul than the account of the official documents of the Church. The phrase "Nazarene xians" refers to the original apostles, James and Peter and their group, who actually knew JC, and had a movement going in Jerusalem. Paul somehow managed to usurp their position. James and Peter and that Nazarene lot were Jews, albeit misguided, who followed Torah, but thought JC was The Moshiach, for whatever benighted reason. They did not believe he was a god or any of the wacky crap Paul hung on him. |
||
Quick Reply
