What would it take to make you happy, TODAY?

[Ben Kenobi]

What happened to all those 'unhelpful' gospels and gnostic texts ?

If you are Islamic, they burned all the stuff that didn't fit in the official Quran.

If you are Christian, all those books are still there, albeit not in the canon. Just because a compilation of documents fails to include other documents, is nothing new in History. Historians do that all the time, so why should the fact that the Christians decided which books gave the best account of Christ be considered a strike against them?

Credit them for not burning the other books.

What happened to all those believers who didn't believe the new party line ? Pauline or Jacobite Church ?

Monophysite or Monothelite ? Nestorian, Arian, Pelagian, et cetera et cetera....

What happened to them? It's a good question. You can still find non-Chalcedonian churches today.

Did the church suppress their teachings, or did they allow them to be presented in an ecumenical council of the church in order to determine what ought to be the proper interpretation? Unlike all the protestants, each of these groups had their chance to convince the church of their doctrine.

More to the point- who is being worshipped, the disciples and apostles or the god ?

Unless of course you're suggesting that the early Christians were attempting to propagate the gospel to get themselves worshipped, which isn't what I suggested.

Not at all. I'm surprised you found issue here, and neglected to address the main thrust of the previous two posts that I have made to this thread.

Oh, let's see, they were left out, burnt, destroyed, marginalized, eradicated, exiled, executed, waged war upon, et cetera, et cetera.

Oh, and it didn't help getting overrun by Muslims, to increase their zeal for converts. I wonder why you left that little detail out?

The Christians proved to be no better when their little sect took power than any of the persecuting pagan Romans, and a good deal less tolerant, since THEIR way was now the ONLY way.

Having an ecumenical council to consider these differences in interpretation is the fairest means to decide these differences. Again, it is a pity that the protestants never received such respect among their Christian peers.

No more toleration of Syrian or Eastern or Egyptian or Etruscan or Greek gods, no more Iranian cults, no more temples to Cybele, or Isis or Serapis.

Gosh, that does have a fine 20th Century intolerant ring to it.

Yes, just like those Islamic fellows blowing up a Buddha. Or the secularists in the US removing all forms of the cross from public life, or trashing the nativity scenes put up at Christmas. Or in banning headscarves, yarmulkes and crosses worn by schoolchildren.

Very much like our 20th century intolerance.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Yes, just like those Islamic fellows blowing up a Buddha. Or the secularists in the US removing all forms of the cross from public life, or trashing the nativity scenes put up at Christmas. Or in banning headscarves, yarmulkes and crosses worn by schoolchildren.

Very much like our 20th century intolerance.

Thanks for agreeing (finally) that Christians were/are intolerant. I knew you'd eventually arrive at that logical conclusion.


Of course much of your little spiel was about the intolerance of other religions- which wasn't the point, but thanks for bringing that up too.


By the way, as the United States is a secular state, why should any particular sect from any particular religion have preference over another, or over the rights of those who choose not to believe in religion ?


But then we've been down this particular route before. If you're so keen to live in a theocracy, then I suggest you may find life in Iran or the Vatican City more congenial.