The dinkelberry gang want to run posters off

[Jon Miller]

Dude, please cite. I have studied early church history and early Christian beliefs. I have never ran into that before.

Not that I agree at all with Sloww.

I am thinking that you are misunderstanding some important theology. Or that you read about some small offshoot (which could believe anything really, and might have nothing to do with modern Christianity) which is only interesting in a historical sense.

JM

[giblets]

Ok. Don't get why you are tasking me on this. Turn the other cheek. It's not like I only *just* started being one. I've been one for 8 years now. Longer than I've been a Catholic.

If your issue is pacifism, start a thread and define it.

You've been what? A pacifist? No. A Christian? Okay, but there's plenty of Christians who support war. I have no idea why.

[giblets]

The Christians in this site cite **** all but as soon as you comment on their religion they demand a bibliography.

[Jon Miller]

What do you want me to cite?

And yes, as a Christian who has a laypersons interest in theology and doctrine and church history, I am legitimately interested.

Unlike you, previously, about your comments about Christianity.

I spent a while with google, I couldn't even find the idea that I understand Dannubis to be arguing for... much less the idea as a legitimate early Christian belief.

And I have repeatedly seen the non-Christians on this board and other places show a lack of understanding of Christian theology (of course, it doesn't help that the Christians (ala Sloww) also show this lack).

JM

[giblets]

I was mostly referring to slowwhand's demands for a citation that Jesus wouldn't want you to stomp someone's ass.

[Jon Miller]

Oh, then I agree. But could you say something else then Christians then?

Even if you said "Some Christians" I wouldn't have in issue with it.

JM
(And I know that some non-Christians have a great understanding of Christian theology. I just don't see it in the vocal non-Christians online.)

[Ben Kenobi]

You've been what? A pacifist? No. A Christian? Okay, but there's plenty of Christians who support war. I have no idea why.

Look up 'mennonite'. And you'll have your answer. Apparently I don't conform with your understanding of a pacifist, which is fine by me, because you don't seem to understand what a pacifist is.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

You can lecture me about many things, but being a Christian isn't one of them. An Atheist can't lecture a Christian about Christianity.
If you want to continue to try, you should at least cite a reference.

Start with the preceding part of the quote you're referring to.

“But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

Matthew 5:39

[giblets]

Look up 'mennonite'. And you'll have your answer. Apparently I don't conform with your understanding of a pacifist, which is fine by me, because you don't seem to understand what a pacifist is.

A pacifist isn't someone who says "I think war is bad, but under the right circumstances I'll support it". Why? Because most sane people take that position. Few people like war, but that doesn't mean we're all pacifists. But go ahead and define 'pacifism' in a way that makes it almost meaningless.

[dannubis]

Dude, please cite. I have studied early church history and early Christian beliefs. I have never ran into that before.

Not that I agree at all with Sloww.

I am thinking that you are misunderstanding some important theology. Or that you read about some small offshoot (which could believe anything really, and might have nothing to do with modern Christianity) which is only interesting in a historical sense.

JM

I followed once a lecture on early christian belief at university because it seemed interesting. Don't remember what cult/sect/viewpoint he was describing though.

[dannubis]

Besides, it seemed not all early christians agreed with the currently accepted theology which feels very Roman to me.

http://muslim-responses.com/Ebionite/Ebionite_

And don't shoot the source right away. The guy did his best to write a good and balanced essay.

[Jon Miller]

Yes, there were a lot of other interpretations early. Just like there are a lot of interpretations now.

Doesn't make them Christian in the sense that 2 billion people are Christian today.

Book writers today want to make money based off people who read Dan Brown and emphasize the small sects and groups. They play up the controversy, if you will.

It is quite illuminating to look at the church leaders at ~100 AD and see how similar their Christianity is to that preached today.

From what I have seen, the Christianity which is the one practiced by and large today is known as Paulian Christianity, to separate it from the offshoots/etc in the past 2000 years.

Irregardless, a fascinating subject... I think I might look up the book he references. (Early Christianities)

JM

[Jon Miller]

One thing that interests me yet I don't understand... how is Paullian Christianity "Roman".

Note that it is sayings of Christ (which are found in all 4 gospels, including Matthew which was the only gospel/new testament book the Mar Thoma church had for ~100 years) that made the early church think Christ was God and existed before 0 AD (as well as most Christians since).

JM

[SlowwHand]

Start with the preceding part of the quote you're referring to.

“But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

Matthew 5:39

I spoke of this from the very start. That's not the issue.

[Fake Boris]

Nice try Gribbler, but give it up, most people are hapless when they discuss Quebec.