<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Aug 24 2007, 10:39 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Aug 24 2007, 10:39 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->CHRISTIANITY WAS ORIGINALLY CATHOLIC
(Roman Piso, 05/27/02)
(2) Saints. If we look to the New Testament itself, we will find the proof of this. All of the evidence that I am presenting in this short examination is based upon that which is found in the earliest known New Testament texts themselves. The Catholic version of Christianity has recognized "saints" from the very beginning of Christianity<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]72424[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Greek Orthodoxy also has saints. Apparently Constantine the tyrant is a saint of the Orthodox Church. (But even he is a better choice than many that the catholic church reveres.)
I'll get to Church records in a moment, first:
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Aug 24 2007, 10:39 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Aug 24 2007, 10:39 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->CHRISTIANITY WAS ORIGINALLY CATHOLIC
(4) Popes. And this brings up the idea of Popes. No other version of Christianity has a Pope.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]72424[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Of course no other version of christianism had a pope. The western (Roman) branch of the initial conjoined imperial christianity had a Bishop of Rome, who was head of the other bishops in his part of the empire. Then there was the Bishop in the east, Constantinople I think (am presuming that this now corresponds to the Archbishop of the Greek Orthodox Church). But eventually, one Bishop of Rome thought he was somehow more important and elevated himself to Pope, calling himself the Vicar of Rome and then in time the Popes were dubbed the 'Vicars of Christ'. This is one of the reasons the eastern and western churches split (see here, http://freetruth.50webs.org/A2c.htm#Crus...Orthodoxy). The Orthodox refer to the Pope as the devil. I don't blame them, they *know* catholicism is a huge fraud and that the pope is nothing, nobody but an imposter and self-appointed - and not actually given any particularly special charge.
http://freetruth.50webs.org/C3.htm#PopeVisitsGreece
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Some Greek Orthodox Christians compared the Pope to the Devil himself
New York Times - Pope Visits Greece Today on a Tough Mission of Reconciliation, May 4, 2001:<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Orthodox priests and monks have held protest vigils and marched under signs that read "the heretic pope" and "two-horned monster of Rome." Archbishop Christodoulos, head of the Greek Orthodox Church, has vowed not to pray alongside the Roman Catholic pope, who arrives in Athens on Friday.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Guardian Unlimited - Monks protest at Pope as Greece goes on strike, April 27, 2001:<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"Out with the two-horned beast, the Pope of Rome 666!" read a banner. "No to the leader of heresy," read another.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Telegraph News - Pope's visit to Greece infuriates Orthodox Church, April 29, 2001:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Orthodox priest [Father Chrysostomos of Athens] declared: "He will infect our country,"
A poster outside Fr Chrysostomos's church spells out Orthodox opposition to the visit. Denouncing the Pope as a "false prophet and the anti-Christ" who adorns his mitre with "666", it announces a demonstration to be held tomorrow against the visit and lists the historical crimes for which successive popes were allegedly responsible.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--><i>So if an Indian catholic were ever to insult your beliefs, you can retort by saying that you have it on very good authority that the Pope is the devil:</i> because so says the more traditional christian church, the Greek Orthodox church. <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' /><!--endemo--> The Greek Orthodox Church is considered older by everyone except the modern WASPys who only know about protestantism and catholicism, and they're so ignorant NO ONE takes them seriously. (Even protestants in general only tend to know about catholicism which is kind of what they compare themselves to/compete with.)
But having said that, the original 'orthodox' church of the empire (=the joint catholic+Greek Orthodox church before the split) was not the first nor the original church. Apparently the earliest forms of christianity were all the small groups that soon came to be considered heresies (and many of their traditions were eradicated; but though they're no longer in practise, their traditions have been documented):
http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/triumph_...cholarship.html
(a site which reviews a lot of current books on biblical scholarship, so they know what they're talking about)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity</b>
by Walter Bauer
For hundreds of years everyone assumed that the earliest Christians were orthodox New Testament Roman Christians, and"heretical" Christianitiesâlike Gnosticism and Marcionismâdeveloped later, branches off the original orthodox trunk.
Then in the 1930s this German guy named Walter Bauer decided to actually look at the evidence. Imagine! What he discovered was that pretty much everywhere he lookedâSyria, Palestine, Egypt, etc.âthe "heresies" weren't branches off any trunk, they were the original local Christianities. And they weren't small marginal sects, they were the main local Christianities.
The evidence shows that all around the Mediterranean, outside Rome, the orthodox New Testament Roman Christianity was a secondary sect, a sect that became dominant only after the conversion of Constantine gave it the advantage of Roman swords. Wow.
No wonder the big boys call this as a paradigm shattering book. Scholarly and technical, especially in the tedious first section of chapter one. Stick with it, because it gets fun and exciting.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
(Roman Piso, 05/27/02)
(2) Saints. If we look to the New Testament itself, we will find the proof of this. All of the evidence that I am presenting in this short examination is based upon that which is found in the earliest known New Testament texts themselves. The Catholic version of Christianity has recognized "saints" from the very beginning of Christianity<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]72424[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Greek Orthodoxy also has saints. Apparently Constantine the tyrant is a saint of the Orthodox Church. (But even he is a better choice than many that the catholic church reveres.)
I'll get to Church records in a moment, first:
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Aug 24 2007, 10:39 AM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Aug 24 2007, 10:39 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->CHRISTIANITY WAS ORIGINALLY CATHOLIC
(4) Popes. And this brings up the idea of Popes. No other version of Christianity has a Pope.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->[right][snapback]72424[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Of course no other version of christianism had a pope. The western (Roman) branch of the initial conjoined imperial christianity had a Bishop of Rome, who was head of the other bishops in his part of the empire. Then there was the Bishop in the east, Constantinople I think (am presuming that this now corresponds to the Archbishop of the Greek Orthodox Church). But eventually, one Bishop of Rome thought he was somehow more important and elevated himself to Pope, calling himself the Vicar of Rome and then in time the Popes were dubbed the 'Vicars of Christ'. This is one of the reasons the eastern and western churches split (see here, http://freetruth.50webs.org/A2c.htm#Crus...Orthodoxy). The Orthodox refer to the Pope as the devil. I don't blame them, they *know* catholicism is a huge fraud and that the pope is nothing, nobody but an imposter and self-appointed - and not actually given any particularly special charge.
http://freetruth.50webs.org/C3.htm#PopeVisitsGreece
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Some Greek Orthodox Christians compared the Pope to the Devil himself
New York Times - Pope Visits Greece Today on a Tough Mission of Reconciliation, May 4, 2001:<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Orthodox priests and monks have held protest vigils and marched under signs that read "the heretic pope" and "two-horned monster of Rome." Archbishop Christodoulos, head of the Greek Orthodox Church, has vowed not to pray alongside the Roman Catholic pope, who arrives in Athens on Friday.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Guardian Unlimited - Monks protest at Pope as Greece goes on strike, April 27, 2001:<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"Out with the two-horned beast, the Pope of Rome 666!" read a banner. "No to the leader of heresy," read another.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Telegraph News - Pope's visit to Greece infuriates Orthodox Church, April 29, 2001:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Orthodox priest [Father Chrysostomos of Athens] declared: "He will infect our country,"
A poster outside Fr Chrysostomos's church spells out Orthodox opposition to the visit. Denouncing the Pope as a "false prophet and the anti-Christ" who adorns his mitre with "666", it announces a demonstration to be held tomorrow against the visit and lists the historical crimes for which successive popes were allegedly responsible.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--><i>So if an Indian catholic were ever to insult your beliefs, you can retort by saying that you have it on very good authority that the Pope is the devil:</i> because so says the more traditional christian church, the Greek Orthodox church. <!--emo&
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tongue.gif' /><!--endemo--> The Greek Orthodox Church is considered older by everyone except the modern WASPys who only know about protestantism and catholicism, and they're so ignorant NO ONE takes them seriously. (Even protestants in general only tend to know about catholicism which is kind of what they compare themselves to/compete with.)But having said that, the original 'orthodox' church of the empire (=the joint catholic+Greek Orthodox church before the split) was not the first nor the original church. Apparently the earliest forms of christianity were all the small groups that soon came to be considered heresies (and many of their traditions were eradicated; but though they're no longer in practise, their traditions have been documented):
http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/triumph_...cholarship.html
(a site which reviews a lot of current books on biblical scholarship, so they know what they're talking about)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity</b>
by Walter Bauer
For hundreds of years everyone assumed that the earliest Christians were orthodox New Testament Roman Christians, and"heretical" Christianitiesâlike Gnosticism and Marcionismâdeveloped later, branches off the original orthodox trunk.
Then in the 1930s this German guy named Walter Bauer decided to actually look at the evidence. Imagine! What he discovered was that pretty much everywhere he lookedâSyria, Palestine, Egypt, etc.âthe "heresies" weren't branches off any trunk, they were the original local Christianities. And they weren't small marginal sects, they were the main local Christianities.
The evidence shows that all around the Mediterranean, outside Rome, the orthodox New Testament Roman Christianity was a secondary sect, a sect that became dominant only after the conversion of Constantine gave it the advantage of Roman swords. Wow.
No wonder the big boys call this as a paradigm shattering book. Scholarly and technical, especially in the tedious first section of chapter one. Stick with it, because it gets fun and exciting.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->