Original Church from Israel...Where did it go?

[jimraboin]

Hello group.

Some of you have asked for an overview of history showing how Rome became the foundation of all institutional Christianity. Some of you will like more detail than shown here. Others will find it just enough. And to those who think it is too much, I apologize.

If the remaining believing Jews from Israel immediately after the apostles were one with Rome's concept of Christianity, then it stands to reason that at least one should have made a recordable contribution to Christianity in pre-Constantine era. And that account should have been included with and considered equal to those of Greek early fathers. In fact, that believing Jew should himself been considered an early father. Is there such a record?

Yet I find that the Gentile quasi believers after Jerusalem's destruction made a conscious effort to separate themselves from any believing Jews from Israel. Why?

Exhibit 1:

From Erdmans Handbook to the History of Christianity first edition 1977. Page 50.
"At first Christians were regarded as a Jewish sect by both Jews and Gentiles. This led to oppostion and persecution of the church by the Jewish authorities, who objected to its doctrines and the admission of Gentiles without their accepting the Law. After the Jewish revolts against Rome (ad 66-73) most (Gentile) Christians dissasociated themselves from the Jews. The Jewish Christians refusal to support the revolts caused them to be regarded as national enemies. From this time few Jews were converted to Christianity."(emphasis mine)

So here we see the Gentile Christians separating from ALL Jews from Israel. Next we see that Israel itself rejected the Jewish believers. But can we pick up the trail of Messianic beleivers in history? Consider the remaining evidence.

Exhibit 2:

Clement

Date of birth unknown; died about the year 215. St. Clement was an early Greek theologian and head of the catechetical school of Alexandria.

He became a convert to the Faith and travelled from place to place in search of higher instruction, attaching himself successively to different masters: to a Greek of Ionia, to another of Magna Graecia, to a third of Coele-Syria, after all of whom he addressed himself in turn to an Egyptian, an Assyrian, and a converted Palestinian Jew. At last he met Pantaenus in Alexandria, and in his teaching "found rest". Catholic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htm

Here we have a man who testifies that there were believing Jews from Israel. Time period in mid 100's to A.D. 215. Here we also have confirmation that Gentile Christian's preferred one another and rejected any contribution to the faith by the Israeli brethren.

Exhibit 3:

Aristides of Athens

A Christian apologist living at Athens in the second century.
The aim of the "Apology" is to show that Christians only have the true conception of God. Having affirmed that God is "the selfsame being who first established and now controls the universe", Aristides points out the errors of the Chaldeans, Greeks, Egyptians, and Jews concerning the Deity... Catholic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01712d.htm

Facts I gather: Christianity among the gentiles is becoming more and more distinct and separate from the believing Jews of Israel. Here Christianity, like Clement's belief, is not the same as that of the Messianic Jews and seems to be based in Greek/Alexandrian teaching. Aristides claims Jews have wrong ideas concerning God. Confirmation that Gentile Christianity is in conflict with and separated from the believing brethren from Israel.

Exhibit 4:

Heggisipus

He was clearly an orthodox Catholic and not a "Judaeo-Christian", though Eusebius says he showed that he was a convert from Judaism, for he quoted from the Hebrew, he was acquainted with the Gospel according to the Hebrews and with a Syriac Gospel, and he also cited unwritten traditions of the Jews. He seems to have belonged to some part of the East, possibly Palestine. Catholic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07194a.htm

Another clear example that a distinction between Judaeo-Christians and Gentile Christians existed. Gentile believers still maintained their separation from the believing brethren from Israel.

Exhibit 5:

Clement

Date of birth unknown; died about the year 215. St. Clement was an early Greek theologian and head of the catechetical school of Alexandria.

He became a convert to the Faith and travelled from place to place in search of higher instruction, attaching himself successively to different masters: to a Greek of Ionia, to another of Magna Graecia, to a third of Coele-Syria, after all of whom he addressed himself in turn to an Egyptian, an Assyrian, and a converted Palestinian Jew. At last he met Pantaenus in Alexandria, and in his teaching "found rest". Catholic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htm

Eusebius

Eusebius Pamphili, Bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine, the "Father of Church History"; b. about 260; d. before 341.

The passage just quoted shows that the date of Eusebius's birth is more than a merely curious question. According to Lightfoot, it cannot have been "much later than A. D. 260" (p. 309); according to Harnack, "it can hardly be placed later than 260-265" (Chronologie, I, p. 106)...Eusebius succeeded Pamphilus in the charge of the college and library. Catholic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05617b.htm

Origen

Born in 185, Origen was barely seventeen when a bloody persecution of the Church of Alexandrian broke out...He assumed, of his own accord, the direction of the catechetical school, on the withdrawal of Clement, and in the following year was confirmed in his office by the patriarch Demetrius (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", VI, ii; St. Jerome, "De viris illust.", liv). Origen'sschool, which was frequented by pagans, soon became a nursery of neophytes, confessors, and martyrs...Frequenting the philosophic schools, especially that of Ammonius Saccas, he devoted himself to a study of the philosophers, particularly Plato and the Stoics. Catholic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htm.

These three men are the founding trio upon which all of Catholicism is built. Among these Eusebius stands head and shoulders above the other two and has become the "Father of Catholic history". All these men served a the Director of the very same School in Alexandria. A school devoted to the pursuit of Greek thinking and philosophy. I don't think it would be a too broad of generalization to say that any others Catholic institution uses in support of these three's philosophies are found almost exclusively in writings by these three. Only scraps, fragments or memories are left from the original authors. So these men were believed based on their own testimony of themselves and their testimony of what other men supposedly said and believed.

Exhibit 6:

Rome's Emperor's were considered Gods.

"Whoever wished to approach the head of the State must first pass through many ante-rooms and prostrate himself before the emperor as before a divinity.” http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04295c.htm

Exhibit 7:

Roman emperor held title “Pontifex Maximus” which literally means he was God on earth and as such was head of all pagan and now Christian religions.

Exhibit 8:

Persecution in pre-Constantine era remained fierce against all those who would not worship according to Emperor's design. Jews and Gentiles alike. But the dream of a unified religion under Roman control is made manifest in Trajan's edict.

Trajan, flushed with victory over the Scythians and Dacians, sought to perfect the universality of his dominion by a species of religious conquest. He decreed, therefore, that the Christians should unite with their pagan neighbors in the worship of the gods.... Cathlic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07644a.htm

Exhibit 9:

Trajan's vision of religious unity between pagan and Christian was finally realized at Council of Nicaea A.D. 325 under Emperor Constantine.

"The Church tolerated the cult of the emperor under many forms. It was permitted to speak of the divinity of the emperor, of the sacred palace, the sacred chamber and of the altar of the emperor, without being considered on this account an idolater."
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04295c.htm

Exhibit 10:

Trajan's vision produced bloodshed, terror and death to all who would not embrace it in his day. Constantines' produced the very same. All who would not convert to his new unified religion were persecuted. Rome's lust to be ruler over a unified kingdom saw its completion in Catholicism.

“It looks almost as though the last persecutions of the Christians were directed more against all irreconcilables and extremists than against the great body of Christians” http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04295c.htm

From this foundation Catholicism proceeded with inquisitions, crusades and ethnic cleansing under the banner "convert or die". If one didn't accpet Nicene Creed, then they were not worthy of living.

I could go on and on. The evidence is clear and unmistakable. I think there is good reason to question motives, representations and opinions of Catholic institution. I further think that there is no good reason why Gentile institution separated itself from the Jewish brothers in the faith from Israel. They existed. God built his Church on them. They are the key.

Jim

[Lion Heart]

Originally posted by jimraboin
Hello group.

Clement
Here we have a man who testifies that there were believing Jews from Israel. Time period in mid 100's to A.D. 215. Here we also have confirmation that Gentile Christian's preferred one another and rejected any contribution to the faith by the Israeli brethren.
ClementJim

jIM,

You have Clement listed twice.

The second Clement you have listed above Usabius would probably be the one who lived around the time John was writing the Letter of Revelation at the Isle of Patmos; He was a leading elder/Bishop in Rome; Since he lived in Rome and is considered to have answered an appeal in writing to the church of Corinth "urging a demonstration of Christian Graces and daily relationships against some who were rebelling it is unlikely, He is the other Clement around the time of 215 AD.

Just want to clarify this as it could confuse your time line.




Grace and peace , RICHARD

[Lion Heart]

Originally posted by jimraboin
Hello group.
I could go on and on. The evidence is clear and unmistakable. I think there is good reason to question motives, representations and opinions of Catholic institution. I further think that there is no good reason why Gentile institution separated itself from the Jewish brothers in the faith from Israel. They existed. God built his Church on them. They are the key.Jim


Thanks for your info,

I am not sure what you mean by your last paragraph; however, just one point concerning the Lords church;

The apostle Paul prophecies a revelation of the Holy Spirit made to him; states the following:

Eph 2 , begining at verse;

13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; (between Jew and Gentile )
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,
2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.
8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;
9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: EPH 1:13


And when the word states ALL Israel will be saved He speaks of all those who have believed in Jesus, and have been sealed by the Holy Ghost (Eph 2:1)



RICHARD

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

The references in classical Jewish sources to the early Jewish Christians are few & far between. The rabbinic leadership shunned them from very early on, especially after their failure to join in either the Great Revolt or the Bar Kochba Revolt against the Romans. Our Sage Samuel the Small (so called because of his extreme modesty) in the early first century CE (between the Revolts) added a 19th benediction to the main thrice-daily weekday prayer (which up until then had 18 benedictions), which is still recited. It is beneduction against sectarians, heretics and informers and was originally directed (in part) against the Jewish Christians.

Be well!

stillsmallvoice

[Lion Heart]

OK....!

[jimraboin]

Hello people,

Good to hear from all of you.

Here is my point. There were two sects of Christinity in the pre-Constantine period. The original Jewish believers from Israel and the gentile believers from Rome who were eventually referred to as "Catholic". Hostility existed between Rome's version and Israel's. All Catholic history is slanted towards Rome and a curious lack of anything whatsoever written by the believing Jews from Israel has not been preserved by Rome. Yet they did exist as many of the above personalities had contact with and heard their gospel. The Messianic believers existed prior to and outside of Catholic form of Christianity. None of the above early fathers were Messianic Jews from Israel.

At least one of the multitude of priests who became obedient to the faith in Acts 6:7 should have had some impact on Catholicism and their recording of history if the believing Jews were not cut off by Rome? But not one believing Jew from Israel in any capacity has ever been invited or any contribution made to Catholicism in pre-Constantine era let alone any of the believing faithful of God's legitimate Old Testament authority. But the above quotes do prove that Rome's form of Christianity both knew and rejected the gospel of the Jews from Israel. The gospel that Jesus gave to Israel first hand that was pure and in fulfillment to Israel's own Scriptures vested with Aaron's priestly line located at Jerusalem's Temple. At minimum, they should have had impact for history's sake as testimony of the things God did, said and had recorded in times past. Their testimony was rejected and Alexandrian "broader view" was taken to be superior concept of truth.

Why do we trust those who should be held suspect of bad motives and such violence towards the believing Jews from Israel? Was it God who built the Roman institution on such hatred? If not God, then who?

Hard questions for some, I'm sure. But necessary if we wish to build upon Truth.

Thoughts?

Jim

[GreenEyedLady]

This is by far one of the best threads I have read! Jim...could you post some refrences about this.
I am lacking in this area...I really need to be educated about this. Can you point out some historical books or sites?
Thanks so much for your words...
Awesome!
GEL

[Lion Heart]

Two Sects of Christianity?

One of the Sects as you call them, obviously could not have been Christian according to Scrioture.

Me thinks you've misplace an oar.






Respectfully, Richard

[jimraboin]

Sorry, can't offer you an author besides me. It is my studies over the past five years have produced what you are now reading. Mine and only mine.

You Catholic faithful can take shots at me for this. But my arguments are sound. Look forward to discussing them with you.

Truth has to be true in order to be Truth.

Jim

[GreenEyedLady]

What I am wondering is where you found your information...I understand that is your writing in the OP but I would LOVE to get my hands on your sources!
Thanks
GEL

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

Have a look at <http://www.israel-mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00n00> for a very good article on the various Christian communities in the Holy Land today. (The article is available in English, Spaniah, French, Portuguese & German.)

Be well!

ssv

[jimraboin]

You aren't going to believe me but my sources are almost exclusively Catholic ones. Chief one being "Catholic Encyclopedia". In my original post I list web address.

Literally have read it as if it were a legal document. As I attempted to put the facts on a time line strange voids appeared. As I continued to search for the information that was supposed to fill the void, things became clear.

A messy task. But that is how I have arrived at what you are now reading.

Jim

[judge]

think there is good reason to question motives, representations and opinions of Catholic institution. I further think that there is no good reason why Gentile institution separated itself from the Jewish brothers in the faith from Israel. They existed. God built his Church on them. They are the key.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Hi Jim, hope all is well! :wave:

Your research is very interesting.

Can you elaborate on what it means that "They are the key"

What are they the key to?

&nbsp;

Thanks in advance.

[isshinwhat]

After the Jewish revolts against Rome (ad 66-73) most (Gentile) Christians dissasociated themselves from the Jews. The Jewish Christians refusal to support the revolts caused them to be regarded as national enemies. From this time few Jews were converted to Christianity."(emphasis mine)

So here we see the Gentile Christians separating from ALL Jews from Israel. Next we see that Israel itself rejected the Jewish believers.

First, Jim had to add the word "Gentile" to this quote to make it appear that the Gentile Christians had disassociated themselves from the Jews while the Jewish Christians hung around their Jewish ancestors. The original article lumps all Christians together, and only refers to Jewish Christians to show that they had allegiance to their gentile brothers instead of their Jewish ancestors. SSV's comments on the added prayer clarify this further, as they show there was hostility between the Jewish converts and the Jewish mainstream. The article was in no way intended to show that the Gentiles left the Jewish Converts, but instead it shows their unity.

Here we have a man who testifies that there were believing Jews from Israel. Time period in mid 100's to A.D. 215. Here we also have confirmation that Gentile Christian's preferred one another and rejected any contribution to the faith by the Israeli brethren.

First, the article mentions a "converted Palestinian Jew," not a Jewish Christian whose beliefs vary from those of his gentile bretheren. Paul, Peter, Andrew, John, all the apostles were converted Jews, yet Paul was the minister to the gentiles, and Peter founded the Church at Rome and Antioch. Again, there is no statement, nor is any ill will implied by the article in regards to the contribution by Jewish converts to Christianity.

In regards to Exhibits 3 and 4, there was a difference between the Judaizing Christians, and the Jewish and Gentile Christians. The latter two held identical beliefs, while the others did not. Hence the article's differentiation between orthodox Christians, and Judeo-Christians. The following comes from Jim's source, the Catholic Encyclopedia.

Judaizers

A party of Jewish Christians in the Early Church, who either held that circumcision and the observance of the Mosaic Law were necessary for salvation and in consequence wished to impose them on the Gentile converts, or who at least considered them as still obligatory on the Jewish Christians.

Notice the article says a party of Jewish Christians, not all Jewish Christians. There were orthodox, Jewish converts.

These three men [Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, Origen] are the founding trio upon which all of Catholicism is built.

That is a blatant misstating of the facts. No mention is made of Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Iranaeus, Ingatius, the early Tertullian, Justin the Martyr, or any of the various other Church Fathers who held distinctly "Catholic" beliefs. There is no such "founding trio." If anyone wishes, I can post a myriad of quotes from these other men which contradict Jim's assertions.

Exhibit 7:

Roman emperor held title “Pontifex Maximus” which literally means he was God on earth and as such was head of all pagan and now Christian religions.

Exhibit 8:

Persecution in pre-Constantine era remained fierce against all those who would not worship according to Emperor's design. Jews and Gentiles alike. But the dream of a unified religion under Roman control is made manifest in Trajan's edict.

quote:
Trajan, flushed with victory over the Scythians and Dacians, sought to perfect the universality of his dominion by a species of religious conquest. He decreed, therefore, that the Christians should unite with their pagan neighbors in the worship of the gods.... Cathlic Encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07644a.htm

These are true...

Trajan's vision of religious unity between pagan and Christian was finally realized at Council of Nicaea A.D. 325 under Emperor Constantine.

This one is not. Christianity was legalized, it was not made binding on anyone to believe in Christ under pain of death, nor was there a mixing of both into one religion. There was only religious freedom, for as the article Jim quoted also says, "Therefore they had decided to grant Christians and all others freedom in the exercise of religion. Everyone might follow that religion which he considered the best. They hoped that "the deity enthroned in heaven" would grant favour and protection to the emperors and their subjects. This was in itself quite enough to throw the pagans into the greatest astonishment. When the wording of the edict is carefully examined there is clear evidence of an effort to express the new thought in a manner too unmistakable to leave any doubt. The edict contains more than the belief, to which Galerius at the end had given voice, that the persecutions were useless, and it granted the Christians freedom of worship, while at the same time it endeavoured not to affront the pagans."

Exhibit 10:

Trajan's vision produced bloodshed, terror and death to all who would not embrace it in his day. Constantines' produced the very same. All who would not convert to his new unified religion were persecuted. Rome's lust to be ruler over a unified kingdom saw its completion in Catholicism.


“It looks almost as though the last persecutions of the Christians were directed more against all irreconcilables and extremists than against the great body of Christians” http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04295c.htm

This statement was not made in regards to post-Constantine imperial rule, as Jim would have you believe, but to the previous rule where orthodox Christians were killed for their beliefs. There will always be Christians who do not hold the orthodox faith, or who will save themselves instead of stand up for their faith, but the Church itself, as a body, did not teach religious syncretism.

God Bless,

Neal

[judge]

Thanks for the post Neal.

[visionary]

bumpBecause of the posting on another thread of the start of Messianic being only since the 70's... I thought I would bring this thread forward as it present some interesting points to ponder.

[visionary]

Origins of Our Faith - The Hebrew Roots of Christianity
by Rick Richardson

You can find the online version on the following site:
http://www.originsofourfaith.com/
Just click on the link next to the book to either order the book or read it online.

You can also read the book on this site as well, which also has many other books. It is the first link in the list:
http://www.shalom-crmi.org/html/books.html

[MyZz]

Thanx Vis for bumping that up...a great thread indeed:thumbsup: It was Jimraboiin's posts on other forums that led me to find this forum !BH!

[SaintGeorge]

And here comes a Catholic now!;)

No Jewish arthors...is outrage!

Ever heard of the Desert Fathers?:thumbsup:

[visionary]

Howard Vos in his book Exploring Church History writes:

Though Christianity was winning a victory of sorts over paganism, paganism achieved victories of her own by infiltrating the Christian church in numerous subtle ways. As opposition to paganism increased, many took their place in church without experiencing conversion. Thus large segments of church membership consisted merely of baptized pagans. The distinction between Christianity and paganism became increasingly blurred as the state church was established under the ultimate authority of the emperor.

We need to remember that they were not JUST “brand new believers in Yeshua (Jesus),” they were ALSO brand new believers in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Before this time they were PAGANS, worshipping OTHER gods!

[visionary]

In his book This Hebrew Lord, John Shelby Spong writes:

When I analyze the language, the concepts, the understandings, the meanings in traditional religious patterns today, I discover that they come to us not from our biblical Hebrew heritage at all; rather they are the direct outgrowth of the Neoplatonic roots of Greek philosophy.

The Christian faith was born in a Hebrew context, serving a Hebrew Lord – a life-giving, life loving, whole, free man. But when this faith moved outward from the Hebrew world into the Mediterranean civilization, it inevitably confronted the dualistic mind of the Greek world. After that confrontation, Christianity was never the same.

Dualism became the basic mental assumption through which the Christian faith was viewed. It was a gradual occurrence. All material things did not suddenly become evil; it was much more subtle than that. Slowly but surely the Hebrew view of the goodness of creation and the wholeness of life was forgotten, and Christianity bought Greek dualism, the inevitable result being what I now call the Grecianization of the gospel.

The world became a place to be escaped, not to be engaged. Christians who followed the “higher calling” turned their backs on life and gave themselves to the “spiritual” pursuits of prayer, meditation, and contemplation.

I am convinced that if the Bible is going to be understood in our day, we must develop “Hebrew eyes” and “Hebrew attitudes toward life.” The Bible is a Hebrew book, telling the story of the Hebrew people. Jesus was a Hebrew Lord.

Those who became the “Christian Fathers” were not educated in the Torah. They were educated in Greek philosophy. The debate did NOT center on how to interpret the Torah; rather, it centered on which Greek philosopher to follow. Because the Gentile had a totally different paradigm, the manner in which they viewed what the earliest followers had written led them to entirely different conclusions.

[visionary]

In his book Our Father Abraham, Marvin Wilson writes:

Platonism holds that there are two worlds: the visible, material world and the invisible, spiritual world. The visible or phenomenal world is in tension with the invisible or conceptual world. Because it is imperfect and a source of evil, the material world is inferior to that of the spiritual. In this view, the human soul originates in the heavenly realm, from which it fell into the realm of matter. Though human beings find themselves related to both of these worlds, they long for release from their physical bodies so that their true selves (their souls) might take flight back to the permanent world of the celestial and divine.

Plato's view of the cosmos was then transposed to man. The body was a prison for the soul. The immortal soul -- pure spirit -- is incarcerated in a defective body of crumbling clay. Salvation comes at death, when the soul escapes the body and soars heavenward to the invisible realm of the pure and eternal spirit.

This had a widespread influence upon the history of Christian thought. "The most important fact in the history of Christian doctrine was that the father of Christian theology, Origen, was a Platonic philosopher at the school of Alexandria.” -- Werner Jaeger, “The Greek Ideas of Immortality," Harvard Theological Review 52 (July, 1959): 146.

Unlike the Greeks, the Hebrews viewed the world as good. Though fallen and unredeemed, it was created by a God who designed it with humanity's best interests at heart. So, instead of fleeing from the world, human beings experienced God's fellowship, love, and saving activity in the historical order within the world.

Although most of the early “Church Fathers” came from a Greek background, some were even more extreme in their views. Marcion, who would eventually be labeled as a heretic, gives one a glimpse at the ideas that were being promoted during this early point in Christian history.

[visionary]

Dr. John Garr writes:

In the middle of the second century, the Hebrew foundations of Christian faith were attacked by the first great heresy that challenged the church. Some of the ideas of this heresy so permeated the church's corporate psyche that it has not yet fully recovered its spiritual and scriptural equilibrium.

Marcion, son of a bishop of Sinope in Pontus (there is some question about this) joined the Syrian Gnostic Credo in Rome in developing a dualistic view of sacred history which postulated the existence of two gods, the good and gracious God (Christ) and the Demiurge (Jehovah of the Jews). Marcion taught an irreconcilable dualism between gospel and law, between Christianity and Judaism. The Demiurge and his religion were seen as harsh, severe, and unmerciful, and they were cast into Hades by Christ, the good God.

Marcion invented a new canon of Holy Scripture which included only an abridged Gospel of Luke and ten of Paul's epistles, some of which he edited. He wrested the words of Jesus in Matthew 5:17 to declare, “I am not come to fulfill the law and the prophets, but to destroy them.”

In Marcion's view, Christianity had no connection whatever with the past, whether of the Jewish or the heathen world, but had fallen abruptly and magically from heaven. Jesus, too, was not born, nor did he die. His body was a phantom to reveal the good God, and his death was an illusion. This Christ was not the Messiah predicted in the Old Testament; he was a totally new and unforeseen manifestation of the good God of Greek dualism. Because the rest of the apostles were Judaizing corrupters of pure Christianity, Christ called Paul as the apostle to preach the truth of Marcion's extreme antinomianism and anti-Judaism.

Marcion was the first one to create a “New” Testament. He believed that the “Old” Testament should be discarded, and his influence is with us to this day. How could this have happened? Didn’t the Jewish believers try to guide and influence the Gentile “converts”? One reason for this “oversight” is that the great increase of Gentiles into the sect happened at the same time that Roman oppression was growing. Within a few short years most of the Jewish leaders of the sect were no longer around.

[visionary]

The Changing of the Guard

Fox’s Book of Martyrs, The First Persecution, Under Nero, A.D. 67

This was the occasion of the first persecution; and the barbarities exercised on the Christians were such as even excited the commiseration of the Romans themselves.

Nero even refined upon cruelty, and contrived all manner of punishments for the Christians that the most infernal imagination could design. In particular, he had some sewed up in skins of wild beasts, and then worried by dogs until they expired; and others dressed in shirts made stiff with wax, fixed to axletrees, and set on fire in his gardens, in order to illuminate them.

This persecution was general throughout the whole Roman Empire; but it rather increased than diminished the spirit of Christianity. In the course of it, St. Paul and St. Peter were martyred. To their names may be added, Erastus, chamberlain of Corinth; Aristarchus, the Macedonian, and Trophimus, an Ephesian, converted by St. Paul, and fellow-laborer with him, Joseph, commonly called Barsabas, and Ananias, bishop of Damascus; each of the Seventy.

The Death of the Jewish leaders

The following is a list of those Jewish leaders of the sect who were killed before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, most of them at the hands of the Romans or other pagans:

Banabas - dragged out of the city and burned, at Salamina in Cyprus, A.D. 64

Mark - dragged to the stake at Alexandria, died on the way, A.D. 64

Peter - crucified upside-down, A.D. 69

Paul - beheaded at Rome, A.D. 69

Andrew - crucified at Patras A.D. 70

Bartholomew - tortured, then flayed alive, and finally beheaded in Armenia, A.D.70

Thomas - cast into a furnace, and his side pierced with spears in Calamina, A.D. 70

Matthew - nailed to the ground and beheaded at Nad-Davar, A.D. 70

Simon Zelotes and his brother Judas Thadeus,
both slain, one crucified, and the other beaten to death with sticks, A.D. 70

Mathias - tied on a cross upon a rock, stoned, and then beheaded, A.D. 70

70 disciples of Yeshua, and several fellow travelers of the Apostles - slain, A.D. 70

The Second Persecution, Under Domitian, A.D. 81

The emperor Domitian, who was naturally inclined to cruelty, first slew his brother, and then raised the second persecution against the Christians. In his rage he put to death some of the Roman senators, some through malice; and others to confiscate their estates. He then commanded all the lineage of David be put to death.

A variety of fabricated tales were, during this reign, composed in order to injure the Christians. Such was the infatuation of the pagans, that, if famine, pestilence, or earthquakes afflicted any of the Roman provinces, it was laid upon the Christians. These persecutions among the Christians increased the number of informers and many, for the sake of gain, swore away the lives of the innocent.

Another hardship was that, when any Christians were brought before the magistrates, a test oath was proposed, when, if they refused to take it, death was pronounced against them; and if they confessed themselves Christians, the sentence was the same.

Nicodemus, a benevolent Christian of some distinction, suffered at Rome, and Protasius and Gervasius were martyred at Milan.

Timothy was the celebrated disciple of Paul and bishop of Ephesus, where he zealously governed the Church until A.D. 97. At this period, as the pagans were about to celebrate a feast called Catagogion, Timothy, meeting the procession, severely reproved them for their ridiculous idolatry, which so exasperated the people that they fell upon him with their clubs, and beat him in so dreadful a manner that he expired of the bruises two days later.

The Third Persecution, Under Trajan, A.D. 108

Trajan being succeeded by Adrian, the latter continued this third persecution with as much severity as his predecessor. About this time Alexander, bishop of Rome, with his two deacons, were martyred; as were Quirinus and Hernes, with their families; Zenon, a Roman nobleman, and about ten thousand other Christians.

At the martyrdom of Faustines and Jovita, brothers and citizens of Brescia, their torments were so many, and their patience so great, that Calocerius, a pagan, beholding them, was struck with admiration, and exclaimed in a kind of ecstasy, "Great is the God of the Christians!" for which he was apprehended, and suffered a similar fate.

The Fourth Persecution, Under Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, A.D. 162

Polycarp, the venerable bishop of Smyrna, hearing that persons were seeking for him, escaped, but was discovered by a child. After feasting the guards who apprehended him, he desired an hour in prayer, which being allowed, he prayed with such fervency that his guards repented that they had been instrumental in taking him. He was, however, carried before the proconsul, condemned, and burnt in the market place.

If we look at history, most of the persecution and martyrdom did NOT come from the Jews ... but from the Gentiles (Romans). Why is there no mention of the ROMAN persecution in the New Testament? Because that was so commonplace, it was assumed that everyone KNEW about THAT. Although there was an occasional lifting of the oppression, the Gentile (or Roman) rule was a constant reality.

By 70CE (AD), the Temple was destroyed, Jews were forced to flee Jerusalem, and most of the leadership (of the followers of Yeshua), were dead. Between 70CE (AD) and 90CE (AD) there is very little recorded history, however, when the record resumes, we see a very different group of people emerging as the leadership within this messianic movement. The emerging leadership was unfamiliar with and uneducated in the Torah. So they did what they knew; and they understood their beliefs through a different perspective: a Greek perspective.

Their misunderstanding of the faith was not surprising since most of them didn’t have the privilege of owning a Torah scroll. What they DID have were copies of letters and testimonies written by certain Apostles. These letters and testimonies were never intended to be understood as “law,” and yet that is exactly what happened. The body of letters and testimonies that became the “New Testament” were soon not only given equal status to that of the law and prophets, they eventually became more important; a reality that would have made the first followers of Yeshua shudder.

In his book Early Christian Fathers Cyril Richardson writes:

Outside the New Testament writings, the earliest Christian document we possess is an anonymous letter of the church of Rome to the church of Corinth. It was written about AD 96.
The most striking facts about early Christian literature are its rich variety and its almost exclusively Gentile authorship. [pp 15]

As the Gentile believers became more in numbers than the Jewish believers, the division between them also grew. The Gentiles, more familiar with Greek philosophy than with the Torah, interpreted Paul’s letters from a very different perspective.

The writings of Paul and others of his contemporaries also began to be considered to be as authoritative as the word of God (the Torah), after their death. The idea, originally proposed by Marcion, to create a “new” testament, also began to grow, and for the next couple of centuries became a political struggle as to what books were authentic, and whose version of a “new” testament would be used to shape the doctrinal direction of the Gentile believers who were already far from the Jewish perspective.

As time went on the Hebraic perspective diminished as pagan influences grew. The main body of believers was now moving firmly out of Judaism and into paganism. By the time of Emperor Constantine, observing customs that were considered to be “Jewish” had become illegal. All subjects of the empire were mandated to accept this profession:

“I renounce all customs, rites, legalism, unleavened breads, and feast of Lambs of the Hebrews, sacrifices, prayers, aspirations, purifications, sanctifications, and propriations, hymns and chants, observances and synagogues, and the foods and drinks of the Hebrews. In one word, I renounce absolutely everything Jewish, every Law, rite and custom…” [Stefano Assemani, Acta Sanctorum Martyrum Orientalium at Occidentalium, Vol 1 (Rome 1748)] page 105.

The customs and the culture of “Christianity” became those of the pagan society of the Roman Empire including the days that were honored as “holy”; now those of pagan deities rather than the Holy Days of God.