Who was the founder of Christianity?

[fullywired]

The following is not my work and I make no claim to it but I cannot remember where I read it and do not know the link

What Christianity did not begin with

Christianity refers to Jesus of Nazareth. But it did not begin with him. Jesus was a Jew. He was born as a Jew, lived as a Jew and died as a Jew. If he is described as the founder of Christianity, then he is a founder who throughout his life belonged to a different religion from the one he is supposed to have founded. His death on the cross with the reason of his execution indicated by the inscription "King of the Jews" shows that the Roman power in the person of the prefect Pontius Pilate had him executed as a Jewish agitator. That is a fact, even if the Romans misunderstood his work. The Gospels represent Jesus as a Jew who lived in the Jewish context and rarely came in contact with non-Jews. They show him sometimes in conflict and at other times in consensus with other Jewish groups. Whoever interprets Jesus as he appears in the Gospels as being outside of Judaism – as having transcended Judaism, having overcome it or even broken with it – can do so only by ignoring or disregarding and misinterpreting the Jewish sources. This much has been widely accepted: Jesus was a Jew

PS managed to find link http://www.jcrelations.net/When_Did_Christianity_Originate.2788.0.html

fullywired

[Leonardo]

I would argue that, even if those early convertees from Pharisaic Judaism were still technically Jews, albeit now Messianic, that they were Messianic still allows us to refer to them as Christians. After all, isn't 'Christ' simply the anglicisation of the Greek khristos - from the Jewish mashiach (messiah). That 'Christianity' back then was different to the 'Christianity' of today, does not make those early Messianic Jews any less 'Christians'.

When the article argues against the naming of early Messianic Jews as 'christianoi' (Acts 11:26) except by 'outsiders', it makes the mistake of assuming the name 'Christian' should have been a matter of self-recognition by Messianic Jews, but this ignores the language barrier. Was the early Messianic Jews predominant language Greek or Aramaic? I would argue the latter, thus we shouldn't expect to hear them refer to themselves as 'Christians' - but the Aramaic (Jewish) equivalent. And they did.

Edited October 3, 2014 by Leonardo

[Doug1029]

If he existed, I would have to name Paul as the founder of Christianity. But I suspect that Christianity was already around when Paul came on the scene and all he did was usurp the leadership which he then extended and developed.

Doug

[back to earth]

I would say Paul too .

[libstaK]

If he existed, I would have to name Paul as the founder of Christianity. But I suspect that Christianity was already around when Paul came on the scene and all he did was usurp the leadership which he then extended and developed.

Doug

Yup, usurp the leadership pretty much sums up how I feel about him.

[+Paranoid Android]

An argument could be made that the movement that became known as "Christianity" could equally be described as "Messianic Judaism" (or as another member once called "Fulfilled Judaism"). The movement that Jesus started was Christianity, it doesn't matter when the word "Christian" was first coined.

As to some other claims here, Paul was not the founder of Christianity, or even an usurper into power of Christianity. This is a popular but completely wrong understanding, and I'm not surprised it's almost the very first reply to this thread. But I'm not going to argue this point with anyone, so disagree all youlike, I don't have the energy to argue this.

[+DieChecker]

Jesus meant to reform ALL the Jews. So what he meant to happen was that the Jews would basically change over to following his teachings. He didn't mean to start Christianity really. And, if I remember right, he didn't even mean for non-Jews to follow his teachings. It was OK if they did, they just were not his target audience.

[eight bits]

FW

An interesting article and webite. Thank you for posting them.

Paul seems to be the innovator of the Gentile church, based on what he acknowledges to be an already exsiting Jewish church devoted to Jesus as the Christ (Jewish Messiah). He did not, so far as I can see "usurp" anything from that Jewish church, he brought a Jesus-as-Christ message to Gentiles, and proposed that they could join his church without also becoming Jews.

That much stuck - Gentile forms of Christianity prospered, and still do. Paul did not diminish the Jerusalem-based Jewish church by bringing his message to a new audience.

However, Paul's message was that Jesus was returning very soon, during the lifetimes of his audience. Obviously, that message had a "Best used by" date, which understandably expired when Paul himself died. This led to the "Gospels," narratives which promoted the credentials of the immediate disciples of Jesus, probably to the benefit of their still-living "students."

That, I think, is where the "founding of Christianity," at least as we know it, lies: the instituion of apostolic succession, a mechanism for perpetuating a teaching mission beyond the current generation, while retaining a link to the original churches of Jerusalem and Paul's converts.

At some point, centuries later, those apostolic successors made lists of books suitable for reading in church. The common list became a link to the original churches all by itself. Most Christians today belong to churches which have both apostolic succession and a reading list (the canonical Bible), but more recently founded churches (supposedly) rely only on the reading list.

So: credits

Jesus, for teaching a small cadre of Jewish disciples who remained active among Jews after his death. There is no reason, except faith, to imagine that Jesus had any interest in founding a worldwide Gentile movement that would persist for millennia. Even if he did, there is no principled reason, except faith, to exclude his teachers from some credit for the subsequent movement, like John the Baptist (who was supposedly his teacher, according to Gospel stories).

Peter, James, John and others, for being Jesus' disciples, and teaching their own disciples,

Paul, for innovating and promoting the idea that Gentiles could venerate Jesus without also converting to Judaism

BUT, the first "Christian church" that would be recognizable as an instance of modern, organized Christianity was developed by the anonymous innovators of some self-propagating group that could survive from one generation to the next, and intended to do just that. This development seems to have occurred around the turn of the First Century, about two generations after Jesus is supposed to have died.

Other views are possible, of course.

Edited October 4, 2014 by eight bits

[Davros of Skaro]

Who ever came up with the school of thought that the Old Testament contained revelations of an inbetween deity to God.

[Mr Walker]

The following is not my work and I make no claim to it but I cannot remember where I read it and do not know the link

What Christianity did not begin with

Christianity refers to Jesus of Nazareth. But it did not begin with him. Jesus was a Jew. He was born as a Jew, lived as a Jew and died as a Jew. If he is described as the founder of Christianity, then he is a founder who throughout his life belonged to a different religion from the one he is supposed to have founded. His death on the cross with the reason of his execution indicated by the inscription "King of the Jews" shows that the Roman power in the person of the prefect Pontius Pilate had him executed as a Jewish agitator. That is a fact, even if the Romans misunderstood his work. The Gospels represent Jesus as a Jew who lived in the Jewish context and rarely came in contact with non-Jews. They show him sometimes in conflict and at other times in consensus with other Jewish groups. Whoever interprets Jesus as he appears in the Gospels as being outside of Judaism – as having transcended Judaism, having overcome it or even broken with it – can do so only by ignoring or disregarding and misinterpreting the Jewish sources. This much has been widely accepted: Jesus was a Jew

PS managed to find link http://www.jcrelatio...ate.2788.0.html

fullywired

Yup. Christ and Christians for the first 10 or 20 years were all jews. They followed jewish customs, worshipped in synagogues, and kept the seventh day as Sabbath they washed each others feet etc.. Slowly a unique christian doctrine evolved.

At first there were a number of variants including jewish Christians and gnostic Christians, but particularly under the influence of paul, and through the first church leaders from around the region, a more cohesive and centralised doctrine evolved. By about AD 50-60 there was general agreement on christian doctrine and by 80 AD this was formalised and standardised enough for Rome to be able to tax Christians separately from jews based on different religious practices and beliefs Christs first mission was to the jews It was paul and other leaders in the first century who responded to general jewish antagonism and a deisre to widen their influence by preaching to the gentiles, and deliberately altering some concepts and practices to make the faith less jewish. Also, as it happened, Christianity had an almost universal appeal to everyone of the time EXCEPT for the jews (Remember the saying about a prophet not being honoured in his own country) While Christ offered an opportunity to non jews he presented a threat to many jews.

The rest of the evolution from Judaism came over time ( Several centuries) with deliberate shaping from the catholic church. Yet as a modern Christian I can live like a jew of the time did, because that is how Christ lived. However I live based on love not legalism or fear, and have the advantage of Christ's teachings and ethics to help me live.

Edited October 4, 2014 by Mr Walker

[fullywired]

I have always believed that Jesus had no intention of starting a new religion and has the O/P said he was born a Jew lived as a Jew and died as a Jew and before he died he preached to Jews The founding of Christianity was the work of others and I think he would be astounded if he could see what as happened in his name if he could come back

fullywired

[Mr Walker]

I have always believed that Jesus had no intention of starting a new religion and has the O/P said he was born a Jew lived as a Jew and died as a Jew and before he died he preached to Jews The founding of Christianity was the work of others and I think he would be astounded if he could see what as happened in his name if he could come back

fullywired

It depends, I guess, on your definition of founded . Christ founded Christianity in the same way that the first white settlers to America founded the United States of America ie they provided a foundation stone on which later stones were laid, resulting in the present edifice. Without Christ's teachings and his physical charisma and presence Christianity would not exist. Others shaped the form it took, but Christ began it.,and provided a "wedge" with traditional Judaism which evolved into Christianity.

Christianity as a separate religion from Judaism existed by about 50 AD but the catholic form took another several centuries of evolution; and much modern Christianity has moved on from Catholicism to a point where it is almost a separate religion. I agree with you that Christ wasn't trying to start a new religion. He was one of a number of reforming jews of the time and not the only one to be killed by more zealous jews. But the majority of jews had a strong traditional faith and could not be 'reformed" so Paul in particular, but also other church leaders, began converting non jews who were much more receptive to christ's teachings.

[Bluefinger]

The following is not my work and I make no claim to it but I cannot remember where I read it and do not know the link

What Christianity did not begin with

Christianity refers to Jesus of Nazareth. But it did not begin with him. Jesus was a Jew. He was born as a Jew, lived as a Jew and died as a Jew. If he is described as the founder of Christianity, then he is a founder who throughout his life belonged to a different religion from the one he is supposed to have founded. His death on the cross with the reason of his execution indicated by the inscription "King of the Jews" shows that the Roman power in the person of the prefect Pontius Pilate had him executed as a Jewish agitator. That is a fact, even if the Romans misunderstood his work. The Gospels represent Jesus as a Jew who lived in the Jewish context and rarely came in contact with non-Jews. They show him sometimes in conflict and at other times in consensus with other Jewish groups. Whoever interprets Jesus as he appears in the Gospels as being outside of Judaism – as having transcended Judaism, having overcome it or even broken with it – can do so only by ignoring or disregarding and misinterpreting the Jewish sources. This much has been widely accepted: Jesus was a Jew

PS managed to find link http://www.jcrelations.net/When_Did_Christianity_Originate.2788.0.html

fullywired

Thanks for sharing fullywired. I was under the impression that Christians got their names by the Romans. I'm not sure when it happened, possibly during the reign of Nero. That is why Peter, in Rome, responds:

However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name." (1 Peter 4:16 NIV)

The term came from when the Romans would crucify the Christians, calling them "little christs," because they suffered like Jesus. Tradition holds it that Peter himself was crucified upside-down in Rome during the reign of Nero.

Before that, I believe followers of Jesus were called either Nazarenes (as a Jewish sect) or followers of the Way. So, yes, Jesus was a Jew. He was also a Rabbi. And He had His own sect of Judaism. This can be deduced by his several confrontations and denunciation of the prevailing Jewish sects and religious leaders of his time, including the Pharisees and the Saduccees.

Furthermore, the book of Acts details how God began calling the Jews first in Jerusalem, then in Judea, then in Samaria and Syria, then the Diaspora. Then through the missionaries of Paul, God began calling Gentiles all over the Roman Empire to become children of Abraham (and thus God's promises) through faith (See Galatians 3).

It was likely the war in Judea that forced such a major shift from the Jewish identity of the church to the Gentile identity; so much that the Jewish believers stopped showing their Jewish identity. Perhaps this is the meaning behind the woman hiding in the wilderness in Revelation 12. After the war, Jewish believers declared that they were Christians and not Jews so as to avoid the heavy tax placed on all Jews in the Roman Empire.

It was likely at this time (c. 70 CE) that the term Christian came to be identified with all followers of Jesus, rather than Nazarene or followers of the Way.

Edited October 5, 2014 by Bluefinger

[fullywired]

It depends, I guess, on your definition of founded . Christ founded Christianity in the same way that the first white settlers to America founded the United States of America ie they provided a foundation stone on which later stones were laid, resulting in the present edifice. Without Christ's teachings and his physical charisma and presence Christianity would not exist. Others shaped the form it took, but Christ began it.,and provided a "wedge" with traditional Judaism which evolved into Christianity.

Christianity as a separate religion from Judaism existed by about 50 AD but the catholic form took another several centuries of evolution; and much modern Christianity has moved on from Catholicism to a point where it is almost a separate religion. I agree with you that Christ wasn't trying to start a new religion. He was one of a number of reforming jews of the time and not the only one to be kille

Christianity as a separate religion from Judaism existed by about 50 ADd by more zealous jews. But the majority of jews had a strong traditional faith and could not be 'reformed" so Paul in particular, but also other church leaders, began converting non jews who were much more receptive to christ's teachings.

i am not arguing semantics ,the original article made it plain,jesus was born a Jew ,lived as a Jew ,preached to Jews and died as a Jew

"

Christianity as a separate religion from Judaism existed by about 50 AD"yes but Jesus had long gone at that time so could not claim to have founded it

fullywired

[danielost]

Jesus meant to reform ALL the Jews. So what he meant to happen was that the Jews would basically change over to following his teachings. He didn't mean to start Christianity really. And, if I remember right, he didn't even mean for non-Jews to follow his teachings. It was OK if they did, they just were not his target audience.

this is almost correct. jesus knew that his teachings would reach beyond the jews. but, because he was a jew and a rabbi he wanted to give the jews the first chance at it. this is displayed in the roman centerian who asked him to heal his servant and the sumaritian who begged him for his help, which he refused several times before helping. no, jesus was not Christian. being a Christine just means that you believe that he lived and died for our sins. the first Christians were jews and practiced all of the jewish faith. it wasn't until they started converting non-jews did that change.

[danielost]

It depends, I guess, on your definition of founded . Christ founded Christianity in the same way that the first white settlers to America founded the United States of America ie they provided a foundation stone on which later stones were laid, resulting in the present edifice. Without Christ's teachings and his physical charisma and presence Christianity would not exist. Others shaped the form it took, but Christ began it.,and provided a "wedge" with traditional Judaism which evolved into Christianity.

Christianity as a separate religion from Judaism existed by about 50 AD but the catholic form took another several centuries of evolution; and much modern Christianity has moved on from Catholicism to a point where it is almost a separate religion. I agree with you that Christ wasn't trying to start a new religion. He was one of a number of reforming jews of the time and not the only one to be killed by more zealous jews. But the majority of jews had a strong traditional faith and could not be 'reformed" so Paul in particular, but also other church leaders, began converting non jews who were much more receptive to christ's teachings.

the catholic form is not real christanity it is pagan. that is the church is pagan. there are many members of that religion that are Christian.

[danielost]

I have always believed that Jesus had no intention of starting a new religion and has the O/P said he was born a Jew lived as a Jew and died as a Jew and before he died he preached to Jews The founding of Christianity was the work of others and I think he would be astounded if he could see what as happened in his name if he could come back

fullywired

seeing as he is a live and watching us, he can see what is going on in his name.

[Davros of Skaro]

seeing as he is a live and watching us, he can see what is going on in his name.

Is it true he watches very bad things happen to innocent people and does nothing but watch?

[fullywired]

seeing as he is a live and watching us, he can see what is going on in his name.

In that case ,pray tell me is he astounded?

fullywired

[Doug1029]

the catholic form is not real christanity it is pagan. that is the church is pagan. there are many members of that religion that are Christian.

Constantine effectively abolished Christianity, replacing it with Greek philosophy a la' Plato's Republic, but calling it Christianity. At least the name is still the same.

Doug

[J. K.]

If you look in Acts 2, the bestowal of the Holy Spirit was the last piece of the puzzle, so God could be considered the founder. If you prefer a human source, then it would be Peter and the other apostles.

[danielost]

In that case ,pray tell me is he astounded?

fullywired

if you mean crying I would think so. but, his/our father may not be since he already knew what was going to happen. he does have to suffer for all the bad things himself.

[Mr Walker]

i am not arguing semantics ,the original article made it plain,jesus was born a Jew ,lived as a Jew ,preached to Jews and died as a Jew

"

Christianity as a separate religion from Judaism existed by about 50 AD"yes but Jesus had long gone at that time so could not claim to have founded it

fullywired

I agree with all the quoted piece but it does not mean Christ could not be called the founder of Christianity. Lots of convict Australians were English Irish Scottish etc and yet were the founders of Australia as we know it today. A lot happened in between and Australia isn't like it was 220 years ago, yet those people founded the nation we call Australia.

[danielost]

if Christ was a normal human. we would say he started a movement that blossomed into christianaty. the movement went beyond what he may have intended, but he started it.

[fullywired]

I agree with all the quoted piece but it does not mean Christ could not be called the founder of Christianity. Lots of convict Australians were English Irish Scottish etc and yet were the founders of Australia as we know it today. A lot happened in between and Australia isn't like it was 220 years ago, yet those people founded the nation we call Australia.

There you go again ,off on a tangent.We are not talking about what he could have been called but what he was or in this particular case ,what he wasn't .(in my opinion of course)

fullywired