Main article: History of early Christianity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Christianity
The earliest followers of Jesus composed an apocalyptic, Second Temple Jewish sect, which historians refer to as Jewish Christianity. The first part of the period, during the lifetimes of the Twelve Apostles, is called the Apostolic Age. In line with the Great Commission attributed to the resurrected Jesus, the Apostles are said to have dispersed from Jerusalem, and the missionary activity spread Christianity to cities throughout the Hellenistic world and even beyond the Roman Empire. Though Paul's influence on Christian thinking is said to be more significant than any other New Testament author,[4] the relationship of Paul of Tarsus and Judaism is still disputed.
Early Christians suffered sporadic persecution because they refused to pay homage to the emperor as divine. Persecution was on the rise in Asia Minor towards the end of the 1st century,[7] as well as in Rome in the aftermath of the Great Fire of Rome in AD 64.
During the Ante-Nicene period following the Apostolic Age, a great diversity of views emerged simultaneously with strong unifying characteristics lacking in the apostolic period. Part of the unifying trend was an increasingly harsh rejection of Judaism and Jewish practices. Early Christianity gradually grew apart from Judaism during the first two centuries and established itself as a predominantly gentile religion in the Roman Empire.
According to Will Durant, the Christian Church prevailed over Paganism because it offered a much more attractive doctrine and because the church leaders addressed human needs better than their rivals.[8]
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Charles Brown <cb31450 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd say the fact that there was a religious cult based on Jesus of
> actually existing people from that time period is some evidence that
> there was a real Jesus. Why would they start a religion based on a
> fictional character ?
>
> Charles
>
> On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Arthur Maisel <arthurmaisel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I am far from being an expert on 1st-century Judean history, but I think
>> the evidence that the Jesus of Christianity is based on someone who
>> actually lived is pretty good, attested by sources nearer to being
>> contemporary than the New Testament. As with Shakespeare, Occam's razor
>> suggests that it is more likely that there was someone recognizably
>> connected to the figure who has come down to us than that it was someone
>> else or no one. Of course, the Jesus of Christianity is a fictional
>> character, and no one event in the story can be implicitly relied on,
>> including the crucifiction. Some of his sayings, however, are thought to
>> date from a contemporary compiliation, now lost, that was incorporated by
>> the writers of the Gospel accounts. We ourselves can witness how a person
>> we all know was real is being changed into a fictional character in the
>> case of MLK.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 2:38 AM, Chuck Grimes <cagrimes42 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Today, as the world pauses on the birthday of one of history's greatest
>>>> men, whose teachings continue to benefit the entire human race, let us join
>>>> in toasting the memory of Sir Isaac Newton, and of all the giants on whose
>>>> shoulders he stood.
>>>>
>>>> Jim Farmelant
>>>> http://independent.academia.edu/JimFarmelant
>>>> http://www.foxymath.com
>>>> Learn or Review Basic Math
>>>>
>>>
>>> ----------
>>>
>>> The annual reminder, reminded me of a question I've never been able to
>>> answer.
>>>
>>> Did Jesus exist? Is there any independent information that he did?
>>>
>>> Is there any historical support that any of the original apostles ever
>>> existed or were there any groups like them? There had to be something, but
>>> what?
>>>
>>> Given Shlomo Sand's Invention of the Jewish People and his rant on the
>>> second temple, which was the nearest contemporary event rests on dubious
>>> ground, and given that most `people' are inventions of some sort, well you
>>> get the idea.
>>>
>>> This is coming from my own ruminations on Strauss and his concept of
>>> classical Greece, which he seemed to think had a very specific worldview,
>>> which I think is a laugh ... beause ... He seemed to have forgotten that
>>> his idea of antiquity was an invention of the Renaissance with the late
>>> recovery of Plato in Florence, and more particularly the Enlightenment (his
>>> bete noir)...
>>>
>>> Strauss had a real axe to grind on the concept of history, which is
>>> ridiculous since without enligthenment history, he would have no idea how
>>> to construct a worldview from the texts and fragments of ancient
>>> thought---which were endlessly mediated by a couple of thousand years of
>>> translations. The texts that were used in Florence to recover Plato came
>>> from Constantinople. Not sure of the dates, but probably about the time
>>> that Justinian abolished pagan texts. ...
>>>
>>> Anyway happy birthday Newton, you old bastard.
>>>
>>> CG
>>> ___________________________________
>>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>>
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk