Do most Christians even understand their own religion?

[Into the Night]

As usual, you are responding to what you wish I wrote, not what I actually wrote.

I said nothing about the day to day, garden variety practice of religion.

Yes you did, liar.

My post specifically spoke to biblical scholarship and advanced theology.

Yet another religion.

A competence only developed by years of rigorous seminary school study of ethics, philosophy, theology, Greek, Latin, and logic.

Nah. It's just another religion.

That is an education completely beyond the ability and interest of Joel Osteen and the televangelist conmen.

'Education' is not a proof nor a Universal Truth, dude.

[Cypress]

Paradox. Trolling.

So you admit to being unware that the bible as we know it, and the New Testament canon did not exist until the third century, while APL was clearly speaking to the early first century Christianity of the apostles, their companions, and their ministries in Asia Minor and the Eastern Mediterranean.

[Into the Night]

So you admit to being unaware that the bible as we know it, and the New Testament canon did not exist until the third century,

Irrelevant.

while APL was clearly speaking to the early first century Christianity of the apostles, their companions, and their ministries in Asia Minor and the Eastern Mediterranean.

That he was. So?

[Cypress]

Irrelevant.

That he was. So?

It's not irrelevant.

Your posts perfectly demostrates the premise of my thread.

So-called Christians do not even understand some of the basics of their own religion.

You were not aware that the bible as we know it and a New Testament canon did not exist until at least the third or fourth century.

You did not know that the first century early Christianity of the apostles, their companions, and their ministries did not have a bible or New Testament canon as we know it, though they did have an oral tradition and an incipient written tradition.

[Into the Night]

It's not irrelevant.

It is irrelevant.

Your posts perfectly demostrates the premise of my thread.

So-called Christians do not even understand some of the basics of their own religion.

Inversion fallacy.

You were not aware that the bible as we know it and a New Testament canon did not exist until at least the third or fourth century.

Irrelevant.

You did not know that the first century early Christianity of the apostles, their companions, and their ministries did not have a bible or New Testament canon as we know it, though they did have an oral tradition and an incipient written tradition.

Irrelevant. Denial of the existence of writing.

[Cypress]

It is irrelevant.

Inversion fallacy.

Irrelevant.

Irrelevant. Denial of the existence of writing.

Thanks for your confessions that you did not know about the history of early Christianity or the history of the new testament canon.

It is a perfect illustration of the premise embedded in my thread title.

[Into the Night]

Thanks for your confessions that you did not know about the history of early Christianity or the history of the new testament canon.

It is a perfect illustration of the premise embedded in my thread title.

Your 'history' is fiction.

[Trumpet]

Didn't Karl Marx describe the church as an institution of exploitation???

[Frank Apisa]

Homosexuality and abortion were never a thing during early Christianity.

Actually...both were.

[AProudLefty]

Actually...both were.

Nope. The word "sodomy" didn't even mean anal sex. And there is no mention of abortion in the Bible.

[Frank Apisa]

Nope. The word "sodomy" didn't even mean anal sex. And there is no mention of abortion in the Bible.

I agree with you on so much, I almost want to abandon this area of discussion.

And your wording is such that I am not sure if you are saying:

Early Christians did not put as much emphasis on homosexuality and abortion as present day Christians do.

or

Homosexuality and abortion were not problems back when Christianity was in its infancy.

I disagree with both of those, although much more with the second.

If you want to discuss it, we can do so. But I want to establish that I agree with you on so much in the political realm, I almost hate doing it.

[AProudLefty]

I agree with you on so much, I almost want to abandon this area of discussion.

And your wording is such that I am not sure if you are saying:

Early Christians did not put as much emphasis on homosexuality and abortion as present day Christians do.

or

Homosexuality and abortion were not problems back when Christianity was in its infancy.

I disagree with both of those, although much more with the second.

If you want to discuss it, we can do so. But I want to establish that I agree with you on so much in the political realm, I almost hate doing it.

That's okay. I've agreed with the most egregious of the posters and disagreed with the most sensible posters. As they love to say, "fuck your feelings".

The first one is pretty much what I was saying. I doubt the Gnostics cared much about homosexuality and abortion.

The word "sodomy" was redefined to mean gay anal sex much later.

[Frank Apisa]

That's okay. I've agreed with the most egregious of the posters and disagreed with the most sensible posters. As they love to say, "fuck your feelings".

The first one is pretty much what I was saying. I doubt the Gnostics cared much about homosexuality and abortion.

The word "sodomy" was redefined to mean gay anal sex much later.

Okay, we will discuss.

The earliest "Christians" were Jews...almost to a man. Until Paul started proselytizing among the "heathens"...they were ALL Jews. And they ALL considered homosexual activity to be an abomination...because the god they worshiped considered homosexual activity to be an abomination...worthy of death. What "sodomy" meant means nothing. It was the nebulous male "homosexual activity" that was in question...and it was condemned in the most egregious way possible...a condemnation to death. Leviticus 20:13

Jesus is reported to insist that he was not here to change the law...so that law stayed in effect. Matthew 5:17ff

Abortion was rife...the second oldest profession, occasioned by the oldest. The silence of Jesus in this regard at least intimates that he saw nothing wrong with it.

[AProudLefty]

Okay, we will discuss.

The earliest "Christians" were Jews...almost to a man. Until Paul started proselytizing among the "heathens"...they were ALL Jews. And they ALL considered homosexual activity to be an abomination...because the god they worshiped considered homosexual activity to be an abomination...worthy of death. What "sodomy" meant means nothing. It was the nebulous male "homosexual activity" that was in question...and it was condemned in the most egregious way possible...a condemnation to death. Leviticus 20:13

Jesus is reported to insist that he was not here to change the law...so that law stayed in effect. Matthew 5:17ff

Abortion was rife...the second oldest profession, occasioned by the oldest. The silence of Jesus in this regard at least intimates that he saw nothing wrong with it.

Ezekiel 16:49-50
New International Version
49 “‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen."

No mention of homosexuality.

As to the Leviticus laws, those were the health codes. They wandered in the desert and semen and water were precious. See Onan as an example.

Notice that those laws did not directly address homosexuality itself, just the act of wasting semen during anal sex? (One has to wonder why there is no mention of an anal sex with a woman)

[Matt Dillon]

Homosexuality and abortion were never a thing during early Christianity.

For one thing, they stoned homosexuals to death.