Yes lol
Posadist-marxist-leninism-maoism-third-worldidm is the one true form of communism!
You ultra leftists of the posadist-marxist-leninsm-maoism-thirdworldism (workers party of) sectarians need to do self crit and join posadist-marxist-leninsm-maoism-thirdworldism (workers party of) (marxist unity)
This is now an early christianity history thread
I think it is telling that the possibly earliest gospel, is also the only one not considered canonical by the church. I also think it is telling that the gospel of Thomas is merely a collection of sayings, and point to an oral tradition. I also find it is telling that all of the gospels are either apocalyptic in their vision or possibly apocalyptic, while thomas is just chilling.
That first depiction of Jesus, "Alexameno's Graffito" is interesting af. I read a little about it, and it seems like it was engraved in a boarding school that got walled off for centuries.
In one room, somebody inscribed "Alexameno is faithful," or something to that effect. Then, in a different room, somebody drew Jesus with the head of a donkey being crucified, and a worshipper venerating him. Underneath is written, "Alexameno worships his god." This could've been to make fun of the other kid who wrote the first graffiti. I just thought that was super interesting.
That 6th portrait ( Christ Pantocrator, 6th century ), is basically how I look like right now lol.
Cool stuff though
I like how the 6 pointed star in this image is just a regular star with an extra point crammed in on the right.
Thomas (while fascinating and arguably the only book that should have been kept in the Bible.) isn't the earliest Gospel, the 40CE date is where some of the Sayings in the book may date from. I don't think I've read anyone who claimed a date before 100CE for Thomas as a complete work, even proponents of it as a majority early text or a branch off of Q.
Also, I'm not sure you can say Mark or the Q source doesn't have the same early date, if the initial origin of the individual sayings or parables within is the metric used.
Finally wherever that's from they're wrong about Matthew, pretty sure P64/67 predates P37, admittedly dating is controversial, but dates range from 66AD to 250AD.
Finally wherever that’s from they’re wrong about Matthew, pretty sure P64/67 predates P37, admittedly dating is controversial, but dates range from 66AD to 250AD.
the image is from 2016 and maybe the scholarship has changed since then.
Some fundamentalist Baptists found their way around this by claiming that their sect has always existed but was suppressed so nobody knew about it. I think that's what Jack Chick is on.
You also get restorationists that attempt to live like the early church, but if they take it seriously they end up semi-anarchist like the Diggers or the Jesus Christians
Wow this is really ignoring all non-Chalcedonian denominations. Bruh the Church of the East is older than the Roman Catholic Church.
What, are you trying to imply I didn't read "Council of Chalcedon (451)" when it was literally written on there?
Shit like this is why I just dont try to even comprehend mainstream religions, they've existed for too long and are all sorts of confusing
The single most mind-blowingly smug and ignorant thing I've heard from a religious person was "I do not follow any religion! I am a Christian. I have a personal relationship with God!" :so-true:
There was a great podcast called "Literature and History" that did an episode on Gnosticism. It cited evidence that early Christianity was, itself, a giant mess of boutique cults and regional variants championed by different early philosophers and preachers. It wasn't until the Romans really began to integrate Christianity into the government that it was homogenized into the strict orthodox codes we recognize today.
![do you look more like the jejej half [left] or the susus half [right]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2F75%2Ff0%2F7f%2F75f07f352436942146d961d5d57f29f2.png&f=1&nofb=1){kind=link}
