Was the emergence of Christianity a step down from the teachings of Yeshua?

I would not have asked this question if that was not my own understanding of the relationship between the original teachings of Yeshua and the complex syncretic amalgam of texts that grew around His teachings leading into the Christian Church (and other movements that were eventually surpressed or that just petered out).

There are people on this forum such as Buddhists and perhaps Hindus who follow a more tantric or mystic path like Yeshua did and there is perhaps a larger group that follows a more religious or extrovertial path more in line with Christianity or Islam (not sure about the position of Bahai).

So does the first group on the forum view Christianity as a step down from the teachings of Yeshua/Jesus or just as a neutral extension of the original Yeshua or otherwise? Please share your thoughts whatever you think about this idea.

Marcion said:

just petered out

Click to expand...

Very cleverly done, and you didn't even see you did it:

Yeshua called Simon the stone (Petros - Matthew 16:13-23) which is fulfillment of Zechariah 3:9, that he would mislead the whole world, and in the same bit where he calls him satan, this is Zechariah 3:1-2...

So when Yeshua tells the Parable of the Seed Sower (Mark 4:3-9 + Mark 4:10-20), and some falls on Stony ground, that is plural of petros.

Thus 'petered out' was prophetically stated, that the original teachings of Yeshua would become corrupted in the Parable of the Wheat and Tares (Matthew 13:24-30)...

So that the Synoptic Gospels prophesied there would be "I Am" ("Ego I-mee" - Luke 21:8, Mark 13:5-6, Matthew 24:4-5) statements after, to deceive many in the fake Gospel of John...

That Simon misled the church from the offset, by telling people to have faith in a man, rather than God...

With Paul finalizing it into being Christianity (Acts 11:25-26), which has been Anti-Christ from the offset, as they've taught Balaam teachings (Jude 1:11 - Micah 6:5-8 = God doesn't require sacrifice).

In my opinion.

Marcion said:

I would not have asked this question if that was not my own understanding of the relationship between the original teachings of Yeshua and the complex syncretic amalgam of texts that grew around His teachings leading into the Christian Church (and other movements that were eventually surpressed or that just petered out).

There are people on this forum such as Buddhists and perhaps Hindus who follow a more tantric or mystic path like Yeshua did and there is perhaps a larger group that follows a more religious or extrovertial path more in line with Christianity or Islam (not sure about the position of Bahai).

So does the first group on the forum view Christianity as a step down from the teachings of Yeshua/Jesus or just as a neutral extension of the original Yeshua or otherwise? Please share your thoughts whatever you think about this idea.

Click to expand...

Yes, I think that Paul, and later, what became the Catholic Church introduced a lot of error. Then, it seems that Martin Luther tried to bring some correction. Today we have all sorts of traditions, heresies, and distractions that further undermine what was started in the First Century.

The debate about Trinitarianism and non-Trinitarianism, Transubstantiation, Baptism for Membership, Tattoos or not, and so many other issues are divisive and not helpful at all, and distracts from the two or three important concepts.

Marcion said:

I would not have asked this question if that was not my own understanding of the relationship between the original teachings of Yeshua and the complex syncretic amalgam of texts that grew around His teachings leading into the Christian Church (and other movements that were eventually surpressed or that just petered out).

There are people on this forum such as Buddhists and perhaps Hindus who follow a more tantric or mystic path like Yeshua did and there is perhaps a larger group that follows a more religious or extrovertial path more in line with Christianity or Islam (not sure about the position of Bahai).

So does the first group on the forum view Christianity as a step down from the teachings of Yeshua/Jesus or just as a neutral extension of the original Yeshua or otherwise? Please share your thoughts whatever you think about this idea.

Click to expand...

There are different perspective on this with problems of the attachment to cultural views of God from different perspectives. In this case neither side has a leg to stand on.

I have yet to see a follower of Jesus who loves their enemies, prays for those who persecute them, turns the other cheek as Jesus commanded. It simply doesnt happen and it dont exist.

I have been to some Christian churchs, and met many people claiming to be Christians, and they do none of that. They do what everybody else does, they get downright mean when faced with those that oppose them, and they get pretty darn spiteful on top. They dont proclaim the gospel to the heathen, they pretty much stick to their own people, and shun those they deem unworthy of the message.

The love of Jesus is a risky endeavour, and highly dangerous to your health. If that kind of love is out there, i have yet to see that kind of radical love. It doesn't sound realistic.

Marcion said:

I would not have asked this question if that was not my own understanding of the relationship between the original teachings of Yeshua and the complex syncretic amalgam of texts that grew around His teachings leading into the Christian Church (and other movements that were eventually surpressed or that just petered out).

There are people on this forum such as Buddhists and perhaps Hindus who follow a more tantric or mystic path like Yeshua did and there is perhaps a larger group that follows a more religious or extrovertial path more in line with Christianity or Islam (not sure about the position of Bahai).

So does the first group on the forum view Christianity as a step down from the teachings of Yeshua/Jesus or just as a neutral extension of the original Yeshua or otherwise? Please share your thoughts whatever you think about this idea.

Click to expand...

Who says Yeshua? I don't speak Hebrew.

I read the Bible in a context that Jesus is a Spirit being, not an itinerant rabbi who makes mistakes concerning things that are absolutely false . So, translation problems aside, no, I just disagree. So do the Bible authors.

John 3:36

Disciple of Jesus said:

I read the Bible in a context that Jesus is a Spirit being, not an itinerant rabbi who makes mistakes concerning things that are absolutely false . So, translation problems aside, no, I just disagree. So do the Bible authors.

John 3:36

Click to expand...

I don't understand what you mean.

sooda said:

Who says Yeshua? I don't speak Hebrew.

Click to expand...

That's the name of Jesus in the Aramaic Bible.

Disciple of Jesus said:

That's the name of Jesus in the Aramaic Bible.

Click to expand...

Yeah.. I don't speak Aramaic either. Why do you call Jesus Yeshua?

sooda said:

Yeah.. I don't speak Aramaic either. Why do you call Jesus Yeshua?

Click to expand...

I usually would call Jesus, Jesus. If someone want's to say, Yeshua, that's fine. If they read that Bible, it's contextual.

I use the name Yeshua sometimes because it correlates to Jesus, Yeshu, Jesu, Jesus, and other variations, by my estimation.

Disciple of Jesus said:

I usually would call Jesus, Jesus. If someone want's to say, Yeshua, that's fine. If they read that Bible, it's contextual.

I use the name Yeshua sometimes because it correlates to Jesus, Yeshu, Jesu, Jesus, and other variations, by my estimation.

Click to expand...

Is your Bible in Aramaic?

sooda said:

Is your Bible in Aramaic?

Click to expand...

The thread premise is using the name Yeshua, so it's fine, as far as I'm concerned.

No, I actually cross- reference Bibles.

Disciple of Jesus said:

The thread premise is using the name Yeshua, so it's fine, as far as I'm concerned.

No, I actually cross- reference Bibles.

Click to expand...

Aramaic and its dialects are still spoken in Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria mainly.

IMO, it doesn't make sense to much distinguish Paul from the Twelve as it says in Acts that he met with Peter and the others at least three times, plus there was continuing correspondence between he and them. If Paul was so "different" than they, especially since he had such a rather hostile past towards the Twelve, why would they even have given him the time of day if he wasn't on board with them?

No doubt Paul went beyond Jesus' teachings, as the Twelve also did, because Jesus built a very basic foundation that needed to be expanded upon to try and answer some basic questions and to also deal with controversies that arose. Whether one agreed with him or not, Paul actually was quite bright, thus reflecting his Greek education largely based on "reason".

Instead, what caused the Church to increasingly change was when the Church became increasingly less Jewish whereas Jewish Law became less and less important and that process accelerated in 70 c.e. with the destruction of the Temple and so many in the early Church leaving for the diaspora. With Rome being the overall political model, it should be of no surprise that the political model of the Church reflected that, also especially since the model of Jesus and the Twelve was authoritarian as well ("Jesus taught with authority...").

Marcion said:

So does the first group on the forum view Christianity as a step down from the teachings of Yeshua/Jesus or just as a neutral extension of the original Yeshua or otherwise?

Click to expand...

I assume that by 'a step down' you intend x amount of times a saying or parable of Jesus has been removed from its original setting as spoken by Jesus and reworked by those who penned the Gospels.
Some of the problems we encounter;
Translation into Greek
Embellishment
Change of audience
Influence of the church's situation
Situations created by the redactor