When did the Christian mission...

[Hope]

Is it? Why?

Its telling because, compared - for instance - to Jesus' teachings, in which 'diversity and tolerance weren't even mentioned because they imply inequality and division, and were aimed at humanity as a whole; 'various' continues the inequality and division theme because, by definition, the term implies that not all groups are included.

[Brownie]

I understand what you are saying, Hope, but wonder if you are reading too much into that particular section of what Shaker said.  I agree that Jesus's teachings were aimed at everyone so there was no need for him to mention 'tolerance and equality', nor 'various' people.   However we live in a world where there is blatant intolerance and inequality so 'tolerance and equality' are virtues which we try to embody and encourage, and that cannot be done without mentioning them. 

As to 'various', we may wish to embrace the entire human race but we don't know them so we deal with different groups as they come into our sphere of consciousness, whether by knowing them personally or knowing of them.  That's where the word ''various'' comes in, it isn't so very vague, it is merely a way of describing many people or peoples whilst acknowledging there are others we do not know.

[Shaker]

Partly because it wasn't imposed from the top of society but grew from the bottom up.  For much of those first 300 years, it was the 'preserve' of the slaves, the servants, the working class and towards the end of that period, the lower eschelons of the army.

Sklavenmoral or slave morality built upon ressentiment, as Nietzsche put it.

The most obvious is that it offered hope to the downtrodden, the disenfranchised and the marginalised.

... by convincing people that they won't actually be prey to the thing they hate and fear most, not really.

[Shaker]

Its telling because, compared - for instance - to Jesus' teachings, in which 'diversity and tolerance weren't even mentioned because they imply inequality and division, and were aimed at humanity as a whole; 'various' continues the inequality and division theme because, by definition, the term implies that not all groups are included.

No it doesn't. Various means various, as in "Lots but too many to list individually." I could have enumerated the examples I had in mind if I'd foreseen that you'd have a comprehension breakdown over such a simple word.

Didn't Jesus (supposedly) say he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel? That doesn't encompass the whole of humanity, presumably.

[Rhiannon]

There's also Matt 5-6:

5 These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, 6 but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

[Brownie]

There is also:
1 John 2:2
He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

[Shaker]

Seems to be a significant difference between what Jesus himself said of himself (it is alleged) and what was claimed for him by others later on.

A glaring contradiction in the Bible? Say it ain't so!

[Brownie]

I wouldn't say it ain't so because it's there in black and white. 
He healed people who were not Jews.

[Sassy]

Until you can actually demonstrate the existence of your god then your ju-ju isn't much different to any other superstitious mumbo jumbo.

Until you can demonstrate you have an understanding of my God you cannot even begin to know if someone had produced evidence.

As for superstition and mumbo jumbo you cannot judge what you haven't read and do not understand.
But hey! don't let a thing like ignorance stop you, it hasn't done so far.

[Sebastian Toe]

But hey! don't let a thing like ignorance stop you, it hasn't done so far.

That's a keeper!

[jeremyp]

OK, lets start to analyse that.  For starters, were the followers illiterate?  Probably not as Jewish society - even in the 1st Century AD - put a high value on basic education.

This is interesting. When people point out that the gospels were not written down for about 40 years and therefore there must be errors of transmission, you like to insist that, in societies where the only means of transmission are oral, then oral transmission is accurate.

Would you like to make up your mind. Was the society in Palestine literate or not. You can't have it both ways.

Most lads (though, agreed, not necessarily girls) would be educated up to what we would regard as the equivalent of Years 5/6. (10-11 year olds)  They would then go into vocational work, such as carpentry, agriculture, fishing, leatherwork, etc. - or 'further education' to prepare to be clerks, rabbis, leaders, etc.

In reality, of course this is nonsense. Maybe five or ten percent were literate. How else do you explain the complete absence of Christian documents in the first twenty years of its existence?

[Gonnagle]

Dear Farmer,

Post 143.

In what way can we explain the success of Christianity?

I think Hope has made a pretty good stab at answering your question in post 149 but would add, right religion right time.

To repeat, Christianity sang out to the poor, same today as it was back in the times of early Christianity, the poor far outweighed the rich, it really was a religion for the common man.

I can't remember the exact words of a quote I read from Josephus, something about crazy Christians gathering at dawn and giving their food and goods away for nothing, not a bad selling strategy.

But I too would question your term "illiterate followers" maybe by today's standards, are today's standards any better, I don't need to remember stuff I just google it but I think we need to remember that early Christians were heavily influenced by Greece and the Greeks were very big on education.

Now it is just a little theory of mine and maybe someone on the forum who knows more about Greek history or how they were educated can say, Gonnagle you are talking pish, but I think they were taught differently back then, they didn't have the three R's they had four, the fourth being remembering, they were highly educated in remembering stuff, books, paper, pen and ink were not common commodities.

Anyway, lots of stuff why Christianity was a success, I think God thought, time for a rebrand, Jesus son, get off yer arse and do something, and he did

Gonnagle.

[Hope]

As to 'various', we may wish to embrace the entire human race but we don't know them so we deal with different groups as they come into our sphere of consciousness, whether by knowing them personally or knowing of them.  That's where the word ''various'' comes in, it isn't so very vague, it is merely a way of describing many people or peoples whilst acknowledging there are others we do not know.

Whilst I appreciate that we 'don't know the entire human race' ourselves, there are enough people who have studied the globe's population and people groups for us to know pretty well about them.  However, we only have to look at our own society to see how much the mantra of 'tolerance and diversity' is paper thin.  Look, for instance, at the current situation in British Cycling, the attitude of the Government itself to the disabled or even attitudes to immigrants.  Jesus' teachings are very clear on this - it is unacceptable.  However, there is a difference between "tolerance and diversity' and real equality.

[Hope]

Sklavenmoral or slave morality built upon ressentiment, as Nietzsche put it.

... and we all know that Nietzsche isn't infallible!!

... by convincing people that they won't actually be prey to the thing they hate and fear most, not really.

I'd agree, Shaker, not really.  It wasn't, and isn't, anything to do with not being 'prey to the thing they hate and fear most'.  It is to do with relationship, both with the creator and the rest of humanity.

[Shaker]

... and we all know that Nietzsche isn't infallible!!

He never set himself up as such and nobody treats him as if he is.

Unlike some I could name.

I'd agree, Shaker, not really.  It wasn't, and isn't, anything to do with not being 'prey to the thing they hate and fear most'.  It is to do with relationship, both with the creator and the rest of humanity.

So the alleged exemption from death has nothing to do with it then? Right.

[Hope]

No it doesn't. Various means various, as in "Lots but too many to list individually." I could have enumerated the examples I had in mind if I'd foreseen that you'd have a comprehension breakdown over such a simple word.

Didn't Jesus (supposedly) say he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel? That doesn't encompass the whole of humanity, presumably.

Oxford Dictionary:

various:

ADJ:
1 Different from one another; of different kinds or sorts:
dresses of various colours; his grievances were many and various

1.1 Having or showing different properties or qualities:
their environments are locally various

DETERMINER & PRONOUN
More than one; individual and separate:
various people arrived late
[AS PRONOUN]: various of her friends had called

In none of these definitions really match yours, I'd go with the Oxford Dictionary.

Didn't Jesus (supposedly) say he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel? That doesn't encompass the whole of humanity, presumably.

He did, and that was speaking about himself (Matthew Chapter 15).  In Chapter 10, he was giving instructions to his disciples for a specific, time-limited 'project'.  He later instructed his disciples to 'Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, ...'  In all cases I know of, later instructions supersede earlier ones.

[Hope]

There's also Matt 5-6:

5 These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, 6 but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

And that was a specific, time-limited 'project', Rhi.  Matthew 28 gives a later instruction that is commonly known as the 'Great Commission'.

[Hope]

Seems to be a significant difference between what Jesus himself said of himself (it is alleged) and what was claimed for him by others later on.

A glaring contradiction in the Bible? Say it ain't so!

You mean that there is a contradiction between what Jesus believed his own purpose to be, and what he believed his disciples' purpose to be? 

[Hope]

Would you like to make up your mind. Was the society in Palestine literate or not. You can't have it both ways.
In reality, of course this is nonsense. Maybe five or ten percent were literate. How else do you explain the complete absence of Christian documents in the first twenty years of its existence?

Oh, so you regard someone who can't write to be uneducated?  Literacy isn't the only level of education someone needs to be able to be educated.  If, as you say, only 5 or 10% of the population was literate, why write anything down whilst you still have the eye-witnesses able to visit and talk to people in person.

[Shaker]

You mean that there is a contradiction between what Jesus believed his own purpose to be, and what he believed his disciples' purpose to be?

No. The contradiction is between what Jesus (according to the story) believed his mission to be, and what his later followers believed his mission to be.

[Ricky Spanish]

Moderator:

Fair point Thrud, so I'll lock it while we have a look. While I'm at it I'll move this thread to the Christian Topic.

Update: I've removed the most obvious examples to the Mod Board, so I'll unlock and move this thread to the Christian Topic.

Cheers..

[floo]

Oh, so you regard someone who can't write to be uneducated?  Literacy isn't the only level of education someone needs to be able to be educated.  If, as you say, only 5 or 10% of the population was literate, why write anything down whilst you still have the eye-witnesses able to visit and talk to people in person.

Oh come on, that appears to be a daft comment coming from a teacher! Writing is one of the most important elements to education along with reading, if you can't write you are lacking in education. However it doesn't necessarily mean you are unintelligent, just not had the opportunity to be educated in that way.