I don’t hink the early Christians can be easily tagged by a one sentence descriptive. (’Heretic’, of course, depends on a certain perspective, much like ‘traitor’)
First of all, Jesus was not the only prophet preaching, and there were several bands of prophets and followers, each with their own message. Some of them had no relation to Jesus at all.

In the first decades after Jesus died, there were divergent sects all calling themselves Christians, but with widely differing theological beliefs. For a long time, though, all of them self-identified as Jews. Some called themselves Christians while believing that Jesus was merely a reformer of Judaism, not the son of God or the Messiah at all. Then there were the Gnostics – a very wide range.

It took a long time for a formal church authority to emerge and solidify the now accepted Christian belief system.

I also don’t believe that Jews were ever a totally united front.
There were divergent schools of Judaic thought as well. Looking back, we tend to focus more on the school that prevailed.

The theme of faith based arrogance runs through many stories of devout believers. A dose of humility is a welcome virtue.

I completely agree with you. As stated, it’s now time for the jury to vote and my sincere hope is that it’s based on in-depth study way beyond any “evidence” (pro or con) or opinion presented here. In your questioning of one’s validity (primarily mine), it’s you who gets to wrestle with the elements of what I’ve presented and come to your own conclusions.

- STAN

It is quite possible, even appropriate, to have faith in Jesus but question the validity of your self-appointment as his true representative/lawyer/
spokesman/channeler.

Pete, you’ve done a masterful job defining the differences between “religious right” and other types of Christians today. Admittedly I am not looking for a broader more inclusive world view, nor am I seeking to disprove anything related to my upbringing in the Faith. Faith and doubt are polar extremes, and faith is what pleases God. Call me a nut, but I feel that Jesus is still the way, the truth, and the life, not just a way, a truth and a life. In that, I think it reveals the fundamental differences between “types” of Christians if you will…some seeing the Bible as absolute and relevant, others seeing it as more subjective and nebulous thus allowing it to be explained away or compartmentalized to less prominent corners of our lives.

With that said, the prosecution rests at this time. I’ve presented the case, you’ve presented a defense. I could rebut and in turn garner another rebuttal from you…and we’d bore the reader to tears. It now comes down to having ears to hear what the Lord is saying to America as a people. I trust the readers won’t lose sight of that in the middle of our politics, and now it’s time for the jury to vote. Based on what I see above, the jury isn’t slanted in my direction (on this website). But the ultimate test of anything is time, and that my friends will be the tell-all as to what’s right and what’s wrong. In the meantime, study well beyond what has been presented here, for your future may depend on it.

In defense of a nation…

Stan Grant
http://www.stanforpresident.com

The Bible can be a wonderful source of inspiration and a gateway to a transcendental spirituality. But I’m losing patience with the Stans, who feel it is a message from above just for them, i.e. their own interpretation of the great mysteries.

Exactly, domajot. Exactly.

I wonder how Stan explains this evolution in Christian thinking. Was God changing his mind as time wore on? Did God switch teams?

I don’t mean to be disrespectful.
The Bible can be a wonderful source of inspiration and a gateway to a transcendental spirituality. But I’m losing patience with the Stans, who feel it is a message from above just for them, i.e. their own interpretation of the great mysteries.

Pete: Most Pharisees/Jews of the time were not aware that Jesus existed. Most of those who were aware of Jesus’ existence rejected the early Christians’ belief that he was the Messiah. One reason that Paul sought out the Gentiles when Jesus preached to and for Jews is that, basically, the Jews didn’t buy it. A good bit of the NT descriptions of Jesus’ arrest and execution exaggerate/invent Jewish involvement. The Romans murdered thousands of Jews during this period.

More info here: http://jlresources.blogspot.com/2005/05/tolerance-interfaith-relations.html

sheesh it’s been that kinda week.

btw holly, the new chapter for the event was INSANE! i loved it!

I also must confess some embarrasment and regret. Reading back on my first response to your first comment, I was so sure of my understanding of history, believing that the Pharisees were only a minority/marginalized group, when clearly that was NOT the case. I relied on misinformation, pulling a real “Stan” in this case; and I am red-faced for it. I hope you’ll accept my apology.

PS — Maybe you can also teach me some about the Sadducees (sp?) as well?

Well said Holly, as much as we differ I agree on that one with ya 1000%.

Wow! I didn’t know that. Thank you so much for sharing. I guess we can all learn something new.

So, do you agree with my general take then, that Pharisees/Jews of the time were probably split on their reaction to Jesus — or not? I’m sincerely curious.

I’m also curious about Rabbinic Jews today and their views on Jesus. I mean, let’s face it, Jesus lashed out at certain Pharisees rather cruelly — calling them serpents, etc. Granted, they weren’t very nice to him in return, advocating if not participating in the events that eventually led to his killing. So I guess I’m trying to get a read on whether or not this is all viewed as an unfortunate “battle” of ideas gone awry, between one man and a handful of other men, or was it a broader “battle” between the Jews that followed Jesus and those that followed the Pharisees.

Clearly — none of that should matter today. Me as Christian and you as Jew need not and should not engage in the same type of “battle,” nor do we need to think ill of each other, which I know we don’t. To the contrary.

But for historical perspective — and to learn — I am (again) interested.

Finally, if you want to take the discussion off line, that’s cool, too. You have my email. Just let me know.

All Jews living today are the physical (or in the case of converts, spiritual) descendants of the Pharisees, who are the good guys of that era, the founders of Rabbinic Judaism and authors of the Talmud. You can read our ethical sayings in Pirke Avot http://www.shechem.org/torah/avot.html .

I don’t think you’re a Pharisee, nor would you have been in Jesus’ time.

Seriously, too often, today’s Christians wrongly consider the Pharisees as indicative of all the Jews of the time — much like today many Republicans think all Democrats = Michael Moore, and many Democrats think all Republicans = Rush Limbaugh.

The reality of course is that the Jews of the time were divided on Jesus, much like the global population, Jews and non-Jews, are today. Some followed him. Some rejected him. Some hated him. Some loved him. Some were neutral. And I imagine most didn’t pay any attention to him, because they were too busy, like many of us, just doing their damnedest to get buy.

OK — that really departs from the factual into the conjectural. And yes, I know your remark was facetious, but I couldn’t help myself.