Question about Jesus

[SeveredMind]

I recently was having a debate/banter with a devout Catholic and republican person I know at work. He claims that Jesus was Catholic.

He's wrong, right? Catholocism came way after he died, right? I just want to get my facts straight so I can prove him wrong.

[Berry Cool]

1. You're kidding, right? Or this person was kidding, right?

Jesus wasn't even a Christian. :rofl: He was a Jew.

And yes, Catholicism came about after he died.

What, pray tell, would make a person think Jesus was a Catholic? I'm sorry, that's just too funny.

[Kutjara]

6. But he spoke English, right? I mean that part's true. Right?

[MnFats]

9. yes, and he had blonde hair and blue eyes, too...

according to the Aryan Nations nutjobs....he was very northern European...since he was in god's image and everyone knows.....ah, never mind. these nutcases can't keep their story straight, either..

[Proud_Democratt]

2. Many Mexican guys named Jesus are Catholic.

[Berry Cool]

4. Oh well, there you have a point.

good one...:rofl:

[Kutjara]

3. Er, Jesus wasn't even Christian.

The church wasn't established until after his death. By Peter. I think Jesus would have viewed himself as Jewish, if anything. As for Catholic, the church didn't evolve into something that called itself by that name for hundereds of years.

[sweetheart]

5. catholic comes from "universal"

jesus was universal, is universal, a boundryless holy ghost that knows only presence, love and forgiveness.

[acmavm]

7. How could he be Catholic? The early church was an underground

cult unorganized bunch of people who had to hide in caves and tunnels under Rome. In fact, the early church was exactly what is generally described as a 'cult'. All religions start out that way. What it metamophosed into is what we call the 'Catholic' church. But it in no way, shape, or form resembled what we have today. There were fights over doctrine and ritual that cost many people their lives. At the hands of 'officials' of the church.

P.S. I was baptized Catholic and educated in Catholic schools.

[mrcheerful]

19. Actually catholic came from catacomb which was were they buried their dead

in Rome. The catacombs were the first Christian burial grounds in Rome. One of the things that is often said about the catacombs is that they were hiding places for Christians during the persecutions. This is not true. They were official burial grounds, well known to Roman authorities. During persecutions, they were at times closed, but they often remained open since the Romans respected the dead and since the bodies would still have to be buried somewhere outside the city walls. The reason why they were made was that Romans usually cremated bodies at that time.

[acmavm]

31. Interesting. But that's not what I've been told. Of course the catacombs

are burial grounds. The bones are still there for all to see. But during the persecutions many of the early Christians did go underground to hold their ceremonies. That wasn't the only place that they held them, they held them in caves, in homes of believers, where ever they could meet in secret.

But that changes nothing I said. The first Christians were NOT Catholics. The church went through many changes and diversions. Catholic may be an official title or name of the religion now, but back then there was no official name, no structured beliefs (considering all the councils and schisms and executions for heresy that were a big part of the early Church). The term Catholic Church was used for the first time in the first century A.D. but it wasn't until the reign on Constantine that it was 'legitimized' and elevated from being an illegal cult to THE recognized religion of the western world.

Regardless, the FIRST Christians would not have considered themselves as what we know of as being Catholic, or even early Catholic. They were just followers of the man they believed to be the Messiah, the Savior of mankind.

[neoblues]

8. Obviously and Inarguably: Long After He Died.

Presuming he ever even existed. Even if he didn't exist, the Catholic Church was formed after the story of his existence had been spread and Christian Churches (and Gnostic Churches) had formed and wrestled with what their faith was supposed to consist of.

There's an enormous amount of well presented information readily available via scores of sites... I wonder that you'd ask this.

[SeveredMind]

10. Well

I was raised Buddhist, I don't know much about Christianity.

[neoblues]

40. Okay, Obviously was Obviously a poor choice...

Interestingly, if you had been raised a Christian, you wouldn't know much if anything at all about the early Christian Church... other than what the Bible tells about the Religion's tenets and scripture. To get any real information about the history, you generally have to take secular (or advanced theology) courses or read books on the history--or, with the advent of the internet, merely peruse the many sites/articles on the subject.

Then, of course, you're going to find that "Historians" and "Theologians" disagree with each other and among themselves. Still, I found that I picked up a pretty solid history/time-line of events and developments of Christianity, the Church and it's various denominations. Which to me suggests that if you want a clear, relatively authoritative and thorough review, you'd do well to look elsewhere on the internet and avoid asking amateur historians and lay people.

I wish now that I'd bothered to keep a list; in less than a dozen excellent sites, I found enormous details.

The story of "Christ" existed in various forms long before "Jesus", and in a different "Pagan" religion. There is much evidence to indicate that most of the stories that found their way into Judaism and thus into Christianity (remember, Jesus was Jewish) existed in other older religions; Christianity tends to be an amalgam of many of the religions and superstitions that were popular in the several hundred years before 1CE (Common Era: secular equivalent of A.D. or Anno Domini).

There is shockingly little evidence Jesus even existed as a real human being. There is no historical/archeological evidence contemporary to Jesus that he ever lived--which, in an of itself, is a strong argument that He is the result of a myth-become-religion. There were actual "Historians" writing of the events of the time, as well as Roman records and so on... they are of sufficient detail that anything as amazing as Jesus's miracles, crucifiction and resurrection would have surely been recorded. Alas, all we get are highly suspicious and exceedingly brief mentions of the Jesus, the first of which is dated between 70 and 140 years (+/- 30) AFTER his proclaimed death.

Now, regardless of his reality... the story was spread and a huge number of beliefs about how people should live their lives as well as instructional stories were written (by unknown authors, sometimes several different authors, but certainly not the apostles named as authors--curiously, such was a common activity in those times) and agressively spread at a time when people were suffering under oppression and needed some way of living that would allow them peace (it's okay, you'll live in heaven in the afterlife, meanwhile forgive those who trespass against you (passive resistance somewhat like Ghandi adopted many centuries later), and you're never alone for your all powerful God is always with you and loves you and forgives those evil sins (thoughts as well as naughty behavior)... ahhh, all is well though my faith is being "tested" by being fed to the lions). They were persecuted by the Romans during their first few centuries, but then again they refused to participate like everyone else in the community based worship of the Roman pantheon of Gods. When Rome burned in 433CE, Nero blamed it on those strange, troublesome Christians (who knows, they may well have been involved--it's not outside the realm of possibility given what the Christian religion was at the time; disaffected people with scores of different sets of beliefs beyond the common theme of Jesus). He was the worst ever, he had them burned alive and crucified in groups--of course, all executions in those days were public spectacle/sport/entertainment (seems rather barbaric). Anyway, the Roman Empire became split into a relatively rich East and a sort of agrarian West each with it's own Ceaser... At the beginning of the third century, the East side was persecuting Christians substantially and the Ceaser of the West, Constantine, wanted to conquer/take power over the whole Empire. He found that by supporting Christianity, he could instantly have allies already in place in the desired lands. So he did that, willy-nilly, he proclaimed Christianity to be the official Roman religion. He won out and became the one Ceasar in charge and he found it advantageous to continue the religion as it helped organize a powerbase throughout his empire. Curiously, at the time, Christians were still only about 5% of the population. He himself, doesn't appear to have converted or if he did, he made no effort to follow the religion's proscriptions for behavior; Christians followed him from the beginning just for his proclamation that he "was the protector of Christendom" and for the fact he used/displayed and took Christian symbology as his own. Easy enough.

The early "Church" consisted of many different groups covering a rather wide range of conflicting beliefs. Once it became the official religion, Constantine demanded that it sort itself out into one single religion... a "universal" church... "Catholic" means universal... so, the Catholic Church is born. Though, to be fair, it had already begun the process in the second century but was still significantly divided over doctrine and other matters. Nevertheless, Constantine made all the warring parts join and organized it after his own army with a hierarchical leadership with Bishops at the top, each ruling a region with clerics and such handling smaller and smaller segments but still answering up the chain of command (including sending in all the wealth collected from the peasants). The title Pope is sort of complicated since in English it refers to the supreme head of the Catholic Church (now and even before "The" church, the title referred to another title associated with the head of the church in Rome, "The Vicar of Peter" which was later updated to "The Vicar of Christ"), yet it otherwise (other languages, other times) was just to refer to their high spiritual leaders... in that sense, Pope Peter was the first as of the year 30CE... the leader of the Christian religion, long before the formal "Catholic" Church was formed. Note, however, that if you asked The Catholic Church when it was formed, it would probably claim it's history unbroken all the way back to Peter and the Apostles. Still, one could hardly call the scores of competing contentious groups who were completely separate... a "Universal Church". Actually, I just read that the first recorded mention of the phrase "Catholic Church" was found in a letter by Saint Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch to Christians in Smyrna in the year 107. Doesn't mean there was such a church, but it was in their minds early on.



The Bible is merely a collection of what were separate writings. Late in the 3rd century and extending into the early 4th century, a man of seriously questionable morals named Jerome (later Saint Jerome) was tasked with translating the Bible from the original Hebrew into Latin (up to that point the main copy of the bible in use was the Septaguent, a Greek translation of the Hebrew performed by the Jews). This would be the Bible for another thousand years.

Immediately upon it's legalization and promotion to state religion, Rome and The Church began persecuting non-Christians! Turn about is fair play? Turn the other cheek and all? Nope. By the year 380, Christianity becomes the sole, exclusive Religion of the Empire; it is then a 95 year old hierophant, Nestorius announces "the predominance of mental darkness over the human race." The beginnings of repression so pronounced that seeks out and destroys practically all ancient knowledge and prevents through crushing force all efforts to progress. Thus we have the "Dark Ages", courtesy of the Catholic Church. They even outlaw all non-Christian Calendars and methods for dating events... thus much of the world is stuck with A.D. and B.C. (and their new secular equivalents, C.E. and B.C.E. (B.C.E. - Before Common Era). During this time there are numerous massacres and ubiquitous executions—"by fire, crucifixion, tearing to pieces by wild beasts or cutting to pieces by iron nails" for anyone who doesn't profess the faith (or who is found guilty of blasphemy, idolatry, magic, etc. Baptism becomes mandator for everyone. Also, while there's no real evidence any Christians were actually fed to lions, the Christians themselves very much did feed people to the lions. The whole of Europe that had become a civilization reverted to a primitive village subsistence--though armys were still gathered and went about the Christianization of "heathen" tribes. Christian despots held power in the many regions we now know as nations and rule in a tyrannical manner. Fortunately, after some 500+ years of darkness the church's grip loosened ever so slightly and bright people were pressing for advances (and being tortured and put to death for their efforts). Though, to be fair...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_ages#Enlightenment">Most modern historians dismiss the notion that the era was a "Dark Age" by pointing out that this idea was based on ignorance of the period combined with popular stereotypes: many previous authors would simply assume that the era was a dismal time of violence and stagnation and use this assumption to prove itself.

Meanwhile, in the Muslim world, they were making all the normal advancements in the sciences, medicine, literature and even the law. Bit by bit some of these advancements drew attention and made footholds in the darkened world of what had once been the Roman Empire. Renewed interest in improving living conditions and interest in the arts and sciences began to explode in what has been proposed to be several "Renaissances" mostly simultaneously... The enforced ignorance waned and creativity took hold once again.

Of course, any real coverage of even parts of this story would be a full book length work and then there would be the effort to reconsile the differing stories as provided by different books/different authors. It is a big subject and full of facinating details, many of which are both disturbing and terribly disappointing (as in, but for this religion, we'd be more than 1000 years ahead of where we are!). Some of the more facinating ideas involve how much of the Bible was fabricated out of pure fantasies, many from other belief systems. Others would involve recognizing that even things like Sin are purely fabricated means to an end--offering salvation from the unavoidable eternal punishment in exchange for large donations to the Church. In fact, it was just this kind of behavior that led to the Protestant Reformation in which the Church basically broke in two... (alas, the Protestant side kept the idea of sin and hell--though they allowed for forgiveness without having to make a donation to the Church). So much information, so little time.

I suspect the more religious and faithful expression about the Church and it's history would focus more on the beliefs, the dogma, catechisms, doctrine, creed or whatever. Alas, I cannot provide that view beyond a basic list which could be wrong due to the temptation to conflate Christian beliefs of different denominations with those of the Catholic Church--which is a world unto itself.

It should well be noted here as well that this represents a heretical point of view which is critical of the Church and the Religion behind it. I can't even see how anyone could hold the pious belief in the goodness of this church and it's religion, it doesn't even seem rational to me. So, again with the word "obvious", but obviously this is just my opinion and interpretation of the available evidence (obtained second-hand). Even so, I'm confident in the basic facts, dates and events mentioned.

Still, you only asked whether Christ was a Catholic. In some imaginary sense, he was the founder of such a Church--albeit long before it enstantiated on Earth and continues to be it's "leader" in a sort of... what appears to the infidel to be wishful thinking--at least they would probably claim it to be so. Besides, surely he would have converted to his own Church if he had lived (as a God in human form), but that would probably have weakened the story a bit (not having the crucifixion and resurrection and all). Then again, the certain reality of the story is that he was formally, in fact, a Jew--complete with multiple lineages back through his father, Joseph to King David and on to the grand patriarch of the whole of the Israelites and the subsequent development of Judaism (phew). No easy answers; it involves Religion.

[SeveredMind]

46. wow

Thank you for that well written response! You didn't have to do all that for lil ol' me....

[Wheezy]

11. Jesus was a Jew

Christianity began with him, he was Jewish in his culture, but the Christian church began with him.


The Jewish people believed that there was a Messiah that was to come. The Jewish folks and gentiles of the day that believed Jesus was the Messiah of the second coming became Christian. Jews who didn't believe Jesus was the Messiah are still waiting for the Messiah.

The Catholic Church came about not much after Jesus' supposed resurrection, through one of Jesus's friends/diciples, Peter. (Saint Peter)


I could be wrong. Would love a Catholic to clarify before you go telling this story.

[roguevalley]

12. Jesus was a Jew. A devout practicing Jew. He lived and died a

Jew. Your friend is full of shit.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

42. Yes, or maybe eleven years old?

[Proud_Democratt]

15. Peter was charged with the responsibility........

of "carrying the torch" by Christ and understood to do so after Christ's death. Peter was the first Pope.

[Proud_Democratt]

50. Which brings me to another point..........

If Peter was "handed the torch"...why would Jesus do this, knowing that he'd rise in 3 days?????????

[TomInTib]

13. Jesus IS the Answer. What is the Question?

Who is Matty Alou's brother?

[saltpoint]

24. I had the Alou brothers' baseball cards for years.

Loved 'em.

But my favorite SF Giant by far was Juan Marichal. O my that wind-up!

How ya doin', Tom? Hope it's going well for you out west.

[TomInTib]

30. Marichal vs. Roseboro..

I was watching the teevee (in Los Angeles) when Roseboro threw that one (back to the mound) past Marichal's ear.

Juan spun around and tagged Roseboro with his bat.

I was also in attendance at Chavez Ravine when the Dodgers beat the Twins (Killebrew, Boog) in the 7th game of the Series. This Texas boy was absolutely astounded when the fans began throwing articles of value onto the field (like clothing).

I caught one of Killebrew's foul balls. My evil stepfather (THAT's another story) had it signed by most of the Dodger team.

Thanks for asking, OC, everything is just like Christmas out here. The weather is perfect and the wine is oh, so, cheap.

You?

[saltpoint]

32. Ah yes, Tom, I just knew you had to be a baseball fan.

John Roseboro! A name that doesn't come up every day. Had his baseball card, too. I imagined he somehow came with the stadium at Chavez Ravine, that he had no other life than the glorious one I imagined him to have as the Dodgers' great catcher.

You have seen your share of historic moments on a ball diamond.

I'm doin' ok. Some politickin' and some letter-writing to Congresscritters, and just ordered Mario Cuomo's book, WHY LINCOLN MATTERS. I'm a Cuomo fan and a Lincoln fan both.

You hang in there and say hi to the Golden State for me. Let's get Arnold out of there and put a Democrat in that job!

[TomInTib]

33. OK, OC, we are in the club.

Now, who else gets in?

And I will tell everybody "Hey" (I am going to exercise some artistic license) who I run into.

[saltpoint]

34. I guess anybody who loves the game. Anybody who can still

visualize Jr. Gilliam on the hot corner, or Vada Pinson whirling around the bases like a gazelle, or Jim Bunning when he was alive and well as a pitcher and not nowadays when he's unplugged and irrelevant in the Senate.

Don't get me goin' on baseball. I could talk about it all night long, and HAVE, often!

'Was taken as a child several times to old Crosley Field in Cincinnati. Then went quite a bit later to Wrigley, old Commiskey, and Fenway. I love those places. Closest I ever get to feeling like I'm in a sacred place.

[TomInTib]

35. and Junior..

only made it to '78.

50 years.

You would've thunk Jimmy woulda lasted forever.

[saltpoint]

36. Did you ever see a game when Cesar Geronimo was in the outfield?

I used to love to watch him throw the ball. He was no slouch at the plate either, but I was happy enough just watching him throw the ball.

He came along later during the 70s, but he had that incredible arm that come from another realm. My interests were scattered by that time, and Geronimo helped refocus me on baseball. I owe him a huge debt for that.

[TomInTib]

38. Saw him in Houston sometimes in the late 60s

'Dude could wing it.

[saltpoint]

39. Yep. I wish I could have seen a game at Candlestick. Had a chance, too,

and passed it up.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

43. LOL

This is the most blatantly hijacked thread I have ever read. And it deserves it.


Go Red Sox!

[saltpoint]

47. Hi, TG. I admit it -- Once we established what religion Jesus was,

I felt it was kosher to spin off into Baseball.

:hi:

[TomInTib]

48. I just couldn't help myself, TG. My religion is Baseball.

And Jesus was a Capricorn, by the way.

[987654321]

14. He was a Jew

I mean, it's right there in the bible.
These Catholics who say this kind of crap are the ones who think that Jesus would have been a republican and that everyone who was abused by priests are nothing but "sue-happy priest haters." That was a quote from a conservative Catholic customer of mine.

Catholicism is the oldest Christian religion active today, so they can hang their hats on that one.

[saltpoint]

16. Upthread DUers are on target. Jesus was not Catholic nor Protestant.

Likely a Jew, is anybody's best guess.

And tell your friend that one of the most visible aspects of Jesus' ministry is that he avoided synagogues and other organized religious functions. He appeared to prefer the desert exiles of John the Baptist and eschewed the formal, sanctioned venues of faith.

The institution of the Catholic Church came way later.

[Proud_Democratt]

18. Yeshuah was his name.....sounds Jewish to me.

[saltpoint]

20. Hi,m Proud_Democrat. Yep. My money's on "Jewish," for sure.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

44. And he was circumcised. That caps it

no pun intended.

[northzax]

17. wouldn't that mean

that Jesus, as a good catholic, would have to worship himself? isn't that kinda whack?

[Warpy]

21. Jesus lived and died an observant Jew

Yes, he founded a reform sect. However, it was a JEWISH sect and remained so for a century or two. It didn't become non Jewish until Rome and Byzantium decided to make it their imperial religion.

He wasn't a Catholic in any sense of trhe word because the religion hadn't been begun yet.

[shain from kane]

22. I heard he was a carpenter. n/t

[Proud_Democratt]

23. Son of a carpenter....

Hi neighbor!!!:hi:

[shain from kane]

26. Did you realize that you were at 785 posts, same as me at the time?

[Proud_Democratt]

28. Twilight Zone?????????

[ChristianLibrul]

37. Probably a stone mason

Joseph was a carpenter. Historical indications are that Jesus was probably a stonecutter.

[Proud_Democratt]

25. And I suppose Jesus and the disciples were eating mackerel....

at the Last Supper, the meal(Seder) is eaten 1-2 days before Passover.

[shain from kane]

27. I ate at Bandana's tonight. Pulled pork sandwich. n/t

[shain from kane]

29. Holy mackerel.

You changed your posting, and made my comment irrelevant.
Irregardless, as they say in Missouri, are there any mackerel in the Sea of Galilee?

Corrected my spelling.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

41. You're toying with us, aren't you?

[SeveredMind]

45. Unfortunately, no

[Meshuga]

49. Perhaps Jesus was two different people

Jesus was a Jew and a very religious Jew according to some theories. Not at all like the Jesus in the New Testament.

But Jesus was not the founder of Christianity. Paul of Tarso (or St. Paul or whatever you want to call him) was the founder. So Jesus was definitely not Catholic. :-)

There are historical mentions of two different people with the name Yeshu (they dropped the last letter of his name Yeshua) that if you put the story of the two Yeshu's together you would come up with a similar story of Jesus. But they are two people and some believe that the Jesus we know today may be a product of two historical figures.

Here is an interesting site I found when searching on the subject talking about a "historical Jesus" in the Talmud:

http://www.angelfire.com/mt/talmud/jesusnarr.html

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

55. Fascinating article

thanks for the link!

[SPKrazy]

51. Jesus Was Jewish

and possibly belonged to the Essene sect, but he was Jewish

Catholicism didn't start until well after Jesus's death

What kind of idiot told you that

[Donald Ian Rankin]

52. What he's getting at, rather obliquely,

is what Catholics refer to as "Apostolic succession".

The Catholic church teaches that it continues in unbroken succession from St Peter, and hence from Christ himself; as such Christ was the founder of what is now the Catholic church. Catholics claim that all other churches are splinter groups from theirs, and as such can't make that claim, and as such they have the sole claim to be "the church that Jesus founded". This is, of course, hotly disputed by other denominations of Christians.

I've never heard this phrased as "Jesus was a Catholic", though.

I'm not sure when the word "catholic" started to be used to refer to the Church, but it wouldn't surprise me if a word meaning that was around well before it was being used to distinguish it from other churches, possibly even as early as the time of the apostles (although I have no information that that *was* the case); it simply means "universal".

[USA_1]

53. catholic means "universal"

Jesus welcomed all into His church. This is what was originally meant by being "catholic". But note how there are only churches in the New Testament, not religions.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

54. Jesus was called rabbi

don't know that Catholic priests are called that. :) The Catholic Church as we know it today came centuries after the death of Christ, succession of the Popes from Peter not withstanding.