Fascinating stuff.
Don’t know anything much about the Thomasine church founded in India. Is there decent evidence to show it was actually founded by the apostle Thomas the skeptic, ‘doubting’ Thomas (?) He who is also called the twin. I have no idea to whom he was meant to have been a twin.
I was under the impression that mainstream scholars think the Thomas element in India is myth.
Yeah, no doubt Thomasine christianity would have ben very different without the dogmatic and quite horrid medieval Spanish Catholicism.
The Christianity with which we are familiar is called “Paulism” by some scholars. It is my understanding that Paul de-jewified “our” Christianity, by removing the ritual commandments. Perhaps the most important was removing the requirement for circumcision. That meant gentiles were able to join. Adult circumcision was a life threatening procedure at that time and extremely painful
It’s my understanding that in the early days, the new faith, often called “The Way” was especially attractive to the marginalised, specifically women and slaves. Of course, this new religion promised them an afterlife far better than the one they had.
A couple of things bother me about Paulist christianity:
Jesus is recorded as saying : Matthew 5: 17-18 “17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”
It’s my position everything was most certainly not accomplished. In the early days of Christianity, a basic teaching was that Jesus would return. He said so himself : Matthew 16:28" . [S]ome of you standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”
I think it can be argued that Jesus did not come into his kingdom because he did not return as he promised. Early followers seem to have believed that Jesus’ return ,and with him the New Age of world peace, were imminent. When Jesu didn’t turn up, christianity became just another failed millenarian movement. The early church fathers changed Jesus’ expected return to some vague future time and quietly dropped it.
During my Catholic upbringing, ‘the second coming’ was only ever mentioned in passing and was never taught in any detail.
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((9))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
My next confusion probably has something to do with the contradictions found within the bible. IE Jesus said:
Matthew 10:5 " These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:"
It tends to be constantly over looked (imo) that Jesus as described in the bible was a devout Jew and rabbi. The sect he founded was above all, Jewish.
yet Paul seems to have ignored Jesus’ crucial admonitions and effectively invented his own religion. But I’m an ignorant man, I’m sure I’ve misunderstood.
()(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((9))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Oh, I found A N Wilson’s “Paul; the mind Of the Apostle”. It was hiding underneath a National Geo. Only bought that book because I enjoyed his " The Victorians" so much.
If you’re interested in the history of that time ,with the Roman influence, I recommend ; " Caligula: The Corruption Of Power" by Anthony .A. Barrett. He points out that most of what we think we know about the emperor Gaius Caesar Augustus Germanicus comes from Suetonius’ The Twelve Caesars’, which he considers scurrilous . However, Barrett is no revisionist , he does not rehabilitate Caligula, but tries to be a bit more objective. Having only read this one book on the topic, I’m not really able to reach an informed conclusion.