(November 7, 2018 at 1:56 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: As late as the late 300's AD, the split between Judaism and Christians was still not complete.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adversus_Judaeos
"Adversus Judaeos (Greek Kata Ioudaiōn, "against the Jews" or "against the Judeans") are a series of fourth century homilies by John Chrysostom directed to members of the church of Antioch of his time, who continued to observe Jewish feasts and fasts. Critical of this, he cast Judaism and the synagogues in his city in a critical and negative light."
When he was made Bishop of Constantinople, they also were found to be doing the same things ... and he railed against it again in he Christmas sermon, of the year 400.
"Homilies against Jews and Judaizing Christians[edit]
Main article: Adversus Judaeos
During his first two years as a presbyter in Antioch (386–387), John denounced Jews and Judaizing Christians in a series of eight homilies delivered to Christians in his congregation who were taking part in Jewish festivals and other Jewish observances.[44] It is disputed whether the main target were specifically Judaizers or Jews in general. His homilies were expressed in the conventional manner, utilizing the uncompromising rhetorical form known as the psogos (Greek: blame, censure).[citation needed]
One of the purposes of these homilies was to prevent Christians from participating in Jewish customs, and thus prevent the perceived erosion of Chrysostom's flock. In his homilies, John criticized those "Judaizing Christians", who were participating in Jewish festivals and taking part in other Jewish observances, such as the shabbat, submitted to circumcision and made pilgrimage to Jewish holy places.[45]
John claimed that synagogues were full of Christians, especially Christian women, on the shabbats and Jewish festivals, because they loved the solemnity of the Jewish liturgy and enjoyed listening to the shofar on Rosh Hashanah, and applauded famous preachers in accordance with the contemporary custom.[46] A more recent theory is that he instead tried to persuade Jewish Christians, who for centuries had kept connections with Jews and Judaism, to choose between Judaism and Christianity.[47]
In Greek the homilies are called Kata Ioudaiōn (Κατὰ Ιουδαίων), which is translated as Adversus Judaeos in Latin and Against the Jews in English.[48] The original Benedictine editor of the homilies, Bernard de Montfaucon, gives the following footnote to the title: "A discourse against the Jews; but it was delivered against those who were Judaizing and keeping the fasts with them [the Jews]."[48]
According to Patristics scholars, opposition to any particular view during the late 4th century was conventionally expressed in a manner, utilizing the rhetorical form known as the psogos, whose literary conventions were to vilify opponents in an uncompromising manner; thus, it has been argued that to call Chrysostom an "anti-Semite" is to employ anachronistic terminology in a way incongruous with historical context and record.[49] This does not preclude assertions that Chrysostom's theology was a form of Anti-Jewish supersessionism.[50]
if you had ever read the bible most of everything you mention is found in there. albeit subtly, in that the churches set up by Paul were being bombarded with all the jewish tradition, trying to infiltrate the gentile church.. and what was Paul's response? we are free from the law to the point that if we wish to bind ourselves with these 'legal observances' we can, but at the same time it is not necessary... nothing new here sport all very very old hat. like 1st century church old. just fyi I spent 10 years studying this period in the church under the personal tutelage of a doctor of theology, there is very little you can say here, that we have not already covered.. such as there remains a remnant of this jewish inspired church today referred to as the messianic jews. they hold tight to tradition and also the message of Christ. nothing's changed just the number of members has shifted in favor of the gentile church. In the first and second century this was 'the church this was the church of peter. but later through the guys you posted about a change went down to convert to a more gentile friendly church... eitherway works as there are not rules of worship in christianity. outside of do what your heart says must be done to worship God with all your being!
understand i am not a catholic where all of this has been hidden from me. I understand what the church was and where it came from... remember I was telling you just one post ago what the church was despite your modern understanding of the word had you believe it to be a sanctuary. (meaning you did not know the difference between a church and sanctuary) think both where the same and one being proof that a passage in mat 16 could not exist...
I say that because you keep trying to ah ha! me.. Like provide me with a fact i did not know which will undermine my belief... So here's the thing... 25 years ago when I started I knew nothing, and I knew I knew nothing no pretended to so I sought out to learn the truth.. I started not with the church's history but the secular history of the church which is why I guess everything you have been going over I feel like it has been done and put to rest in the 1990s as that is when I started my studies. so this is all nice and all but getting very boring fast what else you got?
