The idea of a Christian Holy City seems antithetical to the religion, is the argument I get from the middle of this book. These chapters (10 in particular) hold very little relevance for me. Most of the institutions of early Christianity had an inbuilt hostility to Jews (p. 205). Armstrong recounts here the formation of Christian theology. This religion had issues to work out that were unlike any found in Judaism or Islam. The way I see it, there was this person on earth who affected a lot of people in many different ways. For a few hundred years, escaping persecution for believing in this new religion superseded the need to actually iron out all the details, such as the real nature of Jesus. After Christians were allowed to worship in the open, they all decided to hate on Jews for rejecting and forsaking their saviour. Apart from this, Christians had very little they could agree on. Besides establishing a separate identity from the Jews, Christians had to determine whether Christ was divine, man, half and half.
This process always seemed sketchy to me, I'll be very honest. Christianity, I know the least about, despite it being the most ubiquitous of faiths in America. Especially about the divisions between different sects. I've been spewing my own opinions too much, I should ask more questions. What do the Christians in the classroom have to say about these Ecumenical councils?
Also, I noticed in two separate occasions, Armstrong used the word "catholic" as an adjective and "presbyter" as a noun. Anyone know about the usage of these words outside of referring to Catholicism and Presbyterianism?
No comments:
Post a Comment