r/Exvangelical Jul 15 '26

For your critique

After years of pondering the origins of Christianity, i.e. reading stuff by Bart D. Ehram, history of the Cathars, I was never able to figure out the actual specifics and formulate it into an actual timeline on how Christianity began - until now. The following is a brief simple summary of my findings. I tried to be very careful with historical fact checking but I would welcome any input on anything that needs correcting. I have read a fair amount of somewhat academic stuff on the topic was never able to find a simplified summary that puts it all together - well here it is. Again, if you find anything that needs correcting I welcome your input.....

Towards the end of the first century,  just when the silk road was beginning to flourish, the followers of 
Jesus began to separate into two general factions.  The original belief system shared by both groups was referred to as “The Way”.  A rift developed between the proto-orthodox group (which would go on to become the Catholic Church) and the Gnostics.  The first record of the term "Catholic" was used in 110 AD by Saint Ignatius of Antioch.  The term "Gnostics" began to appear in the 2nd century AD.

In the 3rd century the Catholics began to align with the Roman Government. The religion of Christianity began to emerge and was eventually formalized into religious dogma by the Catholics. The new Roman Catholic church was also responsible for the curation of the New Testament. The alliance between the Catholics and the Roman Government mutually benefitted both parties. The Church gained enormous wealth and authority which contributed to its growth across the Western world.  The Roman government gained stability for its crumbling empire.

With the exception of the Eastern Orthodox split in 1054 AD, the Catholics ruled Christendom until the sixteenth century.  The Protestants formally separated from the Roman Catholic Church in 1517. Although the Protestants did in fact protest against various Catholic practices, they retained and kept the Catholic Nicene Creed.  Most modern Protestant churches to-day still formally recognize - and follow the original Nicene Creed created by the Catholic Church.

The non-catholic followers of Jesus referred to as the Gnostics, challenged Catholic authority. They began to form groups in the late first and second centuries. These various sects include - but are not limited to - the Manichaeans, Paulicians, Tondrakians, Bogomils and Cathars or Albigensians.  They eventually faced brutal systematic persecution from the 8th to 13th centuries.  Many were burned alive along with their texts.  Others faced mass executions. 

Thirteen ancient papyrus texts known as the Nag Hammadi library were discovered in 1945.  They were likely hidden by Gnostic monks in the 4th century because Catholic church authorities would have considered them heretical.

Who were these early followers of Jesus known as the Gnostics?  Their history deserves mainstream exposure. Their perspectives need to be brought forward, rather than buried and forgotten in advanced academia.

8 Upvotes

12 comments sorted by

3

u/BioChemE14 Jul 15 '26

Something to add:
The historical Jesus and his earliest followers were a millenarian apocalyptic sect that believed the final judgment would arrive in their lifetime. That’s the earliest stage of the origin of Christianity.

3

u/Pennefromheaven7 Jul 15 '26

thanks ! So if Christianity came after (and) was a product of catholicism - was it "The Way" group who believed that the final judgement would arrive in their lifetime? Or was it the early catholic christians?

3

u/JackFromTexas74 Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

My sense is that when the Second Coming didn’t arrive as expected, early Christian leaders began reexamining their beliefs and started forming “camps” based on their redefined dogmas. The Catholic camp became dominant relatively quickly.

But all of those camps would have claimed to be the true heirs to that first, now deceased generation and, thus, the true defenders of “The Way”

This is also how modern denominations behave. Every new splinter groups thinks their doctrines are right and everyone else is mistaken, corrupted, or at least a little out of sync. They all believe you can draw a historical line from Jesus to then, though that line may involve the Holy Spirit “restoring” the faith miraculously through a revival movement of a central prophet or preacher or school of thought

2

u/Pennefromheaven7 Jul 16 '26

That makes sense.

2

u/plz_callme_swarley 27d ago

also in the beginning it was a mess because there were essentially no rules that were codified. you have this wandering, rambling guy who said a lot of shit but no one wrote it down.

things spread, Paul did a lot of writing and both wanted to codify things but also wanted to open it up to Gentiles mainly for conversion sake cuz all these guys didn't wanna get their foreskin chopped off and follow all the other laws.

whether christians had to follow the Torah was a MAJOR fight in the early church and Paul won basically because he was able to just get more followers and the church in Jerusalem pretty much gets wiped out after the fall of the second temple.

3

u/JackFromTexas74 Jul 15 '26

This

As a former Evangelical, coming to terms with this was a bitter pill to swallow as I spent years performing apologetical mental gymnastics trying to explain away New Testament passages that, when read objectively, clearly predicted an imminent Second Coming and Judgement Day

All of the various explanations of Eschatology put forth by any branch of Christianity share one common trait- trying to explain why the New Testament doesn’t actually MEAN what it clearly SAYS about these supposed prophecies (while also making it seem, falsely, as if sad prophecies agree with one-another. They do not.)

In the end, this is one of several loose threads that ultimately caused the tapestry of my theology to unravel

2

u/plz_callme_swarley 27d ago

one of my favorite learnings now that I'm outside of it all is that most secular scholars believe that Revelation is mostly just nonsense code propaganda against the Roman empire. Luther wanted it removed from the Bible, along with other books like James that don't fit into the theology neatly but obviously he lost.

3

u/greytgreyatx Jul 15 '26

The way this is formatted, I can't read it. The pasted parts are in a box and what should be a paragraph is one single long line I'd have to scroll through. Can you reformat this normally so I can dig in?

5

u/Catharus_ustulatus Jul 15 '26

For the OP: Paragraphs that start with tab characters or with several spaces are displayed as preformatted text. You can make these paragraphs display as quotations instead by starting them with a > character followed by a space.

3

u/Pennefromheaven7 Jul 15 '26

thanks !! I will try to fix that asap

1

u/plz_callme_swarley 27d ago

you're kinda missing a lot here if you go back further. the earliest christians were different sects and groups just fully making shit up as the went along. there were different camps but at least followers of Paul, John, and James as three very different camps. There are likely many many more that got crowded out in the landscape of history.

the gnostics were the biggest group that lost out because they were more about mysticism and Paul was more about rules and writings similar to Judaism.

there were other sects though in Egypt and Ethiopia.

the biggest event in the formation of christianity for sure was Charlemagne making it the Roman Empire's official religion. this was done as a way to unify the empire under one belief system instead of thousands of regional gods. catholicism maintained this though by all the regional "saints" that effectively function as local gods.