Evolution of Christianity

[old3bob]

On 12/5/2023 at 10:46 AM, Maddie said:

I thought since I was a history major and since we have this new shiny Abrahamic forum I would bring up the fascinating and totally not controversial topic about the evolution of Christianity. My basic understanding is this 

 

1. Early Christianit(ies) in the first few centuries of the CE.

 

2. The transition to Orthodoxy as one branch of Christianity became the official religion of the Empire. 

 

3. Then there was the great schism of 1054 when the Church split into East and West, because.... reasons.

 

4. The Protestant reformation which began in 1517 with Martin Luther.

 

There should be a lot to unpack there and discuss. 

 

Along the lines of early there is something about the order of Essenes related to Christianity that i read about 30 years ago, I'd have to dig out the text or book if I still have it?

 

along the lines of reincarnation there are versus in the Bible that allude such, for instance when some people asked Jesus if he was Elijah come again, that is if my old tucked away memory is still good...

[old3bob]

Mr. G. of the 4th way said that communion is not just figurative as in most Christian church's today  but was and may still be based on an actual Shamanistic rite used to maintain astral or subtle body connections with their master after the master passed. 

Edited January 5 by old3bob

[Cobie]

.

Edited January 7 by Cobie

[snowymountains]

17 minutes ago, old3bob said:

Mr. G. of the 4th way said that communion is not just figurative as in most Christian church's today  but was and may still be based on an actual Shamanistic rite used to maintain astral or subtle body connections with their master after the master passed. 

 

Communion is identical to an Orphic rite.

The Orphics possibly, even likely, had influences from the Skythians.

Todds classifies the Skythians as Shamans.

 

I'm not aware if there were any connotations in the Orphic rite about astral/subtle bodies, tbh I don't think it's the case but haven't looked into that stuff for a long time.

 

Ultimately it also depends on how one defines Shamanism but this is a different discussion.

Edited January 5 by snowymountains

[old3bob]

5 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

Communion is identical to an Orphic rite.

The Orphics possibly, even likely, had influences from the Skythians.

Todds classifies the Skythians as Shamans.

 

I'm not aware if there were any connotations in the Orphic rite about astral/subtle bodies, tbh I don't think it's the case but haven't looked into that stuff for a long time.

 

Ultimately it also depends on how one defines Shamanism but this is a different discussion.

 

problem is that an academic or looking from the outside- in definition or second hand accounts have serious limits as compared to a full experience of  Shamanism (which I know next to nothing about) that has been going on since the beginning of mankind in various forms that non-Shamans are not really qualified to speak on, including many of our new-age like wanna be Shamans who may mean well but then again buyer beware.... similar scenarios are rampant throughout all the hopeful stuff being put out there!

Edited January 6 by old3bob

[old3bob]

Just a passing fact and not sure if it falls under an "evolution":  Jesus did not fully pass on his position in lineage (although he passed a lot on to Peter and many others!) since he is and always will be number one in Christianity.  Whereas In many sects of Hinduism a fully Self realized/actualized Sat guru normally does fully pass on his and the lineage to the next chosen and qualified Satguru who then becomes the new number one for that sect for his lifetime, (some such lineages do not always continue on Earth but are said to remain on other planes)  thus with that being a big difference between them.  Btw Hinduism does not have a human founder as most all other ways do.  It's Sanskrit name is Sanatana Dharma, or the Eternal Law, also way, or religion. 

Edited January 6 by old3bob

[snowymountains]

4 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

problem is that an academic or looking from the outside- in definition or second hand accounts have serious limits as compared to a full experience of  Shamanism (which I know next to nothing about) that has been going on since the beginning of mankind in various forms that non-Shamans are not really qualified to speak on, including many of our new-age like wanna be Shamans who may mean well but then again buyer beware.... similar scenarios are rampant throughout all the hopeful stuff being put out there!

 

That's more or less the issue with defining it, today we tend to define Shamanism according to Harner.

Harner was great at his job but eg core Shamanism is his creation too.

Post Harner you have even more folks who teach their form of Shamanism..

 

All these cultures do have significant differentiations between them however.

At least to me they don't look that similar and imo if someone is to pick practices from here and there, they should also be generous and cite from which traditions they picked which practice.

The core issue is that if shamanism was a practice which was alive 100000 years ago by hunter gatherers, then what everyone teaches today can only be a mix and match of derivatives of that culture, those who practiced it are simply not around today to tell us what they did.

 

 

Hence I mentioned the attribution of Shamanic roots of the Skythians per Todds, who was outside of circuits whose efforts were to boot a modern form of Shamanism, imo his more objective.

By all means Harner's books and publications are an inspiring read, but I tend to take everything there with a grain of salt.

An interesting question though is to see the practices that have survived today and have their roots in hunter gatherer societies.

Whether these were that similar between tribes or whether we should label them Shamanic ( did they even use that word back then? ) is a different question.

 

Anyhow this is somewhat off topic, though it's a very interesting topic 

[old3bob]

1 hour ago, snowymountains said:

 

That's more or less the issue with defining it, today we tend to define Shamanism according to Harner.

Harner was great at his job but eg core Shamanism is his creation too.

Post Harner you have even more folks who teach their form of Shamanism..

 

All these cultures do have significant differentiations between them however.

At least to me they don't look that similar and imo if someone is to pick practices from here and there, they should also be generous and cite from which traditions they picked which practice.

The core issue is that if shamanism was a practice which was alive 100000 years ago by hunter gatherers, then what everyone teaches today can only be a mix and match of derivatives of that culture, those who practiced it are simply not around today to tell us what they did.

 

 

Hence I mentioned the attribution of Shamanic roots of the Skythians per Todds, who was outside of circuits whose efforts were to boot a modern form of Shamanism, imo his more objective.

By all means Harner's books and publications are an inspiring read, but I tend to take everything there with a grain of salt.

An interesting question though is to see the practices that have survived today and have their roots in hunter gatherer societies.

Whether these were that similar between tribes or whether we should label them Shamanic ( did they even use that word back then? ) is a different question.

 

Anyhow this is somewhat off topic, though it's a very interesting topic 

 

Thanks for the review and information snowymountains, well said...