Is there any branch of Christianity that exclusively follows the teachings of Jesus?
What I mean by that is the Old Testament is mostly garbage that can be dismissed offhand. Also, most of the New Testament after Jesus died is garbage too (Paul is a poser who most likely never even had a vision)
I like the teachings of Jesus, but not much else. Is there a Christianity for me?
Jefferson's Bible.
Marcionism may be the thing for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism
>Marcion believed Jesus was the savior sent by God, and Paul the Apostle was his chief apostle, but he rejected the Hebrew Bible and the God of Israel. Marcionists believed that the wrathful Hebrew God was a separate and lower entity than the all-forgiving God of the New Testament. This belief was in some ways similar to Gnostic Christian theology; notably, both are dualistic, that is, they posit opposing gods, forces, or principles: one higher, spiritual, and "good", and the other lower, material, and "evil" (compare Manichaeism), in contrast to other Christian views that "evil" has no independent existence, but is a privation or lack of "good",[2] a view shared by the Jewish theologian Moses Maimonides.[3]
>>883897
This. Contains just the parts of Jesus, cuts out all of the mythological crap.
I've always wondering if Paul was just lying.
>>883908
I doubt he's lying; talking out of his ass seems more likely.
Careful, OP. You're bordering on heresy. I urge you to take the time to understand the OT more fully.
>>883937
As Anon here says, cutting away the old testament will always be hereshy.
If you don't want the Old testament at all, you may be interested in checking out Hare Krishna. They Admit Jesus as being a prophet (I think) so you will still get that. You will have to become a Vegetarian and obey a new set of rules though, so it may still not be something for you. They do give of cult vibes, but they aren't really any violent and won't try to kill you if you leaves them.
>>883937
*tips fedora*
>>883914
His experience sounds like a drug trip. Maybe he accidentally ate a mushroom or wheat with ergot (lsd).
>>883959
>ergot (lsd)
Ergot does not contain LSD.
How can you be a follower of Jesus and be anti-OT? His coming is prophesied in the OT, there are OT references and direct quotations scattered throughout the NT, and two OT figures literally manifest (Mt. Tabor) in the NT standing next to Jesus.
It's impossible. Even if you only read the NT you would still be reading the OT just because of the many quotes the NT features lol
No way around this senpai. Get used to it.
>>884111
>How can you be a follower of Jesus
Could have just left it at that, senpai.
>>884166
>>883893
DESU I agree win you in principle. I think Christianity would work better if it was more like Theravada Buddhism or Confucianism.
>>883906
Someone's never done his research on the topic.
>>884210
>>884210
>Christianity would work better if it was more like Theravada Buddhism or Confucianism
so what would be the point? Just follow Theravada Buddhism or Confucianism. Christianity is based on love not detachment.
>>884315
Literally you
>>883893
Yes, there is a tradition in India called the "Saint Thomas Christians" who claim to have been founded by the Apostle Thomas, and whose Gospel consists solely of a collection of the sayings of Jesus.
there is also the "Q-Gospel", which is a reconstruction of a now-lost collection of sayings in the same vein, which shows significant similarities to the Thomasan traditions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Thomas_Christians
>>883903
Marcionism is the opposite of what OP wants, it's Christianity with all the Hebrew parts taken out.
>>884111
>His coming is prophesied in the OT
No it isn't.
> there are OT references and direct quotations scattered throughout the NT
A text written by Jews is coloured with Jewish mythology? Wow spooky.
>Even if you only read the NT you would still be reading the OT just because of the many quotes the NT features lol
Only in the Gospels, which are late additions to teh NT. If you read just the Pauline stuff you won't find much OT stuff, just the occasional Jewish turn of phrase.
The God that Jesus talks about is far more sinister than the Yahweh of old. At least after Yahweh brutally killed you and your entire people you could cease to exist, Jesus goes to rub salt in the wound by tossing you into the eternal fire as well. Also how did hell replace the concept of Sheol in Judaism?
>>884367
His coming is prophesied in the NT, read the bible typological instead of literal.
>>883893
Gospel of Thomas
http://gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html
The lost sayings gospel, "Q"
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/q.html
Both consist merely of the statements of Jesus, many of which you will recognise from the NT Gospels.
>>884367
>No it isn't.
Damn nigga, you sure convinced me.
>A text written by Jews is coloured with Jewish mythology? Wow spooky.
That's my point. OP wants just the NT, but the NT itself is full of OT stuff.
>Only in the Gospels
How can you have Jesus with out the stories in which his ministry is recounted?
>>884380
>NT
I'm guessing you mean OT
>>884379
>Also how did hell replace the concept of Sheol in Judaism?
The Greek concept of Tartarus.
>>884380
Give me the chapter and verse.
>>884379
Judaism already had a tradition for what we'd now identify as hell called Gehenna (named after the real-world location in Jerusalem). The way the Rabbinical tradition described it mirrors the way Hell is depicted in Christianity, which is understandable considering Christianity arose from that same tradition.
>>884395
>Damn nigga, you sure convinced me.
Show me where, then.
>That's my point. OP wants just the NT, but the NT itself is full of OT stuff.
Only in a cultural sense, teh religion of the NT is not the religion of the OT.
>How can you have Jesus with out the stories in which his ministry is recounted?
that's a problem for Christians, not for me. The ministry gospels are late additions to the corpus, they're not eye witness accounts or even accounts from eye witness sources, they're literary and allegorical and not based on actual events.
>>883893
bro i'm in the same boat. luckily i recently found some stuff i found really enriching, without all the bullshit and partisan circlejerking that seems to go on.
>itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/historical-jesus/id384233911?mt=10
really good lecture series on the historical jesus and what he actually taught. he also wrote this book which is really good:
>http://infidels.org/library/modern/thomas_sheehan/firstcoming/
Anything by this guy is also really good:
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dominic_Crossan
>>884379
this post of yours sums up my biggest problem with christianity. the jewish concept of not going to hell is incredibly merciful compared to christianity
>>884418
>Show me where, then.
I'm sure you are perfectly familiar with what verses I'm referring to, so spare me the effort, and just give me the refutations.
>>884426
https://afkimel.wordpress.com/2013/03/19/st-isaac-the-syrian-the-hellish-scourge-of-divine-love/
>inb4 muh random blog
I have no interest or connection to whatever blog this is, I just googled "Isaac the Syrian Hell". Just read the quotes from Isaac the Syrian. Yes, his views are representative of Orthodox Christianity. Why continue to hold simplistic views of what Christianity that are based on your own fancy? Look into what is actually taught. Then make up your mind as to whether you reject or accept it. Don't reject a strawman of your invention.
Am I a pleb for liking Luke and Revelation the best? Working my way slowly through the Bible in a roundabout manner.
>>884451
So you know there are refutations for the claim, but you believe it anyway. Good goy.
>>884418
>Only in a cultural sense, teh religion of the NT is not the religion of the OT.
Traditional Christianity rejects that point of view, and they make a case for themselves. As a person with an Orthodox Jewish background, I think it's a legitimate case. Let me guess, "but it's neoplatonism" right?>>884418
>The ministry gospels are late additions to the corpus, they're not eye witness accounts or even accounts from eye witness sources
Cool opinion. I disagree. Just because you don't find copies of texts from certain periods doesn't mean they weren't around, either physically or orally.
>>884457
I don't actually. So please share.
>>884461
I mean I'm not familiar with whatever reasons you have for rejecting those verses as prophecies.
>>884459
>Cool opinion. I disagree.
What part do you disagree with? The fact that they are late additions, or the fact that they are not eye witness accounts?
>>884461
>>884466
Perhaps if you would simply state your claim in teh first place instead of playing a coy little game of "well YOU KNOW what I mean..." you could have saved us all the annoyance of reading this pointless exchange.
>>884469
You're saying you are unfamiliar with all those passages in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Hosea, etc that Christians cite as prophecy? You want me to reproduce all of that? Just tell me why you reject it.
>>884469
>What part do you disagree with? The fact that they are late additions, or the fact that they are not eye witness accounts?
Both. I haven't heard a convincing case. You don't have to write out everything. Share a link if you think it represents your views. I'll check it out.
>>884475
Not him, but for starters, especially if you come from an Orthodox Jewish background, you should know that Daniel isn't even a prophet.
>>884475
>Both. I haven't heard a convincing case.
Correction, you've never taken even a cursory look at the scholarship in the field. Neither point is disputed by mainstream bible scholars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel#Dating
>Mark: c. 68–73,[33] c. 65–70.[34]
>Matthew: c. 70–100,[33] c. 80–85.[34]
>Luke: c. 80–100, with most arguing for somewhere around 85,[33] c. 80–85.[34]
>John: c. 90–100,[34] c. 90–110,[35] The majority view is that it was written in stages, so there was no one date of composition.
>Just tell me why you reject it.
Okay. Fulfilled within the very same chapter it is made. Now guess which prophetic claim I'm refuting :^)
>>884451
>From Lewis I learned that hell is always locked from the inside. The damned freely choose their perdition. Obstinately, and eternally, they refuse to make even the smallest step toward the Good. They have reached the point where they are completely and irredeemably defined by their preference for self and autonomy. The reprobate “has his wish,” writes Lewis—”to live wholly in the self and to make the best of what he finds there. And what he finds there is Hell”
i thought he was lampooning this at first but he isn't. it's incredibly obtuse to assume that someone subjected to any kind of torture would not want it ended in the most expedient way possible and would probably reevaluate his stances if what they get him are fire torture. people crack all the time from the menial tortures inflicted here on earth, how is it at all sound to assume that someone would stubbornly hold on to that which directly and obviously causes them immense misery? it seems abundantly clear to me that someone in hell would not be infinitely less likely to accept god than he would be on earth, but infinitely more so
>>884361
:]
>>884524
Show me an earlier source than Paul's letters.
>Blooming Frances
Why are you so difficult to beat
>>883893
Jesus was a Jew who believed in the God of the Torah. His teachings were a continuation of that message. To dismiss those is to dismiss him.
>>884210
Theravada is 2deep4u meme bullshit. Same with Confucianism. Mahayana master race.
