Continued from previous. Nothing new.
2. But these earliest christians who believed in a non-corporeal christ were long gone even by the time that mainstream Roman christianism started doing its full-on replacement (of all the earlier christian cults who couldn't agree with each other).
The following ones had belief in a fleshy (historical) jeebus, but no resurrection (gasp!) - note that what's interesting is that *Paul* didn't seem to have a corporeal jeebus (i.e. Paul's creation was a vacuole: something that could take any form and hence today it - jeebus - can be a 'dalit' in 'liberation theology India' and can be 'black' in Africa just as easily as it was an oryan in nazi Germany):
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2b.htm#Earl...ianBeliefs
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Many early Christianities:</b> http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/triumph_...cholarship.html
  Jesus' earliest followers ...did not know stories about His death and resurrection.
  Jesus' Jewish followers in Jerusalem, the Jewish Christians who became the Ebionites, did not believe in His virgin birth, or in His divinity.
  The Gnostic Christians, who developed in the first century, who were the first Christians in Egypt and elsewhere, did think Jesus brought salvation â but not by dying on the cross. [Christian] Gnosticism's Jesus saved by bringing sacred wisdom.
  Only the sect of Christianity founded by Paul developed the Christ myth of the dying resurrected savior. Paul was a diaspora Jew, raised in Pagan Tarsus, who never met Jesus.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The Ebionites</b>
These very early followers of Jesus believed that conversion to Judaism was necessary for one to be a Christian. They also had other beliefs that would now be considered un-Christian. According to the writings left by Churchfather Eusebius, who described their beliefs and disbeliefs:
  They [the Ebionites] considered him [Jesus] a plain and common man and justified only by his advances in virtue and that he was born of the Virgin Mary by natural generation. With them the observance of the law was altogether necessary, as if they could not be saved only by faith in Christ and a corresponding life.
  -- Eusebius, 4th century
(Though the Ebionites didn't believe in the Virgin Birth, Eusebius did, which is why he still referred to Mary as the Virgin in his statement.)
  The early Nazarenes, who adhered to the Jewish law, were called Ebionites, or [the meaning of Ebionite:] contemptible people. The Ebionites denounced the Paulinists, and declared that Paul was an impostor...
  -- Crimes of Christianity, by G W Foote and J M Wheeler
In short:
  <b>Ebionites denied the divinity of Jesus and his virgin birth [Link]</b> http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/triumph_...cholarship.html
  <b>Ebionites ...did not believe in Jesus' saving resurrection [Link].</b> http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/scholars...ense_first.html
Ebionites refer to Christianity as Dat Kazav, meaning the "Lying Religion" (derived from Paul, whom they called the "Lying Man").<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->(Compare that last - the 'christian' ebionites who called *Paul* the liar and mainstream christianism the 'lying religion' - with the <b>non-christian</b> Baptism-centred religious sect of Mandaeism:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2b.htm#Earl...ianBeliefs
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>pre</b>-Christian religion of Mandaeism
Mandean literature refers to Jesus, the son of Mary, as the <b>false Messiah.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The Gnostic Christians</b>
The gnostic Gospel of Thomas never mentions Jesus' saving death.
  The gnostics believed Jesus saved not by his dying and resurrection. The gnostics believed Jesus saved by the sacred wisdom he taught.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Note, the above were gradually murdered out early on (Ebionites are mentioned as still existing??? Or maybe they're just a modern group naming themselves after the original ebionites in order to have legitimacy-through-ancientry).
The internal disagreements with Arrianism and Nestorianism and others are entirely fissures in Pauline christianism (which was the only remaining christianism after it was established). This was as a consequence of Roman christianism having wiped out the other earlier christianisms where jeebus was not divine/god or did not resurrect or had no body.
What became mainstream christianism kept wiping out the other christianisms:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2b.htm#Earl...ianBeliefs
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->These and other early Christian sects do matter, even though today's Christians follow a form of Paul's version of Christianity:
  [About Dr. Bauer's book <b>Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity</b>:]
  For hundreds of years everyone assumed that the earliest Christians were orthodox New Testament Roman Christians, and "heretical" Christianities â like Gnosticism and Marcionism â developed later, branches off the original orthodox trunk.
  Then in the 1930s ...Walter Bauer decided to actually look at the evidence. ...What he discovered was that pretty much everywhere he looked â Syria, Palestine, Egypt, etc. â the "heresies" weren't branches off any trunk, they were the original local Christianities. And they weren't small marginal sects, they were the main local Christianities.
  The evidence shows that all around the Mediterranean, outside Rome, the orthodox New Testament Roman Christianity was a secondary sect, a sect that became dominant only after the conversion of Constantine gave it the advantage of Roman swords.
Link http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/triumph_...cholarship.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The sects that fell apart from the mainstream Roman christianisms (arrianism, nestorianism, etc) and what remained of the non-mainstream ones:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Apollinarianism - Marcionism (Caesarea, in Asia Minor) - Arianism (Alexandria) - Monarchianism - Docetism - Monophysitism - Donatism (Carthage) - Monothelitism - Ebionism (Judea) - Montanism (Asia Minor) - Encratite - Nestorianism - Eutychianism - Priscillianism (Spain) - Gnosticism (Syria) - Sabellianism (North Africa) - Manichaeism (Babylonia)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://freetruth.50webs.org/A2a.htm
History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science by John William Draper:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Among a countless host of disputants may be mentioned Arians, Basilidians, Carpocratians, Collyridians, Eutychians, Gnostics, Jacobites, Marcionites, Marionites, Nestorians, Sabellians, Valentinians.
<b>Of these, the Marionites regarded the Trinity as consisting of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Virgin Mary; the Collyridians worshiped the Virgin as a divinity, offering her sacrifices of cakes; the Nestorians, as we have seen, denied that God had "a mother."</b>
(This is post Trinity and/or around the time of "Mary is/not mother of God" concepts were introduced)
...But, though they were irreconcilable in matters of faith, there was one point in which all these sects agreed - ferocious hatred and persecution of each other.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Finally, the fissures in the mainstream Roman christianisms gave rise to more and more argument about the inane concept of jeebus/trinity. Just read this page, it <i>defines</i> hysterical. (Note that these were fundamental pre-occupations of the christians at the time - and determined who they believed would go to hell.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/nestorian.html
<b>From Nestorianism to Monothelitism.</b> About various Church teachings and heresies determined during the Church councils: Apollinarianism and Nestorianism, Euthychianism (Monophysitism) and Monothelitism.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The above type of incomprehensible christian preoccupations (about jeebus' nature) were just continuations of the sort of insane things they had been arguing about before:
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/arian.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Arian Controversy<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Practically ALL of christianism in the world today (minus perhaps those who claim to still be ebionites??) are Orthodox Roman christians (pre-schism). That is the node of the tree from where all of today's branches come from. Orthodoxy, catholicism, protestantism, later protestantism (like the fundy sects which split off from the various protestantisms), the syrian christians of India - all are Orthodox Roman christianisms. They have some position or other on Mary and/or Trinity and/or 'idolatry' and/or the biblical texts and/or Jeebus' nature.
Not one of them holds that jeebus had no corporeal form (unhistoric, invisible). That kind is gone. ("It's a miracle!" No it's not. It's 'Constantine's Sword' and the Inquisition - it's christianism rooting itself out.)
Hindus do not know christianism very well. Christians today have 0 clue - they don't/won't *want* to know. Only western atheists and ambivalent theologians know.
Christianism is the most unfunny prank history has ever played on humanity. Its history has been carefully hidden (forbidden books, auto-da-fes), same as how its PR is very carefully maintained.
Read the first 3 big blocks that appear here:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2b.htm#Earl...ianBeliefs
(Starts with "A colossal fraud lies at the very basis of Christianity." from Crimes of Christianity, by G W Foote and J M Wheeler,
at least until "The Bible, as we have it today, is hardly more than three centuries old." by A Short History of the Bible, by Bronson C. Keeler, 1881)
Then read:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2d.htm
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The inexperienced person has little idea of the difficulty which the critical party finds in getting its facts before the public; nor of the systematic suppression used by the Christian press and clergy to prevent unpleasant truths concerning the Christian religion from coming out. There is not an orthodox religious newspaper in the world that will publish the facts concerning the origin of the Bible, which are given in these pages; there is scarcely a magazine in America that will publish them; and it is but recently that any newspaper would do so. Men who know the Christian theology to be untrue, have to get their audience as best they can.
-- A Short History of the Bible, Bronson C. Keeler, 1881<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
2. But these earliest christians who believed in a non-corporeal christ were long gone even by the time that mainstream Roman christianism started doing its full-on replacement (of all the earlier christian cults who couldn't agree with each other).
The following ones had belief in a fleshy (historical) jeebus, but no resurrection (gasp!) - note that what's interesting is that *Paul* didn't seem to have a corporeal jeebus (i.e. Paul's creation was a vacuole: something that could take any form and hence today it - jeebus - can be a 'dalit' in 'liberation theology India' and can be 'black' in Africa just as easily as it was an oryan in nazi Germany):
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2b.htm#Earl...ianBeliefs
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Many early Christianities:</b> http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/triumph_...cholarship.html
  Jesus' earliest followers ...did not know stories about His death and resurrection.
  Jesus' Jewish followers in Jerusalem, the Jewish Christians who became the Ebionites, did not believe in His virgin birth, or in His divinity.
  The Gnostic Christians, who developed in the first century, who were the first Christians in Egypt and elsewhere, did think Jesus brought salvation â but not by dying on the cross. [Christian] Gnosticism's Jesus saved by bringing sacred wisdom.
  Only the sect of Christianity founded by Paul developed the Christ myth of the dying resurrected savior. Paul was a diaspora Jew, raised in Pagan Tarsus, who never met Jesus.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The Ebionites</b>
These very early followers of Jesus believed that conversion to Judaism was necessary for one to be a Christian. They also had other beliefs that would now be considered un-Christian. According to the writings left by Churchfather Eusebius, who described their beliefs and disbeliefs:
  They [the Ebionites] considered him [Jesus] a plain and common man and justified only by his advances in virtue and that he was born of the Virgin Mary by natural generation. With them the observance of the law was altogether necessary, as if they could not be saved only by faith in Christ and a corresponding life.
  -- Eusebius, 4th century
(Though the Ebionites didn't believe in the Virgin Birth, Eusebius did, which is why he still referred to Mary as the Virgin in his statement.)
  The early Nazarenes, who adhered to the Jewish law, were called Ebionites, or [the meaning of Ebionite:] contemptible people. The Ebionites denounced the Paulinists, and declared that Paul was an impostor...
  -- Crimes of Christianity, by G W Foote and J M Wheeler
In short:
  <b>Ebionites denied the divinity of Jesus and his virgin birth [Link]</b> http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/triumph_...cholarship.html
  <b>Ebionites ...did not believe in Jesus' saving resurrection [Link].</b> http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/scholars...ense_first.html
Ebionites refer to Christianity as Dat Kazav, meaning the "Lying Religion" (derived from Paul, whom they called the "Lying Man").<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->(Compare that last - the 'christian' ebionites who called *Paul* the liar and mainstream christianism the 'lying religion' - with the <b>non-christian</b> Baptism-centred religious sect of Mandaeism:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2b.htm#Earl...ianBeliefs
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>pre</b>-Christian religion of Mandaeism
Mandean literature refers to Jesus, the son of Mary, as the <b>false Messiah.</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The Gnostic Christians</b>
The gnostic Gospel of Thomas never mentions Jesus' saving death.
  The gnostics believed Jesus saved not by his dying and resurrection. The gnostics believed Jesus saved by the sacred wisdom he taught.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Note, the above were gradually murdered out early on (Ebionites are mentioned as still existing??? Or maybe they're just a modern group naming themselves after the original ebionites in order to have legitimacy-through-ancientry).
The internal disagreements with Arrianism and Nestorianism and others are entirely fissures in Pauline christianism (which was the only remaining christianism after it was established). This was as a consequence of Roman christianism having wiped out the other earlier christianisms where jeebus was not divine/god or did not resurrect or had no body.
What became mainstream christianism kept wiping out the other christianisms:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2b.htm#Earl...ianBeliefs
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->These and other early Christian sects do matter, even though today's Christians follow a form of Paul's version of Christianity:
  [About Dr. Bauer's book <b>Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity</b>:]
  For hundreds of years everyone assumed that the earliest Christians were orthodox New Testament Roman Christians, and "heretical" Christianities â like Gnosticism and Marcionism â developed later, branches off the original orthodox trunk.
  Then in the 1930s ...Walter Bauer decided to actually look at the evidence. ...What he discovered was that pretty much everywhere he looked â Syria, Palestine, Egypt, etc. â the "heresies" weren't branches off any trunk, they were the original local Christianities. And they weren't small marginal sects, they were the main local Christianities.
  The evidence shows that all around the Mediterranean, outside Rome, the orthodox New Testament Roman Christianity was a secondary sect, a sect that became dominant only after the conversion of Constantine gave it the advantage of Roman swords.
Link http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/triumph_...cholarship.html<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The sects that fell apart from the mainstream Roman christianisms (arrianism, nestorianism, etc) and what remained of the non-mainstream ones:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Apollinarianism - Marcionism (Caesarea, in Asia Minor) - Arianism (Alexandria) - Monarchianism - Docetism - Monophysitism - Donatism (Carthage) - Monothelitism - Ebionism (Judea) - Montanism (Asia Minor) - Encratite - Nestorianism - Eutychianism - Priscillianism (Spain) - Gnosticism (Syria) - Sabellianism (North Africa) - Manichaeism (Babylonia)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://freetruth.50webs.org/A2a.htm
History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science by John William Draper:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Among a countless host of disputants may be mentioned Arians, Basilidians, Carpocratians, Collyridians, Eutychians, Gnostics, Jacobites, Marcionites, Marionites, Nestorians, Sabellians, Valentinians.
<b>Of these, the Marionites regarded the Trinity as consisting of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Virgin Mary; the Collyridians worshiped the Virgin as a divinity, offering her sacrifices of cakes; the Nestorians, as we have seen, denied that God had "a mother."</b>
(This is post Trinity and/or around the time of "Mary is/not mother of God" concepts were introduced)
...But, though they were irreconcilable in matters of faith, there was one point in which all these sects agreed - ferocious hatred and persecution of each other.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Finally, the fissures in the mainstream Roman christianisms gave rise to more and more argument about the inane concept of jeebus/trinity. Just read this page, it <i>defines</i> hysterical. (Note that these were fundamental pre-occupations of the christians at the time - and determined who they believed would go to hell.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/nestorian.html
<b>From Nestorianism to Monothelitism.</b> About various Church teachings and heresies determined during the Church councils: Apollinarianism and Nestorianism, Euthychianism (Monophysitism) and Monothelitism.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The above type of incomprehensible christian preoccupations (about jeebus' nature) were just continuations of the sort of insane things they had been arguing about before:
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/arian.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Arian Controversy<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Practically ALL of christianism in the world today (minus perhaps those who claim to still be ebionites??) are Orthodox Roman christians (pre-schism). That is the node of the tree from where all of today's branches come from. Orthodoxy, catholicism, protestantism, later protestantism (like the fundy sects which split off from the various protestantisms), the syrian christians of India - all are Orthodox Roman christianisms. They have some position or other on Mary and/or Trinity and/or 'idolatry' and/or the biblical texts and/or Jeebus' nature.
Not one of them holds that jeebus had no corporeal form (unhistoric, invisible). That kind is gone. ("It's a miracle!" No it's not. It's 'Constantine's Sword' and the Inquisition - it's christianism rooting itself out.)
Hindus do not know christianism very well. Christians today have 0 clue - they don't/won't *want* to know. Only western atheists and ambivalent theologians know.
Christianism is the most unfunny prank history has ever played on humanity. Its history has been carefully hidden (forbidden books, auto-da-fes), same as how its PR is very carefully maintained.
Read the first 3 big blocks that appear here:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2b.htm#Earl...ianBeliefs
(Starts with "A colossal fraud lies at the very basis of Christianity." from Crimes of Christianity, by G W Foote and J M Wheeler,
at least until "The Bible, as we have it today, is hardly more than three centuries old." by A Short History of the Bible, by Bronson C. Keeler, 1881)
Then read:
http://freetruth.50webs.org/B2d.htm
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The inexperienced person has little idea of the difficulty which the critical party finds in getting its facts before the public; nor of the systematic suppression used by the Christian press and clergy to prevent unpleasant truths concerning the Christian religion from coming out. There is not an orthodox religious newspaper in the world that will publish the facts concerning the origin of the Bible, which are given in these pages; there is scarcely a magazine in America that will publish them; and it is but recently that any newspaper would do so. Men who know the Christian theology to be untrue, have to get their audience as best they can.
-- A Short History of the Bible, Bronson C. Keeler, 1881<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Death to traitors.