Topic: Family Tree of Abrahamic Faiths/Religions according to Orthodox (Need Help)

[Michał]

AfaIk, Mormonism isn't arian. It's rather tritheistic.

[Orthodox11]

AfaIk, Mormonism isn't arian. It's rather tritheistic.

It is Arian in the sense that they believe "there was a time when the Son was not." That His being begotten from the Father took place in time.

[Nazarene]

Here is the chart as it is now...
I didn't continue the line for Samaritans because of the lack of space, also I read that there are only like 700 now so the movement is no longer as strong...

Both ancient Judaism and modern Judaism are more diverse than your chart shows:

1st Century Judaism:

1. Pharisees of the School of Hillel (survives today as modern Rabbinical Judaism)
2. Pharisees of the School of Shamai (destroyed in 70 CE)
3. Saducees (destroyed in 70 CE)
4. Essenes (destroyed at Bar Kocha rebellion)
5. Zealots (destroyed at Bar Kochba rebellion)
6. Nazarenes (sect of the Apostles, survives as Christianity)
7. Ebionites (survives today)
8. Samaritans (survive today)

For modern Rabbinical Judaism, the timeline goes like this:

Judaism -> Hillel Pharisees -> Rabbinical Judaism

An offshoot of Rabbinical Judaism is Karaite Judaism - "Solas Tanakh" Judaism which broke off at about the 10th century in Baghdad.

A note about the Ebionites (Evyonim):

These are (as they always were) Jews who believed that Yeshua was just a human Messiah (the source of Arianism?) who came to call all humanity to obey the Torah. Most reject the Virgin Birth, and all of them reject the NT except for some grossly distorted medieavel Hebrew translation of Matthew's Gospel (google "Shem Tov").

WRT Islam, note that the Quran calls Christians "Nazarenes". The only people that I know of that called themselves Nazarenes during Muhammad's time were the Assyrian Church of the East and the Ebionites. The Ebionites called themselves Nazarenes but they are not Nazarenes, they broke off from the Nazarenes by rejecting the teachings of the Apostle Paul. And they still call themselves Nazarenes (the outrage!) - http://www.netzarim.co.il/. Since Muhammad clearly rejected Messiah's divinity, crucifixion & resurrection, I think that the "Nazarenes" who taught him about Yeshua were actually Ebionites. And then years later Muhammad tried to "correct" the other "Nazarenes" he met (Assyrian Christians), by telling them not to call God a "Trinity" and not to call Yeshua the "Son of God".

So I suggest adding the Ebionites as an offshoot of early Christianity (the Nazarenes) and a link to Islam.

[rakovsky]

From your graph:

What is west/east unitarianism as an offshoot of Orthodoxy? Were you trying to write the moderated term "Unia---*---ism". I understand some consider this slang, but I don't see anything necessarily bad about it, since it just means they united with Rome.

Second, I would not put Jehovah's Witness as protestant, since I heard from an Orthodox bogoslov they are Arian. Also, I am not sure whether Mormons are even theists in the conventional term. Finally, I would put Rastafarians as a chilian offshoot like Nestorians, Arians, and Orientals, because they all are distinguished from what we consider orthodox Christianity based on their definition of the nature of Christ.

Rastafarians are chilians because they pose a second (reincarnated) coming before His last coming.

[Salpy]

From your graph:

This is a really old thread and I don't want to have to read through the whole thing.  I scrolled through it, though, and I can't find a graph.  Could you be more specific about what graph you are referring to?

What is west/east unitarianism as an offshoot of Orthodoxy? Were you trying to write the moderated term "Unia---*---ism". I understand some consider this slang, but I don't see anything necessarily bad about it, since it just means they united with Rome.

I think I understand what term you are referring to here.  Please just know that some consider it offensive and that our rules forbid its use in the public fora.  That should be enough.  There are other, less offensive, words that can be used.

Finally, I would put Rastafarians as a chilian offshoot like Nestorians, Arians, and Orientals, because they all are distinguished from what we consider orthodox Christianity based on their definition of the nature of Christ.

I'm not sure whom you are referring to as "Orientals."  If you mean the Non-Chalcedonian Oriental Orthodox, the comment you made above would be more appropriate for the private forum, where we hold our more polemical conversations.

[rakovsky]

Salpy!

Thanks for pointing this out. Indeed, I meant to post my reply on the thread:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,21006.0.html

Would you please, as a moderator, be able to move it there?

Hal

[Salpy]

Not a problem.  Posts merged.

[rakovsky]

Here is the chart as it is now...
I didn't continue the line for Samaritans because of the lack of space, also I read that there are only like 700 now so the movement is no longer as strong...

Both ancient Judaism and modern Judaism are more diverse than your chart shows:

1st Century Judaism:

1. Pharisees of the School of Hillel (survives today as modern Rabbinical Judaism)
2. Pharisees of the School of Shamai (destroyed in 70 CE)
3. Saducees (destroyed in 70 CE)
4. Essenes (destroyed at Bar Kocha rebellion)
5. Zealots (destroyed at Bar Kochba rebellion)
6. Nazarenes (sect of the Apostles, survives as Christianity)
7. Ebionites (survives today)
8. Samaritans (survive today)

For modern Rabbinical Judaism, the timeline goes like this:

Judaism -> Hillel Pharisees -> Rabbinical Judaism

An offshoot of Rabbinical Judaism is Karaite Judaism - "Solas Tanakh" Judaism which broke off at about the 10th century in Baghdad.

A note about the Ebionites (Evyonim):

These are (as they always were) Jews who believed that Yeshua was just a human Messiah (the source of Arianism?) who came to call all humanity to obey the Torah. Most reject the Virgin Birth, and all of them reject the NT except for some grossly distorted medieavel Hebrew translation of Matthew's Gospel (google "Shem Tov").

WRT Islam, note that the Quran calls Christians "Nazarenes". The only people that I know of that called themselves Nazarenes during Muhammad's time were the Assyrian Church of the East and the Ebionites. The Ebionites called themselves Nazarenes but they are not Nazarenes, they broke off from the Nazarenes by rejecting the teachings of the Apostle Paul. And they still call themselves Nazarenes (the outrage!) - http://www.netzarim.co.il/. Since Muhammad clearly rejected Messiah's divinity, crucifixion & resurrection, I think that the "Nazarenes" who taught him about Yeshua were actually Ebionites. And then years later Muhammad tried to "correct" the other "Nazarenes" he met (Assyrian Christians), by telling them not to call God a "Trinity" and not to call Yeshua the "Son of God".

So I suggest adding the Ebionites as an offshoot of early Christianity (the Nazarenes) and a link to Islam.

I think it is questionable whether the early Christians belonged to the Nazarene sect. I think that the Nazarenes rejected alcohol, but don't think Jesus did , among other things. I know some people posit it as a possibility that John the Baptist was one. But there were some hermits who just didnt belong to a sect- Fl. Josephus mentioned his own teacher like this.

[88Devin12]

From your graph:

What is west/east unitarianism as an offshoot of Orthodoxy? Were you trying to write the moderated term "Unia---*---ism". I understand some consider this slang, but I don't see anything necessarily bad about it, since it just means they united with Rome.

Second, I would not put Jehovah's Witness as protestant, since I heard from an Orthodox bogoslov they are Arian. Also, I am not sure whether Mormons are even theists in the conventional term. Finally, I would put Rastafarians as a chilian offshoot like Nestorians, Arians, and Orientals, because they all are distinguished from what we consider orthodox Christianity based on their definition of the nature of Christ.

Rastafarians are chilians because they pose a second (reincarnated) coming before His last coming.

If you scrolled down, you would see there was an update form of the graph:

[Jetavan]

You forgot the Zoroastrian (Indo-Iranian) influence.

[rakovsky]

Zoroastrianism may be monotheist yet not be Abrahamic. That may be true of Aten worship in Egypt too.

[Jetavan]

Zoroastrianism may be monotheist yet not be Abrahamic. That may be true of Aten worship in Egypt too.

Some Jews believe that several of Abraham's sons went East and became ancestors of the brahmin class (compare "brahmin" with "A-braham") of India, the hereditary possessors of the Vedas, sacred Hindu scriptures -- which, if true, would make Hinduism Abrahamic (and the Hindu priestly class and the Zoroastrian priestly class are obviously related). So, you never know.

I don't think this is Orthodox doctrine, but perhaps a theologumen?

[David Carroll]

Don't forget the Mandeans (a small group of them still exist in Iraq!) and the Manichaens.

[Nazarene]

I think it is questionable whether the early Christians belonged to the Nazarene sect. I think that the Nazarenes rejected alcohol, but don't think Jesus did , among other things. I know some people posit it as a possibility that John the Baptist was one. But there were some hermits who just didnt belong to a sect- Fl. Josephus mentioned his own teacher like this.

You're confusing the Nazarenes with the Nazarites. "Nazarite" is not a sect, it's Jewish vow stipulated in the Torah, which some would voluntarily take for a period of time (eg: Paul), while others were "born into it", i.e. their parents vowed that they would be Nazarites for life (eg: Samson, Samuel & John the Baptist), usually because God commanded them to. In Acts the Jews of Jerusalem specifically call Paul the "ringleader" of the "Nazarene sect".

Don't forget the Mandeans (a small group of them still exist in Iraq!) and the Manichaens.

Ah yes the Gnostics.

Zoroastrianism may be monotheist yet not be Abrahamic. That may be true of Aten worship in Egypt too.

Some Jews believe that several of Abraham's sons went East and became ancestors of the brahmin class (compare "brahmin" with "A-braham") of India, the hereditary possessors of the Vedas, sacred Hindu scriptures -- which, if true, would make Hinduism Abrahamic (and the Hindu priestly class and the Zoroastrian priestly class are obviously related). So, you never know.

I don't think this is Orthodox doctrine, but perhaps a theologumen?

This might be possible for Zoroastrinism but not for Hinduism as Krishna predates Abraham as far as I know.

[Jetavan]

Zoroastrianism may be monotheist yet not be Abrahamic. That may be true of Aten worship in Egypt too.

Some Jews believe that several of Abraham's sons went East and became ancestors of the brahmin class (compare "brahmin" with "A-braham") of India, the hereditary possessors of the Vedas, sacred Hindu scriptures -- which, if true, would make Hinduism Abrahamic (and the Hindu priestly class and the Zoroastrian priestly class are obviously related). So, you never know.

I don't think this is Orthodox doctrine, but perhaps a theologumen?

This might be possible for Zoroastrinism but not for Hinduism as Krishna predates Abraham as far as I know.

True, Krishna is traditionally dated to 3100 BCE, and sometimes to c. 2000 BCE (around the time the Saraswati River dried up, and Krishna's city of Dwarka collapsed, all due to geological actvity in the Indus Valley).  But one can't discount the possibility that some of Abraham's sons went East and joined a previously existing Vedic culture, adding 'Abrahamic' elements in the process. Or, alternatively, the Vedic culture adopted the Abrahamic sons within their larger cultural milieu.

[rakovsky]

I think it is questionable whether the early Christians belonged to the Nazarene sect. I think that the Nazarenes rejected alcohol, but don't think Jesus did , among other things. I know some people posit it as a possibility that John the Baptist was one. But there were some hermits who just didnt belong to a sect- Fl. Josephus mentioned his own teacher like this.

You're confusing the Nazarenes with the Nazarites. "Nazarite" is not a sect, it's Jewish vow stipulated in the Torah, which some would voluntarily take for a period of time (eg: Paul), while others were "born into it", i.e. their parents vowed that they would be Nazarites for life (eg: Samson, Samuel & John the Baptist), usually because God commanded them to. In Acts the Jews of Jerusalem specifically call Paul the "ringleader" of the "Nazarene sect".

I don't remember "Nazarenes", but makes sense. Peace.

Kyrie Eleison.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGPhc_kLxcM

[Nazarene]

{Acts 24:5}  For we have found this man to be a plague, an instigator of insurrections among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes.

Beautiful song btw, thanks for sharing.

[rakovsky]

And thank you for sharing with us.

[Nazarene]

Always a pleasure, shalom

[88Devin12]

Update:



Forgot to put a note that its not meant to be comprehensive or exhaustive.

[tuesdayschild]

This is great!  Can you make a larger version available? Anti-aliasing makes the dates and events a little difficult to read (for me, at least).

[88Devin12]

Full Size Image:

http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/2954/churchtimelineoriginal.png

[ialmisry]

Update:



Forgot to put a note that its not meant to be comprehensive or exhaustive.

You have to have the Monothelites>Maronites>Roman Catholic

[deusveritasest]

Ah, I had always thought the Rastafari religion had been an offshoot of OO. Maybe I just got it mixed up because of Bob Marley...

Bob Marley went from Rastafarianism to OOy, not the other way around. 

[88Devin12]

Update:

Forgot to put a note that its not meant to be comprehensive or exhaustive.

You have to have the Monothelites>Maronites>Roman Catholic

huh?

[deusveritasest]

A few more ideas:

1. Eastern Catholics come not just from the EOC, but also the OOC, and the ACE.
2. It's spelled Sabellianism.
3. The Donatists are not mentioned, and I would imagine them to have been a much more prominent group than a number of these others you have listed.

[vamrat]

So why exactly are the Old Calendarists separated from the Church?  How exactly would retaining the Calendar that had been in use before the Church be constituted as changing Church doctrine?

[88Devin12]

So why exactly are the Old Calendarists separated from the Church?  How exactly would retaining the Calendar that had been in use before the Church be constituted as changing Church doctrine?

Not all Old Calendarists are separated from the Church. But there are Old Calendarists that are in schism with the Church.

[ialmisry]

Update:

Forgot to put a note that its not meant to be comprehensive or exhaustive.

You have to have the Monothelites>Maronites>Roman Catholic

huh?

The Maronites were Monothelites. They converted when they submitted to the Vatican.

[ialmisry]

Ah, I had always thought the Rastafari religion had been an offshoot of OO. Maybe I just got it mixed up because of Bob Marley...

Bob Marley went from Rastafarianism to OOy, not the other way around. 

Yeah, Rastafarianism came from Protestantism. Some Rastas have gone OO.

On Bob Marley, you can see the front of his funeral service book here:
http://orthodoxhistory.org/tag/bob-marley/

[Shanghaiski]

Not sure if/how the Yezigis or "devil appeasers" of Iraq would fit in. I can't remember what their history is. I think they come from gnosticism.

[vamrat]

So why exactly are the Old Calendarists separated from the Church?  How exactly would retaining the Calendar that had been in use before the Church be constituted as changing Church doctrine?

Not all Old Calendarists are separated from the Church. But there are Old Calendarists that are in schism with the Church.

Do you know which specific churches these are?  Thanks.

[mike]

Do you know which specific churches these are?  Thanks.

    * Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece, so-called "Matthewites"
    * Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece, so-called "Florinites"
    * Orthodox Church of Greece (Holy Synod in Resistance) [64], so-called "Cyprianites"
    * Old Calendar Romanian Orthodox Church [65]
    * Old Calendar Bulgarian Orthodox Church [66]
    * Russian Orthodox Church in America [67]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church

[88Devin12]

Latest version:


http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/2954/churchtimelineoriginal.png

[deusveritasest]

So why exactly are the Old Calendarists separated from the Church?  How exactly would retaining the Calendar that had been in use before the Church be constituted as changing Church doctrine?

It's the other way around. Most of the Old Calendarists are separated from "World Orthodoxy" of their own initiative, believing that the New Calendarists have violated the proper canonical order of the Church, and thus it is wrong to be in communion with them or those who are in communion with them (mainstream EO on the Old Calendar).

[deusveritasest]

    * Russian Orthodox Church in America [67]

While the ROCIA is on the old calendar, I believe that they are not severed from communion over the calendar, but rather the autonomy/autocephaly of the "American Orthodox Catholic Church" (http://orthodoxwiki.org/American_Orthodox_Catholic_Church).

[Saint Iaint]

To 88Devin12,

Just a couple of things... Your early chart says:

"Common belief is that the Church is the same as the Israel of the Old Covenants. However, when Christ came the Church was opened to the Gentiles."

The Church IS Israel. Scripture makes it clear that the Church founded by God Himself is the New Israel; the Israel of God. The faithful Israelites became Christians.

Those who rejected Him as the King of Israel became anti-Christs and are now known as 'Jews'.

The English word 'Gentiles' is a made-up word that has no basis in truth (just like the word 'Jew'). The word 'Gentiles' is derived from the Hebrew word 'Goyim' and means simply: Nations.

Non-Hebrews were always able to become Israelites through circumcision and keeping the Mosaic Law. Abraham himself was chosen from the Nations.

Also... There needs to be more divisions of so-called 'Judaism' - before and after Christ. The original Israelites followed the Mosaic Law. After the Babylonian captivity is when 'rabbinic Judaism' was born. When Christ came, he admonished the Judean Pharisees because they had basically eschewed the Mosaic Law for the 'traditions of men/traditions of the elders'.

The 'Judaism' of today is not the same as was the  faith of the O.T. Israelites. Nor is the 'Judaism' of today entirely the same as the Pharisaism of Christ's time (though it is directly descended from the Pharisaic 'traditions of men' which made the commandments of God of no effect)...

The so-called 'Judaism' of today is a reactionary, anti-Christ brand of Pharisaism which is based on the 'Oral Torah'; the Talmud (which todays 'Jews' just call 'Torah' to fool Christians into thinking that they just follow the Old Testament). Today's 'Judaism' is all based on and subservient to the Talmud and the rabbis.

The Talmud is anti-Christ, and was non-existent before the inception of Christianity. Hence, today's 'Judaism' is completely a reactionary cult based not on the Mosaic Law - but on the 'traditions of the elders'; the 'Oral Torah'... now immortalized in the anti-Christ Talmud. The main thing that makes a 'Jew' - a 'Jew' is their wholesale rejection of Jesus the Christ as the Messiah, the King of Israel.

The only exception today are the Karaites (however there are less than 100,000 Karaites worldwide, and mainstream 'Jewry' asserts that they are not really 'Jews'). What makes a Karaite a Karaite is the fact that they reject the Talmud. If any of today's 'Jews' are to be considered 'faithful' Old Testament 'Jews'.... it has to be the Karaites, for they adhere only to the Tanakh; the Written Law; the Written Torah; the Mosaic Law.

So the Karaites are the closest thing today to the O.T. Mosaic Israelites... while the so-called 'Jews' of today are closest to the N.T. Pharisees (who Christ admonished and denounced as "serpents, vipers and sons of the devil") whose 'traditions of men' have evolved into the anti-Christian 'Oral Torah'; the Talmud.

It's good that you have both Israel and the Church on the same boldened line... but I don't think they should be separated - for they are one and the same. I would present them this way:

"Israel/The Church"

†IC XC†
†NI KA†   

[88Devin12]

Thank you!

While I was making the Timeline for Western Christians... I noticed a few errors...
"Sack of Rome by Gauls" - 387 AD
Rome wasn't sacked until about 410 AD, and it was by the Visigoths, not the Gauls

[vamrat]

Thank you!

While I was making the Timeline for Western Christians... I noticed a few errors...
"Sack of Rome by Gauls" - 387 AD
Rome wasn't sacked until about 410 AD, and it was by the Visigoths, not the Gauls

It should be 387 BC.  Rome was sacked by the Gauls under Brennus after the Battle of the Allia.  But, for a Timeline of Western Christianity this might be a couple centuries too early  .

[88Devin12]

[freddief]

So where do the Pastafarians fit in?

Many Rastafarians view themselves to be one of the lost tribes of Israel. Some view themselves as the true Israelites. But since Rastafari encompasses a wide set of beliefs, it would be hard to pin down as to what its' specific roots are. But undoubtedly it has its roots in Judaic Faith, and culminates in unique Christian interpretations revolving around Haile Selassie and Ethiopia. Here is my brief chronolgy of its evolution:

-Garden of Eden is in Ethiopia/Africa(Genesis 2:13), thus "Black" man was original man.
-Old Testament Patriarchs and Prophets
-Judaic Law
-Solomon and the Queen of Sheba
-Ark of Covenant comes to Ethiopia
-European enslavement and colonization of Africans for around 400 years parallels Israelite's enslavement in Egypt for 400 years.
-Marcus Garvey (Black Jamaican Catholic radical)prophesies that an African King will arise to liberate Africans at home and abroad.
-Prince Ras Tafari of Ethiopia is crowned by his Orthodox Christian baptismal name "Haile Selassie" which means "Power of the Holy Trinity."
-Many Black people in Jamaica see this historical event as the fulfillment of Marcus Garvey's prophecy. The Rastafarian movement is born when many begin to interpret Haile Selassie's name as evidence of fulfillment of the prophecy of Revelation 5:5.
-Rastafarians begin to proclaim Haile Selassie as Christ in His second coming. They hold to the Levitical law as much as possible, and take the Nazarite vow (thus their dreadlocks and beards, their vegetarian diet, their avoidance of alcohol, and their shunning of tattoos etc.)
-Haile Selassie learns that some people in Jamaica are worshiping him. He is deeply grieved by this and therefore sends Archbishop Yesehaq to Jamaica to teach the true and ancient Orthodox Christian Faith. Many Rastafarians are baptized into the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.
-A Rastafarian named Dr. Vernon Carrington, AKA "Prophet Gad," begins to teach that Haile Seassie is not Christ, but that he represents Christ in His "kingly character." Dr. Carrington starts the "12 Tribes House of Ratafari" which is based on the proper worship of the true Christ of the Holy Bible. Haile Selassie is revered but not worshipped by the 12 Tribes. Prophet Gad teaches that "a chapter a day (of the Bible) keeps the devil away." Today the 12 Tribes comprises the largest group of Rastafarians in the world, many of whom are members of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. Bob Marley was part of the 12 Tribes.  

OK. That is VERY brief, but I hope it helps.

Selam

European enslavement and colonization of Africans, but no mention of Arab/Muslim enslavement and colonization of Africans.  That's just racist.  Since the latter enslavement and colonization is ongoing, what would it parallel?

[Justin Kissel]

Pretty sure there was no "0 AD"   

[Didymus]

Pretty sure there was no "0 AD"   

You're correct. 1 BC was followed by 1 AD in both the Julian & Gregorian Calendars.

~~~
Also, don't the Karaites consider themselves to be the descendants of the Sadducees? Or is this just something somebody told me due to certain similarities in their beliefs?

[Eastern Mind]

I would add Yezidi to the tree, although it's so obscure I doubt anyone has really heard of it.

[Jetavan]

I would add Yezidi to the tree, although it's so obscure I doubt anyone has really heard of it.

Might as well add Zoroastrianiam while you're at it.