Why weren't followers of Jesus Christ called "Christians" before Paul visited An

1. 59

   CertifiedHandyposted 11 years ago

   Why weren't followers of Jesus Christ called "Christians" before Paul visited Antioch, Turkey?

   replyreport
2. 58

   Marcus99posted 11 years ago

   I don't know. Why weren't they called Christians before Paul visited Antioch, Turkey?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Why don't you take a moment...look it up, and educate yourself in a discipline other than flippancy.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      JThomp42posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree CJ. There is no point on being on HubPages just to be rude and condescending on every question you answer.

      replyreport
   3. 58

      Marcus99posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Oh my! Children of God we all are? Anger over someone's humor. Shall I drag myself up against the wall, grab a cigarette and await your Holier-than-thou hail of bullets. Lighten up, Francis.

      replyreport
3. 86

   SidKempposted 11 years ago

   This answer may shock some people, but there is little evidence that Jesus wanted to start a new religion. In the three canonical gospels written close to the time of Jesus' life, his ministry is almost entirely to Jews. And he calls them to be better Jews, and to believe in "our Father," the one God of the Jews. During his life, he did not ask people to pray to Him or to believe he was God. The early followers of Jesus were in two groups: Jews inspired by his teachings, and non-Jews who learned of God through his teachings. Later, for various political and social reasons, these communities came together and formed a new religion.
   
   Paul was one of the first followers of Jesus to leave Jewish lands and convert Roman pagans to monotheism. These people needed a name for themselves, and called themselves Christians. Antioch, was one of those places. In contrast, early Jewish followers of Jesus saw themselves as Jews and did not need a special name for themselves.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Good answer, Sid. The thing is, Jesus ushered in the Gospel message...something the Jews had not heard before. This new teaching was very different than the Mosaic Laws of the Old Covenant. Jesus also claimed to be the Son of God and the Messiah.

      replyreport
   2. 86

      SidKempposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      That's one view, CJ. Another, from Matthew 17-19, is that God's law is unchanged since Creation, and that Jesus continues the teachings of Moses and the (Jewish) prophets, and that Paul extended this to the gentiles.

      replyreport
   3. 76

      James-wolveposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      CJ Sledgehammer.I suggested for you before to check what I said about the meaning of son of God in Hebrew.Anyway,it means Servant of God.Actual Greek word used is "pias" or "paida" which mean servant.In Hebrew culture good man was called son of God.

      replyreport
4. 59

   MickSposted 11 years ago

   If I remember rightly, I think the term comes from the Greek, christos, the anointed one, possibly more Greek was spoken in Antioch, Turkey.

   replyreport
5. 69

   SwordofManticorEposted 11 years ago

   The early believers called themselves the followers of the way before they adopted the Christian title.

   replyreport
6. 61

   Brandon Tartposted 11 years ago

   Good Q:  Answer - Remember in Acts 26:28 when King Agrippa said to Paul... "Agrippa replied to Paul, "In a short time you will persuade me to become a Christian."
   
   Their is reason to support that the term "Christian" was what Romans referred to those who were a part of the earlier name of the movement, also found in Acts 9, "The Way."  Christians, as we call them now, did not have a title that they identified with, in fact, you clearly see that neither Peter, Paul, Jude, Timothy - nor the debated author of Hebrews ever used the word Christian in their epistles - neither did John for that matter. 
   
   My take on what Agrippa said, or, what he meant when he used the word "Christian," is that it was a derogatory word meaning - "little messiahs."  Conversion, as you probably have learned from experience, is often a time consuming, prayer rich process.  But Agrippa's statement indicates that Paul was VERY GOOD at persuasive argument.
   
   I do agree with what Sid Kemp said to some measure.  Christ came to reveal Himself in the Old Testament...He did deliver a new Covenant in that He gave  the OT proper exegesis to those who were lost - first the Jews, then the Gentiles - evidenced by the woman who retorted to Christ that - "even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from the Master's table."  "Dog" (historically) was a term Jews used to describe Gentiles - non Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles - all these were "unclean" - but Nehemiah 8 has a clear reference to Jews in OT times being called to spread the word amongst other nations. 
   
   Christian, then, is a "slant" that we take - in truth, it's persecution.  Now, it's a title given to those who believe.  Count it all joy when you are persecuted for MY NAME'S SAKE... In other words, little messiahs means small, little, insignificant when used by an ancient Roman. 
   
   Paul hated titles, and argued with those who said they were "of Paul, or of Apollos."  Paul added to the chain of thought that he says that he is "OF CHRIST."  Not a Christian, but of Christ.
   
   Finally, if anyone could persuade others to become a Christian, it would have to be Paul.  Can you imagine trying to convince someone to become something that is in contrast with their perspectives?  Well we can't, if what we believe is correct, the Holy Spirit will do majority of the work, and that through us.  We do nothing, not even become Christians because big or small, I CANNOT SAVE ANYONE.  I am no messiah, Christ is!  I am not a Christian, but I am of Christ.

   replyreport