[kosta50]

Do you really think that the theology of the Bible was unknown UNTIL the Bible was formally put together?

Pretty much so, FK, with only a few decades separating the two events. The Creed was finalized at the First Council of Constantinople (Second Ecumenical Council), only about a decade before the canonization of the Bible in the west.

The first attempt at theology was not made until c. 190 AD (late 2nd century) by Irenaeus of Lyons, but that was rudimentary. It was not until well into the 3rd century that Origen of all people really set the stage for a systematized Christian theology, which was officially established in 325 AD at the Council of Nicaea (First Ecumenical, aka Nicene Council).

The Trinitarian creed was confirmed and wastly expanded by the second Council in 381 AD and the Bible was canonzied at the local African Third Council of Carthage in 397 AD, following the canon of Athansius of Alexandria form c. 360 AD.

Moreover, extant Bibles dating from circa middle of the 4th century contain books that are no longer considered canonical. Any copies of the New Testament books prior to the Nicene Council are mysteriously missing (presumbaly destroyed by the Church), but fragments and indirect evidence shows that the post-Nicene sources have been heavily redacted to more closely reflect the new trinitarian dogma of the Church.

That would mean there was no such thing as Christianity until hundreds of years after Christ, AND that the Apostles did not individually TEACH Christianity

Oh it was Christianity insofar as all heterodox groups claimed to follow some idea of Christ, just like today. But there was no systematic theoogy, systematized liturgy, uniformed vocabulary, unformed canon, or for that matter unity of beliefs.

[Forest Keeper]

FK: Do you really think that the theology of the Bible was unknown UNTIL the Bible was formally put together?

Pretty much so, FK, with only a few decades separating the two events. The Creed was finalized at the First Council of Constantinople (Second Ecumenical Council), only about a decade before the canonization of the Bible in the west.

But I thought that you all use circa 33 A.D. as the starting point of your particular church. Wouldn't that mean that everyone had it wrong for 300+ years? Wouldn't that also mean that either the Apostles were teaching different things or that they were terrible teachers? :)

Moreover, extant Bibles dating from circa middle of the 4th century contain books that are no longer considered canonical. Any copies of the New Testament books prior to the Nicene Council are mysteriously missing (presumably destroyed by the Church), but fragments and indirect evidence shows that the post-Nicene sources have been heavily redacted to more closely reflect the new trinitarian dogma of the Church.

Do you infer from that that the original manuscripts were altered to match a man-made theology? If so, then the Bible would really be of no spiritual value. It would be no better than, say, Dianetics. :)