You two seem to be talking past each other. They’re merely saying history is complicated, and it is.
My main objection - and, in fact, in the original comment, my ONLY objection - was to their characterization of Roman religion.
There were far more peaceful Christian sects back in the day for the simple fact that there were A LOT more sects.
I’m not discussing ‘peaceful’. That was never on the board. I’ve not stated any position on whether Christianity, in part or whole, is peaceful. Evangelism means ‘actively seeking converts’.
Including ones that thought God was the bad diety.
There’s debate as to whether gnostics should be considered, in historical context, Christians.
Gnostics have not had a significant influence on the history of Christianity.
Gnostics still very much believed in proselytization.
They are correct in that many sects did not preach outreach and indoctrination,
Which ones? The Orthodox Churches, despite the other commenters claims, are far from opposed to outreach and indoctrination. The Coptic Church is only hesitant about outreach because of religious oppression in Egypt, not because of a theological difference.
My main objection - and, in fact, in the original comment, my ONLY objection - was to their characterization of Roman religion.
I’m not discussing ‘peaceful’. That was never on the board. I’ve not stated any position on whether Christianity, in part or whole, is peaceful. Evangelism means ‘actively seeking converts’.
There’s debate as to whether gnostics should be considered, in historical context, Christians.
Gnostics have not had a significant influence on the history of Christianity.
Gnostics still very much believed in proselytization.
Which ones? The Orthodox Churches, despite the other commenters claims, are far from opposed to outreach and indoctrination. The Coptic Church is only hesitant about outreach because of religious oppression in Egypt, not because of a theological difference.