Just so we're clear...

[Christopher M]

What differences? What dude? Who are "John's peeps"? Who are "the others"?

[Ben Gash]

Circumcision springs to mind as a big doctrinal difference between early churches.

[Christopher M]

Right: and didn't the Apostles convene the Council of Jerusalem in 51 AD where the issue was discussed, and the Judaizers anathematized? (Acts 15)

[GunnedDownAtrocity]

so why did we stop feeding christians to lions?

i bet there are a lot of hungry lions out there. there are a lot of hungry lions and living christians. i dont know which makes me sadder.

[Ben Gash]

And Paul left that meeting and promptly circumcised Timothy. I'm at work, and also not really a scholar of the apostolic age, so it's kind of difficult for me to operate at this level at the moment.

[Ben Gash]

But anyway, the point being that they worked it out in a reasonable manner.

[rogue]

No, it's not. Daniel wasn't a Christian, he was Jewish, and it wasn't the Romans who fed him to the lions.

Jesus was a Jew also. Also Dan wasn't fed to the lions, he just kind of hung out with them. And it was Darius who unwittingly put him there.

[Ben Gash]

Indeed, but as Daniel lived 5-600 years before Jesus, I think it would be a bit difficult to argue that he was a Christian.
"16So the king gave the command, and they brought Daniel and cast him into the den of lions." Not really just hanging out with them. Darius didn't do it unwittingly, he just found himself trapped by his own rules.

[Christopher M]

And Paul left that meeting and promptly circumcised Timothy

You're confusing the issue -- no one opposed circumcision. The issue was whether or not circumcision was an act required of Christians according to their covenant with God; the decision was that it was not. But it continued as cultural practice, principally among Jewish Christians.

But anyway, the point being that they worked it out in a reasonable manner.

I don't think that was the point. Your claim was that the early churches "were doctrinally different, but all recognized each other." But this incident demonstrates that from the very beginning there were points of doctrine upon which agreement was required for mutual recognition. Indeed, this concept was formalized in the Creeds which Christians of all denominations continue to recite as the core of their faiths today.

[Becca]

You're confusing the issue -- no one opposed circumcision. The issue was whether or not circumcision was an act required of Christians according to their covenant with God; the decision was that it was not. But it continued as cultural practice, principally among Jewish Christians...

Still comon among more than just Jewish Christians. Can't speek for any other Catholic sub groups, but Irish Roman Chatholics still practice it, as do many Prodistant, Luthrine and Methodist groups.

[BibitClerus]

What differences? What dude? Who are "John's peeps"? Who are "the others"?

The dude... was like the emperor (tough guy that pimps all)...
I dont remember it was John or Peter the guys name (or however you call it in english)... but there were 3 or 4 lineages know what im saying... Not all of the apostoles spread out the exact same things and therefore there were diferent forms of christianism at some point (dont ask me the exact date... but it was before Catholicism became the official religion in Rome, dude)
Speciffic diferences, i read them on a magazine (science based) we got in here. But i dont got it with me right now so what can one do, i dont remember the specifics.
Remember there were some evangelic books that were rejected by the "main catholics"? And those got called the "apocrif" (im translating from portuguese, unsure how you call these) evangelics... well those books for example were present on those other catholicisms.

[Christopher M]

Right: many people of all religious persuasions, including atheists, are currently circumcised as a cultural practice.

[BibitClerus]

Still comon among more than just Jewish Christians. Can't speek for any other Catholic sub groups, but Irish Roman Chatholics still practice it, as do many Prodistant, Luthrine and Methodist groups.

Most of the world and also most of the Roman Catholics dont pratice cicumcision. In fact... we (most of the world) find it rather funny when people cut off an anatomic part of their peepees.
The protestants and other christians groups also dont pratice circumcision in here either. Buddhists dont do it, Taoists dont do it...
Only the jewish do.
Im not sure about the muslims though, but i imagine they dont do (i dunno much about islam).

[BibitClerus]

And oh yeah i ment Peter (Pedro), not John, i was doing crack when i wrote that
god is going to punish me for this and delay my first humping activity for 2 more years, therefore i will only make it in 2019.

[Christopher M]

The dude... was like the emperor (tough guy that pimps all)...

I assume you're thinking of Constantine. However, in that case you'd be wrong -- Constantine didn't make Christianity the state religion.

I dont remember it was John or Peter the guys name (or however you call it in english)... but there were 3 or 4 lineages know what im saying..

Well if you can't remember what the traditions were called, who started them, who practiced them, what they believed, or anything else about them, then I don't think anyone can reasonably accept or critically consider your claim.

it was before Catholicism became the official religion in Rome

Roman Catholicism didn't exist as a distinct religion until 1054, which is after the (Western) Roman Empire fell. The Christianity which became the state religion of the Roman Empire was not Roman Catholicism, but included all of the Christian churches.

Remember there were some evangelic books that were rejected by the "main catholics"?

No, they were rejected by all Christians -- an act which took place in Egypt, not Rome. Again, Roman Catholicism didn't exist as a distinct religion until 1054. Seven centuries after the canon had been formed.