= new reply since forum marked as read
Christianity is all covered in the documentary that I recommended, including thecisdue of circumcision, which is also mentioned in the book of Acts. The spread of the Jesus messianic movement outside of Judaism altered the original theology and added Greek religious beliefs to the early Christian movement. In anthropology, that is called cultural or religious syncretism or synthesis.
Why would you say that the documentary that I suggested is biased? It was not produced by any religious organization. Its focus is a history of Christianity. It is not focused on promoting Christian views. It freely notes discrepancies between history and theology.
Regarding the so called secrecy of church funds and whether or not their financial records are ever published, I have seen the financial publications in more than one Christian denomination. I grew up in the Lutheran Church. My father was on the congregation's elected Council for many years, and was treasurer for part of that time. The church held an annual business meeting before open to the congregation in which it gave out a publication of its budget, how much was taken in through weekly donations, whether they met a previously established goal, how much over or under they were. They also made public other sources like endowments, the costs of building maintenance, church employees (pastor, organist, janitor). In that church, a lot of the maintenance was done by volunteer members of the church, like painting and cleaning.
I have seen the same kinds of open financial business meetings and published financial records in an Episcopal church that I attended but did not join, and in the Presbyterian church that I am currently a member of.
The members are free to take their copies of the financial reports home and share them with anyone. I don't know personally of any requests from outsiders to see those financial reports, but since they are not secret, I think they would probably be shared if anyone requested it.
Church hierarchies (above the congregational level) have numerous projects that they sponsor and finance. The National level Presbyterian, Episcopal, and Lutheran churches have immigration programs, disaster relief programs, and social justice programs that operate within the US and internationally. They have employees who coordinate funds and efforts with vetted local people and groups where aid is needed. They have to comply with national and international laws in their work, so they also have attorneys. Because they have large funds that they deal with, they have accountants. They also have auditors.
Sorry if I sound condescending, but I have personal experience with churches that many critics lack. I get tired of suppositions that have no factual foundations in how churches operate. Also, I minored in cultural anthropology, which included studies of tribal religions as well as several (but not all) larger bodies of world religions. One course (from the History department) was a comparative study of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, with separate research papers on each faith. In addition to written sources, I used interviews with clergy of the faiths covered. I learned a lot from a rabbi's own library about the origins of the messianic movement in Judaism (from Zoroastrianism during the Persian rule of Judea). I have an anthropological perspective on religion in general, and a personal interest in the spiritual aspects of religions.
I certainly do not think that all churches are benevolent in all things. The Orthodox Russian church leader is appalling. There are several evangelical pastors and congregations that I would describe as evil in their bigotry, racism, and political corruption. The Catholic Church's issues of sexual abuse are appalling, as is its history with Native Americans.
As someone with Native ancestry from my paternal grandmother, I am more aware of the details of abusive boarding schools run by churches, and not just the Catholic Church, than most Americans. One of grandma's Native ancestors was a man called Handsome Lake, considered a (non Christian) prophet by the Seneca people. He developed a renovation of Seneca religion after the American Revolution left the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) in shambles. He was strongly anti Christian, but his half brother, the war chief Cornplanter, invited Quakers and other missionaries to help the Seneca adapt to European American customs. Some of the Seneca intermarried with those white people and adopted their religion. Others did not.
Regarding Jews and turning over Jesus to Roman authorities, it is not surprising. Judea was a hotbed of messianic fervor at the time of Jesus. Beliefs among messianists ranged from expecting a miraculous intervention by God to place a messiah ("annointed one"
as ruler over Judea to those who expected that an army of Judean soldiers would overthrow Rome.
That was not such a farfetched notion for Jews. The Maccabees had overthrown Greek rule and achieved brief independence before the Roman takeover. Jewish leaders, who were the priestly hierarchy, tried to maintain a balance between Jewish identity and Roman rule. Jews were not the only people agitating for revolt against Rome. Roman response to any hint of revolt anywhere was brutal. The Jewish historian of the period, Josephus, recorded that dozens of would be messiahs sprang up in Judea and were executed by Rome. A messianic leader with a following could raise an army, in which case Rome would not just execute the self proclaimed messiah, but would brutally attack towns and civilians to reinforce their power and authority. To prevent that, the priests were willing to turn messianists over to Rome.
Religions are a means of social control by setting social and individual rules and models for their members. That is one of the religion functions outlined in anthropology. Another function is to give commonly shared values through stories and customs that unite people as a society. Within those values are models and paths of spiritual growth and development. When authoritarian rulers combine religions and politics, which was the usual case for much of human history, they gain absolute power over people. But there have always been factions of populations who did not believe the religions. Atheism is not new to the modern world. Many of the political absolutists did not believe, either, and used religion to exert "divine" authority over society, as Roman emperors did. The Romans tolerated worship of other gods and other religious practices, but required also that their subjects make sacrifices to Roman gods on specific occasions. Those who refused were severely punished.
There have also always been a faction of people in societies who took the values of religious beliefs seriously as spiritual growth paths and tried to live up to professed values. Kinda like the US has not always lived up to the professed values of the D of I and the Constitution and still doesn't. But those values exist as ideals for people to promote and follow. They are now seriously threatened by a menacing merger of religious and political extremism. Some of our best leaders in combating this threat are themselves religious people - Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer, Senator Warnock of Georgia, and the local volunteer in my town who is inspired by her faith to deliver aid to Ukrainians, backed by a religious community. Why throw out the baby with the bath?
FASCISTS 
but, it hardly "says it all...." 
Response to TomSlick (Reply #44)
