• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

am I Getting decent information

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hyburn

Guest
will somebody tell me if this information is relevent?

I understand the history of christians dating back to the byzentyne empire, when emperor constantine was in power....after years of loosing his power he embrassed the christian believe, thus we have the roman catholic church....(how am i doing so far?) next I understand it as he went on many "holy cruisades" killing all those pagans who would not embrass his "religion"...

that is how I was taught the history of christianity.....please sombody tell me if I have accurate info on this event.... please also note where i have used quotations
 

Danfrey

Warning -- Anabaptist views
Feb 9, 2006
767
32
55
Colorado Springs, CO
✟1,080.00
Faith
Anabaptist
I would suggest you look into Christian history prior to the time you mention. We have quite a few writings from the first couple of centuries. The Early Christians had some very different views on actions like those of the Crusaders. Christianity went through a major change with the conversion of Constantine and the marriage of the Church and the State. A great source of information on this time is the 10 volume set of the Ante-Nicene Fathers. If you would like information on any particular issue, I have a reference work from David Bercot that gives the book and page number for the references. The 10 volumes are available online here [ANCHOR="http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/"]Ante-Nicene Fathers[/ANCHOR]
 
Upvote 0

Philip

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity
Jun 23, 2003
5,619
241
52
Orlando, FL
Visit site
✟7,106.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
hyburn said:
will somebody tell me if this information is relevent?

Relevent to what?

I understand the history of christians dating back to the byzentyne empire, when emperor constantine was in power....after years of loosing his power he embrassed the christian believe, thus we have the roman catholic church....(how am i doing so far?)

Not very well. There are really only two changes in the Church during Constantine's time. The first is that persecution of Christians was outlawed. The second (and partially a result of the first) is that the Church could finally gather together to denounce Arianism.

next I understand it as he went on many "holy cruisades" killing all those pagans who would not embrass his "religion"...

Nope. Constantine pushed tolerance of Christianity. He did not impose it as a state religion.
 
Upvote 0
H

hyburn

Guest
Philip said:
Relevent to what?



Not very well. There are really only two changes in the Church during Constantine's time. The first is that persecution of Christians was outlawed. The second (and partially a result of the first) is that the Church could finally gather together to denounce Arianism.



Nope. Constantine pushed tolerance of Christianity. He did not impose it as a state religion.
thanks for the polite post, most people tell me ( where did you get that $%##)

lol my character is almost naked
 
Upvote 0

salt_of_the_earth

Active Member
Mar 7, 2006
363
16
39
✟15,583.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
CA-Liberals
Philip said:
Relevent to what?



Not very well. There are really only two changes in the Church during Constantine's time. The first is that persecution of Christians was outlawed. The second (and partially a result of the first) is that the Church could finally gather together to denounce Arianism.



Nope. Constantine pushed tolerance of Christianity. He did not impose it as a state religion.
I'm am 100% Christian, but let's me honest here. Constantine did force CHristianity on pagans at the time. Christianity was his reason to go to war. He thought he was fighting a holy way for God. That was the revelation he recevied when he believed he saw a cross in the sky (he believed the cross was a sign to become CHristians and to rule the empire and fight for God)
 
Upvote 0

Philip

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity
Jun 23, 2003
5,619
241
52
Orlando, FL
Visit site
✟7,106.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
salt_of_the_earth said:
I'm am 100% Christian, but let's me honest here. Constantine did force CHristianity on pagans at the time.

Care to offer some historical evidence of this?


Christianity was his reason to go to war. He thought he was fighting a holy way for God. That was the revelation he recevied when he believed he saw a cross in the sky (he believed the cross was a sign to become CHristians and to rule the empire and fight for God)

He believed that God had chosen him to be the Emperor of Rome. This is quite different from fighting a war to impose Christianity on pagans.

If you have evidence to the contrary, please feel free to post it.
 
Upvote 0

salt_of_the_earth

Active Member
Mar 7, 2006
363
16
39
✟15,583.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
CA-Liberals
Philip said:
Care to offer some historical evidence of this?




He believed that God had chosen him to be the Emperor of Rome. This is quite different from fighting a war to impose Christianity on pagans.

If you have evidence to the contrary, please feel free to post it.
I don't have it infront of me now, I find it later, but if you read any historical academic books about Constantine you will read about him forcing Christianity on Jews and Pagans. He blamed the Jews for "killing Christ".
 
Upvote 0

Philip

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity
Jun 23, 2003
5,619
241
52
Orlando, FL
Visit site
✟7,106.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Danfrey said:
I don't blame Constantine for the demise of the church around the time of his conversion. I blame the leaders of the church at the time for selling themselves to the state.

And yet, no demise has been demonstrated. On the contrary, we have great victories in the Church, such as the defeat of Arianism.
 
Upvote 0

Danfrey

Warning -- Anabaptist views
Feb 9, 2006
767
32
55
Colorado Springs, CO
✟1,080.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Philip said:
And yet, no demise has been demonstrated. On the contrary, we have great victories in the Church, such as the defeat of Arianism.

Are you saying that the Church did not part from the teaching of the Apostles and the Early Church Fathers? That is what I would label as demise.

We could talk about the butchering of people in the name of Christianity. (The Crusades) The lack of holiness brought into the church by making Christianity synonimous with citizenship in a certain area. The mixing of pagan practices with Christianity.
 
Upvote 0

Philip

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity
Jun 23, 2003
5,619
241
52
Orlando, FL
Visit site
✟7,106.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Danfrey said:
Are you saying that the Church did not part from the teaching of the Apostles and the Early Church Fathers?

I am saying exactly that. Do you have evidence to the contrary? Tell me, what doctrines were changed when 'the leaders of the church at the time [sold] themselves to the state'?


We could talk about the butchering of people in the name of Christianity. (The Crusades)

What does this have to do with Constantine? Constantine died in AD 337. The First Crusade began in AD 1095, more than 750 years after Constantine died. I fail to see how you can connect Constantine to the Crusades in any way.

The lack of holiness brought into the church by making Christianity synonimous with citizenship in a certain area. The mixing of pagan practices with Christianity.

And yet, the Christians in the areas outside of Constantine's control, those in Armenia, Persia, India, Ethiopia, and so on, held the same beliefs and practices as the Christians within the Empire. If what you claimed happened, that the Church leaders sold out to the Roman Empire, how did the beliefs and practices get to Persia and the rest?
 
Upvote 0

Cajun Huguenot

Cajun's for Christ
Aug 18, 2004
3,055
293
65
Cajun Country
Visit site
✟4,779.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Danfrey said:
Are you saying that the Church did not part from the teaching of the Apostles and the Early Church Fathers? That is what I would label as demise.

We could talk about the butchering of people in the name of Christianity. (The Crusades) The lack of holiness brought into the church by making Christianity synonimous with citizenship in a certain area. The mixing of pagan practices with Christianity.

Hello Danfrey,

Constantine became close to Eusebius of Nicomedia, who lead the Arian faction of the council at Nicea, And it was the same Eusebius that he was baptised. Constantine also turned on the orthodox party and exiled the Athanasius, the orthodox hero of Nicea.

After Constantine’s death the orthodox (non-Arians) Church suffered heavy persecution for years because of the Arian bend of his son Constantius, who was first the Emperor of the East and then the whole Empire. Constantius persecuted the church and it looked ike all would bow before him. This is where the phrase Athanasius contra mundum (Athanasius against the world) comes from, because for a while it looked like only Athanasius still remained orthodox.

I’ve been reading early church fathers (I own a 38 volume set of their work) and Nicea clearly continued in the doctrines of the ECF.

Read the ECF they are very interesting to read. Athanasius, Cyprian, Athenagoras, etc… are worth reading.

Coram Deo,
Kenith
 
Upvote 0

Danfrey

Warning -- Anabaptist views
Feb 9, 2006
767
32
55
Colorado Springs, CO
✟1,080.00
Faith
Anabaptist
The first two centuries of the ECF held a to a strict non-violent stance. They did not wield the states power or desire to. After the 200's we see a leaning toward cooperation with the state. This clearly a trend away from the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. It was the need to rectify this that led to heresies such as "The Just War". As far as the Early Church Fathers, you didn't mention Justin Martyr, Clement of Rome, Ireneaus, Polycarp many of the men that came later had very different beliefs than these men.
 
Upvote 0

Cajun Huguenot

Cajun's for Christ
Aug 18, 2004
3,055
293
65
Cajun Country
Visit site
✟4,779.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Danfrey said:
The first two centuries of the ECF held a to a strict non-violent stance. They did not wield the states power or desire to. After the 200's we see a leaning toward cooperation with the state. This clearly a trend away from the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. It was the need to rectify this that led to heresies such as "The Just War". As far as the Early Church Fathers, you didn't mention Justin Martyr, Clement of Rome, Ireneaus, Polycarp many of the men that came later had very different beliefs than these men.

Hello Danfrey,

Thanks for the comments.

I have read a greater part of the fathers that you mention than the ones I mentioned. It is clear from the Scriptures that Paul certainly believed the secular state had the right and power to wield the sword as ministers of God. And we know the John the Baptist, forerunner of our Lord was not a pacifist and did not believe soldiering was not allowed to the people of God. When asked by soldiers what they should do, his simple answer was be satisfied with your wages and don’t extort and be tyrants (my paraphrase).

It is true that the state has been wrongly used in attempts to defend the faith, just as it has been used to try and destroy the faith. The state is an institution established by God. It has been given a sphere of authority separate than that of the church, but it’s authority is from God and the civil magistrate, who has the power of the sword is a “minister of God for our good.”

Christians and non-Christians alike can be both civil magistrates and civil servants such as policemen and soldiers. Both are responsible to God that they do these jobs according to His will. But this does not equate to pacifism.

Coram Deo,
Kenith
 
Upvote 0

Danfrey

Warning -- Anabaptist views
Feb 9, 2006
767
32
55
Colorado Springs, CO
✟1,080.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Philip said:
I am saying exactly that. Do you have evidence to the contrary? Tell me, what doctrines were changed when 'the leaders of the church at the time [sold] themselves to the state'?
Before
Justin Martyr:
We who formerly murdered one another now refrain from making war even upon our enemies.
Athenagoras:
We have learned not to return blow for blow, nor go to law with those who plunder and rob us. Instead, even to those who strike us on one side of the face, we offer the other side also.
Clement of Alexandria:
It is not in war, but in peace, that we are trained.
Tertullian:
If then, we are commanded to love our enemies (as I have remarked above), whom have we to hate? If injured, we are forbidden to retaliate, lest we become just as bad ourselves, Who can suffer injury at our hands?
Cyprian:
Christians do not attack their assailants in return, for it is not lawful for the innocent to kill even the guilty.
After
Augustine
in obedience to God or some lawful authority, good men undertake wars, when they find themselves in such a position as regards the conduct of human affairs, that right conduct requires them to act, or to make others act in this way.

Chrysostom

"never be afraid of the sword if thy conscience does not accuse thee: never be afraid in war if thy conscience is clear"


Philip said:
What does this have to do with Constantine? Constantine died in AD 337. The First Crusade began in AD 1095, more than 750 years after Constantine died. I fail to see how you can connect Constantine to the Crusades in any way.

I said....
I don't blame Constantine for the demise of the church around the time of his conversion.

It was around this time that the clear teachings of scripture on the seperation of church and state were altered. It was this perversion of the Gospel that lead to the killing of so many in the name of Christ.
 
Upvote 0

Danfrey

Warning -- Anabaptist views
Feb 9, 2006
767
32
55
Colorado Springs, CO
✟1,080.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Cajun Huguenot said:
Hello Danfrey,

Thanks for the comments.

I have read a greater part of the fathers that you mention than the ones I mentioned. It is clear from the Scriptures that Paul certainly believed the secular state had the right and power to wield the sword as ministers of God. And we know the John the Baptist, forerunner of our Lord was not a pacifist and did not believe soldiering was not allowed to the people of God. When asked by soldiers what they should do, his simple answer was be satisfied with your wages and don’t extort and be tyrants (my paraphrase).


This is the same logic Augustine uses, except he quotes in agreement with KJV and Strongs "do violence to no man"
diaseio - to shake thoroughly
Only the modern translations read extort
Cajun Huguenot said:
Christians and non-Christians alike can be both civil magistrates and civil servants such as policemen and soldiers. Both are responsible to God that they do these jobs according to His will. But this does not equate to pacifism.

Can you show were scripture or the first 180 years of fathers teach that a Christian can join the military. I am not talking about a soldier who becomes a Christian. There is witness to this, but there is witness to the fact that they were not allowed to kill or take oaths without being excommunicated. As far as I know it is fairly well accepted that the Church was Pacifist for the first 180 years.
 
Upvote 0

Cajun Huguenot

Cajun's for Christ
Aug 18, 2004
3,055
293
65
Cajun Country
Visit site
✟4,779.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Danfrey,


Thanks for the quotes. All of them are taken from great men of the faith. I think every quote is a good one. At the time of the earlier quotes no Christian, to my knowledge held the power of a Magistrate and then, just as now, the Christian as an individual and a member of Christ Church, has no authority to the sword.

We can agree that the state and the church have been wrong in this manner, but I think our agreement will likely there. I think my pacifists brethren wrongly read to much Scriptures that the use to defend their pacifistic position.

I do agree that Constantine misused the state to persecute Arians and then the orthodox like St. Athanasius, but that does not prove that the Christian can not be a godly magistrate or a godly soldier. God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. God did not teach pacifism in the Old Covenant and in the New Covenant writings we see that the civil magistrate, the soldier and the godly use of the sword clearly affirmed.

Coram Deo,
Kenith
 
Upvote 0

Philip

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity
Jun 23, 2003
5,619
241
52
Orlando, FL
Visit site
✟7,106.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Danfrey said:
After
Augustine
in obedience to God or some lawful authority, good men undertake wars, when they find themselves in such a position as regards the conduct of human affairs, that right conduct requires them to act, or to make others act in this way.



St Augustine was wrong on many points, and the West was to dependant on him. However, one man's voice is not the voice of the Church, especially when you consider the East's opinion of much of Augustine's writings.

Danfrey said:
Chrysostom
"never be afraid of the sword if thy conscience does not accuse thee: never be afraid in war if thy conscience is clear"

Are you sure you are reading this correctly? Let's leave the quotation in context:

So then I fear not an enemy’s plots: one thing only do I fear, which is sin. If no one convicts me of sin, then let the whole world make war upon me. For this kind of war only renders me more prosperous. Thus also do I wish to teach you a lesson. Fear not the devices of a potentate, but fear the power of sin. No man will do thee harm, if thou dost not deal a blow to thyself. If thou hast not sin, ten thousand swords may threaten thee, but God will snatch thee away out of their reach: but if thou hast sin, even shouldest thou be in paradise thou wilt be cast out. Adam was in paradise yet he fell; Job was on a dung hill, yet he was crowned victorious. What profit was paradise to the one? or what injury was the dung hill to the other? No man laid snares for the one, yet was he overthrown: the devil laid snares for the other, and yet he was crowned. Did not the devil take 255his property? Yes, but he did not rob him of his godliness. Did he not lay violent hands upon his sons? yes: but he did not shake his faith. Did he not tear his body to pieces? yes but he did not find his treasure. Did he not arm his wife against him? yes but he did not overthrow the soldier. Did he not hurl arrows and darts at him? yes but he received no wounds. He advanced his engines but could not shake the tower; he conducted his billows against him, but did not sink the ship. Observe this law I beseech you, yea I clasp your knees, if not with the bodily hand, yet in spirit, and pour forth tears of supplication. Observe this law I pray you, and no one can do you harm. Never call the rich man happy; never call any man miserable save him who is living in sin: and call him happy who lives in righteousness. For it is not the nature of their circumstances, but the disposition of the men which makes both the one and the other. Never be afraid of the sword if thy conscience does not accuse thee: never be afraid in war if thy conscience is clear​

Is St John advocating that Christians take up the sword? Or, is he telling them not to fear when someone takes up the sword against them?

In the very next paragraph, he states:

I was the subject of his plots, yet I became his protector. I suffered countless troubles at his hands, yet I did not retaliate. For I copy the example of my Master, who said on the cross, “Forgive them, for they know not what they do.”​

Is he advocating 'Just War'?

Elsewhere, he writes:

“So long as we continue to behave as sheep, we are victorious. Even if ten thousand wolves surround us, we conquer and are victorious. But the moment we become wolves, we are conquered, for we lost the help of the shepherd. He is the shepherd of sheep, not of wolves. These are his words: ‘Do not be troubled that I send you out in the midst of wolves and tell you to be like sheep and like doves. I could have done just the opposite, and not have allowed you to suffer any hurt. But I chose a better way. My way makes you more glorious and proclaims my power.’ These were his words to Paul: ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness. That is the way I made you.’”​

and

Christians above all men are not permitted forcibly to correct the failings of those who sin. Secular judges indeed, when they have captured malefactors under the law, show their authority to be great, and prevent them even against their will from following their own devices: but in our case the wrong-doer must be made better, not by force, but by persuasion.​

I think you may have misrepresented St John Chrysostom.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.