Constantine created Christianity

[prodromos]

The other major difference, facing the Council was the date on which to celebrate Passover. At this time, in Asia Minor, many Christians still commemorated Jesus’ death on the day the Jewish Passover lambs were slain. But Rome and the Western churches chose to honor the resurrection instead. They celebrated the Passover always on a Sunday. The Council ruled in favor of the west and Rome. It ruled that the Passover, commemorating the death of Jesus, no longer be kept—anyone keeping the old way would be put to death.

Another complete falsehood. There is no ruling by the council on such a punishment.

 

[Deade]

Utterly false. Christianity was made the State religion under Theodosius I on February 27, 380AD.

No, he just made it mandatory. It was still optional during Constantine's day. Even the Reformation is full of "state" religions. Check your history. Why do you think we in America expressed a separation of Church and State. Again, check your history.

 

[Deade]

Another complete falsehood. There is no ruling by the council on such a punishment.

Someone need to study history:
The Council of Laodicea of around 365 decreed 59 laws, #29:

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ. (Percival Translation).[12]

Source Wikipedia

 

[Albion]

No, he did not create Christianity---he simply tried to regulate it with government controls.

Constantine created the earliest Sunday law known to history in AD 321. It says this:

"On the venerable Day of the sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.

But Sunday worship precedes Constantine. We have the New Testament itself telling us that!

So it is impossible that Constantine did that. The most that can be said is that he ordered shops to be closed on that day, etc. which is not a Christian doctrine in any case. We might call it an intrusion into the Church's business or something like that--none of which is what this thread is supposedly about.

This thread really needs to be moved to the denomination specific forum.

 

[prodromos]

The first thing Constantine did was to substitute Sunday for the sabbath, instead of the seventh day that should have been. He did this in hopes of attracting the sun worshipers of his day.

Another falsehood. Only the Jews followed the Sabbath, there was no Sabbath rest for any other member of the Roman Empire. The Jews paid a tax to the Emperor so that they could follow their own religious laws and be exempt from many restrictions they would have faced by following Roman laws. The Christians were recognised as being different from the Jews because they did not pay the Jewish tax. They also worked on the Sabbath as did everyone else except the Jews.
When Constantine declared Sunday to be a day of rest, he did so in recognition of the fact that Christians were universally gathering to worship before between Saturday evening and the dawn of Sunday morning, before going off to work. He made the day on which Christians primarily gathered to worship God a day of rest. He most certainly did not do it in the hope of converting a small minority of Sun worshipers.

 

[prodromos]

Someone need to study history:
The Council of Laodicea of around 365 decreed 59 laws, #29:

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ. (Percival Translation).[12]

Source Wikipedia

That is not Nicaea.
Where does that say they are to be put to death?
Yes, you do need to study history.

 

[mmksparbud]

But Sunday worship precedes Constantine. We have the New Testament itself telling us that!

So it is impossible that Constantine did that. The most that can be said is that her ordered shops to be closed on that day, etc. which is not a Christian doctrine in any case. We might call it an intrusion into the Church's business or something like that--none of which is what this thread is supposedly about.

This thread really needs to be moved to the denomination specific forum, the Seventh-day Adventist denomination to be more precise.

No, the bible nowhere says that Sunday was ever a day of worship, they met on a Saturday night. which was sundown and that began the first day of the week---that is how they counted their days---from sundown. That one time they met on a Sat. night, technically the beginning of Sunday and it was to say goodbye to Paul. There were some Christians starting to keep Sunday in order to differentiate from the Jews, but there is nowhere in the bible that says God said we are to worship on Sunday now instead of the 7th day---absolutely nowhere. Constantine was trying to unite a kingdom by bringing everyone under one day of worship and to differentiate from the Jews. Sunday was the preferred day of Roman worship for the "venerable day of the Sun." So he was uniting the pagan with the Christians to bring unity to a divided kingdom. And by the way----SDA are not the only denomination that keeps the Sabbath and -Christians have kept it throughput history.

Sabbath keepers throughout history

• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The First Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Second Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Third Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Fourth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Fifth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Sixth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Seventh Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Eighth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Ninth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Tenth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Eleventh Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Twelveth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Thirteenth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Fourteenth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Fifteenth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Sixteenth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Seventeenth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Eighteenth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Nineteenth Century A.D.
• Sabbath Observance Through The Centuries - The Twentieth Century A.D.

 

[prodromos]

No, he just made it mandatory. It was still optional during Constantine's day. Even the Reformation is full of "state" religions. Check your history. Why do you think we in America expressed a separation of Church and State.

You claimed that Constantine made Christianity "the" State religion in 324. He did no such thing.

Again, check your history.

I'm not the one making false claims.

 

[Deade]

That is not Nicaea.
Where does that say they are to be put to death?
Yes, you do need to study history.

I didn't say it was outlawed at Nicaea. Read it, I said later it was outlawed. BTW proclaiming one anathema from Christ in fourth century Rome was a death sentence.

I believe we are in the time period spoken of in Daniel 12:4: "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

With all the historic tools and references at our advantage, the truth will come out.

 

[Albion]

No, the bible nowhere says that Sunday was ever a day of worship....

You could hardly be more wrong about that.

"Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day—things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ." (Col. 2:16-17).

"And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to depart the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight," (Acts 20:7).

"Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I directed the churches of Galatia, so do you also. On the first day of every week let each one of you put aside and save, as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come." (1 Corinthians 16:1-2)

and those are only some of the Bible verses which prove the point.

 

[timewerx]

I hear this claim repeated over and over again from different people that Constantine created Christianity after the council of Nicaea or the Edict of Milan. Joe Rogan makes this claim on his podcast which gets millions of downloads, Gnostics make this claim, etc.

Where does it come from?

Who first made this assertion?

What "proof" do they offer in defence of such a claim?

It's repeated often but I haven't been able to track down a source for such a claim, a claim so easily refuted.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

I never believed such thing. So I'm definitely biased towards the notion it is false.

Until I became very serious about studying the Bible. And then suddenly, it becomes actually plausible.

It also brings into picture that our understanding of Biblical timelines concerning the "last days" maybe in gross error.

We could already be well into the age of the AntiChrist for a very long time now.

I'm still not convinced about the "Constantine Theory". However, it's also hard to deny the ancient Roman Empire still exerts a very strong influence in modern affairs of power, money, and religion. Often hidden from plainsight but actually pulling strings.

At the very top of everything, you'll always find Latin - the official language of the Roman Empire.

 

[Albion]

I'm still not convinced about the "Constantine Theory". However, it's also hard to deny the ancient Roman Empire still exerts a very strong influence in modern affairs of power, money, and religion. Often hidden from plainsight but actually pulling strings.

At the very top of everything, you'll always find Latin - the official language of the Roman Empire.

The legacies of the Roman Empire AND ESPECIALLY the Roman Republic are strong, even today, but that doesn't at all mean that anyone is "pulling strings" on their behalf or in their name or anything like that!

 

[mmksparbud]

You could hardly be more wrong about that.

"Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day—things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ." (Col. 2:16-17).

"And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to depart the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight," (Acts 20:7).

"Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I directed the churches of Galatia, so do you also. On the first day of every week let each one of you put aside and save, as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come." (1 Corinthians 16:1-2)

and those are only some of the Bible verses which prove the point.

Context is everything! These verses always come up. And have always been put in their appropriate place. All Jewish feast days were called sabbaths. Paul was talking to new Christians who were being told by Jews that they must keep all the feast days. He said no.
The first day of the week that they met on was Sat. night. They came together to send Paul off, he was going away. It was still, technically the first day of the week for the started their days from sundown. But it was not a Sunday morning worship service, but a Saturday night get together to send Paul off.

The collection was for a special collection for the needy and Paul was requesting that they collect the money so there would be no collections when he came to slow him down. Read the whole passages, folks, it explains itself. In none of those verses, does it ever say that God has made the 1st day of the week a day of worship now instead of the 7th. You have not made your point.

 

[Albion]

The verses indicate, without doubt, that the Christians were permitted to have Sunday be their principle day of worship and that they did so. This is the word of the Lord.

I realize that the Seventh-day Adventist church reads them to its own advantage and must find a way to do so because it insists that worship on the Old Testament Sabbath could not and cannot be changed. That's the POV of that denomination.

It is significant, though, that only a tiny minority of Christians adhere to that POV, out of all the billions of Christians from all the different denominations that have existed in Church history. On this matter and on how to understand these verses, there is almost as much agreement as there is with any Christian belief.

 

[Deade]

You claimed that Constantine made Christianity "the" State religion in 324. He did no such thing.

I'm not the one making false claims.

Wars against Licinius
In the following years, Constantine gradually consolidated his military superiority over his rivals in the crumbling Tetrarchy. In 313, he met Licinius in Milan to secure their alliance by the marriage of Licinius and Constantine's half-sister Constantia. During this meeting, the emperors agreed on the so-called Edict of Milan,[195] officially granting full tolerance to Christianity and all religions in the Empire.[196] The document had special benefits for Christians, legalizing their religion and granting them restoration for all property seized during Diocletian's persecution. It repudiates past methods of religious coercion and used only general terms to refer to the divine sphere—"Divinity" and "Supreme Divinity", summa divinitas.[197] The conference was cut short, however, when news reached Licinius that his rival Maximinus had crossed the Bosporus and invaded European territory. Licinius departed and eventually defeated Maximinus, gaining control over the entire eastern half of the Roman Empire. Relations between the two remaining emperors deteriorated, as Constantine suffered an assassination attempt at the hands of a character that Licinius wanted elevated to the rank of Caesar;[198] Licinius, for his part, had Constantine's statues in Emona destroyed.[199] In either 314 or 316 AD, the two Augusti fought against one another at the Battle of Cibalae, with Constantine being victorious. They clashed again at the Battle of Mardia in 317, and agreed to a settlement in which Constantine's sons Crispus and Constantine II, and Licinius' son Licinianus were made caesars.[200] After this arrangement, Constantine ruled the dioceses of Pannonia and Macedonia and took residence at Sirmium, whence he could wage war on the Goths and Sarmatians in 322, and on the Goths in 323, defeating and killing their leader Rausimod.[198]

In the year 320, Licinius allegedly reneged on the religious freedom promised by the Edict of Milan in 313 and began to oppress Christians anew,[201] generally without bloodshed, but resorting to confiscations and sacking of Christian office-holders.[202] Although this characterization of Licinius as anti-Christian is somewhat doubtful, the fact is that he seems to have been far less open in his support of Christianity than Constantine. Therefore, Licinius was prone to see the Church as a force more loyal to Constantine than to the Imperial system in general,[203] as the explanation offered by the Church historian Sozomen.[204]

This dubious arrangement eventually became a challenge to Constantine in the West, climaxing in the great civil war of 324. Licinius, aided by Goths mercenaries, represented the past and the ancient pagan faiths. Constantine and his Franks marched under the standard of the labarum, and both sides saw the battle in religious terms. Outnumbered, but fired by their zeal, Constantine's army emerged victorious in the Battle of Adrianople. Licinius fled across the Bosphorus and appointed Martinian, his magister officiorum, as nominal Augustus in the West, but Constantine next won the Battle of the Hellespont, and finally the Battle of Chrysopolis on 18 September 324.[205] Licinius and Martinian surrendered to Constantine at Nicomedia on the promise their lives would be spared: they were sent to live as private citizens in Thessalonica and Cappadocia respectively, but in 325 Constantine accused Licinius of plotting against him and had them both arrested and hanged; Licinius' son (the son of Constantine's half-sister) was killed in 326.[206] Thus Constantine became the sole emperor of the Roman Empire.[2

In 321, he legislated that the venerable Sunday should be a day of rest for all citizens.[224] In 323, he issued a decree banning Christians from participating in state sacrifices.[225] After the pagan gods had disappeared from his coinage, Christian symbols appeared as Constantine's attributes, the chi rho between his hands or on his labarum,[226] as well on the coin itself.[227]

The reign of Constantine established a precedent for the emperor to have great influence and authority in the early Christian councils, most notably the dispute over Arianism. Constantine disliked the risks to societal stability that religious disputes and controversies brought with them, preferring to establish an orthodoxy.[228] His influence over the Church councils was to enforce doctrine, root out heresy, and uphold ecclesiastical unity; the Church's role was to determine proper worship, doctrines, and dogma.[229]

Source Wikipedia

Looks like establishing Christianity to me. BTW - I am not SDA.

 

[mmksparbud]

The verses indicate, without doubt, that the Christians were permitted to have Sunday be their principle day of worship and that they did so. This is the word of the Lord.

I realize that the Seventh-day Adventist church reads them to its own advantage and must find a way to do so because it insists that worship on the Old Testament Sabbath could not and cannot be changed. That's the POV of that denomination.

It is significant, though, that only a tiny minority of Christians adhere to that POV, out of all the billions of Christians from all the different denominations that have existed in Church history. On this matter and on how to understand these verses, there is almost as much agreement as there is with any Christian belief.

Obviously you did not read all the accounts of non-SDA's who kept the 7th day. It is not an SDA "thing"---It is a God dictated c commandment. And I personally do not care if I alone stand on it. Doctrines are not decided by a popularity poll. There is not one verse in the entire bible that states GOD has changed the 7th day to the 1st day of the week! It has been done by man, not God and I go by what God says---period. You can go by what man says if you want. All anyone has to do is quote the verse where GOD has made that change and you shut several denomination up!

 

[ripple the car]

Obviously you did not read all the accounts of non-SDA's who kept the 7th day. It is not an SDA "thing"---It is a God dictated c commandment. And I personally do not care if I alone stand on it. Doctrines are not decided by a popularity poll. There is not one verse in the entire bible that states GOD has changed the 7th day to the 1st day of the week! It has been done by man, not God and I go by what God says---period. You can go by what man says if you want. All anyone has to do is quote the verse where GOD has made that change and you shut several denomination up!

With all due respect. And I say this is someone who tried this once.

The Law of Moses was for the Jews.

No where in the New Testament are Christians commanded to rest on the Sabbath. No where. We do, however, see a number of passages giving us liberty to *not* rest on the Sabbath. Which is significant.

If you try to observe one aspect of Mosaic Law, which while God given was meant only for the Jews, you must observe all. If Messiah fulfills the Law, He fulfils all of it. All of it. Not just one part, but all parts. The Sabbath, the dietary stuff, the family purity laws, the animal sacrifice stuff, the high holy day stuff, the rule about not wearing clothing of mixed fibers, the mold stuff, the skin disease stuff, the female conditions stuff, all of it. All of it.

Please understand. All of it. We are under Christ. Not Moses. That means that our righteous with God is through faith in the Son, and obeying the Son, and those He appointed as Apostles, and living for Him, in Him, and because of Him, by His grace. That's the Christian life.

 

[timewerx]

The legacies of the Roman Empire AND ESPECIALLY the Roman Republic are strong, even today, but that doesn't at all mean that anyone is "pulling strings" on their behalf or in their name or anything like that!

Even among powerful fraternities, at the core of their rites is Latin.

It's not at all surprising that their founding fathers and those before them would eventually lead to the ancient Roman Empire.

The Bible gave plenty of warnings of the same evil (Roman Empire) returning to power. It seems they already did. For the most enduring empire in history, they'd be smart and devious enough to figure out how to stay in power for thousands of years more.

Sitting in plainview isn't the only means to lead and control an empire or even the world. When it comes to global supremacy, there are no rules. Everything rests in how skillful you are in the art of deceit.

 

[prodromos]

I didn't say it was outlawed at Nicaea. Read it, I said later it was outlawed.

Nope. You made the claim with direct reference to Nicaea.

BTW proclaiming one anathema from Christ in fourth century Rome was a death sentence.

No it wasn't. It meant being cut off from the Church.

 

[prodromos]

Looks like establishing Christianity to me.

Except it doesn't agree with the specific claims you made in your book.

BTW - I am not SDA

Never thought you were.