Constantine created Christianity

[Daniel Marsh]

Guys like him promote that myth.
View attachment 251197 View attachment 251198

Chick promoted many myths, the nonsense of John Todd comes to mind.
From my personal experience with him, I doubt he was even a Christian.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

This is totally untrue, Rubiks.

Actually, it was Julian the Apostate who tried to paganize Christian practices.

Read the book THE APOSTASY THAT WASN"T.

Thanks, I just requested a copy of
The apostasy that wasn't : the extraordinary story of the unbreakable early church / Rod Bennett. from my Library.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

read to here

 

[Deade]

Hello JM. I think some people make the claim that Christianity was turned into a state religion, then or later, which it is claimed changed the beliefs and practices of Christianity in certain ways.

God Bless

Right on. I believe the most important era for Christianity is when a pagan Emperor of Rome (Constantine) hi-jacked it and inserted a false one. Immediately convened the Council of Nicaea, then perverted as best he could.

When the Reformation happened, they needed to completely start over. But they did not. So, they are just offshoots of that false church. It is history folks, look it up: "In hoc signo vinces."

That is why God admonishes us to "come out of her" (Babylon) in Rev. 18.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Right on. I believe the most important era for Christianity is when a pagan Emperor of Rome (Constantine) hi-jacked it and inserted a false one. Immediately convened the Council of Nicaea, then perverted as best he could.

When the Reformation happened, they needed to completely start over. But they did not. So, they are just offshoots of that false church. It is history folks, look it up: "In hoc signo vinces."

That is why God admonishes us to "come out of her" (Babylon) in Rev. 18.

How did the council of Nicea pervert Christianity? What canons or decisions that came out the council lead you to this conclusion?

 

[prodromos]

Right on. I believe the most important era for Christianity is when a pagan Emperor of Rome (Constantine) hi-jacked it and inserted a false one. Immediately convened the Council of Nicaea, then perverted as best he could.

What evidence do you have that Constantine had any influence on the beliefs of the Church? History demonstrates that he leaned towards Arianism, whereas the Council decided contrary to the same.
You also have the problem with the fact that the hundreds of bishops who attended the council didn't suddenly appear out of a vacuum. They weren't something created by Constantine.

 

[lismore]

How did the council of Nicea pervert Christianity? What canons or decisions that came out the council lead you to this conclusion?

The shocking anti-Semitism for one:

"It was, in the first place, declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews in the celebration of this holy festival, because, their hands having been stained with crime, the minds of these wretched men are necessarily blinded. ... Let us, then, have nothing in common with the Jews, who are our adversaries. ... Let us ... studiously avoiding all contact with that evil way. ... For how can they entertain right views on any point who, after having compassed the death of the Lord, being out of their minds, are guided not by sound reason, but by an unrestrained passion, wherever their innate madness carries them. ... lest your pure minds should appear to share in the customs of a people so utterly depraved. ... Therefore, this irregularity must be corrected, in order that we may no more have any thing in common with those parricides and the murderers of our Lord. ... no single point in common with the perjury of the Jews."
Theodoret's Ecclesiastical History records The Epistle of the Emperor Constantine, concerning the matters transacted at the Council, addressed to those Bishops who were not present:

Constantine the Great and Judaism - Wikipedia

 

[Deade]

What evidence do you have that Constantine had any influence on the beliefs of the Church? History demonstrates that he leaned towards Arianism, whereas the Council decided contrary to the same.
You also have the problem with the fact that the hundreds of bishops who attended the council didn't suddenly appear out of a vacuum. They weren't something created by Constantine.

Because it's history: the following is an excerpt from my second book:

In 312, Constantine defeated and killed his rival Maxentius, son of Maximian, and he became emperor of the west. He, like his father, favored Christianity. Constantine had a vision of a burning cross right before his battle with Maxentius. Above the cross were the words En Hoc Signo Vinces, which means “In this sign conquer.” He therefore fought the battle in the name of the Christian God. His victory caused him to convert to Christianity. In 313, Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, giving Christians the right to practice their religion. He urges his followers to become Christians, like him. In 321, Constantine issued an edict forbidding work on Sunday. In 323, he defeated the eastern emperor; and became the sole emperor of the east and west.

In 324, he established Christianity as the state religion. Finally, all of Rome accepted Christianity as their state religion. But at this time, there were many different doctrines among Christians. So Constantine called upon a conclave of bishops from all over Rome, to settle these differences. This happened at the Council of Nicea in 325, which was convened to solve two main differences: The first was the divinity of Christ. Arius, a priest of Alexandria, was teaching that Christ was created and not eternal and divine like the Father. The Council denied him and his doctrines; and condemned his followers, the Arian teachers, although this Arian wing continued strong in some areas. When the Germanic and Gothic invaders were converted to Christianity, it was usually to the Arian form. 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. This new Passover was celebrated on the first Sunday after the full moon following the vernal equinox. It was later called “Easter” by the Germanic Christian converts. But was this so called “Christianity” the real deal; or was it a false, counterfeit version? 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. Remember how I pointed out in chapter three that the seventh-day sabbath was a “sign” commandment? This true sabbath pointed to God’s true covenant people. The Roman Catholic Church grew out of this “hijacking” of Christianity by Constantine. I might note here: as a result of this hijacking—and his Sunday sabbath—the later Council of Laodicea (AD 365) outlawed the true seventh-day sabbath (sunset Friday to sunset Saturday).

Excerpted from:
TWENTY FIRST-CENTURY PROPHECY PRIMER

 

[lismore]

What evidence do you have that Constantine had any influence on the beliefs of the Church?

From the link Deade posted and from the link I posted you will discover that Constantine made it a capital offence to follow the biblical pattern on many issues or to explore the writings of Jews.

 

[Not David]

The shocking anti-Semitism for one:

"It was, in the first place, declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews in the celebration of this holy festival, because, their hands having been stained with crime, the minds of these wretched men are necessarily blinded. ... Let us, then, have nothing in common with the Jews, who are our adversaries. ... Let us ... studiously avoiding all contact with that evil way. ... For how can they entertain right views on any point who, after having compassed the death of the Lord, being out of their minds, are guided not by sound reason, but by an unrestrained passion, wherever their innate madness carries them. ... lest your pure minds should appear to share in the customs of a people so utterly depraved. ... Therefore, this irregularity must be corrected, in order that we may no more have any thing in common with those parricides and the murderers of our Lord. ... no single point in common with the perjury of the Jews."
Theodoret's Ecclesiastical History records The Epistle of the Emperor Constantine, concerning the matters transacted at the Council, addressed to those Bishops who were not present:

Constantine the Great and Judaism - Wikipedia

Israel is the Church

 

[ripple the car]

Right on. I believe the most important era for Christianity is when a pagan Emperor of Rome (Constantine) hi-jacked it and inserted a false one. Immediately convened the Council of Nicaea, then perverted as best he could.

When the Reformation happened, they needed to completely start over. But they did not. So, they are just offshoots of that false church. It is history folks, look it up: "In hoc signo vinces."

That is why God admonishes us to "come out of her" (Babylon) in Rev. 18.

Not true, friend. The practices and beliefs of later generstions of Christians can be found pre-Nicea.

Textual evidence for veneration of Mary, for example.

Sub tuum praesidium - Wikipedia

New Liturgical Movement: The Sub Tuum Praesidium

 

[Albion]

The shocking anti-Semitism for one:

"It was, in the first place, declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews in the celebration of this holy festival, because, their hands having been stained with crime, the minds of these wretched men are necessarily blinded. ... Let us, then, have nothing in common with the Jews, who are our adversaries. ... Let us ... studiously avoiding all contact with that evil way. ... For how can they entertain right views on any point who, after having compassed the death of the Lord, being out of their minds, are guided not by sound reason, but by an unrestrained passion, wherever their innate madness carries them. ... lest your pure minds should appear to share in the customs of a people so utterly depraved. ... Therefore, this irregularity must be corrected, in order that we may no more have any thing in common with those parricides and the murderers of our Lord. ... no single point in common with the perjury of the Jews."
Theodoret's Ecclesiastical History records The Epistle of the Emperor Constantine, concerning the matters transacted at the Council, addressed to those Bishops who were not present:

Exactly what doctrine was perverted or altered there?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

The shocking anti-Semitism for one:

"It was, in the first place, declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews in the celebration of this holy festival, because, their hands having been stained with crime, the minds of these wretched men are necessarily blinded. ... Let us, then, have nothing in common with the Jews, who are our adversaries. ... Let us ... studiously avoiding all contact with that evil way. ... For how can they entertain right views on any point who, after having compassed the death of the Lord, being out of their minds, are guided not by sound reason, but by an unrestrained passion, wherever their innate madness carries them. ... lest your pure minds should appear to share in the customs of a people so utterly depraved. ... Therefore, this irregularity must be corrected, in order that we may no more have any thing in common with those parricides and the murderers of our Lord. ... no single point in common with the perjury of the Jews."
Theodoret's Ecclesiastical History records The Epistle of the Emperor Constantine, concerning the matters transacted at the Council, addressed to those Bishops who were not present:

Constantine the Great and Judaism - Wikipedia

You understand that these attitudes were common between different groups and not the Christians alone? The Jews didn't have anything positive to say about Christians either and mocked and denigrated Jesus and our religion. Same goes for the Pagans and the same goes for even Christians earlier than the council referring to both Jews and pagans. No group had the luxury of complete tolerance.

All this is doing is taking what Paul said but going further beyond in regarding them as an enemy. It's not entirely justified but they were not entirely unjustified in thinking this way either, especially as it came to the practice of Pascha which should be regarded as different from the Jewish Pascha since tehy practice that which ours fulfilled.

Aside from this, how else do you believe the council of Nicaea corrupted Christianity? Is anti-semitism the only sin we can attribute to the council? If so I'm okay with this.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Thanks, I just requested a copy of
The apostasy that wasn't : the extraordinary story of the unbreakable early church / Rod Bennett. from my Library.

The book was well written, my double vision made it a challenge to read. There is no copy available via cd at library nor interlibrary loan.

 

[Albion]

Aside from this, how else do you believe the council of Nicaea corrupted Christianity? Is anti-semitism the only sin we can attribute to the council? If so I'm okay with this.

In any case, it has never been a doctrine of the Christian church. The Nicene Creed, for instance, said nothing about it and incorporated nothing into the wording of the Creed that was in opposition to the much older Apostles' Creed. Yet we are being told that the faith of the church was supposed to have been profoundly and deliberately changed in Constantine's time.

 

[Concord1968]

I would point out that adherence to the Nicene Creed is required to meet the definition of a Christian as per the rules of the forum (see terms and rules link at the bottom of the page). Posters who reject the tenets of the Nicene Creed are not supposed to be posting in "Christian Only" forums.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Concerning the council.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: First Council of Nicaea
CHURCH FATHERS: Second Council of Nicaea
CHURCH FATHERS: Council of Carthage (A.D. 419)
CHURCH FATHERS: Council in Trullo (A.D. 692)
CHURCH FATHERS: Second Council of Nicaea

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Emperor of Rome (Constantine) hi-jacked it and inserted a false one. Immediately convened the Council of Nicaea, then perverted as best he could.

ROFL, Prove that nonsense you claim with only primary sources with links to those sources to be checked in context.

 

[Not David]

I would point out that adherence to the Nicene Creed is required to meet the definition of a Christian as per the rules of the forum (see terms and rules link at the bottom of the page). Posters who reject the tenets of the Nicene Creed are not supposed to be posting in "Christian Only" forums.

This. What's pagan about the Creed?

 

[lismore]

You understand that these attitudes were common between different groups and not the Christians alone?

Followers of Jesus Christ are called to a higher standard, to love their neighbours and their enemies, to bless and not curse. To pray for those who persecute them. We are to pray for, not persecute others.

I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven (Matthew 5:44)

Jesus said his Kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36).

Turning his gospel into a state religion very much of this world then persecuting and killing those who would not accept this state religion is a perversion of the gospel of Jesus Christ on the most basic level. All the brutality and evil of the Roman Empire being mixed with the gospel.

The statement by Constantine- read the vitriol and hatred for the Jews in it. Compare this to the Lord Jesus Christ who forgave those who crucified him.

God Bless You