Paul Yohannan
Well-Known Member
- Mar 24, 2016
- 3,886
- 1,587
- 45
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Oriental Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
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.
Of course, there must be detractors in this debate but as long as there's a shadow of doubt on the pro-Nicene side, I see no reason to accept it.
Do you not adhere to the Nicene Creed?
I believe that 381 is some of the finest Christian theological writing ever.I believe that both creeds of 325 and 381 are imperfect expressions of perfected faith that we all strive for.
Having done a great deal of research on the subject it appears to me that Constantine was no Christian. He "became" one out of necessity. He also continued to be involved in pagan religion. Mithraism in particular.
The real issue here is that He tried to take what is really an esoteric experience of "oneness with Christ" and formalize it into a system of written beliefs and practices.
Please outline for us the basis of your research, with references to relevant historical documents.
Otherwise I will continue to believe St. Constantine's contemporary Eusebius of Caesarea.
My reading of history suggests that the religious dispute amongst the Christians was causing Constantine Political Problems so he called the Bishops together to get a theological solution. I don't think was politically committed to the answer, and happy to live with whatever brought peace the the Republic. Constantine was PRAGMATIC POLitical and piusYes you are correct. It was the Bishops who did that, rather than Constantine. But it seems that the two groups were politically entwined to me.
Constantine continued the state cults during his reign as he only instituted freedom of religion with his edict, not making Christianity compulsory. There is no evidence of Constantine offering sacrifices as the position of Pontifex Maximus had long ago become symbolic in nature.He also continued to be involved in pagan religion. Mithraism in particular
Having done a great deal of research on the subject it appears to me that Constantine was no Christian.
Your latter statement puts a lie to your former statement. No one who has actually researched Constantine could ever reach the latter conclusion.To control this, he simply gave people two choices join or die. Many did both.
It is truly doubtful that the Church would have died had Constantine not converted. All Constantine did was make the Church legal, and allow her to bring out all the troubles into the open to be decided-Arianism primarily, though others, too. The Church got stronger during persecution and weaker when it wasn't persecuted, just as on 9/11 when the lines going into churches were very long, but look at today. People reach for God when they are in dire straights, and tend to forget Him when things are all hunky-dory.I just caught a bit of an episode from the six-hour series "Ancient Roads from Christ to Constantine".
Going into it, I thought that the series would offer an interesting rehash of what historians know of the events leading from the early Nazarene assembly to the conditions surrounding the rise of Constantine as the champion of the changing Christian church in Rome. But having only caught the narration of host Jonathan Phillips on the conversion of Constantine and his subsequent influence on Christendom, I had already found myself in constant disagreement with what he was saying and refused to listen any further.
In short, Mr. Phillips suggests that if Constantine had not accepted Christianity, this weird Judaic sect would have died out or at least become fatally splintered in the thousands of so-called "heresies" that the Roman Church was able to eventually put down.
Is this what Catholics believe? That the millions living far beyond the pale of Rome and Constantinople held to nothing more than weak and dying iterations of Christian faith? I somehow believe that the Vaudois of Southern France would have disagreed considering that they were the epitome of what every well-bred citizen of Europe should aspire to.
I would like to hear your opinion on the matter.
On the other hand there can be too much persecution for the church to handle. Before the Muslim conquest, North Africa was strongly Christian; not that many remain in that area. I think if the church had been more mature it could have handled the transition to state approval better, unfortunately too many Christians wanted the help of the state in enforcing their beliefs, once that became an option.It is truly doubtful that the Church would have died had Constantine not converted. All Constantine did was make the Church legal, and allow her to bring out all the troubles into the open to be decided-Arianism primarily, though others, too. The Church got stronger during persecution and weaker when it wasn't persecuted, just as on 9/11 when the lines going into churches were very long, but look at today. People reach for God when they are in dire straights, and tend to forget Him when things are all hunky-dory.
Citations and examples, please? The Church didn't have to transition, she just was legalized. Allowed to come out, so to speak. Arianism and the like were already being proposed in some places already, but the open debate was allowed only after Christianity became legalized.On the other hand there can be too much persecution for the church to handle. Before the Muslim conquest, North Africa was strongly Christian; not that many remain in that area. I think if the church had been more mature it could have handled the transition to state approval better, unfortunately too many Christians wanted the help of the state in enforcing their beliefs, once that became an option.
Do you believe the fifth century was a time when the church was healthy and its leadership generally did the right thing? I believe their using force to suppress other religions and beliefs was very bad.Citations and examples, please? The Church didn't have to transition, she just was legalized. Allowed to come out, so to speak. Arianism and the like were already being proposed in some places already, but the open debate was allowed only after Christianity became legalized.
Really? Constantine leaned towards Arianism himself, so if he had 'led' the Council in any direction it would have been towards, not against Arianism.Christianity likely would have survived without the help of Constantine but I suspect that it would look quite different today. For example, more than half the bishops attending the Council of Nicea were Arian but the influence of Constantine led the Council in a different direction.
Really? Constantine leaned towards Arianism himself, so if he had 'led' the Council in any direction it would have been towards, not against Arianism.
Wrong. Only 22 were Arian supporters of 270 to 381 bishops according to the historians of the era like Eustatius and various Church Fathers with only 3 remaining so at its end. Where do you get your 'half'? Please supply the citation.Christianity likely would have survived without the help of Constantine but I suspect that it would look quite different today. For example, more than half the bishops attending the Council of Nicea were Arian but the influence of Constantine led the Council in a different direction.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?