steve_bnk

Get real dude.

sotto voce

So Jesus existed, you say. Now how do we get from Jesus, an artisan in Galilee, to a crowned potentate bearing the title of a Roman emperor? Do explain that. Be the first in seventeen centuries.

steve_bnk

Archaic use of sire indicting submission to a personal authority..

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sire

In a discussion on CNN by several Asians on the American influence one put it as they want the USA to be an uncle not a father.

All cultures have cultural terms of respect related to the image of father, and mother as well. Convienient cultural metaphors.

Mother Earth. Grandfather Time.

The meaning of the term father in RCC Christianity should be obvious. God is the father, we are the children. The pope and priests are the RCC intermediaries between children and the father. The Earthly spiritual parents.

Protestants said the hell with that, I'll talk directly to god. Protesants have ministers and pastors, not fathers. Independent Christians have no leaders at all. They freely gather and interpret the bible.

steve_bnk

WTF are you taling about. I posted on the etymology of the term pope related to Christianity.

As to the evolution of Christianity that led to Constantine, it should not be a mystery. One only has to look at the genesis and evolution of modern phenomena like Mormonism and Scientolgy as well of the mass of pseudo Eastern movements/cults. We cam never know the specific details of who what and when. But the huiman process is the same today as 2000 years ago.

Power politics mixed with religion. The ancient Romans viewed religion as a neccessary element of state stability. Today we see religious power politics in Egypt and Iran. And obviously in the USA, muted by our constitution.

At the time of JC the region was filled with Jewish nationalism, sedition, rebellion, amd intense anti-Roman feelings.

Juxtapose to the Mideast today and what do we see. Sedition, anti-American sentiment, rebellion, religioius nationalism. Look at religious geopolitics today and the why and how of Christiaity and its polical rise in the Roman empire should be obvious.

sotto voce

Can we try to stay on topic? The discussion is about 'calling someone 'father' in a religious context'.

What may seem obvious to historians is that the term 'RCC Christianity' is so self-contradictory that its use could be classified as a criminal offence.

As they say:

Get real, dude.

Duvduv

And lo and behold a text called Oration in Praise of Constantine attributed to Eusebius records the subject of the rock differently than it appears in GMatt:
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2504.htm
And again, of his church he says: I will build my church upon a rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Matthew 16:18

In the same text the name Jesus does not appear even once, while the name Christ appears only twice. But the ambiguous term, the unnamed "Saviour," appears many times and is extolled by the emperor himself. He is the unnnamed Word of God, the high priest of God.

Duvduv

So how is it that the Oration in Praise of Constantine forgot to include the Peter element in the rock of the church found in GMatt 16?!

Duvduv

The document does not attribute the quote regarding the rock and the church to any particular source, and we can see that GMatt had not yet emerged from the assorted sources when this Oration was produced (whenever that was).

Iskander

Eusebius is praising the Emperor, why do you expect Eusebius to mention the rock?
PS, I haven’t read that silly thing but I take your word that it doesn’t

Duvduv

Why would you assume he changed what any literate person could check in the gospel? He didn't need the internet in those days presumably!

And again, of his church he says: I will build my church upon a rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.