mountainman

It is a little "left-ball-park" but entirely falsifiable.

Yes, Eusebius can really elaborate can't he?
Too much elaboration becomes an army of text.
How can one fight against an army of text?
Yes, perhaps we should simply surrender ...
Then King Con commanded that the text be bound.

(325AD) Letter of Constantine the King, (purportedly) summoning the bishops to Nicaea.
Synopsis: This is translated from a Syriac ms. in the British Museum, written in 501. Gives as reason for the choice of Nicæa the convenience for the European bishops and “the excellent temperature of the air.” This, if genuine, is the letter mentioned by Eusebius in his Life of Constantine but it looks suspicious.

"That there is nothing more honourable in my sight than the fear of God, I believe is manifest to every man. Now, because the Synod of Bishops at Ancyra, of Galatia, consented at first that it should be, it now seems on many accounts that it would be well for a Synod to assemble at Nicea, a city of Bithynia, both because the Bishops of Italy and the rest of the countries of Europe are coming, and also because of the excellent temperature of the air, and also because I shall be present as a spectator and participator of what is done. Wherefore I signify to you, my beloved brethren, that I earnestly wish all of you to assemble at this city which is named, that is at Nicea. Let every one of you therefore, considering that which is best, as I before said, be diligent without any delay speedily to come, that he may be present in his own person as a spectator of what is done. God keep you, my beloved brethren."

(From B. H. Cowper’s, Syriac Miscellanies, The Council Of Nicea. Extracts From The Codex Syriacus 38 In The Imperial Library At Paris, p.249)

The letter is written by a supreme imperial mafia thug to his new subjects.
He is calling them in to sit down and talk turkey now that he is the new
boss in town. Its what would be expected, after conquest.

King Con was about to set the new rules.

You'll note that King Con. does not actually tell us to whom the letter
is being addressed, and that he does not use the word "bishops"
to describe the people of the eastern empire, whom he has recently
conquered.

I believe these people were simply the people in the power structure
that was controlling the eastern empire in 324/325 CE. They were all
what you'd call "pagans". The only bishops present, were brought in
by the King, from his breeding ground in ROme, and the west.

When they all left the Council of Nicaea, by signing the Nicene Creed,
had become the bishops of King Con, and this power structure, having
consolidated itself 325-337 under Con, 338-359 under Constantinius,
after a brief interlude of powerlessness under Julian (359-363), became
itself supreme afterwards, and the rest of the story is told by Vlassis
Rasis, in his Demolish Them!.




Pete

mens_sana

And neither Paul, Marcion nor any of the Apostolic Fathers had anything to do with it — nothing whatsoever.

spin

Well, that's the theory.

mens_sana

That's why I added to "You must be joking".

mountainman

Literary profiles of a Constantinian propaganda.
Calumniating communicators of a false chronology.

Fictional characters in a monstrous tale - a big joke
on the pagans (for their gold) - a fiction of men
composed by wickedness, and implemented by means
of absolute power (Nicaea, 325CE)


Pete

yummyfur

Several have asked for the source of this, it would be intersting if you could give it. Though it seems to me some very screwed up reference to Demetrius the Cynic, who was banished to an Island in Greece, and who still mocked Vespasian, but Vespasian thought he was harmless enough, supposedly saying "I don't kill a barking dog".

mens_sana

Alliterative rhetoric aside — I just choked on my lime-flavored corn chips! Can I add to "You must be joking" again?

judge

That theory does not account for a lot of evidence. It odes not explain how wrtings coming out of the Parthian Empire in the fouth century might have appeared, such as by Aphrahat.

On that basis alone it should be rejected.

judge

Two people voted certainly??? Well if that ain't a religious belief then what is?

mountainman

So which specific writings are you citing as being
independent of Eusebius? The letter from King Agbar
sent to Jesus Christ, and the written response of Jesus
Christ to the King Agbar, as happily found in Eusebius'
Fourth Century library archives, and as translated from
the Syriac (by Eusebius) and then quoted in greek
by Eusebius in his first Book of Ecclesiastical History.


Pete