FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-13-2004, 10:04 PM   #11
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 15,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Third Eye
I have heard several times before that Emperor Constantine of Rome had paid Christian scholars to go through their scriptures and pick out wich ones they deemed to be the holiest and put together the Bible. Constantine then proclaimed himself the first Pope and created the Holy Roman Catholic church.

Is is any way true? (Some sources and reading would help me out as well)
In addition to what others have said, I would note that the Pope was not a big deal in those days. He was simply the Bishop of Rome and there were other Bishops as well. This is way, way before the Great Schism so there is no real distinction between the church at Rome or the one at Antioch or Jerusalem or other cities that had Bishops.

There was only one church: The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. There was no Roman Catholic Church that was separate from the churches in Greece, North Africa, or the Levant.
boneyard bill is offline  
Old 07-14-2004, 06:01 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boneyard bill

There was only one church: The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. There was no Roman Catholic Church that was separate from the churches in Greece, North Africa, or the Levant.
Absolutely untrue. There were dozens of Christian sects in the first 2-4 centuries CE. And afterwards (aka heresy). You might want to look for a book on this subject called Lost Christianities, or books by Elaine Pagels.
Magdlyn is offline  
Old 07-15-2004, 02:18 AM   #13
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 15,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn
Absolutely untrue. There were dozens of Christian sects in the first 2-4 centuries CE. And afterwards (aka heresy). You might want to look for a book on this subject called Lost Christianities, or books by Elaine Pagels.
There was only one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. There wasn't a Roman Church and a Greek one or an Eastern one. Of course there were many Christian sects that didn't accept the principle of Apostolic Succession that distinguished the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. But this is the church that Constantine dealt with.
boneyard bill is offline  
Old 07-15-2004, 08:14 AM   #14
RRK
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Davis, California
Posts: 25
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn
Absolutely untrue. There were dozens of Christian sects in the first 2-4 centuries CE. And afterwards (aka heresy). You might want to look for a book on this subject called Lost Christianities, or books by Elaine Pagels.
I think he meant that at that time, there was only one church which called itself the "one Holy and Apostolic Church" (a phrase from the Nicene Creed). Today, several use the term, e.g. the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodoxy, Assyrian Church of the East, etc.
RRK is offline  
Old 07-15-2004, 09:19 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,956
Default

Well, the Arian church survived pretty well even without the support of Constantine at its birth. Some future Roman emperors even supported it over the 'original' Catholic one. So much for the myth of the "One Church". It was already split at the Nicene Creed.
Answerer is offline  
Old 07-15-2004, 11:45 AM   #16
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,230
Default

My research tells me Constantine voted against Arianism (to do with the nature of Christ) at the Nicene Council. But 3 yrs later changed his mind, reinstated it and was finally baptised by an Arian priest or bishop at the end of his days. Ironic.

Thanks for cleaning up what was meant by the one Catholic etc, church.
Magdlyn is offline  
Old 07-15-2004, 05:55 PM   #17
SLD
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 4,109
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RRK
Baptism at a later age was common in those days, as it was believed that baptism wiped away all sins. After baptism, if you sinned, you had to repent, confess and all that good stuff.

And it appears Constantine's mother (St. Helena to both Catholics and Orthodox) was raised a Christian, and wasn't a convert.
A very important point, RRK. I have read one source that argued that is the reason we have Christianity instead of Mithraism - the other rival mystery cult of the time. Mithraism didn't allow for such a late conversion and salvation. Constantine's "deal" with Christianity allowed him to continue his sinful ways, which he liked quite well apparently, and still not suffer the consequences. Thus he converts on his deathbed. Gotta love the Machiavellian streak in Constantine. He's certainly one of the best of the emperors.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff the unclean

I have some Holy Nails right here if anyone would like to make me an offer
Would we get some indulgences with those nails?


SLD
SLD is offline  
Old 07-15-2004, 06:08 PM   #18
Bede
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SLD
A very important point, RRK. I have read one source that argued that is the reason we have Christianity instead of Mithraism - the other rival mystery cult of the time. Mithraism didn't allow for such a late conversion and salvation.
Mithrism also didn't allow women or poor people. Whether this was an advantage or not, I'll leave you to decide.

B
 
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:55 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.