judge

Im trying to learn some more about the history of the council of nicea. Has anyone got any suggestions? Links or books? Obviously Id like to get some non religious run downs of it. Thanks

Iskander

My choice is: When Jesus became god (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Richard E. Rubenstein.

Jaybees

I highly recommend the various lectures on sale by the Teaching Company.They have several on the early days of the Xtian Church.

bleubird

I have some lectures from them.
http://www.teach12.com/tgc/courses/c....aspx?cid=6299
This one may help.

bacht

Nicea was just the beginning:

Ecumenical Councils before Islam

I. FIRST COUNCIL OF NICAEA
Year: 325
Summary: The Council of Nicaea lasted two months and twelve days. Three hundred and eighteen bishops were present. Hosius, Bishop of Cordova, assisted as legate of Pope Sylvester. The Emperor Constantine was also present. To this council we owe the Nicene Creed, defining against Arius the true Divinity of the Son of God (homoousios), and the fixing of the date for keeping Easter (against the Quartodecimans).
Further Reading: www.newadvent.org/cathen/11044a.htm

II. FIRST COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE
Year: 381
Summary: The First General Council of Constantinople, under Pope Damasus and the Emperor Theodosius I, was attended by 150 bishops. It was directed against the followers of Macedonius, who impugned the Divinity of the Holy Ghost. To the above-mentioned Nicene Creed it added the clauses referring to the Holy Ghost (qui simul adoratur) and all that follows to the end.
Further Reading: www.newadvent.org/cathen/04308a.htm

III. COUNCIL OF EPHESUS
Year: 431
Summary: The Council of Ephesus, of more than 200 bishops, presided over by St. Cyril of Alexandria representing Pope Celestine I, defined the true personal unity of Christ, declared Mary the Mother of God (theotokos) against Nestorius, Bishop of Constantinople, and renewed the condemnation of Pelagius.
Further Reading: www.newadvent.org/cathen/05491a.htm

IV. COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON
Year: 451
Summary: The Council of Chalcedon -- 150 bishops under Pope Leo the Great and the Emperor Marcian -- defined the two natures (Divine and human) in Christ against Eutyches, who was excommunicated.
Further Reading: www.newadvent.org/cathen/03555a.htm

V. SECOND COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE
Year: 553
Summary: The Second General Council of Constantinople, of 165 bishops under Pope Vigilius and Emperor Justinian I, condemned the errors of Origen and certain writings (The Three Chapters) of Theodoret, of Theodore, Bishop of Mopsuestia and of Ibas, Bishop of Edessa; it further confirmed the first four general councils, especially that of Chalcedon whose authority was contested by some heretics.
Further Reading: www.newadvent.org/cathen/04308b.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/library/almanac_14388a.htm

rlogan

More than that too Bacht - a citation here that refers to seven.

http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/nicaea.html

Check out those canons, baby. You can have your balls cut off by someone else, but if you cut your own balls off, you can't be a priest.

'cuz then you would be denying that sadistic pleasure to someone, keeping it all to yourself.

These councils and their implications are tragically overlooked in the whole history of christianity discussion. Because these demonstrate the dictatorship of the official state-sanctioned religion that suppressed the diversity prior to it and fabricated an official history of Christianity.

The four gospels that were retained represent official Roman history. Eusebius wrote his History of the Church to be consistent with the official religious creed, which was the four gospels along with the other scriptures officially retained. Everything else was supppressed.

That's why Eusebius forged the Testimonium Flavianum, in order to again fabricate an official history. He had not just the Emperor's permission, but the Emperor called the first council in order to organize, perfect, and co-opt religion as a tool for control of the masses. So it was more an order to fabricate history than it was permission.

You'll see that Paulianists have to be re-baptized in 325 and made to conform to the nicene creed.

In light of these councils and the clear motivation of the state and religious authorities for power and wealth, their motive, means, and opportunity for forgery are all there.

andrewcriddle

You could try The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God (or via: amazon.co.uk) by the late RPC Hanson. (Nicea and other fourth century councils.)

Andrew Criddle

bacht

lol - I've been wondering if Stephan Huller is right about clerical celibacy originating with castration. Generally the Catholics followed a middle path between asceticism and libertinism

rlogan

Well it seems to be kind of a common notion that celibacy is a special religious devotion.

Josephus tells us about the Essenes, for example. But they weren't Eunuchs.

You have Eunuchs performing certain social functions in Byzantium. Constantine had them for giving him baths and other personal service.

Been around a long time prior for guarding harems or religious devotion. Singing. Some could apparently still "perform" at least for a while sans nuts.

So I can see how this would either way creep into Christianity.


Been looking for some recipe books. I want them light and crispy on the outside, but tender and slightly rare on the inside. Maybe a hint of rosemary.

mountainman

NICAEA: Ecclesiastical Histories (sources and extracts)

Notably, we have no historians, other than "Ecclesiastical" historians
writing while Constantine lived. The brigand ran a tight ship.

Philostorgius - on the "Council" of Nicaea
Rufinius of Aqueila - on the "Council" of Nicaea
Socrates Scholasticus - on the "Council" of Nicaea
Hermias Sozomen - on the "Council" of Nicaea,
Theodoret of Cyrus - on the "Council" of Nicaea, and
Marutha of Maiperqat - on the "Council" of Nicaea.
Theodore of Mopsuestia - Commentary on the "Council" of Nicaea.
Epiphanius of Salamis - Brief mention of the "council"
Eusebius Pamphilus of Ceasarea - the "Council" of Nicaea as mentioned in Vita Constantini.


The Council of Nicaea was dressed up as a "religious council" by the political victors of the later 4th and 5th centuries. Accounts of the history during the rule of COnstantine are notoriously absent from the evidence. If we had Ammianus's history of the council of Nicaea I would expect it would be radically different than the accounts we believe in today.

Essentially Constantine celebrated his 20 year long service party and commemorated his recent military supremacy in the Eastern Empire, and his securement of the imperial gold reserves previously held by Lucinius. The history of the Council of Nicaea and of the rule of Constantine has been written by those who inherited the orthodoxy after Constantine went to the underworld c.337 CE. Alternative accounts will generate much controversy, and may yet be discovered - like Nag Hammadi.

"But our generation is fleeing since it does not
yet even believe that the Christ is alive.

The Interpretation of Knowledge: NHC 11.1

In some of the extant orthodox accounts about the history of the council of Nicaea Constantine requests attendees to present petitions only to ceremoniously burn them in their presence for the sake of "harmony". There are no non religious accounts of the history of the council of Nicaea, or rather there are none preserved. Many have been "lost". What did these lost non religious accounts disclose? Perhaps time will tell.