Jesus would have hated Christianity as organized religion

[specsaregood]

Oh and just like the average American family too. How many households do you think have nothing more than a couple Stephen king novels? Quite a few.

You must hang around with a completely different class of american households than myself then. One of my favorite things to do when I'm at somebody else's abode is peruse their bookshelves.

 

[PierzStyx]

In fact, the First Council included over 300 bishops who came together representing all of Christendom at that time, all of them in communion with one another and members of the universal Church. Every region had one bishop who oversaw all the communities of believers in his see, just as it was in the days of the Apostles and as it was in the days of Constantine.

You're almost correct. The Apostles were authorized by God, held priesthood power given to them by direct authorization and ordination by the Son of God, and gained revelation and visions directly from God to answer their questions. An example of this is the vision Peter was granted of the clean/unclean animals and being told to baptize Cornelius, or the vision of Christ that Paul had.

The bishops of the First Council of Nicaea came together a full 300 yrs after Christ's death, and a full 200 years after the death of the last Apostle. They gained no revelation from God. They voted. The best debaters won their causes. Those with the best politics took power. And those who refused to go along were ejected from a none-existent church. Constantine, a pagan emperor, called the Council and ruled over it, NOT any authorized servant of God. He forced the majority to get along and form a church which he then used as a tool to control the masses of the Empire.

There is a vast difference between those two, and one that is important to understanding why Christianity is so screwed up generally today. The spiritual kingdom was overthrown by the willful disobedience of its members (after all God forces no man to believe in Him or obey His gospel) and was replaced by an earthly one.

 

[JuicyG]

I don't understand your first sentence. Who didn't make up his mind?

And the 'gospels' and other books that were left out were done so because even though you may find them interesting, they did not pass the scrutiny of the catholic (read: universal) Church as represented by the collected Bishops and hierarchy who came together in council to deliberate and pray over. Some, like the 'Gospel of Thomas' weren't even considered because by that time it was well known to be a dubious writing. Others, like the Shepard of Hermas, they deliberated for a while because while some of it raised questions, most of it was completely orthodox and accepted as divinely inspired by the saints before them. Not being in the canon does not mean certain works are not inspired or beneficial writings. Rather, the ones that were chosen were done considered to be universally accepted as authoritative and adhering to the Apostolic witness of the faith.

In conclusion, texts which were included and texts which were not included in the canon were done so in order to present a universally accepted canon of writings (kanon from the Greek word meaning measuring stick) in order to educate and protect the faithful they were chosen from and were sworn to protect as servants of Christ their God.

What about the gospel of Magdalene?
http://relijournal.com/christianity/secrets-of-the-gnostic-gospels-part-two/

The Gospel according to Mary Magdalene is the only gospel of Jesus Christ purportedly written by a woman. If this document were to be considered divinely inspired and equal to the four traditionally accepted gospels, it would completely change our understanding of early church history, the role of women in the church, and the identity of Jesus Christ himself.

So it is not surprising that mainstream Christianity has not been very accepting of this document as historically accurate, but enquiring minds want to know, so here goes.

First, some history of how this document has come to light. It was purportedly written sometime early in the second century after Christ. Then it disappeared for more that fifteen centuries.

A manuscript copy (a copy written by hand) of the Gospel of Mary was found in an ancient book known as the Berlin Codex or Akhimim Codex. This codex is a collection of four manuscripts written in Coptic (an ancient Egyptian language), and bound with a cover of wooden boards. It was discovered in 1896 in Akhimim, Egypt, wrapped in feathers and stashed in a niche in the wall of a Christian burial site.

The Codex was purchased in1896 in Cairo and taken to a museum in Berlin. An English translation was published in 1955.

The Gospel of Mary is not a complete text. The Coptic text is the largest fragment. It is missing pages 1 to 6 and 11 to 14 of a 19 page document, leaving only have about half of the original document. Two small fragments of separate Greek texts of the gospel of Mary were later found in an archaeological dig at Oxyrhynchus in Lower Egypt.

Read more: http://relijournal.com/christianity/secrets-of-the-gnostic-gospels-part-two/#ixzz1ofXS9p00

 

[PierzStyx]

If you continue to make such ignorant and offensive statements, I will stop debating with you.

Did Constantine kill hsi wife and child though? And if so, what does that say about the man himself as organizer of the church?

 

[PierzStyx]

You must hang around with a completely different class of american households than myself then. One of my favorite things to do when I'm at somebody else's abode is peruse their bookshelves.

hahaha Me too!

 

[Johnny Appleseed]

 

[PierzStyx]

What about the gospel of Magdalene?
http://relijournal.com/christianity/secrets-of-the-gnostic-gospels-part-two/

Its to young. If it was written in the second century AD, even the early parts of it, it couldn't have been her's. She would have died by then.

 

[JuicyG]

Its to young. If it was written in the second century AD, even the early parts of it, it couldn't have been her's. She would have died by then.

Not really because the disciples used to copy those texts and transcribe them, making more copies. It was very common practice at the time as there were not printing presses. This one was most likely a copy of the original text written in 1st century AD.

 

[TER]

I was being sarcastic. I didn`t actually believe that.

Someone who would kill his wife and child doesn`t really care for the message of Jesus. I was trying to imply that emperor and saint Constantine used Christianity as political tool as it was very convenient at the time to do so.

From there onwards it continued to be used as such by various churches.

But what I am trying to explain to you is that it was not convenient for him become Christian when he did, it was in fact extremely risky to do so since Christianity was considered just a fraction of the population, held no political power, and was considered a threat to the State and was persecuted by the vast majority. He did not gain power because he was Christian, he gained power in spite of being Christian. This is very very different.

 

[TER]

You're almost correct. The Apostles were authorized by God, held priesthood power given to them by direct authorization and ordination by the Son of God, and gained revelation and visions directly from God to answer their questions. An example of this is the vision Peter was granted of the clean/unclean animals and being told to baptize Cornelius, or the vision of Christ that Paul had.

The bishops of the First Council of Nicaea came together a full 300 yrs after Christ's death, and a full 200 years after the death of the last Apostle. They gained no revelation from God. They voted. The best debaters won their causes. Those with the best politics took power. And those who refused to go along were ejected from a none-existent church. Constantine, a pagan emperor, called the Council and ruled over it, NOT any authorized servant of God. He forced the majority to get along and form a church which he then used as a tool to control the masses of the Empire.

There is a vast difference between those two, and one that is important to understanding why Christianity is so screwed up generally today. The spiritual kingdom was overthrown by the willful disobedience of its members (after all God forces no man to believe in Him or obey His gospel) and was replaced by an earthly one.

I, and 2000 years of Christians, would disagree. The same Holy Spirit Who was active in the Apostles and was active in the First Council of Jerusalem which was presided by St. James is the same Holy Spirit Who was active in the First Eucemenical Council. You are Mormon and may believe that the Apostolic vocation ended after the deaths of the Apostles and re-appeared almost 2000 years later in America, but for the Orthodox Christian whose Church traces back to the Apostles via the same Apostolic succession as described in the Bible, the Apostolic vocation and power of the Holy Spirit has never left.

In fact, neither have the grace filled miracles of the saints.

 

[Pisces]

hahaha Me too!

Me three! And when I visit a new town, I first like to see what kind of bookstores they have.

 

[specsaregood]

Me three! And when I visit a new town, I first like to see what kind of bookstores they have.

When we travelled/went on family vacations, my family always stopped at the used bookstores wherever we went. Hopefully they don't all go the way of the dinosaurs...

 

[Pisces]

When we travelled/went on family vacations, my family always stopped at the used bookstores wherever we went. Hopefully they don't all go the way of the dinosaurs...

My daughter loves Half-Price Books- she can look for manga and anime DVD's while I browse the books. I actually think the used bookstores are more likely to survive than the stores that sell new books. Half of the fun of visiting a used bookstore is in browsing and coming across books that are long out of print and that you would never have thought to look for. E-readers can't provide the same experience, although they have their own advantages.

 

[specsaregood]

My daughter loves Half-Price Books- she can look for manga and anime DVD's while I browse the books. I actually think the used bookstores are more likely to survive than the stores that sell new books. Half of the fun of visiting a used bookstore is in browsing and coming across books that are long out of print and that you would never have thought to look for. E-readers can't provide the same experience, although they have their own advantages.

I sure hope so. I love used books stores.
You see this? http://betanews.com/2012/03/08/steve-jobs-last-big-deal-is-apples-biggest-headache/
I guess apple/jobs was colluding with publishers to prop up prices on books.... I might actually get an e-reader if it brought the prices down significantly.

 

[JuicyG]

But what I am trying to explain to you is that it was not convenient for him become Christian when he did, it was in fact extremely risky to do so since Christianity was considered just a fraction of the population, held no political power, and was considered a threat to the State and was persecuted by the vast majority. He did not gain power because he was Christian, he gained power in spite of being Christian. This is very very different.

We`d need a new thread to debate this issue.

In short, I don`t agree with your view because Christianity was gaining a lot of support and it had a great momentum. Constantine never took any risks so to speak. Even after Edict of Milan, he still built temples to the usual roman deities.
He was afraid Christianity, due to increasing support in the empire and new recruits, would have collapsed and divided the empire, so he made a strategic move to consolidate his power by adopting Christianity.

He was also very close to Emperor Diocletian who viciously persecuted Christians and Constantine didn`t lift a finger to use his political influence to stop it.

Constantine had returned to Nicomedia from the eastern front by the spring of 303, in time to witness the beginnings of Diocletian's "Great Persecution", the most severe persecution of Christians in Roman history.

It is unlikely that Constantine played any role in the persecution.[49] In his later writings he would attempt to present himself as an opponent of Diocletian's "sanguinary edicts" against the "worshippers of God",[50] but nothing indicates that he opposed it effectively at the time.[51] Although no contemporary Christian challenged Constantine for his inaction during the persecutions, it remained a political liability throughout his life.

 

[Pisces]

I sure hope so. I love used books stores.
You see this? http://betanews.com/2012/03/08/steve-jobs-last-big-deal-is-apples-biggest-headache/
I guess apple/jobs was colluding with publishers to prop up prices on books.... I might actually get an e-reader if it brought the prices down significantly.

No, I hadn't seen that. I'm not surprised, though. I very rarely buy new books with my Kindle because I just can't see myself paying that much for an e-book. There are a lot of free e-books that you can download, though. Almost any book with an expired copyright is available for free as long as someone has bothered to copy it into an electronic format. This includes almost all of the classics that were written prior to about the 1930's. I also use it to download free samples of newer books to see if they're worth actually buying. Amazon also offers some newer books free for a limited time, usually when they are trying to promote a more recent book by the same author.

 

[TER]

Interesting. A "unified" church has less to do with doctrine than with organization. The backbone of the church, the Nicene Creed, was formulated at the council. The Arian heresy was not destroyed by the council. Why do you believe the church was unified when it was both organizationally and doctrinally diverse prior to Constantine? Is this important theologically?

That the Church be One is doctrine indeed. It is the prayer of Christ on the night before He was Crucified. And this is how the Church was in the beginning, as described by St. Paul, in one mind and one spirit. All throughout the Acts of the Apostles and the earliest Christian writings, we learn of the faithful holding fast to the teachings handed to them, coming together every Lord's Day to sing praises and pray to God and partake in the Blessed Bread of the Holy Eucharist. St. Paul admonishes the faithful to beware of those who would cause division through false teachings and to strive to be in communion as one Body, as evidenced by the the One Cup of the Eucharist they communed with. The worship and the faith (doctrines) cannot be separated.

Were there heretical splinter groups that formed? Yes, even from the beginning, for example the Montanist and the Gnostics and on and on. But they separated themselves from the Church and became footnotes in history, while the Church grew and endured. By the time St. Constantine was alive, there was only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church which had spread throughout all of the known world, and it was the bishops of that Church which came together and under the power of the Holy Spirit formulated the Symbol of Faith which we call today the Nicene Creed.

 

[Muwahid]

How does one graduate college having read only one book?

Or elementary school

 

[heavenlyboy34]

That the Church be One is doctrine indeed. It is the prayer of Christ on the night before He was Crucified. And this is how the Church was in the beginning, as described by St. Paul, in one mind and one spirit. All throughout the Acts of the Apostles and the earliest Christian writings, we learn of the faithful holding fast to the teachings handed to them, coming together every Lord's Day to sing praises and pray to God and partake in the Blessed Bread of the Holy Eucharist. St. Paul admonishes the faithful to beware of those who would cause division through false teachings and to strive to be in communion as one Body, as evidenced by the the One Cup of the Eucharist they communed with. The worship and the faith (doctrines) cannot be separated.

Were there heretical splinter groups that formed? Yes, even from the beginning, for example the Montanist and the Gnostics and on and on. But they separated themselves from the Church and became footnotes in history, while the Church grew and endured. By the time St. Constantine was alive, there was only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church which had spread throughout all of the known world, and it was the bishops of that Church which came together and under the power of the Holy Spirit formulated the Symbol of Faith which we call today the Nicene Creed.

Pardon my ignorance, but why are the gnostic gospels heretical and the epistles accepted as scripture?

 

[TER]

Pardon my ignorance, but why are the gnostic gospels heretical and the epistles accepted as scripture?

Because they were deemed by the Church to be either of dubious origin, lacked catholic (that is, universal) consensus or apostolic authority, or were considered harmful to the faithful.