Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Heaven and sin
Greatest I am
Member (Idle past 274 days)
Posts: 1676
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 16 of 28 (660054)
04-20-2012 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by 1.61803
04-05-2012 10:59 AM


1.61803
You forgot to mention why the Holy Ghost is favored.
Or indeed, why Jesus is now the judge of man and not the trinity that Constantine forced down Christianity’s throat.
Seems that everybody gets a starring role except for the unsavory God the father in the O. T.
Regards
DL
Edited by Greatest I am, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by 1.61803, posted 04-05-2012 10:59 AM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 04-20-2012 2:27 PM Greatest I am has replied
 Message 26 by 1.61803, posted 04-26-2012 12:44 PM Greatest I am has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 17 of 28 (660056)
04-20-2012 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Greatest I am
04-20-2012 2:17 PM


Excuse me?
Do you have any evidence to support your assertion that Constantine forced the Trinity down Christianity's throat?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Greatest I am, posted 04-20-2012 2:17 PM Greatest I am has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by dwise1, posted 04-20-2012 2:49 PM jar has replied
 Message 23 by Greatest I am, posted 04-26-2012 7:42 AM jar has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 18 of 28 (660062)
04-20-2012 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by jar
04-20-2012 2:27 PM


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism
In its first few centuries, Christianity diversified into several different competing theologies. Some were trinitarian, which several were not. The non-trinitarian theologies, while not being the same, were and have been grouped together under the label "Arian", after Arius of Alexandria. Going into the First Council of Nicea, called by Emperor Constantine, the "Arian Controversy" was the major issue facing the newly official state religion. Arianism was declared to be heterodox (one step away from heresy, as I understand) and Trinitarianism part of the One True Universal Faith. The article quotes this edict by Constantine:
quote:
In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offence, he shall be submitted for capital punishment.....
Several Germanic tribes had been converted to Christianity by Arian missionaries, so they remained Arians (not to be confused with 20th century Aryanism) until that belief was crushed by the 8th century through a series of military and political conquests.
Unitarianism as it formed independently in Transylvania and England (and from England to the Colonies) traces its roots back to Arianism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 04-20-2012 2:27 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 04-20-2012 3:00 PM dwise1 has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 19 of 28 (660067)
04-20-2012 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by dwise1
04-20-2012 2:49 PM


But it was not Constantine that made those decisions but rather the Bishops that gathered in that council.
In addition, Christianity has never been monolithic. There have always been schisms and sects.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by dwise1, posted 04-20-2012 2:49 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by dwise1, posted 04-20-2012 7:51 PM jar has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 20 of 28 (660085)
04-20-2012 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by jar
04-20-2012 3:00 PM


But it was not Constantine that made those decisions but rather the Bishops that gathered in that council.
No, Constantine did not have a vote. Neither did the Soviet Union's Politburo have a vote in the Supreme Soviet, the governing body that actually passed the laws. And yet, all the Supreme Soviet did was to rubber-stamp the decisions already reached by the Politburo (though Wikipedia notes that starting in the 1950's the Supreme Soviet started to slowly accrue some real power for itself).
Constantine called for the Council, convened the Council, and attended the Council, obviously with the soldiers who formed the Pretorian Guard. He had an agenda in the proceedings and it strains credulity that his presence and his armed guards' presence did not unduly influence the bishops' votes.
We would need to consult historical records to piece together what had actually happened. But the fact still stands that going into the First Council both trinitarianism and non-trinitarianism were sizable factions and the Council did indeed decide for trinitarianism. I do believe that this is what Greatest Am I was referring to, which is the reason for my reply to you.
In addition, Christianity has never been monolithic. There have always been schisms and sects.
Yes, indeed. And that and more had already been happening long before going into the ecumenical councils. What the councils sought to do was to unify all those separate sects into one monolithic church (one article cites this as Constantine's primary agenda). And, of course, the splintering started anew almost immediately.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 04-20-2012 3:00 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by jar, posted 04-20-2012 7:55 PM dwise1 has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 21 of 28 (660086)
04-20-2012 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by dwise1
04-20-2012 7:51 PM


Love to discuss this in depth.
Start a topic on it since it's pretty unrelated to this topic, but you sure seem to be tossing out a bunch of assertions and using lots of innuendo.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by dwise1, posted 04-20-2012 7:51 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by dwise1, posted 04-20-2012 11:54 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 22 of 28 (660103)
04-20-2012 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by jar
04-20-2012 7:55 PM


Re: Love to discuss this in depth.
That would require someone with more knowledge of the history and much more patience with theological and philosophical ... chatter than I have.
But still, the facts (no innuendo) are that there were competing non-trinitarian theologies (AKA "Arianism"), the First Council of Nicea is where they voted for trinitarianism and against Arianism, and Constantine was involved. It's everything else that would need to be hashed out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by jar, posted 04-20-2012 7:55 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Greatest I am
Member (Idle past 274 days)
Posts: 1676
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 23 of 28 (660462)
04-26-2012 7:42 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by jar
04-20-2012 2:27 PM


Jar
I do have a bit of information.
Originally Posted by animefan48
Well, the reality is most Christians do buy into the trinity doctrine because of persecution of the early Gnostics and non-Trinitarians, and the religious councils were dissenters were forced to agree to a Trinitarian theology. Many Unitarian and Universalist theologies argue that when Jesus said he was the way, he meant that he was an example of how to live to be united/reunited with God. As for the name, God does give other names for himself including the Alpha and Omega, as well as some believe a name that should not be written (or even spoken I believe). Honestly, I think using the name I Am That I Am would just be confusing and convoluted, seriously. I seriously do not believe that it is a continuation of Gnostic/mystical/Unitarian suppression. Even the Gnostic and mystical traditions within Islam and Christianity do not tend to use that name, and among the 99 Names of Allah, I did not find that one. Also, many Rastafarians believe that the Holy Spirit lives in humans and will sometimes say I and I instead of we, yet they don't seem to use the name I Am for God/Jah either, so I really don't think it can be related to suppressing mystical and Gnostic interpretations. I think that originally oppressing those ideas and decreeing them heretical are quite enough, the early Church did such a good job that after the split many Protestant groups continued to condemn mystical and later Gnostic sects and theologies.
Yup, the bishops voted and it was settled for all time!!1 (Some say the preliminary votes were 150 something to 140 something in favor of the trinity)
But then Constantine stepped in: After a prolonged and inconclusive debate, the impatient Constantine intervened to force an end to the conflict by demanding the adoption of the creed. The vote was taken under threat of exile for any who did not support the decision favored by Constantine. (And later, they fully endorsed the trinity idea when it all happened again at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, where only Trinitarians were invited to attend. Surprise! They also managed to carry a vote in favor of the Trinity.)
http://home.pacific.net.au/~amaxwell/bdigest/bd12bbs.tx
Even a Trinitarian scholar admits the Earliest & Original beliefs were NOT Trinitarian!
The trinity formulation is a later corruption away from the earliest & original beliefs!
"It must be admitted by everyone who has the rudiments of an historical sense that the doctrine of the Trinity, as a doctrine, formed no part of the original message. St Paul knew it not, and would have been unable to understand the meaning of the terms used in the theological formula on which the Church ultimately agreed".
Dr. W R Matthews, Dean of St Paul's Cathedral, "God in Christian Thought and Experience", p.180
"In order to understand the doctrine of the Trinity it is necessary to understand that the doctrine is a development, and why it developed. ... It is a waste of time to attempt to read Trinitarian doctrine directly off the pages of the New Testament".
R Hanson: "Reasonable Belief, A survey of the Christian Faith, p.171-173, 1980
The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament.
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 306.
"The formulation ‘One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective"
New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299.
"The formulation ‘One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective" (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299).
"Fourth-century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary a deviation from this teaching" (The Encyclopedia Americana, p. 1956, p. 2941).
Was Jesus God to Paul and other early Christians? No. . . . .
(Source: How the Bible became the Bible by Donald L. O'Dell - ISBN 0-7414-2993-4 Published by INFINITY Publishing.com)
Regards
DL

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 04-20-2012 2:27 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 04-26-2012 9:37 AM Greatest I am has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 24 of 28 (660482)
04-26-2012 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Greatest I am
04-26-2012 7:42 AM


No one is arguing that the concept of the Trinity was not something that evolved over time. Nor is anyone arguing that Constantine did not see Christianity as a political tool and that that view is the biggest reason for the expansion and dominance that resulted.
If the vote was in favor of the concept of the Trinity even before Constantine stepped in, you cannot say that the Trinity concept was solely the result of an edict from Constantine.
Look at your other cites.
You say that at the Council of Constantinople "only Trinitarians were invited to attend."
That supports my position that there were also non-Trinitarian Christians.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Greatest I am, posted 04-26-2012 7:42 AM Greatest I am has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Greatest I am, posted 04-27-2012 9:24 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 25 of 28 (660505)
04-26-2012 12:36 PM


Topic Please!!!!!
Is it possable for a person who has died and gone to heaven to sin? If not, why not?
Very simple. Please stick to the topic.
Please do no respond to this message.
Thanks
AdminPD

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 26 of 28 (660507)
04-26-2012 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Greatest I am
04-20-2012 2:17 PM


Greatest I am writes:
You forgot to mention why the Holy Ghost is favored.
Hello, I do not think the Holy Ghost is "favored" per se.
I do not think there is a discernible answer though.
One view is that if a person rebels against the very instrument by which grace is achieved, they are in essence unrepentant and incapable of redemption.
Greatest I am writes:
Or indeed, why Jesus is now the judge of man and not the trinity that Constantine forced down Christianity’s throat.
Jesus the son of God representing a new covenant and mediator between God the Father and Jew &Gentiles alike.This Is one common Christian teaching.
Greatest I Am writes:
Seems that everybody gets a starring role except for the unsavory God the father in the O. T.
The Bible is a very interesting fragmented piece of literature. What it means to you personally and what message you take away can either be a cause of conflict, confusion or enlightenment. It is very provocative in my opinion.
OFF TOPIC
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Greatest I am, posted 04-20-2012 2:17 PM Greatest I am has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Greatest I am, posted 04-27-2012 9:30 AM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Greatest I am
Member (Idle past 274 days)
Posts: 1676
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 27 of 28 (660585)
04-27-2012 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by jar
04-26-2012 9:37 AM


Jar
I agree that there were non-trinitarian Christians. There were as many sects to Christianity back then as there are today. Same goes for the Gnostic sects.
Regards
DL
OFF TOPIC
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 04-26-2012 9:37 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Greatest I am
Member (Idle past 274 days)
Posts: 1676
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 28 of 28 (660586)
04-27-2012 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by 1.61803
04-26-2012 12:44 PM


1.61803
Very provocative indeed.
The following is just my view so please do not respond to it here as I do not want to derail.
It was God's plan from the beginning to have Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit. This can be demonstrated by the fact that the bible says that Jesus "was crucified from the foundations of the Earth," that is to say, God planned to crucify Jesus as atonement for sin before he even created human beings or God damned sin.
If God had not intended humans to sin from the beginning, why did he build into the Creation this "solution" for sin? Why create a solution for a problem you do not anticipate?
God knew that the moment he said "don't eat from that tree," the die was cast. The eating was inevitable. Eve was merely following the plan.
This then begs the question.
What kind of God would plan and execute the murder of his own son when there was absolutely no need to?
Only an insane God. That’s who.
The cornerstone of Christianity is human sacrifice, thus showing it‘s immorality.
One of Christianity's highest form of immorality is what they have done to women.
They have denied them equality and subjugated them to men.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqN8EYIIR3g&feature=related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dspWh9g3hU&feature=related
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c0RFxXrYzg&feature=related
Regards
DL
OFF TOPIC
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by 1.61803, posted 04-26-2012 12:44 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024