 |
|
Pax
|
|
He more than made it acceptable. We both agree that he probably was not really Christian. But as any good(machiavellian) politician will do, he used it as an asset to consolidate his power. He even went so far as to persecute non-christians and christians from different sects. At the time, all christians did not have the same exact beliefs. Some did not believe in the old testament for example. They were persecuted.
My readings also tell me that constantine ruled the east and western empires. So his influence is on east+west=all of christianity.
The previous mormon comment was directed elsewhere.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pax
|
|
If the mormon's accept the bible that was compiled by the Roman catholic church or some other offshoot then they are tainted with paganism. The reason why people question the mormon's is the beliefs that they add to christianity, same for voodoo and christian science.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pax
|
|
Aeson,
I won't pretend to be an authority on the mormon belief. I just see being a moromon as the same way I see the difference between a christian, jew, and muslim. while they have some differences they still come from the same origins.
The mormons believe that there version of religion is the correct one just like baptists, catholics, methodists, shiites, jews, and sunni's among a grwoing list of religion.
According to your statements the mormons believe in the same god that Jews, Christians, and muslims believe. Even if it is their belief that there version of religion is prior to the RC influence that does not make it tru. half the proof that there are exposed to RC is in there name. Later day SAINTS.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Aeson
|
 |
orangesoda
Nov 2001 time: 22:35
|
|
Using the term 'saints' is not restricted to RC or RC based traditions. The LDS use of the term is certainly much different than the RC use as I understand it. All members of the LDS church are considered latter day 'saints'. To them it basically means a follower of Christ, or more specifically, the true doctrine of Christ.
To claim that being exposed to something is the same as being an offshoot of it is rather ludicrous in any case. You obviously have been exposed to RC to some extent, as you are referencing them. You show your exposure to Mormonism in the same light. Does that make what you think and believe in an offshoot of RC and LDS doctrines?
As for the difference in the version of the Bible, it just comes down to what it is claimed to be based off of. What it actually is based off of is a matter of faith. Maybe Joseph Smith did receive revelation, was basing things off of what he had seen in other religions, or was halucinating. Either way, the version definitely isn't the same as the one used in RC.
While I see your point that RC has influenced the Christian world in general, it doesn't mean that any specific aspect of RC has been adopted by any group of Christians, or even that to be Christian is to be an offshoot of RC. Jesus existed before RC (if you think he existed at all). Christians existed before RC. The writings in the New Testament existed before RC, and indeed other writings dealing with Jesus' life are out there that were not accepted by RC. Basing a religion off of these things is possible.
In short, RC != Christianity.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Pax Africanus
He more than made it acceptable. We both agree that he probably was not really Christian. But as any good(machiavellian) politician will do, he used it as an asset to consolidate his power. He even went so far as to persecute non-christians and christians from different sects. At the time, all christians did not have the same exact beliefs. Some did not believe in the old testament for example. They were persecuted.
My readings also tell me that constantine ruled the east and western empires. So his influence is on east+west=all of christianity.
The previous mormon comment was directed elsewhere. |
right
he persecuted christians from different sects
but some of those sects survived
that is why what you are saying is BS
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pax
|
|
Which sects would those be that have the same influence on christianity that catholocism does?the same influence or access to the bible, the calender, and world history?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Pax Africanus
Which sects would those be that have the same influence on christianity that catholocism does?the same influence or access to the bible, the calender, and world history? |
catholocism does have the most influence
but we can see the effects of Constantine by looking at churchs who were not effected by him and by studying history
he did not found modern christianity, like some people are currently implying or saying
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
my statement was that your opening post (especially "My question is would'nt this pervision of christianity make all christian religions corrupt and false religions?") was BS
since we now (and protestants in the past) had and have access to both preconstantine histories and churchs that he did not affect
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
and the bible is basically the same for them
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Verto

|
|
quote: Originally posted by Pax Africanus
If the mormons are worshipping the same Jesus of nazareth that was in the bible. If the mormons believe in the bible as a religous text then they are an offshoot of roman catholicism. |
The Roman Catholic Church did not author the books of the Old Testament, or the New Testament, nor compile them into a Bible.
quote: They accept a version that was given to Joseph Smith through revelation. That version is the original word that existed before Roman Catholicism. |
Our official version of the Bible is the King James Verson; the Joseph Smith Translation is placed in the footnotes, or for longer verses, placed in it's own section, with the Bible Dictionary and Index. The JST is not the official translation, since Joseph Smith was killed before he completed it.
quote: According to your statements the mormons believe in the same god that Jews, Christians, and muslims believe. Even if it is their belief that there version of religion is prior to the RC influence that does not make it tru. half the proof that there are exposed to RC is in there name. Later day SAINTS |
As someone mentioned, the Catholic Church did not create the term Saint, nor did it create Christianity. Therefore, your argument that any church based on Christ had to come from the Catholic Church is wrong.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Cruddy
|
|
It could be argued that all Christian forms of worship go back to St Paul, in the sense that he took it to the gentiles and made it OK for them to believe in Jesus.
Needless to say, the believers who had actually known Christ on earth were a bit miffed with him for enlarging the club.
Given the historical obliteration of the Jews that Believed Jesus was the Messiah, he did the right thing...
...or was that the Nestorian heresy? Are their still Christians today who insist that circumcision ("the Covenant with God") is necessary to be a Christian?
Last edited by Cruddy on 05-05-2004 at 18:39
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote: Originally posted by East Street Trader
That is one of the things which put me off Christianity.
I very much like and admire the Christian ethic and I am inspired by the story of Jesus. But I cannot help thinking that a God who creates the universe for the purpose of peopling a part of it with thinking, feeling creatures of whom he demands love is rather pathetic.
When He goes on to give these people free will but to judge them harshly if they fail to employ it to elect to love Him he is acting in a way which seems downright petulant.
I certainly can't reconcile this with a perfect being. Wanting the love of his creation demonstrates an unmet need.
I just finished "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time" (a good read) and the parents (of an autistic child) in that make no demand on their son that he love them. Nor do they judge him for being unable to do so. And I would think pretty ill of them if they made any such demand.
Of course if I had faith I would just say to myself that it is not surprising to find that God cannot be understood by thinking of Him as a though he is a human being. Lacking faith, though, I am put off a God who acts in a way I would think naff if I did it myself. |
I see what you're saying, and understand why you would feel that way given the limited information about God that Christianity has to offer.
Here is what I believe:
The problem with Christianity is that it's too simplified. Christianity says that either you do God's will or BAM! - eternal suffering. Conversely if you do do God's will BAM! - eternal bliss.
Our spiritual journey towards God does not end with mortal death. There is a lot more for us to learn before we can even stand in God's presence. A spiritual career so fulfilling that we can't even begin to imagine awaits us. God's creation consists of a lot more than just heaven and earth. As we ascend and grow through the ages we get to experience an enormous range of God's creation.
Our best concept of God is that of a loving Father. You're right to be put off by a concept of a God who acts in a way that you would think naff if you acted that way yourself. Would a loving Father ever condemn one of his children to eternal suffering? Of course not! God gives us many many opportunities to redeem ourselves when we fail him. God doesn't punish us, we effectively punish ourselves when we stray from the plan he has for us because we miss out on so many good things. It's not that God makes selfish demands of us - he gives us fantastic opportunities, and it's up to us to decide if we wish to take advantage of those opportunities.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Jamski
There are no churchs that were not affected by him.
-Jam |
by affected I meant ones he influenced (like the RC), not the ones he persecuted
if you mean otherwise you are talking BS
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Caligastia
The problem with Christianity is that it's too simplified. Christianity says that either you do God's will or BAM! - eternal suffering. Conversely if you do do God's will BAM! - eternal bliss.
|
no it doesn't
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
East Street Trader
|
 |
London, United Kingdom
Jun 2000 time: 05:35
|
|
Thank you for that, Caligastia.
I will chew on what you say.
Last edited by East Street Trader on 05-05-2004 at 19:38
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Jon Miller
no it doesn't
|
Yes it does.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
nope
there were other churchs which had already split off
I was not refering to the Orthodox/Catholic split
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35. Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|