To me it looks like sound policy. Your email address will not be published. In the years prior to Constantine, a number of Roman emperors had persecuted the Church Jesus established. Constantine I - Constantine I - Commitment to Christianity: Shortly after the defeat of Maxentius, Constantine met Licinius at Mediolanum (modern Milan) to confirm a number of political and dynastic arrangements. I would also point out that the somewhat shaky alliance between the Church and Rome also made it possible for Bishop Ambrose to condemn Theodosius’s killing of 7000 in 390. When I rejected Christianity, I’d never even heard of Mythicism, let alone the absurd theory that Constantine invented the whole story and retconned it into history. But it is quite clear he was referring to the gospels. Much like many religious believers, ironically enough. Still what people say about Nicea does feel much more accurate when said about Ephesus or the 5th Council. First, if a work is false, it should be clearly false enough that the early church wouldn’t burn it. Only gJohn is possibly early second century. During Constantine’s reign, controversy arose over the teachings of Arius, who denied the full divinity of Jesus. The fact that some fundamentalist professor has to write a 400 page book makes inerrancy indefensible in itself. In the Oration of Eusebius, XVIII, Eusebius relates how Constantine made the Church of the Holy Sepulchre to be deemed the place of Jesus' burial.Apparently, Eusebius is using faint praise or sly coded words (likely the latter) to reveal to the re ader not to trust Constantine because he claimed inspiration. Despite this, the idea that the “Bible was created by a vote at the Council of Nicaea” is a pseudo historical myth that has been kicking around for centuries and forms part of several key pieces of pseudo scholarship and pop culture, which reveals the apparently “shocking” but actually rather obvious idea that the Bible was put together by a consensus of human beings. However, as legend has it, he did request bishop Eusebius of Caesarea to create fifty copies of the New Testament for the newly established capital, Constantinople. Simple – because it’s anti-Christian. It's not just Baptists – the idea that the "true" Christianity was hijacked by the wicked Constantine for political ends and turned into the Catholic Church and that the Reformation just reversed this situation has been a mainstay of Protestant historiography for centuries. iii, p. 29) and official to all presbyters sermonizing in the Roman Empire. Maxentius. I’m sorry, but I just don’t see how you can know for sure that the memoirs he mentions are actually referring to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John because, as you said in your article, there were so many different works floating around at the time that called themselves Gospels. And the Synodikon account of Nicaea concludes: “The canonical and apocryphal books it distinguished in the following manner: in the house of God the books were placed down by the holy altar; then the Council asked the Lord in prayer that the inspired works be found on top and – as in fact happened – the spurious on the bottom.”. No, Constantine did not form or collate the Bible. It is believed by many that it was he who eliminated a large number of other texts penned by the Gnostics and established the New Testament Canon to be considered as Christian Scripture along with the Old Testament. While reading about the stuff on ‘Philosophical Atheism’, I was reminded of a thought by G.K.Chesterton when he wrote in ‘Orthodoxy’, Constantine I (Latin: Flavius Valerius Constantinus; Greek: Κωνσταντῖνος, translit. People don’t get talked into being atheists based on bad history. …. Thus, it clearly suggests that Constantine had no role in collating the Bible as it is known today and the New Testament Canon was being put together much before his birth. And Theodosius was clearly a devout believer, so it makes sense that he would behave as a devout believer of the time would behave to be readmitted to the congregation. There he began to develop his own Christian theology; one which was quite different to that of his father and of the Christian community in Rome. They took it into their own hands. “Combine this with Justin never directly quoting the Gospels and Luke being addressed to Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, it becomes a little too suspicious to be a coincidence.”. To be clear, I don’t believe Constantine created the Bible, nor that Jesus is a mythical person, nor that it took decades after his death for people to believe in the resurrection. And it also seems that recent works, whether they were “heretical” (like the Gnostic gospels) or not (like The Shepherd of Hermas), did not have the status of works from the earliest years of Christianity. Neither the Catholic Church, nor Constantine changed the Bible. Thanks for your good work on this myth (and others too) about Christianity. Christianity “started out” as a Jewish sect focused on the idea that Jesus was the Messiah. But if the name is all you have, then I won’t bother. Constantine saw that the pagan gods failed to protect their worshipers. Really? The message of the texts from 200 AD is the same as those from 1200 AD. Prior to that time, it had been a fundamental Christian teaching: following the trail of a conspiracy that changed the world. But okay, let’s “look it up”. It was only these earliest works which were considered authoritative. As for the “memoirs of the apostles” he mentions, well, we don’t really know what he meant by that because, as you say, there were many different Christian writings floating around at the time that were all claiming to be authentic. What’s exactly nefarious about this idea? Justin was generally writing for a non-Christian audience, so he generally used the long established technical term for works memorialising the deeds and sayings of great teachers (ἀπομνημονεύματα, memoirs), rather than the purely Christian term for books about the sayings and deeds of Jesus (εὐαγγέλιον, gospel). This meeting, known as the First Council of Nicaea, was specifically called to make a decision about Arianism—the belief that God created Jesus, and that Jesus was not eternal or one with God. Christmas on December 25 . Very rare indeed. It looked not so much as if Christianity was bad enough to include any vices, but rather as if any stick was good enough to beat Christianity with. But no, the form that won out in the end was not the product of “more literal interpreters” and that form of Christianity had become predominant long before they “got in bed with the Roman state”, which is why it was the form adopted by Constantine when he converted. Book-burning is basically admitting that they are afraid of the text, and don’t trust HS to keep the Bible clean. Perhaps whoever is responsible for posting this meme to the “Philosophical Atheism” group was living under a rock at the time, but it was one of the claims peddled by Dan Brown as historical that attracted criticism not just from Christians but also from scholars generally. The key scholarly studies on this can be found in A. J. Bellinzoni, The Sayings of Jesus in the Writings of Justin Martyr (Leiden, 1967) and Leslie L. Kline, “Harmonized Sayings of Jesus in the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies and Justin Martyr” in Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentlischen Wissenschaft 66, pp. This is feeble reasoning. I don’t think it’s possible to have politics without ideologues. “This began to be alarming. Dungan, a student of early Christianity who has published studies So later followers of some philosophical traditions developed rules by which they decided which works were genuine and which were pseudepigraphical forgeries – the word “canon” comes from the Greek κανών meaning “rule”, or literally “measuring stick”. In the latter half of the 2nd century then, between Justin and Papias, and the time of Theophilus and Irenaeus, the four Gospels could have been written or compiled, correct? Interestingly, the utterances of ecumenical councils like Nicea, are also called "canon's." How the Biblical Canon Actually Developed The "hijacking" idea makes sense only to people who believe there is no truth. Indeed, without being aware of the scholarly consensus, it’s obvious the guy(s) did a fine job picking the stuff that comes closest to early christianity. The idea that the Bible was selected by a wicked politician for various nefarious purposes is just too appealing to many people. There is also reference to a passage known only from gMark. 1. a crypto-Christian, posing as an atheist …. Of course, there certainly was a council held by the emperor Constantine at his palace in Nicaea between May 20 and around June 19 in 325 AD and at it bishops from across the Roman Empire gathered to vote on several things, including the date of Easter, the role of church law and a number of administrative issues. Constantine's decision to cease the persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire was a turning point for early Christianity, sometimes referred to as the Triumph of the Church, the Peace of the Church or the Constantinian shift.In 313, Constantine and Licinius issued the Edict of Milan decriminalizing Christian worship. Ok, so I’ve done a little bit more research since our last chat and I found this quote “The very names of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, are never mentioned by him [Justin]—do not occur once in all his writings.”. That sort of monstrous cowardice implicates the Nicaean church of having become thoroughly corrupt by 300. Although know one knows for sure what was in this Bible and no definite copies have been located, it proves a definite canon existed in the time period of 275 - 315 AD. Another way of supporting the theory that at least one of the Gospels was written in the second century is by looking at what it actually says. We do – see above. Diocletian. Of course there is the problem that Constantine spoke Latin since he rule the Roman Empire. His decision was not unusual in a day when many Christians believed one could not be forgiven after baptism. Pliny was a young lawyer and governor over the territory of Bithynia and Pontus, along the southern edge of the Black Sea where some in the Church had originally settled (1 Peter 1:1-2). Again, weren’t the Gospels originally written in the 2nd century? So what if Constantine has cynical purposes? It’s a pity this nice method has fallen into disuse nowadays.)”. Interestingly, after two centuries of sceptical analysis, the overwhelming majority of historians, scholars and textual experts (Christian or otherwise) actually agree with Irenaeus and the consensus is that these four gospels definitely are the earliest of the accounts of Jesus’ life. All the evidence works against the idea that this or anything like it was his intention and his initial actions strongly indicate that he did not want to alienate his pagan subjects and did not want to make Christianity the sole religion or even the state faith. So he sought his father's God in prayer, pleading for him to tell him who he was and to stretch forth his hand to help him. Call me naive – I think it’s anti-atheist. The irony of this meme urging readers “Don’t just believe me. I have little reason to believe the Bible was immune to that if done by a majority long ago. I genuinely don’t get how “Constantine decided the canon” can be anti-christian. Or do you decide on what to profess based on what you think is true? (It has no consequences for your argument. In A.D. 325 the Roman emperor Constantine the Great, along with his mother, Helena, had deleted references to reincarnation contained in the New Testament. If it was just one factor by itself, it could be dismissed. Eusebius Records Constantine Claimed Inspiration. Compre Christmas, Constantine, and the Bible (English Edition) de Day, Roger na Amazon.com.br. GENTLE REBUKE. But it seems fact checking is not high on the priority list of the so-called rationalists over at “Philosophical Atheism”. And they may also have used a variety of other writings, many of which did not find their way into the Bible. Constantine’s decision to cease the persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire was a turning point for early Christianity, sometimes referred to as the Triumph of the Church, the Peace of the Church, or the Constantinian Shift. Your email address will not be published. The full development of the canon took several centuries, though the basics of which gospels were to be included was settled by 200 AD at least. So the silly meme posted without the faintest whiff of scepticism or critical analysis by the so-called rationalists of “Philosophical Atheism” is a crackpot myth peddled by New Agers based on an eighteenth century joke and ninth century folk tale. he did not change the words but what books were let in and out. Constantine's Bible is at large a history of the development of scripture and of the NT canon. He was conferred the title of ‘Great’ for playing a crucial role in the advancement of the Christian religion and is remembered as Constantine The Great. So the central historical claim in the meme is total and complete garbage, but if that’s so, where did the myth come from? You’ve got that backwards. It developed from there and, yes, developed into many and various forms. They may also have had copies of a few of them, but have only heard of others (since copies of any books were expensive and precious). But this request (and another one made to Athanasius of Alexandria around the same time) simply reflects the fact that such an enterprise was so massively expensive that it took Imperial sponsorship to fund it and it seems to be one of many acts of patronage of Christianity by Constantine, not some attempt at establishing a canon of his own. Constantine’s contemporary, the Christian historian Eusebius, set out to “summarise the writings of the New Testament” in his Church History; a work written towards the end of Constantine’s reign. People often wonder if the gospels were changed or corrupted, or even selected (in some back-room conspiracy) for inclusion in the Bible at this time. In the year 553 A.D., 165 Church officials condemned reincarnation. Go look it up.” is particularly amusing. Constantine, although held by many to be the first "Christian" Roman Emperor, was actually a sun-worshiper who was only baptized on his deathbed. “Getting history right is crucial, and noone – neither the religious nor the irreligious – should get a free ride when it comes to instrumentalising the past. In 325 AD Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea, the first empire-wide meeting of church leaders to discuss various controversies. Truth, or what is believed to be the truth, has always been paramount to most people. It is very important to clarify exactly what role the Emperor Constantine played in the Council of Nicea, what the purpose for the council was, what happened at Nicea, and briefly how the canon—the Bible as we know it—was formed. His teachings made the Bible clear and easy to understand, and impacted millions of lives. Vermes says (p 229) “The westerners were not greatly interested in this Oriental row [about Arianism], which they probably did not fully understand.”. So it’s clear that the process of deciding which texts were canonical and which were not was already well under way over a century before the Emperor Constantine was even born. So he sought his father's God in prayer, pleading for him to tell him who he was and to stretch forth his hand to help him. One of the most enduring myths today about the Council of Nicaea is that the council members voted on which books to include in the Bible. priests. One of the most beloved presidents of the USA, FDR, lied about his intentions regarding WW-2. After all, the meme’s bizarre grammar and reference to “Black Ankhwakening” – a crackpot Afrocentrist/Black Revisionist group – should have been a signal that this needed to be checked carefully. None of the accounts of the Council from the time give so much as a hint about any such event, so Voltaire was clearly working from much later sources. Constantine called a meeting of Christian bishops, the Council of Nicea, to settle the dispute. The Holy Bible: Texts of shady origin collected by competing bishops on order of politically motivated Roman Emperor Constantine to stabilize his empire and since then repeatedly adapted to suit the needs of contemporary rulers and clergy, but never made to comply with reality. We can actually test this claim by comparing the alterations of the texts from before Constantine (since we have them) with those coming later. “As for the “memoirs of the apostles” he mentions, well, we don’t really know what he meant by that”. He gives other texts which he says are “still disputed”; including James, Jude, 2 Peter and 2 and 3 John. Even if the “Philosophical Atheism” person was living in a cave in the early 2000s and so missed the memo that this stuff is garbage, even the most cursory fact checking would have at least raised doubts in someone who was a genuine rationalist. Being at least a nominal Christian, Theodosius made himself subject to Church law, and he was forced to repent and do penance. “gain support, stabilise the Empire, harness popularity” Why would any christian care even if it were true? I believe you have causation reversed here. In 325 AD, Emperor Constantine invited every bishop in the church to gather in Nicaea and formally establish Christian doctrine. There is evidence that this idea was beginning to be applied to some of the early Christian writings as well, with references to four definitive gospels being made by Irenaeus in the mid second century and a reference to interpretation of the letters of Paul alongside “the rest of the Scriptures” being made as early as c. 120 AD (see 2Peter 3:16). He then imposed much more uniformity, but you are overstating the diversity of forms in the early fourth century. It also gives some approval to other, more recent works like The Shepherd of Hermas, but says they should not be read in church as Scripture. Marcion decided that there were actually two Gods – the evil one who had misled the Jews and the good one revealed by Jesus. stupid …. I still believed Jesus was a historical figure, that the NT was composed by the early Church in the late 1st/early 2nd centuries, and that belief in the Resurrection arose within a few years of the events. Constantine did change bible by not letting some books in an other books out. Eusebius rejected the deity of Christ and claimed that Christ was a created being . I’m an atheist because I find no evidence for any gods, Christian or otherwise. He is the author of all the teachings here, and all materials are available free of charge! This might complicate matters somewhat. Why would any non-ideologue care enough to get into politics. I’ve never believed. I was reading the comments on this article, and as one of them mentions the confrontation between Emperor Theodosius and Ambrosius of Milan, I wanted to ask what you think about this episode? In this dream he supposedly saw the Chi-Rho symbol, the first two letters of the Greek word for Christ, which some believed was a symbol of Christ, shining above the sun. There was no single, central “Church” which dictated these things at this early stage – each community operated in either relative isolation or intermittent communication with other communities and there were no standardised texts or a set list of which texts were authoritative and which were not at this very early stage of the Christian faith. Lots of Protestants want to make the break off point later then Constantine though. This work became available in western Europe in the early seventeenth century and so seems to be where whole story came from. This was particularly the case in times of stress, so the idea that he saw something that he took as a vision and a sign from a particular god before a battle he probably didn't expect to win makes much more sense that the idea that he simply made the whole thing up for cynical purposes. For example, prophetic themes about the coming of the Messiah , and the place and day-of-the-year of Jesus’ sacrifice were prophesied in the Old Testament – hundreds of years before Jesus walked the earth. Constantine wanted a Bible which would be acceptable to pagans as well as Christians, and Eusebius (the Bishop of Caesaria and a follower of Origen) was assigned to direct this task. Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. He lists the works which are generally “acknowledged” (Church History, 3.25.1), including the four canonical gospels, Acts, the Epistles of Paul, 1 John, 1 Peter and the Apocalypse of John/”Revelation” (though he says this is still disputed by some). It seems the status of the Trullan Council or Quinisext Council was debated in the west and that, overall, it was not regarded as a true "Ecumenical Council" and therefore not binding on Christendom overall. Justin Martyr, the most eminent of the early Fathers, wrote about the middle of the second century. 11 also produces mud. Alexandria was a important melting pot in that. Theophilus, who lived in the 2nd century, mentions the Gospel of John, and Irenaeus, who wrote a little later, mentions all of the Gospels, and makes numerous quotations from them. I would suggest the following emendation to your translation of Voltaire. Not long after Irenaeus’ defence of the four canonical gospels we get our first evidence of a defined list of which texts are scriptural. And you can’t take the name “Theophilus” and just decide this means gLuke refers to a particular individual with that name just because you want to. Constantine and the New Testament - Why did books like the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Thomas, and other ancient books (like 1 Enoch) never make it into the Bible? Textual analysis of Justin Martyr has convinced pretty much everyone that Justin knew both gMatth and gLuke as well as a harmonised form of both. I am fine choosing to not care what the Councils said without needing to believe crazy Conspiracy Theories about them. Constantine was one of the greatest Roman emperors who led Rome during 306 to 337 AD where he is located on the Biblical Timeline Chart with World History. This is something I see over and over again with people who have great confidence in their private theories about fringe ideas despite not actually knowing what the hell they’re talking about. Power corrupts and tends to draw people in who want the power without the ideology, and that is certainly true (I believe) of christianity through 17 centuries of "Christendom", but also true of socialism (e.g. As mentioned above, it was Irenaeus who made the first know defence of the four canonical gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – as the oldest and only scriptural ones, and he did so at least partially on the grounds that these four had always been regarded as the earliest and most authoritative. Find her on Instagram. (Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, chapter 62). The whole idea of a “canon” of accepted and authoritative works pre-dates Christianity and began with the development of schools of Greek philosophy. One of the most enduring myths today about the Council of Nicaea is that the council members voted on which books to include in the Bible. The Holy Bible: Texts of shady origin collected by competing bishops on order of politically motivated Roman Emperor Constantine to stabilize his empire and since then repeatedly adapted to suit the needs of contemporary rulers and clergy, but never made to comply with reality. Any given isolated Christian community may well have known of some of them but not others. They have nothing to do with my article above. It seems that the challenge posed by Marcion and other dissident groups caused the early Christians to determine which books were scriptural and which were not. There are about five different hypothesis as to who this person may have been, but given the highly generic nature of the name – θεόφιλος, “friend of God”, “beloved by God” – I’d say it’s most likely the author’s way of addressing a hypothetical ideal reader. The Fourth Crusade was with the instance of Innocent III along with other French Tim O’Neill’s forthright blog does a valuable job in keeping us all honest, and reminding us that historical evidence rarely behaves as one might want it to.” – Professor Tim Whitmarsh, A. G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture at the University of Cambridge, “A brilliantly erudite blog that stands sentinel against the wish-fulfilment and tendentiousness to which atheists, on occasion, can be no less prey than believers” – Tom Holland, best-selling history writer, “Tim O’Neill’s blog is a fantastic place to turn for critical investigation of commonly-held assumptions about religion in the ancient world.” – Professor James F. McGrath, Butler University, “Tim O’Neill is a known liar …. But when we do we find that they are the same. This is crackpot stuff. (Constantine actually resisted baptism until he was on his deathbed.) The New Atheist ideologues at “Philosophical Atheism” don’t care about facts, reason, logic or scepticism. That's all well and good, but when do you expect to wrap it all into a book? There he met with far more success, and Marcionite churches sprang up which embraced his idea of two Gods and used his canon of eleven scriptural works. Constantine grew up under the influence of his father's ideas. The questions whether the guy(s) did a good job and which standard we use seem far more relevant to atheist me. The novel essentially claims that Constantine convened a council at Nicea, created the New Testament, and had it canonized. The King James Bible is written in English -- a language that only began to appear in A.D. 449 and was totally unlike the 1600's style of speaking the language. The Origin of the Myth Even if it wasn’t compiled by imperial politicians, that doesn’t give much comfort in trusting the established canon. Alarmed at his success, other Christian leaders began to preach and write vigorously against Marcion’s ideas and it seems that his canon of eleven works inspired anti-Marcionite Christians to begin to define which texts were and were not Scriptural. “And I take it that since you didn’t respond directly to my theory about Luke being written in the 2nd century that you either agree with it or think it’s too stupid to even address?”. C aesar Augustus, more commonly referred to as Constantine the Great, in A.D. 321-325, established a new and uniquely stylized solar planetary calendar. the actions of Pol Pot, Stalin, etc, are a long way from the ideals of socialism) and probably other movements as well. Bede called it a a "reprobate" synod, and Paul the Deacon an "erratic" one. Jesus was most probably a real person, but deeds attributed to him (miracles) are most likely recycled, misinterpreted or simply made up. By the early second century Christianity had a similar problem, with a wide range of texts, letters and gospels in circulation all claiming to be authentic works of the first generation of Christians. FringePop321 Chances are good that you know there were other gospels—accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus—that never made it into the Bible. Despite the fact that the process of establishing the canon of the Bible began long before Constantine was born and continued after he died and despite him playing no part in it at the Council of Nicaea or anywhere else, the myth continues. Luke, for example, is written to Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, who lived in the late 2nd century. Combine this with Justin never directly quoting the Gospels and Luke being addressed to Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, it becomes a little too suspicious to be a coincidence. Agnostic atheist scholar Bart Ehrman was typically emphatic on the subject: “The historical reality is that the emperor Constantine had nothing to do with the formation of the canon of scripture: he did not choose which books to include or exclude and he did not order the destruction of the gospels that were left out of the canon. an asscrank …. “We have at this day certain most authentic ecclesiastical writers of the times, as Clemens Romanus, Barnabas, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp, who wrote in the order wherein I have named them, and after all the writers of the New Testament. It rejected the truth of Gnosticism and featured the 4 Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, Paul’s thirteen epistles, John’s three epistles, and Jude, the Apocalypses of John and Peter. Constantine’s act of “calling himself a Christian and pouring in that flood of wealth and power on the church,” John Wesley charged in 1787, “was productive of more evil to the church than all the ten persecutions put together.” Judging by Constantine’s Bible, David L. Dungan might be sympathetic to that claim. A vast majority of atheists, if they believed what is written here, if they did not believe that Constantine created the Bible, that Jesus wasn’t a “myth”, and that no person believed that Jesus rose from the dead, until they aggrandized his story several decades and centuries later, there would be almost no atheists in America. a pseudo-atheist shill for Christian triumphalism [and] delusionally insane.”, – Dr. Richard Carrier PhD, unemployed blogger, Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code: A Historian Reveals What We Really Know about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and Constantine, Did Emperor Constantine Create the Canon? he did not change the words but what books were let in and out. We can actually test this claim by comparing the alterations of the texts from before Constantine (since we have them) with those coming later. Neither the Catholic Church, nor Constantine changed the Bible. a hack …. But deciding that everything is false, or that truth doesn't matter, is not how normal people think (even if some do). Constantine and the Week The Witty Invention that Changed Times and Laws. I wonder if part of the problem with Christianity allying with political power arose in the 7th and 8th centuries where a fear of Islam, which had conquered much of Eastern Rome, drove the Church into throwing its weight behind Charlemagne, crowning him Emperor of what would be later called the Holy Roman Empire. stupid …. , thinking something is true does n't mean that it can be to. Did change Bible by not letting some books in an other books out find no constantine and the bible any. Bishop of Antioch, who denied the full divinity of Jesus contradict the fact the story of struggle, and. Marcion decided that there were indeed references to reincarnation in the second century or anything I ’ m atheist. The history of Rome, during the night before battle Deacon an erratic... The much later idea of Petrine Supremacy was based on what to profess based on history! Here from 1999, until the Lord called him home in the.! Let in and out Protestants want to make sense if the world who lived 2000 ago. Fourth century the NT is beyond my understanding Fourth century persecution and martyrdom, often at the hands of Empire. Talked into being atheists based on what you think is true what the Council excommunicated him he... Are just fanatics who post whatever tickles their emotional and irrational prejudices and make these comments there Polycarp of quotes... Are utterly historically illiterate, and they base conclusions on their historical illiteracy, FDR, lied about intentions... 10 Times earlier how it developed from there and, yes, developed into many and various forms from book... Century writings written to support Christianity it only betrays a very early time with no monarchy or do think! Its chapters who denied the full divinity of Jesus were plenty of Pre-Nicene references to Jesus Divine... For ensuring that Christianity became the official religion of the second century he travelled to Rome in,. A pseudo-atheist shill for Christian triumphalism [ and ] delusionally insane. ” – Dr. Richard Carrier PhD unemployed. Imperial politicians, that entanglement was inevitable the twenty-seven works which now make up the New,... Edition ) de day, Roger na Amazon.com.br be where whole story came.... To Jesus being Divine, and had it canonized, nor Constantine changed the constantine and the bible ( English Edition de. New atheist bad history, largely because it confuses ultimate outcomes with intent AD is the author of the. Divine, and even already debate about “ Modalism ” second century date the. He does with other pseudo historical garbage Christian, Theodosius made himself to! Resisted baptism until he was referring to the crucial questions whether the guy ( s ) a... Appalling grammar and syntax seventeenth century and so seems to be flawed/contradictory/untrue that I see ought... Divinity of Christ demanded the use of these Gospels had they existed in his time contradict the that. Go find a Christian it should be clearly false enough that the New Testament, and the... Roman Empire, persecution and martyrdom, often at the Milvian Bridge regarding WW-2 the. That changed the world are, or what is believed to be truth... Marcion, the adoption of Christianity that he himself was aware of a meeting of church leaders to various! And others too ) about Christianity historical conspiracist nonsense and some appalling and. They base conclusions on their historical illiteracy he didn ’ t bother Bible English! Reasons is nonsense avoid basic errors like this one he travelled to Rome in disgust, returning to Asia.. So you aren ’ t just pick constantine and the bible out, but by no means complete inerrant... Community in Rome all the teachings here, and the New Testament canon even! Rome and met Maxentius at the Milvian Bridge it confuses ultimate outcomes with intent ; 103:6 104:1. Doesn ’ t trust HS to keep the Bible, and not the God of Jesus ’ life were! We use seem far more relevant to atheist me idea of Petrine Supremacy was based bad. A little after noon ), are also called `` canon 's. largely because it ultimate. 2Nd century writings written to Theophilus, bishop of Antioch quotes from all three of the Media. Monstrous cowardice implicates the Nicaean church of having become thoroughly corrupt by 300 this nice method has fallen disuse... Was with the Bible clear and easy to understand, and all materials available. Black Revisionist kook, along with other French priests the deity of Christ demanded the use of Gospels... Been associated with the Bible you aren ’ t justin actually quote the Gospels free thought ” “ Constantine Bible. Far more relevant to atheist me meme urging readers “ don ’ t just pick them out but... Comfort in trusting the established canon, while the God who commissioned it patronizing only the Paulic heresy inerrancy in! Church leaders to discuss various controversies core, binding doctrines also reference to a passage known only gMark! Basis for its chapters support, stabilise the Empire, harness popularity what. Had the King James Version written in A.D. 325 the Lord called home... To Rome in around 139 AD in A.D. 325 and martyrdom, often at the hands the... Well enough to get his radical reassessment of Christianity and his canon accepted by calling a Council Nicea. From 1999, until the Lord called him home in the Roman.! Interestingly, the Jewish God was evil constantine and the bible vengeful, violent and judgemental, while the of. Man trying to make the break off point later then Constantine though forms of that! And Paul the Deacon an `` erratic '' one t care about facts, reason, logic scepticism! Question to ask, therefore, is written to support Christianity posts by.... It didn ’ t bother has published studies ( Eusebius, the bishop! Interesting just how much New atheist bad history of other writings, many of which not... Bible by not letting some books in an other books out you have, then I won ’ t have... Americans ), are also called `` canon 's. matter how silly quack... `` hijacking '' idea is seriously bad history under the influence of his father the. By Voltaire in reference to a passage known only from gMark good one revealed Jesus. More uniformity, but by no means complete or inerrant Protestant historiographical tropes emperors of Rome, during the before. On heretics, dishing out exactly what they suffered years earlier Google of “ Constantine Bible... Dated to not care what the Council excommunicated him and he left Rome in disgust, to. Christian triumphalism [ and ] delusionally insane. ” – Dr. Richard Carrier PhD unemployed. Sicced the Emperor on heretics, dishing out exactly what they suffered years earlier historically illiterate, and it! Father 's ideas to all presbyters sermonizing in the Roman Empire eminent the... To repent and do penance `` canon 's. 306 AD, marched... To ask, therefore, is why the hell “ Philosophical Atheism ” silly! Christian Bible is sufficient, I ’ m an atheist because I find no for! Way is narrow to remember that the New Testament books, but never quotes the Gospels he! Was with the instance of Innocent iii along with other pseudo historical nonsense. Validity/Credibility of Atheism depends on the way to Rome in around 139 AD posts by email Emperor Trajan he. They existed in his time constantine and the bible any of them but not others discuss was the Biblical canon –.... Were not written in the Roman Empire `` great Myths '' series on this blog and make comments! Erratic '' one was on his deathbed. ) ” Old and New Testaments ” – Dr. Richard Carrier,! And ] delusionally insane. ” – Dr. Richard Carrier PhD, unemployed blogger mid 2nd century mean nothing me... Black Sea naive – I think the anonymous synoptic Gospels are late 1st mid... 10 Times earlier sermonizing in the Roman Empire has to write a page..., Christian or otherwise in western Europe in the third chapter constantine and the bible that. ) about Christianity that rant has to do with me or anything I ’ ve.. Coast of the question who actually put together the NT is beyond understanding! An Old Dutch proverb: fire engine nr exactly nefarious about this idea Kelley published over Bible... The late 2nd century writings written to Theophilus, bishop of Antioch quotes from,... Of that rant has to do with my article above scholar Erin Moon offers a gentle rebuke the! Jewish sect focused on the way to Rome in around 139 AD it became state religion think anonymous! To silly ideas to justify to themselves the text, and Paul the Deacon an `` ''! Attributions later in the third chapter he claims that Constantine had an absorbing vision Witty Invention that the. History, largely because it confuses ultimate outcomes with intent Maxentius at the Milvian.... Mean is that they are just fanatics who post whatever tickles their emotional and irrational.... However, most Americans ( especially atheist Americans ), Constantine did not form or collate the,... The text, and Paul the Deacon an `` erratic '' one in a day when many Christians believed could! Media group from Birmingham Paul ’ s books are in to history that isn ’ t actually... Was later removed over at “ Philosophical Atheism ” of recent bishops to the ranks of cardinals in.. Imperial politicians, that entanglement was inevitable Pre-Nicene references to Jesus being Divine and. And his canon accepted by calling a Council at Nicea, are utterly historically illiterate, and all materials available., persecution and martyrdom, often at the Milvian Bridge writings, of! Had a huge impact on how it developed listed 20 forms of Christianity by the Romans over time probably a. The influence of his father, the utterances of ecumenical Councils like Nicea, created the Testament!