Mary's appearence at fatima

[stevehut]

1- I thought the reason Constantine initiated the Council was so they would determine the canon and "oust" foreign teachings and "heresys"

2- I'd say the Council of Nicea,  regardless of who initiated it, were inspired by God and did a perfect job of determining the canon.

3- That's jmpo

1- Determining a sound doctrine, yes. But the settling of the canon was not the particular purpose of this meeting. The Creed served that purpose.

2- So you don't see any political motivation in Constantine's actions? Again, the settling of the canon was not the purpose of the Council.

3- No need to form any opinions here. History speaks for itself.

[ServingHim]

No need to form any opinions here. History speaks for itself.

isnt' THAT the truth!

[Guest charlie]

1- Determining a sound doctrine, yes. But the settling of the canon was not the particular purpose of this meeting. The Creed served that purpose.

Okay, so they settled sound doctrine. At which council did they decide upon the canon? I for one think The Creed is accurate.

2- So you don't see any political motivation in Constantine's actions? Again, the settling of the canon was not the purpose of the Council.

I didn't say he wasn't political. I just recently read a secular Roman history book on this copywrited 1944. There were a lot of heresies going around during that period of time and Constantine viewed it as a threat to his empire. He called a council and left it to them, the experts, to clear up and put an end to these heresies. He didn't tell them what to decide on, he just wanted them to decide which doctrine was true and state it clearly and uniformly so everyone would be following the same thing (made it easier on him as emperor). According to this history book even though he made Christianity the state religion and went along with the "approved" Christian doctrine he didn't *officially* convert and repent until he was on his deathbed. IMO people are too quick to criticize Constantine these days. He was political, no doubt about it, but he was also a believer.

3- No need to form any opinions here. History speaks for itself.

I agree.

Edited August 6, 2004 by charlie

[stevehut]

1- At which council did they decide upon the canon?

[Guest charlie]

2- Nope. What he did, was he halted the persecutions of Christians and made their religion legal. He didn't make it the official state religion.

Okay. That sounds right. Because I don't think they started punishing people who didn't practice Christianity, but Christians had been persecuted off and on depending on who was the emperor because they refused to worship the emperor along with Jesus. Rome didn't really prevent people from worshipping as they pleased as long as they also worshipped the emperor, as I recall.

3- Do you know why he did this? It amazed me when I found out a few years ago.

I just reread your post and I misunderstood what you were asking the first time around. Anyway, I don't know what you are referring to here. I thought he was preparing to meet God, like any of us would do on our deathbed.

[edited my answer to #3]

Edited August 6, 2004 by charlie

[stevehut]

3- Do you know why he did this? It amazed me when I found out a few years ago.

I thought he was preparing to meet God, like any of us would do on our deathbed.

According to Eusebius, a historian of that era:

Constantine believed that his baptism would bring about the remission of his sins. And if that was the case, then it would be impossible (in his own view) to be forgiven of any sins committed afterward.

During his own lifetime (up to his final days), he never had to repent of his sins. Never had to change his behavior to reflect his newfound belief. He could sin it up all he wanted, because he would be forgiven at the end.

It is impossible to know, with any certainty, the depth of Constantine's faith or the ultimate destiny of his soul. But with this kind of attitude, it gives me reasons for doubt.

[ServingHim]

are you saying he believed in once-saved-always-saved?

[Guest charlie]

Uh-oh, OSAS is what came to my mind too.

[stevehut]

are you saying he believed in once-saved-always-saved?

No, far from it (as far as I can tell).

Again, he didn't get saved until shortly before his death. So he didn't have much opportunity to sin thereafter. Which, as I said earlier, was precisely the point of delaying his baptism.

[Guest charlie]

I knew a guy that waited till he was 98. He was still in pretty good health but he died shortly afterward. Some of his buddies were joking around and said they knew George shouldn't have gotten baptized, the only reason God let him live so long was because he hadn't got saved yet.