759636 No.830732
Lets settle the most pressing question of our times, is the bible the mark of the beast? I found this couple a few months ago when they started purchasing YouTube ads, they seem to think that Constantine and King James distorted the bible, but they continually use the bible when talking about Christianity.
Lets talk about schizos and objectively mentally ill people you've encountered in the christian community.
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
85935d No.830733
>>830732
Anyone who uses the "Contantine" meme when it comes to the Bible or the Church doesn't know much about Constantine. He was barely a recognizable Christian and his influence on the Church is vastly overstated. He only opened the first Council and didn't even get baptized until near his death. If it was up to him, the results of that Council would have actually been different. He was friends with Arians - especially Eusebius. He didn't want them ousted. If this guy puppeteered the direction of the Church, then why did the choose opposite result that he wanted? It doesn't follow.
I partly blame Orthodox and Catholics for holding him up as they have, since it's only played into the fears of later generations of Protestants to overstate his importance. He needs to just be forgotten.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
759636 No.830734
winnie the pooh I meant to post another image uuuh, mods could you delete?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
012d07 No.830999
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
897f52 No.831465
If you're using the word schizo to define your beliefs you're larping
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c5e886 No.831476
>>830732
Why do Seventh day adventists, JWs, and those who parrot Alex Hislop keep pushing the 666=Sunday Worship meme?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
6e04e3 No.831484
>>830733
IIRC he is a Saint correct? If so I see no reason why we should "forget him" due to some dubious things he had done during his life. By making Christianity the official religion of the empire he most likely brought thousands of souls to salvation.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c45160 No.831485
>>830999
We've gone over this.
No, it's not.
>>831476
When all you have is a hammer…
Also, adventists and jehovists have a common origin in the russelites, so old pre-schism memes remain among them.
>>831484
It's just conspiracy christians that think bringing pagans via state encouragment didn't allow real OG "pure" christianity to survive.
But in that case, they should atleast make Theodosius the villain of the story, since he's the one that actually made Christianity the imperial religion(Constantine just made us non-illegal, judicially wise), merged Church and State, and banned freedom of religion.
But at most, he gets a mistaken reference from loony baptists, that think his anti-donatism law is about them.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d7b041 No.831511
>>831485
>(Constantine just made us non-illegal, judicially wise)
Wrong again my man, in 314 Constantine ruled who should be head over his church and in 316 Constantine himself sent Leontius and Ursacius to deprive of their churches anyone who didn't agree with his appointments over them, there is record some people were martyred in resistance. Some years later, the semi-Arian Constans his successor (r. 337-350) sent his legates Macarius and Paul with money to bribe churches into joining him, and when they refused the bribery there was a general slaughter against them where Donatus of Bagai was killed and his dead body thrown down a well.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c2c7af No.831523
>>830732
>>830999
>>831476
Most paranoid schizophrenics seem to be in agreement that the mark of the Beast is anything other than what John wrote about.
They say it's credit cards, vaccines, cell phones, Sunday worship, microchips; anything besides the name of the Beast.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
6d25e8 No.831524
>>830999
invisible ink tattoo doesn't imply rejection of god
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
aad3f7 No.831526
My reply to >>831465 and people like him which don't seem to realize it,
>>830732
>>830999
Both of those posts are laden with sarcasm. The first one obviously is(Drops the farce on the 2nd line, first line is just a demonstration of a schizo belief) , the second post is a joke.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
6e04e3 No.831529
>>831485
>anti-donatism law is about them.
Now that's some interesting stuff I haven't heard about. Is that part of the trail of blood theory that's seen a revival in some Baptist communities. I never looked into it, but it always seemed very wacky to me.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
1303a5 No.831535
>>831511
Outside the point i was making.
The edict of Thesalonica made us the official religion of the Empire, not the Edict of Milan, which just made us a recognized faith.
Constantine sponsoring bishops, and Donatus of Bagai ending up as relics the donatists venerated is another story.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d7b041 No.831540
>>831535
I'm glad you realize the accuracy of this history. Since you accept that the above events happened, that means Constantine really did effect the creation of the official religion. You may arbitrarily define it not to be that way, but the events say he did.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c45160 No.831572
>>831540
I don't care about your goalpost moving.
Theodosius was the guy that made christianity the official state religion.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d7b041 No.831573
>>831572
Since there's no dispute that the Roman legates were going around under Constantine's orders in 316 killing nonconformists, this shows that he was not tolerant of anything but his own faction. If it's only Constantine's faction that is spared of being dispossessed of churches and being killed by Roman legates then it is the truth that Constantine effected the creation of that state religion. Because going around actually killing people who disagree with church-leadership decisions of the Emperor is more than simple toleration. Killing people who disagree is not general toleration. Anyone can understand this. Killing whoever disagrees is not general toleration. Which is exactly the opposite of what you said, because You actually said he didn't ban freedom of religion. Yet within a year after the edict of Milan, he had banned it. So, this is completely refuting the central point of this post, even if you arbitrarily define it otherwise. Nobody cares about the definitions you have in your head, it's the facts that matter. You've simply not done your history research in this case.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c45160 No.831574
>>831573
I love how you use weasel words like "influenced" and "effect" to dance around my point, which is that he didn't LEGALLY PROCLAIM an official religion, but Theodosius did.
LEGALLY, what Milan did was make Christianity a religio licita, with the same recognition as the pagan ones, and that's what i was talking about, but your mental obsessions with state churches keeps you from reading contexts.
His ever-shifting relation with arians, cathorthodox, and donatists, is again, another story.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c45160 No.831575
>>831574
Or to put it in concrete terms, it's like me saying we didn't have a universal legal document declaring human rights until 1948, and you saying that the Bible and the Cyrus Cylinder influenced and effected it's creation.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
b705cc No.831576
Exgirlfriend told me she met a guy at her church after she moved who claims that God talks to him. She said he did some scummy things and was an alcoholic but found Jesus, fixed himself up and now talks to him as he kneels and prays to tears. He also told her she’s going to find her husband in the town so she should come to the church every Sunday, so God told him. She says she doesn’t exactly believe that stuff but is open to it. Not going to be him since he already has a wife he found after finding Jesus so he’s not talking about himself.
I don’t buy it and I fear he’s partially the reason she become my ex. Now still single. Haven’t talked to her for over a year so don’t know about her.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d7b041 No.831637
>>831574
Constantine legally proclaimed an official religion in 314 at the council of Arles, he began enforcing it in 316 by dispossessing people who were not there of their churches and property and martyring some. This effected the creation of a state church.
You have an artificial definition of a state church being required to have something called an "edict" in order to be created, but the fact is the official document that created it was the articles of the Council of Lateran 313 and Council of Arles 314, and these were not only academic decisions, Constantine moved to enforce it and actual people died in resistance to it in 316 and onward. Thus whoever didn't accept the state church was therefore outside of the official religion, even if they may have been following the word of God.
The word "effecting" is far stronger than the existence of a mere document. Many times a ruler will make some kind of declaration but not follow through on it. In this case, the outcome of Constantine's council of Arles was sealed in blood when he martyred other Christians. I am adding additional requirements to the evidence that he created a state church, he both declared it in 314 and he put it into effect in 316 and onward. I never used the word "influence" so you are outright lying about me now. I find it intellectually dishonest the kinds of accusations you are hurling now. You are incapable of defending your arbitrary mental definitions from reality.
>>831575
You can't say that all Constantine did was enact universal tolerance. The very next year he started building up a pro-Constantine faction and within three years he had begun to send enforcers out (imperial legates) to kill those who resisted his decisions. This predates Theodosius. The document which the official state religion is based on is the articles of the Council of Arles which Constantine arranged in 314 (I mentioned this in my first post). I have stronger evidence than just a document to prove that he carried his decisions out to full effect. Theodosius only followed in his footsteps. And Honorius even made it a capital crime to "re-baptize" as he called it, however he lost the power to enforce that law because the empire was collapsing.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c45160 No.831671
>>831637
Dude, Constantine and his successors until Theodosius both supported and gifted things, AND persecuted and confiscated things from arians, catorthodox and donatists.
Both "one faith, one empire" to "eh, everyone should just get along", happened, in many cases, with the same guy as emperor in both situations.
>You have an artificial definition of a state church being required to have something called an "edict" in order to be created
That's what official means.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d7b041 No.831684
>>831671
>That's what official means.
Oh, so because the Council of Arles wasn't later called by historians an "edict" that means it wasn't official? The fact various prohibitions were codified at that time against whoever the emperor deemed, should be ignored because of this?
Simply because the name of the document is not specifically called an "edict" by later historians?
>Both "one faith, one empire" to "eh, everyone should just get along", happened, in many cases, with the same guy as emperor in both situations.
And it still is to this very day and hour. Constantine is the prototype in every way for every other state-church ruler that ever lived after him. Except maybe the Armenians or some obscure thing that came before him which he may or may not have taken inspiration from.
The fact that he is only behaving tyrannical and killing people some of the time does not give any solace. It most likely indicates that the political winds happened to shift and start blowing a different way. Placed in a different situation, any state church ruler might decide to start the killings again or might be forced to stop. You still have falsehoods being enshrined by the state church which now acts tame after having carried out dishonorable massacres. The fact of the massacres does not go away.
The fact their presumed or supposed advantage (in this world) was gained by such does not go away.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
85935d No.831686
I'll grant Constantine credit for one decent thing: The Chi-Rho. He chose something to symbolize his worldly victory over the humility of the Cross. Now if only all churches like him followed suit. The less their stink gets away from the Cross, the better.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d7b041 No.831688
>>831686
You realize that a symbol means nothing if the person with it deviates from the doctrine of the church as laid down by the Lord and brought to us by his apostles?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c45160 No.831702
>>831684
>Oh, so because the Council of Arles wasn't later called by historians an "edict" that means it wasn't official?
Yeah, that's not how the roman legal system worked.
>The fact various prohibitions were codified at that time against whoever the emperor deemed, should be ignored because of this?
>The fact that he is only behaving tyrannical and killing people some of the time does not give any solace. It most likely indicates that the political winds happened to shift and start blowing a different way. Placed in a different situation, any state church ruler might decide to start the killings again or might be forced to stop.
The thing is, there was no THE state church or THE imperial faction until Theodosius.
Cathortodox, arians and donatists took turns being the ones that had the favour of the guy with the crown, or getting their teeth kicked in and their stuff taken away.
Or maybe all of them got state recognition and coexisted.
Or maybe 2 out of 3.
Depended on the year and place, really.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d7b041 No.831707
>>831702
>The thing is, there was no THE state church or THE imperial faction until Theodosius.
So you don't disagree then… you do admit that he had A state church then, but won't call it THE state church.
But now you're moving the goalposts. You said before that the only thing Constantine did was legalize toleration of Christianity and nothing else.
That might have been true but only for about five minutes. You fail to include an analysis of the rest of his acts which went far beyond. Then later tried to duck out of this by claiming that, according to you it wasn't the only official state church, and this justifies the deception.
But who actually defines that? People today? No. That's retroactive headcanon. You retroactively categorize people according to who has later been approved by future state churches. It was the current Emperor who actually defined who is in it. There was only one at a given time. You had to go through him to get into it, he deposed people at will. The emperor, or head of state, shuffled people in and out at will. The official Roman Catholic church was openly Arian for a number of years after the council of Ariminium. Just because some later people don't like that doesn't mean they can go back and change the fact. The state church has believed many false things, has had many false ideas pass through it. That's still the case today, where we have it claiming to be in agreement with Islam on worshipping the same (false) god as muslims do. That is entirely in keeping with the behavior of something that has fornicated with the kings of the earth.
So in conclusion you are only taking exception to the fact that there were rival state churches or factions at the time, But this is always true, in every era. There likely never will be unless Antichrist takes the reins.
Also, don't you think it is backwards to retroactively categorize people according to what the current state churches approve of? It is possible the people you currently think are approvable are eventually deemed incorrect and false pretenders by future generations. You have no way to know what might be viewed as a convenient reinterpretation for people of today's events, centuries from now. It likewise makes no sense to judge the distant past by popular standards of today, as if they already knew how history would end up being perceived.
The fact you think there was no such thing as an "imperial faction" in Imperial Rome really says enough in itself.
>Yeah, that's not how the roman legal system worked.
It doesn't matter how you think it worked. The people who he killed were not part of his state church, the people who he promoted were. Later state appointed bishops claimed continuity of office from them. Thus they were all legally and effectively created by Constantine the Great, by the monstrous elimination of their perceived rivals at his hand. Their problem however is that they have never succeeded at completely destroying the original church, nor prevailed against it. Neither have they succeeded at eliminating the received text of the word of God, despite far reaching efforts to do this.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
d7b041 No.831710
>>831707
So just to clarify, I don't even agree with your new position that there was only one state church after Theodosius and multiple ones before. Clearly that year wasn't the end of conflict, and nothing really changed. What stayed the same is that whoever was politically dominant decided who was inside or not, and people continued to reinterpret past events in order to suit their current situation. There were also multiple state churches both before and after the edict of Thessaolonica. One of which belonged to whoever you interpret as the legitimate emperor.
Of course the only consistent thing to do is to reject the undisputably immoral actions of the originator of all of this in A.D. 313– (who everyone is emulating)– and realize that none of it was legitimate.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
85935d No.831712
>>831688
It still holds much meaning. I don't know any cases where Chi-Rho is used in ignorance. Many using it seek or hold great worldly power and have never cared to imitate Christ or anything to do with a cross. While the innocent among them at least adore that power. It's a perfect symbol for the so called "state church" that the other anon is wisely warning about here.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
c45160 No.831729
>>831707
>So you don't disagree then… you do admit that he had A state church then, but won't call it THE state church.
No, i'm calling your entire logic absurd and wanting to conform to a narrative you like.
There's no state church or consistent plan to institute anything when it was a free-for-all of groups jostling for power among themselves.
Theodosius was, however, since he proclaimed the state had an official church and defined who was in the group(people that were in communion with Alexandria and Rome).
Everything else is just smoke.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
b2bda8 No.834622
Este libro habla sobre los comienzos de la Historia Cristiana en sus comienzos "Compendio de la Historia Cristiana" Audiolibro
https://invidio.us/IoqdUcMpF4Y (parte 1)
https://invidio.us/p031cd2dNUg (parte 2)
https://invidio.us/PsODIpIobPc
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.