|
Posted By
|
Message
|
JP
Registered
07/06/2003
Points
1338
|
18th April, 2004 at 04:37:33 -
joNickArt - wrong, he was not a Christian, if you read my original post I said "the official religion was sun worship, the cult of Sol Invictus, and Constantine was it's head priest."
Now, 300 years after Jesus' crucifixion, Christ's followers had multiplied to such a large number that it threatened to split Rome into two. So Constantine backed the winning horse.
Constantine was a LIFELONG pagan, who was baptized on his deathbed, to weak to protest.
Rick I could hardly believe that Christians were number one, but it is, and here are the numbers:
Christianity: 2 billion
Islam: 1.3 billion
Hinduism: 900 million
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 850 million
Buddhism: 360 million
Chinese traditional religion: 225 million
primal-indigenous: 150 million
African Traditional & Diasporic: 95 million
Sikhism: 23 million
Juche: 19 million
Spiritism: 14 million
Judaism: 14 million
Baha'i: 6 million
Jainism: 4 million
Shinto: 4 million
Cao Dai: 3 million
Tenrikyo: 2.4 million
Neo-Paganism: 1 million
Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand
Rastafarianism: 700 thousand
Scientology: 600 thousand
Zoroastrianism: 150 thousand
Ranked in order, from largest to smallest.
Steve Zissou: Anne-Marie, do all the interns get Glocks?
Anne-Marie: No, they have to share one.
|
Teapot
Does he even go here
Registered
02/10/2003
Points
2631
|
18th April, 2004 at 09:04:44 -
The whole Nicaea thing is wrong. Their were Christians before Conatantine. Christians in all countries were persecuted, unlike Jews. "So what?" you say, well this proves that the beliefs in Christ must have been of him as more than just a prophet, otherwise they would not have been persecuted.
So Constantine did not "invent" most of the new testament as we know it today.
Ok, most of that is questionable, theoretical and possibly hypothetical.
But what JP is missing is that the gospels were in fact written around 73AD (assuming Christ was born in 3AD, being the current "accurate figure"), which is long before 330 A.D, and clearly before the birth of Constantine in 306AD.
Of course, the one fatal flaw in this argument is the undisputed fact that the romans clearly had access to a time machine, and could have easily influenced the writing of the gospels.
n/a
|
Teapot
Does he even go here
Registered
02/10/2003
Points
2631
|
18th April, 2004 at 09:13:24 -
Though I usually don't associate with Satanists (or are you a "sa-tanist" they are different), Rick raises valid points. I am not insulting Rick or anything, I respect his beliefs and tolerate them, but I don't agree with them.
Also to note is a view of aetheists that things can simply BE. This is really scientifically irrational. When you have breakfast, and you pour your cereal, someone made that serial, someone in a factory. When you want a house, someone has to make it for you. When you drive your car, someone made your car.
When you live on the Earth, someone made the earth.
n/a
|
Grazzum - Scorpion E
Registered
25/10/2003
Points
918
|
18th April, 2004 at 11:18:47 -
Someone? I just associate the earth and the universe filled with a bunch of molecules, mostly Hydrogen. I still belive in God and all that, but I belive in half religious and half scientific
n/a
|
Pete Nattress
Cheesy Bits img src/uploads/sccheesegif
Registered
23/09/2002
Points
4811
|
18th April, 2004 at 11:46:20 -
i know scientifically minded christians can say things like "well, god made the big bang, and everything formed after that, so he did create us and the world". but, as an atheist, i can take that a step back and ask, who created god? where did he come from. and that's the proverbial end of the line. where did god come from?
www.thenatflap.co.uk
|
Mr Coffee
Registered
04/09/2003
Points
440
|
18th April, 2004 at 12:25:37 -
Questions like that are beyond human understanding in my opinion. The answer would be, God has always existed, nothing made him. If you ask someone who does not believe in God how the atoms which created the Big Bang came into being then they could not give you a good answer either. I don't think us humans will ever understand the answer to that question.
99 percent chance that the above post is 100 percent correct.
|
Grazzum - Scorpion E
Registered
25/10/2003
Points
918
|
18th April, 2004 at 12:29:02 -
a Headache is forming
n/a
|
Knudde (Shab)
Administrator
Crazy?
Registered
31/01/2003
Points
5125
     
|
18th April, 2004 at 12:39:42 -
I'm proud of you guys, this is what debates/discussions should be like.
Craps, I'm an old man!
|
Pete Nattress
Cheesy Bits img src/uploads/sccheesegif
Registered
23/09/2002
Points
4811
|
18th April, 2004 at 13:09:41 -
i agree mr coffee. there are some things that we will never know, much as we'd like.
and anyway, ignorance may be bliss.
www.thenatflap.co.uk
|
JP
Registered
07/06/2003
Points
1338
|
18th April, 2004 at 14:53:21 -
I wish I didn't have to explain things over and over again. As I said before, Constantine commissioned and financed a new bible, and omitted gospels that spoke of him as a mortal, then embellished the gospels that made him godlike.
God, now I have to review some more for you Teapot:
"Their were Christians before Constantine"
Of course there were Christians before Constantine, and there were Christians in Rome being persecuted BEFORE Constantine. Here is a timeline for you:
303 AD Diocletian forbade Christian worship.
306 AD Constantine I became the emperor of the western provinces
313 AD Constantine and Licinius, the emperor in the East granted freedom of worship to the Christians.
"So Constantine did not 'invent' most of the new testament as we know it today."
He did indeed, refer back to the Council of Nicaea. But here, I will outline it for you:
During the transmogrification:
Egyptian Sun Disks became: Halos
Isis nursing Horus became: Mary nursing Jesus
Mithras, born on December 25, died, buried in a rock tomb, then resurrected in THREE days.
Also born on December 25th: Osiris, Adonis, and Dionysus.
Even Christian worship was moved, Constantine shifted it to coincide with the pagan's veneration day of the sun, or Sunday.
As you can see the bible already starts to fall apart there, you don't go to Church on Sunday because that is when God rested.
Ok Teapot, there you go. Everything I have said is backed by dates and facts.
Steve Zissou: Anne-Marie, do all the interns get Glocks?
Anne-Marie: No, they have to share one.
|
Nick of All Trades
Possibly Insane 
Registered
03/09/2002
Points
2312
|
18th April, 2004 at 15:14:26 -
He was too christians, but you might be right about that baptiseing thingy.
Are you familiar withg the expression "In hoc signo vince"? It's latin and means "In this sign we shall win". It was Constantine, yes Constantine the Great who said it once before a battle.
According to a nation- fameos TV documentary I saw once about Swedish pre- history, the handle of the crusader's sword was carved with just this text. Why would the ones which fought for God carry a weapon wearing a sentence a Solgod priest once said?
Plus, the sign Constantine saw was a cross in the sky.
n/a
|
JP
Registered
07/06/2003
Points
1338
|
18th April, 2004 at 15:32:00 -
312 the Battle of the Milvian Bridge: In hoc signo vince, “In this sign conquer”.
Indeed it was said by Constantine, here is how the story goes:
312 AD Constantine had a vision that he would defeat his major rival if he fought under the sign of the cross. So Constantine followed his vision and was victorious.
That is how Christians like to believe it happened, but Historians know that Constantine backed the winning horse.
Why, you ask, would a pagan emperor choose Christianity as the official religion?
Because he would either have to convert the Christians into pagans, or pagans into Christians to unite Rome. Christianity had more followers, so he reinforced it.
Historians still marvel at the brilliance with which Constantine converted the pagans to Christianity. By fusing pagan symbols, dates, and rituals into the growing Christian tradition, he created a hybrid religion acceptable to both parties.
Steve Zissou: Anne-Marie, do all the interns get Glocks?
Anne-Marie: No, they have to share one.
|
Philipe (Phil-Con Games)
Registered
27/03/2004
Points
520
|
18th April, 2004 at 15:47:34 -
Yea! Another quick comment!
Just so we can know, where are you getting this JP? I'm not saying this as if you didn't have a source, I would just like to see, and so would a lot of others probably. Is it a bunch of websites or just 1, is it a book, just what? What your saying is THEORETICALLY possible, and I can see how, but we need more than your word alone. I'm not trying to neccisarily go against YOU, I just want to do a little research on my own, cuz it might be that your source is incorrect in the first place  . What is it?
Games currently in "the works":
Moonrise
My Fantasy (dieing dream)
Shadowed Sunset (this one will be cool)
Dragon Riders (Newer, better animated, cooler, and less gradient version!)
....................
www.phil-con.com baby!
|
TheAlee
Registered
27/02/2003
Points
250
|
18th April, 2004 at 15:56:31 -
hmm... just for the people who said the bible was nuts... read it all, then your view will be concidered  i really don't reccomend saying bad things about things you don't know anything about, once you find out information, then you can combat it.
- Alee
Alee is a Moo proggrammer and is a 3d graphics artist.
|
JP
Registered
07/06/2003
Points
1338
|
18th April, 2004 at 16:11:06 -
Let me see if I can remember them all:
Websites:
JEWS AND CHRISTIANS IN ROME'S GOLDEN AGE
http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch19.htm
The persecution of Christians in Rome http://www.publicbookshelf.com/public_html/Outline_of_Great_Books_Volume_I/persecutio_eg.html
Ancient Rome
http://www.worldhistory.com/ancientrome.htm
FIRST COUNCIL OF NICAEA
http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum01.htm
Major Religions of the World
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
Opus Dei
http://www.opusdei.org/
Books:
Micro Pedia World History
Da Vinci Code
Through the Looking Glass
Film:
Dogma
I may have missed some sources because I don't keep my history in explorer. Also I don't just get dates and facts from one source, because they often contradict themselves. So I listed about half of my actual website sources because two would be redundant.
Proof I double check facts:
World History said:
312 AD Constantine had a vision that he would defeat his major rival if he fought under the sign of the cross. So Constantine followed his vision and was victorious.
Department of Classics said:
312 the Battle of the Milvian Bridge: In hoc signo vince, “In this sign conquer.”, the Christian Caesar.
Christian Caesar is wrong, so I checked a third source, the Da Vinci Code, and World History Checked out.
Also, I had already written that Constantine had been converted on his deathbed, whilst surfing on the internet, I found this in the World History:
337 AD Constantine died. He converted to Christianity on his death bed. His three sons and two nephews fought for the title of emperor.
I also always spell-check with Microsoft Works before submitting.
So, as you can see, I put none of my own theories or opinions into my posts, and use multiple sources.
Steve Zissou: Anne-Marie, do all the interns get Glocks?
Anne-Marie: No, they have to share one.
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
Post Reply