The First Council of Nicaea

[Mister D]

Some of you are watching too much Davinci Code and Ancient Aliens. Others are getting their history off of kook websites. The First Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the formation of the biblical canon. It was not on the agenda. The 2nd Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the bible either and the only possible connection Constantine had with the biblical canon is his request for 50 bibles for the Church of Constantinople. That may have motivated debate on what books were considered sacred scripture. The bible took centuries to reach its final form although it was slightly modified by Luther in the 16th Century.

[donttread]

Some of you are watching too much Davinci Code and Ancient Aliens. Others are getting their history off of kook websites. The First Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the formation of the biblical canon. It was not on the agenda. The 2nd Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the bible either and the only possible connection Constantine had with the biblical canon is his request for 50 bibles for the Church of Constantinople. That may have motivated debate on what books were considered sacred scripture. The bible took centuries to reach its final form although it was slightly modified by Luther in the 16th Century.


OK? Thanks for the update?

[Just AnotherPerson]

First I want to say I do not claim to know exact dates or verses on things or to know everything or believe my words are the gospel. No pun intended!

But I will just give my "opinion" on what I think

Many of the people here have spent their life reading the constitution and government documents becasue that was their passion and interest. I have spent a better part of my life reading religious literature. I have read the bible countless times. I have read the entire Buddhist cannon, as well as many other writings of the time. I have also read the Gnostic gospels. And that is not all. I have read writings on the lives of the saints, it goes on and on. I believe that is an important part of our history. I am a seeker of truth and knowledge, and am constantly looking to grow. If I am wrong about something tell me how I am wrong in a civilized way and explain it and give me some links so that I can understand what you mean. Telling me I am a Kook does not help me to understand what you mean. But if you explain it to me because you are unhappy with my understanding I will be more than pleased to see my Err, and I would rather know what is true than just to say I am right. And also not every word a person says needs to be taken to court. Where you have to prove everything. You can just give thoughts and opinions. Not all of us have to be perfect or right about everything.

The movie the Davinci code does not even mention the council of Nicaea, and ancient aliens is just an entertainment show and every single fact is backed up by the quote, "ancient astronaut theorist say yes" and that is suppose to make it credible. That show is full of Shi#. If you have watched one episode you have watched them all.

Here is what I know that the council of Nicaea was was basically a gathering of bishops and Constantine and people who had religious and political control in their respected places. Constantine was an attendee to the meetings and he presided over the meetings in his splendid robes, but gave the power of decision to the bishops. It is true that they did not "write" the first bible per se, but they were the first council to gather and they are responsible for the religion of Christianity. They created the creed of Nicaea. What that was is the basic tenents for what the Christian religion would be. They decided on what god was, and many other topics. They established the religion and what it was. They also decided what cannon would not be allowed, and they burned any documents that were not in accordance with their creed. They decided what was the new, one and only way, anyone who did not act or believe in accordance with the creed was exiled or excommunicated.

So although they may not have written the bible per se they enforced the law that gospels that were not in accordance with the creed were to be exterminated. If you have any sense of deep looking you will see that by saying what is not allowed and violators will be punished only leaves what is left, and it is those that were left that formed the bible over time. It prevented documents not in accordance with the creed, not available for future consideration.

By this council the basic tenets of Christianity were laid out, it established control over all Christians under one banner. Free or roaming ideas were no longer allowed, and the ONE church was established. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

As for Saint Martin Luther, this was an amazing man. At the time the common man did not have access to the bible, mainly because the bible was in latin and most could not read it. The other reason is that bibles had to be written by hand and took thousands of hours to write and it took a large amount of sheep skins in order to produce one bible. Bibles were so valuble that for 300 years they were chained in the church. The only way the common man could learn of God was through their religious leader.

Saint Martin Luther changed all of that he was one of the first to translate the bible and make it accessible, I believe it is thanks to him that we have access to the bible as we know it today. I may be wrong but I feel that as my opinion and am very grateful for the great gift that he passed down to us all. We now have the chance to read the bible for ourselves and look into what it really means for ourselves and not just what another person tells us that it means. http://reformation.org/saint-martin-luther.html

http://www.catholicbridge.com/catholic/did_the_catholic_church_forbid_bible_reading.php


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAP-VfvClAs

[Mister D]

Your opinion is noted. You don't know what you're talking about and I have nothing nice to say about that.

[Just AnotherPerson]

I gave links with historical facts that explain the history. If you think the historical facts are other than that it is not my fault.

[Mister D]

I gave links with historical facts that explain the history. If you think the historical facts are other than that it is not my fault.

You linked to a Wikipedia article you obviously haven't bothered to read and to a totally irrelevant topic about Martin Luther. Again, this council had nothing to do with the bible. Neither did Constantine. You don't know what you're talking about.

[Mister D]

OK? Thanks for the update?
You're welcome?

[Just AnotherPerson]

You linked to a Wikipedia article you obviously haven't bothered to read and to a totally irrelevant topic about Martin Luther. Again, this council had nothing to do with the bible. Neither did Constantine. You don't know what you're talking about.
I did read every word, Martin Luther was not an irrelevant topic because you mentioned him in your OP. You said he slightly modified the bible in the 16th century. I am wondering why is it that what ever I say no matter what it is makes you so angry? Have I said anything to harm you in any way? I am not going to be so rude as to tell you that you don't know what you are talking about. But I definitely do know what I am talking about. Anyone who reads the Wikipedia link can see what I said in there. I just gave an over all description of the whole, not a word for word court document style. This is just a forum, come on now.

[RadioGod]

You linked to a Wikipedia article you obviously haven't bothered to read and to a totally irrelevant topic about Martin Luther. Again, this council had nothing to do with the bible. Neither did Constantine. You don't know what you're talking about.
So, since JAP pointed out that the Council of Nicea excommunicated and exiled people who didn't accept their new christian doctrine, and burned their manuscripts, and that was in fact a way in which the first councils of Nicea affected which books would not be considered for the bible, she is right. The council of Nicea did begin editing which books would be considered for the bible. It took a few hundred years from there to get something similar to what we have today.
The funny part, to me, is since she was right about that, you switched to attacking her about Martin Luther. Good one.

[Mister D]

So, since JAP pointed out that the Council of Nicea excommunicated and exiled people who didn't accept their new christian doctrine, and burned their manuscripts, and that was in fact a way in which the first councils of Nicea affected which books would not be considered for the bible, she is right. The council of Nicea did begin editing which books would be considered for the bible. It took a few hundred years from there to get something similar to what we have today.
The funny part, to me, is since she was right about that, you switched to attacking her about Martin Luther. Good one.

No, the biblical canon was not even discussed at the Council of Nicaea, no books were "edited" and the doctrine agreed upon was not "new" (lol). Please read the Wiki article JAP supplied. It's something you should both probably do.

I didn't "attack" her over Martin Luther. I said her citation was irrelevant.

If you want to be her protector at least do it well.

[Mister D]

I did read every word, Martin Luther was not an irrelevant topic because you mentioned him in your OP. You said he slightly modified the bible in the 16th century. I am wondering why is it that what ever I say no matter what it is makes you so angry? Have I said anything to harm you in any way? I am not going to be so rude as to tell you that you don't know what you are talking about. But I definitely do know what I am talking about. Anyone who reads the Wikipedia link can see what I said in there. I just gave an over all description of the whole, not a word for word court document style. This is just a forum, come on now.
I mentioned Martin Luther as an aside. He's beside the point. Was that not obvious? What you wanted to do was pretend you had something to say so you went on and on about Luther. You don't. Again, the Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the bible. The biblical canon wasn't even discussed. Nor did Constantine make any decisions about the bible. Worse still, the Council was one of many held to settle theological and ecclesiastical disputes.

Yes, please read your Wiki link and you will understand why the council was held, what was addressed and what was agreed upon.

Third, I'm not "angry" but I you are starting to irritate me.

[RadioGod]

No, the biblical canon was not even discussed at the Council of Nicaea, no books were "edited" and the doctrine agreed upon was not "new" (lol). Please read the Wiki article JAP supplied. It's something you should both probably do.

If you want to be her protector at least do it well.

I didn't "attack" her over Martin Luther. I said her citation was irrelevant.



Books were excluded, which means when time came to start editing, they were already not in consideration. That is editing.

[Just AnotherPerson]

I messed up this post anyways


Never mind I don't really get into religious arguments because religion is based on an individual persons beliefs and some people can be really extreme. This is not my style. Even though I am saturated with religious knowledge. I understand that there are such differing views regarding religion, and it is best to keep it to ones self when it comes to what you know on religion because many people are so set in their ways and will get violent when it comes to their religious beliefs.

I only responded because I was sure that this thread was started because I made a comment to Mr V yesterday regarding the council of Nicaea. I get it. I will just say you are correct. That will satisfy me well. I do not wish to engage in something like this.
You win
You are right
conversation over.....

[Mister D]

Books were excluded, which means when time came to start editing, they were already not in consideration. That is editing.







There was nothing under consideration at the council. Please read the Wiki article. Encourage your damsel in distress to do likewise.

[Mister D]

I messed up this post anyways


Never mind I don't really get into religious arguments because religion is based on an individual persons beliefs and some people can be really extreme. This is not my style. Even though I am saturated with religious knowledge. I understand that there are such differing views regarding religion, and it is best to keep it to ones self when it comes to what you know on religion because many people are so set in their ways and will get violent when it comes to their religious beliefs.

I only responded because I was sure that this thread was started because I made a comment to Mr V yesterday regarding the council of Nicaea. I get it. I will just say you are correct. That will satisfy me well. I do not wish to engage in something like this.
You win
You are right
conversation over.....




It's not a religious argument and we aren't discussing anyone's beliefs. It's not even an argument. I'm the only here who knows anything about this. Leave the history to me. Thanks

[Just AnotherPerson]

It's not a religious argument and we aren't discussing anyone's beliefs. It's not even an argument. I'm the only here who knows anything about this. Leave the history to me. Thanks
Ok I am at an understanding with you.
You know everything about past history as well as current history.
You are the only one who can ever be right.
I got it!

I know nothing , have never known nothing, and never will.
Even if I provide a historical link it is a lie and no matter what I cannot understand it.
Got it.
You win
You are right
Everything is what you say it is no matter what!
Conversation over...…...

[Mister D]

Ok I am at an understanding with you.
You know everything about past history as well as current history.
You are the only one who can ever be right.
I got it!

I know nothing , have never known nothing, and never will.
Even if I provide a historical link it is a lie and no matter what I cannot understand it.
Got it.
You win
You are right
Everything is what you say it is no matter what!
Conversation over...…...

lol No, in this case I just know more about the Council of Nicaea and corrected your misconceptions. You don't seem to be able to accept that. Pride? Embarrassed for having believed this bologna for so long? Yeah, I guess I would be too...

[Captdon]

These "early" councils, including Nicea, were to determine what Christianity was. There were fights over whether Jesus was a spirit and not a man and fights over whether Jesus was a man only and whether he was both.

Yes, certain written teachings were dismissed at Nicea. It didn't put the New Testament together but it did eliminate certain written teachings.

I know this because I have studied it as well.

I did the two year Bethel Series and have a son who is an ordained minister with a bachelor's degree in religious studies from Indiana University,three years of divinity school and a Doctorate as well. He knows a bit more than either of us.

You are not the end all, be all you think you are.

[Mister D]

These "early" councils, including Nicea, were to determine what Christianity was. There were fights over whether Jesus was a spirit and not a man and fights over whether Jesus was a man only and whether he was both.

Yes, certain written teachings were dismissed at Nicea. It didn't put the New Testament together but it did eliminate certain written teachings.

I know this because I have studied it as well.

I did the two year Bethel Series and have a son who is an ordained minister with a bachelor's degree in religious studies from Indiana University,three years of divinity school and a Doctorate as well. He knows a bit more than either of us.

You are not the end all, be all you think you are.

The council had nothing to do with "putting the New Testament together" and was held primarily to address the Arian controversy. Glad we agree on this, Don. I don't care about your son but if he thinks the council put the bible together or did much of anything beyond trying to settle the Arian controversy he should ask for his money back.

[Captdon]

The council had nothing to do with "putting the New Testament together" and was held primarily to address the Arian controversy. Glad we agree on this, Don. I don't care about your son but if he thinks the council put the bible together or did much of anything beyond trying to settle the Arian controversy he should ask for his money back.

I did not say the council put the New Testament together. I said it didn't. I said it threw out certain writings. The Bible as we know it came later.

You should save your snarking until I earn it.

[Orion Rules]

Ya, the whole design of why religion is the best subject to fight over, as to where the proxies sent to war had to be derived from, that Moses is not the sole author of the first five books of the Bible, and so from there it goes on...

It was the easiest example to just study the Great Pyramid to see how the Lord Jesus Christ was fit to it, and to practically forget the rest of what men of God had said about it, because they were taught the Bible is perfection.

[Mister D]

I did not say the council put the New Testament together. I said it didn't. I said it threw out certain writings. The Bible as we know it came later.

You should save your snarking until I earn it.
No, you didn't say the council put the New Testament together. "I'm glad we agree on this..." would seem indicate as much. See, you earned my snark again, Don.

I am responding to people who think not only that that this and much more happened at the Council of Nicaea but that any attempt to define Christianity and clarify what the community of the faithful actually believe is a diabolical scheme to "control the masses".

Do better next time.

[Captdon]

No, you didn't say the council put the New Testament together. "I'm glad we agree on this..." would seem indicate as much. See, you earned my snark again, Don.

I am responding to people who think not only that that this and much more happened at the Council of Nicaea but that any attempt to define Christianity and clarify what the community of the faithful actually believe is a diabolical scheme to "control the masses".

Do better next time.

Nope. You snarked me for my son. He also didn't say what you accused people of yet you took a shot at his education and vocation. It's on you after all.

I don't mind being snarked but I mind my son being snarked. I did fine. You sort of didn't.

[Mister D]

Nope. You snarked me for my son. He also didn't say what you accused people of yet you took a shot at his education and vocation. It's on you after all.

I don't mind being snarked but I mind my son being snarked. I did fine. You sort of didn't.
1. I didn't accuse you or your son of saying anything.
2. Don't bring your son into the discussion if he's off limits.

BTW, when I said I am the only one who knows anything about this topic I was referring to the people I was actually having the discussion with. I'm sorry that set you off but your insecurity isn't my problem.

[Orion Rules]

Ya, the whole design of why religion is the best subject to fight over, as to where the proxies sent to war had to be derived from, that Moses is not the sole author of the first five books of the Bible, and so from there it goes on...

It was the easiest example to just study the Great Pyramid to see how the Lord Jesus Christ was fit to it, and to practically forget the rest of what men of God had said about it, because they were taught the Bible is perfection.
It was the wonderful finding by Robert Bauval who started the whole thing of how three stars would be found aligning to something else once written...the universe had expanded by then. The search for truth never stopped, but was rather elevated even higher when an associate stated he had found the Lord Jesus Christ by studying the layout of just the Great Pyramid. Then the story began to unfold there was way more to something else, and that once truth is sought after, it will be found. 'Ask, seek, knock', Jesus said.

[Captdon]

1. I didn't accuse you or your son of saying anything.
2. Don't bring your son into the discussion if he's off limits.

BTW, when I said I am the only one who knows anything about this topic I was referring to the people I was actually having the discussion with. I'm sorry that set you off but your insecurity isn't my problem.

You said he should ask for his money back for his education. Snark.

I guarantee he knows more about Christianity than you ever will. You couldn't take what I said with good grace. I said what I did about snarking him as a joke.

That's your problem not mine.

You are talking to everyone on a forum. Don't be so defensive when you mistype.

[Mister D]

You said he should ask for his money back for his education. Snark.

I guarantee he knows more about Christianity than you ever will. You couldn't take what I said with good grace. I said what I did about snarking him as a joke.

That's your problem not mine.

You are talking to everyone on a forum. Don't be so defensive when you mistype.
See, you're doing it again. Don't bring your son into it if he's not fair game. Understood? I'm sure your son is totally awesome but he's irrelevant.


No, I'm not talking to everyone on a forum. If I address a particular member or members I am talking to them alone. Sorry if what I said made you defensive. Don't be so insecure.

This is incredible. You agree with me but for some reason you want to argue about...something.

[Orion Rules]

Some of you are watching too much Davinci Code and Ancient Aliens. Others are getting their history off of kook websites. The First Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the formation of the biblical canon. It was not on the agenda. The 2nd Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the bible either and the only possible connection Constantine had with the biblical canon is his request for 50 bibles for the Church of Constantinople. That may have motivated debate on what books were considered sacred scripture. The bible took centuries to reach its final form although it was slightly modified by Luther in the 16th Century.

Specifically, you are right from what historical accounts tell of those times, i.e. of those same councils. But in the beginning there was the destruction of certain manuscripts, as also what have been called the trials of Christ's descendants. This was the subject of certain parts of the works of Sir Laurence Gardener and what the Grail purportedly is. The allegation is that the Christ had children who were born afterwards. This is regarded by some to be heretical news. "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown, as of his other works, it's almost as if what other writer even compares. The best thought-out, it all seems, as the stories are told in "The Da Vinci Code" and "Angels & Demons".

***/\Ham/\Shem/\Japheth's Europe, to first there is Tutankhamun, Egyptian King. His father, was he the chief Antichrist of then? Was Mr. Obama made the second antichrist to sit by one? The real Antichrist is his name. Shem is the name of a German shepherd. The shepherds know their LORD rides a swift cloud, Isaiah 19, verses 24-25, Christmas Eve and Christmastime, the colors Ptah wears in mummified form. The Grand Architect of the Universe, once was, still is, that light is a shadow of darkness, that Isaiah 19:24-25 describes how the Egyptians were 'God chose those Israelites'.

Whatever the different Bible versions leave out or include in them, there are still other works. The Gospel given as being full partly works. It is not all of it, though, as are the Heavens. The faith of the church is into the pulling down of the anti-Christian strongholds. Whatever light yet unseen, the wrath of God is in the wings. Airborne sickness, the feathers of birds. Horus owns the horses. 'The works of Ra' are found in the Book of Revelation, chapters 1-21, 22 x 4, the cost of the 144,000 foundation stones for all of the thefts, murders, sorceries. The Egyptian rams represent(ed) the wheels of Aries.

Evul wuckid mayhem **** ********* ****.

'All heresy and false doctrine came by the popes'.

The faces of the Earth's quarters:

New International Version
Each of the cherubim had four faces: One face was that of a cherub, the second the face of a human being, the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle.

New Living Translation
Each of the four cherubim had four faces: the first was the face of an ox, the second was a human face, the third was the face of a lion, and the fourth was the face of an eagle.

Contemporary English Version
Each of the winged creatures had four faces: the face of a bull, the face of a human, the face of a lion, and the face of an eagle.

Ezekiel 10:14, Numbers 1, Genesis 14, Isaiah 19, Isaiah 1, Genesis 1, Isaiah 66:3.

[zachroidott]

You linked to a Wikipedia article you obviously haven't bothered to read and to a totally irrelevant topic about Martin Luther. Again, this council had nothing to do with the bible. Neither did Constantine. You don't know what you're talking about.
Kerfluffy. I don't care how that bric-a-brac history, genealogies and fairy tales came about.