Does history match the prophesies of the bible?

[metis]

The Nicene Council of 325 AD was inaugurated by Constantine, who also published his own 50 copies of a bible, with only one chapter noted by history, which is not in the canon described by Athanasius in 367 AD. I expect that Arius, the right hand man of Constantine, a so called priest, put together that bible. Arius and Athanasius were on different sides of theology. Arius was against the Trinity. The focus of the Council of Nicene was the Trinity, not publishing a bible out of the 1000s of manuscripts found among bogus preachers of many bents. Before 325 AD there were no Roman bishops, only the so called bishop of Rome. There were many so called, self proclaimed bishops involved in the Council, but the bishop of Rome was not among them. The pope sent two secretaries. The so called "bishops", were mostly from the Eastern part of the empire, many were illiterate. Constantine was interested in uniting his empire, and therefore wound up merging his pagan religion theology with this new "Christian" religion.

When you fabricate stories like the above, there's no where to go with this. I linked you to a non-denominational source, but it's clear that you either didn't read it or you didn't understand it.

 

[GardenLady]

There are many (and I am one) who think that Revelation is about the early church and the Roman Empire (the “beast on 7 hills” who persecuted the church, and not a book of prophesy for 2000 years later. Either that, ir an acid trip.

 

[PearlSeeker]

The Jewish OT precedes the Roman church's NT canon of 367 AD written down by Athanasius.

NT canon wasn't defined only after 300 years with Constantine. Informal canon existed early on. Stories about Constantine at once deciding what's in the Bible belong to fantasy or even sci-fi genre (Constantine in paralel universe).

 

[2ndpillar]

NT canon wasn't defined only after 300 years with Constantine. Informal canon existed early on. Stories about Constantine at once deciding what's in the Bible belong to fantasy or even sci-fi genre (Constantine in paralel universe).

The NT canon, generally used by the "Christian" church, was not determined by Constantine. The present NT canon was incorporated into the Easter festal letter of Athanasius in the year 367 AD, years after Constantine was dead. As for the link of a bible with Constantine, he had his man Friday, the Arian Eusebius, the historian for the "Christian" church, publish 50 bibles, for which there is no remaining record except for one chapter which is not contained within the NT canon. Your church history, is like that written by most victors, written without emphasis on reality. Quote from Eusebius: "That it will be necessary sometimes to use falsehood as a remedy for the benefit of those who require such a mode of treatment".

 

[PearlSeeker]

The NT canon, generally used by the "Christian" church, was not determined by Constantine. The present NT canon was incorporated into the Easter festal letter of Athanasius in the year 367 AD, years after Constantine was dead. As for the link of a bible with Constantine, he had his man Friday, the Arian Eusebius, the historian for the "Christian" church, publish 50 bibles, for which there is no remaining record except for one chapter which is not contained within the NT canon. Your church history, is like that written by most victors, written without emphasis on reality. Quote from Eusebius: "That it will be necessary sometimes to use falsehood as a remedy for the benefit of those who require such a mode of treatment".

Sorry, I misunderstood you. Then your story would have a different title Athanasius In Parallel Universe. In this universe 4 Gospels and Paul's epistles have been standard sources in Church from early on. How do we know? From references in liturgy and other early Christian writings.

 

[2ndpillar]

Sorry, I misunderstood you. Then your story would have a different title Athanasius In Parallel Universe. In this universe 4 Gospels and Paul's epistles have been standard sources in Church from early on. How do we know? From references in liturgy and other early Christian writings.

Your Triune "Christian" church, is the legitimate Roman church per the 380 AD decree of Theodosius, and is based on the Nicene Trinity, and from that false basis, along with the teachings of the false prophet Paul and his associates, is the basis of the daughter of Babylon church which you seem to cling too. Apparently, clinging to false prophets, and not heeding the testimony of Yeshua, results in the fall of the houses which choose do so (Matthew 7:15-28). The downward spiral of the churches can be seen in their leadership, especially evident in the current Catholic pope. The "first" "gathering" of the "tares" can not be far behind (Matthew 13:30). Keep in mind that the tares are thrown were there is "weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 13:42) Your church is founded on Peter, the "worthless shepherd" of Zechariah 11:17, and Paul, a principal false prophet of Matthew 7:15 These two leaders being the "horns like of lamb" of the 7th head of the beast of Revelation 17. The canon of the anti Arian Athanasius is as errant, as far as being sacred, as is his apparent black heart as shown by his display of glee at the death of Arius. Paul' gospel of grace/cross, is antithetical to the gospel of the kingdom, and when that kingdom is set up, the church of Babylon, will as you might say, be thrown into the sea.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Your Triune "Christian" church, is the legitimate Roman church per the 380 AD decree of Theodosius, and is based on the Nicene Trinity, and from that false basis, along with the teachings of the false prophet Paul and his associates, is the basis of the daughter of Babylon church which you seem to cling too. Apparently, clinging to false prophets, and not heeding the testimony of Yeshua, results in the fall of the houses which choose do so (Matthew 7:15-28). The downward spiral of the churches can be seen in their leadership, especially evident in the current Catholic pope. The "first" "gathering" of the "tares" can not be far behind (Matthew 13:30). Keep in mind that the tares are thrown were there is "weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Matthew 13:42) Your church is founded on Peter, the "worthless shepherd" of Zechariah 11:17, and Paul, a principal false prophet of Matthew 7:15 These two leaders being the "horns like of lamb" of the 7th head of the beast of Revelation 17. The canon of the anti Arian Athanasius is as errant, as far as being sacred, as is his apparent black heart as shown by his display of glee at the death of Arius. Paul' gospel of grace/cross, is antithetical to the gospel of the kingdom, and when that kingdom is set up, the church of Babylon, will as you might say, be thrown into the sea.

I'll leave you with your interpretation of Revelation. There's already another thread about that... I don't claim Trinity doctrine to be true or that canonized books are a 100% reliable recording of Jesus' teachings. I'm just saying that Paul's letters and the 4 Gospels were main scripture right from the start.

 

[2ndpillar]

I'll leave you with your interpretation of Revelation. There's already another thread about that... I don't claim Trinity doctrine to be true or that canonized books are a 100% reliable recording of Jesus' teachings. I'm just saying that Paul's letters and the 4 Gospels were main scripture right from the start.

The "falling away" was right from the start (Zechariah 13:7 & Matthew 26:31). The coming "false prophets", wolves in sheep clothing, such as the false prophet Paul, were right from the start (Matthew 7:15) The book of Matthew has nothing in common with the false gospel of Paul and his associates. As for the letters of Paul, about half were apparently not even written by Paul. Christianity is built on a foundation of sand (Matthew 7:24-28), and the false Trinity doctrine is a foundation stone of the Roman church and many of her daughters. As for the gospel of Luke, Acts and 2 Peter, who were the actual authors? Who was the author of Hebrews? These are the meat of your canon, and you can't even give an definitive answer as to who even wrote them. The teachings of Yeshua, and the teachings of Paul, were not the same, and the "Christian" church is built on the teachings of the false prophet Paul, and his buddy Peter, the "worthless shepherd" of Zechariah 11:17.