OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 19, 2014, 09:04:07 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Did Emperior Constantine pretended to be Christian?  (Read 5402 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Victoria
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: inquirer in Orthodox Faith
Posts: 113



« on: December 22, 2010, 05:39:38 PM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?
Logged

Humility and fear of God are above all virtues-Saint John Kolobos
mike
Warned
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,536


« Reply #1 on: December 22, 2010, 05:41:18 PM »

It's all fake.
Logged
Victoria
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: inquirer in Orthodox Faith
Posts: 113



« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2010, 05:49:08 PM »

i didn't think it was very crediable, but i was curious what everyone thought the same
Logged

Humility and fear of God are above all virtues-Saint John Kolobos
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,494


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2010, 05:50:52 PM »

Was the "earlier pagan god" called Mithras?
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 4,997



« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2010, 05:56:29 PM »

History Channel isn't worth jack and hasn't been for a long time now...
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,766



WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2010, 06:07:46 PM »

It reminds me of the "Jesus Family Tomb" scandal that I partly believed in for a little bit, and which was promoted by the Discovery Channel.

If everything is neutral and we are a country of no religion, then it seems that the TV programs should at least be more honest. I mean how do they know that Constantine was never really Christian inside? He didn't have to make it the empire's religion. It seems like they should make a show describing that he actually was Christian, because his conversion made such a huge impact on global history.

There are only two results from such obvious mis-portrayals if they are often promoted: people who believe them will think that Christianity is a ruling-class conspiracy from Rome, and people who believe in Christianity will think there is a ruling-class conspiracy against Christianity from TV. Indifference is not a result.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 06:09:29 PM by rakovsky » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #6 on: December 22, 2010, 06:48:43 PM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

I'm not sure: I've seen so much pseudo-history on the "History" Channel that it all sorts of blurrs together.

If he faked Christian beliefs, he would have gotten baptized with all the pomp at Jordan like he planned, rather than doing it rushed on his deathbed.  Btw, his mother St. Helena was Christian.

What the Church teaches about Jesus now and in the days of St. Constantine is amply documented from the time of the Apostles until Constantine.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 4,997



« Reply #7 on: December 22, 2010, 06:57:55 PM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

I'm not sure: I've seen so much pseudo-history on the "History" Channel that it all sorts of blurrs together.

If he faked Christian beliefs, he would have gotten baptized with all the pomp at Jordan like he planned, rather than doing it rushed on his deathbed.  Btw, his mother St. Helena was Christian.

What the Church teaches about Jesus now and in the days of St. Constantine is amply documented from the time of the Apostles until Constantine.

One thing though, while he was indeed baptized, it was by an Arian.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,496


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #8 on: December 22, 2010, 07:08:27 PM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

I'm not sure: I've seen so much pseudo-history on the "History" Channel that it all sorts of blurrs together.

If he faked Christian beliefs, he would have gotten baptized with all the pomp at Jordan like he planned, rather than doing it rushed on his deathbed.  Btw, his mother St. Helena was Christian.

What the Church teaches about Jesus now and in the days of St. Constantine is amply documented from the time of the Apostles until Constantine.

One thing though, while he was indeed baptized, it was by an Arian.

That would make no difference. If he held valid orders, then the Baptism is valid.

There are parts of Protestantism that seek to discredit The Church by saying Constantine was the root source of the corruption that they have reformed.. It's a bogus Partisan attack.. 
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2010, 07:09:10 PM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

I'm not sure: I've seen so much pseudo-history on the "History" Channel that it all sorts of blurrs together.

If he faked Christian beliefs, he would have gotten baptized with all the pomp at Jordan like he planned, rather than doing it rushed on his deathbed.  Btw, his mother St. Helena was Christian.

What the Church teaches about Jesus now and in the days of St. Constantine is amply documented from the time of the Apostles until Constantine.

One thing though, while he was indeed baptized, it was by an Arian.
Crypto-Arian
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Victoria
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: inquirer in Orthodox Faith
Posts: 113



« Reply #10 on: December 22, 2010, 07:22:28 PM »

Was the "earlier pagan god" called Mithras?
yes, it was. It was said that he was "just like Jesus and his believers followed same beliefs as Christians"
Logged

Humility and fear of God are above all virtues-Saint John Kolobos
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #11 on: December 22, 2010, 07:30:21 PM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

Yes, many History Channel programs are full of veritasiness from emotional antitheistic scholars.   
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,766



WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 22, 2010, 07:33:36 PM »

It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?
There are parts of Protestantism that seek to discredit The Church by saying Constantine was the root source of the corruption that they have reformed.. It's a bogus Partisan attack..  

The attack portrayed Christianity as Mithraism, so the source of the attack cannot be Protestantism.

There are only two results from such mis-portrayals if they are often promoted: people who believe them will think that Christianity is a ruling-class conspiracy from Rome, and people who believe in Christianity will think there is a ruling-class conspiracy against Christianity from TV.  Huh
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 07:37:58 PM by rakovsky » Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #13 on: December 22, 2010, 07:35:50 PM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?
I'm not sure: I've seen so much pseudo-history on the "History" Channel that it all sorts of blurrs together.
If he faked Christian beliefs, he would have gotten baptized with all the pomp at Jordan like he planned, rather than doing it rushed on his deathbed.  Btw, his mother St. Helena was Christian.What the Church teaches about Jesus now and in the days of St. Constantine is amply documented from the time of the Apostles until Constantine.
One thing though, while he was indeed baptized, it was by an Arian.
Crypto-Arian
Correct.  I think we have been through that topic several times already. 
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #14 on: December 22, 2010, 07:41:22 PM »

It's all fake.
I know, they could at least give up on the Dan Brown promotions. 
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,496


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #15 on: December 22, 2010, 09:36:59 PM »

It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?
There are parts of Protestantism that seek to discredit The Church by saying Constantine was the root source of the corruption that they have reformed.. It's a bogus Partisan attack..  

The attack portrayed Christianity as Mithraism, so the source of the attack cannot be Protestantism.

There are only two results from such mis-portrayals if they are often promoted: people who believe them will think that Christianity is a ruling-class conspiracy from Rome, and people who believe in Christianity will think there is a ruling-class conspiracy against Christianity from TV.  Huh

The attack portrayed Christianity as Mithraism, so the source of the attack cannot be Protestantism.


Why do you think that? Protestants all the time want to portray The Church as having borrowed heavily from Paganism.

Here is a link to a typical Protestant screed attacking The Roman Church in this manner... Hold your nose 

http://www.gotquestions.org/origin-Catholic-church.html
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 09:42:01 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Victoria
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: inquirer in Orthodox Faith
Posts: 113



« Reply #16 on: December 22, 2010, 09:55:50 PM »

It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?
There are parts of Protestantism that seek to discredit The Church by saying Constantine was the root source of the corruption that they have reformed.. It's a bogus Partisan attack..  

The attack portrayed Christianity as Mithraism, so the source of the attack cannot be Protestantism.

There are only two results from such mis-portrayals if they are often promoted: people who believe them will think that Christianity is a ruling-class conspiracy from Rome, and people who believe in Christianity will think there is a ruling-class conspiracy against Christianity from TV.  Huh

The attack portrayed Christianity as Mithraism, so the source of the attack cannot be Protestantism.


Why do you think that? Protestants all the time want to portray The Church as having borrowed heavily from Paganism.

Here is a link to a typical Protestant screed attacking The Roman Church in this manner... Hold your nose 

http://www.gotquestions.org/origin-Catholic-church.html



That article is laughable. The tragic part is Protestant’s ignorance and their arrogance that their doctrine is the only right one. Never mind that it’s a man made
Logged

Humility and fear of God are above all virtues-Saint John Kolobos
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #17 on: December 22, 2010, 10:01:23 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperor Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

That is just a slim minority of opinion, and further sounds tainted by a Protestant background or perspective which generally wrongfully associates the Holy Tradition as being pagan.  This is just ignorance and further from my perspective as person academically trained in the study of History, I'd say it just mere sensationalists to contrarians playing intellectual sport.

Saint Constantine was not faking his conversion, it is easy to see in several key ways how it was sincere.  We must indeed however take this into historical context of Saint Constantine being a Roman, and an Imperial elitist oligarch at that!  The Romans had a flexible religion like the Hellenists they idealized, and it would not be uncommon for many converts to remain attached to other Roman "pagan" religions and gods and their services.  If there is indeed historical evidence of say Saint Constantine participating in temple services of other Roman gods, this should not necessarily condemn the sincerity of his Christianity.  Saint Constantine was the Emperor by the way, and surely he did have to play politics to manage the Empire and he surely had to participate in other religious services aside from Christianity just was today Christian leaders attend Muslim and Hindu and Jewish services out of diplomatic respect.  Also, Saint Constantine did not declare Christianity the only religion of Rome or even the Official religion of Rome, rather he legalized it publicly and also established it as the favored religion of the State, but not necessarily the exclusive.  

Further, to imply that his conversion was merely political exploitation is in fact dangerous, and is precisely why Protestants who base their lives on this kind of gossip and hearsay have gotten themselves in quite a mess and in the process made quite a mess of the our world.  This idea was quite common amongst Baptists and Baptist colleges in the early 1980s, which aimed to revive the strict antagonism with "Popish" religion and what they saw as Catholic superstition in favor of fundamentalist literal Biblicalism.  All the aspects of the Holy Tradition were attributed to the Church supposedly pandering to pagan converts and reclaiming pagan ideas and holidays as part of the Church.  This is indeed dangerous and blasphemous nonsense which should be gently pushed aside.

Also, many have accused Saint Constantine and Saint Helena as having just made up a lot of the Holy sites and holidays as a realpolitik move at maintaining Roman order.  This is simply not true, even the vaguest aspects of the Holy Tradition mention that SS Constantine and Helena consulted the Bishops and clergy as to the accuracy of the sites and traditions.  Saint Constantine did not simply make all this up, or commandeer it from pagans, but actually was the codifying and legitimizing of the Christian traditions and histories which previously were forced underground and the point of the Imperial sword.  Saint Constantine established public Christianity, but he by no means invented the Holy Tradition, just Christopher Columbus didn't make the world round in sailing around it, he just discovered what most others already knew Wink

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
tuesdayschild
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 971



« Reply #18 on: December 22, 2010, 10:05:34 PM »

One thing though, while he was indeed baptized, it was by an Arian.

That would make no difference. If he held valid orders, then the Baptism is valid.

I know this has been dealt with many times, but I thought it had been established that the Orthodox position is that a priest or bishop must have both valid orders and correct faith in order for a sacrament to be valid. Isn't what has been described above ("If he held valid orders, then the Baptism is valid.") the Roman Catholic position (once a priest, always a priest/indelible mark) that Orthodoxy opposes?
Logged
Ian Lazarus
The Main Man!
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: AOA
Posts: 1,545


yIjah, Qey' 'oH!


« Reply #19 on: December 22, 2010, 10:15:18 PM »

I'll start listening to the History Channel again when it admits that John Lennon was a stoner, UFO's did not come to and aliens did not in fact found the Ancient Egyptian Empire, and that Elvis is dead. It amazes me that they will take up any crackpot intelectual's theory on the street as long as it threatens to debunk the Christian Faith, but will shy away from offending other faiths. One has to wonder if the staff are lapsed Catholics and Protestants, or ex hippies, still clinging to flowerpower and those special brownies...
Logged

"For I am With thee, withersoever thou goest"

Joshua 1:9
Victoria
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: inquirer in Orthodox Faith
Posts: 113



« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2010, 10:27:03 PM »

I'll start listening to the History Channel again when it admits that John Lennon was a stoner, UFO's did not come to and aliens did not in fact found the Ancient Egyptian Empire, and that Elvis is dead. It amazes me that they will take up any crackpot intelectual's theory on the street as long as it threatens to debunk the Christian Faith, but will shy away from offending other faiths. One has to wonder if the staff are lapsed Catholics and Protestants, or ex hippies, still clinging to flowerpower and those special brownies...
I’d say ex-hippies
Logged

Humility and fear of God are above all virtues-Saint John Kolobos
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2010, 10:30:25 PM »

I'm in more of a "get over it" mentality - "The History Channel" is in it for money and ratings, and so they'll put on whatever will get that; sometimes it's good (like the series on the great aircraft carrier Enterprise and her crew in WWII), and sometimes it's, well, feces.  Don't look to it for an authentic treatment of history any more than you look to Fox News, CNN, N/ABC, etc. for an authentic treatment of news, politics, et al.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2010, 10:30:35 PM by Fr. George » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 12,963


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


« Reply #22 on: December 23, 2010, 12:56:17 AM »

I'll start listening to the History Channel again when it admits that John Lennon was a stoner, UFO's did not come to and aliens did not in fact found the Ancient Egyptian Empire, and that Elvis is dead. It amazes me that they will take up any crackpot intelectual's theory on the street as long as it threatens to debunk the Christian Faith, but will shy away from offending other faiths. One has to wonder if the staff are lapsed Catholics and Protestants, or ex hippies, still clinging to flowerpower and those special brownies...

Zahi Hawass would be very happy to hear that...lol
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
MyMapleStory
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Approaching Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: Will probably be Greek
Posts: 181


« Reply #23 on: December 23, 2010, 01:03:12 AM »

"History channel"

That is your first problem.

But regardless, It makes no sense for St Constantine to bring Christianity into the empire which was mostly pagan. Is That to say that Constantine had an articulate knowledge of the faith? No I doubt he had much understanding for the theology, but he must have most certaintly believed in the God of Christianity as at least the greatest God for allowing it to be practiced in the empire and building alot of churches.
Logged
Agia Marina
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Bulgarian Diocese
Posts: 423


St. Marina of Antioch


WWW
« Reply #24 on: December 23, 2010, 01:30:51 AM »

I watched it this morning while getting ready for work.  Bullfeathers, I say.  The History Channel's treatment of this story is nothing more than conjecture: "Is it possible that Constantine perpetrated the biggest hoax in history?"  "Could it be that Constantine wanted to be worshiped as Apollo/Mithras/Jesus Christ, and that's why his image was plastered all over the Empire?"  "Is it possible that Constantine liked wearing pink tutus while going to war?"  "Could it be that we just need the ratings, and are full of horse manure?"

I report.  You decide.  Grin
Logged

“When I have a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes.” - Erasmus

"God became man so that man might become a god." ~St. Athanasius the Great

Poster formerly known as EVOO.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #25 on: December 23, 2010, 04:20:23 AM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

The History Channel is mostly garbage when it comes to the issue of Religion. Especially Christianity.

Read this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Defending-Constantine-Twilight-Empire-Christendom/dp/0830827226 (Defending Constantine) it was written by a Presbyterian, but it's pretty good. I plan on giving a review in a week or two.

I don't think Constantine faked his Christian beliefs. The empire was only 10 to 15 percent Christian, and most of his soldiers were not Christian. He saw Christians get killed under the reign of the pagan Emperor Diocletian. Constantine was a soldier in his army. Also, his father showed mercy to the christians in his region, and so when Diocletian allowed him to rejoin his father in the north west.....near where Britain is today.....I think....I have to re-read that part in the book. But his father's dealing with christians could of had an influence on Constantine, as well as the harsh and severe treatment he saw by the senior Emperor......Diocletian....back when he was a soldier of his in the Eastern region of the Empire. Constantine was able to see the ruins of Jerusalem, and other cities like Antioch, Byzantium.......etc. And he saw the harshness of how christians were treated.

I could be wrong, but I think there are two different accounts of his famous vision. It seems as if it took some time for Constantine to understand the meaning of the vision, but there is no reason to assume that he wasn't sincere.

When he defeated one of the minor Emperors in the west at Rome, he got rid of the victory pagan sacrifices. If he faked being a Christian then why would he openly offend the Roman Senate by doing so? He got rid of Roman Sacrifices. If he wasn't sincere then why would he change Roman custom to do that? Also, he was known to preach or give lectures about God in his court. He seemed to care alot about not offending God.....for he read how God judged the kings of the world in the Old Testament. He also wanted a unified Church (The Donatist and Arian issues) because of this very reason.....he didn't want to offend God.  Just like alot of Roman leaders before him, he was somewhat superstitious. He wanted God to be pleased with the Roman Empire and with him. And so I think he was really sincere. He had to walk a tight rope because 80 to 85 percent of his citizens were still pagan. And so he made Christianity acceptable, but he didn't make it the state religion.....that happened after his reign. He set the Empire in the direction of a christian course, but like the Emperors before him, he let the governers of certain regions enforce his decrees. This is why we see inconsistency in actual practice. Constantine didn't want to convert the pagan population by force. His goal was to convert them through persuasion. Through Christian unity, church buildings, moral example, and argumentation. If you think about it, Constantine was alot more humane than later kings. The Franks and Saint Vlad were pretty harsh to their subjects compared to Saint Constantine. I think we should keep that in mind.

But yeah, read the book! It's a good read and it will help with alot of your questions. Oh, the reason why Saint Constantine waited to get Baptized at the last minute was because of a popular belief that sins can't be forgiven after water Baptism. Or that sins could be forgiven only once or twice after water Baptism.

Constantine saw himself as a very sinful man, and so he wanted to make sure that all his sins would be forgiven and that there wouldn't be a chance to sin again after water Baptism.......and so he waited to be Baptized shortly before death.



Orthodoxtv use to have a 30 minute video about Saint Constantine.
http://www.orthodox.tv/thesaints.php#stconstantine (St. Constantine:
The Emperor Who Freed Christianity)



Also, in regards to the Zeitgeist nonsense, an Anglican on youtube did a good job in debunking it:
http://www.youtube.com/user/labarum312#g/c/3816CCC6BFA0F976 (Contra Zeitgeist)

I hope this helps!


« Last Edit: December 23, 2010, 04:50:01 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #26 on: December 23, 2010, 04:36:46 AM »

I'll start listening to the History Channel again when it admits that John Lennon was a stoner, UFO's did not come to and aliens did not in fact found the Ancient Egyptian Empire, and that Elvis is dead. It amazes me that they will take up any crackpot intelectual's theory on the street as long as it threatens to debunk the Christian Faith, but will shy away from offending other faiths. One has to wonder if the staff are lapsed Catholics and Protestants, or ex hippies, still clinging to flowerpower and those special brownies...

Zahi Hawass would be very happy to hear that...lol


I personally feel that it is an insult on the ingenuity of man. The History Channel wants everything to be done by Aliens.
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #27 on: December 23, 2010, 04:57:19 AM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperor Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

That is just a slim minority of opinion, and further sounds tainted by a Protestant background or perspective which generally wrongfully associates the Holy Tradition as being pagan.  This is just ignorance and further from my perspective as person academically trained in the study of History, I'd say it just mere sensationalists to contrarians playing intellectual sport.

Saint Constantine was not faking his conversion, it is easy to see in several key ways how it was sincere.  We must indeed however take this into historical context of Saint Constantine being a Roman, and an Imperial elitist oligarch at that!  The Romans had a flexible religion like the Hellenists they idealized, and it would not be uncommon for many converts to remain attached to other Roman "pagan" religions and gods and their services.  If there is indeed historical evidence of say Saint Constantine participating in temple services of other Roman gods, this should not necessarily condemn the sincerity of his Christianity.  Saint Constantine was the Emperor by the way, and surely he did have to play politics to manage the Empire and he surely had to participate in other religious services aside from Christianity just was today Christian leaders attend Muslim and Hindu and Jewish services out of diplomatic respect.  Also, Saint Constantine did not declare Christianity the only religion of Rome or even the Official religion of Rome, rather he legalized it publicly and also established it as the favored religion of the State, but not necessarily the exclusive.  

Further, to imply that his conversion was merely political exploitation is in fact dangerous, and is precisely why Protestants who base their lives on this kind of gossip and hearsay have gotten themselves in quite a mess and in the process made quite a mess of the our world.  This idea was quite common amongst Baptists and Baptist colleges in the early 1980s, which aimed to revive the strict antagonism with "Popish" religion and what they saw as Catholic superstition in favor of fundamentalist literal Biblicalism.  All the aspects of the Holy Tradition were attributed to the Church supposedly pandering to pagan converts and reclaiming pagan ideas and holidays as part of the Church.  This is indeed dangerous and blasphemous nonsense which should be gently pushed aside.

Also, many have accused Saint Constantine and Saint Helena as having just made up a lot of the Holy sites and holidays as a realpolitik move at maintaining Roman order.  This is simply not true, even the vaguest aspects of the Holy Tradition mention that SS Constantine and Helena consulted the Bishops and clergy as to the accuracy of the sites and traditions.  Saint Constantine did not simply make all this up, or commandeer it from pagans, but actually was the codifying and legitimizing of the Christian traditions and histories which previously were forced underground and the point of the Imperial sword.  Saint Constantine established public Christianity, but he by no means invented the Holy Tradition, just Christopher Columbus didn't make the world round in sailing around it, he just discovered what most others already knew Wink

stay blessed,
habte selassie

Good stuff! I agree 100%ly
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #28 on: December 23, 2010, 05:02:02 AM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

I'm not sure: I've seen so much pseudo-history on the "History" Channel that it all sorts of blurrs together.

If he faked Christian beliefs, he would have gotten baptized with all the pomp at Jordan like he planned, rather than doing it rushed on his deathbed.  Btw, his mother St. Helena was Christian.

What the Church teaches about Jesus now and in the days of St. Constantine is amply documented from the time of the Apostles until Constantine.

One thing though, while he was indeed baptized, it was by an Arian.
Crypto-Arian

True! Alot of people tend to confuse the semi/moderate-Arains with the radical Arians.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2010, 05:03:13 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #29 on: December 23, 2010, 05:10:45 AM »

It reminds me of the "Jesus Family Tomb" scandal that I partly believed in for a little bit, and which was promoted by the Discovery Channel.

If everything is neutral and we are a country of no religion, then it seems that the TV programs should at least be more honest. I mean how do they know that Constantine was never really Christian inside? He didn't have to make it the empire's religion. It seems like they should make a show describing that he actually was Christian, because his conversion made such a huge impact on global history.

There are only two results from such obvious mis-portrayals if they are often promoted: people who believe them will think that Christianity is a ruling-class conspiracy from Rome, and people who believe in Christianity will think there is a ruling-class conspiracy against Christianity from TV. Indifference is not a result.

It would seem as if from 1870 onward atheism became the default position in the western world. In the 1960's.....before I was born.....I was born in 1977, but in the 1960's I read that the colleges, and media were saying that god was dead and that it was only a matter of time when religion would naturally die out. They had the faulty belief that as science increased, religion would decrease, and the world would eventually be atheistic. Now this was back in the 1960's. Religious folk are still here and we are not going away.

But yes, the media, some of the laws of our government, and the school system are pushing atheism onto the masses. Things will change once our economy collapses. They won't have the funds to keep us marginalized and criminalized forever.

« Last Edit: December 23, 2010, 05:15:17 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Andrew21091
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,271



« Reply #30 on: December 23, 2010, 05:26:32 AM »

I'll start listening to the History Channel again when it admits that John Lennon was a stoner, UFO's did not come to and aliens did not in fact found the Ancient Egyptian Empire, and that Elvis is dead. It amazes me that they will take up any crackpot intelectual's theory on the street as long as it threatens to debunk the Christian Faith, but will shy away from offending other faiths. One has to wonder if the staff are lapsed Catholics and Protestants, or ex hippies, still clinging to flowerpower and those special brownies...

Zahi Hawass would be very happy to hear that...lol

So would I! I fully agree with Dr. Hawass. Every time I see anything suggesting "ancient astronauts" it makes me want to scream. I've enjoyed some things that the History Channel has put out, but I don't anymore. They really need to move away from "ancient astronauts," Nostradamus, and conspiracy theories and bring back shows like Engineering an Empire or Digging for the Truth and then I will start watching again.
Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #31 on: December 23, 2010, 05:43:40 AM »

I'll start listening to the History Channel again when it admits that John Lennon was a stoner, UFO's did not come to and aliens did not in fact found the Ancient Egyptian Empire, and that Elvis is dead. It amazes me that they will take up any crackpot intelectual's theory on the street as long as it threatens to debunk the Christian Faith, but will shy away from offending other faiths. One has to wonder if the staff are lapsed Catholics and Protestants, or ex hippies, still clinging to flowerpower and those special brownies...

Zahi Hawass would be very happy to hear that...lol

So would I! I fully agree with Dr. Hawass. Every time I see anything suggesting "ancient astronauts" it makes me want to scream. I've enjoyed some things that the History Channel has put out, but I don't anymore. They really need to move away from "ancient astronauts," Nostradamus, and conspiracy theories and bring back shows like Engineering an Empire or Digging for the Truth and then I will start watching again.

Yeah, like this one!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYVkJu8xKCo&feature=player_embedded (Jesus and the Space Aliens)
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
sprtslvr1973
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA; Jurisdiaction of Dallas and the South
Posts: 684


"Behold I stand at the Door and Knock" Rev. 3:20


« Reply #32 on: December 23, 2010, 02:11:18 PM »

I saw a show on History Channel to today that talked about Emperior Constantine and his Christian conversion. The historian there claimed that Constantine actually faked Christian beliefs and that "his version" of Christianity was based on well known pagan beliefs. Allegedly he pretended to be Christian to gain support from his troops(some of which were Christians). It was also said that what we believe now, reg Jesus, is actually came from earlier pagan god(i forget the name he was quoting) Did anyone see this show or have an opinion?

I'm not sure: I've seen so much pseudo-history on the "History" Channel that it all sorts of blurrs together.

If he faked Christian beliefs, he would have gotten baptized with all the pomp at Jordan like he planned, rather than doing it rushed on his deathbed.  Btw, his mother St. Helena was Christian.

What the Church teaches about Jesus now and in the days of St. Constantine is amply documented from the time of the Apostles until Constantine.

One thing though, while he was indeed baptized, it was by an Arian.

That would make no difference. If he held valid orders, then the Baptism is valid.

There are parts of Protestantism that seek to discredit The Church by saying Constantine was the root source of the corruption that they have reformed.. It's a bogus Partisan attack.. 
I agree. I have heard more than one Jack Chick-esque Protestant try to make this claim.
Logged

"Into thy hands I commend my spirit"- Luke 23:46
“Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!” - Mark 9:24
Thomist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite: Archdiocese of Baltimore
Posts: 203



« Reply #33 on: December 26, 2010, 08:35:28 PM »

Constantine varied throughout his life between Nicene and Arian Christianity. He had granted greater patronage to the Arians for some time before his death, and when he was baptised on his deathbed, it was by Eusebius, an Arian Bishop. There isn't much evidence that he felt any particular personal piety. Most probably he took a Pagan-Roman approach to Christianity. The Christian god had aided him politically, and so was worthy of honor and respect, but his relationship with God was probably one of Honor-Advantage exchange in the pagan tradition rather than personal salvation in the Christian tradition.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 08:38:58 PM by Thomist » Logged

"Would heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come?" - Saint Cyprian of Carthage
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #34 on: December 26, 2010, 10:05:12 PM »

I believe that he was sincere.
Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #35 on: December 26, 2010, 11:47:41 PM »

Constantine varied throughout his life between Nicene and Arian Christianity. He had granted greater patronage to the Arians for some time before his death, and when he was baptised on his deathbed, it was by Eusebius, an Arian Bishop. There isn't much evidence that he felt any particular personal piety. Most probably he took a Pagan-Roman approach to Christianity. The Christian god had aided him politically, and so was worthy of honor and respect, but his relationship with God was probably one of Honor-Advantage exchange in the pagan tradition rather than personal salvation in the Christian tradition.

You mean the moderate Arians. Some decades later, the moderates would be brought back in communion with the Nicene party.  And I personally believe that Constantine's relationship with God was because of both Honor-Advantage exchange in the Roman tradition, as well as a personal salvation in the Christian one. You have to keep in mind that the popular belief that one either can't sin or shouldn't sin after ones water Baptism was still around. And so it wasn't uncommon for some to wait till the last minute in order to be Baptized. Why? Because they didn't want to sin after being Baptized.

And so it was both. Was Saint Constantine perfect? No! But he wasn't all that bad either. He showed way more mercy on his pagan population than some of the later pagan kings who converted......like the Franks, and St. Vlad.

And so he wasn't really all that bad.......not as bad as what some make him out to be.


« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 11:53:31 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Thomist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite: Archdiocese of Baltimore
Posts: 203



« Reply #36 on: December 26, 2010, 11:59:33 PM »

Constantine varied throughout his life between Nicene and Arian Christianity. He had granted greater patronage to the Arians for some time before his death, and when he was baptised on his deathbed, it was by Eusebius, an Arian Bishop. There isn't much evidence that he felt any particular personal piety. Most probably he took a Pagan-Roman approach to Christianity. The Christian god had aided him politically, and so was worthy of honor and respect, but his relationship with God was probably one of Honor-Advantage exchange in the pagan tradition rather than personal salvation in the Christian tradition.

You mean the moderate Arians. Some decades later, the moderates would be brought back in communion with the Nicene party.  And I personally believe that Constantine's relationship with God was because of both Honor-Advantage exchange in the Roman tradition, as well as a personal salvation in the Christian one. You have to keep in mind that the popular belief that one either can't sin or shouldn't sin after ones water Baptism was still around. And so it wasn't uncommon for some to wait till the last minute in order to be Baptized. Why? Because they didn't want to sin after being Baptized.

And so it was both. Was Saint Constantine perfect? No! But he wasn't all that bad either. He showed way more mercy on his pagan population than some of the later pagan kings who converted......like the Franks, and St. Vlad.

And so he wasn't really all that bad.......not as bad as what some make him out to be.

Oh, I am not condemning him for deathbed baptism, it was a perfectly valid practice. And I don't think he was "bad", whether he was a pious man himself or not, he is a great hero in the history of the Church for the Edict of Milan. I just don't think there is a ton of evidence that he himself was a greatly pious man. He probably believed, to some degree or another. After all, he did have himself baptised. I did not meant to say that he was not a Christian, I just think that he was probably not filled with great religious fervor, and he probably thought about Christianity in terms of the pagan religion which he was brought up with. Most initial converts from paganism to Christianity, other than the most extremely pious, do seem to.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2010, 12:01:23 AM by Thomist » Logged

"Would heretics dare to come to the very seat of Peter whence apostolic faith is derived and whither no errors can come?" - Saint Cyprian of Carthage
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #37 on: December 27, 2010, 01:41:09 AM »

Constantine varied throughout his life between Nicene and Arian Christianity. He had granted greater patronage to the Arians for some time before his death, and when he was baptised on his deathbed, it was by Eusebius, an Arian Bishop. There isn't much evidence that he felt any particular personal piety. Most probably he took a Pagan-Roman approach to Christianity. The Christian god had aided him politically, and so was worthy of honor and respect, but his relationship with God was probably one of Honor-Advantage exchange in the pagan tradition rather than personal salvation in the Christian tradition.

You mean the moderate Arians. Some decades later, the moderates would be brought back in communion with the Nicene party.  And I personally believe that Constantine's relationship with God was because of both Honor-Advantage exchange in the Roman tradition, as well as a personal salvation in the Christian one. You have to keep in mind that the popular belief that one either can't sin or shouldn't sin after ones water Baptism was still around. And so it wasn't uncommon for some to wait till the last minute in order to be Baptized. Why? Because they didn't want to sin after being Baptized.

And so it was both. Was Saint Constantine perfect? No! But he wasn't all that bad either. He showed way more mercy on his pagan population than some of the later pagan kings who converted......like the Franks, and St. Vlad.

And so he wasn't really all that bad.......not as bad as what some make him out to be.

Oh, I am not condemning him for deathbed baptism, it was a perfectly valid practice. And I don't think he was "bad", whether he was a pious man himself or not, he is a great hero in the history of the Church for the Edict of Milan. I just don't think there is a ton of evidence that he himself was a greatly pious man. He probably believed, to some degree or another. After all, he did have himself baptised. I did not meant to say that he was not a Christian, I just think that he was probably not filled with great religious fervor, and he probably thought about Christianity in terms of the pagan religion which he was brought up with. Most initial converts from paganism to Christianity, other than the most extremely pious, do seem to.

Oh I see, ok, Thanks for explaining!
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Ephraim.ID
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 19



« Reply #38 on: January 07, 2011, 05:07:24 PM »

There is ample evidence to show that Constantine not only was a Christian, but also fairly pious and very knowledgeable about the faith.  He is not without his faults, and he made some serious errors (as did many other people), but he responded to those errors with great repentance and a desire to honor Christ.

A great book on Constantine, by one of the leading Constantinian scholars:

Constantine and the Christian Empire, 2nd ed. by Charles Matson Odahl.  Dr. Odahl wrote his dissertation on Constantine in the 1970s and has been researching and writing about him since, publishing dozens of articles in academic journals on Constantine in the last 35 years, with this book being the culmination of all that work.

Also, a note on his baptism.  Eusebius of Nicomedia was an Arian, there is no question about that.  However, at the time of Constantine's baptism, he was claiming to be a Nicene Christian.  After Constantine's death, Eusebius revealed his true colors, that he had never left the Arian position.  So, while it is true to say that Constantine was baptized by an Arian, it does not follow that he was himself Arian or really even all that sympathetic to Arians (he had earlier exiled Eusebius of Nicomedia for writing letters to Arius, who also was in exile - Eusebius of Nicomedia was allowed back when he professed Nicene Christianity).
Logged
Tags: St. Constantine 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.156 seconds with 66 queries.