In the bible college which i am currently studying to become a pastor,

a lot has been taught us in the courses called 'Church history 1' and 'Church history 2'.

We have been taught how emperor Constantine converted to christianity,

how he stopped the persecution of christians,

and how he subsequently made christianity the official religion of the Roman emperor.


Emperer Constantine started ruling in 288 AD.

But according to the lecturer,

the conversion of the emperor to christianity lead to a fall in some christian principles.

One of the fallout of emperor Constantine conversion was the coming of catholism.


The lecturer gave the impression that the conversion was not good for christianity.


He then gave this assignment:

Was the conversion of emperor Constantine to christianity a blessing or a curse? Discus.

If you have any idea on this issue,

please feel free to express it.

Curse, that's when politics entered the Church and they started compromising with pagan beliefs

Emperor Constantine did not convert to Christianity.... Emperor Constantine created it himself... He wanted a single religion for his empire... He called together the council of nicea, it was that council that created Jesus and Christianity....

It is true o.

I never thought about the politics aspect of it.

Politics entered the church.

tsinzu:
Curse, that's when politics entered the Church and they started compromising with pagan beliefs

Too complicated a subject for me to really weigh in on, but I want to correct this:

daddymummy:
and how he subsequently made christianity the official religion of the Roman emperor.

Constantine did not make Christianity the official religion. He simply legalized it in the Edict of Milan. It was a later emperor, Theodosius, who made it the official religion in the Edict of Thessalonica, given over 40 years after Constantine had died.

sonmvayina:
Emperor Constantine did not convert to Christianity.... Emperor Constantine created it himself... He wanted a single religion for his empire... He called together the council of nicea, it was that council that created Jesus and Christianity....

Utter nonsense. Christianity existed for centuries prior to Constantine and Nicaea. Nicaea did not "create" Jesus and Christianity, its actual purpose was to resolve what was known as the "Arian Controversy", a dispute about whether Jesus was eternal or not (there was not, as some will claim, disagreement on whether Jesus was divine--both sides agreed on this). But everyone agreed on the other basics of the faith, i.e. the life of Jesus, the Bible, etc. This council did not "create" Jesus and Christianity.

Without him,Christianity would still be a minority faith or probably even be extinct.

Ok.

But i also believe that God could have ended the persecution in another just as He arrested Paul and stopped Paul's persecution of christians.

tartar9:
Without him,Christianity would still be a minority faith or probably even be extinct.

RandomGuy48:
Too complicated a subject for me to really weigh in on, but I want to correct this:Constantine did not make Christianity the official religion. He simply legalized it in the Edict of Milan. It was a later emperor, Theodosius, who made it the official religion in the Edict of Thessalonica, given over 40 years after Constantine had died.

Utter nonsense. Christianity existed for centuries prior to Constantine and Nicaea. Nicaea did not "create" Jesus and Christianity, its actual purpose was to resolve what was known as the "Arian Controversy", a dispute about whether Jesus was eternal or not (there was not, as some will claim, disagreement on whether Jesus was divine--both sides agreed on this). But everyone agreed on the other basics of the faith, i.e. the life of Jesus, the Bible, etc. This council did not "create" Jesus and Christianity.

That is what they told you... But we actually know more than that... Well, the gospel stories comes from ancient tales about marduk... Marduk is the son of Enki.. It was at the council of Nicea that Athanasius said he was both God and man and thereafter a history was forged for him.... The Messiah God promised the jews is a mortal man like me and you he is coming to rule In an earthly Kingdom and a peaceful world.. God never said he was coming to die for sins as God has already given a solution to the problem of sin in the old testament read 2nd chronicle 7 :14

sonmvayina:


That is what they told you... But we actually know more than that... Well, the gospel stories comes from ancient tales about marduk... Marduk is the son of Enki..

As far as I can tell, the supposed "similarities" are so vague they are essentially worthless.

It was at the council of Nicea that Athanasius said he was both God and man and thereafter a history was forged for him....

Jesus being both God and man was agreed upon by both Athanasius and Arius, the two sides in the dispute; there was no argument concerning that fact. And before then, Jesus being both God and man was stated by many Christian writers. Heck, forget extrabiblical testimony, it's stated in the Bible itself (most notably John 10:30), which was written well before Nicaea (as evidenced by physical manuscripts of it existing beforehand). The idea it was Athanasius who came up with this idea is absurd.

The Messiah God promised the jews is a mortal man like me and you

Where does it explicitly state this? Or perhaps more accurately, where does this explicitly state this in a way that does not work with Christianity? Jesus, while divine, was a "mortal man" in the sense that he was born, grew up, and was killed.

he is coming to rule In an earthly Kingdom and a peaceful world..

Which will occur after the Second Coming.

God never said he was coming to die for sins

Isaiah 53. And before anyone says "but that's a prophecy about Israel, not the Messiah" I should note that it being a messianic prophecy was an interpretation that the Jews themselves held--even for centuries after the birth of Christianity. It wasn't until long afterwards that it became the Jewish interpretation that it referred specifically and solely to Israel.

as God has already given a solution to the problem of sin in the old testament read 2nd chronicle 7 :14

2 Chronicles 7:14 is referring to forgiving the collective sin of the nation of Israel, not individual sins of individual people.

daddymummy:
In the bible college which i am currently studying to become a pastor,

a lot has been taught us in the courses called 'Church history 1' and 'Church history 2'.

We have been taught how emperor Constantine converted to christianity,

how he stopped the persecution of christians,

and how he subsequently made christianity the official religion of the Roman emperor.


Emperer Constantine started ruling in 288 AD.

But according to the lecturer,

the conversion of the emperor to christianity lead to a fall in some christian principles.

One of the fallout of emperor Constantine conversion was the coming of catholism.


The lecturer gave the impression that the conversion was not good for christianity.


He then gave this assignment:

Was the conversion of emperor Constantine to christianity a blessing or a curse? Discus.

If you have any idea on this issue,

please feel free to express it.

I don't know if the conversion of Constantine to Christianity was a curse, but whatever was responsible for the derailment from the original standard of Christianity is, so if it was his conversion, then It certainly was.

Maybe that was one of the "while men slept" moments in the respect of the parable of the tares that Jesus taught, which was when the devil was able to come into the church and sow his tares.

So he may have been one of the tares that Satan sowed, even though at the time, some of the christians may have been relieved and thought it was God because he stopped the persecution of christians.

But it all depends on the big "IF"!

tartar9:
Without him, Christianity would still be a minority faith or probably even be extinct.

daddymummy:
Ok.
But i also believe that God could have ended the persecution in another just as He arrested Paul and stopped Paul's persecution of christians

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, a small rock and upon the large rock I will build my congregation {Gr. ekklesia – called out ones}, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against her"
- Matthew 16:18

daddymummy:
In the bible college which i am currently studying to become a pastor, a lot has been taught us in the courses called 'Church history 1' and 'Church history 2'.

We have been taught how emperor Constantine converted to christianity, how he stopped the persecution of christians, and how he subsequently made christianity the official religion of the Roman emperor.

Emperor Constantine started ruling in 288 AD. But according to the lecturer, the conversion of the emperor to christianity lead to a fall in some christian principles. One of the fallout of emperor Constantine conversion was the coming of catholism.

The lecturer gave the impression that the conversion was not good for christianity. He then gave this assignment:

Was the conversion of emperor Constantine to christianity a blessing or a curse? Discus.

If you have any idea on this issue, please feel free to express it

MuttleyLaff:
But if I tarry long,
that thou may know how it is expedient to behave thyself in the house of God,
which is the congregation {Gr. ekklesia – called out ones} of the living God,
the pillar and base of the truth.
- 1 Timothy 3:15 Jubilee Bible 2000

For all it's worth, it's necessary and important to be familiar with this word "church"
because as we start to read about or know things done in the past,
we can begin to learn from them, learn a thing or two, would have become wiser and wise enough to make re-adjustments, where if applicable, to our theology

To start with and as a matter of fact, "ekklesia" is the proper and correct noun word for believers called out and/or gathering together, which the word "church", as it is, presently or currently represents.

"Ekklesia" actually, is a Greek word, which in Athens and in most Greek poleis (i.e. Greek cities or states) means an assembly of demo (i.e. yes, demo, is Greek for people, as like the demo in democracy)

"Ekklesia" is an assembly of summoned free people or gathering of those summoned. The word is derived from “ekkletos” meaning summoned and “ekkaleom” meaning to summon or call out.

"Ekklesia" in Strong's Greek Concordance, is defined as "an assembly, congregation, the whole body of Christian believers"
and says it’s formed from a compound of "ek" which means "out of or out from and to" and a derivative of "kaleo" which means "to call or a calling"

"Ekkletoi" refers to the called-out inhabitants or citizens of Athens or any of the Greek poleis, assembled together, as a result of a call out request done by a herald, announcer or town crier.

"Ekklesia" appears 114 times in the NT. It first appeared in Matthew 16:18, and that's where it was first mentioned and first used by none other than Jesus

Now here's a sense of biblical déjà vu repeating itself , Eve out of Adam, Israelites out of Egypt etc and this is, God, again, in the person of Jesus Christ doing a "call out from... and to assembly"

"Ekklesia" as far back in the Old Testament wilderness, has always been an assembly or congregation of called-out people (i.e. Acts 7:38 is referring to the congregation in Deuteronomy 9:10) and it's no different in the original Greek New Testament whether in non-secular and secular capacities (i.e. Matthew 16:18, Acts 7:38 non-secular and Acts 19:32, 39 and 41 for secular) Notice in Acts 19:32, 39 and 41, that "ekklesia" is used three times, for people not connected with religious or christian matters, assembling or gathering together.

This so far, is showing that, "ekklesia" represents something totally different to what we've commonly perceived what "church" is.

Also, the true meaning, import or connotation of "ekklesia" is lost or eroded when it is used or translated to/as "church"

"Ekklesia" isn't about physical structures, and the Greeks; originators of the word, never referred it, to be a building or place of worship, so at least Freeze got something right

At this juncture, some might say, all this etymology stuff is bunkum and time wasting, it's nitpicking over minute details, and that it's pedantic fault-finding or say church or ekklesia, whatever the noun used, it doesn't matter. Others like damọsky12, delighting in their ignorance(s), could say, church or ekklesia, it makes no difference,
it's much ado about nothing and so what's the big deal.

Well, fyi, in 1526 AD, William Tyndale's New Testament, was the first New Testament printed in the English Language and the fact about this translation, is that, not a single occurrence of the word "church" is found used for congregation in it.

William Tyndale did however, use the word "church" twice in Acts 14:13 and Acts 19:37 for something else. It was in reference to pagan Temples; "ekklesia" wasn't used in either of those verses mentioned.

Then Iupiters Preste which dwelt before their cite brought oxe and garlondes vnto the churche porche and wolde have done sacrifise with the people
- Acts 14:13 William Tyndale.

Zeus' temple was at the entrance to the city. The priest of the god Zeus brought bulls with flowery wreaths around their necks to the temple gates. The priest and the crowd wanted to offer a sacrifice [to Paul and Barnabas].
- Acts 14:13 GOD'S WORD® Translation.

For you have brought here these men, who are neither robbers of temples, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess.
- Acts 19:37 King James 2000 Bible

For ye have brought hyther these me whiche are nether robbers of churches nor yet despisers of youre goddes.
- Acts 19:37 William Tyndale.

Tyndale recognised, "ecclesia or ekklesia" to be congregacion or congregation of "called out people" who are believers
and that churches were buildings for religious practices or purposes, and this includes Jewish or pagan temples.

So, in this first English New Testament translation print, congregation originally was in the place where "church" is presently or currently found in most English translations.

In the beginning, building(s) was what "church" was original identified as, but now, it's obvious and no denying that, "church" is prevalently also called or known as the body of Christ.

Examples of other churches, we have, as of today are:
The Church of Scientology, Church of Wicca, The National Church of Bey (i.e. Beyonce), Church of Satan,
The Sunday Assembly (i.e. an atheist church), The Church of Humanity etcetera.

1557 AD was the first time "ekklesia" was translated as "church" by William Whittingham in the Geneva New Testament produced, subsequent bible translations, KJV included, began having "church" used to describe people and their place of congregation or place of meetings too. From then to the present, the norm now is, "church" erroneously is the physical structure and people assembling together (i.e. Matthew 16:18, Acts 14:23, James 5:14)

In the New Testament, we are used to knowing synagogue also to be an equivalent name of the building used for assembling in or congregating in, but the Greek word "sunagogé" means "coming together" and could imply a meeting (i.e. gathering together) rather than a building (i.e. Acts 13:43, James 2:2); so synagogues were simply gatherings that took place outdoors or in people’s houses or courtyards (i.e. refer to 2 Thessalonians 2:1 or Hebrews 10:25 Greek Text Analysis for more details) TB Joshua’s set-up, calls itself synagogue, but then for good measure, appends the word "church", making it: The Synagogue, Church Of All Nations (i.e. SCOAN)

The English word "church" on it's self, actually has pagan origins. It's a derivation from the Old English word cir(i)ce, cyr(i)ce, related to the Anglo Saxon circay, kirk in Scottish, the Latin circus/circulous, Dutch kerk, or German Kirche. These words all have associations with "gathering in circles" and researches showed that most pagan religions meetings have worshippers/attendees gathered together round in prayer circles.

This information gives some insight into Tyndales' understanding and the reason why he selected the word "Church" to refer to buildings; pagan temple(s) included and used congregacion (i.e. congregation) to mean "ekklesia"

Why was a totally unrelated word to ekklesia, substituted for ekklesia? (i.e. like in Job 14:4)

As so far noticed, the word "Church" has varied origins and different meanings to what we're accustomed to, but the word in Latin for ekklesia is also ekklesia, so, if Latin in the absence of a proper word, managed to retain the word ekklesia, why couldn't the "called out ones" who translated, retain it too?

In light of all these information, why the word "church", is falsely used in place of Christ's ekklesia leaves one literally open-mouthed. No doubt, there are strong indications of foul-play somewhere down the history lanes of church, as "church" DOESN'T COME from the original Koine Greek word ekklesia.

As regards the chequered and real truth about ""Church"; where did it come from and where is it headed?”, lack of space and time doesn't permit elaborating, hence these following bullet points:

• Adam & Eve in Eden fast forward to Matthew 16:18 and Acts 2:41
• Roman Emperors Constantine and Licinius' Edict of Milan in AD 313 which established a policy of religious freedom for all.
(i.e. a proclamation that permanently legalised Christianity in the Roman Empire)
• Christianity becoming the official religion of the Roman Empire.
• the sell-out and/or shady deal(s)(e.g. "Church" and State collaboration under Constantine)
• The regularisation and formation of the Roman Catholic Church (i.e. RCC)
• Roman Empire's adoption of RCC as "official" church during Constantine's reign
• The supremacy of the Roman bishop (i.e. the papacy) created/aided with the support of the Roman emperors (i.e. Constantine and his successors)
• Constantine calling the First Council of Nicaea in AD 325, in an attempt to unify Christianity when doctrinal disputes arose
(e.g. Arianism, doctrines named after Arius, a teacher in the early 4th century A.D) and presiding over this first ecumenical church council
• the exploits of the apostles, all charged up in their faith, preaching the Gospel and like Jesus willing to die horrible deaths because of it.
• The apostolic period (i.e. including The "patristic writings'') - about contemporaries of the apostles like Linus, mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:21, and who became the bishop of Rome after Peter was martyred
• the ante-Nicene (i.e. before Nicaea) period - about the likes of Ignatius and his "ekklesia katholicos" phrase, he was a disciple of the apostle John
• the post-Nicene "church" period - about the likes of Augustine, bishop of Hippo, who is often called the father of the [Roman Catholic] Church because of his great work in Church doctrine
• The term "Roman Catholic" defined by Emperor Theodosius on February 27th, 380 in the Theodosian Code.
In that document, he referred to those who hold to the "religion which was delivered to the Romans by the divine Apostle Peter"
as "Roman Catholic Christians" and gave them the official sanction of the empire
• the first canon (i.e. Muratorian Canon), the progressive acceptance of other books as canonical and have them make up the 66 books of the bible
• The fall of the Roman Empire in AD 476 and the rise of the Roman Catholic Church
• the Pontifex Maximus; the highest office in the state religion of ancient Rome and at the collapse of the Roman Empire, RCC popes taking on this title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors
• the tragic compromise of believers with the introduction of pagan religions and assimilation of paganism influences
(i.e. the Romanization and paganization of Christianity and the "Christianization" of pagan beliefs)
• Apostolic succession and Pope Gregory in AD 590, upon assuming office denying any responsibility or support for any ambition to the throne of Peter
• "Church" and State fully merged as the Holy Roman Empire
• Subsequent popes exercising authority over kings and emperors, taking on imperial powers along with ecclesiastical authority (e.g. St Leo III)
• the Filioque clause/Filioque controversy and/or The Great Schism
• John Wycliffe of England, John Huss of Czechoslovakia, and John of Wessel in Germany
• Protestant Reformation; division between the Catholic Church and Protestantism over interpretation of Biblical Testaments.
• The Edict of Worms (i.e. the Holy Roman Empire, Charles V and the Pope banning all writings of Martin Luther and labelling him a heretic and enemy of the state) etc
• Calvinism (i.e. named after French reformer and theologian John Calvin, he was Martin Luther's successor during the Protestant Reformation)
• The Edict of Nantes, The Edict of Restitution.
• King Henry VIII taking over jurisdiction of the Church, after kicking RCC out of England.
• Various political and ulterior motives
(e.g. translators forbidden by King James' official order from replacing the Greek word "ekklesia" with "congregation" (i.e. the true interpretation)
Compare Psalms 22:22 with Hebrews 2:12 for more details on this, bibles translated to fit the politics or traditions of men etc)
• Evangelicalism, Revivalism, Pentecostalism, Christian science, the Charismatic Movement, Mormonism/the Latter Day Saint movement, Word of Faith movement etc
• Institutional/organised church(es); licensed or incorporated as businesses/charities etc (i.e. to gain non-profit tax-exempt status)
• Church(es) under the jurisdiction of man (e.g. unincorporated charities/church(es), unregistered/registered church(es) etc)
• details of corrupted teachings or doctrines.
• Etcetera, etcetera


As for, "Church" where did the word come from and where is it heading? Proper?
Well the word "Church", in letter and/or substance, clearly metamorphosed from "ekklesia" and as it currently stands, those/anyone called "Church" today are seemingly apostate(s) heading towards just deserts.
"Church" will be getting its divine comeuppance some point at the end.

---

1st century AD - ekklēsia founded on the teachings of Jesus
2nd century AD - Christians already denouncing teachings seen as heresies, e.g Gnosticism, Montanism etc
4th century AD - ekklēsia transformed, church evolves, finally legalized and then promoted by Emperors Constantine and Theodosius I as the state church of the Roman Empire
11th century AD - Church within the Roman Empire excommunicated each other - West (i.e. Rome) and the East (i.e. Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria) officially excluded each other
16th century AD - Lutheran Church was founded by Martin Luther
16th century AD - Protestant Reformation
16th century AD - The Presbyterian denomination began by John Knox who was dissatisfied with Anglicanism
16th century AD - Anglicanism (i.e. Church of England) founded by King Henry VIII
17th century AD - The Baptist church launched by John Smyth in Amsterdam, Holland.
18th century AD - The Methodist church launched by John and Charles Wesley in England
18th century AD - The Salvation Army launched by William Booth, who quit the Anglicans, and then the Methodists to set up his own version of Christianity.
19th century AD - The Jehovah's Witness Church developed by Charles Russell.
19th century AD - The Christian Scientist religion began by Mrs. Mary Baker Eddy, centered around an outright denial of Original Sin and its effects
19th century AD - Ballinger Booth, the son of William Booth, quit The Salvation Army and started his own church
19th century AD to date - The Seventh-Day Adventists, Apostolic Faith, Foursquare Apostolic Church, K&C, CAC, CCC, RCCG, MFM, Winners Chapel, KICC, BLW/Christ Embassy, SCOAN,
and various other Pentecostal Churches etc are among the hundreds of new churches founded by men within the past 200 years or so.

Be careful what you wish for daddymummy, as you never know who will be listening and as a result of that, what you wished for might come true, just like as in above.

daddymummy, dont mind about whether the conversion of Constantine was/is a blessing or curse, because we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose however know this much that, if only more christians properly read their bibles there'd be less christians.

sonmvayina:
Emperor Constantine did not convert to Christianity.... Emperor Constantine created it himself... He wanted a single religion for his empire... He called together the council of nicea, it was that council that created Jesus and Christianity....

Foolish talk of a blind man. Created Yeshua? . Even roman historian wrote on the killing of a Jewish criminal called christus .

Jewish history proves the existence of Yeshua so what's this foolish you r spitting .

Lazy man. You know history of your company and village but dont know the history of the world. Atleast simple google search will clear this great folloshness

Yeshua is real. He walked in this earth. When you die you will see His face. Because He is the best one that will judge you

Continue.