history of christianity (or any religion for that matter)

[Tash]

i'm taking a class in medieval history this semester, and we're starting on the fall of the roman empire and the rise of christianity during this time. and i'm finding this really fascinating in the fact that i have never studied it before. and it's surprised me that we never learnt about it at school- for my entire life i went to an anglican/christian school- because i think it's an important thing to learn. in fact i don't even think i know the real concept of what a christian actually is, which leads me to wonder what on earth we learnt in christian studies, apart from reading parts of the bible and who knows what else, i can't say i paid much attention in class.
so for all the religious people on this forum, how much do you know about the rise of christianity in history, the original concepts of their belief, where it came from, how it became the dominant religion in the roman empire, and so on? how important do you think this is in terms of defining your beliefs? because despite the fact that i wouldn't say i'm a 'practicing' christian, i'm still disappointed at the fact that my school failed to teach me about its origins

[pianonut]

wow!  sounds like you are a scholar.  yes.  many things are different today in many areas of scholarship.  just as in music.  you look for the urtext.  that is, the bible in the original hebrew, greek and aramaic.  a few places of the bible have been changed over the years to fit various beliefs of the peoples who were translating.  for some interesting insights you can look at the appedixes of the companion bible.  it will surprise you in some of the things it has to say in the comparison of the texts.

i learned about the same thing last year in regards to music.  that sometimes there are many copies of a manuscript and they simply pass on mistakes (in some) and others are more accurate.  you do get a 'general' feel for the piece, but to be as close as accurate as possible gives you a little less 'interpretive room' and more exactly what the composer was thinking.  same with God, imo.

he says somewhere in the bible that he will do nothing without first telling us through his prophets.  today, we might laugh about that idea.  many people think Christ is the first and the last prophet, but in rev. 11:3 it speaks about two witnesses at the end time, that will be telling people of the whole world to turn back to God and not listen to people who try to convince you of another power (mankinds) and government.  this government, in rev. is spoken of as the beast power.  in daniel it speaks of several world governments (daniel 7 interpreted by God in verse 17)  the first 'reich' started with charlemagne, then otto the great 'holy roman empire,' and then the hapsburg empire of austria, the rise of napoleon (who almost revived it), an attempt of hitler (called 3rd reich), and now we are waiting for a fourth 'beast' if you believe prophecy.  this will be a combination of states (just as in the roman empire) that cling to somthing other than God and actually worship the beast (or the power that reigns). 

as christians, we are told not to worship the beast, his name, or number.  to many, this sounds utterly ridiculous.  but, with all the technology today, we are soon coming to a point that one place on earth could keep tabs on a world empire.  i mean, that's what cartoons have been about for ages.  someone tries to take over the world.  it even mentions in the bible that they are somewhat of a lunatic.  dan. 7:23-25 esp 25 says that he will try to persecute christians.  "he will speak against the Most High and wear down the saints of the Highest One...he will intend to make alterations in times and in law..."  one church i attended believed this to mean a total change of the calendar so we cannot keep possibly the days that God originally intended us to keep (day of rest) and must work on all (thus giving opportunity that the laws of God be broken unless resistance).

many people become obsessed with prophecy, but when you look at history, you realize you can't become complacent either.  i don't believe in hanging on the street corners yelling and holding up signs, but i do believe in quietly watching the times.  if you see something happening that looks like the release of the last four horses of the apocolypse (famine is one - and it's happening right now in sudan and other parts of the world) you can see that the horse riding death (so many deaths of our men in iraq, too) is probably only preceeded by the sixth seal (world war, sun becoming black as sackcloth - remember this is a vision and john could not interpret the vision totally, because it was in our modern day.  the moon becomes like blood (probably people looking at so much violence that they find no rest in looking up at the sky...and the stars of the sky fell to earth (john didn't know about satellites, weapons of war that fall - ie bombs, and man-made stars as well). 

anyway, that's my take on the books of daniel and rev. - that there will be one last world empire and then God's kingdom will be established.  it will rule for 1000 years (millenium) and then those who never had a chance to hear God's word will be also ressurrected.  the saints of God will rule with God forever.  God isn't partial to any people, race, or background - only those who are willing to take a chance on His government over the governments they have experienced and become 'like Him' in holiness.  different than the cultures and values of the world.  this is a hard thing, because as a christian you rarely fit fully into this society.  you try to be different.  to lead people in a different direction than depression in what the current situation of the world is.  it's going to get worse, and then a lot better.  that gives christian's hope (even if they die).  to me, this gives hope to those parents whose children have died in what seems to be a neverending war in iraq.  and, may soon lead to other nations fighting in that exact region (where the euphrates will dry up and make way for the nations to come and fight). 

the 'Day of the Lord' is when Christ returns to fight for us.  despite all these weapons of mass destruction, his angels can do far greater damage.  rev. 8 speaks of the sort of miracles that egypt saw (when moses was told to do them)except on a larger scale.  verse 7 is fire, verse 8 volcanoes verse 9 1/3 of sea life dies and 1/3 ships destroyed verse 10 speaks of pollution of water verse 11...etc.  all of this is after the saints are 'sealed' so that no damage or hurt will apply to them.  this sounds bizarre but very possible.  some call this a 'rapture' of sorts.  i don't know much about rapture ideas, but i do know that Christ says to be ready because one will be in the field and the other 'taken'  (this is in Matthew somewhere)  it's not a new concept to have the protection of God.  all the saints have had it at some point or other, and the Last Days will be no exception.  instead of panic, people who are christian simply see the signs of the times as an imminent reminder of Christ's return and the establishment of peace. 

[tolkien]

It is indeed a fascinating period of history. I would recommend reading Norwich's Byzantium (The Early Centuries, The Apogee, The Decline and Fall), which is a history of the Roman Empire from Constantine the Great onwards, and - after 476 AD -  of the remaining Eastern part of it aka Byzantine empire, which lasted until 1453. Religious matters - integral part of the politics of the day -  and the evolution of the Church are minutely analyzed. Vasiliev's account - though older - is even more detailed. Steven Runciman's writings are also a great and valuable source, among which The Great Church in Captivity is dealing exclusively with Church history. You should read that last one, anyway.

[timothy42b]

You are right, few Christians have any idea of the history of their religion, or even of the Bible. 

Obviously the Christian denominations are an outgrowth of the Jewish traditions, about which we usually learn even less.  That national history is fascinating, with all the wars, defeats, enslavements and loss of land, through which they somehow maintained faith in a Yahweh that might have seemed insufficiently protective to an outsider. 

[Waldszenen]

All I can say about the history of Christianity is that it's full of rape, murder, corruption and sin... pretty good considering it's now pretty much the biggest established "organisation" on earth.

[thalbergmad]

There was a programme on the TV over in here in England a couple of days ago that i was half listening to.

Apparantly, the Roman Emporer Constantine saw a meteor or comet in the sky and thought it was a fiery cross. He won a battle the next day and made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire.

The Christians then went on a killing spree that put the pagans to shame.

I might not have got this right as i was trying to listen to the Massenet Piano Concerto at the same time.

[Tash]

thalbergmad you're on the right track! Constantine saw the greek symbol 'Chi-Rho' in the sky,  which are the first letters of 'Christ', saw it as a sign between him and God so he put it on all his soldiers' shields and they won some battle against Licinius (they were battling over emporerish power) and then he made the Edict of Milan of toleration in 313 so christianity was legalised, but they didn't do any killing that i'm aware of yet...

pianonut, interesting post, i have no idea where half of it came from but that's ok

[tolkien]

Actually, we can't be sure that this event actually happened. The vision of Constantine (the mark of the Cross and the motto "Hoc Vince") is only mentioned by Eusebius in his book De Vita Constantini, which he wrote many years after the death of Constantine. No mention of this vision is made in any other source of the period or, indeed, any of the other books that Eusebius wrote, including his ecclesiastical history (in which he gave an account of the battle). So,it seems to me that it might be safe to assume that this could be a legend, in order to give the strategic genius of Constantine divine inspiration and so be more impressive. It might also be true. We can't know for certain.

The battle in question was against Maxentius in 312 outside Rome and it was significant because it then made Constantine sole ruler of the western part of the empire (it was the period when the administrative division of the empire into 4 parts made by Dioklitianus no longer worked). Then Constantine  went to fight Licinius (by then, governor of the eastern part of the empire) who didn't respect the Edict of Milan (first issued in 311 by Galerius, then signed by Constantine and Licinius alike) and persecuted the Christians.


thalberg, as you see, documentaries can be very simplified versions of what actually happened and can tell us only so much between commercials. Even less if we have Massenet to distract us even further! That concerto is charming, btw.

[pianonut]

dear tash,

world governments and religions have many historical treatises written about them (besides being prophecied in the bible).  one that was recommended to me a long time ago was 'the rise of fall of the roman empire' by edward gibbons.  he is quoted by wikipedia here:  www.answers.com/topic/fall-of-rome

his views are that the reason rome fell was:
1.  rapid increase of divorce
2.  higher and higher taxes
3.  mad craze for pleasure, sports becoming more exciting and brutal
4.  building of giant armaments - when the real enemy was within
5.  decay of religion; faith turning into mere form, losing touch because of decadence of people and becoming impotent to guide it.

he even quotes (i think gibbons) "righteousness exhalts a nation:  but sin is a reproach to any people."  prov. 14:34
and "blessed is the nation God is for"  ps. 33:12

as a historian, gibbons challenged 'the church' by quoting church doctrine as a secondary source (and not first).  he challenged what was the true faith - first delivered by Christ and what was actually done within several hundred years of the death of christ (in terms of combining paganism with christianity).

if you want to first read about one world empire (the roman), you can read it online under www.ccel.org/gibbon/decline/volume1/index.html

or many many books on various subjects but harder to read, imo

www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/g#a375   (click read on-line)

[Tash]

Actually, we can't be sure that this event actually happened. The vision of Constantine (the mark of the Cross and the motto "Hoc Vince") is only mentioned by Eusebius in his book De Vita Constantini, which he wrote many years after the death of Constantine. No mention of this vision is made in any other source of the period or, indeed, any of the other books that Eusebius wrote, including his ecclesiastical history (in which he gave an account of the battle). So,it seems to me that it might be safe to assume that this could be a legend, in order to give the strategic genius of Constantine divine inspiration and so be more impressive. It might also be true. We can't know for certain.

The battle in question was against Maxentius in 312 outside Rome and it was significant because it then made Constantine sole ruler of the western part of the empire (it was the period when the administrative division of the empire into 4 parts made by Dioklitianus no longer worked). Then Constantine went to fight Licinius (by then, governor of the eastern part of the empire) who didn't respect the Edict of Milan (first issued in 311 by Galerius, then signed by Constantine and Licinius alike) and persecuted the Christians.


thalberg, as you see, documentaries can be very simplified versions of what actually happened and can tell us only so much between commercials. Even less if we have Massenet to distract us even further! That concerto is charming, btw.

yeah, what tolkien said- probably more reliable than what i wrote down in a lecture...

we just covered the 'fall' of the roman empire, though i got the impression it was because the germanics had all started crashing rome due to the huns coming into their territory and then the germanics in the west decided that they didn't need an emporer...but whatever, i'm not looking for a history lesson here! i just want to know what the christians think about their knowledge of their history and its relevance to their beliefs...

[pianobabe_56]

Pianonut~  Your beliefs sound strikingly similar to mine, and I really appreciate your insights. Do you belong to any particular branch of Christianity?

[tolkien]

One reminder:  Gibbons’s account of the roman empire was published in six volumes between 1776 and 1788. His views are seriously outdated. His books are very well written (his use of language is very evocative) and that's the only virtue that holds to this day. He had no access to many sources, made a lot of assumptions based solely on his personal beliefs, etc. You get the meaning. For a historical account of the Roman Empire (too many things have come to light since then) one is advised to look elsewhere first.

Tash, you’re absolutely right, that’s the main reason why the western roman empire fell. The eastern part was seriously tested as well by barbarian invasions but was ultimately able to hold them back and survive. It's interesting to note, however, that after the fall of Rome, the Visigoth rulers claimed that they governed Italy in the name of the Roman Emperor in Constantinople. Emperor Justinian managed briefly to reclaim Italy but after that short period it was mainly the drifting apart of the eastern and western Churches that led to the estrangement and ultimate antagonism between the still surviving roman empire aka byzantine and the emerging european medieval states in Italy and elsewhere. The Great Schism of 1054 (that divided the until then united Church into the Roman Catholic and the Othodox) was a major cause of that.

The main reason that the pope of Rome became so influential was that he had no ecclesiastical or indeed secular rival in the west and he was away from any real influence from the Emperor in Constantinople (and thus he was able to influence himself the frail power of the kings of the feudal european states). There were other elements as well (difference of language, latin vs.latin/greek, from a point onwards the election of Frankish Popes bearing a different mentality, or the  influence of Aristotle through Thomas Aquinas - whereas the eastern Church was equally influenced by Plato, whose writings were not known in the West). In the east, however, where the empire survived, the church found a role within the state and never had aspirations of domination over the secular leader (or was able to act on them!).

This difference of evolution is also witnessed today. For example, the eastern orthodox church, traditionally more attuned to society and people's needs, didn't and of course needn't under the historical circumstances, witness a Reformation as did the western church. Now, that's another whole huge subject and I'm afraid I rambled on enough already!

[pianohopper]

What if god is a woman?  Male chauvinists would boil in hell.

[prometheus]

Schoenberg wrote two full pages on the fall of the roman empire in an attempt to explain the I vs V polarisation in his book 'Harmonielehre'.

[pianonut]

dear pianobabe_56,

i attend a sabbatarian church (avodat yisrael - messianic jewish), but agree with pianohopper that the only difference between proclaiming oneself a christian, and acting like one is the help of the holy spirit.  we can talk a lot, but we have to do.

this is the hardest part of christianity, no matter the church.  we were discussing today the  'Lord's prayer' and how we are told that Christ prayed.  also, we discussed that all our needs are abundantly cared for by Him and that when in doubt or depression to count our blessings.  (told to count 50) there are many people (i suppose in many congregations) that are going through tough times.  i like this particular congregation because it actively prays for each member and specifics in their lives.  also, for those who are sick, and those who need specific prayers.  it's a very family oriented church and the children are also prayed for (blessing over them every week) and taught.  many scriptures are repeated from week to week, so it gives opportunity to learn some basic scriptures and songs.  this church has the MOST music i've ever heard in one service.  not that music is the only thing, but i really enjoy the service myself.  lots of singing.  i suppose many other churches sing lots, too, though portions of the liturgical service are sung in call/response form with the service printed in the bulletin to follow along.  they are adaptations of ancient service of the temple in jerusalem.  praises to God, praises of his wonders done in history to present, praises of the use of His Spirit to guide and lead us, and a calling of his Spirit to help us speak his words during the week.  also, we pray for forgiveness of sins weekly together as a congregation.

the most wonderful thing i can think of so far, is that recently i was called by a member and asked to play piano for church on a certain date.  after talking a bit, she asked how i was.  i said, ok, except for the last couple of days i had a splitting headache.  right then, she prayed for me over the phone.  i said, 'amen,' and then suddenly my headache was gone.  even my kids were a bit skeptical, but i was telling everyone, as i am you, too.  this is amazing to me even though i have been a christian a long time.  i don't always expect my prayers to be immediately answered, so i am always pleasantly encouraged when i feel like God hears these small requests.  our church also prays for the world, for peace, for those who are suffering, for our nation.  it is an encouraging place to be on the weekend. 

[yamagal]

Kenneth Scott Latourette's A History of Christianity is very good.

[musik_man]

Schoenberg wrote two full pages on the fall of the roman empire in an attempt to explain the I vs V polarisation in his book 'Harmonielehre'.

They edited that out of the translation I'm reading( or maybe was reading... haven't touched it in a couple weeks.)  Really interesting book, but not particularly good at teaching Harmony.

[pianowelsh]

Ok. First things first. Christianity origionated with God!! Jesus Christ is the son of God and Christians follow Christ (Christians meaning - little Christ's).  We know from the bible that  Jesus Christ (son of God) and God the father were involved in creation, we also know that the scripture teachers that Christ was slain before the foundations of the world!! So we know that God' plan even in creation was to make redemption something that in Christ could be grasped. We should here deliniate what it actually means to BE Christian. Constantine never made anyone a Christian (ok maybe interms of records and subscriptions he did - he was wrong to try and do so). A Chirstian is one who has been made alive by Christ.  one who has been convicted by the Holy spirit and has come to a point of repentance through salvation by trusting in the Lord Jesus Christ who takes away our sins.  Essentially one who has met with God at their point of need have become aware of their need for salvation and have realised that it is only available in Christ because he has risen from death and has paid the price for sin  - setting us free.  -they have then commited their lives to him and have become 'born again' into his family and are indwelled by the Holy spirit opening the way of access to our Heavenly father (God the Father - creator/sustainer et al.)  This takes a step of Faith.  The Christian life is Characterised by Faith at every turn.  You will see from this that Noone can be MADE to be a Christian because actually most of the above are done for us by God - we essentially just respond.  Now these 'Christians' we are talking about have been in opperation since the day of pentecost.  Previously the jewish people were officially the 'people of God' - inccidentally God has not abandoned the jewish people, he has made promise to them which have still to be forfilled.  Yet it was clear always that the law given to them was not what saved them but Faith (case in point Abraham) and this is the pattern that God had ordained since the fall 'by Faith Abel offered a more aceptable sacrifice than Cain'.  The early church spread largely with the commissioning of the 12 disciples/apostles  and other followers of Christ who literally took the gosel of Christ to the known world (they didnt kill anyone or force anyone to convert their religion. They preached Christ Crucified the Hope of Glory and men and women repented in all over the place. The church suffered much persecution until Christainity was eventually adopted as the official religion. Which lead to a very faulty concept that because you are born in a particular place and are brought up to believe a certian moral code then you are a Christain - This never was the case and never will be. However although these miscarraiges were  taking place and atrocities done in the name of God were being carried out God used this to make the gospel know throughout the world on a wider scale than 12 men could have reached. The gospel is still spreading today and tribes in remote places are still hearing the gospel for the first time which is really cool!!  the gospel will go out into all the nations and then the end will come (God promised that). I think its really cool that in the last day there will be noone on the planet who does not know who God is because in that day everyone will see him and they will say that is the God i heard about. Unfortunately for many it will be, that is the God i heard about but didnt believe in OR that is the God that i rejected and said i can do nicely on my own thanks to.  but those who know and Love him will see our great redeemer coming to claim his reward and bring everything to a conclusion.  I know i ve not been to detailed but i hope ive opened up a new perspective on it for you.

Pianonut  - i agree but i would add 'be' to your list. We can talk about Christ, we can live in obedience to his commands, but there is an element of just being at peace and at rest in our relationship with God. i alwasy think of the dying thief.  He didnt do much talking. He didnt do many great works for God. He simply trusted that Christ could do what he said he could do because he was the son of God and that is amazing.  granted we who live in Christ do need to be obedient and we do need to witness (by their fruits you shall know them) but its great to rest in th fact that our acceptance before God is entirely on faith in Christ - not on anything we do or say
Pianohopper I dont see where you were coming from with your little list?? But what i do see is that it has everything to do with Joe and nothing to do with God. religion is manmade. Christianity isnt a religion because it originated from God and God does take what we say seriously which is good because it works in a good way and a bad way.  He takes seriously when we confess with our mouth 'Jesus is Lord' GOOD. But he also takes it seriously when people take his name in vain and deny him = BAD because they do so to their own destruction.  I presume you know this but to set record straight God wrote the 10 commandments not Joe and the guy who wrote them down was Moses and he wasnt peeved when he went up the mountain, he went up in Faith and was allowed to survive the experience of being in Gods presence by the Grace of God. Joe has slightly quirky theology too in that the law wasnt meant to stop people form sinning but to show them their need for a saviour ( a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ - as the letter writer more eloquently puts it)  Hope this is helpfull.