Emperor Constantine's ancestors, the Flavians, and Calpurnius Pisos were responsible for the creation of the early Christian scriptures, demonstrated here. Constantine's descent from the Calpurnius Piso family, through Constantines paternal Grandmother:. Arrius Calpurnius Piso. Boionia Procilla. Eunice Corelia Rupilia Faustina.
Piso used the name, Timothy. Domitia Lucilla II. Marcus Aurelius. Roman Emperor from C. Bassina Septimia Severa Princess.
Flavius Numerius Greek Prince. Emperor Clodius Albinus. Aurelia a descendant of Emperor Marcus Aurelius, who ruled C.
Tiberius Claudius Marcian us Eutropius born C. Constantius I Chlorus. Roman Emperor, reigned C. Flavia Julia Helena Britannia. Constantine I. Flavia Maxima Fausta.
Just like his ancestors, to Constantine, Christianity was simply a way to control how the slaves thought, so they would think they were doing the work of their God as opposed to following the commands of the emperor.
Paganism was about the moment at hand, bargaining with the Gods through sacrifice in the hopes of a good immediate outcome. There was no concept of salvation, everyone went to Hades, sinner or not. The offer to follow a religion that did offer salvation and made the slaves as important as their master would have had appeal. By this time, this new religion law had more scriptures written for it, to give the perception of some kind of history to it, whereas before, after the Roman-Jewish War of 70 C.
Plus, the fact that the Pharisees who changed their name to Rabbi were still around after the war, meant they must have informed people the religion was false. The Crisis of the Third Century — C. Emperors came and went by the year C. Therefore, we can conclude that the people doubted their pagan gods were supporting them. Considering Constantine initially adopted the sun god, Sol Invictus, around C.
E, after Diocletian left the imperial office in C. Christianity was a minority faith, but in only one sense, that sense is that only some members of the aristocracy wanted to promote it, and some did not, those who did not were Emperor Diocletian; Galerius; Maximianus I; and Constantius Chlorus - Diocletian was in favor of the traditional Roman religions. The so-called "persecution" in the year C.
However, the "persecutions" would be presented in history as acts of martyrdom, giving the impression that the religion was moral and people were willing to die for it. That both Valerian and, as we will see, Diocletian ejected Christians from public office demonstrates that Christians not only lived peacefully among the Romans, they flourished and rose to positions of prominence and power.
It is only from the fourth century that, under Diocletian, 'Christians' had to give their scriptures to authorities. As I explain in my book, it was not even a religion, it only appears to have been a growing religion because Emperor Constantine's ancestors portrayed it that way in their writings. Scholars are well aware of the exaggerations in the various literary sources available, both 'Christian' and pagan.
Pliny the Younger, the early-second-century Roman governer of Bithynia-Pontus in modern Turkey , is the first account we have of a pagan author to refer to the existence of 'Christians'.
In a letter addressed to the Roman emperor Trajan, written in C. Many persons of all ages, and of both sexes alike, are being brought into peril of their lives by their accusers, and the process will go on. For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only through the free cities, but into the villages and the rural districts, and yet it seems to me that it can be checked and set right.
Ref - Pliny It is clear Pliny wanted the above letter to sound serious. The Roman historian, Tacitus , a few years later, would create his Annals of Rome , published around C. It presents an account of the empire from the reigns of Emperor Tiberius to Nero. Tacitus, too, mentions 'Christians', he portrays the "cult" as "an immense multitude" Annals Tacitus's mention is in regards to the great fire of Rome under Nero in 64 C.
Nero is portrayed as starting the fire and blaming the "Christians", but there are many issues with this. One is the fact that Nero built many great popular buildings and structures before the fire and second is the fact that, in terms of the current understanding of Christian history, Christianity would not have been separated from Judaism in Nero's time.
So here we have:. Pliny the Younger stating " there are so many people involved in the danger. Many persons of all ages, and of both sexes alike But other Roman writers say nothing, only those known in history as ' Suetonius ', Lucian of Samosata, Galen give very brief references.
If Christianity had a large following and was such a threat, why did most Roman authors have little and, more often, nothing to say? The Roman historian, known as Herodian, detailed the careers of the emperors from to C. He gave details about the threats they confronted, any threats from "Christians" are not mentioned.
We then have the exaggerated numbers of 'Christians' portrayed in the New Testament. In Acts , after Jesus's resurrection, the number of Christians presented is eleven, but in the very next verse, the number drastically shoots up to believers? In Acts , 'Peter' apparently converted three thousand Jews and another five thousand in Acts In Acts , we read " And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women. The supposed Christian author, known to us as ' Tertullian ', exaggerates the most.
In addition, as the second major political action taken by Constantine, the Nicene Creed was a fundamental step in his separation of his political and religious beliefs, resulting in a clear political advantage being identified within the Church as a tool for furthering his dominance over Rome. Consequently, the Christian Church moved away from a persecuted minority to the favoured religion of the Roman Empire in less than three centuries.
Through this crucial action, the Church gained a larger proportion of control over the ruling of Rome, resulting in a greater need for Constantine to keep them on side, to ensure this popularity with its citizens. It was his fears of being overthrown that enticed him to allow the Church to take more control of the state foundations. In the wake of the establishment of the Council of Nicaea, both Arius and two overseers who refused to sign the Creed were exiled.
This highly significant action ultimately identified the influence that religion can have on actions within society and politics and how religious structures can be used to establish and consolidate political and social power structures. This theory can clearly be identified as a source of numerous discrepancies amongst the opinions of historians such as Humphries and Frend due to the limited proof of accuracy of the text as well as the creation of various interpretations of the sacred text by religious groups.
Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, legalising Christianity throughout the Roman Empire in an attempt to gain favour with the religious minorities in Rome. The impact of this action established Constantine as an individual who was committed to his promises of introducing an integrated and dynamic relationship between religion and state law, ultimately undermining the methods and theology of many of his predecessors.
The political opportunity that accompanied the Christian minority amongst the empire was recognised by Constantine, and was a key factor in building his support base within the empire. Similarly, by manipulating Roman law to facilitate his desired goals and outcomes, Constantine was able to further expand his control of the empire by making peace with the Church, whilst additionally gaining the moral allegiance of the people. Despite this, historians like Frend conversely argued that it was the Church whom manipulated Roman law to ease its existence within society after years of persecution.
Evidence supporting the concept of Constantine using religion for his socio-political agenda is his response to the backlash regarding his implementation of significant and rapid changes to everyday law. This highlights his desires to demonstrate his control over the empire rather than for religious beliefs.
Taking a more aggressive, physical approach to the issue allowed him to create fear amongst the lower classes. This directly contradicts the claims made by Constantine within the Edict of Milan that allowed for open worship and religious beliefs.
Moreover, this statement proves the disconnection Constantine held with religious faiths. He had no interest in seeking spiritual guidance, he was simply utilising a prime political opportunity in front of him to maintain his control of Rome. Constantine consequently created new minorities and a power shift within the empire as he became more and more consumed by Christian theology as a method of political control. Furthermore, Constantine behaved similarly to his predecessors, demonstrating favouritism towards a single religious following, validating the importance of his Christian followers over other religious minorities as well as Paganism.
This became increasingly evident in his rulings of state law from about AD onwards, following the appointment of church bishops as political advisors to the state operations and policies. This began with the exemption of the clergy from municipal and military duties, and ultimately stemmed to supporters of the Pagan faith amongst the lower ranks of the Roman council converting to Christianity in attempts to climb up the social hierarchy and gain the favour of the Emperor.
Publicly, he became somewhat infatuated with the idea of only Christian Unity. This contributed to the persecution of all non-Christian religions, in contrast to having complete confidence in the teachings of Christ and Christ as a divine being. This created, in terms of power in the state, a role reversal between the Pagans and the Christians. They doubted the faith and blessings of the Emperor, whilst the Church ultimately believed that the two respective devotions could no longer coexist.
Consequently, sudden outbursts of violence began towards Pagans as well as all other religions that could now openly worship under the guidance of Constantine and the Edict of Milan. The previously persecuted Christians became the persecutors of all minorities. Constantine facilitated this for his own political advantages, through the influence and power gained in his newly found religious position, by passing a law to relieve the clergy of their civic duties.
Any initial objectives towards a pathway for peaceful coexistence is lost as many Roman citizens came to view the state as a parasitical vampire. Through this act, Constantine became, in the eyes of the Church, both a physical and spiritual representation of the abilities of the Christian God within the Roman Empire, drawing attention to its teaching, donning Constantine a political saint.
Contrasting this opinion held by historians such as Humphries, is evidence from Frend that Constantine restored the senatorial aristocracy with power. Perhaps, Constantine identified the growing abilities of the Church and attempted to use its power to support his own and vice versa.
By emulating Constantine in a position of equivalent power and influence to the Church as the Twelve Apostles, the Church was able to ensure changes to Roman laws no longer negatively affected it. The relationship between Constantine and the Church was equally beneficial but ultimately permitted the Church to manipulate legislation for its own benefit.
Towards the end of his ruling, Constantine had become consumed by the ideologies of Christianity and his public language in speeches had become ambiguous. In AD , he decreed it a legal requirement that all soldiers, inhabitants of cities, and craftsmen should rest on Sunday and recite a prayer he composed to the almighty God.
This further solidified the interdependence between state and religion. Despite this argument, evidence confirms that bishops following the first councils at Arles ruled that Christians who took public office or any other governing role were to be advised by local bishops. Eusebius recorded that three separate letters were sent to the Carthage, the capital of Roman North Africa.
They are inhuman in their actions. Because we are not them, therefore, we are civilized, rational and humane. The formation of a moral dichotomy based on absolute good us and absolute evil them creates a reality in which moral discernment is trumped by a self-induced delusion of the goodness of the overall character of the U. This delusion is maintained through the dehumanization of those perceived as a threat to the dominant culture.
And now, even asking the question of whether our global actions might lead some to resort to terrorism—or if legitimate concerns exist that force some to take such radical approaches—is to raise the ire of our political and religious leaders who would incredulously dismiss such analysis as providing comfort to the enemy.
In order to preserve The Good, as defined by Constantine Christians, unjust acts may need to be imposed. Sadly, the people more likely to engage in acts against humanity are those who demonize their opponents so as to justify actions as necessary evils required to protect The Good. Ironically, it is in the defense of this type of Good that Constantinian Christianity ceases to be Christian.
Miguel A.
0コメント