Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nicaea. The burning of Arian books is illustrated above. Drawing on vellum. From MS CLXV, Biblioteca Capitolare, Vercelli, a compendium of canon law produced in northern Italy ca. 825.
slimboyfat
JoinedPosts by slimboyfat
-
28
Pre-Nicene christians and the trinity
by joey jojo inthis is just a quick summary that might be useful regarding the threads about the trinity currently on the board.. in 325 ce, the nicene council was called by constantine to settle schisms within the christian church.
the argument about the nature of jesus in relation to god was one of the big problems that needed resolution.
at first, constantine told the 2 main players, alexander and arius to sort it out between themselves, as he, constantine didnt see it as overly important.
-
-
-
51
The unending and fruitless argument on Trinity
by Longlivetherenegades inthose who say they are christians or follow christianity needs .
1. father .
2. jesus .
-
-
slimboyfat
What do you mean Rivergang? aqwsed is on the verge of acknowledging that the Trinity is wrong and Jesus was created. He’ll come round any day now can’t you see that? -
2908
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
slimboyfat
Thanks, those are some wild headlines indeed.
-
171
Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine
by slimboyfat inin an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
-
-
slimboyfat
there may be isolated attempts—ancient and modern—to interpret John 1:1 as implying that the Word had a beginning as the "first creation,"
Yeah, that’s what I’m looking for. Do you know where to find them?
-
2908
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
slimboyfat
It might be clear to you what the Guardian gets wrong but it’s not clear to me that we are thinking primarily about the same things. They get some gender stuff wrong and I would be inclined to agree on that to some extent. But to me the worst thing about the Guardian has been its complicity in bringing down Jeremy Corbyn with false anti semitism allegations and thereby denying us any possibility of a genuine attempt at social democracy and ethical foreign policy in the UK. I also think they’ve been too soft in calling out the ongoing genocide. Those are the biggest problems with the Guardian as far as I’m concerned and I suspect they might not be your list. I am already aware of good critiques from a left perspective and it might be obvious to you where to find critiques from another angle but it’s not obvious to me.
-
51
2024 year Highlights: JWs hit 9 million Publishers
by Sanchy inwatchtower put out some highlights for the 2024 service year:.
average publishers: 8,828,124. peak publishers: 9,043,460. a 43.2 percent increase in "those who returned to jehovah", meaning 65,816 were reinstated.
baptized: 296,267. memorial attendance: 21,119,442. missing stat: number of partakers .. womp womp.
-
-
slimboyfat
Why should anyone believe their membership numbers?
Because dozens of censuses across the globe have shown that their membership figures consistently understate the size of their community as demonstrated in the article cited above?
-
171
Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine
by slimboyfat inin an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
-
-
slimboyfat
aqwsed I know that you don’t think Jesus is God’s first creation. My question was whether anyone knows which ancient or modern scholars have taken “beginning” as a description of the origin of the Word in John 1.1 in a way that indicates Jesus is God’s first creation. I am sure I read it somewhere but I can’t remember where.
On the point that “heaven and earth” is a miasm indicating totality, indeed, and that totality, in context is the whole of physical creation. Genesis 1 is an account of the physical creation, it doesn’t discuss or deal with the creation of the heavenly realm, angels, cherubs, seraphs, and the firstborn of all creation.
-
2908
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
slimboyfat
What are the questionable Grauniad articles? Have you got a link?
-
171
Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine
by slimboyfat inin an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
-
-
slimboyfat
The regular interpretation of John 1.1 is where it takes “In the beginning was the Word”, along the lines: “the Word already existed at the time of the creation of the heavens and the earth”, and this is how JWs currently read the verse.
But I have read there is an alternative way of understanding the phrase so that it is identifying the Word as the beginning. A bit like saying “in the beginning there was light”, or “in the beginning light appeared”, to indicate that the Word emerged at the beginning. If I recall correctly, this is how some ancient interpreters read the verse, and JWs have at times in the past read it that way too, in which case John 1.1 would be further testimony to Jesus as God’s first creation.
But I can’t remember where I read it. Has anyone else come across this argument? -
51
2024 year Highlights: JWs hit 9 million Publishers
by Sanchy inwatchtower put out some highlights for the 2024 service year:.
average publishers: 8,828,124. peak publishers: 9,043,460. a 43.2 percent increase in "those who returned to jehovah", meaning 65,816 were reinstated.
baptized: 296,267. memorial attendance: 21,119,442. missing stat: number of partakers .. womp womp.
-
-
slimboyfat
In what sense is it a 1/4? Because when asked in censuses around twice as many people claim to be JWs than in the publisher count. Are you saying you know better than people themselves whether they are JWs when asked? JWs have one of the strictest methods of counting members of any religious group so even if they “overcount” by their own definition it is still a significant undercount by any comparison with the membership of other groups. And the difference is dramatic.
For example in 2010 JWs claimed 706,699 publishers in Brazil but in the census 1,393,208 identified themselves as JWs. That’s 1.97 times as many describes themselves as JWs than are counted as publishers.
By contrast in that same year Mormons claimed 1,138,740 members in Brazil but in the census only 226,509 described themselves as Mormons. That’s only 0.20 times the number of official Mormon members actually identified in the census.
These results are replicated over lots of countries over many years.
See more details in the article here: