FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Atheists using the council of Nicea in their own defense
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Here is what what some guy is trying to use in his argument against the church. Any way to simply reply with historical proof to this ignorant person?

" The niggerdom of your posts astounds me. It's like you think the bible was written by Jesus and passed down after his death. If you had actually read anything about the Council, you would have read that it resulted in adopting the dumbass, unpopular catholic version of christianity as the state religion, changed several versus in the bible, deleted several versus, wrote the language concerning the "trinity", changed Jesus's birthdate, and some other unimportant shit. Why was this needed? probably because Arianism had overtaken Catholicism and the conflicts resulting from two asshole christian sects not agreeing on facetious dumb shit was irritating the piss out of Constantine. Catholicism was so prominent back then that pope sylvester had little power and nobody gave a shit about him or the delegates he sent to the council. The Catholic church has a long history of niggerdom that is well documented, yet somehow they still convince dumb assholes like yourself to follow it and believe its self proclaimed infallibility which has been refuted time and time again."

Thanks
(01-03-2012, 05:55 PM)MorganHiver Wrote: [ -> ]Here is what what some guy is trying to use in his argument against the church. Any way to simply reply with historical proof to this ignorant person?

" The niggerdom of your posts astounds me. It's like you think the bible was written by Jesus and passed down after his death. If you had actually read anything about the Council, you would have read that it resulted in adopting the dumbass, unpopular catholic version of christianity as the state religion, changed several versus in the bible, deleted several versus, wrote the language concerning the "trinity", changed Jesus's birthdate, and some other unimportant shit. Why was this needed? probably because Arianism had overtaken Catholicism and the conflicts resulting from two asshole christian sects not agreeing on facetious dumb shit was irritating the piss out of Constantine. Catholicism was so prominent back then that pope sylvester had little power and nobody gave a shit about him or the delegates he sent to the council. The Catholic church has a long history of niggerdom that is well documented, yet somehow they still convince dumb assholes like yourself to follow it and believe its self proclaimed infallibility which has been refuted time and time again."

Thanks
Never heard the term niggerdom.
I don't even know what his argument is supposed to be from that.  What is he arguing?
Start out  by saying that he has some nerve calling you ignorant when he can't write at a second grade level.

No, we don't think the Bible was written by Jesus, but by four men called Matthew Mark Luke and John. If he hasn't even bothered to find out what Catholics actually think,  this is going to take a while. Next: unpopular, so adopting it was bad? How does that follow?

Yes, Nicea deleted some verses (considered inauthentic), if they're not authentic, why keep them? Isn't preserving an accurate copy of what Jesus actually said kind of the whole point? They did not make up the Trinity, pre-Nicea manuscript copies include the verse, and it is commonly discussed by earlier writers, which you can see here:
"In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom (To Autolycus II.15). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian (On Pudicity 21). In the next century the word is in general use. It is found in many passages of Origen ("In Ps. xvii", 15). The first creed in which it appears is that of Origen's pupil, Gregory Thaumaturgus. In his Ekthesis tes pisteos composed between 260 and 270, he writes:

   There is therefore nothing created, nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore the Father has never been without the Son, nor the Son without the Spirit: and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever (P.G., X, 986)." Catholic Encyclopedia
They did not change Jesus birthday, it doesn't appear in the Bible, and had been celebrated on Dec 25th since the 3rd century ( a hundred years before). Made up charge.
Also, the council did not establish a state religion at all, there was no "state religion" for the Roman Empire of the time. Especially since Constantine wasn't even Christian yet. Completely made up.
Next point, so Nicea was called so that two groups could decide what they believed in concerning God and Christ. Why is that bad? I mean, if he wants to complain that the two camps don't agree, calling a meeting to discuss the question seems like the best way to solve that problem, but he's complaining about that as well? On Pope Sylvester, well, Constantine sure seemed to think he was important, since he asked his permission before the council was called. Eusebius seems to think the papal delegates were key, and he was a historian who was actually there at the time. People with that fancy book-learning call that a "primary source". As opposed to your friend's opinion which is based on.............?
How did he manage to disprove infallibility, by the way?
Does this person realize that Constantine was basically an Arian sympathizer? Why would he have been in favor of the decision at the Council?
I am not very good at citing scripture as an accompaniment to historical facts and events. Thanks for the well informed reply, Anastasia.

Yeah, this illiterate buffon is trying to say that the first Christians were not Catholic and that is exactly why CON was held. Basically for Catholics to take out the competition.
lolo niggerdom.  I stopped there to lolo.  And tell you.
.
eta cuz someone's a dum-dum
What is painfully obvious is how hard that person's heart must be.  :( How sad.  :pray2:

BTW, what's with the blank posts? I see these occasionally. Is it intentional or just my comp/browser? (I almost typed Bowser lol)
Pages: 1 2