It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Council of Nicea - NO reincarnation, NO books of the Bible

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 12:51 AM
link   
Greetings all,

I thought I'd make a new post on this interesting subject. I was a little dissappointed that LadyV ignored my post pointing to the original documents that showed the truth. I would think a "seeker of truth" would want to read the original documents for herself :-)


The legend that the Council of Nicea removed re-incarnation from the Bible (as well as another legend about it chosing the books of the Bible) is very common on the internet, and I see it popped up here again.

But,
there is no evidence it happened.

Firstly, note that the Council of Nicea took place in 325CE (553CE was 2nd council of Constantinople.)


We still have the official records of this Council (the Creed, the Canons and the Synodal Letter.)


You can read a copy of the these here :
www.newadvent.org...

That's right - anyone who actually wants to check the hard facts can READ the documents the Council of Nicea actually wrote - the "minutes of the meeting", so to speak - it's not a great deal.


You will note there is NO MENTION of re-incarnation (nor any mention of deciding the books of the bible.)


Also,
we have several accounts of the meeting, some from people who attended it.

None of them makes any mention of re-incarnation (nor the books of the Bible.)

Roger Pearse has an excellent essay detailing these accounts of the Council, showing they made no mention of re-incarnation :
www.tertullian.org...


It's another one of those legends passed around on the 'net.

But it's not true.



Iasion



pao

posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 12:55 AM
link   
well....... if they dont want it to be known, wouldnt they NOT write about it?



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Nice try Iasion, but people don't want to know the truth, they want something to support their beliefs first.

Even if you had it on video people won't believe it, they will just say that its been deleted.

Sometimes the illusion is stronger than the reality ....



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 01:27 AM
link   
Greetings pao,


Originally posted by pao
well....... if they dont want it to be known, wouldnt they NOT write about it?


No.

That's not how it worked at all.

These ancient Christian writings are all full of arguments - different sects push their point of view, and lambast the opponents.

When a doctrine is attacked, there are always those who are for and those who are against - we see exactly those signs in these documents - admonissions and arguments and criticisms about variousd issues.

If they really DID "remove re-incaration from the Bible" there would have to be signs of those who BELIEVED in re-incarnation before that - there would be a sect called "The ReIncarnatiists", there would be Christian books called "Against Reincarnation", there would be canons saying "Let anyone who believeth in Re-incarnation be anathema".

Instead we see NOTHING about re-incarnation at all.

No mention before or during or after this council of re-incarnation


HOWEVER,
it IS true that some people in the early days DID believe in PRE-EXISTENCE of the SOUL in some way - a concept not too different to re-incarnation.


This was an old Platonic belief taught by 3rd Century Origen, and the Church DID certainly formally reject (curse, anathema) this view in the 2nd Council of Constantinople in 553CE.


(Council of Constantinople 553CE)
"THE ANATHEMAS AGAINST ORIGEN.
IF anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it: let him be anathema. "



That's what I mean by evidence remaining - the Church DID formally anathemize the belief in the pre-destination of souls.


Then this council and this idea has been confused with Nicea, and with the legend of Nicea fixing the books of the bible, and voila! we end up with the fable that "the Council of Nicea removed re-incarnation from the Bible"


Iasion



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Greetings netchicken,

Thanks for you comments :-)

Indeed,
I thought this site would have lots of people who searched for facts, delved the internet for rare documents, researched the truth behind legends - in other words - EXPOSE conspiracies and untruths, find the history behind the legend (and to be fair, there ARE some people here like that - sceptical and informed :-)

But there also seem to be plenty who take this site as a place to expound their OWN pet theory so to speak...

Much like life I guess :-)

Come on guys and gals,
lets see if we can get 5 people to actually SKIM through the Nicea documents - how about just opening the page and doing a word SEARCH for "reincarnation".


Thats what makes the internet so amazing - the VAST amount of information available.

Nearly ALL these ancient works are available on the 'net.

I have most of the ancient works of the world on disk and can search through all 400M with Grep in 45 seconds.

Its a thrill :-)

Find out ANYONE who mentioned name X in



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 02:43 AM
link   
If Justinian made rebirth a Christian anathema in 553CE than what difference does it make? Clearly this means there were Christians who 200 years after Origen's martyrdom and 500 years after Christ's death, still believed strongly in rebirth.

I believe in Christ and samsara (rebirth of souls), so what's your point?

[edit on 4-3-2005 by smallpeeps]



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
the Nicean council was called by Constantine, officiated by Constantine,
subsidized by Constantine, and anything or anyone not toeing the party line
as it were was banished by Constantine. If i recall right it was also at this time
that he made the claim and was supported by the Church of Rome that He
not Jesus was the Messiah.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netchicken
Nice try Iasion, but people don't want to know the truth, they want something to support their beliefs first.

Even if you had it on video people won't believe it, they will just say that its been deleted.

Sometimes the illusion is stronger than the reality ....


Additionally, Netchicken had a topic thread on this here:
Reincarnation and the bible ... an old horse flogged to death - repeatedly

From 2002, but rings true with this current topic.




seekerof



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:05 AM
link   
hi all...
The early Christian Church fought the idea of reincarnation, which entered the Christian world through Eastern teachings such as those of the Manicheans.
Origen's false teaching of the "pre-existence of souls" was closely related to these teachings, and at the Fifth Ecumenical Council in Constantinople in 553 it was strongly condemned and its followers anathematized.
Many individual Fathers of the Church wrote against it, notably St. Ambrose of Milan in the West (On Belief in the Resurrection, Book II), St. Gregory of Nyssa in .the East (On the Soul and the ,Resurrection), and others.

www.roca.org...



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   
::::Yaaaaawn:::::

I just got up.....how nice of you to call me out telling me that I am not interested in truth....I would like to know how and why you have come to that conclusion please? I have not read the post where you added a link to said "truths" I either didn't get back to the thread, missed it...or any other of several reasons that I may of not seen it.....I will have to go back and check.....but I will say here, that just because you have said it doesn't exist, does not make it so without fact any more than anyone else ...I will check it out, as I'm sure others will....how ever it will have to wait for me till my off days as nay research must wait....I simple do not have time before work and have no energy for if, after work...

EIDT: WOW!! I just went to that old thread...banned members all over the place, and a mod calling someone an "Idiot"


[edit on 3/5/2005 by LadyV]



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 08:56 AM
link   
All of the major passages in the Bible that espoused a belief in reincarnation were ordered by Roman Emperor Justinian to be omitted. This was followed by a period of censorship and persecution of those who didn't adhere to the laws of the church. There are still hints of reincarnation that have remained in the Bible but any open preaching of reincarnation was condemned by the government, starting in the Sixth Century.

I quote my first reference:

>

Taken From How The Early Church Suppressed Paganism & Astrology While Supporting Reincarnation.

I quote my second reference:



>

Here is more on the early church father known as Origen, again from the above site:

>




[edit on 5-3-2005 by Paul_Richard]



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   
I read that Origen castrated himself so as not to be tempted. Now that's devotion!

Time-wise, Justinian's pronouncements (in 533) against Origen, (who died not later than 251), would have been like the president telling America today that anyone who reads John Locke is a heretic. If people remember a guy for 250 years, he probably said some good stuff.



[edit on 5-3-2005 by smallpeeps]



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion
The legend that the Council of Nicea removed re-incarnation from the Bible (as well as another legend about it chosing the books of the Bible) is very common on the internet, and I see it popped up here again.

Indeed, I had thought that the canon was formalized at it also, until



Roger Pearse has an excellent essay detailing these accounts of the Council, showing they made no mention of re-incarnation :
www.tertullian.org...

pearse really does have a great collection of stuff on those pages. And whats better is that he's available for discussion on that and almost anything on soc.hist.ancient and other newsgroups! A very nice fellow too!



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Greetings again,


Originally posted by LadyV
::::Yaaaaawn:::::

I just got up.....how nice of you to call me out telling me that I am not interested in truth....I would like to know how and why you have come to that conclusion please? I have not read the post where you added a link to said "truths" I either didn't get back to the thread, missed it...or any other of several reasons that I may of not seen it.....I will have to go back and check.....but I will say here, that just because you have said it doesn't exist, does not make it so without fact any more than anyone else ...I will check it out, as I'm sure others will....how ever it will have to wait for me till my off days as nay research must wait....I simple do not have time before work and have no energy for if, after work...



Let see if I've got this straight -

YOU claimed the Council of Nicea "removed re-incarnation from the bible".

I pointed out that the original documents from the Council can still be read, as well as several accounts of the meeting itself.

I pointed out that neither the minutes of the meeting, nor any acount of the meeting, mentioned re-incarnation or the contents of the Bible.


You ignored the evidence and repeated your claim,
now you say "just because you have said it doesn't exist, does not make it so."

So,
in other words, even though the original evidence conclusively proves you wrong, you won't even look at the evidence !

You'll just repeat the same old unfounded rumour.


Iasion



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion

YOU claimed the Council of Nicea "removed re-incarnation from the bible".


No, I don't say it...it just is....and I see no reason to repeat all that Mr. Richards above has to say, plus I could not type it nearly as well....I'm sorry that for some reaon I have ruffled your feathers so



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Greetings again,


Originally posted by LadyV
No, I don't say it...it just is....and I see no reason to repeat all that Mr. Richards above has to say, plus I could not type it nearly as well....I'm sorry that for some reaon I have ruffled your feathers so



In other words,
you passed on a rumour.

I pointed out the facts proved your claim wrong,
I SHOWED you where the facts could be checked,
but
you WON'T EVEN LOOK at the evidence which shows you are wrong.

Instead you just keep repeating your false claim.

Incredible.


My feathers are not the least bit ruffled, I assure you. I just like to research old history and check facts for myself.
When I did - I found the facts do NOT agree with the legend - but you obviously want to stick with the legend and ignore the facts - your choice.



Iasion



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   
I have looked.....have you? Did you bother to check out the links from Mr. Richards? And yes, I am interested in the truth.

[edit on 3/5/2005 by LadyV]



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:37 PM
link   
So iasion, what you are saying is that the council of Nicea never occured?



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps

Time-wise, Justinian's pronouncements (in 533) against Origen, (who died not later than 251), would have been like the president telling America today that anyone who reads John Locke is a heretic. If people remember a guy for 250 years, he probably said some good stuff.



In medieval times the Church had great power. If you were labeled a heretic, you faced incarceration, interrogation, and possible execution. People were terrified of Roman Emperor Justinian and for good reason: he had absolute power governmentally, as with any dictator.

On the other hand, I do remember the case of the old woman who said "You suck!" in public to the then President Bill Clinton and was arrested and taken away in chains by the Secret Service.



"A man's got to know his limitations."

I think it was Clint Eastwood who said that.



[edit on 5-3-2005 by Paul_Richard]



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Greetings again,


Originally posted by LadyV
I have looked.....have you? Did you bother to check out the links from Mr. Richards? And yes, I am interested in the truth.


Pardon?
Have you read the Canons of the Council of Nicea?
I have.

I see there is no mention of re-incarnation there.

WHAT exactly have you looked at?

Do you think opinions of others over-rides the original evidence?

Will you EVER check the original evidence LadyV?

Paul Richard's links and quotes are very interesting, the information is not new to me - indeed it is clear that many early Christians DID believe in re-incarnation or pre-existence of souls.

But, did you even notice that Paul Richard's post NEVER claimed that the Council of Nicea "removed re-incarnation from the bible" ?


LadyV,
the plain fact is you were wrong.
The Council of Nicea did NOT "remove re-incarnation from the Bible".

The original documents prove you wrong.
Paul Richard's post no-where supports your view.

It appears you will never admit you were wrong.


Iasion



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join