Constantine

Constantine as the ruler and Patronus of Rome was the benefactor of the Roman empire and Father of the nation.
Constantine murdered people by the thousands including partners and their families to seize their property. Constantine, having obtained rule over the whole Roman Empire, ordered his son by Minervina, Crispus, to be put to death and eventually suffocated Fausta his second wife in her bath.
He gives little evidence he ever was a follower of Christ or believed in what early Christians were doing. He did finance a new form of Christianity by being a benefactor to men like Ambrose.
Jesus legalized Christianity . Constantine legalized what became a false form of Christianity. The merging of the State and Constantine's form of Christianity practiced by some calling themselves Christians would lead in several corrupt practices. From this "new Church of Constantine" has come teachings that subvert the Sound Doctrines of Christ producing a perverted gospel and what may be called the Modern Church.
Many have followed Constantine's pernicious ways and encouraged the people to believe that it is okay to return to socialism making the State their benefactor and the Father of the people again.
Religion use to be defined as how you took care of the needy of society. Pure Religion was doing that without the State.
Early Rome as the Republic , early Israel, the early Church and early America all took care of the needy of society through freewill offerings but under the Imperial Cult of Rome the temples became government institutions supported by taxation. John the Baptist and Jesus the Christ were social reformers who were teaching people how to go back to free societies through the practice of Pure Religion and through the perfect law of liberty. This was the Christian conflict with Rome. The Modern Christian is in conflict with The Way of Christ.

The Allurement of Wolves

Was Constantine a Christian?

The Baptism by the order of Constantine did not require repentance.

Flavius Salerus Constantinus has been touted in some historical accounts as the first Roman Emperor who was converted to Christianity. Was Flavius the King and Emperor really a man propagating the Gospel of Jesus?

He alleged that an apparition of Christ told him to put XP (khi, hro) on his shield, on the eve of the battle against Maxentius, his empirical rival in Italy.

"His (Constantine) conversion to and support of Christianity produced fewer innovations than one might have expected; indeed they served an entirely conservative end, the preservation and continuation of the Empire."

His baptism

Did Constantine convert to Christianity or did he began to convert Christianity to something less than what Christ intended?

Eusebius of Nicomedia was an Arian priest and distant relative of Constantine. He may have baptized Constantine the Great on his deathbed in 337 but only after he was likely dead. With hundreds of new bishops and thousands of new people baptized to the faith of Constantinian Christianity factions like Arianism and the fabrications of doctrines surrounding the Nicene Creed established an atmosphere ripe for political debate. Like the factions at the altar in the days before Christ doctrinalisms gave rise amongst the population a political populism that would begin to unmoor the meaning of the doctrine of Jesus from the righteousness of His method. The need to appear righteous soon outweighed the righteousness of God.

The directive from the beginning was "Repent, and be baptized" but also love one another and keep the Commandments.

Jesus never baptized with water. He desired us to baptized by His spirit.

To repent is to change one's mind, one's thinking. Should our minds be like Chris or should it be like Constantine?

Did Constantine Keep the Commandments according to the decrees and doctrines of Jesus?

Did Jesus alter his his straight forward and simple position on not exercising authority one over the other to provide benefits and welfare for the people through force?

“And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.” (Luke 22:25, 27 - Matthew 20:25 - Mark 10:42)

Should the Church following Christ accept the gifts of Constantine?

The vision

Constantine was truly a man of visions. He claimed a vision that inspired him to paint a cross on the shields of his soldiers which led him to victory. He had also claimed a vision of the sun god in 310 while in a grove of Apollo in Gaul.

It appears that Eusebius perpetuated the myth of the vision of Constantine concerning his defeat of the superior forces of his rival Maxentius at the battle of Milvian Bridge on October 28 in the year 312 A.D.. We are told that on the 27 of October with the armies preparing for battle, Constantine had a vision. But there seems to be no evidence of this vision that supposedly led him to fight under the protection of the Christian God before 325. Certainly the details of that vision, however, differ between the sources reporting the vision.

But the more disturbing contradiction is the absence of this divine vision from any other source for more than a decade.

Lactantius, who had been an advisor to the Roman Emperor Constantine, states in the De mortibus persecutorum (On the Deaths of the Persecutors) that, in the night before the battle, Constantine was commanded in a dream to "delineate the heavenly sign on the shields of his soldiers". Supposedly he followed the commands of his dream and marked the shields with a sign "denoting Christ" described as a "staurogram", or a Latin cross with its upper end rounded in a P-like fashion. But there is no real evidence that Constantine ever used that sign, or even the better known Chi-Rho sign described by Eusebius. Eusebius seems to have began to tell this story after a feast that took place in 324 A.D..

The Latin text De mortibus persecutorum contains an early account of the 28 October 312 Battle of the Milvian Bridge written by Lactantius probably in 313, the year following the battle. Lactantius does not mention a vision in the sky but describes a revelatory dream on the eve of battle.[51] Eusebius's work of that time, his Church History, also makes no mention of the vision.[49] The Arch of Constantine, constructed in AD 315, neither depicts a vision nor any Christian insignia in its depiction of the battle.

In his posthumous biography of Constantine, Eusebius agrees with Lactantius that Constantine received instructions in a dream to apply a Christian symbol as a device to his soldiers' shields, but unlike Lactantius and subsequent Christian tradition, Eusebius does not date the events to October 312 and does not connect Constantine's vision and dream-vision with the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. Eusebius also specifically recounts a vision of a cross in the sky with the words, in hoc signo vinces while, Lactantius describes a dream in which Constantine is instructed to paint the chi-rho on the shields of his army.

To make the soldiers repaint their shields and armor just before going into a battle against a superior force would not easily be forgotten. In fact it would have swept the nation could not have been kept secret.

There is no real evidence of the truth of this story etched in the Arco di Costantino (The Arch of Constantine).

The arch was commissioned by the Roman Senate to commemorate Constantine's victory over Maxentius at the Battle of Milvian Bridge in AD 312. It was dedicated to the emperor Constantine the Great on 315. in this elaborate stone account of the battle their are pagan gods, shields and armor but no Christian symbols, no cross, no Chi Rho'

The arch spans the Via Triumphalis, the route taken by victorious military leaders when they entered the city in a triumphal procession but makes no testimony of this vision nor any Christian symbol.

Destruction or subversion

Constantine may have witnessed Diocletian's destruction of the Christian church at Nicomedia on the 23rd February 303 AD which was the beginning of the "Great Persecution". This was the tenth and final persecution of Christianity as a private religion.

Emperors Diocletian, Galerius, Maximian, and Constantius demanded that Christians comply with traditional Roman religious practices which included the Roman version of the Pharisees' Corban which made the word of Go to none effect.

They rescinded the legal rights of Christians to practice Pure Religion and ordered the destruction of their scriptures, liturgical books, and places of worship across the empire. It became illegal for Christians to even freely assemble.

The Christians had been feared by the emperors of the past because of the "union and discipline" of their network of those faithful to Christ. Their successful non-participation in the welfare systems of Rome caused such envy and jealousy. The Christians were even deprived of the right to petition the administrative courts of Rome, which would often subject them to judicial torture.

They could not respond to actions brought against them in court because they had little or no status due to their refusal to register in Roman government temples. At that time there were Christian senators, equestrians, decurions, veterans, and soldiers who were deprived of their rank. Some freed slaves were even re-enslaved.

People went along with these injustices because they had degenerated as a moral society. Polybius had predicted this hundreds of years before when he wrote:

"The masses continue with an appetite for benefits and the habit of receiving them by way of a rule of force and violence. The people, having grown accustomed to feed at the expense of others and to depend for their livelihood on the property of others... institute the rule of violence; and now uniting their forces massacre, banish, and plunder, until they degenerate again into perfect savages and find once more a master and monarch."

Constantine Church

In 313 AD, Constantine and Licinius as co-emperors had joined together in “issuing the Edict of Milan, which granted toleration”. The Edict of Milan gave Christianity in general a sort of legal exemption status. This was not new but in 311 Galerius, the senior emperor of the Tetrarchy, granted Christians the right to practice their religion.

Of course Christ was already another king that was not a part of Rome and already had His separate status recognized by Pontius Pilate with an Empirical proclamation sealed in the blood if Jesus.

Jesus as the Christ was not of the world of Rome. He had passed this status of separation onto His disciples, appointing into an apostolic role for the kingdom of God at hand.

This provided some reprieve from persecution imposed upon Christians in their assemblies and upon the Church.. There also was some return of confiscated Church property.

Roman Emperor Septimius Severus

Rome had outlawed private religion:

"Severus returned victorious from having vanquished the kings who had taken part with Nigar against him. He published his cruel edicts against the Christians in the year of Christ 202, the tenth of his reign. But the general laws of the empire against foreign religions, and the former edicts of several emperors against the Christians, were a sufficient warrant to many governors to draw the sword against them before that time; and we find that the persecution was very hot in Africa two years before, under the proconsul Saturninus..."

Christianity did not become the state church of the Roman Empire until AD 380 with the Edict of Thessalonica. By then there were large number of what might be called "instant Christians" who had converted to forms of Christianity designed by Constantine and men like Ambrose and formed a parallel form of Christianity that did not conform to the sound doctrines of Christ nor heed the warnings of the apostles and became the forerunner of the Modern Church. His version of Christianity under their binding authority would eventually degenerate the masses. For now there was some improvement.

“As guardian of Constantine’s favored religion”, certain churches and bishops were, “given legal rights and large financial donations.” As early as 313 Constantine was donated to certain bishop of Rome. This included the imperial property of Lateran. There was the new cathedral, the Basilica Constantiniana (This is now called San Giovanni in Lateran). Besides grand church buildings like St. Sebastian Church and others Constantine bestowed "fiscal and legal privileges" upon clergy. Like Augustus Caesar did for the Jews certain civil immunities were granted. He suggested that religious duties of clergy should be unrestricted “…for when they are free to render supreme service to the Divinity, it is evident that they confer great benefit upon the affairs of state.”

These “financial donations”, funded by the spoils of war and compelled taxes, subjected those Churches who accepted them to the benefactors who exercise authority. Christianity and its called out ministers, known as the Church, had been guaranteed their lawful rights to exercise private religion by emperors before. Constantine did not free the Church appointed by Christ, but seduced a small portion of weak Christians and a large number of unrepentant pagans into a new form of church with a “legal status” by the offering of Constantine's “deceitful meats” and the "dainties" of his royal table which was a snare.

"When thou sittest to eat with a ruler, consider diligently what [is] before thee: And put a knife to thy throat, if thou be a man given to appetite. Be not desirous of his dainties: for they are deceitful meat. Proverbs 23:1-3

The sound doctrines of Christ and the prophets warned against eating at the tables of rulers which enjoins covetous practices which would not only subject the Church but such welfare offered through authoritarian governments would make the people merchandise and through debt will curse children with the bondage of Egypt.

"The masses continue with an appetite for benefits and the habit of receiving them by way of a rule of force and violence. The people, having grown accustomed to feed at the expense of others and to depend for their livelihood on the property of others... institute the rule of violence; and now uniting their forces massacre, banish, and plunder, until they degenerate again into perfect savages and find once more a master and monarch."

Polybius saw the downfall of the republic by way of their free bread and welfare a 150 years before the first Emperor of Rome and 175 years before the birth of John the Baptist and Jesus the Christ who opposed these same systems of free bread at your neighbor's expense.

The authoritarian State often uses force and violence to become the Benefactors of the people if the covet what is their neighbors'. They make a social contract where one class of citizen is forced to provide for another class through "legal charity" which is not true charity. The writings of the Apostles warned along with countless passages of ancient writings of the prophets including Proverbs 23 which warned them about what Christ forbid which was the covetous practices of socialist forms of government.

---

Welfare of the people provided by any other means other than the charity of the people, for the people, and by the people has not only weakened the people but empowered their leaders to become despots and tyrants. It made leaders like Augustus literally the gods many of the people holding the office of Apotheos of Rome. Their free bread became things offered to idols. Creating offices with the power to make choices for the people will make "a man but a member, an instrument, a thing".

It also tempts leaders to seek more and more power while scattering and degenerating the people. The people of Rome and leaders like Constantine and Licinius were no exception. A struggle for power soon began between the two commanders, from which Constantine emerged victorious. Constantine betrayed Licinius and had him and all his family put to death. He had thousands of people put to death in mass exterminations of any who opposed him.

Nicene Council

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?” (Matthew 7:15-16)

Constantine was no shepherd of Christ much less a "bishop of bishops" of Christ's church. The more we study the detailed thorns of Constantine’s life and those ministers he and his successors appointed over men, the less convincing it is that the fruits of the Holy Spirit were in their questionable conversions. There were thousands upon thousands that suffered and toiled under their “exercising authority”, with tens of thousands who died at their murderous, bloody hands. The testimony of their lives bears witness to the purity or impurity of their souls and their claim to faith in Christ.

“Constantine intervened in ecclesiastical affairs to achieve unity; he presided over the first ecumenical council of the church at Nicaea in 325.”

He claimed the office of Pontifex Maximus or High Priest, till he died. As the ruling High Priest, he had demanded that the bishops of the Church come to his council. There were over 1200 to 1800 known bishops at that time of this council depending on the source you rely on but at best barely 300 people who could be titled bishop even came. They were not all bishops who did arrive, many could only be called presbyters and deacons with many leaving in protest.

According to the "Reconstructing the Council of Nicaea" by David Gwyn the final decisions of that particular council contained only 200 to maybe 220 people calling themselves bishop with the vast majority coming from the east.

It appears the few western attendees included Hosius of Corduba (also a.k.a. Osius or Ossius) who was an advocate of Homoousion Christianity and had also attended "The Synod of Elvira" some 20 years earlier.

While the vast majority of bishops did not come we know that many who did were paid sums and provided for out of the treasury of Constantine. That would be like Peter going to Rome at the expense of Caligula or Claudius or even Nero.

Some came to settle disputes that were stirring emotions about Arianism whose supporters included Eusebius of Nicomedia, Eusebius of Caesarea, Menophantus of Ephesus, Patrophilus of Scythopolis, Narcissus of Neronias, Theonas of Marmarike, Secundus of Ptolemais, and Theognis of Nicaea who would find themselves opposed by Alexander of Alexandria, Eustathius of Antioch, Marcellus of Ancyra and Macarius of Jerusalem.

A seat of gold

Constantine sat on a golden throne, claiming to be the “Bishop of Bishops”, not as a servant of servants, but as a dictator.

Flavius Salerus Constantinus created the first major False religion posing as Christianity. The first ecumenical council of the church at Nicaea (Nicene Council) was attended by many from the eastern churches, where heresy thrived. A small fraction of known bishops came from the rest of the Empire.
Constantine I organized the Council along the lines of the Roman Senate and presided over it.
Pre-Constantine is an interesting nomenclature. The Church established by Jesus through His "calling out" of His "little flock" and the. appointment of "a kingdom" is clear in the text of scripture.
The Church of Constantine floundered with unrighteous support for a thousand years until it began crowning kings all over Europe and began oppression in earnest. With an inquisition of the faithful and rewriting the truth of history few people today understand what the early Church was doing and how it functioned in the "world" but not of it.
Where does Christ give the authority to the ministers of His Church to dictate a unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom?
The First Council of Nicaea instituted by Constantine promoted a false ideology that religion is "what you think about God". This lie fueled by debate began redefining the word "religion" and has brought persecution, inquisitions, and wars ever since. But the greatest enemy of the Church as it was meant to be is "lack of knowledge" and false pride which keeps the people in darkness.

From Nicene Creed with the birthing pains of new doctrines which would not only unmoor the Gospel of the kingdom from its meaning but cover the truth in a cloud of doctrinal beliefs, rituals and ceremonies.

The historical record shows that those who answered the call of Constantine were financially rewarded with the spoils of Constantine's imperial rule for he clearly eas a ruler who continued to "exercise authority one over the other".

Extravagant gifts of gold, silver, buildings, property, and privilege were bestowed on these collaborating bishops who accepted his rule from the top down. Those bishops who sanctioned his benevolence and title of “bishop of bishops” are difficult to justify since they were desires of his "dainties" in direct opposition to the Doctrine of Jesus.

Did they abandon the teachings of Christ for the rewards of unrighteousness?

His gifts had been taken from fields of corpses and from an overtaxed populations. These false bishopdid not corrupt the Church established by Christ but established false religion in the name of Christ. They would say Lord,Lord with a form of godliness but denied the power to live by faith, hope, and charity alone through pure Religion.

If ever there was a sin of the Nicolaitan branded on the head of men, it was here at this council of hypocrisy. How could men justify this fundamental departure from the teachings of Christ by becoming the state Church of Constantine?

Fortunately, these men were a small minority.

True Christian faith continued to thrive in those who remained in the liberty of Christ.

Council of Constantinople

Those who did not answer his call or questioned his assumed authority were sent packing or, in the years to follow, were labeled heretics and cast out of the graces of these despotic '‘bishops'’, or simply murdered as heretics.

In 381 A.D., the Council of Constantinople was convened by Theodosius I. Only 150 bishops attended condemning various religious groups that did not heed the call of the emperor.

These were the bishops who took the gifts, gratuities, and benefits of men who exercise authority in direct contradiction of Christ.

Theodosius was as much a tyrant, and more, a murder of thousands than Constantine.

Abraham, Moses, John the Baptist and Jesus and the early Church advocated a Daily ministration for the needy. Jesus called out His ekklesia. The Church as we say today was institutionalized by Christ, Institutionalized means "established in practice or custom." Jesus spent years training His disciples which means "students" to be the ministers of His kingdom at hand, His government of God, which He took from those who were not bearing fruit and appointed to His "little flock". The problem today is most Churches are descended from the institutional Church of Constantine which was "established in practice or custom" in a different way. Constantine funded his new Church with tax money which provided for the poor. The modern institutional Church does the same. While there are many people who "say they are Christians" and many who are charitable people most of the care of the needy among the Churched and unchurched alike is provided by the state who merely takes from your neighbor to provide those benefits. These "covetous practices and customs" are contrary to the teachings of the prophets and certainly Jesus, James, Paul the Apostle and Peter and the "new covenant".

Several emperors had earlier guaranteed the protection of the Church. The idea that the Church was “legalized” may not be far from the truth, but what exactly does that mean?

There was now an official Church of Rome established by men who found favor with the rulers of Rome, but were they true Christians?

Or were they taking the name of the Lord in vain?

The legalizing of the Christian church was more a legalizing of certain collaborative sects of churches who claimed to be Christians and were willing to turn a blind eye, or at least give a grateful wink, to the autocratic oppression by these manipulating chiefs of state in exchange for exemption, if not wealth and protection.

Christ would not appeal to Rome to save his life, but these men petitioned Constantine and his senate, not to save their own life, but to take the lives of others. Abraham would not take a buckle, but these men took lavish gifts of gold and silver. They seemed to be “the lovers of soft things” like the Essenes spoken of in the courts of Herod.

These sects and governments have been able to control the writing of history throughout the ages. But, probably even more importantly, they promoted the compilation of the books we know today as the Bible. There is no clear record of how some writings were excluded and how others were chosen to be placed into what some referred as the canon.

“The 27 books of the New Testament are only a fraction of the literary production of the Christian communities in the first three centuries.”

Whether you think you are a highly evolved monkey or a child of God, if you covet your neighbor's goods through the power of governments you have made for yourself you are cut off from the Holy Spirit. If you have come to save your life and not lay it down for your fellowman in righteousness you will not pickup a more abundant life. If you desire to rule over your neighbor through the Fathers you elect you will be ruled over.

This is not a new doctrine. Abraham knew it and so did Moses and John the Baptist and Jesus and even pagans a 150 years before them. This is where the nations of the world are today including Modern Christians.

All Scripture

When we see the phrase, "All scripture" in the Bible that did not mean the Bible because it did not yet exist. The fact is the word scripture was just the Greek word "graphs" which meant "writings" referring to "All writings". It is divine revelation by the Holy Spirit that ultimately reveals the truth and not the private interpretation of the reader.

The vision

It appears that Eusebius perpetuate the myth of the vision of Constantine concerning his defeat of the superior forces of his rival Maxentius at the battle of Milvian Bridge on October 28 in the year 312 A.D.. We are told that on the 27 of October with the armies preparing for battle, Constantine had a vision. But there seems to be no evidence of this vision that supposedly led him to fight under the protection of the Christian God before 325. certainly the details of that vision, however, differ between the sources reporting it.

Lactantius, who became an advisor to Roman emperor Constantine I, states that, in the night before the battle, Constantine was commanded in a dream to "delineate the heavenly sign on the shields of his soldiers". Supposedly he followed the commands of his dream and marked the shields with a sign "denoting Christ" described as a "staurogram", or a Latin cross with its upper end rounded in a P-like fashion. But there is no real evidence that Constantine ever used that sign, or even the better known Chi-Rho sign described by Eusebius. Eusebius seems to have began to tell this story after a feast that took place in 324 A.D..

There is no real evidence of the truth of this story etched in The Arch of Constantine (Italian: Arco di Costantino).

The arch was commissioned by the Roman Senate to commemorate Constantine's victory over Maxentius at the Battle of Milvian Bridge in AD 312. Situated between the Colosseum and the Palatine Hill, the arch spans the Via Triumphalis, the route taken by victorious military leaders when they entered the city in a triumphal procession and dedicated in 315 but makes no evidence of this vision nor any Christian symbol.

Hired Eusebius

Constantine hired Eusebius to produce the first 50 Bibles. Early Christians had a much different view of Jesus than many modern Christians. Constantine had brought in a huge faction who called themselves "Christians" but lacked true repentance and the practice of Pure Religion. These "new Christians" occupied many of the councils we see forming after 300 A.D..

There is one thing clear from the historical record. Large numbers of Christian sects fled the judgment and persecution of the legalized church and their allies of force, fear, and Fealty. This union of church and state was not one sanctioned by God, nor did it bear much resemblance to the ways preached, demonstrated, and taught by Jesus. It was the creation, not of the Body of Christ but of the Harlot.

Their fornicating relationship was self-serving, proud, violent, and oppressive. From Augustus to Constantine, the emperors still held the title, if not the office of Apo Theos, Originator of gods.

There is little doubt that the men, who exclude so much from the compilation of the New and the Old Testaments, did so with less than noble purposes, if not evil intent. This is not to say that those writings are not now authentic or valid, but their relationship with the Roman state can only lead one to believe that there may have been self-serving exclusions. These were not the Apostles who made the final decision concerning Bible content or wrote the Creed of the Apostles, but someone quite different. We can only assume that, what some men meant unto evil, the God of Heaven shall turn for good.

It was centuries before these apostates were able to crown rulers who began an aggressive policy of bloody “reform”. With these new institutions, the beast rose again and brought about the inquisition, annihilation, and extinction of millions of people who were seeking God’s Kingdom in spirit and in truth. The persecution of the early Christians by some emperors was nothing compared to the persecution of Christians and others that this unholy alliance of Church and State would eventually create.

Constantine is responsible for directing Eusebius to put together what became the Bible. I have been looking at manuscripts and fragments for half a century it appears that Eusebius may have been more influenced by Constantine than upon the Wisdom of the Holy Spirit. This does not mean that Holy Spirit did not have its influence upon his choices but it does not make him infallible.

The Doctrines

The Holy Spirit of the Early Church just like Early Israel and Abraham and Adam, Seth, Noah and Shem were guided by the ruach hakodesha which reveals itself to individuals in their heart and mind. That Spirit is the key to understanding of the development of the Church and the Kingdom of God.

Man made Doctrines have evolved, but the truth has not. The doctrines of Christ were the doctrines of truth. No one should teach a new doctrine. No one should require people to believe one man over another. The truth that is right before the people should be sufficient. But facts may allow people to let go of believes and set them down as a lie for they have already received falsehoods as truth.

We think each person should decide for themselves but how can they when their minds are already contaminated by preconceived and implanted notions.

Audio files

Twenty-ninth hour in series Fathers. Deep down inside you know what the truth is. Change the meaning of words and you can change the meaning of the Bible. Binding people together through faith, hope and charity. The social bonds of love versus the bonds of ideology. Governments all over the world are cultic groups. Latest diagnostic manual creates mental illness; Chemical lobotomies. The band of sheep has a thousand eyes. Article on “Why we gather”. The Roman emporium cult. Eric Holder; Homeschooling not a right. Natural rights, Legal Privileges. First century welfare. Augustus Caesar's charity. Constantine's Christian cult. First Council of Nicaea. Baptized under a command not through repentance. Number 1 sign of cult: Group being excessively zealous over it's leader. Second sign of a cult: Questions are discouraged or punished. Third sign of a cult: Mind-altering practices, like meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, etc. Debilitating workloads. Leadership dictates. The group is elitist. If we do righteousness, that will separate us.

http://www.hisholychurch.net/kkvv/020/140927nation29cultsLR.mp3

Ministers | Why Minister | Minister of the world | Minister of the Church |
Elders | Deacon | Priests | Levites | Breeches | Hierarchy |
Altars | Stones | Stoning Daily ministration | Corban | Welfare |
Essenes | Disciples | Seven men | Church | Church legally defined | Christian |
Churches | Ministry Burnout | Religion | The Blessed Strategy | Widow |
Tens | Tithing | CORE | COM | Minister of Record | Benefactors |
Cain | Nimrod | Constantine | Christian conflict | Fathers |
Lady Godiva | Isaac Backus | Government and Liberty Described |
Monks | Lost Monks | Married Monks | Monasticism | Modern Monastic life |
Seek | Votive | Orders | Religious Orders | Rules of St Benedict |
Jesus | Was Jesus rich | Mendicant | Vow of poverty | Fervent Charity |
Denominations | Guru theories | Iconoclast | Cult | Bible Index | First to do List |

---

Religion | Pure Religion‎ | Private welfare | Fleeing Religion |
False religion | Public religion | Our Religion | Christian conflict |
Corban | Baptism | Benefactors | That Word | Daily ministration |
Modern Christians | Diocletianic Persecution | Christians check list |
gods | Judge not | Judge | Fathers | Deist | Damnable heresies |

Factions at the altar |
Pharisees | Sadducees | Zealot | Essenes | Levites |
Messianic Judaism | Menahem the Essene | Sanhedrin |
Altars | Clay and Stone | Red Heifer | Golden calf |
Freewill offerings | Religion | Pure Religion | Public religion |
Christian conflict | Paganism | Denominations | Dispensationalism |
Benefactors | Corban | Daily ministration | Calendars |
Cult | Imperial Cult of Rome | Guru theories| | Covet | Merchandise |
Mark of God | Mark of Cain | Mark of the Beast | Nature of the Beast
Section 666 | Benefactors | Biting one another | Cry out | Worship |
Church | Temples | Religious Orders | Priests | Kings and priests |
Hear | Bible Index | Network |

Piso and the Flavian Myth

Caesar's Messiah is a 2006 book of speculative non-fiction by Joseph Atwill, which argues that the New Testament Gospels were written as wartime propaganda by scholars connected to the Roman imperial court of the Flavian emperors: Vespasian, Titus and Domitian.

The Joseph Atwill's Piso/Flavian theory falls apart as soon as you find out what the character and mission of men like Moses and Jesus really were. They agreed with each other but the Pharisees did not agree with Jesus because they did not know Moses or what he actually was teaching the people.

Through false interpretation of the ancient manuscripts their meaning have become a lost to many people who image they know the truth so much so that people like Atwill are at a decided disadvantage to say nothing of their critics. If you begin with confusion more layers of confusion can easily add insult to injury.

What are they missing

Most of the early Church were actually Jews. Like the Church in the wilderness they were actually performing services for the people cast out of the Corban of Judea which Jesus had strongly objected to.

John the Baptist opposed Herod the Great's system of temple welfare which depended on forced offerings rather than the freewill offerings promoted by Moses.

If the Flavians wrote the Bible why would Jesus criticize the Corban of the Pharisees and Herod which was identical to the Qorban of Rome?

Richard Carrier

Did Richard Carrier prove that Jesus did not exist or that the image of Jesus and the role as Christ is distorted by the modern Church?

Jesus said their would be false Christs. What Richard Carrier is actually proving is that he does not understand history, the purpose of religions beyond the mythical parables used to carry the true meaning.

What is true worship?

What is the purpose of temples and altars?

What does superstition have to do with people that do not have the ears to hear nor eyes to see the true message of the kingdom of God and the intended nature of mankind?

Dr Maurice Casey's "Is John’s Gospel True", Joseph Hoffmann's “Controversy, Mythicism and the Historical Jesus”, Bart Erhman’s publications or comments by theologian Robert Price all go deeply in their own ideologies but none seem to grasp the actual message of the gospel about living by faith, hope, and charity while caring for the needy of society as opposed to the force, fear, and fealty practiced by the governments of the world who exercise authority and the different outcome that occurs when the masses follow the way of Christ as a doer of what he said and the the other which is the way of bondage, the cities of blood.

The appetite of those masses for the benefits and dainties of rulers at the expense of others is certainly a covetous practices that is a snare and a trap, the antithesis of the teaching of John the Baptist, Proverbs and all the Prophets, including Moses and the Ten Statements attributed to God by him.

No man father

Jesus also warned the people to call no man father. Yet, everyone at that time called the Roman emperors Father. One of His titles was Patronus, which is Our Father, and all the Senators of Rome were all called the conscripti patribecause they were the Conscripted fathers of Rome who saw to the funding of the Imperial Cult of Rome which provided the free bread of the Roman welfare state.

No idolatry

To take of that system was considered idolatry by Paul because it was a covetous system of Legal charity which is idolatry. The problem was the tables provided by their temples were systems of legal charity where their dainties were the wages of unrighteousness because they were provided by men who exercise authority one of the other which was covetous practices which made men merchandiseaccording to Peter.

No oaths

Why would Flavius write that Jesus was commanding his people to "Swear not"? And not apply to rulers of authority for benefits when those systems of legal charity gave Caesar more and more power of the people.

Or why would they write that James said "But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and [your] nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation." James 5:12

These prohibitions against oaths and swearing would not be a part of the Flavian policies since an "Oath of Fidelity" was required by Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian, the entire judicial system and their gods many.

The Conflict

If people had been taught the truth about the Gospel of the Kingdom and the reason for the Christian conflict Atwill's suggestion that rebellious and violent Christians were persecuted would be seen as patently false.

The Christian conflict was because they would not sign up, usually requiring and oath, for their free bread offered at the tablse of the Roman welfare state. That persecution which began with Claudius and Marcus Aurelius continued with and the trial of the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs who would not sign up for their welfare system.

Sons of God

There was an annual burning of incense at the temples of Rome where the faithful confirmed their allegiance and acceptance of Caesar as the Son of God.

But both Caesar and Jesus were called Savior and the Son of God. It was the difference in their means and methods which differentiated their Godhood. One called the people to repent, to think differently, to seek righteousness of the creator, while setting up a network of fervent charity to provide a social safety net for His people so they would have the courage and character to attend to the weightier matters of Law..

The other Son of God was the emperor of world of Rome who was also the Principas Civitas and Apotheos of that same world order bribed the people woth "treats and gratuities" and searing the conscience of the people with their "appetite for benefits and the habit of receiving them by way of a rule of force and violence. The people, having grown accustomed to feed at the expense of others and to depend for their livelihood on the property of others" degenerated the masses of the empire.

One operated by faith, hope, and charity setting the captive free and the other operated by force, fear , and fealty making the people more merchandise than citizens.

The Piso/Flavian Myth is a product the false religion of the Modern Church who no longer practice Pure Religion which has allowed the conscience of the people to be seared by the covetous practices of Legal charity through the welfare states of the world.

The same persecution and denial will come when the true gospel of the Kingdom of God and His righteousness is preached again to the world. It will be the Modern Christians who will be at the core of a Christian conflict with the modern New World Order of Rome which will come into conflict with Sound Doctrine which is the Doctrines of Jesus.

Other gods

During the Second Persecution, under Domitian, A.D. 81, persecutions among the Christians would bring death by order of their magistrates who commonly were addressed as gods required a "test oath" to prove innocents. Modern Christians do not know why they called these men gods. Likewise, modern Christians don't understand who their actual gods are today.

While those emperors took oaths themselves to be High-priests of their nation But Jesus was proclaimed high-priest and King. He was king because he was the highest son of David but high-priest because of his older cousin John the Baptist who declared that Jesus was to come after him.

It is only a lack of understanding of Jesus and The Way that allows anyone to accept Atwill's premise of a Flavian authorship. If Modern Christians would fully repent and seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness with their whole heart, mind and soul they could not be seduced by the falsehoods and misdirection of Atwill and others.

Parallels

Joseph Atwill also claims that there are dozens of parallels between the Gospels and the history of Titus and his military. This requires a huge stretch of imagination. They prove nothing but the desperate hope of selling more books.

Atwill and his followers mix facts and ignore others. They fail to explain the well-documented activities of early Christians who were well known Historical characters and what they were doing. They mislead people about the persecutions of Christians and seem ignorant of the court issue that got peaceful people executed by the tens of thousands.

The makers of the film Zeitgeist try to make comparisons with many other characters of ancient history to prove Jesus was a fictional character but the sources and information they present as fact are more often incorrect or entirely fictional.

Many people are quick to jump on board their thesis for a variety of reasons but the whole truth reveals they are confused and dependent upon speculation and leaps of logic.

---

“Sometimes the best way to learn a lesson isn't just hearing the words, but putting it into practice by experimenting with it and finding its truth for yourself instead of taking someone else’s word for it.” ― A.J. Darkholme, Rise of the Morningstar

---

They are right that pagan ideas crept into what began posing as Christianity after Flavius Salerus Constantinus's First Council of Nicaea that attracted only a small number of Bishops who convened in Nicaea in Bithynia.

The people advocating that the Flavians created Christianity are mixing the creation of the Church of Flavius Salerus Constantinus with real Christians.

A thousand years later during centuries of inquisitions the Church created by Constantinus would murder millions of real Christians who were a living Church practicing Pure Religion.

Rome had become a Welfare State. That had not only made the Caesar's gods but made the people subject to the Imperial Cult of Rome in much the same way as the modern image of Rome.

Early Christians were practicing Private welfare instead of Public religion. It was the Public religion which involves the Covetous Practices that made men Merchandise and curses their children with debt.

---

"Fortunately for serious minds, a bias recognized is a bias sterilized." Benjamin Haydon

---

"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)

Footnotes

Author Brother Gregory