Lynde_Wee
stranger
Reged: 05/19/04
Posts: 8
Loc: Ohio
|
|
I read The DaVinci Code about 10 days ago, became really intrigued by it, and dropped about $120 on the prequel ( Angels & Demons ) and books on related subjects. I bought two books on "the facts" about the book ( Cracking Da Vinci's Code by James Garlow and Peter Jones, and Da Vinci Code DeCoded by Martin Lunn) and a number of "support" books including Holy Blood, Holy Grail (by Michael Baigen, Richard Leigh, Henry Lincoln), Rosslyn: Guardian of the Secret of the Holy Grail (Tim Wallace-Murphy), The Gnostic Gospels (by Elaine Pagel), Gospel of Mary Magadalene (by Karen King), and a book on the Gospel of Thomas. I've also spent hours surfing the internet on various topics connected to the book.
I can't claim to have finished reading all of the books yet, but I've skimmed parts of each of them. One thing that jumped out at me was about the Council at Nicea, where the early Church was supposed to have voted on the divinity of Christ. So far, it appears that a Council DID take place in 325 A.D., and that a vote WAS part of the proceedings, but the vote was actually to approve what later became known as The Nicene Creed. In the novel, Teabing said, "A relatively close vote at that," but from the sources I've been reading the vote was actually 316 to 2. It appears that there WAS a difference of opinion between followers of a man named Arius and Alexander, the bishop of Alexandria. The Arians tried to submit a document of doctrine that was greatly defeated there, and the Nicene Creed, affirming Christ's divinity, was adopted instead.
I'm trying to very objective as I read everything. I did read that only the bishops could vote at this council .
Does anyone have additional (or different) information about the Council of Nicea?
|
poia
The Modeleter
Reged: 01/25/04
Posts: 168
Loc: NJ
|
|
'tis what I know: Constantine called the 1st Council to settle various disputes... the council worked out most of the conflicts: the date of Easter and other holidays, what books make the Bible and the issue of Jesus being God or, as Arians believed, not God... It is said there was a real fight between bishops on this subject...:) I think Constantine threaten to kill the "heretics" if they didn't vote the "right" way...
From all present, only 3 bishops didn't sign the creed...
The "Gnostic Gospels" by Pagels is pretty good, it will give you an idea of how Christianity came about...
I picked up last week "Secrets of the Code" by Dan Burstein. He put together information from many books, articles, websites etc... all in one... and all related to TDVC
I would also recommend you "The Chalice and the Blade"by R. Eisler...
have fun;)!
--------------------
"OK, so what's the speed of dark?"S.W.
|
Dazzle
addict
Reged: 04/02/04
Posts: 484
Loc: UK
|
|
Quote:
Does anyone have additional (or different) information about the Council of Nicea?
Which one?
|
poia
The Modeleter
Reged: 01/25/04
Posts: 168
Loc: NJ
|
|
lol... you're right... I always think of 1st...
--------------------
"OK, so what's the speed of dark?"S.W.
|
Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
I've read somewhere that the council was partly to solidify the Roman Catholic church and move the hq to Rome, rather than further to the east.
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
Lynde_Wee
stranger
Reged: 05/19/04
Posts: 8
Loc: Ohio
|
|
Dazzle,
Thanks for pointing out that there was more than one Council of Nicea. Using Google, I've now learned that the Second Council met more than four centuries later in 767 A.D. I've also been introduced to the word "anathema", a word used frequently in the eighth century decrees, but not a word that I can imagine Jesus using. Although Christ preached messages of forgiveness, compassion, love, and acceptance, the words of church leaders at the second council were about rules and penalties for breaking them. The more I read, the more I understand why there are so many different denominations today.
The church I attend is part of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and teaches "No creed but Christ". Communion is served weekly and "all who believe, regardless of church affiliation" are invited to receive the emblems of bread and wine. Having been brought up in a church that promotes unity, it's an eye opener to me to read about the early common history all of our churches share.
Getting back to the my original question, I've now learned that the vote back in 325 wasn't the way I understood it before. The real question was Homo Ousion (same substance) vs. Homoi Ousion (like substance). "The sticking point at the Nicene Council was a concept found nowhere in the Bible: homoousion. According to the concept of homo-ousion, Christ the Son was con-substantial (sharing the same substance) with the Father. Arius and Eusebius disagreed. Arius thought the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were materially separate from each other, and that the Father created the Son."
I also learned that winning the vote wasn't enough for the majority bishops. Because Constantine had declared Christianity the official or state religion of the empire, the 'heresy' of Arius was equivalent to revolt. He was not only excommunicated from the church, he was exiled to Illyria.
|
Lynde_Wee
stranger
Reged: 05/19/04
Posts: 8
Loc: Ohio
|
|
Hey, I've been doing daily searches in the "news" part of Google for "Dan Brown", and today's search brought up a new listing for an article in Christianity Today. The article is about the Council of Nicea, but is focused on the selection of books in the New Testament. It's VERY long and reads a little bit like an encyclopedia, but it might be worth reading if anyone's interested.
Christianity Today
Actually, I think the reason Dan Brown's novel is causing so many people to examine religious history more closely is because HIS information is "USER-FRIENDLY, EASY-TO-READ" . The books "breaking", "debunking", etc. tend to read like historical term papers. That also seems to be true of Holy Blood, Holy Grail... very difficult to read and sort through. I've heard that book caused a stir in the 80's, but I don't think it was as great as The Da Vinci Code, because "mainstream" America didn't read it.
|
Sephia
Supreme Goddess
Reged: 11/28/03
Posts: 876
Loc: MA, USA
|
|
thanks for the article. It was interesting, though I think it employed the straw man argument a bit. It tried to prove that there was already an orthodoxy of sorts before 325. Ok. fine. so? The existence of an orthodoxy at all seems to point out that there were at least some people who had different ideas. How many of these there were may be an interesting topic, especially considering that the Christian church split. THe Eastern Orthodox faiths split off from the Roman Catholics. So, then, there were poeple who disagreed with the "orthodox" teachings. SOme split off, some wrote satirical tracts, and some remained quiet. This neither proves nor disproves Leigh's commentary to Sophie, which the article attempts to disprove.
Or at least, that's what I got out of it....
Lynde_wee: I agree that a lot of the appeal for DVC is from the easy-to-read and accessible way it portrays all the info. That's one of the things I liked most about it.
--------------------
"Your life is yours alone, rise up and live it" ~Terry Goodkind
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: