{"id":3378,"date":"2017-08-21T18:27:15","date_gmt":"2017-08-21T16:27:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/"},"modified":"2026-02-12T21:20:01","modified_gmt":"2026-02-12T20:20:01","slug":"emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/en\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/","title":{"rendered":"Emperor Constantine, the Catholic Church and the Council of Nicaea"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_83 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/en\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/#The_Church_as_an_Instrument_of_Political_Power_and_the_Council_of_Nicaea\" >The Church as an Instrument of Political Power and the Council of Nicaea<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/en\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/#The_Pope_did_not_attend_the_Council\" >The Pope did not attend the Council.<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/en\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/#The_pagan_element_of_the_generation_of_gods_in_the_Nicene_Creed_%E2%80%A6_They_concealed_the_pagan_elements_a_bad_translation_of_the_Nicene_Creed_into_Slovak_and_Czech\" >The pagan element of the generation of gods in the Nicene Creed. &#8230; They concealed the pagan elements: a bad translation of the Nicene Creed into Slovak and Czech.<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/en\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/#The_First_Council_of_Constantinople_or_the_First_Council_of_Constantinople_Jesus_as_not_fully_God\" >The First Council of Constantinople or the First Council of Constantinople: Jesus as not fully God<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/en\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/#A_bold_theory_Did_Christians_really_believe_in_one_God_Or_did_they_believe_in_multiple_gods\" >A bold theory: Did Christians really believe in one God? Or did they believe in multiple gods?<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/en\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/#The_Church_as_an_Instrument_of_Political_Power_%E2%80%93_Historical_Development_after_Emperor_Constantine_and_Theodosius\" >The Church as an Instrument of Political Power \u2013 Historical Development after Emperor Constantine and Theodosius<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/en\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/#Primacy_primacy_of_the_Roman_bishop\" >Primacy \/ primacy of the Roman bishop<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/en\/emperor-constantine-the-catholic-church-and-the-council-of-nicaea\/#In_conclusion\" >In conclusion,<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<p><strong>Emperor Constantine, the Catholic Church and the Council of Nicaea<\/strong><br \/> There is a lot of ballast and conspiracy theories about Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nicaea on the Internet. In this article, however, we will look at this issue with a very serious, objective academic approach.<\/p><h2 class=\"western\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Church_as_an_Instrument_of_Political_Power_and_the_Council_of_Nicaea\"><\/span> <strong>The Church as an Instrument of Political Power and the Council of Nicaea<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p> Almost all historians, who are not Catholic religious fanatics themselves, are of the opinion that the Catholic Church has never been anything but an instrument of political power. The first to think of using a small, insignificant Jewish sect for political purposes was Emperor Constantine, or <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">Theodosius<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">I.<\/span> Academic facts say that in 325 there were many more Gnostics, that is <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">,<\/span> true followers of Christ, than the strange Jewish offshoot of Christianity, which later became the Catholic Church.<br \/> <span lang=\"sk-SK\"><em>More about Gnostics here: Gnosticism, gnosis. Basic information and facts. The real teaching of Christ and true Christianity <a href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/gnosticizmus-definicia-a-zakladne-fakty\">https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/gnosticizmus-definicia-a-zakladne-fakty<\/a><\/em><\/span><br \/> The Council of Nicaea dealt with the dispute with the Arians, who were essentially Jews who recognized Jesus only as a prophet, not as God. It&#39;s strange why Constantine didn&#39;t side with the Arians, because Constantine wasn&#39;t concerned with &quot;truth&quot; or the good of Christians. He didn&#39;t care which sect he supported. The only thing Constantine pursued was to effectively use it to strengthen his political power. The sect (more precisely, a group of sects) that could be better used for several reasons to strengthen political power was something similar to what we currently call &quot;Christianity&quot;, which is why Constantine decided to support this particular group of sects. Few people realize that if Emperor Constantine (or Emperor <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">Theodosius<\/span> ) had supported another type of Christian sect, in this case the Arians, the current form of Christian faith would not exist at all, and instead of the current 2 billion Christians, 2 billion Christians would have Arian faith. Such a large and significant demographic matter was then decided by only one small decision of the Roman emperor. If the emperor had not interfered in religious matters at all, the Jewish forms of followers of Christ (such as current Christianity or Arians) would have spontaneously disappeared, and only one form of followers of Christ would have remained: the Gnostics.<br \/><br \/> The First Council of Nicaea was convened by Emperor Constantine. Emperor Constantine also presided over this council (in other words, he was in charge). It was typical for emperors to be actively involved in religious matters: for example, which Roman or Greek gods pagan priests should worship in temples. After a change of emperor, it was necessary to worship other gods more \u2013 such things happened often \u2013 it is a real historical fact. It logically follows that Emperor Constantine, who, by the way, was not even a Christian, had an active motivation to interfere in Christian religious matters.<br \/><br \/> While searching for information about the Council of Nicaea, I also came across the website of Jehovah&#39;s Witnesses. I was unable to verify whether they quote correctly from the Encyclopedia Britannica, but in any case, even Christian Protestant theologians themselves hold the view, and many historical and factual opinions suggest, that the pagan Constantine interfered quite significantly in the council for Christians. Of course, I in no way want to label the information from Jehovah&#39;s Witnesses in this article as credible, but it is worth mentioning:<br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/www.blogger.com\/blogger.g?blogID=6447143063337143091\" name=\"p2\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><\/a> <em>In 325 AD, Emperor Constantine summoned all the bishops to Nicaea. His goal was to resolve a problem that had been the subject of much discussion: the relationship between God and his Son.<\/em><br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/www.blogger.com\/blogger.g?blogID=6447143063337143091\" name=\"p3\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><\/a> <span lang=\"sk-SK\"><em>At the Council of Nicaea, &quot;Constantine himself presided,&quot; states<\/em><\/span> <em><span lang=\"sk-SK\"><em>Encyclop\u00e6dia Britannica<\/em><\/span><\/em> <span lang=\"sk-SK\"><em>, &quot;actively directing the proceedings and personally proposing&#8230; the crucial formulation expressing Christ&#39;s relationship to God in the creed that emerged from the council, that he is &#39;of one substance with the Father&#39;&#8230; The bishops, intimidated by the emperor, with the exception of two, signed the creed, many of them largely against their own convictions.&quot;<\/em><\/span><br \/> <a href=\"https:\/\/wol.jw.org\/sk\/wol\/d\/r38\/lp-v\/1200274107#h=5\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span lang=\"sk-SK\"><em><a href=\"https:\/\/wol.jw.org\/sk\/wol\/d\/r38\/lp-v\/1200274107#h=5\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/wol.jw.org\/en\/wol\/d\/r38\/lp-v\/1200274107#h=5<\/a><\/em><\/span><\/a><br \/><br \/> The most important thing from the entire Council of Nicaea was the Nicene Creed.<br \/> <span lang=\"sk-SK\">However, I noticed a very controversial thing. The Greek and Latin translation of the Nicene Creed differs in a very serious matter: in the most important word<\/span> <span lang=\"sk-SK\">of the entire creed. <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Homoousion\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Homoousion<\/a><\/span><br \/> While the term &quot;homoousion&quot; is quite clear in the Greek language, meaning the Father and the Son have the same essence, in the Latin version, Emperor Constantine pushed through the more pagan-sounding word &quot;consubstanti\u00e1lem,&quot; which translates to common essence.<br \/> Here, it is necessary to understand the context: according to Greek and Roman mythology, the gods had their children and grandchildren. In 325, the vast majority of pagans could interpret the term &quot;consubstanti\u0101lem&quot; as the relationship of father and son in the pagan mythology of the gods. And the pagan emperor Constantine quite liked it. It is interesting that Christian theologians are very fond of avoiding the controversial Latin term &quot;consubstanti\u0101lem&quot; and prefer to use the Greek term &quot;homoousion&quot;.<br \/> Catholics and Protestants recognize the Nicene Creed, but they do not realize that the creed has many pagan elements.<br \/> <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/consubstantialem\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span lang=\"sk-SK\">https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/consubstantialem<\/span><\/a><br \/> <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/consubstantial\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span lang=\"sk-SK\">https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/consubstantial<\/span><\/a><br \/> <span lang=\"sk-SK\"><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/con-#Latin\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/con-#Latin<\/a><\/span><br \/><br \/> I was unable to determine in which language the Nicene Creed is more original. However, it is clear that the most important person at the council, Emperor Constantine, signed the Latin version of the creed at the council, as Greek was not such a close language to him.<\/p><h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Pope_did_not_attend_the_Council\"><\/span> <strong>The Pope did not attend the Council.<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p> Another interesting fact is that the Pope was not present at the Council of Nicaea, which is a scandal from the perspective of Catholic theology. Did Emperor Constantine forbid him to attend? On the other hand, it must be said that the &quot;Pope&quot; had absolutely minimal influence in the past &#8211; he was just an ordinary bishop of the city of Rome. To this day, in the Catholic Church, the Pope is metaphorically referred to as the Bishop of Rome, but in the past, this was not a metaphor but was literally true.<\/p><h2 class=\"western\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_pagan_element_of_the_generation_of_gods_in_the_Nicene_Creed_%E2%80%A6_They_concealed_the_pagan_elements_a_bad_translation_of_the_Nicene_Creed_into_Slovak_and_Czech\"><\/span> <strong>The pagan element of the generation of gods in the Nicene Creed. &#8230; They concealed the pagan elements: a bad translation of the Nicene Creed into Slovak and Czech.<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p> Nowhere in the Bible is it written that Jesus the Son is begotten of the Father, but in the Nicene Creed it is. But why? What could be the logical justification for this?<br \/> According to Greek and Roman mythology, the gods had wives, children, and grandchildren. Since Constantine still sympathized with pagan philosophy, he tried to transfer pagan philosophy into Christianity &#8211; after all, it would be easier for pagans to convert to Christianity. Constantine thus imposed a pagan element in the Nicene Creed, that the Son (Jesus) was begotten by God the Father. To be begotten by sexual intercourse &#8211; thus it smacks of pagan Greco-Roman mythology of the begetting of gods. The Slovak and Czech translations (and perhaps translations in many other languages) have an incorrect translation: &quot;zroden\u00fd&quot;, i.e. born of the Father (&quot;zroden\u00fd&quot; is a synonym for &quot;naroden\u00fd&quot;). The English translation of the word &quot;g\u00e9nitum&quot; is correct: &quot;begotten&quot;.<br \/> <span lang=\"sk-SK\"><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/genitus#Latin\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/genitus#Latin<\/a><\/span><\/p><h2 class=\"western\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_First_Council_of_Constantinople_or_the_First_Council_of_Constantinople_Jesus_as_not_fully_God\"><\/span> <strong>The First Council of Constantinople or the First Council of Constantinople: Jesus as not fully God<br \/><\/strong> <span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.blogger.com\/blogger.g?blogID=6447143063337143091\" name=\"firstHeading\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><\/a> In 380, Christianity was enacted as the mandatory religion in Rome by the bloodiest Roman Emperor, Theodosius I, and pagans unwilling to convert to Christianity were brutally executed and liquidated. A civil war began in the Roman Empire. <br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/www.blogger.com\/blogger.g?blogID=6447143063337143091\" name=\"firstHeading1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><\/a> <strong>Emperor Theodosius I was the first emperor to come up with the perfect idea that Christianity could be used as a tool of political power.<\/strong> Despite the fact that this emperor was officially a Christian, he still did not give up his pagan thinking. In the Council of Constantinople, this emperor pushed through another pagan element.<br \/><br \/> The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, enacted at the Council of Constantinople, contains another pagan controversy.<br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/sk.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Nicejsko-carihradsk%C3%A9_vyznanie_viery\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span lang=\"sk-SK\">https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Nicene-Constantinopolitan_Creed<\/span><\/a><br \/> <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Nicene_Creed#Niceno.E2.80.93Constantinopolitan_Creed\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span lang=\"sk-SK\">https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Nicene_Creed#Niceno.E2.80.93Constantinopolitan_Creed<\/span><\/a><br \/> <a href=\"https:\/\/sk.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Prv%C3%BD_carihradsk%C3%BD_koncil\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span lang=\"sk-SK\">https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/First_Council_of_Constantinople<\/span><\/a><br \/> <span lang=\"sk-SK\"><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/First_Council_of_Constantinople\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/First_Council_of_Constantinople<\/a><\/span><br \/><br \/> This part is particularly controversial.<br \/> &#8230; <em>.. the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages.<\/em><br \/> The meaning of the word &quot;saeculum&quot; as age is only in third place &#8211; it is a deliberately misleading translation. The correct translation of the Latin word &quot;saeculum&quot; is <em><u>generation<\/u><\/em> . Jesus was conceived before all generations, so he is not a full-fledged infinite god who has existed forever. Again, this element smacks of pagan mythology about the conception and birth of gods.<br \/> <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/saeculum\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span lang=\"sk-SK\">https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/saeculum<\/span><\/a><br \/> <span lang=\"sk-SK\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cs.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/saeculum\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/en.wiktionary.org\/wiki\/saeculum<\/a><\/span><\/p><h2 class=\"western\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"A_bold_theory_Did_Christians_really_believe_in_one_God_Or_did_they_believe_in_multiple_gods\"><\/span> <strong>A bold theory: Did Christians really believe in one God? Or did they believe in multiple gods?<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><div style=\"font-weight: normal;\"> I must say openly that since the culture and dominant thinking in the Roman Empire were still pagan, people interpreted the Nicene and Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed in a pagan way. A pagan would not imagine any Divine Trinity or pair, but would imagine the Father and the Son as two pagan gods. Although all Christians would strongly object to this theory, it is very likely that at one time the Church believed not in one God but in several gods. It could have taken some time for the current teaching on the Divine Trinity to develop: perhaps even until the 11th century.<div style=\"font-weight: normal;\"><h2 class=\"western\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Church_as_an_Instrument_of_Political_Power_%E2%80%93_Historical_Development_after_Emperor_Constantine_and_Theodosius\"><\/span> <strong>The Church as an Instrument of Political Power \u2013 Historical Development after Emperor Constantine and Theodosius<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p> It is clear that Emperor Theodosius had more power over the church than the Roman Bishop himself (later called the Pope). Several emperors <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">after Theodosius I apparently had more power over the church than the &quot;Pope&quot; himself (or rather the Roman Bishop), because the desire for power was great and the church then had more power than the state. Later, more political power began to pass to the Pope, and the political importance<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">of the emperor weakened and later disappeared. Later, the Popes managed to remove the institution of the emperor completely, and the Pope took all political power upon himself.<\/span><span style=\"font-weight: normal;\"><br \/><\/span><\/p><h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Primacy_primacy_of_the_Roman_bishop\"><\/span> <strong>Primacy \/ primacy of the Roman bishop<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">This topic is a bit of a digression from the main topic, but it is something interesting. Catholics manipulatively interpret a certain part of the Bible, where Peter is referred to as the &quot;head&quot; of the church. &quot;You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not overcome it&quot; (Mt 16:18). But nowhere in the Bible does it say that the subsequent Roman bishops should have the same title and the same importance as Peter.<br \/> Another part of the Bible says that Jesus said that his successor was James (I don&#39;t have time to look it up, you can look it up).<br \/> <strong>The Inquisition in the Catholic Church continues to this day. To this day, the Catholic Church despises, scorns, and mocks science, specifically the scientific discipline of history.<\/strong> The Catholic Church still insists that the Bishop of Rome was the Pope, that is, the supreme head of all Christianity and the church from time immemorial. However, every independent, i.e., non-religious academic historian will tell you that the institution of the Pope as a person with influence over the entire Catholic Church only came into being when the institution of the Roman Emperor ceased to exist and all power passed to the Pope, which certainly was not earlier than the 7th or 8th century. The emergence of the institution of the Pope as the head of the entire Catholic Church had nothing to do with Saint Peter or Christianity; rather, it was all about political power. This real historical fact is still strongly denied at an official level in the Catholic Church. Church history is also taught in priestly seminaries (a seminary is a building where future priests study to become priests), but it is taught in a deliberately manipulative way. Catholic priests also teach history in Catholic seminaries. <strong>In the Catholic Church, it is always very strongly emphasized that the Pope is the direct successor of Saint Peter.<\/strong><br \/><\/span><\/p><h2 class=\"western\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"In_conclusion\"><\/span> <strong>In conclusion,<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p> <strong>Serious historical consequences.<\/strong><br \/> It is important to realize a very serious thing: that nothing like Christianity would exist today if the Roman Emperor <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">Theodosius<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">had not decided to impose Christianity on the population under the threat of death, and this purely for the purpose of using some strange sect for political power.<\/span><br \/><br \/> <strong>The Inquisition in the Catholic Church still exists today.<\/strong><br \/> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">Furthermore, it should be noted that the Inquisition has not disappeared from the Catholic Church even today. In the Catholic Church, it is still strictly forbidden to discuss topics that are discussed quite normally on neutral academic ground<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">(<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">e.g.,<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">some<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">topics mentioned in this article).<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">Future priests &#8211; theology students in priestly seminaries will never learn the truth, everything is censored, and the Catholic Church is always praised only in the best light. Real factual and historical facts confirm that the teaching of Jesus Christ was nothing like what we call Christianity today, but so-called Gnosticism. In priestly seminaries, it is only briefly mentioned that there were once some small Gnostic sects, and that&#39;s it, we move on. The truth is exactly the opposite, there were incomparably more Gnostic followers of Christ, the number of Gnostics had a much greater demographic significance, and the small Jewish sects that are called &quot;Christianity&quot; today were very few in number.<\/span><br \/> <strong>The Church does not recognize history as a science &#8211; the Inquisition still exists &#8211; the Church denies real facts.<\/strong> <span style=\"font-weight: normal;\">Most Catholic priests still deny history.<\/span><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Church as an instrument of political power and the Council of Nicaea. The Pope did not attend the Council. The pagan element of the generation of gods in the Nicene Creed. &#8230; They concealed pagan elements: a bad translation of the Nicene Creed into Slovak and Czech. The First Council of Constantinople: Jesus as not fully God. A bold theory: did Christians really believe in one God? Or did they believe in multiple gods? The Church as an instrument of political power \u2013 historical development after Emperor Constantine and Theodosius. Primacy \/ primacy of the Roman bishop.","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3378","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-christianity"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3378","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3378"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3378\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3378"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3378"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3378"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}