How many of the Christian know that their religion was formed by one man, Eusebius for emporor constantine?

Question

Constantaine commissioned Eusebius to form the the first bible, he had sole authority! There were dozens of Gospels, he chose four. One for each direction of the winds! Swiss historian, Jacob Burckhardt said he was the first thoroughly dishonest historian of antiquity! He wrote that it may be lawful and fitting to use falsehood as a medicine, and for the benefit of those who want to be deceived! In other words the ends justify the means, regardless of the truth. Constantine had the blood of hundreds of thousands of people on his hands, he makes Hitler look like a choir boy. Yet he was called the 13 th apostile, and St Constantine by the Roman church he had formed. The remaining Gospels and their followers were purged, just like Hitler did to the people he thought were inferior! But lo and behold some of the purged Gospels were found in 1945 at Nag Hammadi the most important one The Gospels of Thomas these are the true words of Jesus. Check out TheAsender on line for my proof

Answer 1

This is factually incorrect, and that's coming from an atheist.

Answer 2

So you are trying to say that the Christian faith is false? Why, you say right in your question that he chose four of the Gospels when there were dozen available. To me that doesn't make it false...maybe incomplete, but not false. I will admit, I have not read the Gnostic Gospels or the Gospel of Thomas, but then again I haven't read every page of the Bible yet either, I'm working on it though so please don't judge.

Answer 3

Read the book of Acts chapter 1 in the Bible, the true word of God and you will see when the church started. Christian means Christ-like, so Jesus formed Christianity.

Answer 4

They must say that the Catholic Church is wrong or else why are they Protestants? Yet they must also admit that not one of their denominations has any right to declare itself to be the one True Church. And that, for the simple reason that Christ did not estab­lish any institution which could be known by men to be His Church.


They are all brought up with that impression and so they continue in religious matters to wander where they will, like people in a forest, who follow any line of tracks without bothering to ask where it leads. And they so love the risky adventure of experi­menting for themselves that they search Scripture for every possible text which they think will support them.


All Christians admit that Christ intended a unity of some kind to prevail amongst His followers. But we cannot deny for ourselves what type of unity must prevail. The "all going the one way" type of unity, whilst each goes his own way, is useless if it be quite foreign to the mind of Christ. Who can accept the in­vention of Protestants who, noting the numberless ways in which they are divided, define the unity re­quired to suit themselves in their present circumstances and in such a way that they may remain where they are.


Those who believed all that He had taught would at least be one in faith. Again, He demanded unity in worship. "One Lord, one faith, one baptism," was to be the rule and baptism belongs to worship. The early Christians were told distinctly by St. Paul that participation in the same Eucharistic worship probably was essential to the unity. "We, being many, are one bread, one body; all that partake of one bread".
In other words, "The one Christ is to be found in Holy Communion, and we, however numerous we may be, are one in Him if we partake of the same Holy Communion."

Protestantism cannot preserve Christian standards in­tact. Articles of faith have gone overboard. Mortifi­cation and fasting are not required. The evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity, and obedience, with their consequent inspiration of monastic life are ig­nored. Protestant writings excuse, and even approve, laxity in moral practice. Protestantism has not pro­duced anything equivalent to the canonized Catholic Saint. Many of the Sacraments of Christ are not even acknowledged by Protestantism, whilst the heart has been torn out of its worship by the loss of Christ's presence in the Blessed Eucharist. Of spiritual author­ity there is scarcely a trace. The very clergy are not trained in moral law, and cannot advise the laity as they should, even were the laity willing to accept ad­vice. The prevalent notion, "Believe on Christ and be saved," tends of its very nature to lessen the sense of necessity of personal virtue.

Protestantism was a movement of heated dissent. Error and rebellion took the first Protestants from the Catholic Church, the various forms of error, or the various countries in which the rebellion occurred, giving rise to the various sects. But any goodness which the first Protestants took as doctrinal baggage with them was derived from the Church they left. And any apparent goodness in the teachings of Protestant­ism is still to be found in the Catholic Church. Where, in the Catholic Church, cockle sown by the enemy is found here and there amidst the wheat, Satan was wise enough to allow some wheat here and there to remain amidst the cockle of Protestantism. And it is the presence of this wheat which accounts for the con­tinued existence of Protestantism. But the wheat does not really belong to Protestantism. It is a relic of Catholicism growing in alien soil. A Catholic is good when he lives up to Catholic principles, refusing to depart from them. A Protestant is good when he unconsciously acts on Catholic principles, departing from those which are purely Protestant.

Answer 5

Oh, pooh pooh. Such a crock of it, too. "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of Heaven." Now, that's the Truth. Get into it.

Answer 6

Man, there is so much wrong with what you said, I can't untwist it all.
I'll just pray for you