English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

There is no evidence that for the first 300 years after Christ’s death, those claiming to be Christians used the cross in worship. In the fourth century, however, pagan Emperor Constantine became a convert to apostate Christianity and promoted the cross as its symbol. Whatever Constantine’s motives, the cross had nothing to do with Jesus Christ. The cross is, in fact, pagan in origin. The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits: “The cross is found in both pre-Christian and non-Christian cultures.” Various other authorities have linked the cross with nature worship and pagan sex rites.

Why, then, was this pagan symbol promoted? Apparently, to make it easier for pagans to accept “Christianity.” Nevertheless, devotion to any pagan symbol is clearly condemned by the Bible. (2 Corinthians 6:14-18) The Scriptures also forbid all forms of idolatry. (Exodus 20:4, 5; 1 Corinthians 10:14) With very good reason, therefore, true Christians do not use the cross in worship.

2007-11-10 15:43:45 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

In classical Greek the word (stau·ros′) rendered “torture stake” in the New World Translation primarily denotes an upright stake, or pole, and there is no evidence that the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures used it to designate a stake with a crossbeam.

2007-11-10 15:50:57 · update #1

22 answers

Worship today of the so-called cross of Christ leans heavily for support on the story told about Constantine the Great as he set out to conquer the world. It seems he had a vision, then a dream, then a victory, and subsequently was “converted” to Christianity, and all this was due, it is said, to the miraculous power of Christ’s cross.
In the year 312, Constantine, who at the time was emperor of what is now known as France and Britain, set out with his army to war against Maxentius, then emperor of Italy, and who, incidentally, was the brother of Constantine’s wife. Somewhere along the way one day, at about high noon, Constantine was amazed to see in the sky a pillar of light in the form of a cross on which was written Hoc Vince, meaning “By this, Conquer”.
The following night, so the story goes, Jesus Christ himself appeared to Constantine while he was asleep, and told him to make a banner bearing this heavenly cross and to carry it at the head of his army, for it was to be a token or sign of victory. This he did, and, besides, had the monogram cross painted on the shields of his warriors before the final and decisive battle at the Milvian Bridge near Rome where Maxentius was killed.
Religiously, Constantine was a worshiper of the sun, like other pagans of his day. Apollo was his “patron saint”. It may be related, for example, that after putting down rebellion among the Franks in the year 308, he went immediately to the temple of Apollo and offered up gifts and prayers of thanksgiving to that pagan god.
Now to such a man, we are supposed to believe, the Lord gave exceeding precious privileges and blessings. What, then, were the results? Did Constantine demonstrate that he did such things in ignorance and was at heart really an honest and sincere man? Did this soldier follow the course of the centurion Cornelius, make a consecration to God and symbolize it by being baptized? (Acts 10) Did Constantine immediately reform, turn about, abandon his old course and become a true Christian and faithful follower of Jesus’ example? Did he do all of this and besides enter the field of gospel-preaching in imitation of Saul who became Paul the apostle? (Acts 9) Did he give up his emperorship and abandon this old world which is under the overlordship of the Devil, even as all true Christians must do?
No! is the emphatic answer to these questions, an answer that fairly screams from the pages of history. Instead of abandoning his former course of iniquity Constantine simply enlarged his field of activity, increased his appetite for conquest, and expanded his business of killing people.
Constantine’s sideline was a sort of “Murder, Inc.”, a hobby with him, out of which he seemed to get a special joy. Of his known murders, his father-in-law headed the list. His second victim, the first after seeing the vision of the cross, was his sister Anastasia’s husband, Bassianus by name. Next he killed his 12-year-old nephew, Licinianus, the son of his sister Constantina. His wife, Fausta, he killed in a bath of boiling water. Next was a friend named Sopater. Then his sister Constantina’s husband, Licinius, he murdered. Number seven on the list was his own son, his firstborn, Crispus, whom he beheaded.
People in their gross ignorance may call Constantine a “Christian”; they call the butcher Franco a “fine Christian gentleman”; but, praise be to God, none of such murderers will ever enter the kingdom of the new world! So, if there were no further proof than this, the claim that Constantine was “converted” to Christianity falls flat. He was a son of the Devil.

2007-11-10 16:02:06 · answer #1 · answered by conundrum 7 · 2 1

Yikes! Another Chick Flick disciple!

Whoa... there buddy, hang on to that theory of yours. I suggest reading the literature of the earliest historical Christians. See if you can find any current denomination that these early writers are describing? Remember Saint Paul was a disciple to the pagans, Augustine was a pagan, and many gentiles were pagans, so don't throw stones because one might fly back and hit you in your heritage.

New Catholic Encyclopedia does not "ADMIT" anything other than the Truth. I encourage you to read it closely. Maybe take a look at the history of that Bible you are calling "the Scriptures" and find out how it was developed. Might surprise you, if you can be honest with yourself.

My last question is By whose Authority do you claim to be a "True Christian"? Be careful now, many will say Lord, Lord, but God will not listen to them. Gal 1:11-12, 2 Peter 3:16, John 20:30, 2 Thes. 2:14, 2 Thes 1:7-8, 2 John 1:9.

Let us work towards unity in the Body of Christ Jesus.
Praise be Jesus Christ now and forever.

2007-11-10 16:06:02 · answer #2 · answered by Lives7 6 · 1 1

The "cross" associated with Constantine was the ChiRho cross - an X with a P through it. It had nothing to do with the "cross" that is the symbol of Jesus' stauros.

I assume your reference to the use of the word stauros in classical Greek is referring to the time period of Homer, etc. centuries before the time of Jesus and before the time of the Roman Empire. By the first century AD, a stauros was not limited to a simple stake or crux simplex, but often had a crosspiece attached. (Imperial Bible Dictionary, p 84).

The writings of Minucius Felix, in the 3rd century, make it plain that pagans ridiculed Christians because they "worshiped" the cross. Felix, a Christian, denied that Christians worshiped crosses. Obviously pagans were not enamored by the cross. If you haven't read it, you should

I will agree, though, that the cross should not be used in worship.

2007-11-10 16:44:29 · answer #3 · answered by browneyedgirl 3 · 1 1

For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman empire, and Christians were terribly persecuted. This changed after the “conversion” of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine “legalized” Christianity at the Edict of Milan in A.D. 313. Later, in A.D. 325, Constantine called together the Council of Nicea, in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith, but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine promoted was a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism.

Constantine found that with the Roman Empire being so vast, expansive, and diverse – not everyone would agree to forsake their religious beliefs and instead embrace Christianity. So, Constantine allowed, and even promoted, the “Christianization” of pagan beliefs. Completely pagan and utterly unbiblical beliefs were given new “Christian” identities.

2007-11-10 15:51:41 · answer #4 · answered by Freedom 7 · 3 1

It was because of Constantine that Christianity even survived. His motivation was to pull his empire together. There were so many different beliefs creating havoc within his empire that he outlawed everything except Christianity. Yes the cross is pagan - inasmuch as it is Astrological as is the symbol of the fish that are on the back of cars and trucks today. Most of the Christian beliefs are based on paganism but promoted as Christian. Reasons being to unify the Christian movement as many were pagans and the thought was - unification would be accomplished by blending as much together as possible - then reinventing as much as possible. This has been accomplished with the destruction of reason and logic. Fear has its place in all religions, and is the glue that allows the dogmas to continue. But, the fear comes with a special grace - that being a reward in heaven.

So by looking at the scenario we find:

1. Make it acceptable to everyone. Bring it together - alter it and dignify it with a leader that cannot be accessible. [G_D]
2. Make it plausible with the creation of someone [Jesus] who literally rises to the inaccessible [G_D]- to live in heaven that is a happiness that can not be explained in this world.
3. Make sure everyone adheres to the philosophy with the use of torture or any possible dehumanization method available.
4. Keep them tightly wrapped with constant bombardment of motivational sermons.
5. Now the church holds the power, with absolutely NO one able to question it - as all its power comes from an inaccessible deity [G_D] The church dogma holds the secret and is divinely inspired to pass along its great knowledge - BUT - knowledge can only be attained through the church teachings and it's leaders.

It is continued today. Fear with the hope of an afterlife is a welcomed and awaited occurrence. Crosses are irrelevant to the issue that stands clearly in front of the believers today.

2007-11-10 16:45:19 · answer #5 · answered by Tricia R 5 · 0 1

I didn't even have to read the responses- I just read yours. I'm amused by people today (them, not you- though the question is great too.) I'll make you an idol if you like - but I think watching American Idol should fill all your idol worshipping needs. We all know how evil and blasphemous that show is. Just go get an US magazine, cut out pictures of the Hollywood stars and paste them to the wall.

2016-05-29 04:04:59 · answer #6 · answered by diana 3 · 0 0

Constantine was a major player in bringing the problems to the forefront, and especially making the faith 'feel at eaze'. However, MANY problems had been in creeping into what was labeled as the faith since at least PAUL's time, as he, and others, mentions it. One such group was in Titus 1. These "CRETIANS" he claims are "ALWAYS LIARS". The term "christain" was a derogatory term and basically means "liars" and "idiots". The English term "christian", "cretin", "cretan", "cretian" ALL come from the same Latin word "CHRISTANUS" and means just what it used to, but Constantine help pretend to give it a POSITIVE conotation. Him was a bad!

"The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop is a good book on this subject.

2007-11-10 15:53:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

No offense, but that is utter nonsense.

According to Wikipedia,

"However, the cross symbol was already associated with Christians in the second century, as is indicated in the anti-Christian arguments cited in the Octavius of Minucius Felix, chapters IX and XXIX, written at the end of that century or the beginning of the next,[4] and by the fact that by the early third century the cross had become so closely associated with Christ that Clement of Alexandria, who died between 211 and 216, could without fear of ambiguity use the phrase τὸ κυριακὸν σημεῖον (the Lord's sign) to mean the cross, when he repeated the idea, current as early as the Epistle of Barnabas, that the number 318 (in Greek numerals, ΤΙΗ) in Genesis 14:14 was a foreshadowing (a "type") of the cross (T, an upright with crossbar, standing for 300) and of Jesus (ΙΗ, the first two letter of his name ΙΗΣΟΥΣ, standing for 18), and his contemporary Tertullian could designate the body of Christian believers as crucis religiosi, i.e. "devotees of the Cross". In his book De Corona, written in 204, Tertullian tells how it was already a tradition for Christians to trace repeatedly on their foreheads the sign of the cross."

2007-11-10 15:50:39 · answer #8 · answered by NONAME 7 · 2 2

How can you possibly say that the cross had nothing to do with Jesus? Are you saying he wasn't crucified?

If so -- then you are probably misinformed. If not -- then the cross DOES have something to do with Jesus and your point is irrelevant.

I might point out that wine was invented by pagan societies and the Golden Rule was mentioned by Aristotle 500 years BC. SHould these be eliminated from Christian rites and beliefs, too?

2007-11-10 15:52:44 · answer #9 · answered by Ranto 7 · 1 1

The cross, like the 'halo' is a solar symbol stolen from the cult of Sol Invictus upon which modern Christianity is largely based. Constantine did not simply make Christianity the state religion, he actually created a new religion by mixing pre-Constantine Christianity, solar worship, and Appolonius worship.

2007-11-10 15:49:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers