Violence between Factionalism of Christianity in Early AD

[Guest ParatrooperLirelou]

I can't remember the name of it, but I remember in the History Channel there was this documentary about early Christianity.In it, they state that recently discovered texts and archaeological sites reveal new info that dispels the misconception that Christianity was one united religion in the early years after Christ's death and that there were so many different versions of Christianity.In fact they reveal that these sects were so different and divided that there was often violence between the various Christian sects, so much that the Roman empire was having a hard time dealing with it(in fact it states by Constantine's time the empire was on the verge of collapse because of the division in Christianity) and that its one of the primary reasons why Constantine had the First Council of Nicea-to end this factionalism that was going on.

 

Do any of you have more info to add?

[caldrail]

By Constantines time the empire was on the point of collapse for various reasons, but actually christian rivalry wasn't a major cause. In fact, Constantine urged the bishops at the Council of Nicaea in 325 to unite, not to avoid conflict (since they also defined heresy there and introduced a major rivalry between early catholicism and arianism), but to extend political control over the empire and thus hold it together, a situation that suited the ambitious bishops considerably.

 

Although the christian/arian schism was not the only rivalry (Mithraism was losing the battle for dominance), there wasn't much internal fighting and the various factions co-existed reasonably well. What might have affected history far more was patronage of religion. For instance, one motive (among others) for Valen's push toward Adrianople ahead of Gratian's reinforcements was that one emperor was Arian, the other Christian.

[Ursus]

I can't remember the name of it, but I remember in the History Channel there was this documentary about early Christianity.In it, they state that recently discovered texts and archaeological sites reveal new info that dispels the misconception that Christianity was one united religion in the early years after Christ's death and that there were so many different versions of Christianity.In fact they reveal that these sects were so different and divided that there was often violence between the various Christian sects, so much that the Roman empire was having a hard time dealing with it(in fact it states by Constantine's time the empire was on the verge of collapse because of the division in Christianity) and that its one of the primary reasons why Constantine had the First Council of Nicea-to end this factionalism that was going on.

 

Do any of you have more info to add?

 

Hi, the factionalism of Christianity is not a new discovery. It's recorded in the contemporary primary texts by the Christian and Roman authors themselves. (The History Channel has a very poor reputation these days and tries to sensationalize everything).

 

There are dozens of books on this you can easily buy from Amazon or somewhere else. Just do a search for "Early Christianity."

[caesar novus]

The history channel is good for seeing visual artifacts and sites, although their dramatizations and narratives are fluffed up to attract eyeballs for advertisers. They can pose interesting questions though, that you can easily pursue in google for some pretty good summaries. Wikipedia is normally good, but for potentially ideological issues you have to take a grain of salt. I know of physicists and chemists who find there is a 24/7 monitoring of certain environmental articles in order to throw out corrections to false "green facts" (the new age religion).

 

Anyway, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_I#Religious_policy outlines Constantine somewhat weak devotion to Christianity until late, although "led an army of Christians against the Donatist Christians" before Nicaea. If I were to make a History Channel type documentary, it it might sensationalize that the Roman switch to Christianity was due to Constantine being a classic "momma's boy" (I actually heard a female Rome scholar claim this was generally the case in ancient Rome).

 

The facts are fuzzy, but one might claim the mother Helena was originally a floozey trophy wife of a previous emperor, who then divorced her for a more politically acceptable one. Her susceptibility to unconventional new age religion brought her to Christianity which was the main way it slowly seeped into Constantine. He also fell under the spell of his wives, and killed his son by his first wife based on questionable accusations of second wife who wanted to get her own sons in better position to take over. Then Constantine killed the second wife under the rightious spell of his mother. Let's see, wasn't one of his wives a devoted Christian as well? I think he dealt with Christianity as an administrative tool, but didn't feel personally devoted to it until near end of life - seemed to passively let his womenfolk push him to it?

[Emperor Goblinus]

While they all shared an overall unified faith, Christianity had divisions almost right from the beginning. One of the first and most famous was the debate over how much the Gentiles should adopt Jewish customs when converting (such as circumcision). Ultimately the Gentile position won out due to the efforts of Paul and other preachers in Roman world that took the center of the Christian world out of Jerusalem, and the major setback that Jewish Christianity suffered after the Jewish Rebellion in AD 70. Many Christian churches throughout the empire had very divergent practices and sometimes used various Scriptural texts that were later cut out by various councils such as Nicaea. And this does not even take into account the churches that were created outside of the empire, such as in India, Persia, Armenia, Ethiopia, and eventually China, which of course were even more different.