top five

[studyhound]

Top five most important events in the church (after the apostles and Christ)

1. Destruction of Jerusalem
2. The assemble of the Cannon by Constantine
3. The decree making Christianity a legal religion in Rome
4. Martin Luther’s 95 thesis
5.(tie) The east/west schism/ the protestant reformation



other notables:

The conversion of Augustine and Constantine
Jerome Completes the Vulgate
Gutenberg Produces the First Printed Bible
The First Council of Nicea
Tyndale translating the bible in to English

[Ryokan]

1. Conversion of Paul
2. Conversion of Constantine
3.The Two Schisms
4. The invention of the printing press.
5. Rise of existentialism.

[themuzicman]

(AFTER the apostles, Ryokan)

I would have put guttenberg in at #3.
I would have combined #4 and #5.

Another honorable mention (more recent) is the establishing of the American Constitution, which began to put away state run religion.

[TheOneAndOnly]

What about Pope Urban II declaration of Holy War, the crusades?
The American Evangelical movement?
The Spanish Colonisation of the New World?

[Da Lone-Warrior]

I would think that the rise of Islam was a very serious development for Christianity.

I also think the Nazi Holocaust had a strong impact on Christianity in Europe and the US.

The 19th Ctry Evangelical revival in the US with its emphasis on changed lives as being more important than doctrinal agreement was an important development that made it possible for many different sects of Christianity to coexist in the US.

And then there was May 25, 1976 when yours truly was born. A to be discovered truly important development for the future of Christianity.
:eek:

dlw

[Lizard]

I would certainly include the scisms.

I think the printing press/reformation go hand in hand. You couldn't have had the reformation without the printing press so I would count that as one.

Also I think the conversion of Augustine.

And of course the distruction of Jerusalem.

Not necessarily in that order.



(:huh: I need one more :idea: The birth of Tim LaHaye)

[studyhound]

(:huh: I need one more :idea: The birth of Tim LaHaye)
:crazy:

[Christianotaku]

how about the factoration of the bible by rome excluding all ties to mary magdelene being Jesus wif....eh wait am I reading too much da vinci code?

[learning]

I'm reading a book just now called 'The Ultimate Guide to Christian History' by Smith and Smith, and it has taught me a lot about Christian History. It has a lot of the 'debate' put in a humerous perspective, I'll show that later. But in their overview of Church History, I'll put down some of the things they mention 'after Christ and the Apostles.
They divide the time up into years, so here's some of their overview.

"The Roman Empire (A.D. 300 to A.D. 590)

There are two sides to every coin. Constantine, the emperor of the Roman Empire, converted to the Christian faith. In fact, he made it the state religion. Yea!
Yea?
It IS yea, right?
This one event propelled Christianity to the forefront of the bulk of the world. It made the church safe to grow. In the sense that the message of Christ's sacrifice would freely spread, this was the best of news. It was wonderful that the church didn't have to fear persecution.This very safety factor made the church vulnerable to other enemies, though. The corruption of power. The dilution of truth. The enemies within. Heresy.

Without a doubt the heresy that typified the era of the Roman Empire was the heresy of Arianism. This was the belief that Jesus was not equal to God, but was the next best thing. Arianism touched on the most significant point of agreement - the person of Jesus Christ. Orthodox Christianity held firm its stance that Jesus was both parts in one, God and man. The fight between orthodox Christianity and Arian beliefs was as strong as any modern religious prejudice or conflict.
The church formalized its structure with a hiearchy of bishops, that resembled the emperor hierarchy of the Roman Empire. The end of this age is marked by the fall of the western half of the empire (modern Spain, France and Italy).

[learning]

From above book, these quotes are from pages 4-6
"The Middle Ages (A,D, 590-1517)
The first part of the Middle Ages is a mystery in many ways. With the fall of the Western Roman Empire to invading barbarians, the progress of mankind took a few steps back. The world as they knew it went into a period of chaos and disarray.

In what had been the Western Roman Empire, the church was actually the unifying factor at this time period. While rulers came and went, the bishops continued in their spiritual authority. It is the church that actually kept communication open and some kind of organized structure in place, first through monastics and then through the popes (the powerful bishops of Rome)
By the end of the Middle Ages, the papacy (system of popes) had declined and what was left of the Eastern Roman Empire (the Byzantine Empire, which was primarily Greek culture) was gone. The church was badly in need of reform (as was the general culture), but there was disagreement on where to start. Did they need to start all over with a new system? Did they need to reject the church altogether?

The Reformation (A.D. 1517 to A.D. 1648)
It was during this period of history that America was discovered and that what we now call the 'Protestant Reformation' occurred.
Movements to reform the Christian church began before Martin Luther, but it was his famous demonstration posting ninety-five theses to the Wittenberg door that still stands as the marker of the Protestant Reformation. Several other reformations took place as well: Ulrich Zwingli, John Calvin (Reformed and Prebyterian Churches), the Anabaptists, and then the Mennonites, the Anglicans and Episcopals (the British Movements affected by Calvin's teaching). There was also a counter-reformation that happened within the Roman Catholic Church at the same time that these new movements were coming into their own.

[learning]

continued from above book, pages 5,6.
"The Enlightenment (A.D. 1648 to A.D. 1789)

The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were typified by closing minds as well as opening minds.
In the church, orthodoxy was battening down the hatches. The movements of the Reformation and the denominations that sprang from them became more and more fixed in the beliefs and practices that had become their distinctives. It's an easy thing to understand. These denominations had formed out of a desperation to do the right thing. It would make sense that they would hold tightly to their attempt. Unfortunately, the church of Christ lost some unity, and blood was shed in the process.

At the same time, the general culture of the world was opening its mind to resemble more of the philosophical and moral culture that we recognize as 'modern.' The celebration of humanity (humanism) took the form of a renaissance in the arts, literature, painting, sculpture, philosophy. What we now call 'humanities' in the college forum found its birth right here. The crafts of thought and creativity were alive and well.
Before this time the Christian church had faced some competition, such as Islam, but the competition was outside of the church walls. This new way of thinking, this humanism, this rationalism, this individualism, this philosophy was something that could intergrate the church. The church had something new to reckon with, a new understanding of humanity and each person's role within that.

Nineteenth Century: Revivals and Revolutions

The 1800's were full of change. Political upheavals such as the American Revolution, the French Revolution, and the independence of Latin America put a face on the journey toward autonomy that had been the struggle of societies since the Roman Empire and the Middle Ages. Liberalism (a religious counterpoint to orthodoxy) and modernism were on the rise in Protestant circles, while in the Catholic world there was a return to the ancient. (It was during this century that the Catholic Church declared the pope infallible.) The Industrial Revolution changed the way people worked and lived. The nineteenth century was full of missionary expanison throughout the world: Asia, Pacific, Africa, Latin America, and the world of Islam.

[Vorkosigan]

1. Establishment of Christianity as a Missionary religion (as opposed to one you must be born into, or acquire by some other process).

2. Victory of proto-orthodox wing of early Christianity over Gnostic and other versions of early Christianity over 2-4th centuries resulted in militant, proselytizing, expanisionist, authority-centered Church comfortable with status quo in social affairs, co-existing happily with authoritarian governments, utterly lacking in scruples, and willing to use violence to achieve its goals -- perfect for taking over the world.

3. Edict of Theodosius banning all other religions but Christian in Empire ended competition from other forms of religion and ensured Christianity would be embedded in fabric of western culture.

4. Expansion of western Europe after 12th century (first into northern and eastern Europe, then overseas) ensured spread of Christianity and dominance in European controlled areas

5. Rise of Evangelical Christianity in 19th century and resurgence in the late 20th have brought Christianity to Asia in a way never before seen in human history.

[One Bad Pig]

Top five most important events in the church (after the apostles and Christ)

1. Destruction of Jerusalem
2. The assemble of the Cannon by Constantine
Constantine did not assemble the NT canon. The Council of Nicea affirmed what was already established in practice; that these 27 writings were authoritative church-wide, and no others.

3. The decree making Christianity a legal religion in Rome
Actually, I consider this to be one of the worst things to happen to Christianity. It wasn't merely made legal, it was made the religion of the empire. All of a sudden, it was a religion to belong to because it was the state religion, which opened the door much wider for apostates and lukewarm faith (or no faith at all, just external trappings).

4. Martin Luther’s 95 thesis
Many people were questioning the church at this time; Luther's 95 theses challenging the practice of simony were only as influential as they turned out to be due to the political climate of Germany at the time. The recent invention of the printing press helped quite a bit, as well.

5.(tie) The east/west schism/ the protestant reformation
I'd lump the Protestant Reformation with #4.


other notables:

Jerome Completes the Vulgate
I'm not sure why this is so important; the Vulgate was not the first Latin translation.

Tyndale translating the bible in to English
The translation of the Bible into common languages was certainly important, but I'm not sure I'd pick Tyndale's translation; IMHO, John Wycliffe was more important.

[Da Lone-Warrior]

1. Establishment of Christianity as a Missionary religion (as opposed to one you must be born into, or acquire by some other process).

2. Victory of proto-orthodox wing of early Christianity over Gnostic and other versions of early Christianity over 2-4th centuries resulted in militant, proselytizing, expanisionist, authority-centered Church comfortable with status quo in social affairs, co-existing happily with authoritarian governments, utterly lacking in scruples, and willing to use violence to achieve its goals -- perfect for taking over the world.

3. Edict of Theodosius banning all other religions but Christian in Empire ended competition from other forms of religion and ensured Christianity would be embedded in fabric of western culture.

4. Expansion of western Europe after 12th century (first into northern and eastern Europe, then overseas) ensured spread of Christianity and dominance in European controlled areas

5. Rise of Evangelical Christianity in 19th century and resurgence in the late 20th have brought Christianity to Asia in a way never before seen in human history.

What source are you drawing from, Vork, may I ask?

dlw

[Lizard]

Actually, I consider this to be one of the worst things to happen to Christianity. It wasn't merely made legal, it was made the religion of the empire. All of a sudden, it was a religion to belong to because it was the state religion, which opened the door much wider for apostates and lukewarm faith (or no faith at all, just external trappings).
I agree with you. Constantine did more harm than good for the Church.

Many people were questioning the church at this time; Luther's 95 theses challenging the practice of simony were only as influential as they turned out to be due to the political climate of Germany at the time. The recent invention of the printing press helped quite a bit, as well.
I also agree that the political climant and more so the printing press made the reformation possible (see my earlier post). But I think it is a mistake to discount the importance of Luther's role as well.


The translation of the Bible into common languages was certainly important, but I'm not sure I'd pick Tyndale's translation; IMHO, John Wycliffe was more important.
I also agree that the translations of the Bible into the vernacular was important, but not just English.

[Da Lone-Warrior]

Its also important to bear in mind that the economic divergence between northern and southern europe also helped to make the protestant reformation possible. There was an extensive desire to reduce the taxes paid to Rome at the time, as well as a desire to confiscate Church lands.

Constantine may have done harm for the church, but many Christian leaders were unprepared for dealing with the different sorts of situations associated with not being a persecuted minority religion. Hence, we have the white martyrs, who conceivably could have been speaking out against the onset of numerous corruptions within Christianity, such as the institutionalization of anti-semitism.

Which brings up another important development for historic Christianity:Rome's attack of Jerusalem that contributed a good way to the reduction of messianic jewish leadership within Christianity.
dlw

[studyhound]

Constantine did not assemble the NT canon. The Council of Nicea affirmed what was already established in practice; that these 27 writings were authoritative church-wide, and no others.
:doh: Constantine was ment to be on the next line....

Actually, I consider this to be one of the worst things to happen to Christianity. It wasn't merely made legal, it was made the religion of the empire. All of a sudden, it was a religion to belong to because it was the state religion, which opened the door much wider for apostates and lukewarm faith (or no faith at all, just external trappings).
I never said it had to be good. :wink:

Many people were questioning the church at this time; Luther's 95 theses challenging the practice of simony were only as influential as they turned out to be due to the political climate of Germany at the time. The recent invention of the printing press helped quite a bit, as well.
Luther incapsulated the feelings.

I'd lump the Protestant Reformation with #4.


I'm not sure why this is so important; the Vulgate was not the first Latin translation.
Not the first but it became the primary latin translation.

The translation of the Bible into common languages was certainly important, but I'm not sure I'd pick Tyndale's translation; IMHO, John Wycliffe was more important.
Because with the translation in to english the movement of the
Ehh I forgot him :nsm:

[One Bad Pig]

I also agree that the political climant and more so the printing press made the reformation possible (see my earlier post). But I think it is a mistake to discount the importance of Luther's role as well.
I'm not discounting Luther's role at all; I just wanted to acknowledge that there were plenty of other reformers then, as well.

I also agree that the translations of the Bible into the vernacular was important, but not just English.
Exactly. I only picked Wycliffe because his was the first fairly (considering it was hand-copied) widespread translation in the vernacular for quite some time (~1000 years in Europe). I wasn't trying to emphasise English translations; if I'd have known of an earlier translation into the vernacular that had significant impact, I would've cited it.

[learning]

Here's a really good timeline of the times of the reformation, with info to do with the rest of the world at times, like Japan, Brazil, Mexico etc.
www.williamtyndale.com/0reformationtimeline.htm it covers 1215 to 1689.

another link to do with Jan Hus and Zisca

www.williamtyndale.com/0johnhus.htm

[Vorkosigan]

What source are you drawing from, Vork, may I ask?

dlw

History. Those seem to be the major events of the religion, ensuring its spread and eventual triumph on a global scale. Lots of posters focus on individuals, theology, or singular events like the first translations, but those are irrelevant. The content of a belief is largely irrelevant as nearly any belief will find adherents (just look at Scientology). What counts is the structure -- authoritarian, missionary, exclusivist, and militant, like other successful beliefs (Communism, Islam, Facism) that share these traits.

I don't believe in focusing overly much on individuals. Paul was important for doctrine, but the content of doctrine is not relevant, as it will always be bent to circumstances. What was important is that the Church learned early to accomodate itself to power, and later, to seek out power to extend its reach.

Vorkosigan

[learning]

But 'power' is not what the true church is about. John 17 is known as 'The High Priestly Prayer of Jesus.' It explains what He wants for the church.
John 17:1-26
1. Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said,
"Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that Your Son may glorify You,
2. even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life.

3. This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.

4. I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me to do.
5. Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
6. I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word.
7. Now they have come to know that everything You have given Me is from You;
8. for the words which You gave Me I have given to them, and they received them and truly understood that I came forth from You, and they believed that You sent Me.
9. I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours;
10. and all things that are Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine; and I have been glorified in them.

11. I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are.
12. While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me, and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.
13. But now I come to You; and these things I speak in the world so that they may have My joy made full in themselves.
14. I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them, because they are not of the world.

15. I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one.

16. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17. Scanctify them in the truth. Your word is truth.

18. As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world.
19. For their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they themselves also may be sanctified in the truth.

20. I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word;
21. that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.

22. The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one.

23. I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me.

24. Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.
25. O righteous Father, although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that you sent Me;
26. and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them."

New American Standard version

So you see, from this passage, (and others, like John 13, where Jesus washed the disciples feet, to show we are to be servants, not 'lords') we are to be 'in' the world but not 'of' the world, so any earthly glory and/or power, is not of the Kingdom of God, and it is not connected to Christ's true Bride.

[Tercel]

Constantine did not assemble the NT canon. The Council of Nicea affirmed what was already established in practice; that these 27 writings were authoritative church-wide, and no others.You are correct about Constantine, but wrong about Nicea. There is very little evidence to suggest that Nicea affirmed any books as canonical. The canons of Nicea do not list any canon. No one makes any suggestion whatsoever that Nicea affirmed any list of canon, until several hundred years later where we get clearly mythological accounts of all the books being put on a table and God making some fall off and what was left on being chosen as canon. The only authorative suggestion that Nicea might have had anything whatsoever to do with the canon is Jerome's preface to the book of Judith in which he notes that the Fathers at Nicea considered it authorative... it's possible that all he means is that during the council someone quoted from Judith and people nodded their heads.
In short: The canons of the Council of Nicea do not list a Bible canon or make any pronouncement about books of the Bible, and there is no good reason to think the Council made any such declaration.

The first surviving authorative declarations about the bible canon were made by: Athanasius in 367, Pope Damascus (and a council at Rome?) in 380, Councils of Carthage in 397, & 419, and Pope Innocent I in 405. (I'm going from memory so dates may be out by one or two years).
These are all post-Constantine, so he pretty clearly had absolutely nothing to do with the bible canon either.

[Da Blonde]

One might add the publication of Darwin's Origin of the species and the development of fundamentalism in reaction to it; also the concurrent development of pentecostalism. In America, the religious revivals (1740s, 1830s, and 1910s), disestablishment of the state churches, and rise of the religious right as an offshoot of the anticommunist movement. None of these may make the top five compared with more significant, mostly European, events already cited, but they are significant nonetheless.