The Holy Trinity

[okinrus]

you may not interpret church doctrine, but in the 1600's the reason for the explosion in different christian sub-entities was because of the english translation of the bible- allowing all people to interpret the bible their own way. translations in english may have been done before, but who had access to them and how widely were they published? i'm guessing not very many copies were made and those that were weren't open to the general public. no, it was definately the 1600's translation that was the most important as it allowed the bible to become mainstream as everyone could read them (almost everyone) and printing presses existed to allow the bible to be printed over and over again, becoming widely available.

This is untrue. There have been many interpretations by the church fathers, monks, etc. Now most of the public after the roman empire could not read. The only place where they could be taught how to read was in the monastary and so the general public could not read. In any case the manuscripts were written on sheep skin and were well beyond the cost that commoners could afford. Even in the 1600, most could not read.

either way, i look back and see a much simpler form of church than todays one, which has to employ complex ideas and forms of thought to keep a hold of people. an example is the way heaven is now perceived. back in the 1500- 1600's heaven was literally behind the clouds, was a place where everyone was warm and was well fed and no-body got hurt. today it is..... actually i don't now what heaven is thought to be these days, but it is not that same simple idea that kept the masses coming back. heaven back then was a better life than the normal life experienced on earth. today (and no-one still bothers to answer my questions about heaven) i don't know what incentive heaven holds to anyone.

Think of the most joyful event in your life and then heaven is more joyful then that. There has been a constant source of heresy Donatist, Albigensians, Montanist, Arians, etc.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook2.html#fathers2

 

[atheroy]

This is untrue. There have been many interpretations by the church fathers, monks, etc. Now most of the public after the roman empire could not read. The only place where they could be taught how to read was in the monastary and so the general public could not read. In any case the manuscripts were written on sheep skin and were well beyond the cost that commoners could afford. Even in the 1600, most could not read.

you do realise that i am talking about 1600AD, right? that's the time period we've been talking about the whole time. and do you even know what happened in that time period? i don't think so. something called the interegnum (in england specifically) that saw the inception of many schools and universities resulting in many becoming literate- if not by school, then being taught by a parent or sibling or something. add this with the NEW, widely available english BIBLE- because of such things as printing presses which DID exist in 1600AD- and you got an explosion in the number's of new christian sub-entities which is con-current with this timeline.

and please try to explain how and why our perception of heaven had to change even though the example i gave you was the one officially held by the church? because religion is inconsistent, conforms to the times and holds way too much sway over people so that they can't see these inconsistencies.

 

[okinrus]

you do realise that i am talking about 1600AD, right? that's the time period we've been talking about the whole time. and do you even know what happened in that time period? i don't think so. something called the interegnum (in england specifically) that saw the inception of many schools and universities resulting in many becoming literate- if not by school, then being taught by a parent or sibling or something. add this with the NEW, widely available english BIBLE- because of such things as printing presses which DID exist in 1600AD- and you got an explosion in the number's of new christian sub-entities which is con-current with this timeline.

Yeah kind of talking about the 800AD... The problems I see are mainly mis-interpretations. Without knowledge of the entire bible and drawing from the church fathers incorrect interpretations are bound to happend. Also neligating the Church's Tradition is irresponable because the bible was formed by the Church.

and please try to explain how and why our perception of heaven had to change even though the example i gave you was the one officially held by the church? because religion is inconsistent, conforms to the times and holds way too much sway over people so that they can't see these inconsistencies.

The old testament does not speak of heaven or eternal life at all, but uses heaven to mean the sky. Also Jesus does not really use the term "heaven" for the afterlife but speaks of eternal life. He says that the Father has prepared a dwelling place for each one of them and that his "my kingdom is not of this world". I do not think this was official church doctrin but a popular held belief.