Do Christians Know Their History?

I’ve always found it interesting to visit Christian* book stores. It’s interesting to me because I am invariably led to the aisles dedicated to anti-mormon literature. Indeed, anti-mormon literature has always been interesting to me; in fact, I can honestly say I’ve learned quite a lot from reading it (one book in particular strengthened my conviction ten-fold). Lately however, I have not been too interested because I find there is nothing new — it’s all the same recycled stuff. Some is interesting, most is not.

I was first introduced to this bigotry while serving a good chunck of my mission in what is dubbed the “Christian capital of the world” (a.k.a. Colorado Springs, Colorado). Since that time, I have come to understand why so much of this literature is produced — I have even come to appreciate the motive: cognitive dissonance.

A main theme running through much of the literature is of course rooted in an attempt to discredit Joseph Smith. You know the old saying: “Cut off the head and the body dies”. These propogandists percieve themselves succeeding in discrediting Joseph, and thus think the rest of LDS theology and Mormonism dies as a result. Their approach seems logical. But it’s the approach taken by the Carthage Grays, who obviously failed in their attempt to kill the body through decapitation. Hatred dies a slow death I suppose; especially when aimed at the wrong head (the modern bigots have failed, just like their Carthage brethren, to realize that a group in Palestine already succeeded in killing the head of Mormonism — He rose from the dead three days later as the victor).

While thinking about the goal and approach of anti-mormon literature, I have formulated a question: have the mainstream christian apologists (who invest enormous amounts of time and money propogating bigotry against Catholics, Jehova’s Witnesses, and Mormons) failed to see and understand the problems with their own roots because they are so caught up in attempting to undermine others? I think so. Moreover, I think this is the case because their majority position allows them to constantly be on the offensive; they are apathetic about their own beliefs because there is no need to discuss the serious problems of authority, practice, doctrine, and scripture. There is no need because they are never seriously brought into question.

Do Christians understand the purpose of the Council of Nicea (held in A.D. 325)? Do they know how it was brought about? Do they acknowledge that Emperor Constantine was a pagan until just before his death-bed baptism by a Bishop who was a follower of Arius (one who believed the Son of God was a created being)? Do Christians even know why these questions are important to their belief system?

The nature of Christ was “decided” (not determined, His nature already existed) at this Council. Constantine called the council, not because he was worried about the truth; no, because he was worried about losing his power! Pope Sylvester didn’t call the Council — he acknowledged he had not the authority to do so. However, he attended the Council; as did numerous Bishops, none of which claimed Church-wide authority.

Much of the fundamental doctrine of mainstream Christianity today has sprung from this debate about the nature of God. The Bishops were compelled by Constantine to come to a consensus; this forced out ALL OTHER BELIEFS as heretical. Similar Councils of men, who claimed no legitimate authority, would later define God as a concept to unify the people politically.

Today the debate rages. Only now the debate is between “Christians” and those whom the Christians dub as “cults” (cults because we are heretics for believing in truth revealed instead of fabrications from Rome).

Do Christians know their history?

*I use this word loosely because there is certainly a lot of debate about what makes a person Christian. (E.g., virtually all mainstream born-again christians preach, and actually believe in a rather bigoted manner, that Catholics are not Christian).