Julian the Apostate

The falling away from original Christianity into catholic theology can be marked by the fall of Julian, an emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire who succeeded as emperor of the whole. He was taught in Constantinople where the view of Christology and baptism followed pre-catholic theology. He had family killed by Christians so he attempted to change the Empire back to where all traditions were accepted. Catholics saw him as a traitor but his views of religious freedoms were instrumental in creating a record of pre-Catholic beliefs.

Many believe the fall of Christianity into Catholicism was mostly from Constantine, but Julian caused much of the mixture of Pagan and Christian tradition.

It was this freedom that allowed groups to dissent from the Nicene creed, giving rise to groups like Eunomians who changed the Nicene Creed in the Council of Constantinople.

The council of Constantinople followed the Church of Christ's view in many respects. The council dropped the Nicene view that God was substance, stating the wording used at Nicene was un-biblical, which is instrumental in.showing that Nicene wasn't guided by the Holy Spirit. Constantinople also followed the one baptism for the remission of sins.

The Council of Constantinople dropped the wording with God as a substance and tried to follow a mono-theistic model where the Father was God and Christ was a begotten expression. The two main points of Nicene that were alteredin the Council of constantinople:

1. Jesus was not eternal and at some point was begotten before creation. Constantinople changed from eternally begotten to begotten at some point.

2. There was one baptism, differing from modern views of multiple Christian baptisms, and differing from the baptismal formula of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Catholics required immersion three times, Eunomians only required a single immersion.

Peter did not see a baptismal formula in Matthew 28:18-20, but in Acts 2:38 stated it was upon the name of Jesus Christ. It was an acknowledgement of Jesus' name as the Son of God. There is no evidence any Apostle saw a baptismal formula as Catholics required.

3. A third point that Jesus had a different will than the Father was background.

Julius did not accept the Nicene decisions. He ruled at the time following Constantine and was raised as a Christian, but left Christianity in his 30's. He had family members killed by Christians who required following the Nicene creed. This led to him altering his view to allow greater religious freedoms and swung back to the Roman religions. He lived after the council of Nicea 325, but reigned before the Council of Constantinople in 381. He was in a position to affect what was taught about Christ even though he did not see Christianity as the only viable religion. He didn't outlaw Christianity but tried to bring the empire back to paganism.

He had family assassinated by Christians and that was the cause of his fall from Christianity.

It was written that during his reign he mixed Christianity with paganism and many Christian leaders used this to Grow Christianity. It also explains why Christianity regressed into paganism and adopted many traditions from paganism..

Indeed, this development of a pagan order created the foundations of a bridge of reconciliation over which paganism and Christianity could meet.[112] Likewise, Julian’s persecution of Christians, who by pagan standards were simply part of a different cult, was quite an un-pagan attitude that transformed paganism into a religion that accepted only one form of religious experience while excluding all others—such as Christianity.[113] In trying to compete with Christianity in this manner, Julian fundamentally changed the nature of pagan worship. That is, he made paganism a religion, whereas it once had been only a system of tradition.

His view of Christianity came from Constantinople and showed that during his life Christianity practiced one baptism. He also moved religion into a monotheistic direction. This practice was affirmed in the Council of Constantinople. One God meant the Father, and Christ was begotten of him at some point. The Holy Spirit could come from or be sent by Father or Son.

In other words, the idea Christ was not eternal but was begotton of the Father at some point. Some use the term eternally begotten.

The Council of Constantinople notes stating, "Only the Father knows the generation of the Son."

Thus saying Christ was not eternal. Thus, not truly God in an eternal sense. To them he was only God in moral essence and not through an eternal existence from the past. Christ was eternal in the sense he would live eternally into the future.

My view is that Christ is eternal and that begotten doesn't always mean to come into existence but represents change. Those believing Jesus is Christ are begotten of God, even though they were born years earlier. As Christians we are bornagain, born being the same word as begotten.

Begotten can speak of Christ's incarnation or his resurrection. It does not deny his eternal existence. Catholic councils used it incorrectly and out of context.

Some have challenged the translation of the word begotten, stating it is actually the word unique.

Bob Williams writes a good article explaining the view.

http://www.biblelessons.com/begotten.html