God, Defined By Man

Modern translations of Luke 11:43 use the word “crush” when describing the effects of impossible religious demands placed on believers by clergy.

The church described in the book of Acts was not the same church that was organized at the Council of Nicaea formed 300 years after Christ’s death. You may go to the following website for a more complete description at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea.

The First Council of Nicaea, held in Nicaea in Bithynia (present-day I.znik in Turkey), convoked by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in 325, was the first Ecumenical council[1] of the Christian Church, and most significantly resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called the Nicene Creed. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent general (ecumenical) councils of Bishops' (Synods) to create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy— the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom.

The purpose of the council was to resolve disagreements arising from within the Church of Alexandria over the nature of Jesus in relationship to the Father; in particular, whether Jesus was of the same substance as God the Father or merely of similar substance. St. Alexander of Alexandria and Athanasius took the first position; the popular presbyter Arius, from whom the term Arian controversy comes, took the second. The council decided against the Arians overwhelmingly (of the estimated 250-318 attendees, all but 2 voted against Arius[2]).

Another result of the council was an agreement on when to celebrate the Resurrection, the most important feast of the ecclesiastical calendar. The council decided in favour of celebrating the resurrection on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox, independently of the Hebrew Calendar (see also Quartodecimanism and Easter controversy). It authorized the Bishop of Alexandria (presumably using the Alexandrian calendar) to announce annually the exact date to his fellow bishops.

The Council of Nicaea was historically significant because it was the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom.[3] "It was the first occasion for the development of technical Christology."[3] Further, "Constantine in convoking and presiding over the council signaled a measure of imperial control over the church."[3] A precedent was set for subsequent general councils to adopt creeds and canons


From what I remember of Constantine, he was the first Christian emperor of the Roman Empire. I have no reason to believe that he wasn’t sincere in his beliefs but like most politicians and leaders of men, decided to bring order to the Christian faith by instituting a management system through the clergy and finalizing religious facts and procedures so as to bring order to the faith. Somewhere in the reign of Constantine, he was confronted with a believer base that was made up of those converted from paganism and the new converts wanted to keep their idols and religious trinkets. Constantine probably thought about fighting this notion and practice but might have thought that it was harmless concession compared to other religious issues.

I heard a story one time about a man who built a house and the devil said, “I will let you keep the house in peace if you will allow me one nail, reserved for my exclusive use, in the middle of the living room.” The man felt that having one nail on the wall in the main part of the house was an easy trade off thereby avoiding a tedious battle with the prince of darkness over such a minor point. Years went by and the nail was left in place, as per the agreement, and forgotten as the generations that followed lived in the house, seemingly at peace.

Years later, a knock on the door was followed by the entry of old Lucifer himself. He moved with purpose as he hung the smelly remains of a dead animal on the nail and it took seconds for the inhabitants to abandon the home in a panic.

When man makes concessions in regard to the word of God and builds religious institutions that add religious rules, we deviate from what God tells us to do and we become part of the guilty who are admonished by Jesus in Luke 11: 46-49.

To close out this thought regarding these verses, I would like to share this incident that happened in my life. When I was in (Catholic) high school, a fellow student drowned while surfing at Huntington Beach on a Sunday. When we arrived at school on Monday, the news of the tragedy circulated along with shared belief that, because he was surfing and obviously missed church, his soul was probably lost and he probably did not go to heaven.

Now, I’m sure that someone in the church came up with a rule like that so as to pressure people to attend mass on Sunday, certainly a worthy goal. The problem is that God didn’t make a law like that, man did. As a result, I (and I am sure others) made a decision as a teenager, that if God would send me to hell for missing church on Sunday, then I wasn’t interested in knowing any more about Him. In my mind, that God was unreasonable and petty and He could go His way and I would go mine. For thirty years after that, I stayed faithful in my belief that I refused to serve any God who existed only to crush me and impose impossible laws upon me.