[wagglebee]

Yes, the site and quotes presented by caww contained significant errors but that does not detract from the main premise

Is this another way of saying that, while there were a bunch of errors you still like it because of the conclusion that was reached?

That sounds A LOT like, "Fake but accurate."

The acceptance or rejection of the conclusions of this Council by the Pope is meaningless. The Pope was another Bishop, nothing else, and Constantine V was the effective leader of the Church.

This theory is all so fascinating, it's pretty much identical to the way the left rewrites history to fit their agenda.

The Constantine V who is referred to was the BYZANTINE EMPEROR who ruled from Constantinople (present-day Istanbul, Turkey); he NEVER set foot in Rome, in fact the Roman Empire had been gone for centuries at this time.

Nevertheless, if we are to believe your theory, we need to believe that the Church was being run by Turkish emperors, but that eventually authority was transferred to the Bishops of Rome. So, to support your theory, perhaps you can fill us in on some of the missing historical events:

1. When did this transfer of authority take place?
2. At what event did this transfer take place?
3. Who was involved? Which emperor, which bishops?
4. What was the reason for this transfer? Why did the emperors want to surrender authority?
5. Why was authority given to the Bishop of Rome and not the Patriarch of Constantinople?

[Jaded]

Oh, c’mon. They think the Roman Empire is the Holy Roman Empire is the Byzantine Empire. They think the Roman Empire is taking over Europe even as we speak.

They are historically clueless.

[Legatus]

Is this another way of saying that, while there were a bunch of errors you still like it because of the conclusion that was reached?

Thanks for that, I was in the middle of a reply that boiled down to "good grief you're an idiot" but I knew that wasn't going to work.

The emperor may have thought he was the head of the Church because he was the head of the state, but the emperors and the state are gone and the popes and the Church are still here. Rival claims to the same authority don't extinguish the legitimate claim.

[OLD REGGIE]

Nevertheless, if we are to believe your theory, we need to believe that the Church was being run by Turkish emperors, but that eventually authority was transferred to the Bishops of Rome. So, to support your theory, perhaps you can fill us in on some of the missing historical events:

I have no intention in playing a game which is based on a dishonest premise.

I stated no theory!

Who called the First Ecumenical Council? Under whose "authority"?