The Nicene Creed

Open Heart · May 27, 2015

I am no friend to Marcion and his teachings. What I'm laughing about is your suggestion that Marcionism ever went Mainstream or was adopted as orthodoxy by the Catholic Church. It was a popular heresy in its day, but it was defeated by the Church.

JeffTheLearner · May 27, 2015

Open Heart said:
I am no friend to Marcion and his teachings. What I'm laughing about is your suggestion that Marcionism ever went Mainstream or was adopted as orthodoxy by the Catholic Church. It was a popular heresy in its day, but it was defeated by the Church.

I disagree, but I am aware that the Roman Councils did condemn Marcion, but in turn they still adopted his doctrines, and though the heresy was generated by Marcion it does not mean his doctrines can't be replicated under others. As I said, look at his doctrines and compare doctrines

...I mean, how many times have you heard from mouths of our modern churches say, "The God of the old testament is wrathful, angry, and unrelenting, but the God of the new testament is loving, and forgiving."

That is the normal thing to be said in our modern churches hinting at a disregard toward the TANAK ...I've even heard it said directly that the "old testament is done away with" many times.

But even so the Roman Church does this too to justify many of its doctrines that seem contrary to TANAK, it may not make the bold statements in this, but it surely takes a passive push to its adherents to ignore TANAK.

...Marcionism, is still Marcionism ...you may not call it that, but that is what I call it.

Open Heart · May 27, 2015

JeffTheLearner said:
...I mean, how many times have you heard from mouths of our modern churches say, "The God of the old testament is wrathful, angry, and unrelenting, but the God of the new testament is loving, and forgiving."

I hear it a lot. But not from my Church. In my Church we have three scripture readings at the Mass, and one is from the Old Testament. Does that strike you as Marcionite? For hundreds of years, the Septuagint was the only canon the Church had, and even when we finally gained the NT, we still continued using the OT. Nor was there ever a time when it was only the gospel of Luke and the Paulines. I mean, it just never happened. I wish I had a PhD so I could clobber you with the synods and stuff that affirm what I'm saying.

visionary · May 27, 2015

pat34lee said:
Since the Nicene Creed seems not to be part of the SoF or Rules in this forum, I have a question about it.
More specifically about what the second paragraph says about Jesus. I am not asking for doctrine, just what the creed says.

Jesus was God's son from before creation. Jesus became man, lived and died, resurrected and ascended. Jesus is still God today. When he was man, was he limited to what man could do (through God)? Did he give up his divinity for the period of time that he lived as man?

I have also heard of this line of thinking. From what I understand, God came in flesh to show the world that it could be done in the flesh. God's law is not a burden and can be lived perfect in God's eyes, just like His begotten Son did.

JeffTheLearner · May 27, 2015

Open Heart said:
I hear it a lot. But not from my Church. In my Church we have three scripture readings at the Mass, and one is from the Old Testament. Does that strike you as Marcionite? For hundreds of years, the Septuagint was the only canon the Church had, and even when we finally gained the NT, we still continued using the OT. Nor was there ever a time when it was only the gospel of Luke and the Paulines. I mean, it just never happened. I wish I had a PhD so I could clobber you with the synods and stuff that affirm what I'm saying.

lol, you need no PhD to clobber me, just truth. I'm just dust, it don't matter, but I mean no harm to you. I was just telling you what I know.

Open Heart · May 27, 2015

JeffTheLearner said:
lol, you need no PhD to clobber me, just truth. I'm just dust, it don't matter, but I mean no harm to you. I was just telling you what I know.

LOL No really. Sometimes I'm just inadequate to the task. I know I've read stuff, but sheesh louise I can't remember when or where or what I've read. I'm just a regular shmo, you know?

pat34lee · May 27, 2015

visionary said:
I have also heard of this line of thinking. From what I understand, God came in flesh to show the world that it could be done in the flesh. God's law is not a burden and can be lived perfect in God's eyes, just like His begotten Son did.

Exactly. Divine powers or ultimate knowledge would have defeated the purpose.

ContraMundum · May 28, 2015

pat34lee said:
The whole point of the church or any place to teach and learn the scriptures is to unlearn the ways of the world and the pagans, not bring them in with us.

Begs the question though. Are you assuming that the Church doesn't teach us to leave the ways of the world, when I know for a fact that it does.

ContraMundum · May 28, 2015

JeffTheLearner said:
...I would also read St. Ephraim the Syrian's writings: Against Marcion (1 to 3) ... would even read his other discourses for a better background.

There are other "Against Marcion" discourses by other writers during this Roman reformation of the Jewish Apostolic faith, but I forget their names right now.

And another good background would be: The History of the Martyrs in Palestine, by Eusebius of Caesarea ...it shows some affect to Marcion heresy.

I think you have an interesting interpretation of those documents. I wouldn't agree with it generally either.

ContraMundum · May 28, 2015

Open Heart said:
rediculous.

It just goes to show you, just when you think you've heard all the anti-Catholic nonsense out there, someone will invent some new silliness. Contra, have you heard this one before?

No, it's dead wrong. Marcion was declared a heretic, and his radical ideas really had no long lasting effect at all. Any audited and peer-reviewed study of Patristics shows that the ECF were way more conservative than the modern Churches, and in fact the better of the ancient apologists (eg Ireneaus) go to lengths to refute the heretics- and it is their writings and lives that are revered and studied, not the heretics.

Don't forget that often people who believe it is their role to "repristinate" the Church search the works of the heretics to find support. They then turn to conspiracy theories to demonstrate that the heretics were right and the Church wrong. It all comes undone in a rather ugly fashion once the conspiracies are shown to be fanciful imaginations of the rebellious heart of men.

ContraMundum · May 28, 2015

JeffTheLearner said:
Another issue kind of hidden in the background of this Nicene Creed is the redating of Passover to coincide with a common feast of Roman occultist.

You do realize that the dating of Easter is a) not in the Creed and b) not the same in all of the Nicene Churches. Therefore your theory is done and dusted. Easter is and always has been a moveable Feast and is celebrated on differing dates between Nicene Churches, East, West and Oriental. So it is therefore not only impossible but poorly thought out to state that all the Nicene Churches followed some amorphous Roman occult dating. Just doesn't add up. There's no agreement on the date and no universal assent to Rome.

The reason Easter cannot always concur with Pesach is that Easter must land on a Sunday to commemorate the resurrection. Easter remembers that event, Pesach remembers the Exodus. Different events, different emphasis, different dates. Real easy.

The whole theory just crumbles under simple scrutiny.

To me, that right there is blatant idolatry, and is also a contemptuous desecration equal to blasphemy according to the Good Book ...that should be condemned, and denounced harshly.

...if it was true...but it isn't.

BukiRob · May 28, 2015

JeffTheLearner said:
No need ...both believe Messiah came in the flesh, both believe Messiah is King, and Head of the Church, both believe that Messiah was in the Beginning of creation, and both believe Messiah is a God. It is these issues that our faith, and the Gospel only requires.

There is no mandate to worship the Son, but only that we honor The Son as a King and High Priest , and that we together worship The Father.

The dispute really is just a matter of revelation ...and to say who is lacking such a revelation, or who is above his brother for such a revelation should only be nothing more than discussion. No such divisions should occur, and no harsh treatment is warranted at all.

Now what is against The Law of the Assembly of our Messiah, is to murder our brethren, or to show partiality, or to call one a fool, or impose harsh torments upon one another, and to not stir up unnecessary schism ...We are commanded to love one another, and to forgive the faults of anyone who repents as transgressers of YHVH's Law, and the Word of our King, The King of Israel.

For this reason I too believe (over look my personal bias) that Arius suffered a supernatural death, or if one of Athanasius' succeeded in poisoning him AFTER Arius won the majority of the council's, and walking in triumph ...it can be said it was because his doctrine was correct, but his anathematizing of those who did not agree was a sin that YHVH could not leave unchecked. Because Arius too allowed what Alexander of Alexandria did to him, to be done to others who did not agree with Arius.

All in all, The ruler of this world subdued the Church because of this and created a counterfeit filled with all kinds of lascivious heresies, and blatant idolatries.

We need to love each other ...we are brethren, and that is what is important.

We do need to love each other no question about that... To me the issue is very clear, Yeshua, never, ever, not once EVER stopped anyone from WORSHIPING HIM.... for him to allow that to happen if he were not Gd would break the #1 commandment. You shall have no other Gd other than Andonai. Yeshua and YVHV are ECHAD. If you have seen me you have seen the Father is what he says.

Love covers a multitude of sin and perfect love cast out all fear. Only perfect Love could take on all the sin of mankind past, present and future. Only perfect LOVE could stand before the Father as the sacrifice without blemish who walked perfect before the Father and was without sin. Only Gd can do such a thing for it is beyond the grasp of a mere man.

JeffTheLearner · May 28, 2015

ContraMundum said:
You do realize that the dating of Easter is a) not in the Creed and b) not the same in all of the Nicene Churches. Therefore your theory is done and dusted. Easter is and always has been a moveable Feast and is celebrated on differing dates between Nicene Churches, East, West and Oriental. So it is therefore not only impossible but poorly thought out to state that all the Nicene Churches followed some amorphous Roman occult dating. Just doesn't add up. There's no agreement on the date and no universal assent to Rome.

The reason Easter cannot always concur with Pesach is that Easter must land on a Sunday to commemorate the resurrection. Easter remembers that event, Pesach remembers the Exodus. Different events, different emphasis, different dates. Real easy.

The whole theory just crumbles under simple scrutiny.

...if it was true...but it isn't.

...oh no, I have been taken apart, what shall I do?!? lol.

The "movable date" and the benevolence of the Roman Councilors to allow us to celebrate A SET FEAST DAY when ever we like ....how kind of them.

And I don't know how more clear I could have been when I stated "in the background of this Creed" to make the point you felt needed to be "corrected."

Yes, the issue of Passover was too discussed in the establishment of this Creed, and was also a thing Athanasius upheld, being the young Bishop he was (in his 20's) ...he knew better than the elders of the Assembly. But then again this also was a pet project of Alexander of Alexandria his predecessor, and was also a huge debate in the midst of the establishment of this Creed ...this is another issue Arius brought to the forefront as heresy, and was anathematized from the Alexandrian assembly for it ...accusing Alexander of adopting too many pagan doctrines.

(Note: Theodoret, Ecclesiastical History, I, IV. LPNF, ser. 2, vol. 3, 41.) (Note: Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical History, Chapter XIX.—A List Worthy of Study, Given by the Historian, of Customs among Different Nations and Churches.

visionary · May 28, 2015

When truth is discovered, the lies are also uncovered. May we all put away the lies, stop defending them, even if they are part of the foundations of some creed. Let's move on. There is so much more truth to be discovered.

BukiRob · May 28, 2015

ContraMundum said:
You do realize that the dating of Easter is a) not in the Creed and b) not the same in all of the Nicene Churches. Therefore your theory is done and dusted. Easter is and always has been a moveable Feast and is celebrated on differing dates between Nicene Churches, East, West and Oriental. So it is therefore not only impossible but poorly thought out to state that all the Nicene Churches followed some amorphous Roman occult dating. Just doesn't add up. There's no agreement on the date and no universal assent to Rome.

The reason Easter cannot always concur with Pesach is that Easter must land on a Sunday to commemorate the resurrection. Easter remembers that event, Pesach remembers the Exodus. Different events, different emphasis, different dates. Real easy.

The whole theory just crumbles under simple scrutiny.

...if it was true...but it isn't.

This issue goes much further back than the Nicene council. It starts with the Quartodecimanism this IMO is the beginning of the "church" going off the rails

YESLORDIWILL · May 28, 2015

Building with bent nails... falling but holding

ContraMundum · May 28, 2015

JeffTheLearner said:
...oh no, I have been taken apart, what shall I do?!? lol.

The "movable date" and the benevolence of the Roman Councilors to allow us to celebrate A SET FEAST DAY when ever we like ....how kind of them.

Wow...that's almost exactly the way it isn't...but...

Yes, the issue of Passover was too discussed in the establishment of this Creed, and was also a thing Athanasius upheld, being the young Bishop he was (in his 20's) ...he knew better than the elders of the Assembly. But then again this also was a pet project of Alexander of Alexandria his predecessor, and was also a huge debate in the midst of the establishment of this Creed ...this is another issue Arius brought to the forefront as heresy, and was anathematized from the Alexandrian assembly for it ...accusing Alexander of adopting too many pagan doctrines.

(Note: Theodoret, Ecclesiastical History, I, IV. LPNF, ser. 2, vol. 3, 41.) (Note: Socrates and Sozomenus Ecclesiastical History, Chapter XIX.—A List Worthy of Study, Given by the Historian, of Customs among Different Nations and Churches.

Has it not occurred to you that Arius' accusations were proven false? That kind of is the whole point.

ContraMundum · May 28, 2015

BukiRob said:
This issue goes much further back than the Nicene council. It starts with the Quartodecimanism this IMO is the beginning of the "church" going off the rails

I guess we'll never agree. I don't think the Church ever went off the rails. It's God's Church, His responsibility. What good the Church has done, He moved. What bad the Church has done, He allowed.

pat34lee · May 28, 2015

ContraMundum said:
Begs the question though. Are you assuming that the Church doesn't teach us to leave the ways of the world, when I know for a fact that it does.

The church teaches you to sit in pews and listen and never grow or progress in the faith. It does not train you to be disciples as Yeshua did with those he taught.

pat34lee · May 28, 2015

Marcion is a side track in this thread.

The Nicene Creed

Well-Known Member

a puff of smoke

Well-Known Member

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

a puff of smoke

Well-Known Member

Messianic

Messianic Jewish Christian

Messianic Jewish Christian

Messianic Jewish Christian

Messianic Jewish Christian

Newbie

a puff of smoke

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Newbie

Have you not read? 1Sa 20-22, Ps 52

Messianic Jewish Christian

Messianic Jewish Christian

Messianic

Messianic

Similar threads