Nicene Creed - Believe it?

Do you believe in the Nicene Creed?

  • Yes, the Nicene Creed is God-inspired and infallible.

  • Yes, but it is not inspired or infallible.

  • No, it is not inspired and I disagree with it.

  • I am not sure.


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Henaynei

Sh'ma Yisrael, Adonai Echud! Al pi Adonai...
Sep 6, 2003
21,304
1,805
North Carolina - my heart is with Israel ---
✟43,691.00
Country
United States
Faith
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Constitution
This poll was posted in another place on CF several weeks ago and I voted and commented then - however I can't find it. I also believe Maximus posted that poll.

Maximus, and others, strongly disagreed :)
 
Upvote 0

SonWorshipper

Old Timer
Jan 15, 2002
2,840
31
✟10,769.00
Faith
Messianic
You are correct See this:

Is the Nicene Creed Inspired and Infallible?
Maximus Well, is it?

I believe the original Nicene Creed was inspired by God and is infallible.

Agree or disagree?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
See here:

http://www.christianforums.com/t60117&page=1&pp=40

Seems you were deemed a Modalist in there, as I have been in this forum for my none beliefs in three gods. I don't worry about it though, some of the same beliefs there have this to say:
I think the Nicene Creed in someways has more authority than the New Testament itself. It is the bedrock Christian confession, and the guiding light on how to read the New Testament.
:rolleyes:

( that is a smilie as well as this one :( that is regarded as unproductive and a fuel for the fire in posts but not this one : :mad: )

go figure...................:sigh:
 
Upvote 0

SonWorshipper

Old Timer
Jan 15, 2002
2,840
31
✟10,769.00
Faith
Messianic
simchat_torah said:
I just realized that I should not have voted. It was intended for those who attend a messianic synagouge.

ooops.
As far as this poll is concerned, anyone who is a Messianic Jew or attends a Messianic congregation and shares their beliefs should vote.


You aren't included in this?:scratch:
 
Upvote 0

simchat_torah

Got Torah?
Feb 23, 2003
7,345
433
46
San Francisco, CA
Visit site
✟9,917.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
As far as this poll is concerned, anyone who is a Messianic Jew or attends a Messianic congregation and shares their beliefs should vote.
oops, I guess I misread this quote earlier today. I was having a conversation with my wife while reading this sentance, and I was headed out the door and gave it a quick glance. hahah... I guess I was mistaken.

hehe, let my vote stand.
 
Upvote 0

sojeru

just a Jew
Mar 22, 2003
870
21
41
USA
Visit site
✟1,145.00
Faith
Judaism
A bit of ROMANS HISTORY from Yashanet

Background - Part 1
Rome and Judea

(Last updated 4/10/00)
JEWS IN 1ST CENTURY ROME

By the time of Yeshua and Paul, the land of Israel (Judea and Samaria) had been part of the Roman Empire for several decades. The first emperor, Julius Caesar,granted rights to Jewish communities because their ancestral laws predated Rome. Jews had legal privileges as a collegia (defined by Roman law as religious & legal entities),giving them the right to assemble, have common meals and property, govern and tax themselves, and enforce their own discipline.

All of this authority was placed under the auspices of the Synagogue and its legal body, the Sanhedrin. The Jews were also given exemption from military service and emperor worship. They were the only non-pagan religious group in the Roman empire to have these rights. Under Roman law, no new religions were allowed and all other religious societies (other than Judaism) were forbidden by Caesar to have presence in the city of Rome. All of these factors led to much resentment and the formation of a social anti-Jewish sentiment among the population. (1)

JEWISH VERSUS ROMAN CULTUREAnti-Jewish commentaries can be found in many of the writings of popular Roman authors of the time such as; Tacitus, Poseidonius, Apollonius Molon, Damocritus, Apion, Quintilian, Cicero, Plutarch, Philostratus and Aelius Aristeides. Most of their slurs centered around Jewish separatism, the Sabbath, dietary laws and circumcision. (2) The Roman world was pagan and centered around the worship of many gods. Idolatry was woven into Roman life. Basic table fellowship was done with a god as guest of honor or master of ceremonies. Meat and wine were often eaten only in "religious" settings.

Roman society was also centered around "openmindedness", community, and a Hellenistic view of life, emulating the culture and philosophies of the Greeks. In the midst of this was a Jewish society of around 7 million (about 10 percent of the Roman population), a very noticeable minority. (3) The Roman culture stood in great contrast to that of the Jews and their Torah, which taught; moral absolutes, separation from the (pagan) ways of Rome and belief in one God (and living for Him).

The majority of Roman citizens could not comprehend the "strangeness" of the Jews. Beyond that,proselytism was considered an un-Roman act. Jews were despised by the rest of the Roman people for their peculiar religious practices and failure to worship the gods of Rome -- as every other conquered people was forced to do. The "citizen of the Pax Romana" was the antithesis of "a good Jew." (4)

THE SYNAGOGUE

The authority given by the Romans to the Synagogue explains such occurrences as Paul being able to persecute Jewish believers (before his conversion) as mentioned in the book of Acts. (These were Messianic Jewish believers, still under the authority of the Synagogue, even as believers. They were not "Christians" as often taught.) The Synagogue had the right to enforce discipline on anyone who was under their authority. As Scripture points out, Paul was given the "39 lashes" by the Synagogue authorities on more than one occassion(2 Corinthians 6:3-10; Acts 21:21-26; 32).

An important point to note here is that Paul kept himself under the authority of the Synagogue. According to Roman law, he could have used his Roman citizenship to stop this discipline. However, according to Jewish law, he then would have forfeited his right to speak and teach in the Synagogue and possibly been barred from the Temple. (5) As we will see in this study, although Paul is commonly known as "the apostle to the Gentiles," this ministry was for the benefit of Israel (Romans 11:13). (6)

When the "Synagogue" is mentioned in Scripture it is important to note that this is not simply some local religious group or building. The Synagogue was a system made up of groups throughout Judea and out of the land. Each was independent but operated in concert with the others. Although there were varying views, factions and sects, there were key similarities including; Torah observance, Sabbath, circumcision, and dietary halakhah (keeping the kosher laws). There was a hierarchy of authority and all ultimately answered to the Sanhedrin.



The Synagogue was also a social institution around which Jewish community life evolved. Leaders were responsible to school children, provide lodging for travelers and bury their dead. The association of synagogues acted together like the organization and government of a city. Each member was under authority and discipline of the leaders. Their parameters of authority in relation to the Jewish Community included:
  • Religious education
  • Administration, including collection of temple tax and Roman tax
  • Discipline, including judgement and punishment (flogging is mentioned in the Mishnah)
The Jewish society in the city of Rome consisted of a number of synagogue communities. About a dozen have been positively identified, but there were likely many more, due to smaller size of the homes of the Jews, that were mostly located in less affluent sections of Rome. Meetings were often held in the larger homes. It is also important for this study to note that such gatherings were also considered to be held under Jewish synagogue authority as they were the only religious group allowed to do this by law. There were no "Christian house churches," as is often incorrectly taught. Not only would have been illegal to hold such meetings, but Christianity as a separate sect did not exist at the time of Paul's letter to Rome. Acts 15 shows that decisions regarding gentiles were being made by their Jewish leadership, who stated that the gentiles would learn more as they continued attending Synagogue (Acts 15:21).

GENTILES WITHIN JUDAISM

Gentiles have always had the option to follow the minimal requirements of God or to become involved with the faith of Israel, and even fully convert. They were also welcome in the Synagogue, as long as they acted appropriately. There was no "corner bookstore" for them to purchase a Bible and go home and read it. The only place they could hear the Scriptures read was in the Synagogue (or the actual Temple if in Jerusalem).

Judaism had long established standards for gentile God-followers who were welcome in synagogue (re: Isaiah 56:6-7). Such gentiles were regarded as "potential" Jews in different stages of development. There were minimal requirements for gentiles who were righteous without becoming Jews, and others for gentiles in process of conversion to Judaism. Cornelius, a Roman mentioned in Acts, is an example of a gentile who had taken on some of the ways of Judaism.

These standards were in a constant state of evolution and discussion within Judaism. The rules also varied between gentiles living in the land of Israel, versus those among the Jewish diaspora. As such, Acts 15:19-32, 16:1-5 and 21:25 reflects the minimum standards for gentile followers of Yeshua, living among Jews in a diaspora setting at that time. This was not a strict or stagnant definition, as these gentile believers were to continue learning and taking on more of the Torah as they went to Synagogue (Acts 15:21). This was nothing new -- Paul's view on this issue is also seen in Ephesians 2:10-12, where he tells gentiles that now they are part of the faith of Israel, including its Torah.

This is another important point - which stands in contrast to standard Christian doctine. Although gentiles were not required to take on all the Torah as a prerequisite to salvation, the Torah has always been God's guideline for all his "called out ones" to live by -- be they Jew or gentile. This will be discussed in detail in a later section.

THE CONGREGATION AT ROME

The congregation at Rome had a very important distinction to the other Messianic congregations mentioned in the "New Testament." It was the only one not directly founded by one of the apostles. It would seem that at the time of the events of Acts 2, some of the Jews who came from Rome to Jerusalem for the feast of Shavuot, became believers. They returned to their city and began a congregation. By the time of Paul's letter, the congregational makeup most likely had a gentile majority, though the leadership probably was still in Jewish hands.

Unfortunately, the congregation was not properly established by apostolic authority and had developed internal problems. This is the purpose for which Paul wrote the book of Romans. As we will see, much of the difficulty the congregation was experiencing was caused by a great influx of gentiles. Most of these gentiles were not previously regular Synagogue attendees with an appreciation of the faith of Israel (as compared to those in Jerusalem for example). Rather, they entered their "new faith" directly from the pagan Roman world, full of its anti-Jewish prejudices, as outlined above. As new "believers," they knew very little about God and His Messiah, and virtually nothing of the Torah. Beyond that, they had no respect for Jewish customs and Synagogue regulations.

  1. The Mystery of Romans, Mark Nanos, 1996, Fortress Press, Minneapolis, pp. 43-46.
  2. Jew & Gentile in the Ancient World, Louis H. Feldman, 1993, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 123-176
  3. Caesar and Christ, Will Durant, 1944, Simon and Schuster, New York, p. 546.
  4. The Mystery of Romans, Mark Nanos, 1996, Fortress Press, Minneapolis, pp. 64-68.
  5. ibid.
  6. Romans - A Shorter Commentary, C.E.B. Cranfield, 1985, William B. Eerdmans publishing Company, Grand Rapids, MI, pp. 275-276.

Hope this helps Maximus in understanding there was NO "ChURCH" with the original followers of messiah. And I hope this helps others here aswell realize the Orthodoxy of our Jewish faith.
 
Upvote 0

yod

the wandering goy
Sep 6, 2003
1,521
12
Dallas, TX
Visit site
✟1,749.00
Faith
Messianic
Hope this helps Maximus in understanding there was NO "ChURCH" with the original followers of messiah. And I hope this helps others here aswell realize the Orthodoxy of our Jewish faith.



Maybe I don't understand what you are trying to say here....

But there was definitely a separate time/place for jews and gentiles to come together in fellowship outside of the synagogue.....in the diaspora especially.

Usually a home group or the like...but not in a synagogue where gentiles had to be circumcised to enter.

This is my understanding of the Book of Acts. If I'm mistaken please show me where you get that...


 
Upvote 0

sojeru

just a Jew
Mar 22, 2003
870
21
41
USA
Visit site
✟1,145.00
Faith
Judaism
no, you are right about that (kind of)...this existed in the diaspora- to gather in home groups, especially more in ROME for this IS the way synagogues were done. And all of hese home synagogues were under the beit din...

There was no such thing as a "church" home group all were synagogues,

And remember, Judaism always had something for the righteous gentile- he had no need to be circumcised and could always attend the synagogue.
 
Upvote 0

KelsayDL

Seeker of the Way
Aug 9, 2003
294
20
54
✟8,104.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
but not in a synagogue where gentiles had to be circumcised to enter


I had heard this one time as well.

Led me to a great deal of searching but what I found out was this was not true.

I forget everything about it, but perhaps Sojeru, Yafet or someone else can comment on that belief further.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

yod

the wandering goy
Sep 6, 2003
1,521
12
Dallas, TX
Visit site
✟1,749.00
Faith
Messianic
There were of course Gerim (G-d fearers) in the synagogues..and I suppose there still are.

But Acts 15 is the story of a great controversy about what to do with all the gentiles who came to faith in the Messiah of Israel.

Should they convert to judaism? If so, does that mean circumcision? There were quite a lot of disciples who thought so evidently.

But in the end they decided that it wasn't necessary. These "christians" were not considered the same as "gerim" in the synagogue or they wouldn't have started churches, would they?
 
Upvote 0

KelsayDL

Seeker of the Way
Aug 9, 2003
294
20
54
✟8,104.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Not sure myself.

I don't believe being cast out of the synagogue was a desirous thing back in the day.


I'd thought Yeshua even mentioned it would happen to his followers, but I couldn't find where he said that exactly. maybe it was a teaching on this verse;


Lu 6:22 - Show Context
Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.


The synagogue is where the early believers desired to be, at least in Israel. I believe that sentiment would be echoed throughout the diaspora.



Joh 9:22 - Show Context
These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.


Joh 12:42 - Show Context
Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:


But Acts 15
Yes acts 15 is something, quite the eye opening chapter for me the past 6mos.


Never forget how it ended though (something I never noticed in 20yrs);


21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.



So, the way I read it is those coming to faith were able to enter the synagogues on the sabbath. At least until the persecution of believers began.


And as you pointed out, acts 15 basically came about in regards to circumcision.
 
Upvote 0
V

Valid Name

Guest
Greetings Kelsay!


I do find your thought enlightening, humorus, and disterbing all at once. That you did not see verse 21 in Acts 15. I say Enlightening because it goes to show that The Father is opening people's eyes. Humorous because I've been beating my head against the wall whenever people don't see it, and Disturbing because people don't see it!


I am curious to your thoughts or anyone else's for that matter on Acts 15.

The Council decided that 4 Laws were to binding upon the Gentiles that were to be converted. I am curious if anyone thinks they bound the 4 Laws, plus the 10 commandments? Interestingly this is what 'traditional' Christianity says - that these were the only 'ceremonial' laws that were to be binding. I however have the opinion that these were the ONLY Laws that were bound on the Gentiles for the time being - I can clarify with scripture later if you like.

Just curious what everyone thinks about it.

Peace!
Valid Name
 
Upvote 0

KelsayDL

Seeker of the Way
Aug 9, 2003
294
20
54
✟8,104.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Valid Name said:
Greetings Kelsay!


I do find your thought enlightening, humorus, and disterbing all at once. That you did not see verse 21 in Acts 15. I say Enlightening because it goes to show that The Father is opening people's eyes. Humorous because I've been beating my head against the wall whenever people don't see it, and Disturbing because people don't see it!


I am curious to your thoughts or anyone else's for that matter on Acts 15.

The Council decided that 4 Laws were to binding upon the Gentiles that were to be converted. I am curious if anyone thinks they bound the 4 Laws, plus the 10 commandments? Interestingly this is what 'traditional' Christianity says - that these were the only 'ceremonial' laws that were to be binding. I however have the opinion that these were the ONLY Laws that were bound on the Gentiles for the time being - I can clarify with scripture later if you like.

Just curious what everyone thinks about it.

Peace!
Valid Name
It is disturbing. Especially to me.

It just goes to show, people will see what they want to see regardless of whether they read it over and over again or not.

I'd always had a problem when people would say something like "the old laws are dead." Or anything like that. Even when I was a young boy, it never sat well with me. I had a hard time with people saying the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob somehow changed, yet didn't...

It took over 20yrs time, and so much more in heartache for my eyes to finally be opened.


My thoughts on acts 15 is summed up in the last verse of the chapter;

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.


I believe the Kingdom of God extends to all men who are willing to take hold of it. And while I feel the initial necessary things set forth by the council were of the Noachide laws, the gentiles coming to faith were not limited there.

Isaiah talks of the sons of the foreigner joining himself to God, taking hold of his covenant and not profaning his sabbath.

Some may argue thats only for those in the land of Israel, but to them I say if a Jew can practice Judaism outside of Israel, then why can't a seeker of God join himself to the Lord just as they in their own country?

This is an area of been earnestly seeking the truth on.


All's I know for now, is when I seek a new fellowship, they will be preaching Moses far more than Paul. :cool:
 
Upvote 0

Maximus

Orthodox Christian
Jun 24, 2003
5,822
373
✟7,903.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I think the Nicene Creed in someways has more authority than the New Testament itself. It is the bedrock Christian confession, and the guiding light on how to read the New Testament.

SW -

I did not write that. I think you implied that I did.

Who were you saying was "deemed a modalist"? It was not me.

I will return to this thread later when I have a chance, I'm out of time now.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SonWorshipper

Old Timer
Jan 15, 2002
2,840
31
✟10,769.00
Faith
Messianic
SW -

I did not write that. I think you implied that I did.





No, I did not imply that, I posted your OP and then drew a line. If anyone thought that I was implying that Maximus posted that please forgive. It can be found in post 100, which IS NOT by Maximus.


Maximus said:
SW -
Who were you saying was "deemed a modalist"? It was not me.


I was speaking to henaynei that she was "deemed a modalist" and it was by you in fact:

I think most generic Pentecostals do believe in the Trinity, but the United Pentecostal Church (a specific denomination) is Modalist in its doctrine. They believe God is One Person who wears three hats, as it were. Sometimes He's the Father, sometimes the Son, and sometimes the Holy Spirit.

That seems to be what Henaynei was describing as her belief.

BTW,
http://www.upci.org/doctrine/60_questions.asp is a link to a United Pentecostal web site that discusses their Modalist doctrines if you would like to confirm that what I am saying is true.
6th October 2003, 09:33 PM Post #97
image.php

Maximus
Orthodox Catholic
 
Upvote 0

yod

the wandering goy
Sep 6, 2003
1,521
12
Dallas, TX
Visit site
✟1,749.00
Faith
Messianic
The Council decided that 4 Laws were to binding upon the Gentiles that were to be converted. I am curious if anyone thinks they bound the 4 Laws, plus the 10 commandments? Interestingly this is what 'traditional' Christianity says - that these were the only 'ceremonial' laws that were to be binding. I however have the opinion that these were the ONLY Laws that were bound on the Gentiles for the time being - I can clarify with scripture later if you like.

Just curious what everyone thinks about it.



this is a good topic because it requires thought!

I don't think they were saying that gentiles could just be a law unto themselves with the exception of these 4....but they certainly were not saying that gentiles had to covert to judaism either.

They must have understood that an uncircumcised gentile would never be welcome to bring a sacrifice into the Temple (which was still standing at this time). This means that they did exclude gentiles from following the entire Torah. To me, this says that they did consider a covenant with Israel as being somewhat different than the "new" covenant which included gentiles.

And my study of history over the years tells me that the jewish believers in Yeshua would come together with gentile converts for times of fellowship on the first day of the week...AFTER they had observed Shabbat...usually on a Saturday evening. I'm fairly convinced that this is where Sunday worship in the church began taking hold.

But I could be swayed if someone has facts that show otherwise.







 
Upvote 0
V

Valid Name

Guest
Greetings Yod!

I do agree, it would be a little ridiculous to let the Gentiles run around with only four commandments. I do however think that these four commandments were the only ones given to them in the beginning. I'll give you my logic and have you see what you think.

The Gentiles of course were coming from pagan societies, and they did pagan things. These four were more than likely some of what they did when they worshipped their pagan gods. This logic I am sure is not new to you. These laws would keep them out of their pagan temples, and verse 21 as Kelsay alluded to would become much more evident.

The debate that they were having was about circumcision AND the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses here seems to be including everything BESIDES cicrumcision.

Traditional Christianity has always been keen in telling me that my sabbath observance is futile, because we have died to the law. And one law we have died to is:
Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. 7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
So one law that we are dead to is 'thou shalt not covet.' No one in their right mind would tell you that you are free to covet. However, 'thou shall not covet' is a part of the Law of Moses is it not? (If anyone disagrees please say).

So it can be said I believe that the Council was debating on circumsision AND The Law of Moses (inlcuding thou shall not covet).

Verse 21 then is given much the more meaning - for they had better be learning somewhere!

Also Acts 21 should be cited:
Acts 21:25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
I don't believe that they separated the 10 commandments from 'the law' or the 'Law of Moses.' However if so, please say.

Peace!
Valid Name
 
Upvote 0

yod

the wandering goy
Sep 6, 2003
1,521
12
Dallas, TX
Visit site
✟1,749.00
Faith
Messianic
Do you find it interesting that 3 of these 4 laws were dietary in nature? Abstaining from idols had to do with meats sacrificed to idols.

I think that gentiles were not only to observe the 10 commandments, but the intent of the entire Torah. In other words, the spirit of the law applies to all men everywhere.

But I do think that some of the law is/was applicable only to Israel. The civil codes and ceremonial sections which even they can not keep today because the entire context and structure of their society has changed in such a way as to make it impossible. (No Temple...etc..)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SonWorshipper

Old Timer
Jan 15, 2002
2,840
31
✟10,769.00
Faith
Messianic
I look at it as a starting point; just like anything else you need to learn and have interest in you need a "jumping off" point. They agreed that that jumping off point wasn't circumcision but they did agree that out of all the things that they needed to learn these four were of a daily necessity and needed to be taught at once.
Sex and eating, these are daily functions and as such needed to be immediately addressed, as well they would be acceptable to have oneg with :) to start, and the rest they would learn on Shabbat in synagogue. You can't exactly tell them the good news and they believe and then throw the whole Torah at them and expect them to learn it overnight. :confused:

Just like you don't expect a child to read before you teach them letters and then words and then sentence structure.........etc. But the Christian church wants to keep things simple and somehow after reading verse 20, verse 21 disappears from their sight. ;)
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.