Nicene Creed - How much different If Jews were allowed to be present?

[SonWorshipper]

How much different do you think that the Creed written up with Constantines blessing in 325AD if the Bishops of Jerusalem or any other Jewish believers were allowed to attend ( of course they would have to be invited first ).

The number that participated in this council varies from 225 to over 300 but not a one was of the original faith. I find that very disturbing.

Would it have changed what succeeding councils ratifyed? Would the Passover that Yeshua celebrated with his talmidim still be celebrated instead of turned over to a pagan day of worship? Would the Biblical day of rest still be on the seventh Day as G-d proclaimed back in Genesis?

What do you think?

 

[Woodsy]

Very interesting question!
I am not nearly knowledgable enough about history or the theology of the time to comment, but it's got me thinking.

 

[Oblio]

Would the Passover that Yeshua celebrated with his talmidim still be celebrated instead of turned over to a pagan day of worship?

We celebrate Pascha of our Lord every year, it has nothing to do with pagans ! In fact, the calculation of the date is based on the Jewish calendar ! Unless you are saying that that is pagan !!

 

[Oblio]

The number that participated in this council varies from 225 to over 300 but not a one was of the original faith. I find that very disturbing.

The 'original' faith, denied that Jesus was the Christ and as such were not part of the Church. How could they have affirmed the phase :

---

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.

---

?

 

[Woodsy]

The 'original' faith, denied that Jesus was the Christ and as such were not part of the Church. How could they have affirmed the phase :

<HR>
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
<HR>

?

Correction: Judaism and its officals denied tha Jesus was the Christ. His first followers, however, were Jews that affirmed, with Thomas, "My Lord and My God."
I believe these are the Jews (the Jewish followers of Jesus, the Nazarenes who remained believers in Israel.) that SonWorshipper is referencing.

 

[Oblio]

Were they part of the Christian Church ?

The original Church did segue from Jewish Temple worship into Christian worhsip that we see to this very day in Orthodox Temples throughout the world. In fact, the Orthodox Liturgy used today is a shortened variant of the Apostle James, the first Bishop of Jerusalem.

Liturgical Worship and Music from Judaism to Christianity

 

[SonWorshipper]

The 'original' faith, denied that Jesus was the Christ and as such were not part of the Church. How could they have affirmed the phase :

<HR>
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
<HR>

?

Original faith as in Matthew, Stephan, Thomas, John, James...............etc. Those were all Jewish and believed in their Jewish Messiah.

If what you say is true , then no one would have ever heard of Jesus would they? For it was Jewish "evangelists" that brought the saving faith to the heathen nations.

Please keep in mind that this is NOT IDD. Thanks!

 

[Oblio]

Please keep in mind that this is NOT IDD.

Just defending my faith, that was insinuated as being pagan.

Would the Passover that Yeshua celebrated with his talmidim still be celebrated instead of turned over to a pagan day of worship?

 

[SonWorshipper]

We celebrate Pascha of our Lord every year, it has nothing to do with pagans ! In fact, the calculation of the date is based on the Jewish calendar ! Unless you are saying that that is pagan !!

When is that done, on the 14th of Nisan? Or the closest SunDay?

I am interested as to how you do this, as from what I have read, the RCC and the OC do alot of things differently?

 

[Oblio]

It's kinda complex, I'll update this with a link ...

Concerning the Date of Pascha and the 1st Ecumenical Council

 

[SonWorshipper]

Just defending my faith, that was insinuated as being pagan.

Not your faith, but the day of commemoration. Passover has always been held on the same day on the Hebrew calendar. It is either celebrated on that day with the meaning given it by the L-rd in Exodus and the L-rd in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, or it isn't.

 

[Oblio]

OK, but the day of celebration of the Pascha of our Lord is given to us by the Holy Spirit through the work of His Church. The day of celebration is not pagan. I can't speak for the Westen Christians though

 

[SonWorshipper]

OK, but the day of celebration of the Pascha of our Lord is given to us by the Holy Spirit through the work of His Church.

And where can I find that in scripture?

 

[SonWorshipper]

Ecumenical

How exactly was it "Ecumenical" if the Believers that were also Jewish were not there? The ones who roots directly tied into the faith?

 

[Oblio]

The first example of the Holy Spirit working through the Church in council can be found in Acts 15. Orthodox Christians do not limit the Revelation of God to Scripture alone. This is a modern Protestant invention.

 

[Oblio]

The ones who roots directly tied into the faith?

The roots of the faith were planted in Acts 2. IIRC Ecumenical means that the entire Church was represented and agreed to the council. note: I'm not too well studied on the Eccelesiastical definiton and what is needed, or if the Church of Jerusalem was there, Philip or Maximus could tell us for sure.

 

[SonWorshipper]

The roots of the faith were planted in Acts 2.

Are you saying that the belief in the one G-d and his plan of salvation didn't begin until Shavuot? ( Pentacost?) If so I will definately have to get back to this later,

IIRC Ecumenical means that the entire Church was represented and agreed to the council. note: I'm not too well studied on the Eccelesiastical definiton and what is needed, or if the Church of Jerusalem was there, Philip or Maximus could tell us for sure.

From what I have read and the point of this thread is that they weren't there, and weren't even asked to be there, so it is biased in it's desicions that were made there.

The first example of the Holy Spirit working through the Church in council can be found in Acts 15. Orthodox Christians do not limit the Revelation of God to Scripture alone. This is a modern Protestant invention.

Messianics DO believe that only the word of G-d is all that should be adhered to, not man. So I guess it's not just the Protestants?
Messianic first article in Statement of Faith:

WE BELIEVE

That the BIBLE, consisting of the Tenach (Holy Scriptures) and the later writings commonly known as the B'rit Hadasha (New Covenant), is the only infallible and authoritative word of God. We recognize its divine inspiration, and accept its teachings as our final authority in all matters of faith and practice (Deut. 6:4-9; Prov. 3:1-6; Ps. 119:89, 105; Isa. 48:12-16; Rom. 8:14-17; II Tim. 2:15, 3:16-17).

 

[Oblio]

It appears they were there.

The assembly numbered among its most famous members St. Alexander of Alexandria, Eustathius of Antioch, Macarius of Jerusalem, Eusebius of Nicomedia, Eusebius of Caesarea, and Nicholas of Myra.

From here

The Church of Jersualem was represented, so it would have been incumbent upon the ethnic Jews in Jerusalem to join the Church. Assuming they had, it appears that they were represented.

Messianics DO believe that only the word of G-d is all that should be adhered to, not man.

The problem with that is

• It is not in Scripture
• We see God the Holy Spirit working through His Church in Scripture itself (see above Acts 15)

 

[Oblio]

That the BIBLE, consisting of the Tenach (Holy Scriptures) and the later writings commonly known as the B'rit Hadasha (New Covenant), is the only infallible and authoritative word of God.

I respect that that is your belief, but it is not Biblical, nor has it been practiced for 2000 years.

 

[Woodsy]

I respect that that is your belief, but it is not Biblical, nor has it been practiced for 2000 years.

This is a good point. Especially since the early Church didn't have one definitive collection of NT scriptures.
I suppose the doctrine of sola scriptura would need to demonstrate that once the NT canon was decided upon, the Holy Spirit stopped its "tutoring."