Nicene Creed

[flautist]

"I believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God."

Shouldn't that be all that's needed? Do we really need all the pomp and circumstance of a creed? And why the Nicene Creed? Why not the Apostolic, or any other of the number of creeds that are out there?

Uniting ALL Christians as one body. I didn't see a disclaimer there. Until I read the rules, that is.

 

[mark53]

There are a number of Churches that do not believe in creeds at all. The Campbell - Stone tradition for a start! They believe that what the Bible says (or I suppose how it is understood to say) is what they go on. So why use them?!

 

[ebia]

Why can't the CF look at this whole issue as there are a number of main-line Churches who do not believe in Creeds but most probably agree with most, if not all of what is in it.

I presume that CF uses it because having a "Christians Only" section demands that one have a (practical, usable) definition of Christian. The Nicene Creed might not be perfect for such purposes, but it's the least contraversial definition. The least bad option, if you will. Any other definition would result in more disputes, not less.

 

[MidnightBlue]

"I believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God."

Shouldn't that be all that's needed? Do we really need all the pomp and circumstance of a creed? And why the Nicene Creed? Why not the Apostolic, or any other of the number of creeds that are out there?

I prefer the UCC approach; they see creeds and statements of faith as "a testimony, and not a test." I'm personally most comfortable with the Nicene Creed in its Eastern version, but we've settled on the Apostles' Creed for our worship because although our community is small we have some diversity of belief, and the Nicene Creed is problematic for some. I can see that even the Apostles' Creed would be problematic for other people, and in that event I wouldn't personally have any problem with using the Beatitudes or some other passage from the teachings of Jesus in place of any creed at all. In fact, there are times I think that would be preferable, anyway.

 

[icbal]

Just interested in your views on the Nicene Creed - where it fits into your faith, and into Christianity generally?

[I've just been informed by CF moderators that I cannot display a Christian icon without ascribing to the Nicene Creed]

I look forward to your replies.

I dont.

I consider it a nonsense (in the most respectful and non-hurtful way).

Admittedly I have not read all of it, but what I have doesn't seem to make too much sense, and really looks like someones interpretation of what the bible, and most specifically the NT, means.
Which is what it is.

Since no two eyes see the same thing in the same way, i think the nicene creed is a waste of time to adhere to, because at best people would only ever agree with most of it.

 

[ebia]

I dont.

I consider it a nonsense (in the most respectful and non-hurtful way).

Admittedly I have not read all of it, but what I have doesn't seem to make too much sense,

Which bits? I would have thought most of it at least was pretty straightforward.

and really looks like someones interpretation of what the bible, and most specifically the NT, means.
Which is what it is.

Well, not someone's but a Council's.

Since no two eyes see the same thing in the same way, i think the nicene creed is a waste of time to adhere to, because at best people would only ever agree with most of it.

Again, I don't follow you. A heck of a lot of people do agree with all of it. Not everyone, but that was the point of it in the first place - to contradict certain teachings common at the time it was written, and make it quite clear to everyone that those teachings were wrong according to the whole church acting in council.

 

[stumpjumper]

This is what Leo Tolstoy had to say about the Nicene Creed. He is mainly referring to is the statement from the Nicene Creed about Jesus coming to judge the living and the dead not the status of Jesus as the same substance as God:

"The Sermon on The Mount or the Nicene Creed. One cannot believe in both. And the Churchmen have chosen the latter....People who believe in a wicked and senseless God who has cursed the human race and devoted his own Son to sacrifice and a part of mankind to eternal torment cannot believe in the God of Love. The man who believes in a God, in a Christ coming again in glory to judge and to punish the quick and the dead, cannot believe in the Christ who bade us to turn the left cheek, judge not, forgive those that wrong us, and love our enemies."

I find more truth in the Sermon on The Mount myself but I'm not sure if it is an either/or proposition.

 

[CaDan]

There are a number of Churches that do not believe in creeds at all. The Campbell - Stone tradition for a start! They believe that what the Bible says (or I suppose how it is understood to say) is what they go on. So why use them?!

CF uses them for the purpose of excluding certain groups from using Christian icons. Specifically, the Nicene Creed is used as a test of Christianity in order to exclude LDS and JWs. There was a thread about a year ago in CF Support discussing this.

 

[icbal]

The parts about the Trinity for one.

Again, I don't follow you. A heck of a lot of people do agree with all of it. Not everyone, but that was the point of it in the first place - to contradict certain teachings common at the time it was written, and make it quite clear to everyone that those teachings were wrong according to the whole church acting in council.

No. Not true.
A heck of a lot of people adhere to it. But I am yet to meet someone who has absolute belief, without a shred of doubt, in what a council decided Jesus was talking about 400 years after he said it.

The First Head of the Church after Jesus, was James. Not Peter. James who is pretty much sidelined in the Bible, and his epistles are in obscurity.

The Nicene Creed is the opinion of a council.
Not Gospel.
The Nicene Creed is not an authority on whether or not you are a Christian, the Bible is. Belief in that and God alone is all you need.

 

[CaDan]

The parts about the Trinity for one.


No. Not true.
A heck of a lot of people adhere to it. But I am yet to meet someone who has absolute belief, without a shred of doubt, in what a council decided Jesus was talking about 400 years after he said it.

The First Head of the Church after Jesus, was James. Not Peter. James who is pretty much sidelined in the Bible, and his epistles are in obscurity.

The Nicene Creed is the opinion of a council.
Not Gospel.
The Nicene Creed is not an authority on whether or not you are a Christian, the Bible is. Belief in that and God alone is all you need.

Why choose the Bible?

 

[Im_A]

The Nicene Creed is just a creed to me, but call me weird.

 

[PastorJason]

The Nicene Creed is just a creed to me, but call me weird.

Okay.

You're weird.

 

[artybloke]

I don't object to the Nicene Creed. So I can accept it. As a Quaker, I ignore it; when I go all Anglican, well, it's part of the service. Like the Gloria.

 

[ebia]

"The Sermon on The Mount or the Nicene Creed. One cannot believe in both. And the Churchmen have chosen the latter....People who believe in a wicked and senseless God who has cursed the human race and devoted his own Son to sacrifice and a part of mankind to eternal torment cannot believe in the God of Love. The man who believes in a God, in a Christ coming again in glory to judge and to punish the quick and the dead, cannot believe in the Christ who bade us to turn the left cheek, judge not, forgive those that wrong us, and love our enemies."

The Nicene creed doesn't say about half of that. It doesn't say he cursed the human race, and it doesn't mention punishment or eternal torment.

 

[ebia]

The parts about the Trinity for one.

Ok, and what else?

A heck of a lot of people adhere to it. But I am yet to meet someone who has absolute belief, without a shred of doubt, in what a council decided Jesus was talking about 400 years after he said it.

Who said anything about "without a shred of doubt"? How does this differ from the bible?

The First Head of the Church after Jesus, was James. Not Peter. James who is pretty much sidelined in the Bible, and his epistles are in obscurity.

What's this got to do with the price of eggs?

The Nicene Creed is the opinion of a council.
Not Gospel.

It's the opinion of a council acting for the whole church. Just as the canon is the opinion of a discussion and consultation process acting for the whole church. Why accept one and not the other?

 

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

It's the opinion of a council acting for the whole church. Just as the canon is the opinion of a discussion and consultation process acting for the whole church. Why accept one and not the other?

Because the Bible is inclusive,compelling and unifying... or at least it can be!
The Creed is divisive and misses the essence of Christianity out - God living in and with us.

 

[ebia]

Because the Bible is inclusive,compelling and unifying... or at least it can be!

But frequently, in practice, is used to be divisive.

The Creed is divisive

Can't really argue with this one.

and misses the essence of Christianity out - God living in and with us.

but it's not supposed to be a complete statement of belief.

 

[DailyBlessings]

As far as the icon is concerned, I kind of wish they would use the apostle's creed as the standard, as it is a bit simpler and freer of baggage IMO.

 

[ebia]

As far as the icon is concerned, I kind of wish they would use the apostle's creed as the standard, as it is a bit simpler and freer of baggage IMO.

Perhaps, but the Nicene Creed is the only one instituted by an Ecumencial Council and historically accepted by "all" the churches. The apostles creed is part of the Western church tradition only - the Eastern Orthodox churches do not have it.

 

[stumpjumper]

The Nicene creed doesn't say about half of that. It doesn't say he cursed the human race, and it doesn't mention punishment or eternal torment.

Sorry, but it says what I and Tolstoy said, even though I never mentioned the eternal torment that you wrote above:


We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And we believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Not saying I totally disagree but I do understand why some do.