Nicene Creed

[ebia]

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

Your Tolstoy quote does mentions eternal torment:

"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 creed does not mention punishment, or eternal torment, or the human race being cursed. Those are inferences that you and/or Tolstoy have infered from it, but it does not say or necessarly imply any of those things.

 

[DailyBlessings]

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.

Not the LDS churches... or the Rastafarian church... Or Messianic Jews... If no creed is accepted by all, I'd rather have that is less exclusive in spirit and tone as the guide.

 

[ebia]

Not the LDS churches... or the Rastafarian church... Or Messianic Jews... If no creed is accepted by all, I'd rather have that is less exclusive in spirit and tone as the guide.

I understand that, and I don't entirely disagree. I was just making the point that if one is going to use a creed in this way there is an argument for using the only creed that possibly claim ecumenical authority - the so-called Nicene.

 

[DailyBlessings]

I understand that, and I don't entirely disagree. I was just making the point that if one is going to use a creed in this way there is an argument for using the only creed that possibly claim ecumenical authority - the so-called Nicene.

I also understand- and I understand why CF uses any creed in the first place.

 

[AnarKiss]

Thanks for all your replies. Guess I'll wait and see whether I get to remain a "Christian" here on CF.

 

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

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

But surely it should cover the core of the faith - that we personally know God thru HolySpirit!!! Otherwise it's just a bunch of words with no power.

 

[MidnightBlue]

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.

I find that the Apostle's Creed makes things easier on people, especially people who have been brought up in non-liturgical, non-creedal churches. But it wouldn't serve the purposes of CF; it would let all the "wrong" sorts of people in.

Actually, even the Apostles' Creed can cause confusion. My dad grew up in the Evangelical & Reformed Church, saying the creed without the phrase "he descended into hell." The first time he attended my mother's Methodist church and heard that phrase, he burst out: "What?!"

 

[ebia]

But surely it should cover the core of the faith - that we personally know God thru HolySpirit!!!

Depends what you are using it for.

 

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

Depends what you are using it for.

Toilet paper, mostly.

 

[bloved]

My biggest qualm with it is the way in which it is used. It is used as sort of a litmus test on this forum for who is and who isn't a Christian. I've read enough of the posts here to know that posters can be some of the most arrogant, condescending, rude, hateful, and unChristlike people on a public forum but, as long as they agree with the Nicene Creed, they are considered to be Christians.

That is one of the problems with creeds and doctrinal statements, they seem to support an ideology that says as long as folks give mental assent to certain statements, no change or transformation is necessary. The result? Evangelical Christianity believes IN Jesus but nobody acts LIKE Jesus. How one conducts one's self become secondary to what one believes. Personally, I think Jesus would have a big problem with that ideology.

bloved

 

[DailyBlessings]

Actually, even the Apostles' Creed can cause confusion. My dad grew up in the Evangelical & Reformed Church, saying the creed without the phrase "he descended into hell." The first time he attended my mother's Methodist church and heard that phrase, he burst out: "What?!"

LOL!

Well, in some versions it says "to the dead"...

 

[flautist]

My biggest qualm with it is the way in which it is used. It is used as sort of a litmus test on this forum for who is and who isn't a Christian. I've read enough of the posts here to know that posters can be some of the most arrogant, condescending, rude, hateful, and unChristlike people on a public forum but, as long as they agree with the Nicene Creed, they are considered to be Christians.

That is one of the problems with creeds and doctrinal statements, they seem to support an ideology that says as long as folks give mental assent to certain statements, no change or transformation is necessary. The result? Evangelical Christianity believes IN Jesus but nobody acts LIKE Jesus. How one conducts one's self become secondary to what one believes. Personally, I think Jesus would have a big problem with that ideology.

bloved

You must spread some reputation around before giving it to bloved again.

 

[Im_A]

we all can say that it was created to settle major disputes back in the day. it was a way for the church at the time to create the orthodox and unorthodox. now i know it can be shown that there was a lot of political motives behind it, or at least good reason to speculate that and maybe even believe it. nevertheless...

if our culture today would what happened today, i wonder if the Nicene Creed would have changed any? any thoughts?

 

[stumpjumper]

Your Tolstoy quote does mentions eternal torment:


The creed does not mention punishment, or eternal torment, or the human race being cursed. Those are inferences that you and/or Tolstoy have infered from it, but it does not say or necessarly imply any of those things.

Hi ebia

It might not explicitly mention the human race being cursed but that is precisely the view of the incarnation and atoning crucifiction of Jesus that is implied by the statement of "for us and for our salvation he came down from heaven".

In the creed, atonement is the only reason for the incarnation mentioned and then right after you have the statement that he will come back to judge the quick and the dead. The falleness of man is implied by that reason for the incarnation. Many believe there were other reasons for God becoming man than atonement, yet that is the only view offered by the Nicene Creed.

I'm not saying that I disagree with all atonement theories but that is what is put forth by the creed.

 

[ebia]

Hi ebia

It might not explicitly mention the human race being cursed but that is precisely the view of the incarnation and atoning crucifiction of Jesus that is implied by the statement of "for us and for our salvation he came down from heaven".

Not to me it's not. "We needed help" is a long way from "God condemned us for eternity".

In the creed, atonement is the only reason for the incarnation mentioned

Again, it say's "for our sins", not "in atonement for our sins". You are reading stuff into the creed that isn't there.

and then right after you have the statement that he will come back to judge the quick and the dead. The falleness of man is implied by that reason for the incarnation.

No it's not. It just says that we will all be judged. It makes no comment on the possible or actual outcomes of that judgement.

Many believe there were other reasons for God becoming man than atonement, yet that is the only view offered by the Nicene Creed.

I don't see that the creed offers any view. Given that the atonement model is not big in the Eastern Orthodox chuches I'd actually need some convincing that the authors of the creed actually majored on that model. Either way, it's something you are reading into the creed that simply is not there.

 

[ebia]

we all can say that it was created to settle major disputes back in the day. it was a way for the church at the time to create the orthodox and unorthodox. now i know it can be shown that there was a lot of political motives behind it, or at least good reason to speculate that and maybe even believe it. nevertheless...

if our culture today would what happened today, i wonder if the Nicene Creed would have changed any? any thoughts?

If it were being written today on the same basis as the original, then it would "answer" the big issues in the church today. Rather than get into a cat fight about what the answers would be (which would depend on which side one the councils) perhaps it might be better to ask:

What issues would an ecumenical creed address if one were to be written today?". Please do not attempt to say what answers it would give.

 

[Cassiopeia]

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

weird

Just kidding...Happy Bday

 

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

My biggest qualm with it is the way in which it is used. It is used as sort of a litmus test on this forum for who is and who isn't a Christian. I've read enough of the posts here to know that posters can be some of the most arrogant, condescending, rude, hateful, and unChristlike people on a public forum but, as long as they agree with the Nicene Creed, they are considered to be Christians.

That is one of the problems with creeds and doctrinal statements, they seem to support an ideology that says as long as folks give mental assent to certain statements, no change or transformation is necessary. The result? Evangelical Christianity believes IN Jesus but nobody acts LIKE Jesus. How one conducts one's self become secondary to what one believes. Personally, I think Jesus would have a big problem with that ideology.

bloved

Imagine Jesus reading the Nicene Creed, shrugging and carrying on tipping over tables, calling religious biggots really bad swearwords and serving the needy.

 

[ahab]

Imagine Jesus reading the Nicene Creed, shrugging and carrying on tipping over tables, calling religious biggots really bad swearwords and serving the needy.

No cant imagine Jesus doing that. He overturned the tables like it says He did.

 

[Cleany]

I agree with it, although I think it proffers a fairly complex Trinitarian theology in the language of 4th century Greek philosophy. I don't think it's necessary to subscribe to its (either of its, now, I suppose, as a nod to my Orthodox friends ) specific trinitarian position to be a Christian, though.

agreed