Nicene Creed

[AnarKiss]

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.

 

[tel0004]

I agree with everything in it, minus the part where it says about one united cathloic church. I agree they are united, but they are not the only church.

 

[Joykins]

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.

 

[ebia]

I'm happy to ascribe to it (without the dodgy bit the west added). That doesn't mean my understanding of it exactly corresponds to the understanding it's original authors gave it.

 

[CaDan]

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 have nothing good to say about CF policy on this, so I will say nothing at all.

 

[Matt Never Existed]

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

Ok, so we're saying we only have one true God, and all other 'gods' are idols and meaningless. That seperates us from quite a few other religions.

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.

Here we are basicly stating that we believe Christ is God's Son, God himself, in human form. He was with/is the Father, and was there at creation.

For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

Here it states that Christ died for our sins, and rose from the grave 3 days later to ascend into Heaven to sit at the right hand of God, where he will judge all mankind.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.

Holy Spirit, God's third form to mankind. Basicly, in my mind, this is the 'breath of God'.

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.

Now, Catholic can stand for the Roman Catholic church, or it can stand for "Universal" church, meaning all of the denominations.

We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come.

And Finally we have where we confirm where it says we must be born again, of water and spirit, and that in the end, the dead shall come back to stand at the last judgement.

~~~~

Honestly, I don't really have a problem with it. I can read my bible and find scripture supporting all of that.

 

[MidnightBlue]

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 have happily subscribed to everything in the Nicene Creed, in either its Western or (later) Eastern version as long as I can remember. But I think creedal formulae are improper criteria for defining who is and who is not a Christian; that's why I don't display the Christian icon on CF.

I'm a Trinitarian myself, but I think Unitarianism is a tenable position for a Christian to take. My aunt -- a Baptist, but not much on the fine points -- has some acquaintances who are Jehovah's Witnesses. On one occasion my granduncle got very upset during one of their visits, and protested, "They don't believe in the Trinity!" My aunt asked what he meant, and when it was explained to her, she was unimpressed. "Well, no wonder they don't believe in that! Nobody in their right mind would believe in that!" I think if we're honest we can see her point of view.

Also, there are people who subscribe to the Creed without necessarily taking it the way others might prefer. For instance, it's possible to affirm that Christ was born of the Virgin Mary without meaning it as a statement of biological fact; for some believers, Virgin Mary is just a conventional way of identifying the Mother of Christ, and doesn't mean technical virgin any more than Maid Marian does. So you have people who agree with the Creed on their own terms, and don't necessarily attach importance to the same issues as others do.

And since you asked, I've been a little uncertain lately about the resurrection of the body.

 

[calebnostro]

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 trust creeds made by fallible human beings, I trust the Bible and what it states directly - nothing more and nothing less.

 

[ebia]

I dont trust creeds made by fallible human beings, I trust the Bible

You presumably trust the Holy Spirit to have directed the people who wrote the bible, and you presumably trust the Holy Spirit to have directed the people who sorted out which books should make up the bible, so why is it so unreasonable to trust the Holy Spirit to have guided those who authored the "Nicene" Creed?

and what it states directly - nothing more and nothing less.

So nothing that can be deduced from what it does say, then?

 

[calebnostro]

You presumably trust the Holy Spirit to have directed the people who wrote the bible, and you presumably trust the Holy Spirit to have directed the people who sorted out which books should make up the bible, so why is it so unreasonable to trust the Holy Spirit to have guided those who authored the "Nicene" Creed?

Tell me, does the Nicene creed teach only One God, like Judaism teaches, or One God as a Trinity?

 

[ebia]

Tell me, does the Nicene creed teach only One God, like Judaism teaches, or One God as a Trinity?

Ah, so you don't agree with because you don't agree with it, rather than there being something clearly and fundamentally different about it's claimed nature to that of the bible.

 

[calebnostro]

Ah, so you don't agree with because you don't agree with it, rather than there being something clearly and fundamentally different about it's claimed nature to that of the bible.

There is no indication that that is the reason as to why I asked you that question, Ebia. Its a valid question and is very important if you want to hear my answer.

 

[MidnightBlue]

There is no indication that that is the reason as to why I asked you that question, Ebia. Its a valid question and is very important if you want to hear my answer.

The Creed is very clearly Trinitarian. However, it's a mischaracterization of Trinitarianism to say it teaches more than one God. (I know you asked Ebia, but you didn't ask privately. )

 

[PastorJason]

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 see the Nicene Creed as I do most other creeds - nice, concise ways for some folks to declare a systematic theology. I do, however, feel the spirit of the Campbell-Stone tradition when I say (and this is quite contrary to CF policy, but bear with me) that the use of creeds as tests of fellowship or membership is sinful, and stands over against the open fellowship practiced by Jesus. I think if one can declare that they believe that Jesus is the Christ, that is the sole "test" of whether or not one is Christian.

While I agree with the spirit of the Nicene Creed, what I mean when I read the words may be (and probably is) quite different than what others may say about the same phrases.

However, I also use a Christian-based icon because I am indeed a disciple of the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, and consider myself Christian - although I may not be seen that way by others on these forums. It's a self-declared faith stance, in my opinion.

 

[bloved]

I'm pretty much with PastorJason on this one. There are parts of the Nicene creed that make sense and there are parts of it that make nonsense.

While the creed may help some folks in expressing their faith, I don't think agreeing with it should be the litmus test for Christianity that this forum makes it out to be.

As long as the owners of this forum insist that being a Christian is dependant, not upon one's own conscience and convictions, but upon the consciences and convictions of those long dead, I suspect its efforts to unite all Christians as one body will be futile. We should be united in spirit, which is love, not necessarily in the letter, which is often law.

But then, the whole format of this forum is, in my opinion, based upon works, not grace. You have to have a certain amount of blessings to buy certain features of the forum, a certain number of posts to post in some areas, agree to certain creeds in order to post in others, and post a certain amount in order to be considered "healthy." If this isn't legalism, I don't know what is.

But then, I'm not too surprised. It simply reflects the current theology of our times -- that certain blessings must be earned. The church, at large, is more under the law than the Galatians ever were. Thankfully, I still find a grace-filled post here and there, even on a "Christian" forum.

bloved

 

[TheListener]

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.

If you think the Nicene creed is flawed then you should probably read your Bible a bit more, especially the Gospels and the book of Romans.

 

[mark53]

I have nothing good to say about CF policy on this, so I will say nothing at all.

But, you just did, in a way!

 

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

If you think the Nicene creed is flawed then you should probably read your Bible a bit more, especially the Gospels and the book of Romans.

The Nicene Creed doesn't mention Baptism by HolySpirit - God living in us is essential to being a Christian... even in the Gospels!!! It's why Jesus left US in charge after all..

So, there is a HUGE FLAW in the Creed.

PLUS, the PJ said, Creeds Suck. Divisive trash.

 

[ebia]

There is no indication that that is the reason as to why I asked you that question, Ebia. Its a valid question and is very important if you want to hear my answer.

I presumed it was a rhetorical question because:
a. I display a christian icon, which I am only allowed to do on this forum if I agree to the 'Nicene' creed.
b. I have said earlier in this thread that I agree with the 'Nicene' creed.

I believe what the church has 'always' taught - roughly summarised as one God in 3 persons.

So to restate my question in a different form, you might reject the creed on one of two bases:
1. You don't trust it's source. In which case my question is "what is different about it's source to the source of the biblical texts and the formation of the canon?"
or
2. You reject it because you believe it is incorrect.

 

[mark53]

I see the Nicene Creed as I do most other creeds - nice, concise ways for some folks to declare a systematic theology. I do, however, feel the spirit of the Campbell-Stone tradition when I say (and this is quite contrary to CF policy, but bear with me) that the use of creeds as tests of fellowship or membership is sinful, and stands over against the open fellowship practiced by Jesus. I think if one can declare that they believe that Jesus is the Christ, that is the sole "test" of whether or not one is Christian.

While I agree with the spirit of the Nicene Creed, what I mean when I read the words may be (and probably is) quite different than what others may say about the same phrases.

However, I also use a Christian-based icon because I am indeed a disciple of the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, and consider myself Christian - although I may not be seen that way by others on these forums. It's a self-declared faith stance, in my opinion.

I also come from that same tradition, the Churches of Christ (Australia) which doesn't believe in, bit sometimes uses, creeds of any type. I believe that the Nicene Creed was designed to sort out theological decisions of the time for the "winners" to discredit the "losers". If a creed, of any type, is used to say who is "in" and who is "out" we are going against the teachings of Jesus himself. He spoke of what God wanted then and now. 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.