The Ecumenicalism of the Nicene Creed

[Enow]

The Nicene Creed was being used as a means of unifying the churches: even heretical ones.

Look at the history of the use of creeds as being ecumenical in nature.

Constantinopolitan Creed

What does the scriptures say about making an agreement with those not likeminded in Christ Jesus?

2 Corinthians 6: 14Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. 18And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

Now look at the scriptures of what a false prophet is:

Matthew 7:15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

The fruit of the false prophet is by the way they gather grapes of thorns and figs of thistles, thus being ecumenical in nature.

So what deceptions has been slipped in by the Nicene creed? What did the scriptures say before those verses?

Matthew 7: 13Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.


If Jesus is the gate, how would false prophets broaden the way in how we are to approach God in the worship place?

By including the Holy Spirit to be worshipped with the Father and the Son, thus allowing problematic results to occur when worshipping the Spirit. The link below is to that thread for reproof.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7538883/

The Nicene creed gave the title of the Giver of Life to the Holy Spirit, but Jesus Christ is the Giver of Life. That is His glory as the Saviour: Below is the link to that thread for reproof.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7538852/#post56841146

One has to wonder about why Protestants are reciting the creeds irregardless of the fact that they claim they are not endorsing the Catholic Church as being the Church, but if you read it as it is originally intended: then why rationalize it to be used for any other christian churches?

Creeds of the Catholic Church

The fact that we are to be seperated from those not likeminded in Christ proves that we, as believers, should not be seeking any common ground for which an agreement or a creed would unify us with heretical churches.

Matthew 16: 6Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees....11How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees? 12Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

 

[wayseer]

The Nicene Creed is a political document. It marks the time when the persecuted church became the persecuting church.

 

[Enow]

Believers should not identify themselves by a creed.

The disciples did not create them and thus saw no need for them.

We are identified as the children of God by faith in Jesus Christ. Others will know that we know Him when we have love for one another.

The statement of faith should be as simple as the Gospel is.

We are to be witnesses of the Son in seeking His glory.

We are not to be witnesses of ourselves by a creed in identifying with others.

We are to decrease so that He may increase.

 

[Soulgazer]

"Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees" Refers to the substitution of law over love, justice over mercy, scripture over reason.

The Nicene creed bound everyone together in one faith, catholicism, one scripture, catholic, to prevent a possible future civil war within the empire. The establishment of Christendom as part of imperial rule bound church and state into one single entity. Thus questions of faith that fell outside of guidelines could quickly be bumped up to treason against the empire. This was really the political precursor to the Holy Roman Catholic church, which continued to rule by proxy much of Europe, and so kept the empire alive well into the 1800's.
Deep suspicion of the Roman Catholic Church popped up in 1865 when secretary of war, Stanton, believing that the Vatican was somehow involved with Lincoln's assassination, severed all political ties. This is the root of the average american suspicion of Catholics. Ronald Reagan re established ties in his presidency.

 

[he-man]

"Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees" Refers to the substitution of law over love, justice over mercy, scripture over reason.

The Nicene creed bound everyone together in one faith, catholicism, one scripture, catholic, to prevent a possible future civil war within the empire.

Humbug!
Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament. The Encyclopedia of Religion The New Encyclopedia Britannica

The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the trinity was apparently unknown; . . . they say nothing about it. Yale University professor E. Washburn Hopkins "Origin and Evolution of Religion"

Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word 'Trinity' appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord. Historian Arthur Weigall "The Paganism in Our Christianity"

 

[RadicalDissenter]

The Nicene Creed is a political document. It marks the time when the persecuted church became the persecuting church.

 

[Soulgazer]

Humbug!
Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament. The Encyclopedia of Religion The New Encyclopedia Britannica

The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the trinity was apparently unknown; . . . they say nothing about it. Yale University professor E. Washburn Hopkins "Origin and Evolution of Religion"

Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word 'Trinity' appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord. Historian Arthur Weigall "The Paganism in Our Christianity"

Humbug back at you. Yes it is a fact Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word 'Trinity' appear. Yet He did mention the "leaven of the pharisee" numerous times both in biblical and non biblical writings, proving the two are not connected. I think you are confusing it with the Q'uran's statement of : Say not "Trinity": desist: It will be better for you:

 

[wayseer]

Humbug back at you. Yes it is a fact Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word 'Trinity' appear. Yet He did mention the "leaven of the pharisee" numerous times both in biblical and non biblical writings, proving the two are not connected. I think you are confusing it with the Q'uran's statement of : Say not "Trinity": desist: It will be better for you:

Qumran does not matter. The fact that the Biblical texts no where mention 'trinity' should be sufficient evidence.

Ironically, it was the Church that established the canon in the first place in order to provide some basis for the Church's authority but then goes immediately outside the canon which it so suits the situation.

 

[Son of Zadok]

Qumran does not matter. The fact that the Biblical texts no where mention 'trinity' should be sufficient evidence.

Ironically, it was the Church that established the canon in the first place in order to provide some basis for the Church's authority but then goes immediately outside the canon which it so suits the situation.

For the most part I agree with what you are posting. A few statements here from my perspective:

1. When you say “The Church” you are referencing a church divested of Apostles. The Church you reference at the time to which you reference was more reflective of the structure and methods of the ancient Roman Empire than it was the organization and methods of the Church established by Christ and overseen by his chosen and ordained Apostles.

2. I think you have mistakenly crossed the Q’uran (Koran) with the Dead Sea Scriptures that were discovered in association with the Qumran community. Which - I believe to be a Trinitarian plot to confuse the issue of the Dead Sea Scriptures. Qumran is a modern Arabic name. The ancient name used for the community was “Damascus” but any possible association with Damascus and possible connection to Paul’s conversion and scriptural education is avoided - almost to deliberate and malicious misrepresentation of history and what was “common” scripture in the era and community familiar to Jesus and the Apostles.

3. The concept and doctrine of “canon” is a pagan doctrine and not a “Biblical” (meaning the current Old and New Testament)

I have been informed that LDS (or Mormons like me) are prohibited from posting in the “Christian” only sections of the forum -- because we are not Trinitarian (Niacin Creed) Christians. Since a post of mine was therefore removed from that section - I post it here; where we Mormons can have voice:

It does appear to me that the concept of canon is not scriptural but comes to us from pagan influences. Not that all pagan influences are bad but the concept of canon is not Biblical.

There are a few things that cause me to ponder. For example there is the only autograph text (claimed to be autograph text) kept by the Nestorian Christians of Asia that was supposedly written by Jesus Christ. It is carbon dated and proven to have originated in the Jerusalem area at the time of Christ. Then there is the Book of Enoch that is quoted in Jude as prophetic scripture. But then we do not have a complete text. The texts we have that predate Jesus are incomplete and fragmented. The scary thing about the Book of Enoch is the broad changes that were introduced by the first century following Christ.

Son of Zadok

 

[Soulgazer]

It does appear to me that the concept of canon is not scriptural but comes to us from pagan influences. Not that all pagan influences are bad but the concept of canon is not Biblical.

There are a few things that cause me to ponder. For example there is the only autograph text (claimed to be autograph text) kept by the Nestorian Christians of Asia that was supposedly written by Jesus Christ. It is carbon dated and proven to have originated in the Jerusalem area at the time of Christ. Then there is the Book of Enoch that is quoted in Jude as prophetic scripture. But then we do not have a complete text. The texts we have that predate Jesus are incomplete and fragmented. The scary thing about the Book of Enoch is the broad changes that were introduced by the first century following Christ.​

Not really....bear me out. "Canon" represents a core collection of scripture. The scriptures of the "Bible" (there are several bibles) are an anthology of christian scriptures chosen by catholics to promote catholicism. However, even though they were chosen because they best represent catholicism, the original intent was never that other scriptures would be excluded. One may go through any of the letters of the patriarchs and find scriptures of all variety quoted and commented upon. The Canon was collected under a doctrine of inclusion...meaning that no matter where you went in the Christian realms, there would be a set of familiar scriptures being taught from in conjunction with scripture that were unique to the area or faith.
In the year 1540, at the Council of Trent, in response to protestantism, the doctrine of inclusion was changed to a doctrine of exclusion. Unless one is catholic, or catholic protestant, this doctrine does not apply to you.
It is a superstitious belief purposely introduced into Christianity to help the "church" maintain political control over believers. Nothing more.

​

 

[Enow]

"Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees" Refers to the substitution of law over love, justice over mercy, scripture over reason.

Refers to the doctrines of the Pharisees and of the Sadduccess of which I can see as substituting law over love: but not justice over mercy nor scripture over reason.

It would substitute sacrifice over mercy of which God would prefer mercy and not sacrifice.

It would substitute reason over scripture for which the RCC strives on.

The Nicene creed bound everyone together in one faith, catholicism, one scripture, catholic, ......The establishment of Christendom as part of imperial rule bound church and state into one single entity. Thus questions of faith that fell outside of guidelines could quickly be bumped up to treason ......

Or to heresey.

You are adding to my case as to why Protestant churches and even this forum should not be identified by this Nicene creed with the RCC.

 

[Enow]

The Nicene Creed is a political document. It marks the time when the persecuted church became the persecuting church.

It also marks the time of the beginning of ecumenicalism which is the fruit of the false prophets as coming into the churches.

The doctrine of the Nicoliatanes is estblishing a heirarchy or a ruling body over the churches.

Jesus is the Head of every church.

 

[Soulgazer]

Refers to the doctrines of the Pharisees and of the Sadduccess of which I can see as substituting law over love: but not justice over mercy nor scripture over reason.

It would substitute sacrifice over mercy of which God would prefer mercy and not sacrifice.

It would substitute reason over scripture for which the RCC strives on.



Or to heresey.

You are adding to my case as to why Protestant churches and even this forum should not be identified by this Nicene creed with the RCC.

Jesus pointed out how they used scripture over reason. "What goes into the mouth, etc",

Protestant is Protestant Catholic. It's still Catholic. "Heresy" is always in the eye of the particular church or state proclaiming it. Just feel fortunate that there is now separation between church and state.

 

[Enow]

Humbug!
Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament. The Encyclopedia of Religion The New Encyclopedia Britannica

The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the trinity was apparently unknown; . . . they say nothing about it. Yale University professor E. Washburn Hopkins "Origin and Evolution of Religion"

Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word 'Trinity' appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord. Historian Arthur Weigall "The Paganism in Our Christianity"

That is because the early church never lost focus of Whom the Gospel is all about and Whose name is above every other name.

Even though the Holy Spirit is God: He dwells within us to speak of the Son in seeking the glory of the Son and thereby the Father's as well.

1 Corinthians 2: 2For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.


The name of the Trinity is not the name to be glorifying God by.

That is how a little leaven leavens into a whole lump when the RCC uses reason that the Holy Spirit is God so then He should be worshipped as well with the Father and the Son, but scriptures declares that the only way to honour and glorify God the Father was by honouring and glorifying the Son: that is the standard of judgment that believers as well as churches should take heed: John 5:22-23 & John 13:31-32 & John 17:1-5

Thus the RCC has become an errant church by using reason over scriptures: truly of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadduccees.

 

[Enow]

Jesus pointed out how they used scripture over reason. "What goes into the mouth, etc",

Matthew 15: 7Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 10And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: 11Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.... 18But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20These are the things which defile a man:

Scriptures is not listed as defiling a man.

False witness is listed as defiling a man.

And since the RCC is a false witness: then all those within are what?

Do note how the RCC is ignoring scripture in being ecumenicalistic with other religions of the world.

2 Corinthians 6:14Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. 18And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

There is a call for the RCC to seperate: and yet they are not doing that.

Then Protestant that are in disagreements with the RCC over catholicism: should avoid all ecumenicalistic ties with the RCC: and that includes not utilizing the Nicene creed in order to heed the call for seperation..

Protestant is Protestant Catholic. It's still Catholic. "Heresy" is always in the eye of the particular church or state proclaiming it. Just feel fortunate that there is now separation between church and state.

Apostasy is departing from the faith. This action is eyed and judged by the Lord Jesus Christ. That is why every believer that has His seal are called to depart from inqiuity so that they can become that vessel unto honour in God's House which is the eternal glory that comes with our salvation which is in Jesus Christ. 2 Timothy 2:10-26

Otherwise: they shall be reproved, chastened, and scourged to become that vessel unto dishonour so that they may be partakers of His holiness in God's House: which will mean missing out on the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.

1 Corinthians 3:10-23 & Hebrews 12:1-29

 

[Soulgazer]

That is because the early church never lost focus of Whom the Gospel is all about and Whose name is above every other name.

Even though the Holy Spirit is God: He dwells within us to speak of the Son in seeking the glory of the Son and thereby the Father's as well.

1 Corinthians 2: 2For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.


The name of the Trinity is not the name to be glorifying God by.

That is how a little leaven leavens into a whole lump when the RCC uses reason that the Holy Spirit is God so then He should be worshipped as well with the Father and the Son, but scriptures declares that the only way to honour and glorify God the Father was by honouring and glorifying the Son: that is the standard of judgment that believers as well as churches should take heed: John 5:22-23 & John 13:31-32 & John 17:1-5

Thus the RCC has become an errant church by using reason over scriptures: truly of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadduccees.

The Pharisee; They argued scripture all day every day; they were lawyers. Scripture meant more to them than God--- Scripture became their idol.


Scripture was and is the leaven of the Pharisee; Think...if there is a religious nut out there condemning somebody, he usually has a couple of pages backing it up. Same thing; religious lawyering.

 

[Enow]

The Pharisee; They argued scripture all day every day; they were lawyers. Scripture meant more to them than God--- Scripture became their idol.

Scripture was and is the leaven of the Pharisee; Think...if there is a religious nut out there condemning somebody, he usually has a couple of pages backing it up. Same thing; religious lawyering.

You had used Matthew 15th chapter for the reference of what defiles a man.

Now look at how Jesus referred to the scriptures and how Jesus declared that they, The Pharisees and the Sadduccees, were using reason to disregard the scriptures.

Matthew 15: 1Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, 2Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. 3But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 4For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 5But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 6And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

The commandment of God is scripture as it is traditions created by religious zealots that undermine the spirit of the scriptures to make them of no effect.

Thus by the works of catholicism: the traditions of men: they have made the cross of Christ to no effect, voiding the faith in Him as sufficient for salvation, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Catholicism is nothing more but lawyering to add works necessary for salvation as if faith in Jesus Christ is not enough to be saved. In the process of catholicism: even then, there is no real assurance as it is on you to save yourself by persevering to do charity.

The first step of this lawyering is to take the believers eyes off of Christ Jesus their Saviour and look to the RCC for salvation.

"The Second Vatican Council's Decree on Ecumenism explains: 'For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained.'" Pg. 215, #816

"...all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation..." Pg. 224, #846

Then comes the lawyering for the sacraments as the means of salvation.

"There are seven sacraments in the Church: Baptism, Confirmation or Chrismation, Eucharist, Penance, Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders, and Matrimony." Pg. 289, #1113


"The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation." Pg. 292, #1129

And as if that is not enough to enslave the believer to the works in the RCC for salvation:

"Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved." Pg. 222, #837

Now that is lawyering to make void the scriptures by traditions and to cause the cross of Christ to have no effect. This is causing many believers to void their faith in Jesus Christ as their Saviour, dividing their hope in Him with works that offers no assurance whatsoever, thus labouring in unbelief.

Hebrews 4: 1Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. 2For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. 3For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.... 9There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. 10For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. 11Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

Colossians 1: 20And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. 21And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: 23If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

That is the importance of keeping the faith which is the good fight.


Jesus described all those that come before Him as thieves and robbers and here is the RCC presenting themselves as a stepping stone to Jesus Christ as the means for salvation and thus stealing the joy of their salvation by robbing their faith in Him as being able to save them all by Himself.

John 10: 1Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

John 10:7Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep. 8All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them. 9I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. 10The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. 11I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

1 Corinthians 1:18For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

It is by the preaching of the cross is how anyone is going to believe in Jesus Christ and be saved. That is why He is the Good News to man.

Jesus never gave an invitation to anyone nor anyplace else to obtain salvation but to Himself, and that is why it is important to heed His words, the scriptures, over the reasons of those that would make it void as the Pharisees and the Sadduccees had done in Jesus' days.

Indeed, Jesus described their actions as mirroring the RCC.

Matthew 23:13But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

 

[Soulgazer]

Catholicism is catholicism. You quote John 10:7 but without Enoch, you do not have a clue who he was referring to.You're going to repeat the same old catholic apologetic that He was talking about other Messiah's.

 

[Son of Zadok]

[/size][/color][/i]Not really....bear me out. "Canon" represents a core collection of scripture. The scriptures of the "Bible" (there are several bibles) are an anthology of christian scriptures chosen by catholics to promote catholicism. However, even though they were chosen because they best represent catholicism, the original intent was never that other scriptures would be excluded. One may go through any of the letters of the patriarchs and find scriptures of all variety quoted and commented upon. The Canon was collected under a doctrine of inclusion...meaning that no matter where you went in the Christian realms, there would be a set of familiar scriptures being taught from in conjunction with scripture that were unique to the area or faith.
In the year 1540, at the Council of Trent, in response to protestantism, the doctrine of inclusion was changed to a doctrine of exclusion. Unless one is catholic, or catholic protestant, this doctrine does not apply to you.
It is a superstitious belief purposely introduced into Christianity to help the "church" maintain political control over believers. Nothing more.

[/indent]

The concept of canon or as you say a core collection of scriptures is contrary to reality. One of the main differences between pagan and the early Christians (Jews) is the manner in which scriptures were used. From the Dead Sea Scrolls there existed "core" scriptures. The problem is that during this era the scriptures were all from what is called the Old Testament era. But all scriptures were contained in multiple versions of the same books. The influence of paganism was the following of the doctrine you are pointing to. That any one particular book of scripture should have only one version.

In the ancient world there were many versions. The Bible as it is defined today portends one singular version of each and all books contained in the Bible. By going to a single version of scripture books man has violated the commandment of modifying scriptures as modern Christianity has used a smorgasbord aproach to defining what "experts" (in essence man) wants and excluding what G-d had defined as scriptures.

Son of Zadok

 

[Soulgazer]

The concept of canon or as you say a core collection of scriptures is contrary to reality. One of the main differences between pagan and the early Christians (Jews) is the manner in which scriptures were used. From the Dead Sea Scrolls there existed "core" scriptures. The problem is that during this era the scriptures were all from what is called the Old Testament era. But all scriptures were contained in multiple versions of the same books. The influence of paganism was the following of the doctrine you are pointing to. That any one particular book of scripture should have only one version.

In the ancient world there were many versions. The Bible as it is defined today portends one singular version of each and all books contained in the Bible. By going to a single version of scripture books man has violated the commandment of modifying scriptures as modern Christianity has used a smorgasbord aproach to defining what "experts" (in essence man) wants and excluding what G-d had defined as scriptures.

Son of Zadok

"Pagans" is just a term to describe "Hillbillies". Himmler latched on to the term in WWII to try to give rise to a new religion inside the Third Reich. There never was a religion that went by the name of "Pagan". "Pagans" were uneducated religious folk, including Christians as well as the Roman religions, who basked in superstition and ignorance. It was a derogatory term.

I posted an ancient sermon that gives the proper use of the Written Torah in conjunction with the Oral Torah, and also incorporates many Christian Scriptures. Some will be startled to note that "Odyssey" was considered to be Holy Writ.

I have studied under three doctorates, and I'm still learning----nobody could possibly hope to hold it all. But I will tell you right now that I have met very few people on this board who know what scripture is, what it's use was, or how to read it. That is forgivable. What is not forgivable is the unwillingness to learn. I don't want to sound arrogant. I am NOT arrogant. But I am appalled at the amount of disinformation that has been taught in the protestant churches. It's like walking into a school where all the students seriously believe that there are only thirteen letters to the alphabet, or worse, seriously believing that reciting the thirteen letters backward will break the teachers back.

I am going to stop now before I say something unforgivable.

The first canon of scripture was held by the Marcionites. There is absolutely no evidence based on critical scolarship that the Jewish religion had a canon, other than the books of the Law. The catholics developed a canon in response to the Marcionites. The Marcionites were not Pagan. They were extremely well educated and were by far the largest section of Christianity, and if you will excuse the bad pun, had the lions share of Martyrs.

There were two groups of Christians before the Nicene creed. Non Torah believing Christians, which made up the larger share, and Torah believing Christians that made up the smaller half. The difference between them was summarized in the second century in the Marcioite scripture called "Antithesis" ANTITHESIS

"Marcionites" in General The Marcionite Research Library


Johnites came up with the Gospel of John, and it is Heavily dependent on this Book: Books of Enoch


An excellent recourse for studying the actual history instead of fairy tales, or the rantings of the Atheist religion is Early Christian Writings: New Testament, Apocrypha, Gnostics, Church Fathers

The jewish site is now defunct, but it was even more amazing.

A couple professors you might want to check out:

April D. DeConick

Robert H. Eisenman

Study hard and have fun.