The Nicene Creed.

[Watchman on the Wall]

Senecharnix, I have always had the idea that Paul contradicts Jesus at the back of my mind, but since my Christian experience has usually been influenced by those who believe the Bible is absolutely 100% inerrant and therefore cannot contradict itself, I have tried not to consider that possibility too seriously. I prefer reading the King James Version, which I believe to be infallible, and I attend a church where the KJV is viewed as being the only "true" Bible, but obviously the spurious 1 John 5:7 in the KJV and also the warning at the end of Revelation debunk the idea that the Bible cannot be tampered with. I asked my dad about this issue of Paul seeming to contradict Jesus, and he seems to believe that Paul only seems to contradict Jesus, and that is because Jerome and other church fathers tampered with the early manuscripts to suit the emerging doctrines that were to become what we know today to be orthodox.

I want to believe that in the Bible's present state, every word as it has been translated is still "God-breathed", but too many issues have been raised. It is obvious that there has been tampering and corruption. Do I still trust the Bible as infallible for the purposes of salvation and for revealing God's will toward man? Absolutely yes. Do I believe that nothing in the original scriptures as they were inspired contradicts itself? Absolutely yes. However, in their present state, as corrupted by man, I will not affirm the total, absolute inerrancy of the Bible.

 

[Hentenza]

One liners are not a response and do not address the scripture given but are very weak attempts to side step the issue.

Jn 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.​

I fully agree with that verse and it changes not a thing. Do you think that you could address my earlier post to you instead of c&p from other websites? I don't debate websites.

 

[Senecharnix]

Hentenza, if you knew God and the Son as well as you think you do, one of the first things that you would notice about them is that neither of them are gargantuan egos demanding worship. God relates to His children in a fatherly way. The Son, in turn, relates to them in the way of a big brother. Worship does not please either of them. They are only pleased by those who claim to be theirs acting right and cultivating proper attitudes...Did the disciples worship Yeshua? No! They were his little brothers and honored him by doing their best to emulate his example.

 

[boldlion]

For me, it's not what it says, it's what it doesn't say.
It's used as a "proof" or indicator that you are a member of the church /
an "orthodox" christian, yet if we look at Acts where people became Christians
by receiving the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:8-9, 15-16, John 3:6-8), it is never
quoted and no-one is expected to accept it before being considered a Christian.
It has replaced God's independent witness of speaking in tongues (and the
command to be baptised as a believer).

I agree.

The Nicene Creed is a compromise of the truth. Throughout history, the majority were often wrong ! The Nicene Creed completely ignores the sign of speaking in tongues, which was so prevalent in the early church when one receives the Holy Spirit. If one cannot speak in tongues, they have not received the Holy Spirit, and they don't belong to Christ. !

 

[Senecharnix]

Watchman on the Wall, your dad is mostly correct. I more or less agree with you about the Scriptures. My biggest point of difference revolves around this: What actually belongs in the Bible and what does not? Keep in mind that the Catholic Church hosted council after council to decide what to include and what to exclude. Personally, I do not and will not trust the "good will and wisdom" of Catholic theologians, especially those who lived way back when. Then one comes to the juncture that demands the question: Who actually wrote what when and why? Were they truly inspired? Or did they pursue an agenda?...

Even so, the basics of what the Scriptures are about are true. And as you imply, one can discern the way to salvation through them....

By the way, Revelation begins and ends with false prophecies--and it most certainly was not written by the Apostle John. But, as one of the wise men of this site pointed out, Revelation is essentially a distillation of Jewish prophecy. That is not how he put it. But that's my spin on it. And so, I assert that it contains much truth, but....

Anyway, either Paul or misguided folks using his writings to hijack the early Church and open the gate that allowed paganism to pollute her. Perhaps not so ironically, Paul did the most to kill The Way in its infancy only to murder it in its youth by hijacking it and opening that proverbial gate. The Way soon died. The Church then began wandering off course into what quickly became Catholicism....

By the way, the true Apostles disliked and distrusted Paul and vehemently opposed most of what he stood for. Since his side of things won the war, the early Church became less and less Jewish and more and more gentile and amalgamated with paganism. Most folks do not know this, but the idea of a Trinity originated within pagan religions long before Yeshua was born. Most of them celebrated Trinities. And so, it is no great wonder that the gentile-led Church adopted that perversion. After all, the gentiles in question were pagans living in a pagan world. Even after converting, they still thought much more like pagans than like Jews....

 

[Truth_Warrior]

I fully agree with that verse and it changes not a thing. Do you think that you could address my earlier post to you instead of c&p from other websites? I don't debate websites.

Its strange how those who adhere to creeds written by men see no problem with contradictions and dismiss them with saying"I see no problem" or something similar when in fact propping up Jesus a mortal man up as God is probably the greatest error ever intstituted into the Church.

I just posted these verses in another thread..........explain them for me.

Romans 1:22 and 23
(22) Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
(23) and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

God cannot die. Scripture tells us that God is “immortal,” which means “not subject to death,” but Jesus died.


Scripture says that God is spirit; yet even after his resurrection Jesus said of himself that he was not a spirit, but flesh and bone.

John 4:23
God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.

Luke 24:39 (KJV)
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.


God makes clear who Jesus is and also who God is and what he is...........its man who changed God into man.

 

[gort]

I agree.

The Nicene Creed is a compromise of the truth. Throughout history, the majority were often wrong ! The Nicene Creed completely ignores the sign of speaking in tongues, which was so prevalent in the early church when one receives the Holy Spirit. If one cannot speak in tongues, they have not received the Holy Spirit, and they don't belong to Christ. !

Well then, let's toss out salvation by Grace through faith and replace it with salvation through speaking tongues.

 

[JRSut1000]

I seem to get the impression then that in order to be a Christian or 'saved', one has to accept the Nicene Creed in it's entirety?

 

[JRSut1000]

Now let's not get into the tongues debate! That could take a loooooooong time!

 

[Senecharnix]

JRSut1000, I do not believe accepting the Nicene Creed leads to anything good. It is codified blasphemy.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I wholly affirm the Nicene Creed. And... I am vehemently NON-Trinitarian, especially Filioque.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

JRSut1000, I do not believe accepting the Nicene Creed leads to anything good. It is codified blasphemy.

Do you hold that the Son was pre-Incarnate as a separate Transcendent person/being/entity?

(I'm searching through your posts to get an idea what your views are.)

 

[Lion King]

I seem to get the impression then that in order to be a Christian or 'saved', one has to accept the Nicene Creed in it's entirety?

Yeah, unfortunately it seems to be rampant on this forum- people putting the traditions of men on the same level as the word of God. The Nicene creed does not and has never made anyone a Christian, you could believe in the Nicene creed in it's entirety, and still not be a Christian. People were Christians long before the Nicene creed was formulated, and will continue to be long after it disappears.

Today, you have around countless number of churches who all affirm to the creed, but have so much diverse beliefs. Do all these churches belong to the LORD? Is God the author of confusion?

 

[Senecharnix]

PneumaPsucheSoma, I believe the Son was the Son eons before he walked on this world as Yeshua. Furthermore, I believe he has served the same function--that of the supreme example, mediator, and sacrifice--on countless worlds in this and other time/space continuums. [During a vision, he came to me as he appeared (or perhaps, appears) on another world. His appearance astounded me. But his persona is the same that I have become accustomed to.] Even so, I also believe he is not nearly the only child of God in the Heavenly realms. But he is the child that God honors above all others because he pleases Him more than do any of the others....

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

PneumaPsucheSoma, I believe the Son was the Son eons before he walked on this world as Yeshua. Furthermore, I believe he has served the same function--that of the supreme example, mediator, and sacrifice--on countless worlds in this and other time/space continuums. [During a vision, he came to me as he appeared (or perhaps, appears) on another world. His appearance astounded me. But his persona is the same that I have become accustomed to.] Even so, I also believe he is not nearly the only child of God in the Heavenly realms. But he is the child that God honors above all others because he pleases Him more than do any of the others....

Specifically, who/what is the Son? Created? Uncreated? A god? The offspring of God? Etc.?

What was His origin, if any? Same for cosmology, in general?

Who are the other children of God? Other ascended created natural persons from many worlds?

 

[interpreter]

So you are a full-preterist. What was the sign of the Son of Man that appeared in the clouds?

I'm not even a partial preterist. I'm an historicist.
The sign of the Son of Man that appeared in the sky on Oct. 28th, 312 AD was a cross (or X) formed by an unusual allignment of the planets.

 

[Senecharnix]

I believe the Son was an offspring of God. And that his brothers and sisters were also off springs of God. No doubt, countless folks from other worlds became children of God just as many of us have....

Anyway, I would love to discuss this further. Believe it or not, however, I must get to bed. I work the late shift as it were and probably will not be able to get back on the Internet for a couple of days. One last morsel for thought, though. God created us in His image, or as Genesis implies, in the image of Heaven's inhabitants. The resemblance is much more than skin deep. We are like those folks on the inside as well as on the outside...Darn, I forgot where I was going with this. Me is too tired to properly maneuver....Consequently, they are like us on the inside as well as on the outside. What sort of implications does that make? Of course, they are unlike us in many ways, being much more highly evolved than we are. But they eat and they drink and do some of the other things that we mortals do. What do you suppose some of those things are?
Of course, it is entirely too possible that they live in various levels simultaneously. But they do have physical bodies. One of the things that I have learned through my mystical experiences is that, in both Heaven and Hell, one has mass and weight and one's skin is cohesive. You see, we perceive them as spirits whereas, from their perspective, we are no more substantial than are spirits. That is because the quantum matrix of their reality is entirely different than is that of ours. Another large difference between them and us is that their spirits are immensely powerful compared to ours. Another is that they can use their intellects to do travel and move stuff, and do other things that we perceive as miraculous actions. My goodness, they are supernatural!...

 

[Senecharnix]

I believe the Son was an offspring of God. And that his brothers and sisters were also off springs of God. No doubt, countless folks from other worlds became children of God just as many of us have....

Anyway, I would love to discuss this further. Believe it or not, however, I must get to bed. I work the late shift as it were and probably will not be able to get back on the Internet for a couple of days. One last morsel for thought, though. God created us in His image, or as Genesis implies, in the image of Heaven's inhabitants. The resemblance is much more than skin deep. We are like those folks on the inside as well as on the outside...Darn, I forgot where I was going with this. Me is too tired to properly maneuver....Consequently, they are like us on the inside as well as on the outside. What sort of implications does that make? Of course, they are unlike us in many ways, being much more highly evolved than we are. But they eat and they drink and do some of the other things that we mortals do. What do you suppose some of those things are?
Of course, it is entirely too possible that they live in various levels simultaneously. But they do have physical bodies. One of the things that I have learned through my mystical experiences is that, in both Heaven and Hell, one has mass and weight and one's skin is cohesive. You see, we perceive them as spirits whereas, from their perspective, we are no more substantial than are spirits. That is because the quantum matrix of their reality is entirely different than is that of ours. Another large difference between them and us is that their spirits are immensely powerful compared to ours. Another is that they can use their intellects to do travel and move stuff, and do other things that we perceive as miraculous actions. My goodness, they are supernatural!...

 

[A New Dawn]

I wholly affirm the Nicene Creed. And... I am vehemently NON-Trinitarian, especially Filioque.

Which, of course, is totally non-plausible, since the Nicene Creed defines Trinitarianism.

You could believe in the Nicene Creed as you reinterpret it, though.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Which, of course, is totally non-plausible, since the Nicene Creed defines Trinitarianism.

You could believe in the Nicene Creed as you reinterpret it, though.

Nope. Just because everyone has been indoctrinated by Trinity Ideology as Theology and can't comprehend such a thing, nonetheless it is true.

Though I disaffirm the later anonymous-but-attributed Athanasian Creed with its Filioque and "persons" terminology, I DO wholly affirm the Nicene while being adamantly, staunchly, vehemently, arduously, assuredly ANTI-Trinitarian.