You Confirm The Nicene Creed By the Scripture

[Tellastory]

From another thread;

Anything that disagrees with this is heresy:

We believe in (Romans 10:8-10; 1John 4:15)
ONE God, (Deuteronomy 6:4, Ephesians 4:6)
the Father (Matthew 6:9)
Almighty, (Exodus 6:3)
Maker of Heaven and Earth, (Genesis 1:1)
and of all things visible and invisible. (Colossians 1:15-16)

And in ONE Lord Jesus Christ, (Acts 11:17)
the Son of God, (Mathew 14:33; 16:16)
the Only-Begotten, (John 1:18; 3:16)
Begotten of the Father before all ages. (John 1:2)
Light of Light; (Psalm 27:1; John 8:12; Matthew 17:2,5)
True God of True God; (John 17:1-5)
Begotten, not made; (John 1:18)
of one essence with the Father (John 10:30)
by whom all things were made; (Hebrews 1:1-2)
Who for us men and for our salvation (1Timothy 2:4-5)
came down from Heaven, (John 6:33,35)
and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, (Luke 1:35)
and became man. (John 1:14)
And was crucified for us (Mark 15:25; 1Cointhians 15:3)
under Pontius Pilate, (John 19:6)
and suffered, (Mark 8:31)
and was buried. (Luke 23:53; 1Corinthians 15:4)
And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures. (Luke 24:1 1Corinthians 15:4)
And ascended into Heaven, (Luke 24:51; Acts 1:10)
and sits at the right hand of the Father. (Mark 16:19; Acts 7:55)
And He shall come again with glory (Matthew 24:27)
to judge the living and the dead; (Acts 10:42; 2Timothy 4:1)
whose Kingdom shall have no end. (2 Peter 1:11)

And in the Holy Spirit, (John 14:26)
the Lord, (Acts 5:3-4)v
the Giver of Life, (Genesis 1:2)
Who proceeds from the Father; (John 15:26)
Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; (Matthew 3:16-17)
Who spoke through the prophets. (1 Samuel 19:20 ; Ezekiel 11:5,13)

In one, (Matthew 16: 18)
holy, (1 Peter 2:5,9)
catholic, (Mark 16:15)
and apostolic Church. (Acts 2:42; Ephesians 2:19-22)

I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. (Ephesians 4:5; Acts 2:38)
I look for the resurrection of the dead, (John 11:24; 1Corinthians 15:12-49; Hebrews 6:2; Revelation 20:5)
and the life of the world to come. (Mark 10:29-30)
AMEN. (Psalm 106:48)

This is not a debate. I am merely asking those that believe in the Nicene creed to actually look up each scriptural reference given for each line supposedly to validate that line for what it is saying by the actual meaning of that scriptural reference.

I will give one proof why you should check each scriptural reference for each line.

Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; (Matthew 3:16-17)

Matthew 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Nowhere does it validate nor teach the practise of worshipping the Holy Spirit with the Father & the Son. If you can find a better reference teaching that, be my guest.

There are other references that do not apply; BUT most of them do apply to the actual meaning of that line in the Nicene creed.

I am asking all believers to make sure you check those scriptural references before you stand behind it as saying the whole creed is supported by scripture.

As it is, I reiterate that the Holy Spirit in us is sent to NOT speak of Himself ( John 16:14 ), but of the Son ( John 15:26 ) in glorifying Him ( John 16:14 ) as all believers led by the Holy Spirit will be sharing in like testimony ( John 15:27), even in worship ( John 5:22-23 & Philippians 2:5-13 with emphasis on 12 ) & especially in worship so that our singular testimony along with the Holy Spirit's testimony makes the worship of the Son of God as true in according to :

John 8:17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.

So when you as an individual believer worship the Holy Spirit with the Father & the Son, the Holy Spirit in you is not sharing that in your testimony in worship; therefore in according to His words, that kind of worship is apostasy as standing apart from the truth in His words so narrow the way back to the straight gate by only honouring the Son in worship & thereby honouring the Father in His will.

Unfortunately, there are alot of saved believers with the Holy Spirit that are following unscriptural church traditions without actually confirming the creed by the scripture as kept in the King James Bible by those that loved Him & His words.

But hey, I am sure the framers of the Nicene creed did not supply those scriptural references but someone down the line did. If you can improve on that list by exposing the wrong scriptural reference and then showing the right one from the King James Bible that actually teach what that line says in the Nicene creed, you would be doing God's service, either way for yourself & for others.

John 15:1
I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

That's right. Even fruit bearing disciples can be purged to bear more fruit still.

May God cause the increase in keeping our eyes on the Bridegroom in worship.

 

[Wgw]

I don't need to confirm the Niceno-Constantinoplean Creed in Scripture because the Holy, Righteous and God-bearing Fathers of the First Council of Constantinople, like St. Gregory the Theologian, already did that for me in the year 381.

 

[timewerx]

This is not a debate. I am merely asking those that believe in the Nicene creed to actually look up each scriptural reference given for each line supposedly to validate that line for what it is saying by the actual meaning of that scriptural reference.

I will give one proof why you should check each scriptural reference for each line.

Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; (Matthew 3:16-17)

Matthew 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Nice thread! but probably wrong section to ask??

A lot of people hanging out here in Controversial Theology doesn't share the Nicene Creed beliefs and obviously gonna be biased against it.

I for one does not acknowledge the writings of Apostle Paul as trustworthy teachings... Many of them are quite favorable to the agenda of the ruling elites (which are often evil people). Some of Paul's teachings are even unfavorable to the weakest of society which undermines the teachings of Christ regarding the weakest, the least.

Since a significant portion of the Nicene Creed is from verses written by Apostle Paul, I certainly don't go by the creed.

 

[Wgw]

Nice thread! but probably wrong section to ask??

A lot of people hanging out here in Controversial Theology doesn't share the Nicene Creed beliefs and obviously gonna be biased against it.

I for one does not acknowledge the writings of Apostle Paul as trustworthy teachings... Many of them are quite favorable to the agenda of the ruling elites (which are often evil people). Some of Paul's teachings are even unfavorable to the weakest of society which undermines the teachings of Christ regarding the weakest, the least.

Since a significant portion of the Nicene Creed is from verses written by Apostle Paul, I certainly don't go by the creed.

You do realize that the Pauline Epistles predate the Gospels according to almost all scholarship? And all of the people who settled on the four canonical gospels as being canonical also accepted the Pauline epistles. Those who rejected St. Paul like the Enionites had their own Gospels, like the lost Gospel of the Hebrews (fragments of which survive in Orthodox polemics).

In fact, Church tradition holds that St. Luke was a disciple of Paul and based his Gospel on the narrative of Paul concerning the life of our Lord. This makes sense in light of the content of Acts. Also St. Mark, whose Gospel was allegedly based on the account of St. Peter, is referenced by name in some of St. Paul's epistles. So at least two of the four Gospels have Pauline influence. But then if one looks at the epistles of Ss. Peter and John, these seem highly theologically compatible with Paul. The only major discord seems to be between St. Paul and St. James the Just; if there was a quarrel, the Orthodox cited with St. James in rejecting sola fide, but we do not believe St. Paul intended to teach this.

The Marcionists only accepted some of the Pauline epistles and a truncated version of Luke.

Paul is just too interwoven into the four canonical Gospels to escape while holding onto the other books of the Athansian Canon. To have a non-Pauline Christianity one must resort entirely to the use of non-canonical scriptures like those of the Gnostics. But some Gnostics liked Paul, some were in different to him, some disliked him. However, no Gnostic gospel has been shown authoritatively to predate the Canonicals. The Jesus Seminar thought the Gospel of Thomas was older than the canonical four, but most scholars date it to the third century, which is consistent with a report by a contemporary bishop warning his flock not to read it, and attributing it to Thomas the disciple of Mani, the Gnostic prophet who created a large religion based on a syncretism of Christian, Gnostic, Zoroastrian and Indian influences, which St. Augustine practiced before converting to Christianity.

 

[timewerx]

You do realize that the Pauline Epistles predate the Gospels according to almost all scholarship?

True but not because it came before, it is more authoritative....

Because the Ancient Egyptian Myths mirror Christian myths up to the New Testament, do we hold Ancient Egyptian religion more authoritative? Of course not.

And not because you wrong something later, you are persuaded to copy or be influenced by earlier works.

Because there's a significant difference especially against the Gospel of John. Similarities exist with the Synoptic Gospels - Matthew, Mark, and Luke because they were more closely connected to Paul.

But overall, significant differences between the Gospels and the teachings of Paul..


Don't be surprised it happened because Apostle Paul himself said that he treats different people/cultures differently and it's not surprising if he taught a different theology between cultures.


Read this:

1 Corinthians 9:20-22
To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; 21to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law.22To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some


It's really funny to be in defense that contradictions in teachings in the Bible when concerning Apostle Paul does not exist because Paul himself said it, he will adapt.

 

[Wgw]

The problem is you're lookimg at this through the aprotestant lens of sola Scriptura, reading different Biblical texts in opposition to each other and drawing your own conclusions. Which I daresay is a presumptuous way to do theology. Why would St. Athanasius include the Pauline Epistles and the Gospel of John in his Biblical canon if they contradicted each other? The answer is that of course, they do not.

What is more most of the social teachings of Jesus you say Paul deprecated are in the Synoptics, which you admit are more closely connected with Paul. Which is logical because Paul casually mentions his relationships with Ss. Mark and Luke, the two most gifted scribes of the early church according to tradition, in his epistles. St. John is much more otherworldly,,which prompted a liberal Christian to attack his Gospel and trumpet "the tragic Gospel" of St. Mark (with the Shorter Ending, of course), as the social gospel par excellence, dealing chiefly with the marginalized here and now. To which I say yawn. Not because I don't care about the poor and marginalized; at present to my chagrin I fall into that category, but rather because there is so much more of a pressing concern of life everlasting.

I maintain if one really wants to throw out poor St. Paul, one can't do it coherently in the framework of the Canonical Gospels. One must follow Elaine Pagels, Marcis Borg and Dominic Crossan into the moth eaten realm of the Gnostic gospels, which have emerged from the sands of Egypt like some accursed mummified pharaoh. That said, they make fun reading.

Speaking of which, your last quote of St. Paul actually describes how the Orthodox and Catholic Churches historically did evangelism to different peoples. We call it acculturation. That's why the Oriental Orthodox boast five distinct liturgical rites,,why Russian Orthodox four part harmony is distinct from Byzantine Chant, and why Roman Catholic missionaries have sought where possible to "baptize" indigenous customs.

 

[A New World]

The problem is you're lookimg at this through the aprotestant lens of sola Scriptura, reading different Biblical texts in opposition to each other and drawing your own conclusions. Which I daresay is a presumptuous way to do theology. Why would St. Athanasius include the Pauline Epistles and the Gospel of John in his Biblical canon if they contradicted each other? The answer is that of course, they do not.

What is more most of the social teachings of Jesus you say Paul deprecated are in the Synoptics, which you admit are more closely connected with Paul. Which is logical because Paul casually mentions his relationships with Ss. Mark and Luke, the two most gifted scribes of the early church according to tradition, in his epistles. St. John is much more otherworldly,,which prompted a liberal Christian to attack his Gospel and trumpet "the tragic Gospel" of St. Mark (with the Shorter Ending, of course), as the social gospel par excellence, dealing chiefly with the marginalized here and now. To which I say yawn. Not because I don't care about the poor and marginalized; at present to my chagrin I fall into that category, but rather because there is so much more of a pressing concern of life everlasting.

I maintain if one really wants to throw out poor St. Paul, one can't do it coherently in the framework of the Canonical Gospels. One must follow Elaine Pagels, Marcis Borg and Dominic Crossan into the moth eaten realm of the Gnostic gospels, which have emerged from the sands of Egypt like some accursed mummified pharaoh. That said, they make fun reading.

Speaking of which, your last quote of St. Paul actually describes how the Orthodox and Catholic Churches historically did evangelism to different peoples. We call it acculturation. That's why the Oriental Orthodox boast five distinct liturgical rites,,why Russian Orthodox four part harmony is distinct from Byzantine Chant, and why Roman Catholic missionaries have sought where possible to "baptize" indigenous customs.

I, like most Christians, accept the works of Paul as authentic and authoritative. Thank you for the information here that I find to be both interesting and confirming regarding the reliability of Paul's inspired epistles.

 

[Wgw]

Glad to be of help.

 

[fatherjimparker]

From another thread;



This is not a debate. I am merely asking those that believe in the Nicene creed to actually look up each scriptural reference given for each line supposedly to validate that line for what it is saying by the actual meaning of that scriptural reference.

I will give one proof why you should check each scriptural reference for each line.

Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; (Matthew 3:16-17)

Matthew 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Nowhere does it validate nor teach the practise of worshipping the Holy Spirit with the Father & the Son. If you can find a better reference teaching that, be my guest.

There are other references that do not apply; BUT most of them do apply to the actual meaning of that line in the Nicene creed.

I am asking all believers to make sure you check those scriptural references before you stand behind it as saying the whole creed is supported by scripture.

As it is, I reiterate that the Holy Spirit in us is sent to NOT speak of Himself ( John 16:14 ), but of the Son ( John 15:26 ) in glorifying Him ( John 16:14 ) as all believers led by the Holy Spirit will be sharing in like testimony ( John 15:27), even in worship ( John 5:22-23 & Philippians 2:5-13 with emphasis on 12 ) & especially in worship so that our singular testimony along with the Holy Spirit's testimony makes the worship of the Son of God as true in according to :

John 8:17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.

So when you as an individual believer worship the Holy Spirit with the Father & the Son, the Holy Spirit in you is not sharing that in your testimony in worship; therefore in according to His words, that kind of worship is apostasy as standing apart from the truth in His words so narrow the way back to the straight gate by only honouring the Son in worship & thereby honouring the Father in His will.

Unfortunately, there are alot of saved believers with the Holy Spirit that are following unscriptural church traditions without actually confirming the creed by the scripture as kept in the King James Bible by those that loved Him & His words.

But hey, I am sure the framers of the Nicene creed did not supply those scriptural references but someone down the line did. If you can improve on that list by exposing the wrong scriptural reference and then showing the right one from the King James Bible that actually teach what that line says in the Nicene creed, you would be doing God's service, either way for yourself & for others.

John 15:1
I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

That's right. Even fruit bearing disciples can be purged to bear more fruit still.

May God cause the increase in keeping our eyes on the Bridegroom in worship.

I would use Acts 5:3-4 to illustrate that the Holy Spirit is God.

But Peter said, "Anani'as, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy
Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land?While it remained
unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your
disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have
not lied to men but to God.

Hereby, Peter states that the Holy Spirit is God is so many words.

jim

 

[Wgw]

I would use Acts 5:3-4 to illustrate that the Holy Spirit is God.

But Peter said, "Anani'as, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy
Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land?While it remained
unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your
disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have
not lied to men but to God.

Hereby, Peter states that the Holy Spirit is God is so many words.

jim

Many years to you, Father Jim!

 

[Tellastory]

I don't need to confirm the Niceno-Constantinoplean Creed in Scripture because the Holy, Righteous and God-bearing Fathers of the First Council of Constantinople, like St. Gregory the Theologian, already did that for me in the year 381.

Psalm 118:8 It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. 23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

2 Timothy 3:12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. 13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Ephesians 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:

Scripture teaches YOU to prove all things with His help and by the scripture too.

Paul had to do this to Peter.

Galatians 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. 13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. 14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? 15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, 16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. 17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. 18 For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. 19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. 20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. 21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

What right did Paul had to confront Peter to be submissive to the Word of God?

1 Corinthians 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. 2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. 3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Paul did not say that he was the head nor was Peter the head, but Jesus Christ is and all believers are to follow Christ Jesus personally as being their "Head". Paul asked to follow after his example which is to follow Christ Jesus; not to follow himself.

And so Peter nor any member of the Fathers of the First Council of Constantinople, gets a free pass when our confidence is in the Lord; and not in men in being our sole Head.

Jesus Christ really is the Good Shepherd; accept no substitute.

So do reconsider your stance not to prove all things by Him, okay , Brother?

 

[Tellastory]

Nice thread! but probably wrong section to ask??

A lot of people hanging out here in Controversial Theology doesn't share the Nicene Creed beliefs and obviously gonna be biased against it.

The rules of the forum limits discussion of the Nicene creed to this section only when wanting to raise questions about it. You should be able to find a thread pinned in this section clarifying the CF's position on that subject more accurately, but if I recall correctly, there is to be no debate on it.

I for one does not acknowledge the writings of Apostle Paul as trustworthy teachings... Many of them are quite favorable to the agenda of the ruling elites (which are often evil people). Some of Paul's teachings are even unfavorable to the weakest of society which undermines the teachings of Christ regarding the weakest, the least.

Since a significant portion of the Nicene Creed is from verses written by Apostle Paul, I certainly don't go by the creed.

You would have a problem with Peter's writings then, because Peter, other than still calling Paul a beloved brother in relations to his writings, had placed Paul's epistles on par with the accepted scripture when writing this;

2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

So either you place Peter's writings in the category as Paul's writings as not acceptable scripture or..... you need to ask Jesus for help in seeing the truth in Paul's epistles.

Even Paul was careful to convey in his writings when he was writing something of his own volition from writing what the Lord would have him write.

1 Corinthians 7:6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. 7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. 8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for them if they abide even as I. 9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.

Here above, Paul alerted that what he was writing, he did so out of permission so as to clarify that he was not conveying a commandment from the Lord, but then he alerted when he was speaking of commandment from the Lord below.

10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

And then again, Paul alerted his readers that what he was speaking about next was from him and not from the Lord Jesus Christ.

12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. 13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. 16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife? 17 But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.

I hope the Lord will lead you to reconsider your stance on your error about Paul's writings.

 

[Tellastory]

Don't be surprised it happened because Apostle Paul himself said that he treats different people/cultures differently and it's not surprising if he taught a different theology between cultures.

Read this:

1 Corinthians 9:20-22
To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; 21to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law.22To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some


It's really funny to be in defense that contradictions in teachings in the Bible when concerning Apostle Paul does not exist because Paul himself said it, he will adapt.

If you want an example of what Paul meant in verse 20... here it is below, but first, a testimony of his stance about the law in his fellowship with James.

Acts 21:18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. 19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. 20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: 21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. 22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come.

Here is the example of being under the law unto the Jews to win some of the Jews. If you think about it, sharing that vow of purification which ended in 7 days is like having those four Jews as a captive audience.

23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; 24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. 25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them. 27 And when the seven days were almost ended,

Apparently, the Jews heard what Paul had been sharing to those four Jews as well as what he had taught unto others.

....the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him, 28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place. 29 (For they had seen before with him in the city Trophimus an Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.) 30 And all the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut. 31 And as they went about to kill him, tidings came unto the chief captain of the band, that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.

So Paul was not preaching as you say he was. Paul was respecting the law of that vow for purification to be with those four Jewish men to have them as a captive audience in sharing the gospel as well as the scriptures with them about Jesus Christ.

So basically, Paul will use the law to be under the law to win some. Due note that he finished what was required of him under the law for that purification, and therefore was no longer under the law after using it in the hopes of winning some to Christ.

 

[Tellastory]

I would use Acts 5:3-4 to illustrate that the Holy Spirit is God.

But Peter said, "Anani'as, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy
Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land?While it remained
unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your
disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have
not lied to men but to God.

Hereby, Peter states that the Holy Spirit is God is so many words.

jim

Thank you for sharing and participating in trying to find a better reference that teaches the actual practice of worshiping the Holy Spirit with the Father & the Son, BUT... it does not really say that and therefore does not teach that for believers to do plainly.

I understand that the Holy Spirit is God, and you will find a lot of scriptures attesting to Him as God, but in respect to the Nicene creed, the listed scriptural reference of Matthew 3:16-17 and your suggestion of Acts 3:5-4 does not really teach that practice of worshiping the Holy Spirit with the Father & the Son.

God means what He has said and therefore He would teach that, but He hasn't because;

The Holy Spirit will not speak of Himself in seeking His own glory ( John 16:13-14 ) so how can we as led by the Spirit?

Since John 5:22 raised the bar on how every believer will be judged and John 5:23 cites what that bar is, then the Holy Spirit will lead us to honour the Son if we ever hope of honouring the Father at all in according to the Father's will of how He wishes to be honoured only by... and that is the Son as the Father is glorified only in the Son ( John 13:31-32 & Philippians 2:5-13 note verse 12 for the obedience Paul emphasized on how worship was to be carried out upon which is to the glory of God the Father )

 

[he-man]

The rules of the forum limits discussion of the Nicene creed to this section only when wanting to raise questions about it. You should be able to find a thread pinned in this section clarifying the CF's position on that subject more accurately, but if I recall correctly, there is to be no debate on it.
I hope the Lord will lead you to reconsider your stance on your error about Paul's writings.

Will you do the same?
At times in the Synoptics this Son ship of Jesus involves some subordination of Jesus to the Father. There were things that the Son did not know: 'But of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father' (Mk 13.32).
Again in Mark we hear Jesus saying: 'Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone' (10.18). 1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto Him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. And again, 1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

On the kenosis whereby ‘Who, being in the figure1 of God, thought it not grasping2 to lead3 to be
similar4 to God: 7 But himself, he was completely lacking5, and clinged6 to the figure of a
slave, and became in likeness of men: (Phil 2.6, 7).’ [1 * Greek μορφή figure 2 * Greek αρπαγμον grasp 3 * Greek ηγεομαι ηγούμαι to lead 4 * Greek ίσα, ίσος ίσιος be similar to 5 * Greek κενωσεν completely lacking 6 * Greek λαβη λαβων cling to]
there is only ‘One who is Good’, it becomes clear that Paul views Christ both as subordinate and only to be similar to God the Father which is fulfilled in the purpose of the visible creation that results from it (Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. ) .
CHAPTER TWO
The New Testament Witness to God

 

[Wgw]

Tellastory, I did search the scriptures and verified my faith in Orthodoxy. But I believe you are engaging in eisegesis; the Biblical command to search the scriptures is not general or universal but soecific to the addressee for perfect of proof.

Now as for trusting God vs. trusting men, our Lord promised the Gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church. I believe the Orthodox Church can be identified as the True Church by the river of blood floeing from her martyrs over the centuries, and the lack of any real change in theology from the fourth century at least, if not earlier.

So because our Lord promised the gates of Hell would not prevail against the church, we regard the Church as the Body of Christ and, in its entirety, infallible. However, we mistrust individual men. Which is why we have no supreme pontiff but rather regard all bishops as peers, with the leaders of indeoendent churches in communion with each other, like the Armenian, Syriac, Coptic and Ethiopian churches, or in the Eastern Orthodox, the Greeks, Russians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Serbians, Antiochians, Georgians and other ethnicities, each of which has an indeoendent church, well, the leaders of these churches are not mini popes but rather the first among equals. The Holy Synod comprised of all the bishops of each church has ultimate authority. So we have checks and balances, and refuse to give any one bishop the absolute power enjoyed by the Roman Pontiff.

In fact before the great schism, the Sixth Ecumenical Council anathematized a Roman Pope. The Popes had since Victor in AD 200 tried to claim leadership of the church, but were rebuffed until the Great Schism in 1054, when in frustration the Papal Legates excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople for refusing to acknowledge papal supremacy, the filioque clause, and for daring to have bearded priests and using leavened bread in the Liturgy or Mass.

 

[MoreCoffee]

...
Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; (Matthew 3:16-17)

Matthew 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Nowhere does it validate nor teach the practise of worshipping the Holy Spirit with the Father & the Son. If you can find a better reference teaching that, be my guest.​

...

The Spirit and the Lord Jesus Christ are associated with the Father in Matthew 3:16-17 KJV And Jesus, when he was baptised, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: (17) And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. The association is connected to the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity and hence the people here in CF who produced the Creed, as it is quoted in the original post, are drawing the link between association and identification which the holy scriptures make in a number of passages not least of which is the gospel according to saint John where it is written John 1:1-3,14 KJV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (2) The same was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. ... (14) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. So I do not quite see the validity of the objection stated in your post.

 

[Wgw]

Duplicate post, sorry mods

 

[Wgw]

The Spirit and the Lord Jesus Christ are associated with the Father in Matthew 3:16-17 KJV And Jesus, when he was baptised, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: (17) And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. The association is connected to the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity and hence the people here in CF who produced the Creed, as it is quoted in the original post, are drawing the link between association and identification which the holy scriptures make in a number of passages not least of which is the gospel according to saint John where it is written John 1:1-3,14 KJV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (2) The same was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. ... (14) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. So I do not quite see the validity of the objection stated in your post.

In the Orthodox Church, we regard this along with Pentecost as one of the two main Trintarian feasts and celebrate it on January 6th. All three persons were manifest at the baptism of our Lord.

Likewise, Pentecost is for us Trinitarian because the Holy Spirit, which proceeds from the Father, was sent by the Son to the Apostles as tongues of fire.

Regarding the filioque as you know, we dont confess this, but I believe the origins are innocent confusion of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father, with our Lord sending the Spirit on His current temporal mission. However at the Annunciation in a way the Spirit sent our Lord into the world by imoregnating the Blessed Virgin.

 

[he-man]

I believe the Orthodox Church can be identified as the True Church by the river of blood floeing from her martyrs over the centuries, and the lack of any real change in theology from the fourth century at least, if not earlier.

Shortly after Nicea a powerful Anti-Nicene group developed which for years refused to accept the homoousion as the test of orthodoxy. Against these Anti-Nicene a smaller group, headed by Athanasius, battled tenaciously for the Nicene homoousion and put forth a sound Trinitarian doctrine. But this doctrine left unsolved many questions about the divine persons, their definition and distinction and relation to one another and to the godhead.
The Council of Nicea had merely declared, 'And we believe in the Holy Spirit.' Augustine's theology left many questions unanswered: What is the nature of the two processions? How do they differ? Why are there only two processions and only three persons?
What, how many years after the death of Christ did it take to fool people in the belief of a polythestic God intead on the one Paul taught?
Between Augustine in the 5th century and Anselm in the 12th, two men stood out for their Trinitarian contributions, Boethius (d. 524) and Eriugena (d. 877 c.). In the 13th century Dominicans and Franciscans .
There were three great Trinitarian councils in the 13th and 15th centuries. In the 17th century Protestant theologians .
Kant, by his Critiques, put an end to the Enlightenment; he rejected both orthodox and rationalist views of religion, regarded the doctrine of the Trinity as of no practical value, and opened the way to the modern theological mood.
We do not intend to seek in the Old Testament and in the New Testament what is not there, a formal statement of Trinitarian doctrine. More recent scholars find no evidence in the Old Testament that any sacred writer believed in or suspected the existence of a divine paternity and filiation within the Godhead itself.
The word of Yahweh effects what it signifies : 'so shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose' (Is 55.11).1 The word of Yahweh is a creative agent, and it is fulfilled in the visible creation that results from it (Genesis ch. 1). Nature as well as history is a word that reveals Yahweh who speaks it, but the word of Yahweh is also the written law.
Nowhere in the Old Testament is there any solid evidence that a sacred writer viewed the word of Yahweh as a personal being distinct from Yahweh, and thus had intimations of plurality within the Godhead. The word of Yahweh is only Yahweh acting, or the means by which He revealed His will to men. It has been much discussed down the centuries. Jewish speculation saw in it the affirmation of the pre-existence of the Law, which was easily identified with the wisdom of God. The Arians found in it a strong argument to show that Christ was but a creature.' The people of the Old Testament, however, did not see wisdom as a person to be addressed. Today scholars agree with them and see in wisdom only God's own activity, or an attribute of God, or just a personification, or an extension of the divine personality.
But to the people of the Old Testament the wisdom of God was never a person to be addressed but only a personification of an attribute or activity of Yahweh. PART ONE The Biblical Witness to God