Is the Nicene Creed your favorite belief?

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Friends. Is the the original Nicene Creed of 381 AD containing only the word "who proceeds from the Father" and not containing the words "and the Son" your favorite belief, your favorite statement of Christian Faith?
If so, why? If not, why not?
Just wondering. What Scripture would support it? Do you think there is anything in Scripture that does not support it?
Scott in Erie PA

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Friends. Is the the original Nicene Creed of 381 AD containing only the word "who proceeds from the Father" and not containing the words "and the Son" your favorite belief, your favorite statement of Christian Faith?
If so, why? If not, why not?
Just wondering. What Scripture would support it? Do you think there is anything in Scripture that does not support it?
Scott in Erie PA

Nah, The niceed crede is words of men, written by men.

The Holy Scripture is the words of God, inspired by God. and written as God moved men.

Anyone who would hold any crede above scripture, well I would just wonder about their motives!

 

[resurrection33]

Friends. Is the the original Nicene Creed of 381 AD containing only the word "who proceeds from the Father" and not containing the words "and the Son" your favorite belief, your favorite statement of Christian Faith?
If so, why? If not, why not?
Just wondering. What Scripture would support it? Do you think there is anything in Scripture that does not support it?
Scott in Erie PA

I pay little attention to creeds.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Nah, The niceed crede is words of men, written by men.

The Holy Scripture is the words of God, inspired by God. and written as God moved men.

Anyone who would hold any crede above scripture, well I would just wonder about their motives!

Can you prove from the Bible that anything in the Nicene Creed is not Biblical? How do you know?
Why would you hold to Scripture alone without reading what the Scripture says about Scripture? Does the Bible teach Sola Scriptura? You have failed to prove from the Bible that the Bible proves we should go by the Bible "alone". You have failed to BELIEVE 2 THESSALONIANS 2:15.
Scott Erie PA

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Can you prove from the Bible that anything in the Nicene Creed is not Biblical? How do you know?
Why would you hold to Scripture alone without reading what the Scripture says about Scripture? Does the Bible teach Sola Scriptura? You have failed to prove from the Bible that the Bible proves we should go by the Bible "alone". You have failed to BELIEVE 2 THESSALONIANS 2:15.
Scott Erie PA

Sorry Scott. I believe my God is not a God who does not finish what he started. He started the scripture thousands of years ago with a man named moses. And finished it thousands of years later with the apostle John. If he wanted to continue giving us his word he would not have stopped. He would have continued. God did not all of a sudden say, oops, I screwed up, I forgot to put some stuff in my word. I better write another book or whatever.

If you only knew what your belief makes God out to be!

 

[Grandpa]

2 Thessalonians 2


1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
13But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
16Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace, 17Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.



It looks like the traditions we have been taught can be double-checked through the bible. 2 Thessalonians is brilliant. Thanks Scott.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Sorry Scott. I believe my God is not a God who does not finish what he started. He started the scripture thousands of years ago with a man named moses. And finished it thousands of years later with the apostle John. If he wanted to continue giving us his word he would not have stopped. He would have continued. God did not all of a sudden say, oops, I screwed up, I forgot to put some stuff in my word. I better write another book or whatever.

If you only knew what your belief makes God out to be!

You are using words. You don't just read the Bible to me. You comment on the Bible. This would be forbidden if you really believe in the Bible only, you would just read the Bible outloud, without comment or interpretation. But some man must say what the Bible means (Acts 8:30-31), and this requires using words that are not in the Bible, which, if they are true, will agree with the words SPOKEN BY THE 12 APOSTLES.
What does 2 THESSALONIANS 2:15 is the APOSTLES DID NOT PREACH USING THEIR OWN WORDS? If their words WERE NOT TO WORD OF GOD, then what were they? Were the 12 Apostles PREACHING HERESY?
All of the 12 Apostles preached the Gospel. How could they do that without writing Scripture? Not all of the 12 Apostles wrote books that became part of the NT.
Yet they all PREACHED THE WORD OF GOD (IN ORAL, NOT WRITTEN, FORM).
Your words are full of rationalism, and trying to presume things.
Not everything God intended to be preached needs to be written down in a book. Or else 2 Thessalonians 2:15 HAS NO MEANING!

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

2 Thessalonians 2


1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
13But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
16Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace, 17Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.



It looks like the traditions we have been taught can be double-checked through the bible. 2 Thessalonians is brilliant. Thanks Scott.



Grandpa:
The Gospel of the 12 Apostles came ALSO IN WORDS NOT WRITTEN DOWN, and not only by epistles written down.
Scott

 

[StMichaelTheArchangel]

Sorry Scott. I believe my God is not a God who does not finish what he started. He started the scripture thousands of years ago with a man named moses. And finished it thousands of years later with the apostle John. If he wanted to continue giving us his word he would not have stopped. He would have continued. God did not all of a sudden say, oops, I screwed up, I forgot to put some stuff in my word. I better write another book or whatever.

If you only knew what your belief makes God out to be!

Collosians 4:16 And when this letter has been read among you, have it also read in the church of the Laodiceans; and see that you also read the letter from Laodicea.


If Paul was the divine voice of God and if God gave us the Bible as the only inspired Word, then why don't we have Paul's Epistle to the Laodiceans? You are saying that God was the one who gave us the Bible once and for all, then how could God have not given us one of Paul's divine letters? Its because Scripture is not the only source of authority but tradition is (2 Thess 2:15), and the Church is (the Ground and Pillar of the Truth 1 Tim 3:15).


Your belief makes God out to be a magician or a fairy god mother, because the construction of the biblical canon was not a magical act of God (though it was by his Providence). The Bible came through the holy men of the Church, not magic. So, for you to reject the Church is for you to reject the authority of the Bible because the Bible has no authority without the Church. Unless you beleive that God is a fairy god mother or a magician who just magically operated through men to make the canon.

 

[rodogg]

Friends. Is the the original Nicene Creed of 381 AD containing only the word "who proceeds from the Father" and not containing the words "and the Son" ....etc

What's the problem with "proceeds from the Father and the Son"?

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

What's the problem with "proceeds from the Father and the Son"?

Simple Christ-taught True Wisdom answer for All Christ-taught Christians: John 15:26 (Christ says "who proceeds from the Father" (He does not say "and the Son".

Traditional Christ-given True Wisdom answer for All Holy Spirit-taught, Church taught, Scripturally-instructed, Tradition-taught, Christians:

Saint Photios. (1983). On the Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit. Holy Transfiguration Monastery, translators.
Boston, MA: Studion Publishers.

Saint Photios. (1987). The Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit. Joseph P. Farrell, Ph.D., translator. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press.

 

[rodogg]

I still don't see the problem with saying "and from the Son". Is this really a big issue?

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

I still don't see the problem with saying "and from the Son". Is this really a big issue?

So you don't have a problem with putting the words "and (from) the Son" into the mouth of Jesus Christ our Lord, when Christ did not say those words? Isn't that falsifying and make of none effect the Word of God Himself? The Words of the Word of God Himself?

 

[StMichaelTheArchangel]

So you don't have a problem with putting the words "and (from) the Son" into the mouth of Jesus Christ our Lord, when Christ did not say those words? Isn't that falsifying and make of none effect the Word of God Himself? The Words of the Word of God Himself?

Indeed brother Scott, the Filioque is a huge doctrinal error in the history of the Roman Catholic Church and Western Christianity - but it is not the worst. The Filioque stems from the super heresy which started the whole Protestant and Roman Catholic schisms. This super heresy is rationalism and humanism.

I commend your study on the Filioque, but I advise that you study other things such as: the 1054 Great Schism of the East and West, the Council of Florence, and the Hesychast controversy of St Gregory Palamas and Latin monk Barlaam.

There are WAY more proofs that you could use to prove the Orthodox Church than the Filioque. I understand that you are a recent convert - good for you, I am a convert of 3 years. You should study those three things I mentioned, starting with the first.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Indeed brother Scott, the Filioque is a huge doctrinal error in the history of the Roman Catholic Church and Western Christianity - but it is not the worst. The Filioque stems from the super heresy which started the whole Protestant and Roman Catholic schisms. This super heresy is rationalism and humanism.

I commend your study on the Filioque, but I advise that you study other things such as: the 1054 Great Schism of the East and West, the Council of Florence, and the Hesychast controversy of St Gregory Palamas and Latin monk Barlaam.

There are WAY more proofs that you could use to prove the Orthodox Church than the Filioque. I understand that you are a recent convert - good for you, I am a convert of 3 years. You should study those three things I mentioned, starting with the first.

Dear stmichaelthearchangel:
I have studied the Council of Florence already. What I don't understand at all, dear friend of St. Michael our defender (one of our defenders), is the controversy on hesychasm with blessed St. Gregory Palamas versus Barlaam the Calabrian. Where should I read about this, brother?
Scott Erie PA

 

[StMichaelTheArchangel]

Dear stmichaelthearchangel:
I have studied the Council of Florence already. What I don't understand at all, dear friend of St. Michael our defender (one of our defenders), is the controversy on hesychasm with blessed St. Gregory Palamas versus Barlaam the Calabrian. Where should I read about this, brother?
Scott Erie PA

I will give you links on it.

I have not read this but I know its really good. Notes on the Palamite Controversy and Related Topics, Part I

Part II

Notes on the Palamite Controversy and Related Topics, Part II


Here is a book on St Gregory Palamas by Heirotheos Vlachos: ST. GREGORY PALAMAS AS A HAGIORITE

 

[rodogg]

So... Let me understand this. The addition of the words "and from the Son", which by all accounts, only serves to give Jesus Christ more importance and places him where he is, next to God and doing His will, is to you, a most blasphemous thing? Aren't there far, far, far bigger fish to fry?

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

So... Let me understand this. The addition of the words "and from the Son", which by all accounts, only serves to give Jesus Christ more importance and places him where he is, next to God and doing His will, is to you, a most blasphemous thing? Aren't there far, far, far bigger fish to fry

?

The Spirit proceeds from the common essence of the Father and the Son. It splits God into a Dyad.
It subordinates the Holy Spirit. Making Him less than the Father and the Son. It posits two principles in the God this.
Answer this: If the procession of the Holy Spirit from God the Father is perfect, and it is perfect, because God is perfect, why is an additional procession from God the Son needed? This implies an imperfection in the procession of the Spirit from the Father? Also, does the Holy Spirit proceed from Christ's Divinity, or from His humanity?
Tell us where John 15:26 says "and the Son". Why would anyone want to teach a doctrine not specifically taught in the very (true) words of the Holy Bible?

 

[rodogg]

The Spirit proceeds from the common essence of the Father and the Son. It splits God into a Dyad.

So.. The Spirit proceeds from the Father and The Son. That's what you're saying. I think this is a totally stupid debate to be honest, however. And "splits God into a Dyad"???? Sure you yourself speak of the Father and the Son. The father and the Son exist! Dyad? Ahh... why oh why do you waste your energy on this stuff?

It subordinates the Holy Spirit. Making Him less than the Father and the Son. It posits two principles in the God this.

So what about when you say "Proceeds from the Father". Doesn't this also make the Spirit less than the Father? By your logic? And since the Father is with the Son and the Son does the will of the Father, can we not therefore deduce enough to say "Proceeds from the Father and the Son."?

Answer this: If the procession of the Holy Spirit from God the Father is perfect, and it is perfect, because God is perfect, why is an additional procession from God the Son needed? This implies an imperfection in the procession of the Spirit from the Father? Also, does the Holy Spirit proceed from Christ's Divinity, or from His humanity?

Tell us where John 15:26 says "and the Son". Why would anyone want to teach a doctrine not specifically taught in the very (true) words of the Holy Bible?

Again. I will repeat. Far, far, far, far, far bigger fish to fry. Jesus taught Love, Love and more Love. This dissection of silly wee things causes us to forget about love. Why spend time on these irrelevant topics when we could be spreading Jesus' love. Helping humankind. Feeding the poor. Housing the homeless. Etc. Etc.

I love you as a brother in Jesus. really I do. I love everyone. And I HATE arguments. But... come on man!!!