Nicene Creed

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Disturbinatti

Why do you say this
Its a lie

If you think the black is white strategy will work you are mistaken.

Calling me a liar is easy.

Try proving it and see the difference.

Its not church doctrine its new testament scripture, a new testament that Muslims dont believe in.

Not James, Jude and 2 Peter contain rebukes of Paul's doctrine of faith without works, they agree with faith without works leads to salvation.
They just say WORKS is EVIDENCE of SALVATION, proof of salvation
They dont say works leads to salvation, GET THAT, They dont say works leads to salvation
You are reading it the wrong way around, like a Muslim who hates christianity would

The Quaran is a book of dung that Muslims worship as much as their prophet.
Idolaters of the book called the quaran, their paper messiah

I dont know who thinks the Nicene creed is any more authoritative than the New Testament other than yourself? thats a very strange comment/assumption to make
Why do you ask that

As for the Trinity, its traced back to Judaism, yeah those peoples you or your religion at the very least want dead...
OT
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 19:24
Isaiah 6
Isaiah 40-55
Isaiah 45:23-24
Micah 5:2
NT
Mark 2:5-12
John 1:1
John 5:18
John 8:58
John 10:33
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6
John 19:7
Romans 14:11
Philippians 2:1-2
Philippians 2:9-11
Revelation 22:3
www.bible.ca...

But hey, you just go on trashing our God.
Its ok by me, you Muslims have no respect for others as I have noted by your actions

And your rather rude comment that was factually untrue was meant to what, enflame me?

I didn't trash God or Jesus pbuh.

Because they are not the Trinity.

Also citing passages doesn't provide evidence and I know why you won't quote them. Because you know what will happen I will logically refute every attempt you make at lying about the Bible

Says Jesus pbuh. "God is ONE "

How many?

a reply to: Disturbinatti

No like a good little angry Muslim you trashed others beliefs.
All conquering Muslims displaying their contempt to others of different faiths

I recon your prophet was a slime ball pedophile, murdering criminal and your quaran, mere toilet paper
Out of respect I wouldnt say that in most circumstances, you, you just want to cause others discomfort.

Pretty dam funny isnt it
You are not here to understand, consider or learn anything. Just to do what I see most Muslims do, attack.

I didnt quote/cite those passages, I provided a link to a website where if people want to study them they can
You are not here to understand, consider or learn anything. Just to do what I see most Muslims do, attack.

The bible states that we shouldnt praise anyone but God, yet you, praising Jesus
Dont you see your own hypocrisy

No different to catholics praising saints long dead, Muslim idol worshipers

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman

The Trinity is something we as humans dont understand.

thats because its not biblical... but Christianity tries to shoehorn it into the bible

The Old Testament, old covenant isnt biblical to you.
Hey at least Muslims agree with you, cool.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman

The Trinity is something we as humans dont understand.

thats because its not biblical... but Christianity tries to shoehorn it into the bible

The Old Testament, old covenant isnt biblical to you.
Hey at least Muslims agree with you, cool.

Neither the OT or the Old covenant have anything to do with a trinity

thats called Christian dogma...

a reply to: WeLovePutin

Don't let this thread discourage you, there are many expressions of faith. Studying the Good News and a sincere desire for a personal relationship with God is all you need to start to grow spiritually. Jesus told us to pray the Our Father.

The Nicene Creed is a statement of faith, there are a wide variety of Churches that fall under the umbrella of Christianity. Religion should be a life preserver, not a straight jacket.

I'd like to see sources for what the op is saying.

When someone attempts to take something away, it would be wise to look at what they are trying to replace it with.

a reply to: Akragon

You've expressed your opinion about Paul in other threads around here, Arkragon.

In this thread what's your take on op describing the Nicene Creed superseding the message of the Good News?

a reply to: Akragon

Thats your opinion and I believe like most things pertaining to your "spiritual" beliefs is bordering on crazy
Oddly, outside of your crazy, think you seem balanced mostly.

The OT points to Jesus as Lord and Messiah, making Jesus God with Jehovah and the Spirit

So while you disagree and I understand that, I disagree

the OT or the Old covenant have everything to do with a trinity

OT
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 19:24
Isaiah 6
Isaiah 40-55
Isaiah 45:23-24
Micah 5:2
NT
Mark 2:5-12
John 1:1
John 5:18
John 8:58
John 10:33
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6
John 19:7
Romans 14:11
Philippians 2:1-2
Philippians 2:9-11
Revelation 22:3
www.bible.ca...

a reply to: Raggedyman

No... The OT has nothing to do with a triune God

Neither does the NT for that matter...

but you're welcome to believe whatever makes you happy

regardless theres no trinity in the bible

originally posted by: dffrntkndfnml
a reply to: Akragon

You've expressed your opinion about Paul in other threads around here, Arkragon.

In this thread what's your take on op describing the Nicene Creed superseding the message of the Good News?

I suppose that would depend on what one considers "the good news"

said creed is distinctly trinitarian... mainly because it came from where the trinity doctrine was solidified

And as i've said many times, even above... theres no trinity in the bible

i actually have more of an issue with the athanasius creed... which is just wrong

a reply to: Akragon

Thanks for the response. Idk, I was going to ask you about op's contention that the Nicene Creed supersedes the Gospels, then.

Come to think of it, it doesn't matter. I've had my say elsewhere and op is entitled to his opinion. You've been patient hearing me out around here, and I appreciate that. I don't need to participate in Disturbinatti's agenda.

Peace

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman

No... The OT has nothing to do with a triune God

Neither does the NT for that matter...

but you're welcome to believe whatever makes you happy

regardless theres no trinity in the bible

the OT or the Old covenant have everything to do with a trinity

OT
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 19:24
Isaiah 6
Isaiah 40-55
Isaiah 45:23-24
Micah 5:2
NT
Mark 2:5-12
John 1:1
John 5:18
John 8:58
John 10:33
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6
John 19:7
Romans 14:11
Philippians 2:1-2
Philippians 2:9-11
Revelation 22:3
www.bible.ca...

You
Me

Pity there isnt a picture with a face and a person with their fingers in their ears humming
I am confident on my God, you, you seem down and angry all the time.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman

No... The OT has nothing to do with a triune God

Neither does the NT for that matter...

but you're welcome to believe whatever makes you happy

regardless theres no trinity in the bible

the OT or the Old covenant have everything to do with a trinity

OT
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 19:24
Isaiah 6
Isaiah 40-55
Isaiah 45:23-24
Micah 5:2
NT
Mark 2:5-12
John 1:1
John 5:18
John 8:58
John 10:33
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6
John 19:7
Romans 14:11
Philippians 2:1-2
Philippians 2:9-11
Revelation 22:3
www.bible.ca...

You

Me

Pity there isnt a picture with a face and a person with their fingers in their ears humming
I am confident on my God, you, you seem down and angry all the time.

sure... yet amazingly enough the people the OT books were written for never heard of a triune God...

it just came around when Jesus arrived on the scene... but wait

Jesus didn't ever hear of a trinity either... thats right, the idea didn't come around until at least 50 plus years later

First from a man named tertullian, who was completely against the idea because a few heretics had a new idea of what God was supposed to be

Christianity is infamous for mistranslating texts to suit their beliefs...

again, believe whatever makes you happy... and no im not angry, i don't get angry

i dislike false doctrine...

originally posted by: dffrntkndfnml
a reply to: Akragon

Thanks for the response. Idk, I was going to ask you about op's contention that the Nicene Creed supersedes the Gospels, then.

Come to think of it, it doesn't matter. I've had my say elsewhere and op is entitled to his opinion. You've been patient hearing me out around here, and I appreciate that. I don't need to participate in Disturbinatti's agenda.

Peace

Most of the book supersedes the gospels my friend... especially Pauls books

thats why i call it Paulianity...

Oh Ak, the fun we could have if we lived in the same city. small mercies

Yes we disagree, I believe in the Trinity, you not so much.

Muslims dont, JWs dont, Agnostics dont, what one are you, are you not sure, I guess?

The funny thing is I dont like catholic doctrine and am happy to divorce myself from as much as possible, the Trinity as well if I though it was wrong. Happily dismiss it.
But it holds up in the Old and New Testament, why I hear you ask...
Lets see
the OT or the Old covenant have everything to do with a trinity

OT
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 19:24
Isaiah 6
Isaiah 40-55
Isaiah 45:23-24
Micah 5:2
NT
Mark 2:5-12
John 1:1
John 5:18
John 8:58
John 10:33
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6
John 19:7
Romans 14:11
Philippians 2:1-2
Philippians 2:9-11
Revelation 22:3
www.bible.ca...

a reply to: Raggedyman

Oh Ak, the fun we could have if we lived in the same city. small mercies

Would be interesting... i have a lot of discussions with Christian friends

Yes we disagree, I believe in the Trinity, you not so much.

Muslims dont, JWs dont, Agnostics dont, what one are you, are you not sure, I guess?

I am myself... i don't label my beliefs, nor do i need labels to have them

The funny thing is I dont like catholic doctrine and am happy to divorce myself from as much as possible, the Trinity as well if I though it was wrong. Happily dismiss it.

Well you should do so... because its false doctrine

the word didn't even exist in "christian" circles until the early second century, and it was considered a heresy

Think about it... Trinity equals three beings that are all equal, that are ONE

Jesus said specifically that His Father is greater then himself in three seperate passages in Johns gospel...

know what that means?

Theres no trinity... debunked by the man you consider God in lots of places where his words are found

but again... believe whatever floats your.... ark

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman

Oh Ak, the fun we could have if we lived in the same city. small mercies

Would be interesting... i have a lot of discussions with Christian friends

Yes we disagree, I believe in the Trinity, you not so much.

Muslims dont, JWs dont, Agnostics dont, what one are you, are you not sure, I guess?

I am myself... i don't label my beliefs, nor do i need labels to have them

The funny thing is I dont like catholic doctrine and am happy to divorce myself from as much as possible, the Trinity as well if I though it was wrong. Happily dismiss it.

Well you should do so... because its false doctrine

the word didn't even exist in "christian" circles until the early second century, and it was considered a heresy

Think about it... Trinity equals three beings that are all equal, that are ONE

Jesus said specifically that His Father is greater then himself in three seperate passages in Johns gospel...

know what that means?

Theres no trinity... debunked by the man you consider God in lots of places where his words are found

but again... believe whatever floats your.... ark

Well put.

It's as if a spell was cast at Nicea that even should one deny the Roman cult of Christ they will never be rid of the curse of Trinity without having the guts to stand for truth

I am not the least agnostic and am w staunch Monotheist, like Jesus pbuh the Will of Allah is what I try to be one with metaphorically speaking.

Let us concentrate for a moment on the quotes which survived the "losing" of the Gospel in Hebrew used by Ebionites and Nazarenes, who, according to Epiphanius were united (5th century) and that means they BOTH rejected Trinity and Paul BUT believed Jesus called the Holy Spirit his "Mother."

This led Jerome to dig a deep hole as he claimed only because of the fem. word in Hebrew that is spirit.

Only all that would explain is "she" not "Mother."


And his standard would also apply to Father.

It's apparent this Father business is metaphorical and not literal as "Our Father" is "His Father" and of course, we are not all God.

Well put though I enjoyed your comment and thought I would add to it.

a reply to: Disturbinatti
The Holy Trinity that you're describing is not what came out of the council of Nicea.

QUICK FACTS:

“The Nicene Creed is actually not the product of the First Council of Nicea (325) . . . but of the First Council of Constantinople (381),” says The New Westminster Dictionary of Church History.

“The Council of Nicea in 325 stated the crucial formula for [the yet future Trinity] doctrine in its confession that the Son is ‘of the same substance . . . as the Father.’”—Encyclopædia Britannica.

Should You Believe in the Trinity? Awake!—2013

325 C.E. is not "late 4th century" (that would be early 4th century). The council of Nicea in 325 C.E. was a stepping stone towards the later doctrine of the Trinity and Trinitarian creeds that added the Holy Spirit. The first step was equating and conflating the Lord Jesus Christ with the Lord Jehovah, of course it helps when you swap out the name with the title and noun "the LORD" about 7000 times in the bible. Very convenient that they're both lords (just as there are many lords and gods mentioned in the bible, with different names).
Myth 4: God Is a Trinity

What is the origin of the myth?

“The impression could arise that the Trinitarian dogma is in the last analysis a late 4th-century invention. In a sense, this is true . . . The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Volume 14, page 299.

“The Council of Nicaea met on May 20, 325 [C.E.]. Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance with the Father.’ . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.”—Encyclopædia Britannica (1970), Volume 6, page 386.

Historical Background

In the middle of the second century C.E., professed Christians were defending their faith against Roman persecutors and heretics alike. However, this was an era of too many theological voices. Religious debates regarding the “divinity” of Jesus and the nature and workings of the holy spirit caused more than just intellectual rifts. Bitter disagreements and irreparable divisions over “Christian” doctrine spilled over into the political and cultural spheres, at times causing riots, rebellion, civil strife, even war. Writes historian Paul Johnson: “[Apostate] Christianity began in confusion, controversy and schism and so it continued. . . . The central and eastern Mediterranean in the first and second centuries AD swarmed with an infinite multitude of religious ideas, struggling to propagate themselves. . . . From the start, then, there were numerous varieties of Christianity which had little in common.”

During that era, writers and thinkers who felt that it was imperative to interpret “Christian” teachings using philosophical terms began to flourish. To satisfy educated pagans who were new converts to “Christianity,” such religious writers relied heavily on earlier Greek and Jewish literature. Beginning with Justin Martyr (c. 100-165 C.E.), who wrote in Greek, professed Christians became increasingly sophisticated in their assimilation of the philosophical heritage of the Greek culture.

This trend came to fruition in the writings of Origen (c. 185-254 C.E.), a Greek author from Alexandria. Origen’s treatise On First Principles was the first systematic effort to explain the main doctrines of “Christian” theology in terms of Greek philosophy. The Council of Nicaea (325 C.E.), with its attempt to explain and establish the “divinity” of Christ, was the milestone that gave new impetus to interpretation of “Christian” dogma. That council marked the beginning of an era during which general church councils sought to define dogma ever more precisely.

The Church Fathers—Advocates of Bible Truth?

Oh, and both Mark and Jesus wouldn't misquote Deuteronomy 6:4,5 (NW):

4 “Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. 5 You must love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your strength.* [Or “vital force; resources.”]

American Standard Version
Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah:

Darby Bible Translation
Hear, Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah;

Young's Literal Translation
Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah;

Mark 12:29 (NW)

Jesus answered: “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah, 30 and you must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind and with your whole strength.’

Divine Name King James Bible
And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; ...( Jehovah Deu 6:4 ) our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love ...( Jehovah Deu 6:5; Jos 22:5 ) thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

Almost all deception removed and replaced with "...". Left 1 in there to spot (another attempt at conflating the noun "lord" which does not appear in the Hebrew in Deuteronomy 6:4,5 with the Divine name, the name of God and demonstration of Jeremiah 23:27). It's not like He's Voldemort or something that you can't mention his name and have to add () as if it's not in the original text while pretending "the LORD" is when it's not (by not making that clear and having "the LORD" in the translation where I put ...).

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Akragon

Thats your opinion and I believe like most things pertaining to your "spiritual" beliefs is bordering on crazy
Oddly, outside of your crazy, think you seem balanced mostly.

The OT points to Jesus as Lord and Messiah, making Jesus God with Jehovah and the Spirit

Who told you this lie?

First the Messiah isn't prophecied to be God OR His son, so I feel like you are making this up and know you can't support the notion with scripture.

Lord is not what YHVH translates to and YHVH is what is where Lord is whenever talking about God in special caps.

Humans are called lord in the Bible. David for one but many men are called lords, Baal Shem Tov is what an eminent Rabbis was called meanind Lord of the Great Name (YHVH is Hashem, the Name) or Baal Hasulam Lord of the ladder.

They don't think they are God and neither did Jesus pbuh think he was.

Just his later followers who were hardly literate, centuries later even non Trinitarians existed called Nazarenes but were declared heretics for some strange reason.

So while you disagree and I understand that, I disagree

Problem you have is you are factually incorrect and I have proven that rather incontrovertibly as has Ak, it's plain simple logic.

the OT or the Old covenant have everything to do with a trinity

I don't think you know what "New Covenant" means but I bet you think it means the Old is voided.

Problem you have is Jesus pbuh came not to abolish but fulfill and make it possible for non Judahites to become full Jews and equals.

This was rejected by the Rabbis because they needed to be the chosen people and converts to this day are openly seen as inferior.

It has aught to do with cancelling even a jot of the Law.

OT
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 19:24
Isaiah 6
Isaiah 40-55
Isaiah 45:23-24
Micah 5:2
NT
Mark 2:5-12
John 1:1
John 5:18
John 8:58
John 10:33
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6
John 19:7
Romans 14:11
Philippians 2:1-2
Philippians 2:9-11
Revelation 22:3
www.bible.ca...

Such a lack of comprehension tells me you have never read the Bible as a story with a narrative and possibly it's just a commodity that opens doors or something but you are way off, with everything you speak about re: the Bible and that is normal and the only way Christianity will survive exposure to the light of truth.

If people don't question what should be question they oppress themselves.

a reply to: whereislogic


The Trinity is an innovation made law at Nicea.

Whoever invented is irrelevant as it is not in the Bible and not real.

Jesus denied it in terms unmistakable for their declaring himself not God or equal to in any way and a creation.

And Christianity ignores his pleas to Worship God with all your heart and they disrespectfully​ worship him who wanted nor to be worshipped .

Black magic has cast a spell on Christianity that makes the Nicene Creed more authoritative than the Bible.

a reply to: Disturbinatti

said creed is more of an affirmation of their beliefs

its not meant to be authoritative in all actuality

More like, something to be repeated to drill it into your head... Churches actually repeat it almost every sunday as an opening statement of faith before "church" begins... Right after the first hymn, or group of...