Should Unbelievers Say the Apostle's Creed And The Nicene Creed In Their Worship Services ?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Don't, Gord, minimize Arianism. Nestorianism! THE FILIOQUE DEBATE!

The reason those disputes mattered so much's because they touched Christ's identity and work and God's nature.

For believers, these shape how we worship. Pray! GRASP SALVATION!

What encourages me's that thru all the noise, political struggles and HUMAN WEAKNESSES, the church kept coming back to Christ. That's not surprising
You are missing my point. My point is that those controversies show ho much divergence there was in understanding who Jesus was/is
 
Here is the Apostle's Creed with Scripture attached


August 8, 2022

Where Is the Apostles’ Creed Found in the Bible?​

Jonathan Petersen
I wonder why Jesus was so hard on the Pharisees, because they seem to have believed in a similar list....minus the Jesus as Messiah story?
 
Jaebius

The Arianism -Debate ------was that Jesus was a created being and not equal to God the Father ----

According to this ------It was condemned at the Council of Nicaea (325 AD), which affirmed that Jesus is "of the same substance" (homoousios) as the Father.


The Nestorianism Debate --was about how Jesus divine and human Nature coexisted ---it said that Jesus was 2 distinct persons ----not one person with 2 natures -----

According to this ----It was condemned at the Council of Ephesus (431 AD).


The Filioque Debate -----the origin of the Holy Spirit -----

From Wikipeda
Filioque is a Latin phrase meaning "and the Son" (from filius, meaning "son," and -que, a Latin enclitic conjunction meaning "and"

Western Church added this phrase to the Nicene Creed to state that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

The Eastern Church strongly rejected this, arguing that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone.


I say -----Scripture confirms that -----The Father is sending the Holy Spirit -----Not the Father and the Son -----

John 14:26

“But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have told you.”

John 15:26
When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me." (ESV


From Bible Hub

Triadic Structure Underscoring the Trinity
1. “The Father” — sender and source

2. “The Holy Spirit” — personal agent sent

3. “In My [Jesus’] name” — authority and sphere of mission

Three distinct referents cooperate in a single redemptive action. The verse thus offers a snapshot of one God in three persons:
the Father commissioning,
the Son authorizing,
the Spirit acting.
 
I wonder why Jesus was so hard on the Pharisees, because they seem to have believed in a similar list....minus the Jesus as Messiah story?
The Pharisees Waterfall were very prideful ----They thought they were the Elite Class --they knew very well the Scriptures and could quote them but they had no Spiritual understanding of them ---and they made up their own rules about the Law -and added to God's law ----they neglected the poor ---and other important matters -----

Matthew 23:23 NIV
“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.
 
Paul was a Pharisee right? All Pharisees always believed in resurrection.... But not the Sadducees.
The key issue, Waterfalls, is not merely BELIEVING THE DOCTRINE EXISTS!

Pharisees affirmed resurrection as a concept while still rejecting Christ.

What changed for Paul was that God opened his eyes to see that Jesus IS the risen Messiah.

The Pharisees already had the category for resurrection. They just didn't believe it'd happened in Christ. That's why Paul could say he was worshipping his fathers' God while also preaching Jesus
 
You are missing my point. My point is that those controversies show ho much divergence there was in understanding who Jesus was/is
Counterfeit's existence, Gord, doesn't prove there was no authentic belief.

In many ways, it shows how seriously the church took getting Christ right
 
Back
Top