So what is wrong with the Nicene Creed?

[LittleNipper]

Originally Posted by Misshalfway

I think the more powerful question is "What is RIGHT with the Nicean Creed?"

1500 years is impressive, I will agree. But truth is eternal It was in the beginning and is the same now. I want truth from the beginning of time and the consistency of that truth over the expanse of peoples and cultures and counsels of learned men doing the best they can.

My intent was for a LDS to tell me exactly what he disagrees with. It would seem that they do agree with some of it.

[tomk]

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

Well, look at it this way. My dad is made of flesh, blood and bone. "I", my dad's son, am also made of flesh, blood and bone. We are both made of the same substance, but we are two individuals. The FATHER, the SON, and the HOLY SPIRIT are all GOD stuff. They are three beings but are all GOD stuff.

As for the Catholic Church, I see that as being the Universal CHURCH --- the body of ALL SAVED INDIVIDUALS that ever lived. No matter where that individual maybe found, as a saved individual, he/she is part of the Universal CHURCH.

What is the POINT of your post?

It seems apparent to me that you understand we do not have a Trinitarian view of the Godhead.

You understand our point of view but you reject it. You believe the Godhead is ONE SUBSTANCE. Three beings but ONE God, literally.

We do not believe that. We believe they are and always have been three seperate, distinct beings, not ONE substance, but ONE in purpose.


Can you be a little more specific in what you are trying to accomplish here? Let's not keep going in circles, please.



Tom

[Misshalfway]

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

My intent was for a LSD to tell me exactly what he disagrees with. It would seem that they do agree with some of it.

I think you are missing my point. I am telling you why I disagree with it. I disagree with it because 1500 years of belief doesn't make something true. Tradition isn't enough to convince me.

And I never said I didn't agree with parts of it. It is mans attempt to explain God. Not God's explanation to man of who and what He is.

Ceeboo's 2 cents

Asking LDS folk " what is wrong with the Nicene Creed " is, IMHO, a starting point that will get stopped before it even gets started. ( It also has no mutual benefit to any )

With the understanding of the " first vision " and respecting what that represents to my LDS friends, this thread has NO CHANCE of going anywhere.

Just my thoughts

Ceeboo

[Misshalfway]

You know.....I don't think I answered completely accurately. I answered from my head, and not from my heart. I do have my intellectual objections to the creed but really it comes down to answers I have received from my personal one on one communications with Father in Heaven.

I think man in all cultures has tried to explain and understand God. The Nicean Creed and the Godhead are both part of the effort and for all I know.....(without the Spirit of God to confirm)....either one could be true or both completely false.

The only way to really settle the question once and for all is to go to God himself. If any of us lack wisdom, HE will give us light to understand and know. And I know that the Godhead is the truth. I know it because in the quietness of my bedroom and in the personal-ness of my scripture study and pondering, God has taught me through the holy Spirit the truth on this question -- even when I have argued with Him. In the end, this is why I can't believe in the Trinity.....even though so many others do and prize it as the foundation of their faith.

[LittleNipper]

Originally Posted by tomk

What is the POINT of your post?

It seems apparent to me that you understand we do not have a Trinitarian view of the Godhead.

You understand our point of view but you reject it. You believe the Godhead is ONE SUBSTANCE. Three beings but ONE God, literally.

We do not believe that. We believe they are and always have been three seperate, distinct beings, not ONE substance, but ONE in purpose.


Can you be a little more specific in what you are trying to accomplish here? Let's not keep going in circles, please.



Tom

Well Tom,

I would submit to you that more than simply Mormons read these posts. I'm a prime example. This is called the Christian Beliefs Board and so I would assume that there are others like myself reading these threads.

(I might as you the very same question.)

They like myself wish to more fully understand what Mormons actually do base their doctrine and beliefs on and why.

There may also be those among the crowd who really do not totally disregard Trinitarian doctrine as false. They maybe sitting on the fence, hopefully asking GOD to provide some wisdom in this matter...

Circles have a way of wearing a track that sometimes get through the thickest finish and begin to change the underlying foundation underneath.

I believe GOD is GOD and HE has always been GOD. Do you believe that?
I believe I have always been a created being and because of Adam's sin I have always been a sinner. Do you accept that?

The problem that I see is that the Bible clearly states that there is but ONE GOD. I know that the FATHER is GOD, that the SON is GOD and that the HOLY SPIRIT is GOD. So understandably one must conclude that THEY are GOD and not gods.

I see three seperate persons united as one GOD. Seperate and equal, but having what appears different roles.

What can you explain without Joseph Smith. I know that I can explain nothing without GOD's WORD, and that is why I as a christian rely on it seemingly to the disappointment of some...

[gabelpa]

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

I believe I have always been a created being and because of Adam's sin I have always been a sinner. Do you accept that?

As LDS, no, I do not accept that. We are as eternal as God, having always existed, but becoming adopted, and quickened by our Father in Heaven to become his Spirit children before this Universe was even created.

Adam fell that men might be, and men are that they might have joy. <- not me, Book of Mormon. Give it a read sometime, looking for truth, not things that you don't want to believe. I believe that Adam and Eve needed to choose to sin, and become separated from God so that we could come to this Earth.

We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression. <- Second article of Faith of the LDS Church. We are here, because Adam and Eve made a choice. We also make a choice, and come to this Earth in a perfect state. All men sin and transgress, all except for Jesus, who never transgressed, and never sinned. Thus, he remained perfect, and able to pay the price for our sins, and act as a mediator between us and Heavenly Father, and our Advocate. Jesus is Mercy, Heavenly Father is Justice.

[Maxel]

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

A few points of confusion/discrepancy for me:

'I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth'
I do not subscribe to the doctrine of ex nihilo, or the doctrine that God made everything out of nothing. I believe God organized preexisting matter into the Earth. I have no qualms with the term 'Maker', but knowing a little bit about the Creeds (and I speak of the Nicene and later creeds when I say 'Creeds'), I know the doctrine of ex nihilo is supported by them.

'And in one Lord Jesus Christ... God of God, Light of Light, very God of God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father...'
I don't believe Christ is of one substance with the Father. I believe the two are separate beings. I also am hesitant about accepting the words 'God of God, Light of Light, very God of God'- what do they mean? I'm sure someone can explain those phrases, but right now they are no more than philosophical mumbo jumbo to me. I could guess at a meaning, but I wouldn't want to assume the Nicene Creed says something it actually doesn't.

'And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son...'
I don't believe the Holy Ghost is Lord and Giver of Life, as I understand the term. I believe the Holy Ghost's role is to testify of truth and carry revelation and the word of God to the hearts of man. If one understands 'Life' as the word of God, then yes I guess he is the Giver of Life; however I understand 'Life' as meaning the physical forces that allow us to eat, breathe, live, repent, etc.- forces I believe work under the influence and direction of the Light of Christ, which emanates from Christ Himself and not the Holy Ghost.

'And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.'
I fully agree with this part. I find it ironic that many Protestants who accept this creed and its intellectual progeny do not believe in an apostolic Church, and catholic only in the sense that all believers are the body of Christ with no need for uniformity of practice, doctrine, etc. I have noted your belief about the 'apostolic' concept, but I personally reject the idea that God would found his Church in one manner, then let it continue to grow in another manner- I see it as planting a carrot but expecting a pear to grow from it. I fear the refusal to believe in apostolic succession comes from the belief that Christ's church could still be found on Earth after the general time of the New Testament (with recorded apostles)- that is, the lack of belief in living apostles arises from tradition instead of revealed scripture.

My biggest problem with the Nicene Creed itself is that it cements the tradition that God's word is to be interpreted by the philosophical lens of men in councils, and not the Biblical example of prophets, seers, and revelators. My big problems with the theology of the early Christian Creeds mainly begins with the Athanasian Creed, and lies largely in the fact that many accept the Creeds as truth on par with the Bible

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

I don't hold it to be "scripture," but as a Christian I do hold it to be a reasonable guide to what the Bible says...

I do not disagree with you here. In fact, I most decidedly agree with you- the Creeds are a guide, not scripture themselves. As all guides, they can be wrong. There are verses in the Bible that lend credence to the ideas found in the Nicene and other Creeds. However, I adamantly reject the idea that the Trinity and other doctrines set forth in the creeds are the only interpretation supported by scripture. When I read the creeds, I see the language and understanding of men, not God. I see the representatives of Athens, not Jerusalem.

Authoritative, prophetic interpretation of scripture is just as important as having authoritative, prophetic scripture itself. Otherwise, sundry heresies and blasphemies could draw 'support' from scripture.

Also- where did you find the information you posted in post # 10? Drawing from outside sources is fine, but you need to cite your source. I don't think they're your words because of the length of the post and the sharp contrast in writing styles- particularly your usually ever present capitalization of the words GOD, CHRIST, HOLY GHOST, etc.

[LittleNipper]

Originally Posted by Maxel

A few points of confusion/discrepancy for me:

'I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth'
I do not subscribe to the doctrine of ex nihilo, or the doctrine that God made everything out of nothing. I believe God organized preexisting matter into the Earth. I have no qualms with the term 'Maker', but knowing a little bit about the Creeds (and I speak of the Nicene and later creeds when I say 'Creeds'), I know the doctrine of ex nihilo is supported by them.

'And in one Lord Jesus Christ... God of God, Light of Light, very God of God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father...'
I don't believe Christ is of one substance with the Father. I believe the two are separate beings. I also am hesitant about accepting the words 'God of God, Light of Light, very God of God'- what do they mean? I'm sure someone can explain those phrases, but right now they are no more than philosophical mumbo jumbo to me. I could guess at a meaning, but I wouldn't want to assume the Nicene Creed says something it actually doesn't.

'And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son...'
I don't believe the Holy Ghost is Lord and Giver of Life, as I understand the term. I believe the Holy Ghost's role is to testify of truth and carry revelation and the word of God to the hearts of man. If one understands 'Life' as the word of God, then yes I guess he is the Giver of Life; however I understand 'Life' as meaning the physical forces that allow us to eat, breathe, live, repent, etc.- forces I believe work under the influence and direction of the Light of Christ, which emanates from Christ Himself and not the Holy Ghost.

'And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.'
I fully agree with this part. I find it ironic that many Protestants who accept this creed and its intellectual progeny do not believe in an apostolic Church, and catholic only in the sense that all believers are the body of Christ with no need for uniformity of practice, doctrine, etc. I have noted your belief about the 'apostolic' concept, but I personally reject the idea that God would found his Church in one manner, then let it continue to grow in another manner- I see it as planting a carrot but expecting a pear to grow from it. I fear the refusal to believe in apostolic succession comes from the belief that Christ's church could still be found on Earth after the general time of the New Testament (with recorded apostles)- that is, the lack of belief in living apostles arises from tradition instead of revealed scripture.

My biggest problem with the Nicene Creed itself is that it cements the tradition that God's word is to be interpreted by the philosophical lens of men in councils, and not the Biblical example of prophets, seers, and revelators. My big problems with the theology of the early Christian Creeds mainly begins with the Athanasian Creed, and lies largely in the fact that many accept the Creeds as truth on par with the Bible

I do not disagree with you here. In fact, I most decidedly agree with you- the Creeds are a guide, not scripture themselves. As all guides, they can be wrong. There are verses in the Bible that lend credence to the ideas found in the Nicene and other Creeds. However, I adamantly reject the idea that the Trinity and other doctrines set forth in the creeds are the only interpretation supported by scripture. When I read the creeds, I see the language and understanding of men, not God. I see the representatives of Athens, not Jerusalem.

Authoritative, prophetic interpretation of scripture is just as important as having authoritative, prophetic scripture itself. Otherwise, sundry heresies and blasphemies could draw 'support' from scripture.

Also- where did you find the information you posted in post # 10? Drawing from outside sources is fine, but you need to cite your source. I don't think they're your words because of the length of the post and the sharp contrast in writing styles- particularly your usually ever present capitalization of the words GOD, CHRIST, HOLY GHOST, etc.

I found the information at a Lutherian site. I found it helpful and nearly in full agreement with what I hold to be my Christian stand.

[Hemidakota]

Originally Posted by LittleNipper

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

I don't hold it to be "scripture," but as a Christian I do hold it to be a reasonable guide to what the Bible says...

Why bother with the creed of apostates and pagans, when we have the opportunity to be a first-hand witness of the Godhead...