Featured Nicene Creed

The Nicene Creed forms the Doctrine of the Trinity.

It was written in 325 (a little over 50 years before the Catholic Church was planted). It would be added to in 381 but represents one of the main pre-Catholic Church creeds today.

Note - "catholic" in this creed means "universal", NOT Catholic Church (like Baptists used "catholic" in the 19th century to mean "true church").


The (Original) Nicene Creed of 325

We 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 Son of God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages.

Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one essence with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salva on, came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man.

And He was crucified for us under Pontus Pilate, and suffered, and was buried. And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead; whose Kingdom shall have no end. And in the Holy Spirit.

But as for those who say, There was when He was not, and, before being born He was not, and that He came into existence out of nothing, or who assert that the Son of God is from a different hypostasis or substance, or is created, or is subject to altera on or change – these the catholic church anathemizes.


I understand that some deny Eternal Generation in the Doctrine of the Trinity.

Are there any other points of disagreement?


I get that today "catholic" is confusing.....so that would be one word I'd change for clarity. The point is that of anybody rejects those truths they are to be "cast from" the church ("given over to Satan").

 

I take it those who reject Eternal Generation (that the Godhead is internal in regard to the relationship of the Word within the Trinity) should also reject that the Eternal nature of the Spirit.

 

Let's look at the doctrines that comprise tge Doctrine of the Trinity:



We believe in one God, the Father almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. [YHWH)

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten, begotten of the Father before all ages.

Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made [EternalGeneration], of one essence with the Father by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salva on, came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary [Virgin Birth] and became man [Incarnation].

And He was crucified for us under Pontus Pilate, and suffered, and was buried. And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures [Resurrection]; and ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead [All Judgment Given to the Son] whose Kingdom shall have no end. And in the Holy Spirit [Eternal Procession]

But as for those who say, There was when He was not, and, before being born He was not, and that He came into existence out of nothing, or who assert that the Son of God is from a different hypostasis or substance, or is created, or is subject to altera on or change – these the catholic church anathemizes [rejection equates to non-Christian doctrine]


Here, @37818 , is the place for you to make your case against the Doctrine of the Trinity.

 

@37818 ,

If you wantvan outlet to reject orthodox Christianity and argue for heresy....here it is.

 

No, of course not.

The creed presents pure Biblical teaching on the Trinity in order to guard against heresy.

The readon it came into being was the rise of various heresies as people tried to work through the Trinity.

Regarding Christ, they addressed issues such as Christ being fully God and fully man (without division and mixture). This means a doctrine that teaches Jesus is less than God in His divinity, or more than man in His humanity, is a heresy.

Regarding the Word, they addressed heresies that denied the immutable nature of the Godhead. The Word be coming flesh did not change the divine relationship between the Persons of the Trinity (Eternal Generation and Eternal Procession).


When people gather Binlical truths about a topic into one document, that is not a replacement for Scripture but a concise agreement with Scripture to guard against heresy.

 

Probably because Pilate represented the "World" under which He suffered and died.

There is also the forgiveness Jesus expressed to the Jews, and Peter's sermon that they acted in ignorance and therefore could be forgiven.

 

Sounds good......still is Eternal Generation, but it would be easier to understand it many.

 

Note that you used the term "Father" in your rewrite.


The "generation" part stands. The Word eternally "comes forth" from the Father.

I do believe that the Word eternally "comes forth" from the Father, and since I believe this to be an eternal relationship I believe that this did not change when the Word became flesh.


I have offered several OT examples of this. Granted, these could be isolated instances spread out over Scripture.

BUT you have not offered a defence for a change within the Trinity with the Incarnation.

In fact, your use of "Father" seems to recognize that the Word eternally comes forth from the Father.


BTW, why did you choose to call the 1st Person of the Trinity "Father"?

 

The Roman Empire represented "the World" to the 1st century Jews and Christians. Pilate was the representative in delivering sentence.

What the Jewish leaders did not recognize was that they were a part of that system.

The Jews were "called out" of "tgecWorld" to be a nation belonging uniquely to God. Branches were cut off and Gentiles "grafted in".

Christians are the "true Jew", regardless of Jewish ethnicity.

 

I am. I believe that the relationship between the Persons of the Trinity is eternal (One immutable God).

There are Biblical examples....specifically stating that God is immutable, that Christ is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the World, that the Word "comes forth" from the Father.

I cannot ignore that relationship when I see it throughout the OT.

 

Yes, that is the issue (whether the Word "comes forth" from the Father).

"Begotten" in this usage does not mean "born" or that He had a beginning. It means "sent", hence the term "come forth" (generated).

AND it is not logical when matched with Eternal.....but "eternal" alleviates your objections.

The "begotten" part also carties the meaning of "consubstantial with the Father" or "of the same substance".


You reject that the Word "eternally comes forth" from the Father and is "consubstantial with the Father" or "of the same substance".

In other words, the Word is always the Word. The Father is always the Father. The Spirit is always the Spirit.

That is fine. You reject the Doctrine of the Trinity. Nobody says you have to accept it


Do you also reject the Spirit comes from God?

 

Here is a Piper article that may help clarify:

Why Does It Matter That Christ Was ‘Begotten, Not Made’?