Greg wrote:
> The council of Nicea was a multiyear assembly
> of nearly every bishop in the church, bathed in
> prayer, and intent on dealing with heresy which
> had attempted to demean the nature of Christ.
> I assume they got it right. Do you have some
> specific disagreements with some of its precepts?
Actually, the council of Nicea was not "multiyear." There is some dispute
about exactly when it began, but it certainly was not longer than three
months. The emperor was there only for two months. The number of bishops
was not from every church, but numbered about 300. Note also that while the
decision is said to have been unanimous, two bishops were removed for
refusing to accept the creed. :-)
The Nicean Creed was changed two times since that original council in 325
A.D. One of the changes added the word "filioque" to indicate that the Holy
Spirit proceeded from both the father and the son, rather than from just the
father. The addition of this one word caused a division between the Roman
Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches.
On TruthTalk, before you came aboard, there was some discussion about
whether or not the Son of God is eternally begotten or if he was begotten
when he was born of Mary. The Nicean Creed of 325 was changed in 381, and
this "eternally begotten" phrase was added. Not all churches quote this 381
version, but many do. At least one TruthTalk member considered Judy to be
departing from orthodox Christianity by not believing that Jesus is the
"eternally begotten Son" as indicated by this 381 version of the Creed.
Judy believes that the Logos was eternally with the Father, not begotten,
but always was, and that the Scriptural indications of his being "begotten"
refer to the Logos becoming flesh, the time when the Holy Spirit came over
Mary and created a child within her womb.
The Nicene Creed is kind of interesting when you consider unity. It's
initial construction spent a great deal of time arguing over a single letter
of a single word. That letter was the Greek letter Iota. So they wrangled
over a single Iota, and the result was separating the Arians from
Christianity, although that did not happen when the creed was first adopted.
No, instead the Arians came to power and the Trinitarians who succeeded in
keeping that iota out of the creed were banished right after the Nicene
Creed was written.
So the Nicene Creed has a history of dividing Christians over a single iota,
and over a single word ("the filioque"), and at least on TruthTalk, it has
caused division over the 381 A.D. addition of the unbiblical phrase,
"eternally begotten Son."
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know
how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL
PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to
join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
