The Nicene Creed

[brother Paul]

Jacor...God, the Son (Creator of all worlds along with the Father and Spirit), became the Son of man (took on a human body) so the sons of men could become sons of God...so the Son, of God, was always God thus before the worlds, and "Jesus" who He became, came into this world to be the Lamb of sacrifice as a man so as to win back the dominion the first man forfeited. No man born of Adam could do this because all have sinned, and so we caused God to bear our sins.

 

[By Grace]

Jacor...God, the Son (Creator of all worlds along with the Father and Spirit), became the Son of man (took on a human body) so the sons of men could become sons of God...so the Son, of God, was always God thus before the worlds, and "Jesus" who He became, came into this world to be the Lamb of sacrifice as a man so as to win back the dominion the first man forfeited. No man born of Adam could do this because all have sinned, and so we caused God to bear our sins.

Are you Oneness, also, Paul?
Your posts here lead me to believe that is the case.

 

[jocor]

[QUOTE ="jocor, post: 1168519, member: 7232"] I know. As for your first sentence, Yeshua opposed roughly 2,000 years of Hebrew scholars who had access to the Hebrew Scriptures. His Spirit lives in me.

The Old Testament has no bearing on your O P because the document was written in 381 AD. It used the Greek texts of the NT as its basis because the Apostles and Gospel writers ALL WROTE IN KOINE GREEK. In other words, you are grasping at irrelevant straws to make your case, and it will not hold up to scrutiny.[/QUOTE]
Here is another example of you not reading my posts with understanding. You came against me because I was "opposing 1700 years of scholars, and the men who who had access to the Greek manuscripts that were closest to the original documents written by the Apostles, and the Gospel writers." Would you come against Yeshua for doing the same thing to 2000 years of Hebrew scholars? No. Yet, Yeshua's Spirit lives in me and directs me to oppose Greek scholars just as he opposed the Hebrew scholars. I was not trying to use Hebrew to support my case.

So far you have provided ZERO Scripture in English, the Latin of the original Nicene Creed, from the Kloine Greek of the New Testament, or from a recognized Bible Dictionary. Therefore, your assertion/promise to use Scripture to make your point.looks shaky at this point. and before I forget, you may supply one Greek word, but the analysis of merely one word without discussing the meaning in its context (the entire words from Scripture surrounding that word is simply being silly.

"ZERO Scripture"?? In post #2, I gave two verses to show the meaning of "begotten" in order to establish the time element of when Yeshua's begettal took place. You have not addressed either one. In post #13 I addressed the meaning of "monogenes" using a Greek lexicon, but you failed to address that as well.

Here is the phrase in English, Greek and Latin as found at http://www.earlychurchtexts.com/public/creed_of_nicaea_325.htm:

begotten from the Father, only-begotten,
γεννηθέντα ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς μονογενῆ
natum ex Patre unigenitum,​

So, in Greek we have the word γεννηθέντα meaning "born" and in Latin we have the word "natum" meaning "born". There was only one time when the Son was "born" and that is when he came out of Mary's womb. So the creed is saying the Son was born before all worlds.

 

[jocor]

Since you have no way of knowing from the things that they wrote what exactly they wrote, you are offering mere speculation, or a stab in the dark that has no foundation whatsoever.

If I have no way of knowing what exactly they wrote, how is it that Christians who recite the creed do? Are they reciting it even though they don't know what the authors wrote?

Since in this post, you are questioning the doctrine, and since you said previously of your own free will "I reject several key doctrines of post Apostolic Christianity..." I will ask you to declare if you are or are not a person who believes in Oneness. On other sites where I post, this is the same thing that they rail against, they use reasons similar to yours in saying as they do.

I totally reject the oneness doctrine as well as the trinity doctrine.

 

[brother Paul]

Are you Oneness, also, Paul?
Your posts here lead me to believe that is the case.

Your "case" is not correct. The Biblically emphatic ONE and ONLY GOD is also the three eternally distinct personae (persons).. this IS the Trinitarian doctrine believed and taught by those who learned from the Apostles and from those first generations of Bishops they trained and appointed. The One as three and the three in Unity (I just do not confuse the order). The one God is not simply a corporation of three nor three gods as one corporate Godhead. He is one and ONLY God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who has revealed Himself in three persons (Father, Word/Son, and the Holy Spirit)...

 

[jocor]

If you REALLY wanted to make a case for that Hebrew word, you should be able to do a word search in the Biblica Hebraica Westmensteris 4 for that word every time it was used in the text.

Then you would take a recognized major theological source such TWOT (Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament or the BDB (Brown Driver and Briggs Lexicon of Biblical Hebrew) and make your case from that. I will not go there to demonstrate that, but I mention it to show that theology that you are stating, which according to your own words, "You are also contending for the Son's eternal existence. I am not. " is totally unsupportable from Scripture. What you are doing is attempting to is to describe things in the Bible using new Age terminology, and are through this ruse (sophistry, actually) attempting to sew discord and disharmony among the brothers and sisters here.,

However, I shall only give you 38 Scripture references in English to demonstrate that Jesus Christ always was, and remains God.
Hebrews 13: 8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever

37 Proofs of the Deity of Christ

1. He was omnipotent over disease. Matt. 8:1–4; Luke 4:39
2. He was omnipotent over demons. Matt. 8:16–17, 28–32; Luke 4:35
3. He was omnipotent over men. Matt. 9:9; John 17:2
4. He was omnipotent over nature. Matt. 8:26
5. He was omnipotent over sin. Matt. 9:1–8
6. He was omnipotent over traditions. Matt. 9:10–17
7. He was omnipotent over death. Luke 7:14–15; 8:54–56; John 11:4
8. He was omniscient, knowing the whereabouts of Nathanael. John 1:48
9. He was omniscient, knowing the plot of Judas. John 6:70
10. He was omniscient, knowing the hearts of the Pharisees. Matt. 12:25; Luke 5:22; 6:8; 7:39–40
11. He knew the thoughts of the scribes. Matt. 9:3–4
12. He knew the sincerity of one scribe. Mark 12:34
13. He knew the history of the Samaritan woman. John 4:24
14. He knew the problems of his disciples. Luke 9:46–47
15. He was omnipresent. Matt. 18:20; 28:20; John 3:13; 14:20
16. He was worshiped as God by the angels. Heb. 1:6
17. He was worshiped as God by the shepherds. Luke 2:15
18. He was worshiped as God by the wise men. Matt. 2:2, 11
19. He was worshiped as God by a leper. Matt. 8:2
20. He was worshiped as God by a ruler. Matt. 9:18
21. He was worshiped as God by a Canaanite woman. Matt. 15:25
22. He was worshiped as God by a mother. Matt. 20:20
23. He was worshiped as God by a maniac. Mark 5:6
24. He was worshiped as God by a man born blind. John 9:38
25. He was worshiped as God by Thomas. John 20:28
26. He was worshiped as God by some Greeks. John 12:20–21
27. He was worshiped as God by his apostles. Matt. 14:33; 28:9
28. He forgave sins. Mark 2:5, 10–11
29. He judges. John 5:22
30. He saves. Matt 18:11; John 10:28
31. Stephen called him God. Acts 7:59
32. The eunuch called him God. Acts 8:37
33. Paul called him God. Gal. 2:20; Col. 1:15–17; 2:9; 1 Tim. 3:16; Titus 2:13
34. Peter called him God. 1 Pet. 3:22; 2 Pet. 1:17
35. Jude called him God. Jude 25
36. James called him God. James 2:1
37. John called him God. 1 John 5:20; Rev. 1:18; 19:16​

Willmington, H. L. (1987). Willmington’s book of Bible lists (pp. 166–167). Wheaton, IL: Tyndale.

There is NOTHING in these Scripture verses that support your opinions, and it is precisely because I am a Christian that I go to Scripture to derive my theology. What I noticed here, and in my study of Oneness on another forum, is that Oneness theology is basically "neo Gnosticism" and it has no Scripture taken in its context to support their belief system. As it is, the Oneness theology is as stable as is a house built from a deck of playing cards

You posted those verses in vain. We are not studying the deity of Christ. That is NOT the issue. The issue is, when was Yeshua "begotten", before or after "all worlds"? Answer the question with Scripture.

 

[jocor]

Jacor...God, the Son (Creator of all worlds along with the Father and Spirit), became the Son of man (took on a human body) so the sons of men could become sons of God...so the Son, of God, was always God thus before the worlds, and "Jesus" who He became, came into this world to be the Lamb of sacrifice as a man so as to win back the dominion the first man forfeited. No man born of Adam could do this because all have sinned, and so we caused God to bear our sins.

As I said to By Grace, so I say to you; We are not studying the deity of Christ. That is NOT the issue. The issue is, when was Yeshua "begotten", before or after "all worlds"? Answer the question with Scripture.

 

[jocor]

Jesus has always existed.
Before the ages, not worlds.
He was/is the "tree of life" in the garden.
He was Melchizedek.
God is Jesus, God begotten in the flesh was Jesus.
In Rev.1:7,8 states ,
Behold, He cometh with clouds, and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him, and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him....
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, Saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

We are not studying whether or not the Son always existed. That is NOT the issue. The issue is, when was Yeshua "begotten", before or after "all worlds"? Answer the question with Scripture.

 

[jocor]

You are all derailing this thread by turning it into a discussion about the deity or eternal existence of the Son. I presented my view in post #2 that the Son was begotten after the world was created. That is what you are supposed to be either accepting or rejecting. If you reject it, then show me where in Scripture the Son was "begotten" "before all worlds".

 

[By Grace]

You are all derailing this thread by turning it into a discussion about the deity or eternal existence of the Son. I presented my view in post #2 that the Son was begotten after the world was created. That is what you are supposed to be either accepting or rejecting. If you reject it, then show me where in Scripture the Son was "begotten" "before all worlds".

Of course, you are entitled to express your viewpoint.

However since that viewpoint is NOT expressed in Scripture, anywhere, I am challenging you to find a Bible-based foundation for that statement.

 

[brother Paul]

We are not studying whether or not the Son always existed. That is NOT the issue. The issue is, when was Yeshua "begotten", before or after "all worlds"? Answer the question with Scripture.

I did answer it from scripture. I gave it to you from Hebrews 1 and Hebrews 2..."Jesus" (Yeshua) was begotten after the creation of the worlds

 

[th1b.taylor]

While I do not want this thread derailed into a law thread, I just want to say that in my circles, it is the Messianics that see Paul upholding the law and mainline Christians seeing Paul abolishing the law.

Correct and on point.

 

[th1b.taylor]

But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. (Micah 5:2).
Since Christ is "from everlasting" He was begotten of the Father before all worlds. You can believe it or disbelieve it, but that does not change the fact.

Point on!

 

[th1b.taylor]

Jocor,
People will step outside of the intended context of an OP in a heart beat and demand you remain in the context they wish. I am following you here and someone has lready tried to chastise me, for what, not really sure.
as I said, you and i have disagreed in the past and we might in the future. But as I love to remind people studying the Word to move closer to our Father, I see Jesus, one day, after the Resurrection and the Catching Away, sitting us all, every single one of us, at His feet to straighten every single one of us out, theologically, perhaps even Paul, who spent three years in one on one instruction. we are pridefully messed up.

 

[Roro1972]

As I said to By Grace, so I say to you; We are not studying the deity of Christ. That is NOT the issue. The issue is, when was Yeshua "begotten", before or after "all worlds"? Answer the question with Scripture.

I just read that verse in 21 bibles and
Ages
Universe
world
worlds
no where is "all worlds"

 

[Sinthesis]

This is a link to an interesting thread that might have something to do with the OP:
http://www.monachos.net/conversation/topic/4788-the-use-of-born-vs-begotten-in-the-nicene-creed/

 

[th1b.taylor]

This is a link to an interesting thread that might have something to do with the OP:
http://www.monachos.net/conversation/topic/4788-the-use-of-born-vs-begotten-in-the-nicene-creed/

Yep, wish I had been able to go to college.

 

[jocor]

How is THAT relevant to your discussion of the Nicene Creed, a document written in 381?

Well, that is one problem we are having. The OP is dealing with the creed of 325 and you are referring to the creed of 381.

 

[jocor]

Of course, you are entitled to express your viewpoint.

However since that viewpoint is NOT expressed in Scripture, anywhere, I am challenging you to find a Bible-based foundation for that statement.

Precisely which statement are you referring to?

 

[jocor]

I did answer it from scripture. I gave it to you from Hebrews 1 and Hebrews 2..."Jesus" (Yeshua) was begotten after the creation of the worlds

So why are you coming against my view? I agree with you that Yeshua was begotten AFTER the creation of the worlds. However, that is not what the Nicene Creed of 325 is saying. It says " begotten of the Father BEFORE all worlds".