The Nicene Creed

[smaller]

I never acknowledged the "eternal existence of the Son". I said, "I am not contending against the Son's eternal existence in this thread."

Of course you are when you are claiming "made" later.

 

[smaller]

The translators put the wrong name there. They made the same mistake in Hebrews 4:8.

Joshua, the successor of Moses was not the party addressed in either sight. The Spirit of Christ, Jesus, is. Name terminology notwithstanding.

 

[jocor]

Paul, a Pharisee since birth, well acquainted with the acceptable understandings of his day, draws attention to the special nature of the birth of Y’shua in his writings as well. In instances of normal human births, Paul uses the Greek verb “gennao“ meaning born or begotten. However, with deeper reflection we find that this verb implies the necessity of a human father! But when referring to Messiah, Paul only uses “ginomai“ which means ‘comes to be’ or ‘came to exist’. So when we read in Romans 1:3 that he “came of the seed of David according to the flesh“, we see that Paul avoids ‘gennao’ even though referring to His earthly birth, thereby revealing Him as “the coming one” that previous generations had anticipated which I believe was inspired from the prophecy of Daniel’s weeks of years.

Matthew 1:16; 2:1, 4; and Luke 1:35 all use "gennao" in reference to the Son. Even Yeshua, in John 18:37, says he was "born" (gennao).

In Philippians 2:7 where Messiah “came to be in the likeness of men“, Paul is revealing to us that this is no mere human male born by natural means, and again makes the point most clearly in Galatians 4:4, where he tells us that the Son of God came into existence by the woman (of a specific woman, and outside of the natural order of things). Yet in the same context, where he speaks of Isaac and Ishmael, they are both born after the natural order. This contrasting distinction throughout the writings of Paul between Messiah’s birth and normal human births is a point often missed by most when reading only in the English, or in some other second or third generation translations.

Sadly, knowing that most are ignorant of this fact, many apostates of the critical school declare that Paul never mentions the virgin birth, as if the doctrine was not a significant 1rst century Christian doctrine. This is obviously faulty logic.

I agree he was "no mere human male". He has no earthly father and was born of a virgin. It is in this sense that he was "uniquely begotten".

 

[jocor]

The Spirit of Christ spoke through Moses. So, yes Jesus was in the wilderness church.

From Acts 7:20 to 7:44, the primary subject is Moses.

Acts 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:​

I can't tell you how many times I was told by a Christian that the angel of YHWH in the bush was the Son. So was the Son talking to the Son?

 

[jocor]

Joshua, the successor of Moses was not the party addressed in either sight. The Spirit of Christ, Jesus, is. Name terminology notwithstanding.

Almost every post KJV Bible corrects these glaring mistakes in both verses.

 

[jocor]

Of course you are when you are claiming "made" later.

The only reason I brought up "made" was because the creed contradicted itself by saying the Son was "begotten, not made" and later said the Son "was made man".

 

[smaller]

The only reason I brought up "made" was because the creed contradicted itself by saying the Son was "begotten, not made" and later said the Son "was made man".

Yes, in accord with His specific human body. This does not mean The Son did not exist prior and the scriptures confirm this many times. There is no contradiction.

John 8:58
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

 

[smaller]

Almost every post KJV Bible corrects these glaring mistakes in both verses.

I think we're familiar with Jesus being a slant on the pronouncing of Joshua/Iesous, so that's just a cop out.

 

[smaller]

From Acts 7:20 to 7:44, the primary subject is Moses.

Acts 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:​

I can't tell you how many times I was told by a Christian that the angel of YHWH in the bush was the Son. So was the Son talking to the Son?

Noted prior that the the Spirit of Christ spoke through the prophets. 1 Peter 1:10-11. And was also "in the church in the wilderness."

1 Cor. 10:
4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.

 

[By Grace]

I am not a Messianic Jew. Why must you label me and put me in one of your boxes?

I did that because of your avatar stating that you were not a Christian, and the fact that you stated that others told you face-to-face that you were not a Christian.

It all boils down to the issue of presumption as well as ability to read other languages.

Supposing I begin a club, and I say that only those who can read Ethiopian (as an example) can join. But you only know English, How is it that you can tell me who to invite into my club or not to invite, or what the by-laws of the club should state?

That is what you are essentially doing. You are on the outside of the "club" by your own admission, yet you try to tell me how I should run things there? That is what I mean by "presumption".

So as a courtesy to you, I ask you to identify the religious label that best describes yourself. Of course you do not have to do that, nor do you have to post here, either. Both are your free will choices. but should you choose to reveal yourself, it would be easier for ll other posters to discuss things with you here.

My point here is since you are the one who is attempting to make the case for the "errors in the Nicene C\reed as translated into English", you have the forensic (debating) burden to support your case by providing evidence for what you state first.

You have referenced other Scripture verses that says, "This supports my belief..." but you have STILL not exactly stated why you believe that the Nicene Creed is wrong, except by your own say-so.

 

[th1b.taylor]

Jocor, Smaller is correct about your words stating the Son of God condemns the notion, actually fact, that Jesus, the Son of God, has not existed as long the Father has and why are you so sensitive to being recognized as a Completed Jew? Grace is not attacking you and all of us are here to learn from one another.

 

[JLB]

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.

And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. Colossians 1:17

Before anything that was made, Jesus was before it.

Before the worlds were made, Jesus was there and in Him all worlds consist, being made from Him and having consisted from within Him, before all things.


JLB

 

[jocor]

Yes, in accord with His specific human body. This does not mean The Son did not exist prior and the scriptures confirm this many times. There is no contradiction.

I don't know what the problem is smaller, but you keep trying to prove that the Son preexisted even though I am NOT trying to prove he didn't preexist. All I'm trying to prove is that he was not "begotten" before the creation of the world. If you can show me how he was, then we can put an end to this issue. The term "begotten," as I understand it, can only refer to three things 1) His resurrection (Acts 13:33) 2) a spiritual begetting (1Co 4:15) 3) his conception/birth (John 1:14), all of which took or take place after the creation of the world.

 

[jocor]

I think we're familiar with Jesus being a slant on the pronouncing of Joshua/Iesous, so that's just a cop out.

Not sure what you mean. "Jesus" and "Joshua" are two different beings that bear the same Greek rendering of their name. Post KJV Bibles corrected the name from "Jesus" to "Joshua" because they knew those verses were not references to the Son.

 

[jocor]

Noted prior that the the Spirit of Christ spoke through the prophets. 1 Peter 1:10-11. And was also "in the church in the wilderness."

1 Cor. 10:
4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.

See post #93

 

[jocor]

I did that because of your avatar stating that you were not a Christian, and the fact that you stated that others told you face-to-face that you were not a Christian.

It all boils down to the issue of presumption as well as ability to read other languages.

Supposing I begin a club, and I say that only those who can read Ethiopian (as an example) can join. But you only know English, How is it that you can tell me who to invite into my club or not to invite, or what the by-laws of the club should state?

That is what you are essentially doing. You are on the outside of the "club" by your own admission, yet you try to tell me how I should run things there? That is what I mean by "presumption".

It is called "love", not "presumption". Even though I am not permitted in the club unless I believe certain man-made by-laws, I still love those who would keep me out. If I see something is going on in the club that is detrimental to others, I speak up so they can determine for themselves if it is indeed harmful. If they don't believe me or could care less, so be it. At least I warned them of the danger.

So as a courtesy to you, I ask you to identify the religious label that best describes yourself. Of course you do not have to do that, nor do you have to post here, either. Both are your free will choices. but should you choose to reveal yourself, it would be easier for ll other posters to discuss things with you here

I do not belong to any denomination and don't have a label for myself. The best I can do is say I am a member of the Body of Messiah, although, I have had so called believers try to kick me out of that exclusive club as well. Whatever. I belong to Yeshua and that is all that matters.

You have referenced other Scripture verses that says, "This supports my belief..." but you have STILL not exactly stated why you believe that the Nicene Creed is wrong, except by your own say-so.

I am trying to do that, but others would rather derail my effort. My first point was to show it is wrong because it teaches the Son was "begotten of the Father before all worlds." You agreed with me that the Son was begotten after the creation of the worlds. Does that not prove, at least to you, that the creed is wrong on that point?

 

[JLB]

The term "begotten," as I understand it, can only refer to three things 1) His resurrection (Acts 13:33) 2) a spiritual begetting (1Co 4:15) 3) his conception/birth (John 1:14), all of which took or take place after the creation of the world.

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. Colossians 1:15-17

He is the firstborn over all creation, and is before all things.

15 who is the image of the invisible God, first-born of all creation,
16 because in him were the all things created, those in the heavens, and those upon the earth, those visible, and those invisible, whether thrones, whether lordships, whether principalities, whether authorities; all things through him, and for him, have been created,
17 and himself is before all, and the all things in him have consisted. YLT

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. KJV

Peter says it this way:

Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

2 Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, 3 as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, 4 by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. 2 Peter 1:1-4


JLB

 

[jocor]

Jocor, Smaller is correct about your words stating the Son of God condemns the notion, actually fact, that Jesus, the Son of God, has not existed as long the Father has and why are you so sensitive to being recognized as a Completed Jew? Grace is not attacking you and all of us are here to learn from one another.

If I was from the tribe of Judah, perhaps I would be a "Completed Jew". However, I don't know what tribe I am from or that I have any Israeli blood in me at all. I do know for a fact that I have been grafted into the natural olive tree of Israel and am therefore an Israelite through Yeshua.

 

[jocor]

And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. Colossians 1:17

Before anything that was made, Jesus was before it.

Before the worlds were made, Jesus was there and in Him all worlds consist, being made from Him and having consisted from within Him, before all things.


JLB

We are NOT discussing the pre-existence doctrine.

 

[jocor]

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. Colossians 1:15-17

He is the firstborn over all creation, and is before all things.


Peter says it this way:

Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

2 Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, 3 as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, 4 by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. 2 Peter 1:1-4


JLB

Show me from Scripture or lexicons that the word "begotten" in English, Hebrew, Greek or Latin refers to anything other than something that takes place after one's conception.