The Nicene Creed

[smaller]

I have no slant.

IF eternal Sonship is valid it might seem that the balance is a somewhat muted point.

You are choosing to make this a personal issue when all I am trying to do is determine what γεννηθέντα means and how it relates to the Son being γεννηθέντα before creation.

And it appears, as it has been brought up many times now, that there is a distinction regarding Jesus' human body, as a made body. Which I don't think anyone has denied as it's quite obvious.

It is so hard for you to believe that I am led by the Holy Spirit and the Scriptures and not by the creeds and traditions of any particular camp?

There's quite a long list of variants that have been floated and examined. Your sight slots in somewhere in those variants. And perhaps not in a good direction. Generally speaking where there are variants there are a bag of other postures of the strange kind to go with it.

Rev. 1:
7 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. Even so, Amen.
8 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.

Rev. 19:
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords.

 

[th1b.taylor]

This is turning into a push of personal pride, not good.

 

[smaller]

This is turning into a push of personal pride, not good.

There have been numerous claims throughout history that The Son was not/is not God or was not God in human form. It's a fairly critical component to the Gospel, regardless.

Denigration of The Son to a lesser status is generally outside of legitimate postures. It's also a common denominator among various cults.

 

[jocor]

No you didn't show that Jesus was not begotten before all things.

Here is how γεννηθεντος was used in Matthew 2:1:




This shows Jesus was born in the womb of Mary, as He became flesh.

Then you also agree that the Greek word γεννηθεντος refers to being born of a woman. Great. That is what I believe. Therefore, when the creed in question says the Son was "γεννηθεντος of the Father before all worlds," it is an impossibility since he was not born of a woman before creation.

 

[brother Paul]

Here is the 325 version

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, 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 [both in heaven and on earth]
Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man;
He suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven
From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
And in the Holy Spirit.
[But those who say: 'There was a time when he was not;' and 'He was not before he was made;' and 'He was made out of nothing,' or 'He is of another substance' or 'essence,' or 'The Son of God is created,' or 'changeable,' or 'alterable'— they are condemned by the holy catholic and apostolic Church.

IMHO "begotten" as used here (as their own qualifying afterthought would indicate) means eternally generated...as being part of the Nature of God

 

[JLB]

Then you also agree that the Greek word γεννηθεντος refers to being born of a woman. Great. That is what I believe. Therefore, when the creed in question says the Son was "γεννηθεντος of the Father before all worlds," it is an impossibility since he was not born of a woman before creation.

Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, 2 saying, “Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him.” Matthew 2:1

Refers to Jesus being born of the woman Mary.


15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. Colossians 1:15

This verse is a reference to Him as the Spirit of the Lord God, before He became flesh.

Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 2 Corinthians 3:17

Your "theology" seems to exclude Jesus as Lord in the OT, and only focuses on Jesus as a Man, in the role of the Christ or Messiah.

There is certainly a lack of "rightly dividing the word" on your part, to only see Jesus as a Man.


Maybe you could offer an explanation, as to how He was before all things, and in Him all things consist, being only a man.

For example: How does the moon and the stars, and all people and planets, consist in Him, as only a man?

...and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ; Ephesians 3:9

All things were created through Him, by Him and for Him.

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



JLB

 

[By Grace]

Then you also agree that the Greek word γεννηθεντος refers to being born of a woman. Great. That is what I believe. Therefore, when the creed in question says the Son was "γεννηθεντος of the Father before all worlds," it is an impossibility since he was not born of a woman before creation.

You are focusing in a twig, but ignoring the forest of information before you. For example, consider EACH of these DIVINE announcements about Jesus

8 Divine Announcements Concerning Christ’s Birth

1. To Zacharias Luke 1:17, 76
2. To Mary Luke 1:31, 35
3. To Elisabeth Luke 1:41–43
4. To Joseph Matthew 1:20–21
5. To the shepherds Luke 2:10–12
6. To the wise men Matthew 2:1–2
7. To Simeon Luke 2:25–32
8. To Anna Luke 2:38​

Willmington, H. L. (1987). Willmington’s book of Bible lists (p. 164). Wheaton, IL: Tyndale.
Each of these are important because they involve angelic beings who cannot lie telling humans about Jesus Christ, some before Jesus was born.

Why would God have each of the messengers tell the same message to so many people if Jesus began at his birth?

Are you not aware that EVERY book in the OT has at least one reference to Jesus Christ? That is 1500+ years of redemptive history. You can focus on your misunderstanding of your one Greek word, which is a twig, or else you can focus on the entire forest of evidence in front of you. I just showed you a few trees.

 

[jocor]

Here is the 325 version

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, 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 [both in heaven and on earth]
Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man;
He suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven
From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
And in the Holy Spirit.
[But those who say: 'There was a time when he was not;' and 'He was not before he was made;' and 'He was made out of nothing,' or 'He is of another substance' or 'essence,' or 'The Son of God is created,' or 'changeable,' or 'alterable'— they are condemned by the holy catholic and apostolic Church.]

IMHO "begotten" as used here (as their own qualifying afterthought would indicate) means eternally generated...as being part of the Nature of God

First, I want to thank you for being the only person who understands what I am asking concerning "begotten" in the creed of 381 and who has attempted to answer it from a linguistic point of view rather than a doctrinal point of view.

As for your last statement, they may have had that idea in mind concerning "only begotten", but you are assuming the phrase in brackets is defining "begotten of the Father". It seems to me they are defining "only begotten" (a totally different Greek word than "begotten".

Also, your quote of the creed omitted the final bracket that I added in red. The final phrase between brackets is sad indeed. It was designed to silence and condemn brethren in the faith (that saw Scripture differently) through the use of fear of condemnation. That statement emboldened the supposed "holy catholic and apostolic Church" to put millions of our brothers and sisters in Messiah to death via a variety of tortures.

 

[smaller]

Also, your quote of the creed omitted the final bracket that I added in red. The final phrase between brackets is sad indeed. It was designed to silence and condemn brethren in the faith (that saw Scripture differently) through the use of fear of condemnation. That statement emboldened the supposed "holy catholic and apostolic Church" to put millions of our brothers and sisters in Messiah to death via a variety of tortures.

And others not of the RCC can simply say the statement is TRUE, but those who don't agree are simply wrong headed on the subject matter. So let's be careful how we toss the blanket.

 

[jocor]

JLB, By Grace and others who continue to post doctrinal defenses of Messiah's preexistence or deity. This will be the last time I try to clarify my intent. In the future, I will simply ignore such posts. I am NOT attacking your doctrinal beliefs. I AM attacking the use of γεννηθεντος in the 381 creed in which the authors use it to refer to a time prior to creation. My contention is that γεννηθεντος can ONLY refer to being born of flesh (a post creation event). If you wish to address that issue, then prove to me via lexicons or Greek texts that show it can refer to a time prior to creation.

 

[brother Paul]

First, I want to thank you for being the only person who understands what I am asking concerning "begotten" in the creed of 381 and who has attempted to answer it from a linguistic point of view rather than a doctrinal point of view.

As for your last statement, they may have had that idea in mind concerning "only begotten", but you are assuming the phrase in brackets is defining "begotten of the Father". It seems to me they are defining "only begotten" (a totally different Greek word than "begotten".

Also, your quote of the creed omitted the final bracket that I added in red. The final phrase between brackets is sad indeed. It was designed to silence and condemn brethren in the faith (that saw Scripture differently) through the use of fear of condemnation. That statement emboldened the supposed "holy catholic and apostolic Church" to put millions of our brothers and sisters in Messiah to death via a variety of tortures.

Sad, but the emperor was concerned with unity for political purposes. Many dissenters were not killed or tortured, just cut off from the Table and basically ignored, The Monophysites and Arians were allowed to continue but were not recognized. To be anathematized was a declaration of spiritual condemnation not physical.

 

[By Grace]

JLB, By Grace and others who continue to post doctrinal defenses of Messiah's preexistence or deity. This will be the last time I try to clarify my intent. In the future, I will simply ignore such posts. I am NOT attacking your doctrinal beliefs. I AM attacking the use of γεννηθεντος in the 381 creed in which the authors use it to refer to a time prior to creation. My contention is that γεννηθεντος can ONLY refer to being born of flesh (a post creation event). If you wish to address that issue, then prove to me via lexicons or Greek texts that show it can refer to a time prior to creation.

Of course, you are NOT attacking our doctrinal beliefs, but you are indeed attacking the Nicene Creed, on which we base our beliefs. That is a distinction without a difference.

You posted, "My contention is that γεννηθεντος can ONLY refer to being born of flesh (a post creation event) If you wish to address that issue, then prove to me via lexicons or Greek texts that show it can refer to a time prior to creation." but the reality of the situation is that it is YOUR OBLIGATION to make the case for what your assert. It is not OUR obligation to disprove an allegation, which is exactly what you have not proved. Here is an absurd examples of the sort of argumentation you are postulating:

1. Prove to me that I did not take a cookie from the cookie jar.
2. I believe the core mantle of the moon is made of green cheese; prove that I am wrong

The point of your argument is you are you are using a word that is NOT in the TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, and the closest root words for that are
νῖκος, † ὑπερνικάω

Kittel, G., Bromiley, G. W., & Friedrich, G. (Eds.). (1964–). Theological dictionary of the New Testament (electronic ed., Vol. 4, p. 942). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Therefore you are creating a non-extant meaning for a word not in the New Testament and asking us to prove that you are in error. Without any bit of sarcasm or meanness, I can say that the closest English word that describes your endeavor is :JABBERWOCKY "'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble in the wabe: All mimsy were the borogoves, And the mome raths outgrabe ."

NICENE CREED

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 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.​

https://www.ccel.org/creeds/nicene.creed.html

What you seem to be doing is to ask us to "fight you" when you really have not given us reason to do so, nor have you really defined what you want us to "fight you" against.

 

[JLB]

There was no button to click saying I was a Messianic Israelite

No such Phrase in the Bible, as "Messianic Israelite".

There is Christian though.

Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this matter. 1 Peter 4:16

The foundation for being "in Christ" or being saved is confessing Jesus as Lord.
Romans 10:9-13

When you change the meaning of the biblical word Lord, and redefine it's meaning to mean something other than what the bible means, then you have denied Jesus as being Lord.

Lord in the Old Testament meant The Lord God.
Lord in the New Testament has not changed.

You claim that Jesus is Lord, when you really mean that Jesus is a lord.

You have openly admitted this is your belief, as you have confessed Jesus is not God, by rather He is only a man.

The Lord is clearly a reference to the Lord God of the Old Testament.

The writers of the New Testament, one of which is Peter the Apostle to the Jews, and Paul who is the Apostle to the Gentiles, both open write to us, that Jesus is God our Savior. Not God the Father, but God [the Son] our Savior.

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 Peter 2:1

not pilfering, but showing all good fidelity, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things...looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, Titus 2:10,13


You have redefined what words mean, and claim to have better knowledge and linguistic skills than those chosen to translate the KJV and NKJV, whereby you say that Jesus Christ did not pre-exist before He was born of the woman Mary.


Jesus was begotten of the Father. He is before all things, and is the firstborn of all creation. Colossians 1:15

He is our great God and Savior, and our Redeemer.


JLB

 

[brother Paul]

http://prayerfoundation.org/nicene_creed_scripture_basis.htm

Read this....

 

[Malachi]

No such Phrase in the Bible, as "Messianic Israelite"

Correct. All the apostles could be considered Messianic Israelites, but they all WITHOUT EXCEPTION believed that Jesus is God. So anyone claiming to be a Messianic Israelite must also believe that, or stop making false claims. "Christian" is the biblical term for those who believe on and follow the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Sinthesis]

JLB, By Grace and others who continue to post doctrinal defenses of Messiah's preexistence or deity. This will be the last time I try to clarify my intent. In the future, I will simply ignore such posts. I am NOT attacking your doctrinal beliefs. I AM attacking the use of γεννηθεντος in the 381 creed in which the authors use it to refer to a time prior to creation. My contention is that γεννηθεντος can ONLY refer to being born of flesh (a post creation event). If you wish to address that issue, then prove to me via lexicons or Greek texts that show it can refer to a time prior to creation.

The 381 Nicene Creed is itself a Greek text that shows γεννηθεντος is not limited to being born of flesh and thus can refer to a time prior to creation. To believe otherwise is to assert that its authors knowingly settled on nonsense.

 

[jocor]

Of course, you are NOT attacking our doctrinal beliefs, but you are indeed attacking the Nicene Creed, on which we base our beliefs. That is a distinction without a difference.

Wow! I'm sorry to hear that. Here I was thinking you based your beliefs on inspired Scripture rather than the creeds of men.

You posted, "My contention is that γεννηθεντος can ONLY refer to being born of flesh (a post creation event) If you wish to address that issue, then prove to me via lexicons or Greek texts that show it can refer to a time prior to creation." but the reality of the situation is that it is YOUR OBLIGATION to make the case for what your assert. It is not OUR obligation to disprove an allegation, which is exactly what you have not proved.

How does one prove something is unscriptural if it is not found in Scripture? Since the creed's use of γεννηθεντος in reference to the Son being begotten before creation is not found in Scripture, it cannot be proven to be Scriptural. The very fact that Scripture does not use γεννηθεντος or any variant of it in reference to the Son prior to creation is proof itself that the creed made an unscriptural statement.

The point of your argument is you are you are using a word that is NOT in the TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, and the closest root words for that are
νῖκος, † ὑπερνικάω

Kittel, G., Bromiley, G. W., & Friedrich, G. (Eds.). (1964–). Theological dictionary of the New Testament (electronic ed., Vol. 4, p. 942). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Therefore you are creating a non-extant meaning for a word not in the New Testament and asking us to prove that you are in error.

Why do you say γεννηθεντος is not in the New Testament when it is found in Matthew 2:1 referring to Yeshua's birth in Bethlehem?

Mat 2:1 του G3588 δε G1161[NOW] ιησου G2424[JESUS] γεννηθεντος G1080(G5685)[HAVING BEEN BORN] εν G1722[IN] βηθλεεμ G965 της G3588[BETHLEHEM] ιουδαιας G2449[OF JUDEA,] εν G1722[IN] ημεραις G2250["THE" DAYS] ηρωδου G2264[OF HEROD] του G3588[THE] βασιλεως G935[KING,] ιδου G2400(G5628)[BEHOLD,] μαγοι G3097[MAGI] απο G575[FROM] ανατολων G395["THE" EAST] παρεγενοντο G3854(G5633)[ARRIVED] εις G1519[AT] ιεροσολυμα G2414[JERUSALEM,]​

 

[jocor]

No such Phrase in the Bible, as "Messianic Israelite".

There is Christian though.

Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this matter. 1 Peter 4:16

Really JLB? Since you have no Scriptural response to my view you are going to attack the label "Messianic Israelite"?

As for the term "Christian," here is what the well respected "gotquestions.org" says:

The term Christian was never used by Jesus. The first instance of the word Christian is found in the book of Acts: “The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch” (Acts 11:26). Most Bible scholars agree that it was highly unlikely that the believers themselves thought up the name “Christians.” The early church had other terms for themselves, such as “disciples” (Acts 13:52; Acts 20:1; Acts 21:4) and “saints” (Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 16:1; Ephesians 1:1) and “brothers” (1 Corinthians 1:9; 1 Peter 3:8).

The name “Christian,” meaning “belonging to Christ,” appears to have been invented by those outside of the church. It was most likely meant as a derogatory term. Only two other times does the word appear in the New Testament (Acts 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16). The idea that the term Christian was originally a pejorative finds some support in the first epistle of Peter: “However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name” (1 Peter 4:16).​

 

[jocor]

http://prayerfoundation.org/nicene_creed_scripture_basis.htm

Read this....

I read it. The only verse they used that had the word "begotten" in it was John 3:16 which uses μονογενη, not γεννηθεντος. Not helpful at all.

 

[jocor]

The 381 Nicene Creed is itself a Greek text that shows γεννηθεντος is not limited to being born of flesh and thus can refer to a time prior to creation. To believe otherwise is to assert that its authors knowingly settled on nonsense.

γεννηθεντος is a NT Greek word. It is defined in Matthew 2:1 as meaning "born" (to a woman). The creed authors had no authority or right to redefine a Biblical word in order to support their belief. They did not "knowingly settle on nonsense". It seems to me they knowingly ignored the Biblical definition.