The Nicene Creed is not Christian

Joyful said:

Of course it is but Jesus made it clear how to practice what is written.

Click to expand...

And James didn't??

'4 What good is it, dear brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but don’t show it by your actions? Can that kind of faith save anyone? 15 Suppose you see a brother or sister who has no food or clothing, 16 and you say, “Good-bye and have a good day; stay warm and eat well”—but then you don’t give that person any food or clothing. What good does that do?
17 So you see, faith by itself isn’t enough. Unless it produces good deeds, it is dead and useless.
18 Now someone may argue, “Some people have faith; others have good deeds.” But I say, “How can you show me your faith if you don’t have good deeds? I will show you my faith by my good deeds.”
19 You say you have faith, for you believe that there is one God.[a] Good for you! Even the demons believe this, and they tremble in terror. 20 How foolish! Can’t you see that faith without good deeds is useless?
21 Don’t you remember that our ancestor Abraham was shown to be right with God by his actions when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see, his faith and his actions worked together. His actions made his faith complete. 23 And so it happened just as the Scriptures say: “Abraham believed God, and God counted him as righteous because of his faith.”[b] He was even called the friend of God.[c] 24 So you see, we are shown to be right with God by what we do, not by faith alone.
25 Rahab the prostitute is another example. She was shown to be right with God by her actions when she hid those messengers and sent them safely away by a different road. 26 Just as the body is dead without breath,[d] so also faith is dead without good works' (James 2:14-26 NLT).

Click to expand...

OzSpen said:

And James didn't??

Click to expand...

Did I say that? Nope.

Joyful said:

Did I say that? Nope.

Click to expand...

At #159 you stated, 'but Jesus made it clear how to practice what is written'. And I said, so did James. The words of Jesus are no more important than the rest of the OT and NT because 'all Scripture is theopneustos - breathed out by God'.

I guess it depends on HOW you read it. In point form to me it is NOT a problem.

• We believe also in only One, Universal, Apostolic, and [Holy] Church;
• in one baptism in repentance, for the remission, and forgiveness of sins;
• in the resurrection of the dead,
• in the everlasting judgement of souls and bodies,
• and the Kingdom of Heaven and in the everlasting life

Baptism conveys a penitent spirit, and conveys that one HAS confessed Jesus as their savior, and indeed has received forgiveness.

StanJ said:

I guess it depends on HOW you read it. In point form to me it is NOT a problem.

• We believe also in only One, Universal, Apostolic, and [Holy] Church;
• in one baptism in repentance, for the remission, and forgiveness of sins;
• in the resurrection of the dead,
• in the everlasting judgement of souls and bodies,
• and the Kingdom of Heaven and in the everlasting life

Baptism conveys a penitent spirit, and conveys that one HAS confessed Jesus as their savior, and indeed has received forgiveness.

Click to expand...

Stan,

This thread began with this statement from The Nicene Creed, 'I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins'.

Could we glean support for this statement from these verses?

Rom 6:3-4 (ESV), '3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life'. Douglas Moo, in his commentary on Romans, considers that 'burial with Christ' in this passage

'is a description of the participation of the believer in Christ's own burial, a participation that is mediated by baptism.... Baptism, then, is not the place, or time, at which we are buried with Christ, but the instrument (dia) through which we are buried with him. It might, then, be an obvious conclusion that the "time" of our burial with Christ was the time of his own burial: that, when Christ died, was buried, and resurrected, we were "in him" and so participated in these events "with" him. Support for this conception can be found in the aorist passive verbs used throughout this passage, the reference to Christ's own form of death, crucifixion, as that in which we participate (v. 6), and the simple logic that runs "if we died with Christ, he died "once" (v. 10), on Calvary, then our dying "with" him must also have taken place on Calvary.... Any explanation of the role of baptism in Rom. 6 must come to grips with the obvious centrality in Paul of faith as the means by which our relationship to Christ is appropriated. This is one of the reasons that some scholars dismiss any reference to water baptism in these verses. However, as we have seen, a reference to water baptism cannot be eliminated in v. 3, and the same is true in v. 4' (Moo 1996:363-365).

Click to expand...

Gal 3:27 (ESV), 'For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ'.

Eph 4:5 (ESV), 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism'.

Col 2:12 (ESV), 'having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead'.

1 Peter 3:20-21 (ESV), 'because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ'.

I consider that Douglas Moo's explanation of Romans 6:3-4 (ESV) is an excellent one in describing the issue that is summarised in The Nicene Creed, 'I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins'. There is adequate biblical evidence to support such a view.

I do not have the time to investigate the other verses in support of this view. However, Col 2:12 (ESV) is a strong parallel verse

Oz

Works consulted
Moo, D J 1996. The Epistle to the Romans (The New International Commentary on the New Testament). Grand Rapids, Michigan / Cambridge U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

At #159 you stated, 'but Jesus made it clear how to practice what is written'. And I said, so did James. The words of Jesus are no more important than the rest of the OT and NT because 'all Scripture is theopneustos - breathed out by God'.

Click to expand...

Jesus is clearing up the mess of wrongful practice of His followers. James is only affirming Jesus' teachings.

Apparently James had no right to do so. We don't need teachers, we only need Jesus' words...according to your views.


Oz,

I understand what Moo is saying and I would like to see more of his context on this verse. Obviously, we are buried "with Christ" and thus the burial that we encounter is that of participation with Christ's burial, etc. However, the clear implication in Paul's writings as well as Lukes (see Acts 2:38) is that the time in which this union with Christ takes place for the believer is at his/her baptism. It is our faith and baptism that connects us with Christ's burial and resurrection. Thus, baptism is the moment in which this occurs for the believer. I think Paul is immensely clear here. I think Cottrell is more on target in his evaluation of these verses:

6:3 Or don’t you know what happened to you in your baptism? Literally Paul says "or are you ignorant" of this. He asks this sort of question quite often. It has the tone of a mild rebuke, implying that you should know this, but just in case you do not I will explain it. In this instance his question has to do with baptism. Without a doubt all of Paul’s Christian readers would have remembered the time and event of their immersion, since this was a part of the basic presentation of the gospel and of becoming a Christian. However, they may not have understood the deeper spiritual significance of this act; this is what Paul now explains.9
Don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? "All of us who were baptized" means all Christians; in the NT there is no such thing as an unbaptized Christian. "Baptized" refers to water baptism and everything the NT includes in it. It is fairly common for expositors to claim that the baptism to which Paul refers in Romans 6 is a "spiritual" or "dry" baptism only, as distinct from water baptism. For example, Lloyd-Jones concludes "that baptism by water is not in the mind of the Apostle at all in these two verses [6:3–4]; instead it is the baptism that is wrought by the Spirit" (36). Those who hold to such a view are almost always from Protestant traditions that have adopted Zwingli’s innovative separation of baptism from the time of salvation. Stott’s view is surely the more reasonable, namely, that in the NT "baptism means water baptism unless in the context it is stated to the contrary" (173).
On the other hand, even though Moo agrees that water baptism is in view (I:376), he wrongly concludes that baptism here "functions as shorthand for the conversion experience as a whole" (I:371). Certainly what Paul has already written (and the NT writings as a whole) make it obvious that faith and repentance are presupposed here as precursors of baptism. But what happens in the initial moment of faith and repentance, and in the conversion experience as a whole, are not Paul’s point here. He specifically refers to what happens in baptism.
The Apostle refers to baptism as being "baptism into Christ Jesus." That he does not dwell on this point shows that it was a basic truth that any Christian would already know. To be baptized into Christ means to be baptized for the purpose of entering into a specific relationship with him, or into a living union with him. As Moo says (I:377), the preposition "into" (eis) has the connotation of movement from one space to another, as well as the connotation of purpose. Thus as Moo puts it, "baptized into Christ" means "baptized with a view to being united with Christ." See Gal 3:27.
This union with Christ is not effected by the ritual itself, either by the water or by the act. It is accomplished by the grace and power of the living God alone. That it happens in the act of baptism is simply a matter of God’s free and sovereign choice; he has appropriately designated this event as the occasion for the beginning of this saving union with the Redeemer. It is not wrong to say that the external ritual of water baptism symbolizes or has a metaphorical connection with this saving union. What is wrong is to separate the symbol from the reality as if the temporal connection between them is irrelevant.

Click to expand...

OzSpen said:

Are you saying that at the time of the writing of the NT, that the OT was not the Bible for the people of that time? You are drawing a long bow with that view. You say, 'The Bible did not exist when Paul wrote' is not true. Why was the OT not the Bible until the NT was written? It is generally understood by NT scholars that 2 Tim 3:16 refers to the OT as 'Scripture'. Gleason Archer wrote in his consideration of 2 Tim 3:16:

Click to expand...

Of course, the Torah existed...there is no real way to know what other scriptures may have been circulating at the time. Not everyone was an orthodox Jew...

I used to understand that

Click to expand...

2 Tim. 3:16 and the reference to “all Scripture” is referring back to the OT. However, in recent times I’ve been asking some further questions of 2 Tim. 3:16-17 and 2 Peter 1:20-21. The following is some tentative thinking (I have not reached a finality yet.

1. Let’s look at 2 Tim. 3:15-17[1], including the verse before the two that you mentioned, (vv. 16-17): Second Tim. 3:15-17 (ESV)states,[/QUOTE]

“and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. [16] All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”

Click to expand...

Here we have two groups of writings distinguished: “the sacred writings” of v. 15 and “all Scripture” of v. 16.

“All Scripture” (v. 16) seems to indicate everything that the Holy Spirit gave to the church as canonical and authoritative, OT and NT. When Paul wrote these words, was he referring to a body of literature that was more than the OT. We know this from:

1 Tim. 5:18 (ESV), “For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,’ and, ‘The laborer deserves his wages.’”

These two sayings are clearly co-ordinated. If the first is Scripture, than so is the second. Here we have a word spoken by Jesus that is on the same level of authority as a saying from the OT canon.

1. “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain” comes from Deut. 25:4 (You’ll find a similar use by Paul in I Cor. 9:8-12).

2. Where do we find the saying, “The laborer deserves his wages”? Its precise wording is in Luke 10:7 (ESV), “And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house.” There is a slightly different form in Matthew 10:10 (ESV), “No bag for your journey, nor two tunics nor sandals nor a staff, for the laborer deserves his food.”

It is not an impossibility that Luke’s Gospel had been completed at the time of Paul’s writing to Timothy. My ESV Bible gives the date for 2 Timothy as “the final letter written by Paul (A.D. 64-68). The ESV states that ‘Luke, a physician and colleague of Paul, probably wrote this account in the early 60s A.D.”. If that is true, then the apostle Paul could have been quoting from Luke’s Gospel. But there is another possibility that Paul was quoting from a collection of sayings or oral tradition that was in circulation and used as a source for Luke (see Luke 1:1-4 ESV).

3. So, when we combine these two quotes in I Tim. 5:18 we are beginning to see that “Scripture” may refer to both OT and NT. So “all Scripture” (2 Tim. 3:16) also could refer to all that is breathed out by God — OT and NT.

We should not find this surprising, based on John 14:26 (ESV), “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.”

There’s further information in 2 Peter 3:15-16 (ESV)

The most important verse you quoted in all of that would be John 14:16.
And again...we can't really know what may or may not have been available at the time. So many new scrolls have been discovered...and who knows what may have been lost forever?

(BAH! That quote thingie never works right for me.)

Wormwood said:

Apparently James had no right to do so. We don't need teachers, we only need Jesus' words...according to your views.


Oz,

I understand what Moo is saying and I would like to see more of his context on this verse. Obviously, we are buried "with Christ" and thus the burial that we encounter is that of participation with Christ's burial, etc. However, the clear implication in Paul's writings as well as Lukes (see Acts 2:38) is that the time in which this union with Christ takes place for the believer is at his/her baptism. It is our faith and baptism that connects us with Christ's burial and resurrection. Thus, baptism is the moment in which this occurs for the believer. I think Paul is immensely clear here. I think Cottrell is more on target in his evaluation of these verses:

Click to expand...

I am closer to accept the 'dry' baptism view (even though I have been immersed) because there are many born again Christians whom I have met who are definitely Christian but who have not been baptised. I think that is being disobedient, but it is the case.

The Salvation Army is an overtly evangelical Christian denomination,and in my country is evangelistic in association with its excellent social work. However, baptism and the Lord's supper are not practised by this denomination. I consider they are being disobedient by not committing themselves to these 2 ordinances, but I know many of them who are delightful Christian people and thus are baptised into Christ. How do I know? I married one of them 47 years ago and she was a delightful Christian woman then (unbaptised) and still is. She was baptised when she came to the Baptist church where I worshipped.

So, requiring water baptism to actualise being baptised into Christ is not something that I'm able to affirm in Scripture and practically.

Oz

The Barrd said:

Of course, the Torah existed...there is no real way to know what other scriptures may have been circulating at the time. Not everyone was an orthodox Jew...



2 Tim. 3:16 and the reference to “all Scripture” is referring back to the OT. However, in recent times I’ve been asking some further questions of 2 Tim. 3:16-17 and 2 Peter 1:20-21. The following is some tentative thinking (I have not reached a finality yet.

1. Let’s look at 2 Tim. 3:15-17[1], including the verse before the two that you mentioned, (vv. 16-17): Second Tim. 3:15-17 (ESV)states,

Click to expand...

Here we have two groups of writings distinguished: “the sacred writings” of v. 15 and “all Scripture” of v. 16.

“All Scripture” (v. 16) seems to indicate everything that the Holy Spirit gave to the church as canonical and authoritative, OT and NT. When Paul wrote these words, was he referring to a body of literature that was more than the OT. We know this from:

1 Tim. 5:18 (ESV), “For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,’ and, ‘The laborer deserves his wages.’”

These two sayings are clearly co-ordinated. If the first is Scripture, than so is the second. Here we have a word spoken by Jesus that is on the same level of authority as a saying from the OT canon.

1. “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain” comes from Deut. 25:4 (You’ll find a similar use by Paul in I Cor. 9:8-12).

2. Where do we find the saying, “The laborer deserves his wages”? Its precise wording is in Luke 10:7 (ESV), “And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house.” There is a slightly different form in Matthew 10:10 (ESV), “No bag for your journey, nor two tunics nor sandals nor a staff, for the laborer deserves his food.”

It is not an impossibility that Luke’s Gospel had been completed at the time of Paul’s writing to Timothy. My ESV Bible gives the date for 2 Timothy as “the final letter written by Paul (A.D. 64-68). The ESV states that ‘Luke, a physician and colleague of Paul, probably wrote this account in the early 60s A.D.”. If that is true, then the apostle Paul could have been quoting from Luke’s Gospel. But there is another possibility that Paul was quoting from a collection of sayings or oral tradition that was in circulation and used as a source for Luke (see Luke 1:1-4 ESV).

3. So, when we combine these two quotes in I Tim. 5:18 we are beginning to see that “Scripture” may refer to both OT and NT. So “all Scripture” (2 Tim. 3:16) also could refer to all that is breathed out by God — OT and NT.

We should not find this surprising, based on John 14:26 (ESV), “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.”

There’s further information in 2 Peter 3:15-16 (ESV)

The most important verse you quoted in all of that would be John 14:16.
And again...we can't really know what may or may not have been available at the time. So many new scrolls have been discovered...and who knows what may have been lost forever?

(BAH! That quote thingie never works right for me.)

[/QUOTE]
Problem is, The Barrd, that I would not know about Jesus and the Gospel if somebody had not proclaimed Jesus Christ, repentance and forgiveness of sin, based on Scripture. It was not some personal revelation of Jesus Christ that the person proclaimed that he/she had received from the Holy Spirit. It was based on the NT Scripture, primarily, but not exclusively.

In saying that, this does not deny the profound importance of the ministry of the 'Helper', the Holy Spirit, who lives in every believer. If we move on from John 14:16 to John 14:21, we read: 'Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself in him'. These commandments come through the OT Scripture and the oral tradition at the time of Jesus that was being passed on.

The Barrd said:

Of course, the Torah existed...there is no real way to know what other scriptures may have been circulating at the time. Not everyone was an orthodox Jew...

Click to expand...

We know that more than Torah (first 5 books of Moses) existed. Please refer to the whole edition of OT Scriptures. We most certainly know for the Christian that the only Scriptures recognised prior to Christ were the OT canon. After all, we are part of the Judeo-Christian religion.

This does not mean that other sacred books did not exist for other religions. But they are not canonical or recognised by evangelical Christians as canonical. There is an excellent article, 'Canon of the Old Testament', by R L Harris in The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, vol 1 (1976. Zondervan, pp. 709-731). I'll check if it's available online. Yes, the full article is available HERE. Thank God for people like those at BibleGateway who are making this excellent material available, free, on the Interet.

However, don't you accept that there was a canon of OT Scripture accepted by the Jews that became the OT canon for Christians? Which books would you like to have included in the OT canon for Christians?

Oz

Apparently James had no right to do so. We don't need teachers, we only need Jesus' words...according to your views.

Click to expand...

James' word harmonize with Jesus' teachings. He is only repeating what Jesus teaches.

When the apostles taught His
followers, they did not have Jesus' word written like what we are getting.

Because we have Jesus' direct word, we have no excuse not knowing Jesus' simple teachings.

Joyful said:

James' word harmonize with Jesus' teachings. He is only repeating what Jesus teaches.

When the apostles taught His
followers, they did not have Jesus' word written like what we are getting.

Because we have Jesus' direct word, we have no excuse not knowing Jesus' simple teachings.

Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand the place of oral tradition in the passing on of any kind of knowledge at the time of Christ and at other times when the printed sayings of Jesus were not available. Of course, this is the time before the printing press.

I suggest a read of this article to explain how the church moved from oral tradition to written script: 'The Gospel: From Oral Tradition to the Written Text The Integrity of the New Testament'.

You don't seem to understand the place of oral tradition in the passing on of any kind of knowledge at the time of Christ and at other times when the printed sayings of Jesus were not available. Of course, this is the time before the printing press.

I suggest a read of this article to explain how the church moved from oral tradition to written script: 'The Gospel: From Oral Tradition to the Written Text The Integrity of the New Testament'.

Click to expand...

We have Jesus' written word available to everyone who want to know what He is teaching, friend.

Joyful said:

We have Jesus' written word available to everyone who want to know what He is teaching, friend.

Click to expand...

How did it become a written word in the first century AD?

Apparently James had no right to do so. We don't need teachers, we only need Jesus' words...according to your views.

Click to expand...

1Jn_2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

As for what Jesus said of scripture

Joh 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
Joh 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.


The world has millions of bibles, thousands of bible scholars millions of christians who read the bible but so few know Christ the Risen Lord , as He said,

Rev_3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

or the Holy Spirit

Joh_14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

one more

Joh_10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

Know if one needs the bible to know its Him than they dont know Him. Sheep dont go looking at books when their shepherd calls they just know His voice and run after Him.

In all His Love.

How did it become a written word in the first century AD?

Click to expand...

Why do you ask this question?

It does not make any difference how it became a written word. Just be thankful that we have His word.

blessings.

It does not make any difference how it became a written word. Just be thankful that we have His word.

Click to expand...

Doesnt it??

The devils convinced the world they have the word of God yet the bible says,

2Co_3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Even Jesus says,

Joh 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
Joh 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

So because christians are convinced they have teh word of God in their hand, they never do teh one thing that Jesus asks them to do,

Go to Him so they can have life.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

Joh_10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me

But who wants to hear that??

We would all have to walk in the spirit and not the flesh

In all His Love

Doesnt it??

The devils convinced the world they have the word of God yet the bible says,

2Co_3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Even Jesus says,

Joh 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
Joh 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

So because christians are convinced they have teh word of God in their hand, they never do teh one thing that Jesus asks them to do,

Go to Him so they can have life.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

Joh_10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me

But who wants to hear that??

In all His Love

Click to expand...

what is your point?

We have Jesus' written word available to everyone who want to know what He is teaching, friend.

Click to expand...

One could just ask Jesus??