Brakelite
Well-Known Member
Just wanted to say...I met Carl personally a couple of weeks ago. Spent a couple of very enjoyable hours chatting and sharing our individual testimonies. A very blessed day it was.
Friendly Bible Study - participants must agree to Nicene Creed.
- Thread starter Carl Emerson
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Brakelite
Well-Known Member
Just thinking about that episode. While it is true that Agabus warned Paul as to what awaited him in Jerusalem, he didn't say to Paul, "in the name of the Lord, don't go". The Lord may indeed have sent the prophet to inform Paul as to what to expect, but still left it up to Paul to choose at his discretion whether to go or not. I agree however, that it was a mistake of Paul to enter the temple and make a show of himself before his enemies. It was that which precipitated the following controversy and arrests.
Dash RipRock
Active Member
I'm hurt that I wasn't tagged.
Hi Barney,
Welcome to the forum.
Introduce yourself and feel free to comment on your personal faith journey.
As this is your first post and you haven't indicated agreement with the Nicene Creed, you are not yet tagged.
The Mods set this up so we could have a safe place to share around the Scriptures without the usual contention over matters central to the faith. We also don't debate the Trinity at the Mod's request.
We are working through Acts.
Sadly that can mean many things...
The Nicene Creed lays out basic biblical facts that we on this forum agree with - this avoids much fruitless argument.
Dash RipRock
Active Member
I don't see the Nicene Creed included in inspired scripture, so I'd better stick with God's Word.
Last edited:
Dash RipRock
Active Member
The point is, why not just quotes what God says in His Word?
The Council of Nicaea was under Roman Emperor Constantine which is where much false doctrine began to come in to the church so it's problematic pointing people to anything related to The Council of Nicaea as this causes the brethren to stumble and accept doctrine not of God that is not taught in God's Word such as the ecumenical movement among other false doctrine
Is this a catholic thread? If so then it stands to reason that the Nicene Creed would be embraced over and above God's Word.
The True Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ was sent to lead us in to all Truth and God's Word is the only Truth
(See John 16:13, and John 17:17)
Is it not better to focus on God's Word rather than none inspired musing and writings?
Just a thought
Happy to discuss this on another thread...
I would love to hear what parts of the Nicene Creed folks consider unbiblical and why.
Dash RipRock
Active Member
It may have some good stuff in it, but none the less Christians are called to live by God's Word.
That's the point I was making.
Why not have a Bible study and say "participants must accept God's Word" rather than some creed made by catholics right as they were bringing in doctrine that does not agree with what the Word of the Lord teaches.
Pointing people to any organization that gets it's doctrine outside of God's canon is problematic as it can cause people to be led astray
That's all I was pointing out is, why not just go by God's Word and point people directly to what God says?
Anyway, I'll unsubscribe from this thread. Thanks for hearing me out.
Members insisting on being only accountable to 'God's Word' can have all sorts of cranky beliefs.
I think a separate thread on the Nicene Creed might be helpful.
I am not sure that we have any RC's in the bible study at all.
Hillsage
Well-Known Member
I'll give you a taste of where Carl is coming from, concerning a few of us. CRAZIMATICS
If you are referring to a RHEMA "Word" spoken from the "True Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ"... I couldn't agree more.
But if that "Word" you reference above, is talking about 'the bible', then I have a personal struggle. Of the 5,000 bits and pieces of the 'oldest' known Greek manuscripts...none are older than 200 AD. That's a recent fact I read which did surprise me. The influence of ROME in 350 had already (poorly IMO) turned Greek into Latin, before the Council of Nicaea.
Again, I agree with the above comments. But the false doctrines came from the Roman influence on biblical translations first. Marin Luther only found 95 to nail to the door at Wittenberg.
But the biggest negative influence of the church of Rome; wasn't even 'doctrine' IMO. It was Rome changing the apostolic leadership model, of every believer striving to being 'spirit led by that very holy spirit of christ being birthed in every believer, which I think is what I hear you 'writing about' IN MY OPINION. Roman influence came by exchanging that model for the Roman governmental hierarchy leadership of 'men lording over men' who were under them. And that has affected every denomination to this day IMO.
Yes, this is a "catholic thread" IN MY OPINION (sorry Carl
). It just isn't a Roman Catholic thread. Though this thread has been influenced by the church of Rome IMO. In the Nicene creed 'catholic' is lower case and therefore simply refers to the 'UNIVERSAL church body of Christ'. Buildings all over have true born again believers in them....as well as 'some, many, most' (????) who simply aren't born again. But they sure do have a religious spirit leading them.If 'that Word' is coming from the same born again spirit in me that Jesus was physically born with, I agree. Because . Jesus wasn't born with 'The Holy Spirit of the triune God' in him. That belief came from bad Roman doctrinal influence while the original apostles were still alive. John saw the "last hour" of the truly 'holy spirit of christ led christian' church coming. And prophesied about it in 1 Joh 2;18. The church morphed from 'maturing into spirit led individuals', into the church of Rome which took after the model of Rome.....CAESAR is GOD. And Constantine lived in ROME while CONSTANTINOPLE was his vacation city. EASTERN orthodox and WESTERN orthodox but same CAESAR model of 'church' hierarchy.
Derek Prince once said; "The only difference between 'the pope' and 'a pastor' is how many people one is 'pope-ing it' over."
OK, I've rambled enough.
And I really don't want to argue MY OPINIONS with anyone. 
So I'll watch a while before posting. Then it's yours again brother Carl. I waited 24 hrs before sending this, and that's long enough. 
Important issues being raised thanks, I notice that when I ask members who are 'creed averse' to read the creed and suggest what might be unbiblical, there is silence.
To balance this it is easy to forget that He chooses the imperfect to implement His perfect plan. This applies to churches, people, scripture, you name it...
So opening up this study we needed to eliminate the incessant arguing over basic doctrine and mine the treasures of Scripture.
The Nicene Creed is doing a satisfactory job in this regard, folks drop off the thread who want to debate the trinity or other central doctrine and we can get on with sharing life instead of arguing death.
So please someone open a separate thread on the Nicene Creed and we will continue with Acts.
To balance this it is easy to forget that He chooses the imperfect to implement His perfect plan. This applies to churches, people, scripture, you name it...
So opening up this study we needed to eliminate the incessant arguing over basic doctrine and mine the treasures of Scripture.
The Nicene Creed is doing a satisfactory job in this regard, folks drop off the thread who want to debate the trinity or other central doctrine and we can get on with sharing life instead of arguing death.
So please someone open a separate thread on the Nicene Creed and we will continue with Acts.
Similar threads
