What Really Happened at Nicea?

Christian Research Institute ^ | June 10, 2009 | James R. White

[boatbums]

Summary

The Council of Nicea is often misrepresented by cults and other religious movements. The actual concern of the council was clearly and unambiguously the relationship between the Father and the Son. Is Christ a creature, or true God? The council said He was true God. Yet, the opponents of the deity of Christ did not simply give up after the council’s decision. In fact, they almost succeeded in overturning the Nicene affirmation of Christ’s deity. But faithful Christians like Athanasius continued to defend the truth, and in the end, truth triumphed over error.

The conversation intensified quickly. “You can’t really trust the Bible,” my Latter-day Saints acquaintance said, “because you really don’t know what books belong in it. You see, a bunch of men got together and decided the canon of Scripture at the Council of Nicea, picking some books, rejecting others.” A few others were listening in on the conversation at the South Gate of the Mormon Temple in Salt Lake City. It was the LDS General Conference, and I again heard the Council of Nicea presented as that point in history where something “went wrong,” where some group of unnamed, faceless men “decided” for me what I was supposed to believe. I quickly corrected him about Nicea — nothing was decided, or even said, about the canon of Scripture at that council.1

I was reminded how often the phrase “the Council of Nicea” is used as an accusation by those who reject the Christian faith. New Agers often allege that the council removed the teaching of reincarnation from the Bible.2 And of course, Jehovah’s Witnesses and critics of the deity of Christ likewise point to that council as the “beginning of the Trinity” or the “first time the deity of Christ was asserted as orthodox teaching.” Others see it as the beginning of the union of church and state in light of the participation of the Roman Emperor, Constantine. Some even say it was the beginning of the Roman Catholic church.

[boatbums]

Okaaaaaaay...a "quadrinity"? Father, Mother, Son and Holy Spirit, you say? Got any Biblical proof for that?

[delchiante]

I just checked quickly the last year with my calendar (2016)

As I stated previously, ‘Pentecost’ is wrong. all the others in 2016 checked.

I would be interested to see if this group holds His sabbath as rome’s saturday. I may get my answer when I can review 2014 or 2015 because I know one of those years, everything was moved a day to make way for rome’s saturday.

But again, Pentecost will be wrong in every year on that chart because they ignore the New Moon Day like Christianity and Judaism does.
And they will never get to ‘Pentecost’ by following rome’s 6+1 template.

I can check 2014 and 2015 when I find those calendars-

Just Found 2015-
Passover was observed one day earlier on this chart- the 13th and not His 14th!
Passover, the 14th, was April 4th- not april 3rd like this chart reads.

Just as I suspected because Passover in Judaism can’t land on a roman saturday. So Judaism had to move it- started the month a day earlier to a make it possible to avoid Passover landing on a ‘saturday’.

Which it appears so did this group. They observed Passover on His 13th Day, not 14th Day, conflicting with scripture-
In essense, following Judaism and their rules that are governed with the pope gregory calendar as their premise for telling time.

With passover a day earlier, it makes the entire Feast of Unleavened Bread a day early.

Going left to right in the chart- This groups Pentecost is wrong in 2015 (as previously stated) because they again count like Judaism and Christianity- ignoring His New Moon Days and what they mean to the Father.

Day of Trumpets a day earlier too! and so is Day of Atonement. And Tabernacles.
Just as I recalled- wasn’t sure which year it happened but knew it did-

I look forward to seeing if the same thing happened in 2014 because it seems this group is doing exactly what Judaism had done.

So, your prediction is wrong-
I found them, at least in 2015 (and pentecost in every year) to be wrong.
Off by day.
To be fair, it looks like 2016 they didn’t have that problem.

Which is sort of my point- even people with tremendous amounts of faith, seeking to follow Him, can stumble into and out of Truth when they begin with a false premise.

The false premise that rome’s saturday is holy.
it isn’t.

It caused people of faith to move His appointed times in at least 2015, when reviewed.

and somebody is following the leader. and the leader, whoever they are, was blind to the Father’s calendar.
To their blindness. and led groups to miss things- by a day.

But He is merciful and gracious. and they will at times stumble into His Truth- just like other parts of religions can without their knowledge.

But they need not continue to be blind in certain years.

But if this group thought 2 days ago was His 7th Day Sabbath, they won’t see tomorow as His genuine 7th Day Sabbath.
And will work when He says rest and worship.
and rest and worship, when He says work.

The subtleness of the enemy makes people of faith miss things that scripture says is important, sometimes by just a little day.

and they do it by faith. not even knowing the enemy has caused it.
They may not see it until the Kingdom comes.

[Zuriel]

**The scriptures doesn’t teach the FATHER did miracles thru our Lord Jesus.**

So you don’t believe that, in John 14:10, Jesus Christ is speaking literally?

**You have two views here. The first is that Jesus is a man anointed by God. The second is that Christ is God. You failed to include the third possibility-that our Lord Jesus is BOTH God and Man. I’ll go with the third possibility.**

Here’s the first, of the three views, mentioned in scripture:

“Ye men of Israel, here these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:” Acts 2:22

Also: “How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power, who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.” Acts 10:38

Psalm 2:2 says: “The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take council together, against the LORD, and against his anointed,...”. Acts 4:26 says: “...against the Lord, and against his Christ”.

In that prayer where that prophecy is quoted by the disciples, they begin it saying: Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is:”, also speak of “thy holy child Jesus” twice (Acts 4:27,30).

Earlier, in Acts 2:36, Peter declared, “..God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

Want to find God the Father? He is in Christ. And if the Father is in Christ, so is the Holy Ghost, which proceeds from the Father. (John 15:26)

The second and third views are simply poor descriptions, since the scriptures declare that “God was IN Christ” (2Cor. 5:19); and “God was manifest IN the flesh” (1Tim. 3:16)

Every place in the scriptures, where one thinks they have a proof of the Son being God, should stop and realize that it is the omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient God the Father dwelling in Christ that gives him the attributes of God. The fullness of the Godhead dwells IN Jesus Christ, whether it be the Father, or that which proceeds from the Father: the Holy Ghost.

The Westminster confession is accurately loaded with He, His, Him, Himself, yet in section III goes inaccurate with the “God the Son”, and “God the Holy Ghost” phrases.

I wonder what those theologians thought about Isaiah 42:1-7.

[Zuriel]

**I’m not sure what you are saying.**

I was referring to John 16:13, “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.”

**It doesn’t say Christ was created.**

Well, the speaker in Isaiah 42:1-7 takes credit for all of creation in verse 5. And the Son was begotten. I think Paul does a nice job, touching on the subject in 1Cor. 8:6:

“But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”

We know that the only begotten Son is the “holy child Jesus”, so he is of the Father. The rest of the verse is deeper than this tired truck driver has time to attempt to elaborate on tonight.

[Yosemitest]

Ponder this

What does the Bible say came first, the evening or the morning ?
Genesis 1:5; Genesis 1:8; Genesis 1:13; Genesis 1:19; Genesis 1:23; Genesis 1:31

What day of the week did God bless and sanctify because He had rested on it ?
Genesis 2:2-3

When does a Day begin and end, according to the Bible ?
Leviticus 23:32; Mark 1:32; Luke 4:40-43

Now researching the subject "The Order of the Days of the Week" and looking for changes :

...There were two important changes
(actually one change that occurred in two stages) to two different Roman calendars.
These changes are acknowledged.
But what were the nature of these changes ?
Did they affect the weekly cycle ?

... Most are unfamiliar with the fact that
today’s calendar is called the Gregorian calendar,
and that the Julian calendar preceded it.
... The first change to the calendar occurred in 1582 and was decreed by Pope Gregory XIII (1572-1585).
From this point, the calendar has been known as the “Gregorian calendar.”
... In 1752, another change was made.
Both involved dropping days from the calendar to correct for previous errors in construction and computation.
... Days were dropped from the month —in October 1582— but not from the week !
The first week of October went from Thursday, October 4th, to Friday, October 15th.
The two Sabbaths on either side of this change were still seven days apart.
The Sabbath remained unaffected.
The weekly cycle was not broken.
Because it was the Catholics who made the change, it is they who possess the best historical record of how they did this.
The official change took place in Italy, Spain and Portugal.


Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 9, p. 251, under article "Lilies,"
"Thus, every imaginable proposition was made, only one idea was never mentioned, viz., the abandonment of the seven-day week."

Left Column, 2nd paragraph on page 251


Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 3, p. 740, article "Chronology,"
" ... it is to be noted that in the Christian period, the order of days in the week has never been interrupted.
Thus, when Gregory XIII reformed the calendar in 1582, Thursday, 4 October was followed by Friday, 15 October.
So in England, in 1752, Wednesday, 2 September, was followed by Thursday, 14 September. ... "
Right Column, last paragraph, 9 lines down.



... As stated, two changes occurred to the calendar that were really one change occurring in two stages.
This bears explanation.
When Pope Gregory decreed the change, the British would not comply.
They retained the old Julian calendar until 1752 —thus remaining ten days behind the newly established Gregorian calendar !
Obviously, Sabbath-keeping remained undisturbed in British areas for these 170 years.

The British finally determined to make the change.
With the passing of 170 years came an additional “drift” in the calendar of one more day.
Now it became necessary to drop eleven days to catch up with the spring equinox, instead of the previous ten !
The change was effected in September of 1752.
Instead of dropping ten days, between a Thursday and Friday as in 1582, the British chose to drop eleven days between a Wednesday and Thursday.
The next diagram explains what happened.

Once again, Sabbath-keeping continued undisturbed during the seven-day period spanning the change:


Actually, there was even a third stage to the calendar changes described above.
The Russians refused to make the change until 1907 !
Their calendar had now fallen thirteen days behind everyone else’s.
It was not until 1907 that they synchronized with the rest of the world by dropping thirteen days from their calendar.
Before and after this change, Sabbath-keepers in Russia observed the same day that Sabbath-keepers everywhere else in the world observed.
Certainly the same practice applied to all Sunday-keepers.

No one can dispute these basic facts of recent history!

[Bobsvainbabblings]

“..begotten, not made..” seems contradictory, especially when one reads this from Rev. 3:14: “..These things saith the

Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God.”

That may just be because you read “the beginning of the creation of God” and think it means Jesus had a beginning. But we know from other Scripture that without Jesus, NOTHING was made that was made and He existed BEFORE all things and by Him everything was created. This means Jesus was the originator or the source of creation. Also, that verse from Rev. 3:14 is also translated as:

I read it the same way.

It would be no different than me, a very wealthy and experienced builder, deciding I wanted to create a large compound for the children I would have someday to all live together with their families. I have a son. I tell him what I want to accomplish. He agrees to follow my plans with no deviation and only answer questions after conferring with me. He builds a huge estate with materials I supply with me guiding every phase of construction. If you talked with my son at any time, It would be the same as talking with me.

My son built all phases of it but he didn’t created it. I, his father did. Just like Jesus’ heavenly Father created Him first and then us.

May God our Father lead us to his truth BVB

[Yosemitest]

"‘Pentecost’ is wrong."

Think about this from How to Count Pentecost :

Many err in reckoning the Day of Pentecost because they FAIL to follow God’s instructions in Leviticus 23:14-16.

And ye shall eat neither bread, nor parched corn, nor green ears,
until the selfsame day that ye have brought an offering unto your God:
it shall be A STATUE FOR EVER throughout your generations in all your dwellings.
And ye shall COUNT unto you FROM the morrow AFTER the sabbath,
from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering;
SEVEN sabbaths shall be complete:
even unto the morrow AFTER the seventh sabbath shall ye NUMBER FIFTY DAYS;
and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the Lord.

... Remember, we are to place it on the day AFTER the weekly Sabbath.
The first day of the week for the wave sheaf offering was to fall DURING the days of Unleavened Bread.

The two main things people misunderstand are:
(1) The meaning of the term “Sabbath” in both verses above,
and (2) the meaning of the term “from” in verse 15.

... The correct day is clearly “the morrow after the seventh Sabbath [Shabbat, meaning Sabbath day].”
The day after the Sabbath (not a High Day, but the weekly Sabbath) was, and always has been, the FIRST day of the week—Sunday.
This day was determined by counting from —and including— the day of the wave sheaf offering.
Verse 16 leaves no doubt.
Again, “the morrow after the Sabbath” is the FIRST day of the week.
According to Scripture —GOD’S WORD — Pentecost is always to be observed on a Sunday.

And here's an addition from How To Reckon The Day of Pentecost :

" ... The Old Testament instructions are further buttressed by a study of the New Testament and Jewish history.
During the time of Jesus, Pentecost was kept by the official priesthood on a Sunday.
There is no evidence that Jesus disagreed with the normal times for keeping the festivals, even though His keeping of them is mentioned several times.
Jesus' example is very significant. ... "

[HarleyD]

Me-**It doesn’t say Christ was created.** You-Well, the speaker in Isaiah 42:1-7 takes credit for all of creation in verse 5.

You seem to be stuck on a few verses wanting to ignore the rest of the scriptures. Moreover, you're wrapped around archaic word structures.

John is very specific and clear about the eternity of Christ:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ...Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Three issues; 1) He (Christ) was with God, 2) He was God, 3) He became flesh. He was in the beginning just as "In the beginning God created the heavens and earth". He wasn't created. Christ descended from heaven:

Joh 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.

It is rather clear.

I would offer a word of caution also from John. He states the following:

1Jn 4:2-3 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.

So if you find yourself in disagreement with John 1 that the Word became flesh and dwelled among us and John 3 that the Christ descended from heaven, then you should heed the warning given in 1 John that those who cannot accept this truth, that Christ as God has come down from heaven in the flesh, is being deceived by the spirit of the antichrist.

[Zuriel]

**But we know from other Scripture that without Jesus, NOTHING was made that was made and He existed BEFORE all things and by Him everything was created. This means Jesus was the originator or the source of creation.**

Who was speaking to who here?... “..but a body thou hast prepared me.” Heb. 10:5

Who made the body?

Who said, “I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.”?

How is the Father greater?.... these SCRIPTURAL phrases explain it: “God the Father”, and “the Son of God”.

The Son is “of” God the Father. Else why would the Father call him his Son? Because it was prophesied:

“Thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee”. Ps. 2:7
and: “I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son”. 2Sam. 7:14 (both quoted in Heb. 1:5).

As I mentioned, the disciples prayed to the Lord God, referring to the Son, as “thy holy child Jesus”. A child is made.

The child was given the name of Jesus. The Son said that he came in his Father’s name (John 5:43). The Son inherited his name (Heb. 1:4). Therefore God’s saving name under heaven, is Jesus.

So the Father does some creating and speaks some words, but is not the Creator and is not the Word? That is the confusion of separate but coequal persons in the Godhead.

If you believe that (using the trinitarian phrase) “God the Son” is separately and distinctly the Word, then you should be equally comfortable using the phrase “God the Word”.

Just as your words, your mind, your personality is expressed by your physical body, God the Father’s words, mind, and personality is expressed by the Son of God.

And while trinitarians believe Jesus Christ is the Word, they seem to ignore that the Son of God credited God the Father for all divine words and doctrine, that he spoke while here on earth. The following says it all: “Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.” Heb. 10:7

It seems that trinitarians give lip service to God the Father, but by saying that the ‘second person’ in the trinity is solely the Word, and performed all of the creating, and that the ‘third person’ does all the miracles, they all but push the ‘first person’ out the back door.

The Word of God is OF God. God (Spirit) prepared a Son, the express image of the invisible God, to display God’s attributes, and to redeem fallen man.

[Zuriel]

**1Jn 4:2-3 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God,..**

I have not denied that.

**..and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God.**

Where have I not confessed Jesus?

I have asked you “where is the Father NOT at?” Is the Father not present in his OWN Son, as the Son firmly declared?

Do you read John 1:14 certain that the Father is not present in his own Word?

The Son declares where his life is from:

“For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he GIVEN the Son to have life in himself.” John 5:26

“As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father....”. John 6:57

That is why there is no phrase, “God the Son”, in the scriptures.

[HarleyD]

I would suggest a prayerful, objective and thoughtful study of the workings of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. This belief was deemed heresy by orthodox Christianity and condemned by the apostle John. Whenever I’m outside the norm of the majority of Christian thinking, which happens from time to time, I become a bit nervous.

[Zuriel]

Your reply would have been as good of a point, I suppose, to cease this discussion,....except for this line:

**This belief was deemed heresy by orthodox Christianity and condemned by the apostle John.**

“orthodox” Christianity has no right to create inaccurate definitions of the Son of God that aren’t in the scriptures (sola scriptura, anyone?). And a ‘majority’ isn’t a guarantee of truth. Jesus Christ said “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, that leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” Matt. 7:14

And speaking of John.....
Let’s just dive right in....

1John 1:1 testifies “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard,...seen,..looked upon,..handled, of the Word of life. (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)”

Remember my previous post contained two verses from the book of John where the Son said his life came from? Let’s go back there for more.....

How can the Word be called God? Answer: God the Father is in the Son, and the Son is in the Father:

“No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” John 1:18

How did the Son of God declare the invisible God? The Father prepared him a body. And the Father is in the Son. (Care to prove that not to be true?)

John 1:4 “In him was life...”.
Where did the life come from? The Son says the life is from his Father.

(If I’m sounding repetitive, remember that Jesus Christ made those claims several times.)

1John 4:12 “No man hath seen God at any time”. That’s twice that John (under inspiration) made that statement.

Paul said, in Col. 1:15, “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature.”

In his first epistle, John uses the phrase “the Son of God” eight times. The phrase “God the Son” is not to be found.

I will head down the home stretch with this from 1John 5:20:

“And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life”.

Did you see God the Father in that verse? Here’s an obvious clue from John 17:1-3...

“..Father, the hour is come, glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.”

[Bobsvainbabblings]

“”””You underlined the wrong part, Zuriel has not denied the Father or the Son.

Please see boatbums post #106. Zuriel, whether intentionally or not, state Christ to be a created being. This contradicts what John states that Christ is eternal.””””

I should have added your name to my post to boatbums which contained this;

“..begotten, not made..” seems contradictory, especially when one reads this from Rev. 3:14: “..These things saith the

Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God.”

That may just be because you read “the beginning of the creation of God” and think it means Jesus had a beginning. But we know from other Scripture that without Jesus, NOTHING was made that was made and He existed BEFORE all things and by Him everything was created. This means Jesus was the originator or the source of creation. Also, that verse from Rev. 3:14 is also translated as:

I read it the same way.

It would be no different than me, a very wealthy and experienced builder, deciding I wanted to create a large compound for the children I would have someday to all live together with their families. I have a son. I tell him what I want to accomplish. He agrees to follow my plans with no deviation and only answer questions after conferring with me. He builds a huge estate with materials I supply with me guiding every phase of construction. If you talked with my son at any time, It would be the same as talking with me.

My son built all phases of the compound but he didn’t create it. I, the father did. Just like Jesus’ heavenly Father created Him first to create this world for us.

“””Are you going to be a liar and not call Jesus the Christ, the anointed one of God as He and the Father claim or a god as men claimed 300 plus years after His death and resurrection?

You have two views here. The first is that Jesus is a man anointed by God. The second is that Christ is God. You failed to include the third possibility-that our Lord Jesus is BOTH God and Man. I’ll go with the third possibility.””””””

I believe Jesus is a man just like Adam. If he isn’t, God could not compare them as He does here;

Romans 5King James Version (KJV)
5 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

3 And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;

4 And patience, experience; and experience, hope:

5 And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.

17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

King James Version (KJV)
Jesus was born without the sin nature which is inherited from our father and grandfathers. He has a free will just like Adam. Adam used his free will to sin againce God.

Jesus uses his free will to live a sinless life pleasing God His Father

Jesus did not come to start a church, he came to be the one time blood sacrifice for us. If Jesus had to be divine to live a sinless life, as I have seen many claim, a righteous God could not punish us for something only a god can do.

“””You also states that men called our Lord Jesus “God” 300 years after his death. This is incorrect. Our Lord Jesus equated Himself to God and the Jews knew it.

Joh 10:33 The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.””””

He equated himself to God but there no place in scripture where He calls himself God. It was part of the plan to have Him crucified.

Men calling Jesus God 300 years after His death is what the subject of this thread is about. By that time the ‘church’ had become catholic, not Christian. When I use the terms catholic and Christian, I am not referring to who is, or is not saved. Only God our Father knows whose names are in the Lamb’s book of life.

A Christian is a disciple of the Christ and only uses his teaching to form their religious belief.

The word catholic has this definition

adjective

1.broad or wide-ranging in tastes, interests, or the like; havingsympathies with all; broad-minded; liberal.
2.universal in extent; involving all; of interest to all.
3.pertaining to the whole Christian body or church.

Easy to see why some claim they added paganism to their belief system.

Most catholics, I have encountered, are against scripture alone. They claim their religion is based on what Christ taught the Apostles and tradition. Traditions, from what I have observed, is created when the majority of the leaders agree about a subject at any one time they make it part of their belief system.

“”””Christ also equated himself with God the Father:

Joh 14:89 Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? “”””””

He stated He did nothing His Father didn’t ask him to say and/or do. In other words, He is His Father’s mirror image.

“”””You seem to have a hard time understanding Zuriel, stating in John, Jesus claiming His Father did the miracles thru Him.

No, I didn’t have a hard time. I said he was incorrect and provided a number of references. The scriptures doesn’t teach the FATHER did miracles thru our Lord Jesus. The scriptures teaches the miracles performed thru our Lord Jesus were performed by the Holy Spirit. This is a very subtle but most important point. We are empowered by the Holy Spirit just as our Lord Jesus was. “””

You just admitted Jesus did no miracles of his own. The fact Zuriel has been trying to have you understand.
May God our Father lead us to His Truth, BVB

[HarleyD]

How can the Word be called God? Answer: God the Father is in the Son, and the Son is in the Father:

You ignore the fact that it states "...the Word became flesh and dwelled among us." The "Word" isn't some kind of symbolic reference. Rather the Word is Christ.

How did the Son of God declare the invisible God? The Father prepared him a body. And the Father is in the Son. (Care to prove that not to be true?)

I believe I quoted you John 1:1-3. He was in the beginning and all things were made through Him. I'm not exactly sure how, if ALL THINGS were made through Him how God the Father could have made Him a body. And certainly He couldn't have made Himself a body.

I will head down the home stretch with this from 1John 5:20: “And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life”. Did you see God the Father in that verse?

While I admire your exercising, I'm not sure of your point. John is saying, in this case, our Lord Jesus to be the true God and eternal life. Is that your point? Then one has to wonder what happened to God the Father.

BTW-I see nothing in your comments about the workings of the Holy Spirit, although throughout scripture Christ credits His ministry, miracles, prayer and just about everything else to the workings of the Holy Spirit. In fact, it is the Holy Spirit which dwells in a believer that empowers us. You seem to be saying that the Father empowered Christ. How does the Holy Spirit relate to any of this?

[HarleyD]

Your post was good up to:

My son built all phases of the compound but he didn’t create it. I, the father did. Just like Jesus’ heavenly Father created Him first to create this world for us.

John plainly states that Christ was "In the beginning". God the Father didn't "create" another God. He and the Father are one. If you see Christ you see the Father. Thus, God the Father wasn't created. Christ is the same as the Father.

Any types of analogies are poor but if you are so wrapped up in trying to figure out this mystery, and how the Father could begot the Son, and the Spirit proceeding from the Father/Son, I would suggest you think of God like a consuming fire. Within the overall fire another fire may start. The original fire didn't create it. It is part of the overall fire. The two fires burning one inside another have the exact same essence as each other. They are inseparable and it is impossible to know where one ends and the other begins. From these two fires may proceed another fire. Same problem. It is all one fire but burning, smothering.

The fire is the same essence but may take on different characteristics throughout a wooded area.

I believe Jesus is a man just like Adam.

And, sadly, people who believe that are not Christians. Unless people understand that God died for their sins and their need to repent and accept God's grace into their lives, they will die in their sins. Mormons believe Christ pattern is one to emulate so that they may live a good life. Well the truth is no one can live a good enough life for God. Only by accepting God's grace to erase our sins can we find peace on earth and joy in heaven. Not because of any works that we've done but because of the works that He's done.

Most catholics, I have encountered, are against scripture alone. They claim their religion is based on what Christ taught the Apostles and tradition.

I'm not sure of your background but you sound as if you're a Mormon. Mormons, Jehovah Witness, Catholics, etc. are all against scripture alone. Each have external sources they refer to. This is a serious and fatal error. Eventually it leads to a work based religion. Christianity is what God did for us. Everything else is what we need to do for God.

You just admitted Jesus did no miracles of his own. The fact Zuriel has been trying to have you understand.

You haven't been listening to what I've been what I have been writing. ;O)

You are trying to separate God the Father from God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. They are all the same essence. So when I say that our Lord Jesus did works through the Holy Spirit, I am not saying that He didn't do any miracles of His own nor am I saying the Father didn't do any miracles. They ALL did the miracles because there is only ONE God. Each have a different function but it all is performed by the One. It is just like part of the fire burning a branch. Which part did it?

[boatbums]

Just like Jesus’ heavenly Father created Him first and then us.

The Son of God is from eternity, He is eternal, He is the only begotten of the Father - who changes not (Hebrews 13:8). There was never a time when the Son did not exist just as the Father and the Holy Spirit are eternally existent. God is the "I AM" - the self-existent one.

Colossians 1:15-17 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 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: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

[boatbums]

Some of the problems with the Incarnational Sonship of Christ are that this teaching confuses or destroys the internal relationships that exist within the Trinity, because if the Son is not eternally begotten by the Father, then neither did the Spirit eternally proceed from the Father through the Son. Also, if there is no Son prior to the incarnation, then there is no Father either; and yet throughout the Old Testament we see God being referred to as the Father of Israel. Instead of having a triune God eternally existing in three distinct Persons with three distinct names, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, those who hold to the doctrine of incarnational Sonship end up with a nameless Trinity prior to the incarnation, and we would be forced to say that God has chosen not to reveal Himself as He truly is, but only as He was to become. In other words, instead of actually revealing who He is, the Triune God instead chose to reveal Himself by the titles He would assume or the roles that He would take on and not who He really is. This is dangerously close to modalism and could easily lead to false teachings about the nature of God. One of the weaknesses of the doctrine of incarnational Sonship is that the basic relationships existing among the members of the Trinity are confused and diminished. Taken to its logical conclusion, denying the eternal Sonship of Christ reduces the Trinity from the relationship of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to simply Number One, Number Two and Number Three Persons—with the numbers themselves being an arbitrary designation, destroying the God-given order and relationship that exists among the Persons of the Trinity. (https://www.gotquestions.org/eternal-Sonship.html)

[Zuriel]

**You ignore the fact that it states “...the Word became flesh and dwelled among us.” The “Word” isn’t some kind of symbolic reference. Rather the Word is Christ.**

I haven’t ignored that. I been using scriptures to show that the Son of God is “in the bosom of the Father” (John 1:18), lives because of the Father (5:26; 6:57), doesn’t do his own will, just the Father’s (4:34; 5:30; 6:38-40; 7:16-18; 8:28,29; 12:44,45,49,50)(some of those references are found in my post with the over “100” list).

I simply believe that the scriptures are plain that the Father is in Christ. So when you think you’ve found Christ isolated, the Father is there. As I asked: prove that the Father is not there.

And if the Father is there, the Holy Spirit is there, for he proceeds from the Father. I have not ignored the Spirit, for I have pointed out that he doesn’t speak of himself, but like the Son, only does the will of the Father.

I gave you 1John 5:20 “And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life”.

And asked: Did you see God the Father in that verse?

Your response: **While I admire your exercising, I’m not sure of your point.**

Exercising? What is ignoring John 17:1-3?

You continue: **John is saying, in this case, our Lord Jesus to be the true God and eternal life.**

Is that a personal interpretation of 1John 5:20? Then I can see why you would avoid John 17:1-3.

In 1John 5:20 we see “that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know HIM that is true, and we are in HIM that is true, even in HIS Son Jesus Christ....”.

**Then one has to wonder what happened to God the Father.**

The Father is “HIM, HIM, and HIS”. I know this because that was what the Son did the whole time while here on earth: give us an understanding that we may know HIM that is true. The Son ALWAYS was doing the will of the Father; ALWAYS giving HIM the glory.

And the Father glorified the Son for doing so.

Does this part seem somehow familiar? “...and we are in HIM that is true, even in HIS Son Jesus Christ...”.....

It should, for here it is: “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also might be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” John 17:21

[Zuriel]

Ping to #138 (possibly a reply later. Nodding off)

[Bobsvainbabblings]

“”””Your post was good up to:

My son built all phases of the compound but he didn’t create it. I, the father did. Just like Jesus’ heavenly Father created Him first to create this world for us.
John plainly states that Christ was “In the beginning”. God the Father didn’t “create” another God. He and the Father are one. If you see Christ you see the Father. Thus, God the Father wasn’t created. Christ is the same as the Father. “”””

I agree, God the Father didn’t create another god, He created His son Jesus, our redeemer. He is one with the Father by His choice. If He wasn’t, it would be a sin.

“””Any types of analogies are poor but if you are so wrapped up in trying to figure out this mystery, and how the Father could begot the Son, and the Spirit proceeding from the Father/Son, I would suggest you think of God like a consuming fire. Within the overall fire another fire may start. The original fire didn’t create it. It is part of the overall fire. The two fires burning one inside another have the exact same essence as each other. They are inseparable and it is impossible to know where one ends and the other begins. From these two fires may proceed another fire. Same problem. It is all one fire but burning, smothering.

The fire is the same essence but may take on different characteristics throughout a wooded area.”””

Not sure where you found our Lord teaching that.

I believe Jesus is a man just like Adam.

“”””And, sadly, people who believe that are not Christians. Unless people understand that God died for their sins and their need to repent and accept God’s grace into their lives, they will die in their sins. Mormons believe Christ pattern is one to emulate so that they may live a good life. Well the truth is no one can live a good enough life for God. Only by accepting God’s grace to erase our sins can we find peace on earth and joy in heaven. Not because of any works that we’ve done but because of the works that He’s done.”””

I posted this scripture from Romans defining both Adam and Jesus as men. Unless you can find a translation which defines Jesus as a god you have to trust God knows what he is talking about.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.

17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

God did not die for our sins, the man Jesus Christ did.

Most catholics, I have encountered, are against scripture alone. They claim their religion is based on what Christ taught the Apostles and tradition.

“””I’m not sure of your background but you sound as if you’re a Mormon. Mormons, Jehovah Witness, Catholics, etc. are all against scripture alone. Each have external sources they refer to. This is a serious and fatal error. Eventually it leads to a work based religion. Christianity is what God did for us. Everything else is what we need to do for God.”””””

Hmmm I am only using scripture. Seems to me your are the one quoting from external sources.

“”””You just admitted Jesus did no miracles of his own. The fact Zuriel has been trying to have you understand.

You haven’t been listening to what I’ve been what I have been writing. ;O)

You are trying to separate God the Father from God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. They are all the same essence. So when I say that our Lord Jesus did works through the Holy Spirit, I am not saying that He didn’t do any miracles of His own nor am I saying the Father didn’t do any miracles. They ALL did the miracles because there is only ONE God. Each have a different function but it all is performed by the One. It is just like part of the fire burning a branch. Which part did it?””””

I agree there is only ONE God

May God our Father lead us to His truth, BVB