HEADER FOR Expressions
(Click picture to go back to Table of Contents)

Welcome

Enjoy... But remember
"Don't give in to winning the argument
and losing one of your eternal crowns..."

God bless you...   tell your friends

Next-in-Thread Next Message

Note Sanctissima/ Sono a casa sto avante de spiritus. 

Forum: Theological Expressions
Date: 2001, Jul 03
From: Thomas Lim

Why Creeds and Confessions?Why Creeds and Confessions?
By Jay Rogers
Modern Dissent from the Creeds
Driving down a country road sometime, you might see a fundamentalist church with
a sign proudly proclaiming: "No book but the Bible -- No creed but Christ." The
problem with this statement is that the word creed (from the Latin: credo)
simply means "belief." All Christians have beliefs, regardless of whether they
are written. The creeds of the early Church were nothing more than scriptural
statements of faith put into a systematic format.
The emphasis on creeds and confessions suffered a blow at the end of the last
century, when conservative evangelicals reacted against Protestant denominations
which fell into liberalism. "Dead orthodoxy" became a term to describe churches
that officially held to the creeds and a confession of faith, yet had little
fruit to testify to the genuine salvation of their members. To vanquish this
apostasy, the evangelical movement (and the fundamentalists a few years later)
emerged emphasizing salvation as an individual experience and the "literal"
interpretation of Scripture.
The evangelical and fundamentalist movements were bulwarks against liberal
apostasy. They did away with most of the public reading of Scripture, creeds and
confessions. Liturgical services were abandoned in favor of a less formal,
"seeker-friendly" type of evangelical meeting. There is certainly nothing wrong
with this. But in abandoning the liturgy, they forgot to teach new church
members the core elements of the faith found in the creeds and confessions.
De-emphasizing the public reading of creeds was intentionally good, but it had
disastrous consequences.
Among Pentecostals and charismatics -- two of the most recent groups to have
come out of the evangelical and fundamentalist movements -- we see an even
greater emphasis on throwing off formalism and dead orthodoxy in favor of
freedom of worship and spiritual experience. Yet we most often find heresies
among churches that stress experience over doctrine. This is not to say that
Christians must now throw off their experience and freedom in order to return to
dead liturgical services. Simply, what is needed at this time is a revival of
confessional orthodoxy.
We call this movement -- "confessionalism" -- which is nothing more than the
historic faith of the Early Church Fathers, Augustine, Luther, Calvin and the
Puritans. Through even a casual study of the creeds and confessions, you will
find that confessionalism stands in stark contrast to what is being offered
today by evangelical Christianity.
Today, we have more options than ever before for becoming heretics. Modern
evangelical leaders make all sorts of wild claims and assert teachings which are
not orthodox. The 20th century Church has promoted many doctrines which are not
historically orthodox. Pelagianism, Sabellianism, modalism, antinomianism and
Gnosticism are frequent heresies. Yet I do not believe that most modern
evangelicals intentionally hold to heresies. I believe that some have propagated
these ideas due to their ignorance or carelessness in what they have written and
preached. Today, we all need a greater knowledge of confessional orthodoxy.
I offer the following recovery plan to all evangelicals who wish to build a
comprehensive systematic theology based on biblical orthodoxy:
First, avoid the trash that is churned out by the modern evangelical pulp mills!
Once this faulty paradigm is demolished, you should begin to build a new
foundation for your faith by studying the creeds of the early Church. Then
graduate to the more exhaustive and theologically comprehensive confessions of
the Reformation period. (I have included a list of these confessions at the end
of chapter six for further study.)
You should then read some select writings of Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Knox,
and the Puritans. With an understanding of confessional orthodoxy, you will see
more clearly that these giants of the faith were theologically grounded in the
creeds and confessions. Then read some of the sermons and writings of great
modern Christian leaders such as George Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, John
Wesley, Charles Haddon Spurgeon and Charles Hodge.
I hope that by the study of these timeless, immutable truths, you will
strengthen your resolve to press into God in prayer and study of Scripture in
order to know Jesus Christ in a fuller, more intimate way.
The Apostles' Creed with Notes and Explanations*
A creed generally emphasizes the beliefs opposing those errors that the
compilers of the creed think most dangerous at the time. The Creed of the
Council of Trent, which was drawn up by the Roman Catholics in the 1500s,
emphasized those beliefs that Roman Catholics and Protestants were arguing about
most furiously at the time. The Nicene Creed, drawn up in the fourth century, is
emphatic in affirming the Deity of Christ, since it is directed against the
Arians, who denied that Christ was fully God. The Apostles' Creed, drawn up in
the first or second century, emphasizes the true humanity, including the
material body, of Jesus, since that is the point that the heretics of the time
(Gnostics, Marcionites, and later Manicheans) denied. (See 1 John 4:1-3)
Thus the Apostles' Creed is as follows:
* I believe in God the Father Almighty,
* Maker of Heaven and Earth,
The Gnostics held that the physical universe is evil and that God did not make
it.
* And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, Our Lord,
* Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,
* Born of the Virgin Mary,
The Gnostics were agreed that the orthodox Christians were wrong in supposing
that God had taken human nature or a human body. Some of them distinguished
between Christ, whom they acknowledged to be in some sense divine, and the man
Jesus, who was at most an instrument through whom the Christ spoke. They held
that the man Jesus did not become the bearer or instrument of the Christ until
the Spirit descended upon him at his baptism, and that the Spirit left him
before the crucifixion, so that the Spirit had only a brief and tenuous
association with matter and humanity. Others affirmed that there was never a man
Jesus at all, but only the appearance of a man, through which appearance wise
teachings were given to the first disciples. Against this the orthodox
Christians affirmed that Jesus was conceived through the action of the Holy
Spirit (thus denying the Gnostic position that the Spirit had nothing to do with
Jesus until his Baptism), that He was born (which meant that he had a real
physical body, and not just an appearance) of a virgin (which implied that he
had been special from the first moment of his life, and not just from the
baptism on.
* Suffered under Pontius Pilate,
There were many stories then current about gods who died and were resurrected,
but they were offered quite frankly as myths, as non-historical stories symbolic
of the renewal of the vegetation every spring after the seeming death of winter.
If you asked, "When did Adonis die?" you would be told either, "Long ago and far
away," or else, "His death is not an event in earthly time." Jesus, on the other
hand, died at a particular time and place in history, under the jurisdiction of
Pontius Pilate, Procurator of Judea from 26 to 36 A.D., during the last ten
years of the reign of the Emperor Tiberius.
* was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into Hades.
Here the creed hammers home the point that He was really dead. He was not an
illusion. He was nailed to a cross. He died. He had a real body, a corpse, that
was placed in a tomb. He was not merely unconscious -- His spirit left his body
and went to the realm of the dead. It is a common belief among Christians that
on this occasion He took the souls of those who had died trusting in the
promises made under the Old Covenant -- Abraham, Moses, David, Elijah, Isaiah,
and many others -- and brought them out of the realm of the dead and into
heavenly glory. But the creed is not concerned with this point. The reference to
the descent into Hades (or Hell, or Sheol) is here to make it clear that the
death of Jesus was not just a swoon or a coma, but death in every sense of the
word.
* The third day he rose from the dead, he ascended into heaven,
* and is seated at the right hand of God the Father Almighty.
* From thence he shall come to judge the living and the dead.
* I believe in the Holy Ghost,
* the holy catholic church,
The Gnostics believed that the most important Christian doctrines were reserved
for a select few. The orthodox belief was that the fullness of the Gospel was to
be preached to the entire human race. Hence the term "catholic," or universal,
which distinguished them from the Gnostics.
* the communion of saints,
* the forgiveness of sins,
The Gnostics considered that what men needed was not forgiveness, but
enlightenment. Ignorance, not sin, was the problem. Some of them, believing the
body to be a snare and delusion, led lives of great asceticism. Others,
believing the body to be quite separate from the soul, held that it did not
matter what the body did, since it was completely foul anyway, and its actions
had no effect on the soul. They accordingly led lives that were not ascetic at
all. Either way, the notion of forgiveness was alien to them.
* the resurrection of the body,
The chief goal of the Gnostics was to become free forever from the taint of
matter and the shackles of the body, and to return to the heavenly realm as Pure
Spirit. They totally rejected any idea of the resurrection of the body.
* and the life everlasting. AMEN
The Nicene Creed
The Nicene Creed is the most widely accepted and used brief statements of the
Christian Faith. In liturgical churches, it is said every Sunday as part of the
Liturgy. It is common ground to Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Anglicans,
Lutherans, Calvinists, and many other Christian groups. Many groups that do not
have a tradition of using it in their services nevertheless are committed to the
doctrines it teaches.
Someone may ask, "What about the Apostles' Creed?" Traditionally, in the West,
the Apostles' Creed is used at Baptisms, and the Nicene Creed at the Eucharist
(the Lord's Supper, or the Holy Communion). The East uses only the Nicene Creed.

The following is the text of the Nicene Creed followed by notes and
explanations.
I believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son].
With the Father and the Son
he is worshipped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. AMEN.
Notes and Explanations*
When the Apostles' Creed was drawn up, the chief enemy was Gnosticism, which
denied that Jesus was truly Man; and the emphases of the Apostles' Creed reflect
a concern with repudiating this error.
When the Nicene Creed was drawn up, the chief enemy was Arianism, which denied
that Jesus was fully God. Arius was a presbyter (an elder) in Alexandria in
Egypt, in the early 300's. He taught that the Father, in the beginning, created
(or begot) the Son, and that the Son, in conjunction with the Father, then
proceeded to create the world. The result of this was to make the Son a created
being, and hence not God in any meaningful sense. It was also suspiciously like
the theories of those Gnostics and pagans who held that God was too perfect to
create something like a material world, and so introduced one or more
intermediate beings between God and the world. God created A, who created B, who
created C, ... who created Z, who created the world. Alexander, Bishop of
Alexandria, sent for Arius and questioned him. Arius stuck to his position, and
was finally excommunicated by a council of Egyptian bishops. He went to
Nicomedia in Asia, where he wrote letters defending his position to various
bishops. Finally, the Emperor Constantine summoned a council of Bishops in Nicea
(across the straits from modern Istanbul), and there in 325 the Bishops of the
Church, by a decided majority, repudiated Arius and produced the first draft of
what is now called the Nicene Creed. A chief spokesman for the full deity of
Christ was Athanasius, deacon of Alexandria, assistant (and later successor) to
the aging Alexander. The Arian position has been revived in our own day by the
Watchtower Society (Jehovah Witnesses), who explicitly hail Arius as a great
witness to the truth.
Here is the Nicene Creed a second time, with notes inserted.
* I believe in one God,
* the Father, the Almighty,
* maker of heaven and earth,
* of all that is, seen and unseen.
* I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
* the only son of God,
Here and elsewhere (such as John 1:14) where the Greek has MONOGENETOS HUIOS, an
English translation may read either "only Son" or "only begotten Son." The Greek
is ambiguous. The root GEN is found in words like "genetics, generation," and
suggests begetting. However, it is also found in words like "genus" and suggests
family or sort or kind. Accordingly, we may take MONOGENETOS to mean either
"only begotten" or "one-of-a-kind, only, sole, unique."
* eternally begotten of the Father,
One might suppose that this means that the Son was begotten, "before the
galaxies were formed," or something like that. But in fact it means something a
little different. Arius was fond of saying, "The Logos is not eternal. God begat
him, and before he was begotten, he did not exist." Athanasius replied that the
begetting of the Logos was not an event in time, but an eternal relationship.
* God from God, Light from Light,
A favorite analogy of the Athanasians was the following: Light is continously
streaming forth from the sun. (In those days, it was generally assumed that
light was instantaneous, so that there was no delay at all between the time that
a ray of light left the sun and the time it struck the earth.) The rays of light
are derived from the sun, and not vice versa. But it is not the case that first
the sun existed and afterwards the Light. It is possible to imagine that the sun
has always existed, and always emitted light. The Light, then, is derived from
the sun, but the Light and the sun exist simultaneously throughout eternity.
They are co-eternal. Just so, the Son exists because the Father exists, but
there was never a time before the Father produced the Son. The analogy is
further appropriate because we can know the sun only through the rays of light
that it emits. To see the sunlight is to see the sun. Just so, Jesus says, "He
who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9).
* true God from true God,
* begotten, not made,
This line was inserted by way of repudiating Arius' teaching that the Son was
the first thing that the Father created, and that to say that the Father begets
the Son is simply another way of saying that the Father has created the Son.
Arius said that if the Father has begotten the Son, then the Son must be
inferior to the Father, as a prince is inferior to a king. Athanasius replied
that a son is precisely the same sort of being as his father, and that the only
son of a king is destined himself to be a king. It is true that an earthly son
is younger than his father, and that there is a time when he is not yet what he
will be. But God is not in time. Time, like distance, is a relation between
physical events, and has meaning only in the context of the physical universe.
When we say that the Son is begotten of the Father, we do not refer to an event
in the remote past, but to an eternal and timeless relation between the Persons
of the Godhead. Thus, while we say of an earthly prince that he may some day
hope to become what his father is now, we say of God the Son that He is
eternally what God the Father is eternally.
* of one being with the Father.
This line: "of one essence with the Father, of one substance with the Father,
consubstantial with the Father," was the crucial one, the acid test. It was the
one formula that the Arians could not interpret as meaning what they believed.
Without it, they would have continued to teach that the Son is good, and
glorious, and holy, and a Mighty Power, and God's chief agent in creating the
world, and the means by which God chiefly reveals Himself to us, and therefore
deserving in some sense to be called divine. But they would have continued to
deny that the Son was God in the same sense in which the Father is God. And they
would have pointed out that, since the Council of Nicea had not issued any
declaration that they could not accept, it followed that there was room for
their position inside the tent of Christian doctrine, as that tent had been
defined at Nicea. Arius and his immediate followers would have denied that they
were reducing the Son to the position of a high-ranking angel. But their
doctrine left no safeguard against it, and if they had triumphed at Nicea, even
in the negative sense of having their position acknowledged as a permissible one
within the limits of Christian orthodoxy, the damage to the Christian witness to
Christ as God made flesh would have been irreparable.
Incidentally, HOMOOUSIOS ("one being") is generally written without the hyphen.
The word has five syllables HO-mo-OU-si-os, with accents on first and third, as
shown. The Greek root HOMO, meaning "same," is found in words like "homosexual"
and "homogenized," and is not to be confused with the Latin word HOMO, meaning
"man, human."
The language finally adopted in the East was that the Trinity consists of three
HYPOSTASES (singular HYPOSTASIS) united in one OUSIA. The formula used in the
West, and going back at least to Tertullian (who wrote around 200, and whose
writings are the oldest surviving Christian treatises written in Latin), is that
the Trinity consists of three PERSONAE (singular PERSONA) united in one
SUBSTANTIA. In English, we say "Three Persons in one Substance." Unfortunately,
the Greek HYPO-STASIS and the Latin SUB-STANTIA each consists of an element
meaning "under, below" (as in "hypodermic," "hypothermia," etc.) followed by an
element meaning "stand." Thus it was natural for a Greek-speaker, reading a
Latin document that referred to one SUBSTANTIA to substitute mentally a
reference to one HYPOSTASIS, and to be very uncomfortable, while a Latin-speaker
would have the same problem in reverse. Thus the seeds were sown for a breakdown
of communication.
* Through him all things were made.
This is a direct quote from John 1:3. Before the insertion of the HOMO-OUSIOS
clause, this line immediately followed "begotten, not made." The two lines go
naturally together. The Son is not a created thing. Rather, He is the agent
through Whom all created things come to be.
* For us and for our salvation
* he came down from heaven:
* by the power of the Holy Spirit
* he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
* and was made man.
* For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
* he suffered and was buried.
By the time of Nicea, it was no longer necessary to emphasize, to spell out
unmistakably, that Christ had really died at Calvary, as it had been spelled out
in the Apostles' Creed: "he suffered death and was buried." Apparently the
Nicene Fathers were supposed that their language would not be misunderstood.
* On the third day he rose again
* in accordance with the Scriptures;
The Scriptures referred to here are the Old Testament prophecies concerning
Christ. The wording here is borrowed from 1 Corinthians 15:3,4: "And I delivered
to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins
according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that He rose again on
the third day according to the Scriptures."
* he ascended into heaven
* and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
* He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
* and his kingdom will have no end.
* I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
* who proceeds from the Father [and the Son].
The words shown in brackets, "and from the Son," are a Western addition to the
Creed as it was originally agreed on by a Council representing the whole Church,
East and West. They correspond to the Latin word FILIOQUE (FILI = Son, -O =
from, -QUE = and; pronounced with accent on the O), and the controversy about
them is accordingly known as the Filioque controversy.
If we are looking for a statement that can be taken as common ground by all
Christians, East and West alike, it clearly cannot include the FILIOQUE. On the
other hand, Western Christians will be unwilling to have it supposed that they
are repudiating the statement that the Spirit proceeds jointly from Father and
Son.
* With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified.
* He has spoken through the Prophets.
This line was directed against the view that the Holy Spirit did not exist, or
was not active, before Pentecost.
* I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
Many Christians from various backgrounds will want to know, "Precisely what
would I be agreeing to if I signed this?" We already defined catholic as
"universal." Catholicity means literally "universality." All true believers are
part of the catholic Church, because they hold to the univeral faith.
* I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
* I look for the resurrection of the dead,
* and the life of the world to come. AMEN.
*Editor's note: I have made use of the writings of James Kiefer whose material
has been edited and paraphrased in the: "Notes and explanations."

Next-in-Thread Next Message

Add Message to: "Sanctissima/ Sono a casa sto avante de spiritus."

Members Subscribe Admin Mode Show Frames Help for Agora Public 1.10

Messages Inline: 1 All Outline: 1 2 3

1. Question Did Jesus go to Hell? by SK, 2001, Jul 03
(_ Feedback Where is Jesus between his death to ressurection? by Thomas Lim, 2001, Jul 04
(_ Feedback According to John's gospel... by SK, 2001, Jul 04
(_ Question Pls explain clearly by Thomas Lim, 2001, Jul 05
(_ Feedback I'm asking for the answer to the question...are you answering or are you conducting a test quiz? :-) by SK, 2001, Jul 05
(_ Feedback No...........= by (Thomas Lim, 2001, Jul 06
(_ Ok Thanks and some clarification. by SK, 2001, Jul 06
(_ None These scriptures may give you some idea. by True Light, 2001, Jul 07
1. Agree Your 2-cents are worth more than a million! by Thomas Lim, 2001, Jul 07
1. Ok Wow! True Light turns into a millionaire... by SK, 2001, Jul 07
(_ Ok We are all valuable in the eyes of God. by True Light, 2001, Jul 07
(_ Ok Hi True Light & Thomas,, 2001, Jul 07
(_ Ok God bless all of us! by Thomas Lim, 2001, Jul 09
(_ Idea It's just a real life story of an English man who was very ugly..., 2001, Jul 09
2. More The 3 Scriptural Texts by Christopher Yip, 2001, Jul 09
1. Question Hi Chris, how do you interprete what Jesus said to Mary Magdalene then? eom by SK, 2001, Jul 09
1. Ok No problem. by Christopher Yip, 2001, Jul 09
1. Question Untitled by Curious, 2001, Jul 09
1. Ok Thomas touched the body of Christ (eom). by Christopher Yip, 2001, Jul 10
2. None Chris,you misunderstood much about Christ descend into Hell.n/t by frankielee, 2001, Jul 09
2. None I had refuted this errors before.It is wrong,Chris! n/t by frankielee, 2001, Jul 09
3. Question Is that a new teaching? by Passer-by, 2001, Jul 09
4. Sad Who is advocating Extra-Biblicals ? by frankie lee, 2001, Jul 09
1. Disagree What does it mean that Jesus went to hell in the Apostles' Creed? by Christopher Yip, 2001, Jul 10
(_ Note Apostle Creed cannot be Challenge at all! by frankie lee, 2001, Jul 11
(_ Question Frank - Where is Your Exegesis? Sorry but I'm losing patience. by Christopher Yip, 2001, Jul 11

Add Message to: "Sanctissima/ Sono a casa sto avante de spiritus."

Members Subscribe Admin Mode Show Frames Help for Agora Public 1.10
FOOTER for Expressions

tell your friends

Copyright © 1996, 1997, 1998,1999, 2000, 2001 Antioch Networks International. All Rights Reserved.
The Agora Forum is a registered trademark of Antioch Networks International.

Thank you for contributing to Expressions!

Back to Antioch's Home Page
For more information, please send your request to: forumaster@antioch.com.sg.