Creed on the Son — Comment and discuss here.

We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, Light from Light, true God from true God, Son of God, through whom all things were made. Who for our salvation was made flesh, was crucified and suffered death for the forgiveness of our sins, and rose again on the third day. He ascended into heaven and will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.

18 Responses to "Creed on the Son — Comment and discuss here."

Vito says:

March 28, 2016 at 9:48 am

I feel as though this creed is so close to being passed unanimously and each side needs to make small compromises. I propose we add “unborn and begotten” before “son of God in the first sentence. I believe the Arians feel strongly about the word “begotten;” however, the Alexandrians want to emphasize how Jesus is different than a human who is created by God, and “unborn” may be a good compromise.
Alexander says:

March 28, 2016 at 9:53 pm

I stand strongly with Vito’s thoughts and amendments to the above Creed. I do however think that “uncreated” might be better than “unborn,” simply because we do know and believe Jesus to have been born of the Virgin Mary. It may just create unnecessary confusion and potentially take away the fully human nature of Jesus Christ. Just a thought!

In addition, I would encourage each and every member of this Council to read the thoughts of everyone here regarding the third day of the Council. I believe that there are important ideas and words to be heard and shared, so I urge everyone, no matter your position or stance regarding the Creed, to take the time to read them all carefully and listen to your brothers.
1. Arius says:
  
  March 28, 2016 at 9:58 pm
  
  Your argument for “uncreated” or “unborn” is unnecessary because I will not accept a Creed in which either of those words are used.
Arius says:

March 28, 2016 at 9:56 pm

Let us consider what Constantine has encouraged us to remember–that Christ is good news. We are forgetting that we agree on the most important aspect of who Christ is as we have stated in the second half of the Creed. Therefore, if we cannot agree on a proper beginning that satisfies both sides, we ought to just leave out any phrasing of “begotten,” “unborn,” “uncreated,” or “true God from true God.” I propose we leave it at what we know to be true–the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.
1. Vito says:
  
  March 28, 2016 at 10:42 pm
  
  If we delete those words, we are both denying our true beliefs about God and Jesus, and this will also result in an ambiguous creed. What do we do when other heresies rise and manipulate the creed to fit their beliefs? We will need another council to debate these beliefs, and be back exactly at square one. But worse, what if these heresies gain great power and bring down Christianity as a whole, then all our work is for nothing!
  1. Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia says:
    
    March 28, 2016 at 10:55 pm
    
    I think this paragraph on the Son is fine and should be included in the creed without any other alterations. The Arians gave up a lot of our wording to compromise with the Alexandrians and I think the Alexandrians should do the same to meet us halfway.
  2. Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia says:
    
    March 28, 2016 at 11:00 pm
    
    Vito, you make good points, but your comments are only dragging out this discussion longer than it needs to be. We need to bring this to a resolve. God does not call us to argue about doctrine. Need I remind you of Matthew 23:37-40 (“Jesus replied: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”) The time that we are spending unnecessarily arguing about this could be used to do the things that God commands us to do most.
    1. Alexander says:
      
      March 29, 2016 at 8:30 am
      
      Doctrine is extremely important. Doctrine means teaching, explaining, clarifying. It is part of the gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ, because news can’t be just declared by the mouth of a messenger–it has to be understood in the mind of a hearer. When the gospel is proclaimed, it must be explained.
      Gospel doctrine matters because the good news is so full and rich and wonderful that it must be opened like a treasure chest, and the doctrine is a description of these treasures. Doctrine serves the gospel by illuminating it as the best news anyone has ever heard, and that’s why it is so important and crucial to make sure our Creed identifies exactly who Jesus Christ is.
      1. Arius says:
        
        March 29, 2016 at 11:47 am
        
        My dear Alexander,
        Are you suggesting that proclaiming the gospel by word of mouth is ineffective? Are you forgetting Jesus’ very own disciples were called to spread the gospel with nothing but their words and the power of the Holy Spirit? Mark 16:15 reads, “He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.” It does not say, “Go make a doctrine that is super specific and rely on that to convince people of the good news.” God calls us, not a doctrine, to proclaim the gospel. Let’s not undermine the power that Christ has to change hearts through our preaching. The doctrine is simply a formality, nothing but politics really. It is our words given to us by the Holy Spirit that will spread the good news, not a doctrine. Why don’t we just drop this whole argument and face the fact that I will not be accepting a Creed that has the word “uncreated” or “unbegun?” Let’s leave it at “begotten” and call it a Creed.
        Blessings,
        Arius
Alexander says:

March 29, 2016 at 12:01 pm

What happens when someone new to the faith inquires about Jesus and His relationship to the Father? What will we tell them, that it’s up to them to decide? Where is the power of God in that? We must have sound doctrine to support our understanding of an all-powerful and loving God, otherwise proclaiming the Gospel is futile because people will see the disagreements about God Himself and not want to be a part of such a disunited community.

The majority of us in this Council believe the importance of including “uncreated” and “co-eternal,” or at least one of them, so why are we letting the minority force the majority to compromise instead of the other way around?
Arius says:

March 29, 2016 at 9:37 pm

Do you not see what needs to happen here? Constantine needs us to agree on a Creed. I will not agree on a Creed that is in direct opposition to my beliefs. I will leave the Church if you continue to insist on an Alexandrian specific creed. I know Constantine does not want this to occur and for your own sake you should not want this to occur either, Alexander. You seem to be walking on thin ice with our Emperor Constantine, so maybe you would find it wise to listen to me. Take out “true God from true God” and I will be happy with the Creed, we can move along with the Council and find peace and unity as desired by all. It’s not about a majority vote, it’s about achieving a unanimous vote.
Alexander says:

March 30, 2016 at 5:17 pm

I move for the Creed to say the following, and that we continue our discussion based off of this Creed so as there at least seems to be progress made towards a unanimous vote:

“We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, Light from Light, Son of God, eternal with the Father, uncreated and through whom all things were made. Who for our salvation was made flesh, was crucified and suffered death for the forgiveness of our sins, and rose again on the third day. He ascended into heaven and will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.”
Athanasius says:

March 30, 2016 at 5:55 pm

I second Alexander’s Creed proposal. I cannot support a Creed that does not state that Jesus is “uncreated” and “co-eternal” with God. It is denying the nature of Christ. As I recall, there were additional words in the part of our Creed about the nature of God that was included that are unnecessary, it was claimed that not including them would be a denial of God. However, not including “true” and the laundry list of characteristics would not be denying the nature of God, and to the dislike of some was included, but for the sake of unity and a unanimous vote. Alexander’s proposed creed is a wonderful creed, and I urge you to think of what is best for unity.
Gertz/Arius says:

March 30, 2016 at 6:23 pm

I’d prefer this:

“We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, Light from Light, Son of God through whom all things were made. Who for our salvation was made flesh, was crucified and suffered death for the forgiveness of our sins, and rose again on the third day. He ascended into heaven and will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.”
1. Athanasius says:
  
  March 30, 2016 at 7:22 pm
  
  Arius, it is too vague. You are rejecting the nature of Christ. I can support changing the line of the Son of God to “the eternally begotten Son of God, but not made, through whom all things were made.”
  1. Alexander says:
    
    March 30, 2016 at 8:58 pm
    
    I would support this change by Athanasius. We cannot have a vague Creed–disunity will only continue if we do.
Alexandra Stapleton says:

March 30, 2016 at 10:29 pm

I propose a creed that states co-equal and of substance with the Father. Therefore, we can eliminate strong words.
Gertz/Arius says:

March 30, 2016 at 10:44 pm

Let’s get this clear–I am in no way “rejecting the nature of Christ” as you say. By trying my best to compromise with you all and pass a creed that only highlights our similarities, I am lifting up the power of Christ found in the resurrection. We already established that we disagree on the the eternality and equality of the Father and Son, but we do agree on what is most beautiful about Jesus’ life. Without him suffering and dying on the cross and resurrecting three days later, Christ is meaningless. Let’s focus on this alone because that is all that we agree on.

I have already sacrificed a lot of my beliefs in this creed and it’s time you start doing the same. In no way is this current creed explicitly expressive of my beliefs. It is not going to be explicitly expressive of yours either. I understand that you do not want a vague creed, you’ve said it plenty of times. However, for the sake of moving on and for establishing unity, you must accept that it will be a vague creed. That is the only way to satisfy every single person at this council.

This back and forth has been useless and tiring because you all are not compromising one bit. You keep pushing for your “uncreated” and “eternal” language to be put in the creed, when you very well know that I will not accept that. If you at all desire unity, then you will understand that the following creed is the only way to go.

“We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, Light from Light, Son of God through whom all things were made. Who for our salvation was made flesh, was crucified and suffered death for the forgiveness of our sins, and rose again on the third day. He ascended into heaven and will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.”

Please playfully consider my request for the above creed to be passed. Even if the creed does not explicitly state your beliefs, God will know where your heart lies.

Comments are closed.