The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed: A Foundation of Christian Orthodoxy | Church Councils
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- In this video, we explore the history and significance of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, one of the most foundational statements of Christian faith. The creed was formed in two major ecumenical councils: the Council of Nicæa in 325 and the Council of Constantinople in 381.
At the Council of Nicæa, the theological disputes between Arius and Alexander over the relationship between God the Father and God the Son were settled, condemning Arianism as heresy. The Nicene Creed was established to affirm the divinity of Jesus Christ and set the foundation for Christian orthodoxy.
The Council of Constantinople expanded upon this by addressing the Holy Spirit's role within the Trinity. The new version of the creed emphasized the Holy Spirit as co-equal with the Father and the Son, a response to the theological challenges of the time, including the Pneumatomachian controversy.
Throughout history, the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed has stood the test of time as a defining statement of faith for both Eastern and Western Christian traditions, reaffirming the doctrine of the Trinity and safeguarding orthodox Christianity.
Join us as we break down the differences between the 325 and 381 creeds, explore their theological importance, and discuss their lasting impact on Christianity today.
🔴 Subscribe to get more videos from Theology Academy
bit.ly/3IyOpRP
Church History:
bit.ly/3iunuff
Biblical Studies - Old Testament:
bit.ly/3LnpNgT
Historical Jesus:
bit.ly/3L8rdvc
Church Fathers:
bit.ly/37LrplP
----------------
Follow us:
Visit our Website: www.theology-a...
Instagram: / engagetheology
Twitter: / engagetheology
Facebook: / engagetheology
Although the Niceno-Constantinople Creed was attributed to the Council of Constantinople (381) by the Council of Chalcedon (451), there is no mention of it in the records of the Council of Constantinople or in any other official documents prior to the Council of Chalcedon.
Neither Gregory of Nazianzus (329-389) - who attended the opening sessions of the Council of Constantinople - nor Gregory of Nyssa (?-394) - who attended the whole of the Council of Constantinople - ever mentioned it. Gregory of Nazianzus only ever referred to the earlier Nicene form to express his ongoing concern about the Creed’s incompleteness regarding the Holy Spirit. Nor is it mentioned by the Church historians Socrates of Constantinople (?-440), Sozomen (400-450), and Theodoret of Cyrus (393-457), all of whom lived between these two Councils. The Council of Ephesus (431) likewise made no mention of it, instead endorsing the earlier creed of Nicaea as a valid statement of the faith when anathematizing Nestorianism.
The Niceno-Constantinople Creed was first recited at the Council of Chalcedon on instructions from the chair of the meeting - the representative of the Emperor. However, since Canon 7 of the Council of Ephesus decreed "it is unlawful for any man to bring forward, or to write, or to compose a different faith as a rival to that established by the holy fathers assembled with the Holy Spirit (σύν ἁγίῳ πνεύματι) in Nicæa", a new version of the Creed could not be introduced. Hence, its back-dating to the Council of Constantinople.
In other words, the attribution of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed to the Council of Constantinople was a "pious" fraud to get around a decree of the Council of Ephesus.
Do you think that the truth or the real history means anything to these people, or that any evidence presented to them will change their minds?
What about all the other events that seemed to have been erased from their version of church history?
Like these:
Edict of Serdica (311 CE)
Constantine's flip on Nicene "Christianity" (30 CE)
Councils of Sirmium in (347, 351, 357, 358, 375 or 378 CE)
Council of Antioch, (341 CE)
The Edict of Thessalonica (380 CE) - where and when the new idea of the Trinity was forced on the church by Roman law.
Your content presentation always amaze me
Music track 🤦♂️ turn it off except for brief transitions. and the keyboard clicks? detracts from content and professional presentation
On the Creed's "We believe in One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church", the video says "If anybody disgreed with the Council's greed and would want to form their own Churches, the Council would recognize just One Church"
NOT EXACTLY! It is the orthodoxy of the doctrine of each Church that the Council recognizes, not each Church per se, i.e. the Oneness of Belief, of Doctrines and not a monolithic Church.
Yes, there was only ONE CHURCH that Jesus founded, and at that time, therejust was only ONE United Catholic or Universal Church, as the Symbol of Nicaea stated. But there actually were several Patriarchal Churches that were started by their respective founding Apostle
1. Jerusalem - Peter / James
2. Antioch - Peter
3. Alexandria - Mark
4. Constantinople - Andrew
5. Rome - Peter
Each of these Church, located in a separate geographical jurisdiction, professed the same Apostolic Faith, considers themselves to be a part of the universal or the Catholic Church and not a stand-alone or spin-off entity. Each Local Church is governed by a Patriarch (head bishop) and are autocephalous (or sui juris or self-governing) from one another. When a any of this local Church cannot handle an internal issue/conflict or when a council cannot end up with a decision, they all refer the matter to the Bishop of Rome, being the successor of Peter, the primus inter pares (first among equals). This was the ONE APOSTOLIC Church that was functioning in those days, ONE in their Apostolic Faith (labeled at that time as the Nicaean Faith) but diverse in their expressions of the same Apostolic Faith or Rites. This is the One, Holy, Apostolic, and Catholic Church stated in the Creed, and the label "Catholic" in those days does not follow that a Church is necessarily Roman Catholic because anyone may also be a Coptic Catholic, a Byzantine Catholic, etc...ergo everyone was reciting this same Symbol of Faith that was an external profession of unity to the Universal or Catholic Faith from the Apostles.
The video WRONGLY stated that 'since it was Theodosius who called for and ratified the decisions of the Council, the state also recognize just one Christian Church."
1⃣ The promulgation of the Έδικτο της Θεσσαλονίκης (Edikto tes Thessalonikes) - that declared the Nicaean Faith as the Roman Empire's official religion was issued on 27 Feb AD380, while the Constantinopolitan Council discussed here was in AD381. (another cart before the horse)!
2⃣ Theodosius, despite his leanings to Christianity, was no Theologian to have the skills to take part and ratify the Council's discussions but had the moral suasion toward his subjects to proclaim the faith of Nicaea as the official state religion. While the Church of both East and West acknowledged his conciliar convocation and support for the Council at Constantinople in the same manner as they acknowledged what Constantine did for the Council of Nicaea AD325, Theodosius had no theological skills to deliberate and interpelate on the various heresies creeping up in those days and did not mess around with its deliberations.
2⃣ The edict of Thessalonika proclaiming the Nicaean Faith as the official state religion was a joint proclamation by Theodosius I as emperor of the East (Constantinople), of Gratian, emperor of the West, and Gratian's junior co-emperor Valentinian II, on 27 Feb 380, part of Theodosius' grateful response to his recent healing from a grave illness by which he earlier accepted Baptism from Ascholius, the Bishop of Thessalonica. So this edict is absolutely NOT related to the decisions in the Council of Constantinople.
Again this is another silly attempt to make it appear that the Catholic Church was founded and run by Roman Emperors. It was NOT!
--► because the Catholic Church was not just Roman,
--► because Theodosius was no Roman Catholic but, being the Emperor of the East, was a Byzantine Catholic, and he taught no doctrine in the Church despite being a Christian
--► because he was no theologian to be able to make decisions for the Council whose convocation he sponsored.
❌ The video also says that "A creed takes into account what challenges to be a Christian" - but the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Symbol mentions nothing of that sort.
✔ But the video CORRECTLY pointed out that "most local churches and christian para-church organization have their own statements of faith or doctrinal statements." Yes, a straying away from the Faith that the Early Church Fathers professed. This was the effect of the divisions fomented starting from the Council of Chalcedon to the Protestant Reformation. The post Chalcedonian rift started the schisms between Eastern and Oriental Orthodox. While the ancient Church professes faith in the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, many today professes faith in the sole and final authority of the Bible and the 'Faith Alone' soteriology (which actually was invented some 1500 years later).
Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost Notice: Name singular, three persons
Individuals need to develop a personal relationship with the Lord and trust him to lead them instead of trusting in organized religion. People put their faith in these men more than God. Let the Lord speak directly to you. You don't need these bureaucrats as an intermediary, that's the Savior's responsibility.
My only creed is the scriptures alone.
Second comment!!!
The video also mentioned that "there were multiple baptismal formulae and creeds in the history of the early Church"
❌ WRONG! The formula for Baptism for all Patriarchal Churches (East and West) has always been ("I baptize _____) in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit", and never did these Apostolic Churches ever shifted it to the newly crafted forms such as "in the Name of the Lord Jesus" or "in the Name of the Creator, of the Redeemer, and of the Comforter" nor was it "Accept Jesus as personal Lord and Savior"
I've always had an interest in church history but never went to college. This was very informative, thank you.
This Church Council of Constantinople did not come out with a new doctrine but was convoked to discuss something that was already part of the Church's ancient teachings from the Apostles, and the Churches of both East and West were merely reacting against various proliferating wrong teachings in those days.
Also, it was the Council Members who ratified the decisions of the participants, NOT Theodosius. Like Constantine, Theodosius was a lay sponsor to the Christian Council, and hosted it in the capital of Byzantium. It has to be noted that Theodosius I was converted only the year before, and with the decriminalization of Christianity in the Edict of Milan AD313, Christianity became more and more socially acceptable. Unlike Constantine who juggled favors between pagans and Christians during his term, Theodosius was more favorable to Christians. It was on this leaning that he proclaimed the Faith of Nicaea as the official religion of his empire in AD30 and neglected the ancient pagan shrines, leading to their decay and destruction.
In the bible in the 10 Commandment God said there is no other God beside him, also oh John 17:1-3 Jesus said that they can know you only true God. And on John 8:40 ``but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God"
So who should we believe the counsel of nicaea or jesus christ and our lord God.
🙏
The Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed has its roots in Scripture. Here's a breakdown of the scriptural basis for each section:
*I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.*
*Genesis 1:1 - "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."
*Isaiah 64:8 - "But now, O Lord, You are our Father."
*Matthew 6:9-10 - "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be Your name."
*I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages.*
*John 1:1-14 - Jesus as the Word, eternally with God.
*John 3:16 - "For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son."
*Hebrews 1:2-3 - Jesus as the Son, heir of all things.
*God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father.*
*John 1:1-4 - Jesus' divinity and relationship to the Father.
*Hebrews 1:3 - Jesus as the exact representation of God's being.
*Colossians 1:15-20 - Jesus' preeminence and divinity.
*Through Him all things were made.*
*John 1:3 - "All things were made through Him."
*Colossians 1:16-17 - Jesus as Creator.
*For us men and for our salvation He came down from heaven.*
*John 3:13 - "No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven."
*Philippians 2:5-8 - Jesus' incarnation and humility.
*By the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man.*
*Luke 1:26-38 - Annunciation and virgin birth.
*Matthew 1:18-25 - Jesus' birth and divine origin.
*For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate, He suffered death and was buried.*
*Matthew 27:35-37 - Crucifixion.
*1 Corinthians 15:3-4 - Death and burial.
*And rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.*
*Matthew 28:1-10 - Resurrection.
*1 Corinthians 15:4 - Resurrection on the third day.
*He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.*
*Acts 1:9-11 - Ascension.
*Hebrews 1:3 - Seated at God's right hand.
*He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end.*
*Matthew 25:31-46 - Second Coming and judgment.
*1 Corinthians 15:24-28 - Christ's reign.
*I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life.*
*John 15:26 - Holy Spirit as Paraclete.
*2 Corinthians 3:17-18 - Holy Spirit as Lord.
*Who proceeds from the Father and the Son.*
*John 15:26 - Holy Spirit proceeds from Father.
*John 16:7 - Holy Spirit proceeds from Father and Son.
*Who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified.*
*Matthew 28:19 - Baptism in Trinity's name.
*2 Corinthians 13:14 - Trinity's shared glory.
*I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.*
*Matthew 16:18 - Church's foundation.
*Ephesians 4:4-6 - Unity and apostolicity.
*I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.*
*Matthew 28:19 - Baptism.
*Romans 6:3-4 - Baptism and forgiveness.
*And I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.*
*1 Corinthians 15:12-58 - Resurrection.
*Revelation 21:1-4 - New heaven and new earth.
This Creed distills core Christian teachings from Scripture.
why protestant only acceptt creed, but not canon of council?
So the Nicene council thought of all this. What they were doing. But they never consulted the living Jesus Christ. So it's man's interpretation. That's sad they never asked Jesus
They were guided by the Holy Spirit, which was promised by Jesus Himself! What's your problem?!
I like your videos, I love history, although I do not accept the creeds. I don't find the evidence for some of the creeds in the Bible.
What evidence from the Bible would you need to read to prove the validity of the Creeds?
@dennis69phd Well, the trinity is the main one. When I read the Bible, I don't get the trinitarian view, but the creeds I do.
@@SCPN333
Simple. The Council of Nicea in 325 A. D. condemned the heresy of Arius who denied that Jesus was God. He claimed that he was a creature and a work of God capable of good and evil.
Modalism was another heresy that often sprung up. It was a denial of the Trinity and claimed that Jesus was the Father and the Holy Spirit while also being his own Son.
Tri-theism was also a heresy that claimed that the Trinity was actually three separate gods working in unison.
None of these are what Christians profess.
@georgepierson4920 See, I believe that The Father, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost are 1 God, 1 Substance, 1 essence, 1 nature, 1 purpose, 3 beings fully divine, Eventually if we make it to heaven, I believe we will be 1 with Jesus as Jesus is 1 with the Father.
Is this a heresy of creedal Christianity?
@SCPN333
The creeds like the Nicene Constantinopolitan creeds are completely biblical. I could literally quote you verses line by line. But you have to be very careful because when you say you don't agree with the creeds, you're placing yourself above the early church and ultimately the successors of the apostles.
And your other post, you state you believe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are 3 beings. Perhaps you mean persons because being is what something is and person is who someone is, these are different categories. The way you explain it would be heresy because 3 beings would be tritheism. This is why the councils were precise in their language because if you aren't, as you have done, you then end up in heresy.
" .... in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church ..." 🤍