Council of Nicea

[Shidoran]

## Voting on doctrine is neithe more nor less reliable than if there had been no voting, because either way, we are faced with the fact that God uses human beings for His Glory. He used human beings to bring the Biblical texts into existence - the Spirit of God did not not write: men did. ##

To begin with, I am really surprised that you could logically claim that voting on doctrine is neither more nor less reliable than not voting. That’s just… well…

There is a distinct difference between voting and generalising doctrines to satisfy human desires, and letting God reveal himself to you so you get it right. Take a look at all the churches around today. This confusion and apostasy and utter rediculousness was created because men won’t listen to God, they’re too busy satisfying their own political desires and changing doctrines to suit their belief. To me this spells one thing, APOSTASY. And it’s still going… fueled by greed, confusion, false information and plain… stubborness. I am shocked to see the “I don’t care what God wants, I have the catholic church (or a prodestant church for that matter)” kind of attitude.

By generalising and voting, the council would have lost basic true doctrines and resorted to falsified and generalised information based on what they thought of God. Why did they not do it the other way around? well… that is the question.

One last thing. Be careful with words. Men wrote the bible as inspired of God through the Holy Spirit. If it was written by men alone, it would be false, opinionated and innaccurate.

For everyone else, I am generalising because I don’t care much for the resulting “doctrine” I merely wanted to discuss the question and pose the question again, that if the catholic church did indeed break away from the church of constantine, are not catholics as apostate as they claim the prodestants are?

 

[RyanL]

Hi, Shidoran! Perhaps you skimmed by it, but I created a thread for you to discuss this (since it’s really not on topic as to why the Council of Nicea might be considered Protestant). Greer, you’re welcome there as well. Once again, here’s the link:

Shidoran’s Apostate Catholic Church Thread

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[NotWorthy]

Shidoran:

To begin with, I am really surprised that you could logically claim that voting on doctrine is neither more nor less reliable than not voting. That’s just… well…

When you have the collection of Bishops, with the power to bound and loose, then it would have come out the same whether they voted or drew lots, simply because they were guided by the Holy Spirit.

Shidoran:

There is a distinct difference between voting and generalising doctrines to satisfy human desires, and letting God reveal himself to you so you get it right.

By generalising and voting, the council would have lost basic true doctrines and resorted to falsified and generalised information based on what they thought of God. Why did they not do it the other way around? well… that is the question.

How does the Doctrine of Homo-ousios represent any generalizations or compromising of doctrines. It is the result of absolutely no compromise, unlike Arianism or Homo-I-ousios. Incidentally, the “I” in Homo-I-ousios is the greek “Iota”. This is where we got the phrase “not one Iota of difference”. But I digress. Carry on.

Shidoran:

For everyone else, I am generalising because I don’t care much for the resulting “doctrine” I merely wanted to discuss the question and pose the question again, that if the catholic church did indeed break away from the church of constantine, are not catholics as apostate as they claim the prodestants are?

I am not aware of this “Church of Constantine” that you are talking about.

Notworthy

 

[NotWorthy]

RyanL:

BTW, if you’re interested, there was a Rosary for James White thread some time ago…you may want to revive it.

God Bless,
RyanL

Considering what our friend, Mr. White, thinks about “vain, repetitous prayer”, that is one of the funniest things I’ve ever heard!!!:dancing:

Notworthy

 

[Aaron_I]

Shidoran, consider a few things. Matthias, Judas’ successor, was chosen BY LOT. How can you lambast a vote when the early Church used blind chance to make an important decision. If the early Church trusted God to perform a random act in accord with his will, how much more can we trust him to guide our current leaders when they actually discuss what they are going to do.

One last thing. Be careful with words. Men wrote the bible as inspired of God through the Holy Spirit. If it was written by men alone, it would be false, opinionated and innaccurate.

Correct. The same thing could be said about the Catholic Church. If it were not guided by the Holy Spirit (as is evidenced in Scripture), it would be false, opionated, and innaccurate. Surely such a corrupt organization would have crumbled without divine guidance. Any Catholic with knowledge of Church history realizes how many scandals the Church has managed to overcome.

Finally, if the Church ever goes back on an issue of faith and morals, it would have disproven itself. Of course this has never happened. You are asking a hypothetical question. You may as well ask, “If Christ sinned, wouldn’t that have nullified his claim of being divine?” The answer to this, of course, would be yes, but what’s the point. Unless you’re trying to make a point (i.e. USE EVIDENCE) then don’t bother mentioning it.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

RyanL:

Hi, Shidoran! Perhaps you skimmed by it, but I created a thread for you to discuss this (since it’s really not on topic as to why the Council of Nicea might be considered Protestant). Greer, you’re welcome there as well. Once again, here’s the link:

Shidoran’s Apostate Catholic Church Thread

God Bless,
RyanL

The link appears to be dead.
I am eager to see how exactly the CC fell into apostacy.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Aaron I.:

Shidoran, consider a few things. Matthias, Judas’ successor, was chosen BY LOT. How can you lambast a vote when the early Church used blind chance to make an important decision. If the early Church trusted God to perform a random act in accord with his will, how much more can we trust him to guide our current leaders when they actually discuss what they are going to do.

Good call!
Just to build on this, here is how things really played out in Acts1:
15 In those days Peter stood up among the brethren (the company of persons was in all about a hundred and twenty), and said, 16 “Brethren, the scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David, concerning Judas who was guide to those who arrested Jesus. 17 For he was numbered among us, and was allotted his share in this ministry. 18 (Now this man bought a field with the reward of his wickedness; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. 19 And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their language Akel’dama, that is, Field of Blood.) 20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’; and ‘His office let another take.’ 21 So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us–one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection.” 23 And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsab’bas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthi’as. 24 And they prayed and said, “Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show which one of these two thou hast chosen 25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside, to go to his own place.” 26 And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthi’as; and he was enrolled with the eleven apostles.
This wasnt just casting lots, this was a well informed decision guided and finished by the power of God. This is exactly how the Catholic Church operates.

 

[NotWorthy]

Catholic Dude:

This wasnt just casting lots, this was a well informed decision guided and finished by the power of God. This is exactly how the Catholic Church operates.

Another little habit we acquired from our Jewish friends. Zechariah was chosen by lottery to enter the Holy Place in the temple. “It fell to him by lot to enter the temple of the Lord and burn incense” (Lk. 1:9).

Notworthy

 

[jimmy]

riggo:

I have heard things about he Council of Nicea, and I’ve also heard James (I hate Catholics) White spew all kinds of stuff out about the Council of Nicea. Can anyone comment on why some protestants think this was a “protestant” council? What are they basing their claims on? Why is that council above others always cited by protestants?

Considering that it supports Apostolic Succession in canon 3 and that it supports priestly celibacy in canon 4, it is Catholic and is impossible that it could be confused with being protestant. I don’t know how they can justify their statements.

 

[jim1130]

Shidoran:

Quick starter note, I am neither Catholic, nor Prodestant.

The council of nicea seemed to me to be a bunch of church leaders trying to keep together the doctrines of a church falling into apostasy. I think Constantine basically got everyone together, told them to agree on the doctrines so everyone could get on with it. (ie so he could have a politically dominating church again, without confusions.)

It seems that most of the doctrines were majority voted, and doctrinal choices were politically motivated. In my mind this discredits most of the doctrines that came from this council, which unfortunately seems to encompass some of the basic catholic beliefs.

Moving along, as the Church of Constantine crumbled, the Catholic church broke away and remained.

Question for catholics: If the prodestants are “apostate” because they broke away from you, are you “apostate” because you broke away from an apostisizing original church and based your belief of a bunch of politically motivated doctrinal choices? I’m not trying to start a heated bible bashing discussion, it is merely a question of a curious truth-seeker.

The tentacles of Mormonism and obsessions with apostasy to justify and rationalize their existence.