Rate this:

Matt,

This post is the second part of my response to your comment on “An Interesting Dialogue”. In the previous post, we discussed a misinterpretation of a theological framework, the Wesleyan Quadrilateral. The importance that Wesley placed upon the scriptures cannot be denied and therefore must alter how we perceive the Quadrilateral. We also determined that objective truth must lie at the heart of a worldview, as well as discussing the importance (that the three religions themselves) have placed upon their respective texts. It is of utmost value to keep in mind that the weight that these texts carry has not been imposed by some community thousands of years after the events took place. In the Bible’s case, these texts were written down by eyewitnesses to these events, and transcribed by people that interviewed and spoke to these eyewitnesses, thereby establishing a text and at the same time the orthodoxy.

You have said several times that you believe that orthodoxies change. It is clear that you have not properly understood the meaning of the word ‘orthodox’. Your idea that orthodoxies can change, is simply incorrect and can be shown to be so, simply by looking up the definition. I challenge you to find a definition of this word that does not in some way include any of the following words: accepted, traditional, established, adhering, customary, prevailing, commonly, or conforming. It is clear by the definition that an orthodoxy is something that is not able to be changed, but rather requires a change of the party interested in the orthodox view itself. This is another key example of the difference in worldviews between relativist and absolutist. The relativist says,  ”The truth must adapt to fit my beliefs.” The absolutist says, “My beliefs must adapt to fit the truth”.

Moving on to the next issue,  I find that again we must address some misinformation regarding the Nicene Creed.  It is my intention to show you that the orthodoxies which you believe originated at the Council of Nicea, in fact had their origin hundreds of years earlier. This is achieved by looking at what sources were available before the Council and examining what it is that they had to say.

“The first is the doctrine of the Trinity itself which happened around 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicea.”

This statement is incorrect. The doctrine of the tri-unity of the Godhead did not originate at the Council of Nicea.  At the most, the council merely confirmed an already pre existing orthodoxy. The first error that you have committed is that you have skipped around five to six thousand years of Jewish texts, traditions and orthodoxies that existed as a theological prerequisite for Christianity. These various texts include the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and most famously the Dead Sea Scrolls. The second error, is that you are completely omitting all of the New Testament texts. This includes, but is not limited to the Codex Sinaiticus , the Codex Vaticanus, the Rylands Papyrus, the Muratorian Canon Fragment, the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyrus, and the Magdalen Papyrus.

If you were to somehow discount all of the above referenced texts, I would still be able to prove to you that a belief in the trinity existed before the Council of Nicea. Here are some quotes to sustain my position.

“We acknowledge a God, and a Son (His Logos), and a Holy Spirit. These are united in essence-the Father, the Son , and the Spirit. Now, the Son is the Intelligence, Reason and Wisdom of the Father. And the Spirit is an emanation, as light from a fire.” – Athenogoras (c. 175 AD)

“It is the Father who anoints, and it is the Son who is anointed by the Spirit. The Spirit is the unction.” – Irenaeus (c. 180 AD)

“The universal Father is one. The universal word is one. And the Holy Spirit is one.” – Clement of Alexandria (c. 195 AD)

“We pray at a minimum not less than three times in a day. For we are debtors to Three: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” -Tertullian (c. 198 AD)

“Who will not say that there is one God? Yet, he will not on that account deny the Economy.” – Hippolytus (c. 205 AD)

“All things that exist were made by God and there was nothing that was not made-except for the nature of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit….For the Father alone knows the Son. And the Son alone knows the Father. And the Holy Spirit alone searches even the deep things of God.” – Origen (c. 225 AD)

I reference the above documents and statements as pre-Nicene evidence for the existence of an orthodox view of the tri-unity or trinity. In conclusion we can see clearly that the belief in a trinity of God did not originate at the Council of Nicea.  I would like to know  what proof there is to the contrary. Next I will be addressing the textual reliability of the ending of the gospel of Mark.

**When readers contribute to the discussion, I will add all relevant links or information I deem appropriate at the end of a post. If anyone would like to read up before my next post, here is a good place to start. Thanks to James Snapp Jr. for the link.**

http://www.curtisvillechristian.org/MarkOne.html

Advertisement