The following is information stemmed from one of the Ecumenical Councils. EVERYONE – please read it without bias and tell me what you think is happening here? In your own words summarize what is taking place in the following transaction……

This is, perhaps, a rare opportunity for everyone to mobilize their critical thinking skills.

---------------------------------------------------------------
NPNF2-14. The Seven Ecumenical Councils
Excursus on the Word Homousios

The Fathers of the Council at Nice were at one time ready to accede to the request of some of the bishops and use only scriptural expressions in their definitions. But, after several attempts, they found that all these were capable of being explained away. Athanasius describes with much wit and penetration how he saw them nodding and winking to each other when the orthodox proposed expressions which they had thought of a way of escaping from the force of. After a series of attempts of this sort it was found that something clearer and more unequivocal must be adopted if real unity of faith was to be attained; and accordingly the word homousios was adopted. Just what the Council intended this 4expression to mean is set forth by St. Athanasius as follows:

“That the Son is not only like to the Father, but that, as his image, he is the same as the Father; that he is of the Father; and that the resemblance of the Son to the Father, and his immutability, are different from ours: for in us they are something acquired, and arise from our fulfilling the divine commands. Moreover, they wished to indicate by this that his generation is different from that of human nature; that the Son is not only like to the Father, but inseparable from the substance of the Father, that he and the Father are one and the same, as the Son himself said: ‘The Logos is always in the Father, and, the Father always in the Logos,’ as the sun and its splendour are inseparable.”5353 Athanas., De Decret. Syn. Nic., c. xix., et seq.

The word homousios had not had, although frequently used before the Council of Nice, a very happy history. It was probably rejected by the Council of Antioch,5454 Vide Swainson, in Smith and Wace, Dict. Christ. Biog., sub voce Homousios, p. 134. and was suspected of being open to a Sabellian meaning. It was accepted by the heretic Paul of Samosata and this rendered it very offensive to many in the Asiatic Churches.

On the other hand the word is used four times by St. Irenæus, and Pamphilus the Martyr is quoted as asserting that Origen used the very word in the Nicene sense. Tertullian also uses the expression “of one substance” (unius substantiæ) in two places, and it would seem that more than half a century before the meeting of the Council of Nice, it was a common one among the Orthodox.

Vasquez treats this matter at some length in his Disputations,5555 Vasquez, Disput. cix., cap. v. “Rightly doth the Church use the expression Homousios (that is Consubstantial) to express that the Father and the Son are of the same nature.” and points out how well the distinction is drawn by Epiphanius between Synousios and Homousios, “for synousios signifies such an unity of substance as allows of no distinction: wherefore the Sabellians would admit this word: but on the contrary homousios signifies the same nature and
substance but with a distinction between persons one from the other. Rightly, therefore, has the Church adopted this word as the one best calculated to confute the Arian heresy.”5656 Vasquez may also well be consulted on the expressions ουσία, substantia, ὑπόστασις, etc.

It may perhaps be well to note that these words are formed like ὁμόβιος and ὁμοιόβιος, ὁμογνώμων and ὁμοιογνώμων, etc., etc.
The reader will find this whole doctrine treated at great length in all the bodies of divinity; and in Alexander Natalis (H. E. t. iv., Diss. xiv.); he is also referred to Pearson, On the Creed; Bull, Defence of the Nicene Creed; Forbes, An Explanation of the Nicene Creed; and especially to the little book, written in answer to the recent criticisms of Professor Harnack, by H. B. Swete, D.D., The Apostles’ Creed.

Interesting

But you can argue semantics for centuries and get nowhere

agreed

Semantics, I was asking for a summary in your own words of what this information is saying.

Are these people DECIDING what to believe? Are they deciding what to pass on to fellow Christians?

In the end what have they decided and how does the Bible support your summary of that decision?

Hi, sorry I had to be away.

So anyway, I was thinking what I see in the OP is that those of the Ecumenical Councils were actually DECIDING what the Christian religion was supposed to mean.

In other words just like we do here at JSH, they were tying to define what they wanted others to believe the scriptures said. And of course, if one scripture showed dissent with another then, obviously, that one showing dissent surely must have been a fake or a lie. At least by saying so, it made it easier to destroy such documents.

So, I guess I don't understand the purpose of the Bible, when others have already told Christians what they are supposed to believe - just because they are Roman Catholic shouldn't make a difference - should it?

I mean, didn't the Ecumenical Councils CREATE Christianity in the form of the Holy Roman and Apoistolic Church???

Some said the Ecumenical Councils did, some said they didn't. The traditions I subscribe to pretty much started back with the Protestant Reformation (which shoved the councils aside) for the most part, and progressed toward the great revivals in the 1800s. Most of the traditions I subscribe to come from personal Bible study and a pretty literal and conservative interpretation of the scriptures as the inspired word of God.

Anything further than that, I tend to put to the side as I'm pretty wrapped up in study of basic scriptures and a few other books right now. Haven't reached the councils yet.

Basically, I trust in the Lord with my heart and lean not to my own understanding for the most part.

Jesus created Christianity!

It’s all about Jesus!

Nothing else matters!

Don’t you get it!

It’s Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, Jesus!

Jesus Christ! Don’t you get it!

Jesus Christ is GOD!

He’s GOD Redykeulous!

Take the God of Abraham and shove him under the carpet!

Pee on the God of Abraham! Nobody likes that God anyway!

Jesus took his place!

It’s all about JESUS!

Nobody wants to hear about any committees

Nobody want to hear about the stupid God of Abraham.

All they want to do is praise Jesus!



Jesus loves us this we know,


for the Bible tells us so.


Pee on your committee


Pee on Abraham’s God.


We have saved Sweet Jesus!


And we don’t think we're odd

Redykeulous

It to me is quite telling it the part of the article about the Sun.



That the Son is not only like to the Father, but that, as his image, he is the same as the Father; that he is of the Father; and that the resemblance of the Son to the Father, and his immutability, are different from ours: for in us they are something acquired, and arise from our fulfilling the divine commands. Moreover, they wished to indicate by this that his generation is different from that of human nature; that the Son is not only like to the Father, but inseparable from the substance of the Father, that he and the Father are one and the same, as the Son himself said: ‘The Logos is always in the Father, and, the Father always in the Logos,’ as the sun and its splendour are inseparable.”5353 Athanas., De Decret. Syn. Nic., c. xix., et seq.

The last sentence "as the sun and its splendour are inseparable.” This is the Sun Worship of the nations Pagans. Equating thier worship to the worship of the Father and son..

By doing this we should see they were concerned in uniting the religions as 1..

So in doing so they accomplished several things as is even seen at the beginning of this paragraph.


That the splender of the Sun and The Splinder of Father is the son therefore the Doctrine of the Trinity is BORN.

Not what Yahshua himself said about his powers and relationship to his father.

Now instead what the church fathers say. Thier interpretation of the scriptures..

Denying the very Power of the Holy Spirit..
Heb 8:11-12
None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, 'Know the Master ,' for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more."
NKJV
This is a quotation from the Prophet Jeremiah. That we will be taught by the Holy Spirit not by the corruption of man..

John 14:26

26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
KJV

Again here Yahshua is reaferming Jeremiah's prophecy...

Luke 12:10-12

10 And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.

11 And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say:

12 For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say.
KJV



So by bringing in the Heresy of the Trinity and mans REASONING.

The people are made subject to the EMPIRE AS THEY STILL ARE AS NOT BEING CAPABLE OF DECERNING THE WORD OF YAHWEH. THEREFORE MAKING THE HOLY SPIRIT OF NO AFFECT TO THOSE WHO WILL AFFERM THIS DOCTRINE.


I call it a DOCTRINE OF DEVILS.. Blessings of Shalom.. May Yahweh Open Our Minds....Miles

This post i had to post in the thread I had posted.. The 6th Day.

Taking on this Trinity fight man wants to hold on to. Red i know u can see that man cares more about his traditions than he does about the WORD OF YAHWEH

It is really sad.. Blessings...Miles


Sun 06/08/08 05:08 PM
Thier is only 1 name the rest are attributes. Like Yahshalom.. Yahweh's Peace. 


Isaiah 9:6 
QUOTE: 
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. 


Wow...Jesus is the Mighty God and the Everlasting Father...and so many names, not just one. Notice the first name, Wonderful. In Hebrew, "Wonderful" means "Unknowable". If God's real name is "Yahweh" (which is knowable), then this prophecy is a lie and therefore Isaiah is a liar. Is Isaiah a false prophet Miles? 

Please explain to all of us why this verse should be ignored and/or is wrong in some way. 


You are rambunctious today aren't we. If u want to see what that scripture saying i will do my best for u. 
Spider 
1st lets see if all that seems fits.. 



Zech 14:9 
And Yahweh shall be King over all the earth. 
In that day it shall be — 
"Yahweh is one ," 
And His name one. 
NKJV 

Here Spider we have Yahshua being King over the whole Earth. 

Now I know you will like this as this is talking about wonderful and how it has been translated. You r right it's a hard word. 


MARVELOUS 

TO BE MARVELOUS 


A. Verb. 


pala' OT:6381, "to be marvelous, be extraordinary, be beyond one's power to do, do wonderful acts." As can be seen from the suggested meanings, this verb is not easy to define. As a denominative verb, it is based on the noun for "wonder, marvel," so it expresses the idea of doing or making a wondrous thing. Found in both biblical and modern Hebrew, pala' occurs some 70 times in the Hebrew Old Testament. The verb is found for the first time in Gen 18:14: "Is any thing too hard for the Lord?" 

Pala' is used primarily with God as its subject, expressing actions that are beyond the bounds of human powers or expectations. This idea is well expressed by the psalmist: "This is the Lord's doing; it is marvelous in our eyes" Ps 118:23. Deliverance from Egypt was the result of God's wondrous acts: "And I will stretch out my hand, and smite Egypt with all my wonders which I will do in [it]..." Ex 3:20. Praise is constantly due God for all His wonderful deeds Ps 9:1. At the same time, God does not require anything of His people that is too hard for them Deut 30:11. Although something may appear impossible to man, it still is within God's power: "If it be marvelous in the eyes of the remnant of this people in these days, should it also be marvelous in mine eyes? saith the Lord of hosts" Zech 8:6. 

B. Noun. 


pele' OT:6382, "wonder; marvel." This noun frequently expresses the "wonder," the extraordinary aspects, of God's dealings with His people Ex 15:11; Ps 77:11; Isa 29:14. The messianic title, "marvel of a counselor" Isa 9:6 ; KJV, RSV, "wonderful counselor", points toward God's Anointed continuing the marvelous acts of God. 
(from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Copyright © 1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers.) 

Now here Spider is the rendition of that verse in the context that it was made to be. Not saying these are his names at all. But that Yahweh his father would call him this his son.. The attributes his son has. Youngs does it much more justice than the other versions. Why? Because he translates it as the Hebrew flow is not as tradition has always said it to be. Like Easter being in the KJV.. Why? Again Tradition of the fathers wanted it their not that it was. 

Isa 9:6-7 

6 For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And (He) ( just who is this HE that calls him this) doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty El Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace. 

7 To the increase of the princely power, And of peace, there is no end, On the throne of David, and on his kingdom, To establish it, and to support it, In judgment and in righteousness, Henceforth, even unto the age, The zeal of Yahweh of Hosts doth this. 
YLT 

Blessings of Shalom…Miles 





http://www.justsayhi.com/topic/show/123322?page=2

You know Miles, sometimes, I find it amazing that you are the one to understand where my post is going.

Thanks, also, for sharing the copy of another reply.

Yashafox - it will be interesting to see what you think when you beigin to study the history of and surrounding the ecumenical councils. I hope you don't embark on that journey with a belief that requires protection, for that idea will surely blind you to what is there.

ABRA - INDEED I know, but you left out one thing -

ITS ALL ABOUT JESUS - (AND THAT CONFOUNDED BOOK)

I know. But they lie about the book. They claim it's all about Jesus to draw you in. And then after you've been suckered in they clobber you over the head with the book and say, "Oh by the way,...."

oh Abra!

Well they can't change what the word of God is.

I don't believe in ritualistic "religion" but after putting God's word to the test found it true & faithful.

I speak from experience... hope that helps.

The very Bible you have in your home and in your churches is corrupted and is not the word of Yahweh if you do not search the scriptures to show yourself appoved.. I you believe almost any bible in print has been corrupted. The only one that if the closest is from The Institute of Scriptual research. Who has done thier best to translate it to thier ability but they do revise it as time goes by and scholars show and prove different rendering of mainly just certain sentences.

Blessings...Miles

This site will send it to u at thier cost of buying it in bulk.

http://www.eliyah.com/thescriptures.html


You can also download it into E sword if you have that bible program on your computer..

Thier are many free programs i believe to work with E sword as a Friend of mine has worked countless hours making these free for download as the word is not to be sold.

The scriptures in print he only charges what his exact bulk rate and shipping is.. He makes nothing from this service he does...

http://www.eliyah.com/thescriptures.html

At the page you either need the main program already downloaded or download it as it says..



Blessings....Miles

I am of the opinion that Christianity has painted the picture of Jesus, and that the powers at be during the editing processes played a huge part in what and how things were recorded.

Add to this the viciousness of the actions taken against the other religions at the time, the strength and character of the majority in power, plus the need for unity and the retention of that power, and you have the concoction that brought about the dark ages.

So Creative - the dark ages, when man was kept in the dark. Right?

What age will the future name us, do you suppose? Seeing as how the dark ages has already been used.

The day that Dark fell Shalom....Miles