Nicene Creed

[lostwanderingsoul]

In the Nicene Creed it says "we believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ" But then a few lines later it says "we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, etc." Does this mean that both Jesus and Holy Spirit are Lord? If so, why say one Lord, Jesus Christ if there are two Lords? Can anyone offer an explanation?

 

[Left Coast]

In the Nicene Creed it says "we believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ" But then a few lines later it says "we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, etc." Does this mean that both Jesus and Holy Spirit are Lord? If so, why say one Lord, Jesus Christ if there are two Lords? Can anyone offer an explanation?

In general it has to do with the Trinitarian belief that the Son and the Holy Spirit share the same divine "substance" despite being distinct as Persons.

 

[Shiranui117]

In the Nicene Creed it says "we believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ" But then a few lines later it says "we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, etc." Does this mean that both Jesus and Holy Spirit are Lord? If so, why say one Lord, Jesus Christ if there are two Lords? Can anyone offer an explanation?

The Son is Lord because He has been given Lordship by the Father. And so it is with the Holy Spirit as well--the Spirit is both called Lord, and Spirit of the Lord. We see this in 2 Corinthians 3:17-18: 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.

The Father, Son and Holy Spirit all share in the one Lordship over all creation. This is part of why we say that the three Persons of the Trinity are one Godhead and one power. In the Creed, we also begin by saying that "we believe in one God, the Father almighty", though of course we affirm in the Creed as well that Christ is also "true God of true God", and that the Holy Spirit "with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified" as God.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

The Son is Lord because He has been given Lordship by the Father. And so it is with the Holy Spirit as well--the Spirit is both called Lord, and Spirit of the Lord. We see this in 2 Corinthians 3:17-18: 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.

The Father, Son and Holy Spirit all share in the one Lordship over all creation. This is part of why we say that the three Persons of the Trinity are one Godhead and one power. In the Creed, we also begin by saying that "we believe in one God, the Father almighty", though of course we affirm in the Creed as well that Christ is also "true God of true God", and that the Holy Spirit "with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified" as God.

So basically all three are God and all three are Lord. That means it makes no sense to say the Father is one Gord and Jesus is one Lord. Someone just put some words together hundreds of years ago and people today keep repeating them even though they make no sense. That seems to be true of a lot of religious ideas. IMO of course.

 

[SalixIncendium]

In the Nicene Creed it says "we believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ" But then a few lines later it says "we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, etc." Does this mean that both Jesus and Holy Spirit are Lord? If so, why say one Lord, Jesus Christ if there are two Lords? Can anyone offer an explanation?

It goes on to say...

...the giver of life,
Who proceeds from the
Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son
he worshiped and glorified.

I take this to mean that all three of the Trinity proceed as one and the same as the Holy Spirit.

 

[Twilight Hue]

So basically all three are God and all three are Lord. That means it makes no sense to say the Father is one Gord and Jesus is one Lord. Someone just put some words together hundreds of years ago and people today keep repeating them even though they make no sense. That seems to be true of a lot of religious ideas. IMO of course.

Stuff like this tends to be appealing because it sounds so mystical and mysterious. Like some deep secret just waiting to be uncovered. It's exciting for a number of people.

 

[usfan]

Stuff like this tends to be appealing because it sounds so mystical and mysterious. Like some deep secret just waiting to be uncovered. It's exciting for a number of people.

I would not say it is appealing.. it is just the nature of the Godhead, as revealed to us by Jesus.

Presuming to fully understand a Supreme Being, able to create the universe & other sentient beings, seems pretty arrogant. Eternity and infinitity is nothing to God, but unfathomable to us finite mortals.

It would be expected for there to be mysterious qualities about the omnipotent, omnipresent Creator of the Universe. Jesus has great credibility as a Spokesman for the Godhead. I trust His description, even if difficult to grasp, over some notion from another fallen human.

 

[usfan]

In the Nicene Creed it says "we believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ" But then a few lines later it says "we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, etc." Does this mean that both Jesus and Holy Spirit are Lord? If so, why say one Lord, Jesus Christ if there are two Lords? Can anyone offer an explanation?

Let's look at it:
We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
God from God,
Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made;
of the same essence as the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven;
he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary,
and was made human.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried.
The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again with glory
to judge the living and the dead.
His kingdom will never end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord, the giver of life.
He proceeds from the Father and the Son,
and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified.
He spoke through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.
We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look forward to the resurrection of the dead,
and to life in the world to come. Amen

The context was over a dispute over the nature of the Deity. Arianism claimed a mystical, non human Jesus, or a created, non-divine advent. Modalism claimed different "modes' that God appeared through.

Athanasius, Irenaeus, and many other early apologists resisted the redefinings of the Apostle's teachings, and affirmed Jesus as 'very God of very God', and also fully man. They disputed both the mystisizing and any attempt to demean His Deity.

The term 'trinity', was not from Jesus nor the apostles, but was coined later, to describe the Triune God that Jesus described. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit ALL are described and defined as God, by Jesus. I will take Him at His Word, lacking a more Authoritative source.

 

[Shiranui117]

So basically all three are God and all three are Lord. That means it makes no sense to say the Father is one Gord and Jesus is one Lord. Someone just put some words together hundreds of years ago and people today keep repeating them even though they make no sense. That seems to be true of a lot of religious ideas. IMO of course.

It makes perfect sense when one is immersed in the theological and scriptural context of the Church Fathers who composed this Creed. However, the majority of Christians aren't, having almost entirely left Patristic theology behind in favor of Scholastic or Reformed theology, or in favor of inventing some entirely new way of doing theology. Even for those of us in churches which still embrace Patristic theology, it's an undertaking to figure out the why of what has been revealed to us about God, His Church and ourselves. We know almost instinctually what and who and how, but the why behind it is where your average layman (of which I am one) really start to get out of our depth.

 

[Shiranui117]

Stuff like this tends to be appealing because it sounds so mystical and mysterious. Like some deep secret just waiting to be uncovered. It's exciting for a number of people.

To the Fathers who composed this Creed, it was very clear and very succinct. We in the 21st-century West are simply far removed from that cultural, linguistic and theological context, so to us it can seem absolutely baffling.

 

[syo]

In the Nicene Creed it says "we believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ" But then a few lines later it says "we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, etc." Does this mean that both Jesus and Holy Spirit are Lord? If so, why say one Lord, Jesus Christ if there are two Lords? Can anyone offer an explanation?

in greek it says ''kyrion'' (lord). in greek language ''kyrion'' is used to describe autonomy. the father is the source, and son and holy spirit have a level of autonomy.

 

[Ellen Brown]

In general it has to do with the Trinitarian belief that the Son and the Holy Spirit share the same divine "substance" despite being distinct as Persons.

I went back and found both the 325 AD and 381AD versions of it. I don't see a way to develop the idea of the Trinity from either. Sadly, I would not want to count the number of people who have died horribly in disagreement over that and other issues. It is shameful and brings the legitimacy of "Christian" thought into question; not whether one or the other is true but the fact that people would murder each other over that squabble causes me to doubt about religion in general.

It is sad because in Islam, one can also easily die in squabbling over a divergence in opinion. They often behead their victims, so at least that would be faster than being burned at the stake.

Despite our own pomposity, we are still more than willing to murder each other. Sad, so very sad.

 

[Shiranui117]

I went back and found both the 325 AD and 381AD versions of it. I don't see a way to develop the idea of the Trinity from either.

Which I find ironic because they were both composed by Trinitarians as simple codifications of Trinitarian doctrine about the three Persons of the Trinity.

 

[steveb1]

I went back and found both the 325 AD and 381AD versions of it. I don't see a way to develop the idea of the Trinity from either. Sadly, I would not want to count the number of people who have died horribly in disagreement over that and other issues. It is shameful and brings the legitimacy of "Christian" thought into question; not whether one or the other is true but the fact that people would murder each other over that squabble causes me to doubt about religion in general.

It is sad because in Islam, one can also easily die in squabbling over a divergence in opinion. They often behead their victims, so at least that would be faster than being burned at the stake.

Despite our own pomposity, we are still more than willing to murder each other. Sad, so very sad.

Yes, it's tragic that people died in the Trinitarian conflicts. But it's crucially important to remember that the issue was essential for the Church, namely: Was Jesus a powerful, pre-existent angelic being, and therefore a very advanced creature; or was Jesus ontological God - of the same substance - as God. Given the high significance of this crisis, it is not difficult to understand why emotions were intense on both sides.

 

[Ellen Brown]

Yes, it's tragic that people died in the Trinitarian conflicts. But it's crucially important to remember that the issue was essential for the Church, namely: Was Jesus a powerful, pre-existent angelic being, and therefore a very advanced creature; or was Jesus ontological God - of the same substance - as God. Given the high significance of this crisis, it is not difficult to understand why emotions were intense on both sides.

It seems like the things that we do to prove our devotion to God, belay the validity of our arguments.

 

[Left Coast]

I went back and found both the 325 AD and 381AD versions of it. I don't see a way to develop the idea of the Trinity from either.

The development came from the Creed's claim that the Son is "very God of very God," and, "consubstantial [of one substance] with the Father."

Sadly, I would not want to count the number of people who have died horribly in disagreement over that and other issues. It is shameful and brings the legitimacy of "Christian" thought into question; not whether one or the other is true but the fact that people would murder each other over that squabble causes me to doubt about religion in general.

It is sad because in Islam, one can also easily die in squabbling over a divergence in opinion. They often behead their victims, so at least that would be faster than being burned at the stake.

Despite our own pomposity, we are still more than willing to murder each other. Sad, so very sad.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[steveb1]

It seems like the things that we do to prove our devotion to God, belay the validity of our arguments.

Yes, the shakier the faith and the claims, the more intense and potentially unfair and even violent the defense...

 

[pearl]

Also known as the Apostles' Creed, a profession of faith, took its form during the 2nd and third centuries in connection with the ceremony of Baptism. Three question are put to the person to be baptized; Do you believe in the God the Father Almighty? Do you believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God..? Do you believe in the Holy Spirit...? The oldest form of the confession of faith in the shape of dialogue, question and answer embedded in the ceremony of baptism.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Let's look at it:
We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
God from God,
Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made;
of the same essence as the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven;
he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary,
and was made human.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried.
The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again with glory
to judge the living and the dead.
His kingdom will never end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord, the giver of life.
He proceeds from the Father and the Son,
and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified.
He spoke through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.
We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look forward to the resurrection of the dead,
and to life in the world to come. Amen

The context was over a dispute over the nature of the Deity. Arianism claimed a mystical, non human Jesus, or a created, non-divine advent. Modalism claimed different "modes' that God appeared through.

Athanasius, Irenaeus, and many other early apologists resisted the redefinings of the Apostle's teachings, and affirmed Jesus as 'very God of very God', and also fully man. They disputed both the mystisizing and any attempt to demean His Deity.

The term 'trinity', was not from Jesus nor the apostles, but was coined later, to describe the Triune God that Jesus described. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit ALL are described and defined as God, by Jesus. I will take Him at His Word, lacking a more Authoritative source.

I certainly agree that I will take the word of Jesus. That just means that the words of the Nicene Creed make no sense. It should say I believe in on God made up of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. When it says one God, the Father it is ignoring the other two and making a salse statement. And one Lord, Jesus Christ is false because all three are Lord. People just repeat it over and over without thinking about what it says and means. This is how much of religion works. Just accept what we say and do not question it.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

It makes perfect sense when one is immersed in the theological and scriptural context of the Church Fathers who composed this Creed. However, the majority of Christians aren't, having almost entirely left Patristic theology behind in favor of Scholastic or Reformed theology, or in favor of inventing some entirely new way of doing theology. Even for those of us in churches which still embrace Patristic theology, it's an undertaking to figure out the why of what has been revealed to us about God, His Church and ourselves. We know almost instinctually what and who and how, but the why behind it is where your average layman (of which I am one) really start to get out of our depth.

So it makes perfect sense to say you believe in ONE Lord, Jesus Christ when you really believe all three are Lord? I am afraid that kind of sense is a little beyond my understanding.