P.S. THE COUNCIL OF NICEA HAS *NOTHING* TO DO WITH SCRIPTURE (or the Canon of scripture) THE COUNCIL WAS CALLED BY CONSTANTINE the Emperor - for ONE reason only - to decide what was to happen with the Christological controversies caused by the teachings of Arius (the heretic).
That's all the Nicene Creed is about. Google: "Arius"
There seem to be a number of legends about the First Council of Nicaea (325AD) in circulation here on Y!A being presented as fact.
Some people here seem to think that the Council, which was the first Council of all the Bishops of the Christian Church, either invented the New Testament there, or edited it there to remove references to reincarnation (or whatever) or burned large numbers of heretical works, or whatever. These are in error.
NOTHING decided nor written in the decrees of the Council of Nicea have ANYTHING to do with the Bible or what books were to be included!!!!
Check it out for yourself: http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum01.htm..
2006-11-30 02:48:14 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
your right, the biblical cannon was decided several years after the council.
"St. Jerome, a rising light in the Church, though but a simple priest, was summoned by Pope Damasus from the East, where he was pursuing sacred lore, to assist at an eclectic, but not ecumenical, synod at Rome in the year 382. Neither the general council at Constantinople of the preceding year nor that of Nice (365) had considered the question of the Canon. This Roman synod must have devoted itself specially to the matter. The result of its deliberations, presided over, no doubt, by the energetic Damasus himself, has been preserved in the document called "Decretum Gelasii de recipiendis et non recipiendis libris", a compilation partly of the sixth century, but containing much material dating from the two preceding ones. The Damasan catalogue presents the complete and perfect Canon which has been that of the Church Universal ever since. The New Testament portion bears the marks of Jerome's views."
2006-11-30 02:59:31 · answer #1 · answered by PandaMan 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Where do you get your information? Certainly not off the web...
My studies, as a religious historian, proves everything you have said false...
Not only did the Nicean Council meet to vote on the gospels of the bible, they purposely chose gospels that supported their claim of Jesus as a Messiah. In fact, whether or not Jesus would be common or metaphysical was a VOTE administered to the members of the council. They then, with their new vote for a metaphysical being, had to alter gospels to support their claims. This included disregarding, for example, the gospel of Thomas, which draws 60% of its writings from the gospel of Q. And what does the gospel of Q entail? That Jesus was merely a sage. He was no more important than you and I. There was 50 years of VERBAL history following Jesus' death. What was written first was of JUST Jesus' teachings. It was then that separate communities added context to these teachings in order to add metaphysical aspects to him.
So why is this all important to the Nicean Council? Because these gospels contradicted what they were trying to advertise...they must not be included and were thus voted out by the council.
If only Christians knew how their religion was founded....
2006-12-01 17:11:14 · answer #2 · answered by Sarah A 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It's also worth noting that the heresiarch, Arius, who attacked the Trinity, WAS IN ATTENDANCE at the council. Nobody was burning him at the stake.
Saturday Sabbath to Sunday was changed by the Apostles, there is not one shred of evidence to support the LIE that it was done at this council.
2006-11-30 02:57:20 · answer #3 · answered by Br. Dymphna S.F.O 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i believe that this flock of sheep will proceed to butt heads with one yet another, basically because the church has continually finished. As for a put off in Christ's go back, i believe which will ensue at the same time as the perfect human being who "will" get saved, receives saved. the field is white, and it really is as a lot as Christians to be busy harvesting the culmination for the dominion. possibly if we were all going interior a similar direction, on a similar p.c.., mutually, it ought to help us to locate that very last lost soul. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord isn't slack suitable to His promise, as some count number slackness, yet ilong sufferingng in direction of us, no longer keen that any ought to perish yet that each one ought to come to repentance.
2016-10-16 11:12:19 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You forgot to mention that that's when they formally decided on the acceptable day of worship to be changed from Sabbath Saturday to Sunday which is not Biblical.
2006-11-30 02:55:50 · answer #5 · answered by Damian 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
From what I remember in school , this was also when the conflict in ideas caused the split to form Catholic and Protestant?
2006-12-01 12:48:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Funny, all the other reference sources say otherwise.
That don't make them right, it just puts them in the majority.
2006-11-30 03:33:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yup! It's true! Jesus' diety had been believed LONG before the Nicean Council. Thanks for telling everyone!
2006-11-30 02:54:48 · answer #8 · answered by teeney1116 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Thank you Father K.
(true...link took me to no where)
2006-11-30 03:02:08 · answer #9 · answered by <><><> 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
whoooa bible lover im so lost with ur religiony speak but muchos for the two points
2006-11-30 02:50:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋