2007-01-10 12:54:28 · 10 answers · asked by art h 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
i meant nicea
lick my taint
2007-01-10 14:28:48 · update #1
Things were hard for the Church in A.D. 325. A certain Arius, a wildly popular presbyter in Egypt, was publicly denying the full divinity of Christ. In his view, Jesus was godlike, but not God Almighty (Jehovah's Witnesses are the modern day purveyors of this position). A charismatic figure, Arius gathered about himself a school of followers, and his influence spread. The local Catholic bishops condemned him, yet his activities continued.
Finally, fearing that perhaps a split in Christendom would lead to disruption in the empire, the Emperor Constantine called a general council of bishops..... While the accounts contemporary to the event mention only Constantine, a statement made in the Third Council of Constantinople (A.D. 680) indicates Nicea was called by both the emperor and the Pope. It is interesting to note this statement was made during the general session, and was received as true without question or objection. Surely they would have known better, were it not true.
Most of the Nicene Council's 318 episcopal attendees were representatives of eastern churches, like Ephesus, Jerusalem and Antioch. Pope Sylvester, too ill to make the journey himself, sent two legates. According to the ancient historian Gelasius, the Roman Church was represented by Hosius, bishop of Cordova (Spain) and the leading proponent of the orthodox position regarding Christ's divinity.
Not only was Hosius representing Rome, but it seems he also presided over the council after Constantine's introduction.
St. Athanasius, an attendee and tireless defender of orthodoxy, wrote admiringly about Hosius, "What council can be mentioned in which he did not preside?" (Apologia de Fuga, 5).
So the Council proceeded, led by a bishop officially representing the Church of Rome. The debate was heated, but the outcome was clear: Christ is not some kind of minor deity, but He is one in Being with the Father — God, in the fullest sense of the term. An important question, then, arises: Just how did the Council arrive at this position?
find out at: http://www.envoymagazine.com/backissues/2.4/coverstory.html
.
2007-01-10 13:12:12 · answer #1 · answered by Br. Dymphna S.F.O 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, the Council of Nicea did not "make" Christ a "non-mortal", as you put it. The Council grappled with some of the theories that had been put forward on how to *understand* the Incarnation. That is a very different question. The debate centered on the use of various Greek words (the Council was conducted in Greek) that had some specific *connotations* (beyond their simple *denotations*) from Greek philosophy.
The Nicean Creed was drawn up to clarify what the council members had agreed what the best way they knew how to describe the Incarnation of God in Christ.
2007-01-10 13:15:55 · answer #2 · answered by Elise K 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's Nicea. And no - the Resurrection proved who Jesus was - and all of the eyewitness accounts were recorded prior to 95 A.D. The Council of Nicea was in 325 A.D. That's a LOT of time. That's several hundred years of Christianity before Constantine called for the Council.
2007-01-10 13:00:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Are you referring to a Council in Nice, France?
Or to the Council if Nicaea?
Are you referring to "jesus christ" or to "Jesus Christ"?
The Church Councils recognized that Jesus, born of Mary (Jesus, the Eternal God Incarnate) was the Eternal God Who took upon Himself a body of Flesh [i.e., of His own will and volition indwelt mortal flesh]. That He was and is Emmanuel, God with us.
He were never a "dude".
Long before the Council of Nicaea, it were recognized that it was Jesus Who created the Universe and all that is in it. This was clearly stated and acknowledged in various Scripture and including the Epistle (Letter) to the Church of the Colossians. This is a fact on record some 250 years BEFORE the Church Council of Nicaea.
2007-01-10 13:12:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In 325 there was a belief called Arianism which said that Christ was not God. Christ did not always exist and was not divine but the highest of creatures, greater than us but less than God. This heresy was condemned by the council of Nicea who said that Christ was the only begotten Son of the Father and of the same being with the Father.
2007-01-10 13:08:49 · answer #5 · answered by Mary W 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jesus was born God. No human council decided that.
2007-01-10 12:59:50 · answer #6 · answered by Blessed 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No Jesus was with God before the earth was created.
2007-01-10 12:59:54 · answer #7 · answered by gwhiz1052 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
JESUS W4S N3V3R JUST 4 DUD3....H3 H4S 4LW4YS B33N P3RF3CT ND HOLY ND SINL3SS=GOD
2007-01-10 12:58:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jesus is and always will be The Son of God. He knew it himself. He was not "just another dude before then". Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Jesu s Rocks! Jesus Rocks! Here I am to worship here I am to bow down!
God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome! God is awsome!
I love the world and God I love life! I love Jesus! Convert to Christianity people. This is no simple sermon. It's like it should be! Loud and clear!
2007-01-10 13:03:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no he is and always was the son of God!
2007-01-10 12:58:34 · answer #10 · answered by revdauphinee 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋