The Council of Nicea did nothing for Christianity.
50 comments
Uh, Spanky, there were no "independent Christians" in the Fourth Century.
Omulate? Does that have something to do with preparing eggs?
Excuse me if I'm wrong but how can the Council of Nicea be unbiblical when the Bible hadn't been compiled yet?
Edit: Yes I'm right. The Council was in 325 and the Bible was first compiled and handed out in Rome in 331.
In that case, please drop Hebrews, James, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation* from your Bible, since they were only officially accepted as canonical as a result of the Council.
*Interestingly, the main reason that the inclusion of Revelation was debated so much was apparently because it was difficult to understand and could easily be misinterpreted.
"The Council of Nicea did nothing for Christianity."
Well, apart from creating that Bible to which you seem so slavishly devoted.
"It did, however, help omulate and foster the beginnings of the Roman Catholic Church and its rise to power."
Well, you can't make an omulate without breaking a few eggs, you know?
"The independent Christians, including the precursors to what are today call Baptists, by and large refused to participate in that council because it, in itself, was not biblical."
Of course the council was biblical -- it CREATED the freakin' Bible!
This person rocks and I'll tell you why:
"Omulate" is not a word, yet he uses it in complete confidence. Therefore he has my respect.
He still knows jack shit about Christian history, though.
If this was true, then the "Baptist" Bible would still have all the Apocrypha and lots of other lost little bits in it.
The Nicean Council is where your Bible comes from.
Plus, I've never heard a fundy make this stupid argument--usually it's some "god influenced the council" pap.
Fail.
I think "Omulate" is first found in the "Jesse Jackson Making Up Words On The Spot Dictionary," 3rd Edition; but I could be wrong. [sarcasm]
Doc_Van should put some history books on his Amazon wish list.
Now, I was only a Presbyterian, not a Hardcore Freakin' Baptist, but we (as Protestants) toooooootally recited the Nicean Creed.
Now, we did have to have a bit of a discussion about how the "catholic church" meant, not the Holy See with Capitalization, but the universal (Greek: katholikos) church of God upon the earth. But the council was a pretty good summation and determinant of a lot of points of theology that Baptists (tend to) agree with as well. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity (which, according to Wikipedia, is normal Baptist doctrine) was formally decided at the council.
This whole "baptist perpetuity" thing is a little nutso, imho. Yes, there were Christian groups in the early church that were *not* absorbed by the big-C Catholics. However, the vast majority of them were cults that were EVEN WEIRDER than you!
In short: while the principle of baptizing when the baptizee is old enough to comprehend the process IS a logical doctrine and probably has existed in some form since antiquity, the notion that a Baptist Church Tradition in its entirety has done the same is a little... looney.
Especially since the KJV's from 1611. :-P
Well, you can't make an omulate without breaking a few eggs, you know?
David D.G. wins the internet
I find it funny that a council had to be convened to decide what goes into the future Bible and what doesn't.
That's already fail.
Baptists (Protestants, really) came about because of the RCC's corruption hundreds of years after the Councl of Nicea.
Learn yourself some history, Doc.
Ok, there MIGHT have been early Christians who shared some of the theological views of the Baptist movement. If so, we don't know about them. Second, there is no such thing as the Roman Catholic church until 1054, although the eastern bishops and the Bishop of Rome weren't getting along before that.
I've always wondered what KJV only Baptists would do when they realized their holy KJV was actually written for Episcopalians.
jsonitsac--King James himself was quite sympathetic to the Catholic church. The old Tyndale English translation shied away from Catholic terms--or even anything too latinish, for that matter. Hence, the Tyndale Bible uses the Old English derived* title 'presbyter' where the KJV reverts to the inexcusably Latinate Catholic title 'Priest.'
So, a KJV-only Baptist disclaiming any association with Catholic history has some 'splainin' to do.
*If I remember correctly, Tyndale's Bible debuted right at the cusp between the Middle and Early Modern periods--a time when many of the old Anglo-Saxon guard were having a knee-jerk reaction against increasing Franco-latin influences on their language and culture.
Beanheel
Um... nothing prior to the council of nicea was biblical by today's standards. One of the primary purposes of that council was to decide which books were to be kept and which were to be removed from the body of works which eventually became the bible.
Please stop lying... it makes Jesus cry.
"...omulate and foster..."
Is that like "to hem and to haw" or "kit and kaboodle?"
Oh wait... Isn't that real estate firm?
the baptists don't have any creeds.
"We have tended to avoid embracing prepared creeds or other statements that might compromise our obligation to interpret Scripture as individuals within the community of faith under the guidance of the Holy Spirit."
http://www.abc-usa.org/identity/bible.html
That's okay Independent Baptists are really Biblical anyway, they fake a lot, cherry-pick what they like, and add stupid stuff like "rapture" that really isn't in there.
The Council of Nicea did nothing for Christianity.
thats right, the council of nicea lied, cheated stole and killed to make christianity such a "wonderful" religion.
well this guy is right in saying that the baptists didn't participate. i still wonder how anyone can figure that the bible came before the church when the church is mentioned in the bible.
and that Buddhist joke was really funny.
Omulate. You know, every time they throw some random non-word out there, I think of the Simpsons:
Other Teacher (I've forgotten her name): You know, I never heard the word 'embiggen' until I came to Springfield. [note: not sure if I spelled that right - might be 'imbiggen']
whathehell:
Please, enlighten us. Where in the Bible does it mention the Baptist Church? Especially since there was no Christianity then; they were simply another group in the Jewish faith.
And you're right, the Baptists didn't participate, because they didn't have a time machine. There's no historical record of them before the 1500s or so. Period.
"the precursors to what are today call Baptists"
Name them and show us historical evidence, as all Christian sects would have similiar rituals and beliefs you can't claim your favorites as yours by todays Baptist beliefs. Not even all Baptist churchs freak out over evolution or gay marriage like the Southern style Paranoid End-Timers.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
