Author Topic: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?  (Read 10991 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« on: Thu May 20, 2010 - 20:30:19 »
The Roman Catholic Church inserted the following words in italics in the Nicene Creed:

"We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord the giver of life, who proceeds from the father and the son."

If the Protestant churches want to return to the early church, why would they include this Roman addition well after the original Nicene Creed?

I admit I am being provocative, but I am curious.

Offline Snargles

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1777
  • Manna: 48
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #1 on: Fri May 21, 2010 - 13:43:48 »
97% of the people in the Church of Christ don't even know what the Nicene Creed is.

Offline Jimmy

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14574
  • Manna: 294
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #2 on: Sat May 22, 2010 - 10:44:42 »
97% of the people in the Church of Christ don't even know what the Nicene Creed is.

Why should that matter, outside of some historical significance?  There is a lot of church history that most Christians, incluceing Catholics, EO, protetants, etc., don't know about.  That really represents no threat to their salvation and their worship of God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #3 on: Sat May 22, 2010 - 11:20:53 »
Most Protestants, don't even know what a Protestant really is anymore, let alone anything about far more ancient history.  If they don't even know why they are what they are, why would they care what is in the Nicene Creed?

Offline Jimmy

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14574
  • Manna: 294
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #4 on: Sat May 22, 2010 - 12:12:47 »
Most Protestants, don't even know what a Protestant really is anymore, let alone anything about far more ancient history.  If they don't even know why they are what they are, why would they care what is in the Nicene Creed?

What is that supposed to mean?  Why do they have to know anything about anything other that what the Bible says?  Are most protestants a little weak on their theology?  Probably, but no more so than most Catholics.  What the actual history is is rather immaterial except from an historical point of view.  Not being terribly interested in history as such, I really couldn't care less about the Nicene Creed.

The RM, of which I claim association, had its beginnings primarily for the purpose of casting aside all such man made creeds and returning to theScriptures themselves as the only authority.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #4 on: Sat May 22, 2010 - 12:12:47 »



Offline Snargles

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1777
  • Manna: 48
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #5 on: Sat May 22, 2010 - 12:16:53 »
97% of the people in the Church of Christ don't even know what the Nicene Creed is.

Why should that matter, outside of some historical significance?  There is a lot of church history that most Christians, incluceing Catholics, EO, protetants, etc., don't know about.  That really represents no threat to their salvation and their worship of God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

That was my point. We don't know and don't need to know but we will get to heaven anyway. It doesn't matter if the filioque is in the Nicean Creed or not becasue the Creed doesn't count for anything.

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #6 on: Sat May 22, 2010 - 15:26:45 »
Quote
What is that supposed to mean?  Why do they have to know anything about anything other that what the Bible says?  Are most protestants a little weak on their theology?  Probably, but no more so than most Catholics.  What the actual history is is rather immaterial except from an historical point of view.  Not being terribly interested in history as such, I really couldn't care less about the Nicene Creed.

The RM, of which I claim association, had its beginnings primarily for the purpose of casting aside all such man made creeds and returning to theScriptures themselves as the only authority.

It simply means, that if they don't even care why they are called by the name they are called, why would they care about a creed much older than the same?  Apparently history, even about themselves, is not an important topic among them.  Sometimes history reveals truths, that are no longer welcome. 

Offline Jimmy

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14574
  • Manna: 294
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #7 on: Sat May 22, 2010 - 16:43:21 »
Quote
What is that supposed to mean?  Why do they have to know anything about anything other that what the Bible says?  Are most protestants a little weak on their theology?  Probably, but no more so than most Catholics.  What the actual history is is rather immaterial except from an historical point of view.  Not being terribly interested in history as such, I really couldn't care less about the Nicene Creed.

The RM, of which I claim association, had its beginnings primarily for the purpose of casting aside all such man made creeds and returning to theScriptures themselves as the only authority.

It simply means, that if they don't even care why they are called by the name they are called, why would they care about a creed much older than the same?  Apparently history, even about themselves, is not an important topic among them.  Sometimes history reveals truths, that are no longer welcome.  

We are called Christians.  I and every other Christian, other than a mentally challenged one, knows why they are called by that name.  Don't misinterpret me.  I have nothing against history.  It can be enlightening.  But it doesn't change the truth of the Scriptures.  If you are referring to the designation, protestant, then I, not being much of an historian,couldn't be certain, but suspect that moniker was affixed by the RCC and not in a loving way.  But it really doesn't matter one way or the other.

Amo

  • Guest
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #8 on: Sat May 22, 2010 - 18:16:20 »
Quote
We are called Christians.  I and every other Christian, other than a mentally challenged one, knows why they are called by that name.  Don't misinterpret me.  I have nothing against history.  It can be enlightening.  But it doesn't change the truth of the Scriptures.  If you are referring to the designation, protestant, then I, not being much of an historian,couldn't be certain, but suspect that moniker was affixed by the RCC and not in a loving way.  But it really doesn't matter one way or the other.

Yes, we are called Christians because of one of the most, if not the most important historical event ever.  The word Protestant came about because of a huge disagreement between two groups of people who both believed they were Christians, as to just what being a Christian really means. 

Offline AvrilNYC

  • Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 640
  • Manna: 19
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #9 on: Sat May 22, 2010 - 20:54:06 »

If the Protestant churches want to return to the early church, why would they include this Roman addition well after the original Nicene Creed?

I admit I am being provocative, but I am curious.

The Protestants include the filioque, because it is theologically sound ::smile:: The "Orthodox" have too many Arianism tendencies to realise that. If Jesus is fully 100% God (true God from true God, Light from Light), then he can do 100% of what the Father can do. Light emanates Light. Jesus is Light and can emanate (although He is not the original source) Light...simple isn't it?

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #10 on: Sun May 23, 2010 - 13:46:02 »

If the Protestant churches want to return to the early church, why would they include this Roman addition well after the original Nicene Creed?

I admit I am being provocative, but I am curious.

The Protestants include the filioque, because it is theologically sound ::smile::


Avril, I don't think you speak for Protestants.  Our RCC friends can't rewrite history; the filoque was a development supported by Rome only. There are many reasons the historic church did not include the filioque, but
let me point to the simpliest one:  Jesus himself made rather clear that the HS proceeded from the Father.
"But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.  (John 15:26, emphasis mine).

For further information on the filioque controversy, I suggest the reader go to the filioque thread on the Eastern Orthodoxy subboard.  The RCC even get their say there.

It surprises me (in a sense) that Protestants who put so much emphasis on Scripture would buy into this contradiction of John 15:26.

The "Orthodox" have too many Arianism tendencies to realise that.

This backhanded slap at Orthodoxy is spurious.  St. Athanasius, Basil and Gregory were the leaders against Arianism and were all Orthodox Christians.   What opposition to the Filioque, developed well after the council of Nicea, has anything to do with the supposed inability of the East to think theologically correctly is beyond me.  And, yes, those three are saints in your church too.

See, my dear Protestant brethen, we can fight like cats and dogs too.  Staying on topic and avoiding zingers can help calm things down.  (I have had my fair share of zingers, so I can't claim innocence.  ::blushing::)

Amo,  this is brilliant:


It simply means, that if they don't even care why they are called by the name they are called, why would they care about a creed much older than the same?  Apparently history, even about themselves, is not an important topic among them.  Sometimes history reveals truths, that are no longer welcome.  

Jimmy,


The RM, of which I claim association, had its beginnings primarily for the purpose of casting aside all such man made creeds and returning to theScriptures themselves as the only authority.

This is how I understand the RM too.  I guess we see it quite differently, because we see God working through history, not just during NT times.  Firstly, we don't think the creed was "man-made" but was guided by the Holy Spirit, just as the NT was guided by the Holy Spirit.  It was used to separate the true Christians with the cults of its time.  It has been used since as the standard summary of true Christianity.   Even this website uses it to define a Christian.  

Your quote about "returning to the Scriptures" themselves as the only authority has several problems.  Firstly, the historical church did not do this--there was no compiled Scriptures to refer to.  Secondly, Jesus promises to guide his church, not just a book to do it.  Don't get me wrong--we believe in reading Scripture and always have (John Chrystostom encouraged scripture reading, unlike our friends in Rome who have both opposed and supported Scripture reading in history)--  but . . . authority does not lie in books but in people.  The danger in this is each person can interpret the Good Book as he wants resulting in no one having authority, and therefore, unity is not possible.

But I disgress, I guess I don't understand why Protestants would support the Filioque since it contradicts what the Scriptures actually say.    


(edited to add one word--plus these!)
« Last Edit: Sun May 23, 2010 - 17:14:14 by trifecta »

Offline Snargles

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1777
  • Manna: 48
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #11 on: Sun May 23, 2010 - 15:32:32 »
I have been in the CoC all my life and have never heard the Nicene Creed mentioned. I wasn't even aware of it until I went to college. How important is the creed to Prot. denoms? Do they teach it to little kids in Sunday School and then forget it? Is it recited out loud during Sunday morning worship? Is it only important to High Church types? Is it only important to academics or is it talked about in the church on the corner? Someone put the creed's place in 21st century Protestant man-in-the-pew theology in perspective for me.

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #12 on: Sun May 23, 2010 - 16:16:46 »
Snargles,

You ask excellent questions.  The Nicene Creed is recited weekly in my church (Orthodox) and two of my ex-churches (RCC and Anglican).  In my church, when someone is ordained to be anything--including just a member, they recite the Nicene Creed.  Why?

Let me make an analogy.  "I know that you love me, but I want to hear you say it." Have you heard this? (In our Oprahfized world, I'd be surprised if you hadn't.)  It is not enough to know something is true, you have to say it.  "That if you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. (Romans 10:9)

So, why do we go beyond "Jesus is Lord?"  Ever hear of the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses?  They say these things too.   So, creeds needs to be more specific.

By the way, yes, the early church had creeds too. The Apostles Creed (poorly named because the apostles did not write it) predates the Nicene Creed and most scholars believe that the language in I Cor 15:3-8 is taken from an early creed.

 By repeating what we believe, we are less likely to be swayed by arguments from the other side.

Now, to what difference does it make to a 21st century Christian?  First, I wish our Christian society would get away from that mindset.   The Christian faith is the historic faith.  What is true now was true then.   Truth doesn't change over time, although many modernists think that is does.  Therefore, we should not concede that point to the critics.

But back to the question.  Why does it matter today?  For the same reason it always mattered: repeating the truth helps us not fall into error.   In fact, I think the Nicene Creed is very relevant to today.  We have liberal types saying that Jesus is not God.  We have "legitimate" groups denying the Trinity.   We are moving away from baptism all together in favor of a "commitment to Christ."   The Nicene Creed reaffirms the truth, not to mention helps the visitor know what a church believes.

When I was a Protestant, my pastor delivered a very interesting sermon about how many Christians don't know the basics of the faith.  The polling data he presented was shocking.  And you said it yourself--these are things kids learn at Sunday School and forget.   Now, do you remember how to balance  chemical equations or triginomitry?  Probably not.  Similarly, without the faithful repeating the truths of the faith they may well forget them.
 
Thanks for reading.

Offline Jimmy

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14574
  • Manna: 294
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #13 on: Sun May 23, 2010 - 16:37:56 »

Jimmy,


The RM, of which I claim association, had its beginnings primarily for the purpose of casting aside all such man made creeds and returning to theScriptures themselves as the only authority.

This is how I understand the RM too.  I guess we see it quite differently, because we see God working through history, not just during NT times.  Firstly, we don't think the creed was "man-made" but was guided by the Holy Spirit, just as the NT was guided by the Holy Spirit.  It was used to separate the true Christians with the cults of its time.  It has been used since as the standard summary of true Christianity.   Even this website uses it to define a Christian. 

Your quote about "returning to the Scriptures" themselves as the only authority has several problems.  Firstly, the historical church did not do this--there was no compiled Scriptures to refer to.  Secondly, Jesus promises to guide his church, not just a book to do it.  Don't get me wrong--we believe in reading Scripture and always have (John Chrystostom encouraged scripture reading, unlike our friends in Rome who have both opposed and supported Scripture reading in history)--  but . . . authority does not lie in books but in people.  The danger in this is each person can interpret the Good Book as he wants resulting in no one having authority, and therefore, unity is not possible.

First, the creed is definitely man made.  I see no other means that it came into being.  You say it was "guided" by the Holy Spirit, but I don't think you can substantiate that.  Second, you must think there is something besides the Bible that we now need in order to have the knowledge of God that He would have us know.  I don't think so.  As far as authority residing in people, there is not a single person that I have known or have ever met in whom I would trust my salvation.  I am sure you and those with whom you associated with are very fine folk, but I will just place my trust in the "book"  not in you or anyone else.

As far as the early church not having the compiled Scriptures, I think that is overdone.  Nothing new was added in the establishment of the canon.  It only limited which of the documents were considered canon.

As far as unity is concerned.  A "forced" unity as you would require is not of inerest to me.  I find that "unity" too much like the unity of the Scribes and Pharisees that Jesus railed against.

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #14 on: Sun May 23, 2010 - 17:58:30 »
Jimmy,

Thanks for your response. 


First, the creed is definitely man made.  I see no other means that it came into being.  You say it was "guided" by the Holy Spirit, but I don't think you can substantiate that.


Can you substantiate that the NT was inspired by God? Can you substantiate that the gospel of Luke was written by Luke?  No, it is a matter of faith. 

So, how can I believe that the creed is of God?  It is a product of God's church, as is the New Testament itself (later I might add).  God works through history. The Nicene Creed was an important way of distinquishing Christians from the cults of its day.   It turned out to have staying power.

Quote
  Second, you must think there is something besides the Bible that we now need in order to have the knowledge of God that He would have us know.  I don't think so.

The Bible says there is.  2 Thess. 3:15: "Therefore, brethren stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or by epistle."  In ancient times, the oral word was considered more reliable than the written word (because forging was very common and there was no board to stop it).   The NT was not in its current form at a minimum until 367 AD. What were they doing for 300 years?  Going by the church's oral tradition.

Are there traditions that you believe that are not spelled out in the NT?  Yes, the Trinity for one. 

Quote

 As far as authority residing in people, there is not a single person that I have known or have ever met in whom I would trust my salvation.  I am sure you and those with whom you associated with are very fine folk, but I will just place my trust in the "book"  not in you or anyone else.


Every Christian tradition gives a context in which to read the Scriptures.  There are people who have read the Bible without a contextual frame, but I doubt any of them were born in Christian families.    Having been in three versions of Christianity, I can affirm this is true.    Just like the eunich who couldn't understand Isaiah without someone to guide him, we are the same way, except that we were born into one of those conceptual frameworks.

I too trust Jesus for my salvation, but note that Jesus himself entrusted his church to men--the Apostles.    The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth (1 Tim 3:15).

Quote
As far as unity is concerned.  A "forced" unity as you would require is not of inerest to me.  I find that "unity" too much like the unity of the Scribes and Pharisees that Jesus railed against.

You misunderstand me. I am not for a forced unity.  But unity is important to God.  In John 17:20, Jesus prays that "they all may be one." The creed helps us to do this by, frankly, leaving out those who are not really Christians.

   As I said in the previous post,  if you don't think there were creeds in the early church, think again.  The Apostles' Creed predates the Nicene Creed and most scholars think Paul was reciting an early creed in I Corinthians 15.

The RM idea of "returning to the Scriptures" doesn't work historically.  Firstly, most people in history did not read or did not have the Scriptures, they were taught by people.  Secondly, the early church did not have the NT as already noted a few times.   Thirdly, I think God is kinder than to throw a book down from heaven.  Just as in the eunich's case, he sent someone to help him.  The help we get is the church.  That is why Jesus loves the church so much.

We can never acheive real unity --not false unity-- if we each read the Scriptures individually.  Evidence of this is the multitude of denominations we have that disagree about what the Scriptures say.

History and the church give us the context in which to read the Scriptures.  And if we don't have the context, we can't understand the text very well.

Offline Jimmy

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 14574
  • Manna: 294
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #15 on: Sun May 23, 2010 - 19:12:35 »

Quote
As far as unity is concerned.  A "forced" unity as you would require is not of inerest to me.  I find that "unity" too much like the unity of the Scribes and Pharisees that Jesus railed against.

You misunderstand me. I am not for a forced unity.  But unity is important to God.  In John 17:20, Jesus prays that "they all may be one." The creed helps us to do this by, frankly, leaving out those who are not really Christians. 

With all due respect, this is precisely why I would reject any such adherence to a man-made creed.

Offline Snargles

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1777
  • Manna: 48
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #16 on: Mon May 24, 2010 - 11:34:32 »
Trifecta --

Since you think the Creed was written by inspired men after the close of the Bible as we know it today, do you think there are inspired writers today? How would we recognize them? If the original writers of the Creed were inspired how do you know the writers of the filioque weren't likewise inspired?

Recitation of the creed sounds to me like a "vain repetition" like the reciting of the Lords Prayer, another vain repetition. We maintain unity of thought through Sunday AM and Wednesday PM Bible study, week-long gospel meetings and pot luck lunches.

You mentioned the use of the creed in the Orthodox, RCC and Anglican churches. Do you know how it is used in Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist and low-church evangelical churches?

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #17 on: Mon May 24, 2010 - 20:40:18 »

Quote
As far as unity is concerned.  A "forced" unity as you would require is not of inerest to me.  I find that "unity" too much like the unity of the Scribes and Pharisees that Jesus railed against.

You misunderstand me. I am not for a forced unity.  But unity is important to God.  In John 17:20, Jesus prays that "they all may be one." The creed helps us to do this by, frankly, leaving out those who are not really Christians.

With all due respect, this is precisely why I would reject any such adherence to a man-made creed.

Jimmy,

I think I understand you.  However, as in all things, we have to draw the line somewhere.
For example, what of those people who say they are Christians but deny the Resurrection.

Can we commune with them?   

Ultimately, it is God who judges; we don't do that. The church, the pillar and foundation of the truth (1 Tim 3:15) has to define was is and (more often) is not truth.

ex cathedra

  • Guest
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #18 on: Mon May 24, 2010 - 20:56:09 »
The Roman Catholic Church inserted the following words in italics in the Nicene Creed:

"We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord the giver of life, who proceeds from the father and the son."

If the Protestant churches want to return to the early church, why would they include this Roman addition well after the original Nicene Creed?

I admit I am being provocative, but I am curious.

The Roman Catholic Church inserted the following words in italics in the Nicene Creed:

"We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord the giver of life, who proceeds from the father and the son."

If the Protestant churches want to return to the early church, why would they include this Roman addition well after the original Nicene Creed?

I admit I am being provocative, but I am curious.

 Lutheran like the addition becuase it is what we believe .

we believe  the holy spirit is fully God And  that he gives us new life in Christ And we believe since he is fully God He procedes  form both God the Father and God the Son  .And the bible testifys to this to.


Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #19 on: Mon May 24, 2010 - 21:30:12 »
Once again, Snargles, you ask good thought-provoking questions.

Trifecta --

Since you think the Creed was written by inspired men after the close of the Bible as we know it today, do you think there are inspired writers today?


Yes, people are inspired today, but nothing new can really be said because the faith was given "once for all." (Jude 3).    Writings today must agree with the early church.

Let me add, too, that the principles of the Nicene Creed, we believe were believed by the earliest Christians.  It's not really a new idea.  It just helped to clarify what the church always believed.
 
Quote
How would we recognize them?

We have a test:  It has to have antiquity (be historical-meaning what the early church believed), universality (believed by the whole church) and consent (agreed to by all).  

While today "innovation" has a positive conotation; in the old times, to have innovation in theology was to be avoided.  

Quote

If the original writers of the Creed were inspired how do you know the writers of the filioque weren't likewise inspired?


Simple. It fails the antiquity test.  The historic church did not believe it.   Remember the term "proceeds from" comes directly from John 15:26:
"But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.

Furthermore, the whole church didn't believe it--only Rome did/does.  (fails universality and consent test).

Then, there is the fact that it was not added for theological reasons but for political reasons.  Finally, RCC tacitly admits it is not important today (although it was a big deal in the 11th century) by allowing in the eastern expressions of the Roman Catholic faiths--so it is not universal even among Catholics.   


Quote

Recitation of the creed sounds to me like a "vain repetition"


There is nothing wrong with repetition.  It helps us to remember.  Someone in the Protestant movement took these two words and took it way too far.  Firstly, a more accurate translation of the Greek is "empty words."   But if even if you maintain the English translation, the problem isn't with "repetition" but vain repetition. The fact is  that early worship was liturgical, so there was repetition.   

Then there is . . .

Quote

 like the reciting of the Lords Prayer, another vain repitition.


Careful there, the Lord's Prayer is NOT a vain repetition.

If Jesus was so against repetition, why did he give us the Lord's Prayer and told us to use it?   I humbly suggest to Protestants to give more credence to Jesus' words than some theological conjecture.

Quote
We maintain unity of thought through Sunday AM and Wednesday PM Bible study, week-long gospel meetings and pot luck lunches.


If that works for you great, but as often happens, a new leader or even a layman can change things over time.    We've maintained our church for 2,000 years by following the traditions passed down from generation to generation.   The creeds protect us against heresy.    Let me add that the Orthodox Church has been the most consistent in its beliefs.  For example, no one believes in strange theories of the resurrection that have polluted many Protestant churches lately.   Many of our clerymen came from Protestant churches who no longer maintain the historic faith.

Quote
You mentioned the use of the creed in the Orthodox, RCC and Anglican churches. Do you know how it is used in Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist and low-church evangelical churches?

The Presbyterian churches maintain the Nicene Creed (I think), but it is not read in most services. Methodists do as well.  The Baptist movement is against all creeds, but remember the Baptist church is the newest of those listed.  It's roots rebelled the most against Rome.  In my opinion, this was reactionary move, not made with sound judgment.

History is important because it guards against any Tom, Dick, or Harry who thinks he knows how the early church thought.   

Thanks again for the questions. Hope this helps.

Offline Snargles

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1777
  • Manna: 48
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #20 on: Mon May 24, 2010 - 22:23:03 »
Quote
Thanks again for the questions. Hope this helps.

Thanks Trifecta. We don't agree but I can see where you are coming from.

With respect to the Lords Prayer, my understanding is that Jesus didn't expect us to repeat that exact prayer, he was giving an example of how to pray. It is like the sample sentences you type when you are learning how to use a typewriter or like playing Twinkle Twinkle Little Star in a Suzuki violin class. Jesus was telling the Apostles "Here are the rudiments now go out and make up your own prayer." Prayer is a personal conversation with God. My earthly father wouldn't like it if I called him up every day and said "How are you today father I am well and I hope you are too." He wants to know what I have been up to and how life is going. He would consider a rote recitation to be a waste of time. Liturgy might have its place but I think we are to speak to God on a personal level and worship him as a living God and not use the same forms every day. This can be taken to expremes as in holy roller churches with their jumping and holering and dancing around but we can worship "decently and in order" and still express ourselves without using set liturgy.

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13866
  • Manna: 368
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #21 on: Wed Nov 03, 2010 - 00:33:31 »
The answer to your question is simple - heredity.  Most protestant churches are descended from Catholic roots, not Orthodox roots.

If you care, I'm opposed to the filioque, and I'm Protestant.

Offline LightHammer

  • Defender of the Faith
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8424
  • Manna: 273
  • Gender: Male
  • I.C.T.H.Y.S.
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #22 on: Thu Nov 04, 2010 - 03:49:03 »
Well dang if you guys didn't want to answer the man's question then don't geesh. Instead of going all off with, "Why does it matter?""Who cares about the Nicene Creed" "Stupid man-made Creed", maybe you should've just said "Sorry brother I am not familiar with the filoque or even the Nicene Creed for that matter but I hope you find what you're looking for." Or better yet just don't respond.

HRoberson

  • Guest
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #23 on: Wed Jan 12, 2011 - 22:13:22 »
The answer to your question is simple - heredity.  Most protestant churches are descended from Catholic roots, not Orthodox roots.

If you care, I'm opposed to the filioque, and I'm Protestant.
If this post hadn't been here, Ida said the same thing. Protestants are Western Christians and take their lead from the Western Church - at least those that have some admitted connection to the Western Church.

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Why do Protestants include the Filioque in the Nicene Creed?
« Reply #24 on: Sun Jan 30, 2011 - 18:08:15 »
The answer to your question is simple - heredity.  Most protestant churches are descended from Catholic roots, not Orthodox roots.

If you care, I'm opposed to the filioque, and I'm Protestant.
If this post hadn't been here, Ida said the same thing. Protestants are Western Christians and take their lead from the Western Church - at least those that have some admitted connection to the Western Church.

Wow!  You guys are the first Protestants I have met that don't believe in the filioque.  (The vast majority don't know what it is. )  Then again, you two are among the most thoughtful Protestants I know.

Anyone else here buy into the Nicene Creed but not the filioque?