“the thing is that the creeds encapsulate the core beliefs. We all agree that as humans we are open to flawed interpretations — and this was apparent in the early years when people were arguing over the divinity of Christ, etc. the Nicene creed effectively encapsulates what scripture has said about these core matters.”
I find the scriptures themselves sufficient, without having a group of uninspired men reformulate them for me and prescribe what is core and non-core. I also believe it is more ecumenical to let the scriptures rule our faith and practice and it tends to be divisive to require adherence to man-made creeds. Thus, in my view creeds can be divisive rather than unifying.
**I find the scriptures themselves sufficient, without having a group of uninspired men reformulate them***
How can you call these people “uninspired” as it was these people who safely guarded and passed down the BIBLE to us.
By YOUR standards the translators of the KJV and all other Bibles were vile lost men.
Go to ANY CoC and you will see preachers reading out of bibles translated by what you would refer to as LOST MEN.
What is the difference between the Nicene Creed and a CoC pamphlet by V E Howard or A G Hobbs?
The Nicene creed and the others are believable!
I disagree with you, however you have posted your point calmly and without malice, thank you — can we agree to disagree?