Yeah, maybe I will, Tom.
Okay, team, why don't we make a go of it?
What's in a name?
At the very heart of the Christian faith is, arguably,
!
Not an ethical way of living in the world, though this is important,
nor even a set of doctrines, as vital as this is also,
but perhaps most fundamentally, a name.
As Peter proclaimed to the Jewish crowd,
there is no other name under heaven given by which we are saved.
Acts 4.12
As new converts responded to Christ, they took his name,
declaring their allegiance to the one whose name they now would bear.
I am Christ's.
I belong to Christ.
I am a Christian.
I believe in his name.
But what did it mean to believe in his name?
What was in that name in which, that is to say, in whom we believe?
And the creeds emerged in answer to that question.
Perhaps the first proto-creed was Peter's answer to the question Jesus posed at Caesarea Philippi.
Who do you say that I am?
You are the Christ.
The son of the living God.
And especially in the name was the relation of Jesus to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
The Lord and his saving arm.
As the apostle to the Gentiles preached to the Romans,
if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead,
you will be saved.
And fundamental to the name was these divine relationships.
What we only later came to describe as Trinitarian relationships.
Ringing in the first Christians' ears was Jesus' final charge at his ascension
to make disciples across the whole world,
baptizing them in the name, note the singular,
the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.
So much indeed was in this name into which Christians believed,
into which they were baptized,
and to which they came to belong.
And faith, like all strong conviction,
has a desire to utter itself before others.
As the Master says,
out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.
I believe, therefore I spoke out,
echoes the apostle in 2 Corinthians 4.
Whether this was in the marketplace,
or at the baptismal pool,
whether in answer to the puzzled neighbor's query,
who are you?
Or perhaps, whose are you?
Or in answer to the question,
put the catechumens at the font, the baptismal font.
Christian, in whom do you believe?
The language of creedal confession came forth.
Among these creedal confessions,
it sprang up where the gospel of Christ
was responded to in faith and allegiance,
earliest,
to gain wide formal recognition,
and use, also,
in the West, that is,
was the Apostles' Creed.
It took that name from the early belief
that it had been composed
by the Twelve Apostles themselves,
each contributing
one particular phrase.
This, it was said,
attested to the apostolic unity
of conviction
before they all parted
to go to the ends of the earth,
spreading the good news.
Thus, Peter
was said to have supplied
the opening phrase,
I believe in God the Father Almighty.
Then he handed the composition over to Andrew,
who added,
and in Jesus Christ,
his only son.
James then added,
born of the Holy Spirit
and the Virgin Mary.
And so on,
through all the Twelve Apostles
until Matthias
concluded with,
life everlasting.
Okay, so,
that was,
that was the story
as they had understood it.
But before we continue this story,
let's hear the Apostles' Creed
that it be fresh in our minds
as we make some observations.
So why don't we recite it
together,
if you feel comfortable,
if, for you,
reciting it before studying it
is kind of like signing a document
before you've read it,
you know,
lawyers would warn us
against such a thing.
Well, please don't feel
any embarrassment
and refraining
or any pressure
to participate.
But let's,
if you,
you have on your handout
two,
one is called
the Old Roman form,
the Old Rome,
the earliest one,
and then the second
is called T
from Textus Receptus.
That is the Received form.
That's the one
that we all say
around the world today.
So,
why don't we say together,
reading from
the Received form
that developed
in the 8th century.
Now,
why don't we say it together,
if you feel comfortable.
I believe in God,
the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ,
his only Son,
our Lord,
who was conceived
by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified,
dead,
and buried.
He descended into hell.
The third day,
he rose again
from the dead.
He ascended into heaven.
He is seated
at the right hand
of God,
the Father Almighty.
Whence he will come
to judge the living
and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Holy Catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.
Amen.
Here it was.
Well,
before we delve
into particulars,
what I wonder,
if you're not already
familiar with the Creed,
I wonder what your
first general impressions are.
Any thoughts?
Any first general impressions?
questions?
What strikes you about it?
First things first.
Yeah.
Deals with...
There you go.
That's right.
Really fundamental.
Let's get right out of the gate
with the most important things,
the primary things,
the fundamentals.
and see that they're pretty similar.
Yeah,
we'll come...
Similar.
Yeah,
yeah,
we'll come,
rather,
to the comparison
in just a minute.
Yeah,
yeah,
that's,
yeah,
they are very similar.
Yeah,
yeah,
Richard.
For me,
these words are very familiar
since I've recited them
from childhood
having been brought up
in the Church of Rome.
Yes,
okay,
so very,
very familiar,
yeah.
And is that,
is that familiarity
a comfort to you?
Is that,
is that,
is it,
yeah,
mostly,
okay.
Yeah,
yeah,
yeah.
I just find it grounding.
Grounding.
Because I'm not in a church
that repeats the Creed often.
There's something,
yeah,
anchoring.
Yeah,
yeah.
There,
there is,
it's,
you know,
that it has been uttered
with conviction
by people
across cultural differences
of time and place.
Dude,
don't they,
it kind of gives it
a Gibraltar-like character.
Amid so much
that ebbs and flows
in life
that rises and falls,
emerges and passes away,
this has endured
the tides
and time
and taste,
tides of time
and taste.
Yeah,
that it is,
I feel,
I feel that way too.
It's grounded in history.
Yeah,
that's,
yeah.
Pontius Pilate.
Pontius Pilate,
there you go.
Yeah,
we'll comment about that
in a little bit.
Yeah,
yeah.
Yeah,
I remember
upon hearing someone say,
Pontius Pilate gets
a place in the Creed.
It's like
entering a big ballroom
and you see a dog.
Yeah.
Pontius Pilate
is a story.
Yeah,
that's right.
Anchored in history.
That's right.
Yeah,
Matt?
A little bit said
about the Father
and then the Jesus section
just goes on and on and on
and the Holy Spirit
kind of added is,
I guess we have to...
Yeah,
yeah,
isn't that interesting?
Right,
right.
So the centerpiece,
Jesus,
that God's great gift
to us is salvation.
He is the storehouse
of all the treasury
that is ours
as believers.
yeah,
yeah.
Clearly not made up
by Pentecostals.
Yeah,
the language
kind of
in its
tersely
concentrated
expression
just kind of
has a lapidary
quality,
doesn't it?
It's just
kind of like
what you'd describe
on a tombstone.
Just nice,
terse,
short phrases.
I love that
quality about it.
And even the
rhythmic
pleasing cadences
kind of have the effect
upon the
ear
that retains it
as like a smooth
stone in the hand
that holds it.
You ever walk along
a beach,
you pick up a stone
and you just
want to keep holding it
because it's just so smooth.
Same sort of thing
to get it
to our
ear.
And in the
phrase of
Philip Schaaf,
one of the
great church
historians,
do you not
catch
what he calls
the scent
of antiquity?
And perhaps
you need not
be an historian
to even
say the
fragrance
of antiquity.
Then it goes
back
so far
that Christians
were saying
this
centuries
and centuries
ago
and we still
feel comfortable
saying it now.
Those are
pretty special
things.
Pretty special
things.
And it's all
in order.
God,
Creator,
Jesus,
Lord,
Holy Spirit,
Virgin Mary,
the life of Christ.
It's not
I believe in God
the Father
is the last thing.
It's the first thing.
Yeah.
In order.
Yeah.
It's as if
it probably took
its skeletal shape
which we're going
to find in a moment
from Jesus
when he said
go into all the world
and baptize them
in the name
of the Father,
the Son,
and the Holy Spirit.
So that's kind
of the skeletal outline.
It just expands
each one a little bit.
So absolutely.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
Well,
let's look a little bit
at the history.
How did the Apostles' Creed
emerge
and develop
into its final
received form?
Okay.
So the one
the
T
down at the
bottom there,
the bigger one,
that's called
the received form.
That's the Textus Receptus.
Okay.
But then the first one
that you have there,
that's the earliest one.
That's called
the Old Roman Symbol
or R
as it's referred to.
So we want to know
how the Apostles' Creed
emerged and developed
into its final form.
How did you get
from that first one
that we have
there on your paper
to the bottom one?
The upper one
to the bottom one.
Well,
I think
we may safely
say
that the origin
of the Apostles' Creed
as the collective
creation
of the twelve
apostles themselves,
yeah,
I think that's
probably fictional.
You know,
though this legend
won near
universal acceptance
down through
the Middle Ages,
I think many
and entrenchant
are the arguments
against it.
First,
there's,
it seems to me,
the intrinsic
improbability
of such a collective
construction
of something
like a creed.
You know,
when it comes
to a creed,
experience tells us
that even if a committee
is tasked
of generating
the thing,
usually it's
fundamentally
the work
of a single mind,
even if other people
edit it.
You know,
that's just kind of
how these things
work historically.
besides,
there's no trace
at all
of the origin
story among
the apostolics
of the earliest,
those people
who are alive
during the time,
the apostles,
those Christians,
and the
Nicene fathers.
And had they
known
of such a story,
it would be
hard to imagine,
it seems to me,
they're superseding
this creed.
if they really
thought,
hey,
this thing
came from
the apostles,
it would have
been hard
to imagine
that they would
have felt
at liberty
to just kind
of make up
their own.
They might have
added a few
things,
but to make
it up.
So,
you know,
can you imagine
the,
yeah,
not bad
apostles,
but I think
I like mine
better,
we'll just
choose this
mine.
No,
probably not.
Probably not.
No,
it seems that
the origin
of what
in its
primitive form
came to be
known as
the Apostles'
Creed,
was originally
the old
catechetical
creed used
for instructing
baptismal
candidates
in the
Church of
Rome.
And in its
simple structure
we see that
it goes all
the way back
to the command
of Jesus
to baptize
disciples in
the name
of the Father,
the Son,
and the Holy
Spirit.
Raul has
noticed that
structure.
So,
how did it
develop then
from that
first baptismal
creed?
Well,
over time,
in different
places,
a few phrases
were added
to the
core,
usually
to exclude
errors that
were gaining
currency,
or to try
to affirm
some truth
in need
of reinforcement.
Notably,
these editions
had their
origin
outside
of Rome,
in some
of the
outskirts
of the
spread of
the gospel
up in
Europe.
But,
they were
recognized
back in
Rome
as true
to the
faith
and were
assimilated
to give us
the final
form of the
Apostles'
Creed,
what we now
call the
Textus
Receptus,
the received
text.
So,
we'll come
to these
accruals
in a moment,
but first
let's look
at the
creedal
affirmations
present in
the first
form,
the old
Roman symbol,
and consider
something of
their meaning.
So,
we're looking
at the
top one
now,
just going
to walk
down
through
that
and make
a couple
observations.
So,
go ahead
and glance
down at
that top
one.
So,
I believe
in God
the Father
Almighty.
So,
here,
while God
as Father
would have
been for
the early
Christians
primarily
in reference
to the
Son,
he was the
Father of
the Son,
his relation
to Jesus,
and Tom
talked about
how important
that was
in the last
session,
it is clear
from their
writings that
it was also
taken to be
in relation
to us,
our Father.
And that
was a thought
that was
cherished as
very precious
to the early
Christians.
The term
Almighty
Almighty,
well,
it comes
to us
in translation
from the
Latin
omnipotentum,
and it's
understandable,
omnipotent,
well,
that seems
to be
Almighty
would be
a good
translation
for omnipotent,
but it's
likely that
the original
Roman symbol
was written
in Greek
first,
because the
earliest church
in Rome,
even though
there were
many Romans,
they would
have been
Greek-speaking
Romans,
so historians
think that
probably the
original was
in Greek,
and there
the term
is from a
term called
Ponto
Krator,
which is a
very active
word,
conveying not
just a capacity,
but an
actualization
of capacity.
Ponto,
all things
Krator,
ruler.
So really
what's conveyed
here is,
we might say,
all-rueling.
I believe in
God the
Father,
all-rueling,
or all-sovereign.
And what an
incomparable
comfort,
incomparable
comfort it is
to know
that God our
Father is
sovereign in all
things.
So as you hear
that Almighty,
think of it
also in the
fuller sense
of all-sovereign,
sovereign over
all things.
And in
Jesus Christ,
His only
begotten Son,
our Lord.
You know what?
I'm going to
skip over that
because Tom
did such a
good job on
that.
The Nicene
Creed does
a lot of
work there.
But then
notice,
there follows
an expansion
on Jesus
Christ,
who was born
of the Holy
Spirit of the
Virgin Mary,
crucified under
Pontius Pilate,
was buried.
The third
day He rose
again from
the dead.
He ascended
into heaven
and sits
at the right
hand of
the Father.
From whence
He shall
come to
judge the
quick and
the dead.
Now,
it's likely
that some
of this
enlargement
would have
been connected
with
counterattack,
what we
might think
of as
counterattack.
That is,
if someone
made some
sort of
claim
that was
heretical,
we'd have
to say,
as Orthodox,
no,
that's
not right,
in fact,
that's
consequentially
wrong,
this is
the truth
instead,
that's
not the
case,
this is
rather the
case.
So you
would get
phrases that
would be
kind of
filled out
to say,
no,
that's
cordoned off,
don't go
there,
that would
be wrong
belief.
one of
the earliest
heresies
to afflict
the church,
to challenge
the church,
was called
docetism.
Docetism,
they held
that Christ's
physical body
was not
real,
it only
seemed to
be real,
it only had
the appearance
of being
real,
from the
Greek
docetism,
or to
appear
that way.
So he
really only
appeared to
be material,
he did not
really have
a physical
body,
not a
material body.
And again,
you can
probably
recognize
some of
the Greek
notion of
kind of a
Gnostic view
that,
well,
the spiritual
is good
and positive
and the
material
is bad
and stained,
so God
could never
have any
sort of
relation of
physicality,
anything like
that.
So,
no,
in contrast
to that,
we affirm
these things.
Can you
see anything
in the
description
of Christ
that might
have been
a buttress
against
the claim
that he
had no
materiality?
Any of
those phrases
that you
think?
Well,
born of
the birth.
There you
go.
Yeah,
bingo.
Yeah,
born.
Natural birth.
Natural birth,
there you
go.
That's a
little too
material.
That's
kind of
sanguinary
and all
that stuff.
No,
doesn't get
any more
material than
that.
Yeah,
yeah,
exactly.
Yeah.
How about
dead?
Why do you
have to
bury something?
Well,
you only
bury a
body.
You don't
bury a
spirit.
So,
these things
would have
been affirming.
So,
if you
were a
docetist,
you wouldn't
really have
been able
to say
that.
So,
that would
kind of
surface the
people.
Oh,
uh-oh,
we noticed
that Rufus
here closed
his mouth and
didn't affirm
this.
Oh,
there's
suspicion.
Let's put
the elders on
this.
He can't
affirm this.
Let's make
sure that
there's nothing
that's gone
too wrong
here.
So,
then pastoral
care.
Put them on
the pastoral
care list if
they couldn't
affirm these
things.
So,
this is how
a lot of
the phrases
then would
have been
added.
Again,
as a defense
of orthodoxy
or as an
affirmation of
some certain
aspects of
the truth
that some
people either
denied or
were wobbly
about.
But,
we probably
ought not to
exaggerate the
motive of
counterattack
against heresy
too,
too much
as this
sort of
historical
expansion
also follows
the pattern
of apostolic
preaching.
Does it
kind of,
you know,
you're probably
reminded of
Paul's words
when he
summarizes the
gospel in
1 Corinthians
15.
I gave you
what was of
first importance.
There we go
again.
You know,
Christ died for
our sins
according to
the scriptures.
He was
buried,
you were
crucified,
buried.
So,
you know,
there's good
reason there
just in the
apostolic
preaching to
add these
things to.
You barely
need the
inducement of
heresies,
although that
can be a
spur also.
Now,
we've already
commented,
you've picked
this up,
at first sight
it may seem
puzzling for
a dog to
show up at
the party,
Pontius Pilate,
to be
accorded a
place in
the church's
confession.
And again,
any thoughts?
Why would
that be?
Why would
that be so
important to
put him in?
What might
early Christians
have been
getting at
in putting
Pontius Pilate
in?
Any thoughts?
Yeah,
yeah.
What better
way to
mark the
messiahs
coming into
history than
to cite
a historical
personage with
which everyone
would agree,
yes, he's
part of
history.
Absolutely.
Yeah, I think
you're spot on.
This was their
instinct.
The importance
of anchoring
all of these
things, all of
these saving
truths, our
saving truths
in salvation,
they really
happened.
They really
happened in
history.
Yeah, absolutely.
Perhaps, too,
notice, maybe
it's felt, we
don't seem to
add such
stress, perhaps
on Christ's
ascension or
his session
that is being
seated at the
right hand of
the Father
Almighty, his
session, it's
called.
But this
truth was
very precious
to the early
believers, as
for them, as
it should be
for us.
It meant that
Christ was the
great victor
who had
triumphed over
all the hostile
powers opposed
to him, and
consequently his
victory was
ours, that of
his people.
It's interesting
that probably
the Old Testament
scripture most
cited, both in the
apostolic preaching,
we see this in
the New Testament,
in the epistles,
and also in the
early writers, was
probably Psalm 110,
verse 1.
The Lord said to
my Lord, sit at
my right hand until
I make your
enemies your
footstool.
That is Christ's
triumphal session
where he reigns over
all his defeated
enemies.
This was very,
very meaningful.
works its way
into that
creed that has
those things of
fundamental
importance.
Fundamental
importance.
This was to
them.
So, then
finally, I
believe in the
Holy Spirit.
And this
kind of
completes the
Trinity,
the Trinity
name formula,
which is the
skeleton of
the creed.
But then
there follow
what seem
a string of
miscellaneous
credenda.
as Kelly
puts it.
Well, then a
few other
things that we
believe too.
The Holy
Church,
forgiveness of
sins,
the resurrection
of the body.
It could
seem like an
odd pairing
to range
one's belief
in the
Church with
the belief
in the
Holy Spirit.
I mean,
after all,
the Holy
Spirit's one
of the Divine
Persons of
the Trinity.
Well, maybe,
maybe not.
It did take
the early
Church a little
time to work
out the
Trinity,
and the
Holy Spirit
was kind
of the
final person
to be given
sustained
attention,
theological
attention to.
So in the
earliest creeds,
we believe in
the Father.
We believe
this,
and this,
and we
believe in
the Son,
and we
believe this,
this,
and this,
and we
believe in
the Holy
Spirit.
Yeah,
well,
what particularly
do you believe?
We'll get
back to you on
that.
And they
did,
they did.
It just,
you know,
you can only put
be sweeping.
You just,
you know,
one thing at a
time.
And they got
to it.
They got to it.
So it's a little
sparse on the
Holy Spirit at
first,
but they would
add to it.
So,
and there is,
we need to
remember,
a development
of clarification
and expression
even where
there is
robust faith.
You know,
we can have
deep intuitions,
and I'm sure
Tom talked about
this,
that,
hey,
we worship
Jesus as
God.
We know
he was a
man.
How does
that work?
That he's
God and
he's man?
That's a
great question.
We'll get
back to you
on that one.
So sometimes
you can
believe it
vehemently,
robustly.
You have
no doubts.
But just
how to
explain it
can be a
little tricky
sometimes.
You need
to really
call upon
some of
the wonderful
gifts that
God has
given the
church to
be able to
work these
things out
and articulate
them in the
vernaculars of
the day.
So that's,
it'll take a
little time to
do that with
the Holy Spirit.
But we get
there.
You know,
the first
line there was
crucified under
Pontius Pilate
and was
buried.
That's the
only thing
that a
non-believer,
if a
non-believer
is going to
believe anything,
it would be
only that line.
Everything
else is
fabulous.
He ascended,
he sits at
the right
hand,
he will
come to
judge living
and the
dead,
the Holy
Spirit,
the church,
forgiveness of
sins.
Yeah.
This has to
be believed
by a believer.
Absolutely.
Except
Pontius Pilate.
Yeah,
yeah,
yeah.
You'd have to
be pretty
skeptical to
have,
to have
difficulty
with that.
That's right.
when we,
oh,
yeah,
one thing
that's probably
worth noting,
that the
preposition for
belief in
reference to
the Father,
Son,
is the same
as that of
the Holy
Spirit.
So,
I believe
in,
or we could
even say
into,
in Greek
it would be
ace.
So,
into,
I believe
into,
and one
could,
and I think
should think,
I think,
read this as a
personal trust
and reliance
upon.
And when we
come to the
Holy Church,
in the final,
final form,
when we come to
the Holy Church,
and the following
phrases,
we simply have
believe,
it's simply a
Greek accusative.
narrative.
So,
there is a
little bit of
a distinction
in the way
in which we
believe.
It's not as
if we are
relying personally
in terms of
faith,
trust for our
salvation,
in terms of
these other
things,
in the way
that we do.
So,
there's not
quite an
equivalence
and a
parody,
and there's
language here
that preserves
that.
It's certainly
how I like
to read
it.
And perhaps
we might
think of
these phrases
as connected
with the
Spirit,
the ones
that follow
the Spirit,
as showing
us the
Spirit in
action,
gathering
the Church,
imparting
forgiveness
by uniting
us with
Christ,
and finally
quickening
our mortal
flesh in
resurrection.
So,
that's a
work of
the Spirit.
So,
in one
sense,
it kind
of follows
on.
And if
the term
holy
church
grates
as somewhat
exalted,
remember that
the term
church,
ecclesia,
was borrowed
from the
Septuagint,
that is,
the Greek
translation of
the Old
Testament,
where it
was used
to translate
the Hebrew
kahal,
that is,
the title
commonly given
to the chosen
people of
Israel,
gathered in
solemn
assembly
before God.
So,
that's what
the church
meant,
that kahal.
God's people.
Exactly.
So,
it was used
here by
Christians,
it expressed
their convictions
that they,
believers in
Jesus Christ,
through Christ,
were the
new Israel,
and heirs to
all the
promises that
were given
to God's
people.
So,
that's what
they meant
by church.
And recall
that holy,
hagios,
also goes
back to the
Old Testament,
where it
applied,
principally,
to whatever
belonged to
God.
That's what
made something
holy,
belonging to
God,
and in
particular,
in reference
to his
people,
his holy
people,
that is,
the people
that belong
to God.
So,
that's
really what
the term
holy church
means.
So,
when we say
holy church,
we're simply
saying,
God's
God-gathered
people.
That's what
we're saying.
So,
the...
Set apart.
Yeah,
set apart.
Yeah,
yeah,
for God,
for his,
his special
possession,
his people,
his gathered
ones,
his church.
That's what
we mean
when we say
this.
Yeah,
yeah,
Tom,
please.
That's
serious,
you know?
I've noticed
that before,
and if I
can just
summarize,
so the
word church
in Greek
is not
special.
In the
Old Testament,
it's used
of the
assembly of
the Israelites.
Yes.
But in
other Greek
contexts,
it just
means assembly.
Yes,
yes,
yeah,
exactly.
And so,
if they said,
I believe in
the assembly,
you'd be like,
what?
Our English
translation,
I think it
does a little
bit of a
disservice,
because there's
technically all
churches should
be holy.
So when you
say the
holy church,
you're like,
kind of making
a particular
church,
but in Greek,
it wouldn't have
that context.
It's simply
referring to all
Christians
assembled
everywhere.
And there's
going to be
another term
that's going
to be added,
Catholic,
that will
really emphasize
that point,
too,
and we'll get
to that in a
moment.
So these,
then,
were the
creedal
affirmations
of the
old Roman
creed,
out of which
the Apostles'
Creed,
as we know
it,
grew.
So when
did the
Apostles'
Creed receive
its final
form,
and what
was added
to it,
and why?
So that's
what we want
to consider
now.
What was
added on
to the
old Roman
symbol that
we've just
looked at?
So back to
history for a
moment.
Well,
the earliest
appearance of
the Apostles'
Creed in
its final
form,
what you
have there
on the
page,
is found
in the
writings of
a Saint
Prominius,
who was a
missionary,
who worked
in the area
of Lake
Constance,
right at the
borders of
Germany,
Austria,
and Switzerland
now,
a little
bit prior,
just a little
bit prior,
to that
pivotal
battle of
Tours,
732,
there was
a very
significant
historical
battle
where
Charles
Martel
halted
and then
repulsed
the Muslim
advance that
was coming up
through Spain
into Central
Europe.
And Charles
Martel,
the hero of
that battle,
he was the
founder of
the Carolingian
dynasty.
He was
succeeded by
his son,
Charles
Martel's
son,
Pepin the
Short,
and then
his grandson,
Charlemagne,
or Carl
the Great,
Charlemagne,
we call him
in English.
And under
these
Carolingian
kings,
an alliance
was forged
between
them,
there,
the Frankish
regents,
and the
Roman
pontiffs.
So it
was,
their whole
territory was
evangelized
by missionaries,
these missionaries
like,
St.
Perminius,
and they
forged an
alliance.
And the
Frankish
kings
desired their
subjects,
all their
subjects,
to be
educated
uniformly
in the
Lord's
Prayer
and in
the
Creed.
They
wanted
to be
saying
the
exact
same
thing
all
across
the
kingdom
for
unity's
sake.
And
Rome,
on the
other
side
of
the
Alps,
desired
a
uniform
liturgy
also,
based
upon
the
Roman
practice.
So they
thought,
okay,
let's
work
together.
Let's
work
together
on
this.
And in
the
royal
effort,
the
Frankish
kings,
Charlemagne,
took
inventory
first on
all the
different
creeds,
as they
were
said,
in
his
vast
sprawling
lands.
Okay,
when you
say the
creed,
what do
you
say?
What
do
you
say?
What
do
you
say?
And
they
pulled
all
these
together
and
they
discovered
that they
were,
as Raul
observed,
they were
fundamentally
similar,
but
slightly,
the ones
outside of
Rome,
were fundamentally
similar,
but slightly
fuller.
There
were a
few
extra
phrases
that
were
there
as
compared
to
the
Roman
symbol
that we
looked at
that was
used
in
Rome,
the
original
one.
But
here
is
an
interesting
thing.
Rather
than
Rome
insisting
that
the
outskirts,
the
missionary
outskirts
conform
to
the
Roman
creed,
Rome
adopted
the
fuller
formula
from
the
missionary
outskirts.
Pretty
extraordinary,
but that's
what they
did.
It
appeared
that
in
these
more
distant
outskirts
there
were
a
few
more
there
was
a
little
bit
more
theological
ferment.
You'd
have
some
Aryan
influences
that
would
come
in.
There
were
all
kinds
of
things
were
going
on
a
little
bit
of
not
it's
so
there
were
there
was
a
little
bit
more
heretical
innovation
in
the
outskirts
not
as
much
as
you
had
in
Rome.
!
So
in
consequence
they
would
add
some
of
these
phrases
that
were
really
helpful
as we
noticed
in
shoring
up
the
truth
and
stating
it
a little
bit
more
carefully
a little
bit
more
forcefully
so
Rome
ended
up
concluding
hey
that's
actually
helpful
we
kind
of
like
this
you've
required
a little
bit
more
creedal
specificity
but
we
like
that
specificity
so
we're
going
to
just
take
this
as
a
bulwark
against
distortion
that
it
was
helpful
there
it'll
probably
be
helpful
here
and
why
not
make
a
concession
if we're
happy
to do
it
say
we'll
use
yours
makes
the
local
people
happy
as you
can
imagine
so
that's
what
they
did
Rome
found
the
additions
a
useful
enrichment
and
adopted
them
as
J.
N.
D.
Kelly
concludes
his
is
probably
one
of the
magisterial
studies
of the
creeds
the
early
creeds
and
he
writes
in
persuading
Rome
to
accept
a
new
baptismal
confession
the
church
beyond
the
Alps
that is
the
missionary
the
mission
part
the
church
beyond
the
Alps
was
merely
handing
back
to her
Rome
enriched
and
improved
the
same
venerable
rule
of
faith
which
she
herself
had
compiled
in the
second
century
as
an
epitome
of the
everlasting
gospel
so
that's
how we
got the
fuller
one
from the
shorter
original
extraordinary
so
let's
conclude
by considering
what were
these
enriching
additions
that give
us
the
apostles
creed
yeah
I'm sorry
but
the
Roman
symbol
do we
have
a
date
for the
earliest
extent
of
manuscript
or when
we
you just
mentioned
second
century
yeah
we already
have it
from the
second
century
so
that's
yeah
and we
know that
it goes
back further
than that
but that's
where we
actually
we have
copies from
that
wow
okay
thanks
so what
were these
additions
these enriching
additions
that we
now have
well
a few
of them
were already
contained
in
or
reminiscent
of the
Nicene
creed
this is what
Tom talked
about last
week
381
so for
example
you'll
yeah
isn't it
the other
way around
the Nicene
creed
is reminiscent
of these
well
there are
a few
phrases
that are
going to
get added
to the
Roman
symbol
that when
we look
at oh
that's
new
where did
that
come
from
some
of
these
things
we
see
as
echoing
what
was
already
in the
Nicene
creed
so when
Rome
is adopting
these
things
that
were
used
as
creeds
in the
outskirts
they said
oh
look
yeah
we don't
mind
taking
that
phrase
in fact
we remember
seeing that
phrase
in the
Nicene
creed
that they
would have
been
familiar
with
so
we're
in the
8th
century
now
they know
the
Nicene
creed
and they
thought
oh
yeah
so
the
Gallic
churches
are
suggesting
we add
this
phrase
so for
example
sorry
I thought
we were
still in
the
second
to the
fourth
century
okay
I'm
sorry
no
this
is
the
eighth
century
now
this
is
when
after
the
battle
of
Tours
in
732
that's
when
some
of
these
changes
begin
to be
brought
in
it
is
around
that
time
so
early
eighth
century
that
we
have
the
first
appearance
in
manuscript
form
of
the
apostles
creed
the
way
we
read
it
now
that
fuller
one
that
you
have
that
doesn't
appear
as
that
we don't
have
evidence
of it
exactly
in that
form
until
the
eighth
century
so
that's
yeah
we're in the
eighth
century
now
sorry
about
that
yeah
Louis you
had a
question
no
okay
so
let me
give you
an
example
this
might
be
helpful
so
you'll
notice
that
they
have
in the
received
form
I believe
in God
the Father
Almighty
maker
or creator
of heaven
and earth
so that
phrase
maker
creator
of heaven
and earth
that's
that was
not part
of the
original
but
that was
in the
eighth
century
that was
in some
of these
other
creeds
so Rome's
thinking
do we
accept
that
oh
we have
no problem
with that
besides
it's a
phrase
that's
in the
Nicene
creed
anyway
why
would
we
have
any
trouble
adopting
that
doesn't
seem
too
racy
you know
it doesn't
seem
too risky
it's
in the
Nicene
creed
it's
not
unbiblical
yeah
that's
probably
the
fundamental
question
to ask
yeah
absolutely
so
so that's
one of them
and you'll
notice
that's
one of the
phrases
that gets
added
creator
of heaven
and earth
so
and
probably
they
assume
well you
know
we meant
that
anyway
when we
talked
about
God
the
father
almighty
father
also
meant
generator
of all
things
so
yeah
we
probably
meant
that
anyway
you know
and it's
nothing
strange
and it's
biblical
so why
wouldn't
we
take
that
yeah
we'll
take
it
we'll
add
that
that's
okay
we'll
add
that
any
demure
no
every
fort
the ace
take it
universally
there we
go
yeah
we'll
add this
so that
would be
an example
of some
of the
things that
they were
willing to
add
and
you know
perhaps
it can be
heard maybe
a rumble
of anti-gnosticism
again
gnostics
oh
creation
is
you know
god
is
never
going
to
have
any
sort
of
contact
with
the
material
universe
so if
he's
going
to
create
he's
got
to
have
all
these
intermediators
these
demiurgs
and all
that
you know
he
would
never
be
in
direct
contact
with
creation
that's
material
stuff
that's
yuck
that's
too
yucky
for
god
no
you're
absolutely
wrong
creator
of
heaven
and
earth
okay
and
heaven
and
earth
is
merism
if you
say
you know
the two
ends
of the
spectrum
includes
everything
in between
creator
of
everything
yeah
not only
that
when he
created
everything
he called
it good
called it
good
there you
go
yeah
in their
face
yep
there
you
go
got
that
absolutely
I think
there's
another
way
to
read
that
clause
though
and
that
is
as
a
concession
!
who
made
heaven
and
earth
well
God
the
father
right
well
I
think
Jesus
yeah
it's
that was
a lot
of the
debate
so
when
if you
look
in
proverbs
and
I
can't
get
into
this
too
much
now
and
this
is
hopefully
that
was
Tom's
glass
territory
one
of
the
arguments
that
Athanasius
made
was
Christ
is
wisdom
he
created
yes
the
father
created
but
through
wisdom
and
who
was
that
wisdom
that's
the
son
so
yes
you're
right
Arians
would
make
this
I
don't
think
that
this
would
have
been
a
concession
to
the
Arians
because
the
debate
would
well
yes
sure
the
father
was
involved
but
who
did
he
do
it
through
the
son
so
yes
this
is
very
unimportant
oh
it sounds
good to the
ear
creator
I
love that
yeah
antiphonal
yeah
yeah I like it
I mean
let's make
sure
that it's
true
you're
right
but
then
hey
I
have
nothing
against
it
sounding
sonorous
and lovely
cadences
what wonderful
rhythmic
cadences
well
let's
then
here
you notice
the addition
of Catholic
to Holy Church
Holy Catholic
Church
did you see
that
that was
added to
we're going
to get to
that in
just a
second
okay
again
addition
of Catholic
Church
that was
added
well
that's
also
founded
in the
Nicene Creed
so okay
no trouble
by the way
the term
simply means
universal
okay
it simply
means
universal
so it
comes from
the Greek
cathodicos
which is
comes from
the word
kata
according to
and holos
the whole
so the church
according to
the whole
that is
not just
a local
church
in Philippi
or a local
church in
Ephesus
but the whole
universal
church
that's what
the word
catholic
means
in this
confession
yeah
across time
and place
across time
and place
absolutely
so
and then
that final
phrase
life everlasting
that's kind of
reminiscent
to the Nicene
Creed
which ends
the life
of the world
to come
so
okay
no problem
with any of those
now
so nothing
new
nothing
new
and adopting
those
changes
but
there
were
a few
other
places
where there
was something
new
two in
particular
could use
some comment
and we'll
make some
quick comment
on that
yeah
well you
you
Argus I'd
noticed
one of them
he descended
into hell
okay
he descended
into hell
he Christ
so Christ's
descent
into hell
is by far
the most
controversial
assertion
of the
Apostles
Creed
you know
I tell people
that you
wait a minute
should that
even be
in the
Creed
wait
is it
even
biblical
he descended
into hell
and its
case continues
to be argued
and re-argued
today
so
what did
the phrase
originally
mean
well it's
interesting
that Rufinus
of Aquileia
the earliest
commentator
on the
Creed
so he's
writing about
307 to
309
it was his
opinion
that it
simply meant
he descended
into hell
he said
the hell
hell
is the
it's a
translation
of the Old
Testament
Sheol
translated
in Greek
as Hades
and in
English
hell
so
simply
the place
of the
dead
or the
grave
that's
what
Rufinus
thought
undifferentiated
underworld
the place
of the
dead
so it's
just another
way to
say
he died
so it's
it's
very likely
according to
Rufinus
that
that's
the way
that probably
at least
linguistically
he said
yeah
that's
probably
but
so we
could
understand
it
that way
but
the belief
that Christ
was active
during the
interval
between his
death and his
resurrection
his death
on the cross
and the
resurrection
and active
in the
underworld
was
commonplace
in the
earliest Christian
teaching and
preaching
so Ignatius
Polycarp
Irenaeus
Origen
Tertullian
Cyril
of Jerusalem
there are
quite a few
that think
this
so
what
according to
their
understanding
was Christ
doing
in hell
or the
underworld
what was he
doing
between his
crucifixion
and the
resurrection
okay
well
there were
two views
and they're
not incompatible
and sometimes
they were
blended or
mixed
one is
so think
of
heralding
and
harrowing
heralding
and harrowing
okay
heralding
that is
Christ
descended
into hell
to announce
his victory
over Satan
and his
demonic
denizens
and his
triumph for
his people
over death
and sin
so basically
an announcement
a heralding
Christ
is the
victor
I have
had victory
over
death
and hell
and Hades
opened
this gate
for
all those
who trust
in me
so that
was one
view
that they
thought
the other
harrowing
that is
taking some
out
okay
that is
Christ
actually
physically
went down
to hell
and liberated
the hell
imprisoned
particularly
that was
thought
old testament
saints
who were
kept in
bondage
kind of
in a
sheol
or the
bosom
of
Abraham
this
kind of
undifferentiated
place
of the
dead
and he
went down
there
and some
and then
preached
there
preached the
gospel
and some
even
suggest
that there
were those
not simply
the saints
who had
trusted
in God's
provision
but maybe
even some
others
that hadn't
before
they had a
chance to hear
the gospel
and they
responded to the
gospel
and he
was able
to take
them
out of
hell
so
that notion
was later
condemned
in a church
council
but it
was held
at least
by some
now
this might
strike some
as strange
who are
accustomed to
thinking
of salvation
in terms
of
wait
surely
everything
that needed
to happen
already
happened
on the
cross
what need
is there
to go
down
to hell
in any
of that
nothing
needed
there
surely
if
Jesus
took
on
all
what
I
deserved
and
hell
is
what
I
deserved
why
wouldn't
you
descend
into
hell
ah
okay
so we'll
get to
this in
just a
moment
this is
John
Calvin's
view
this is
John
Calvin's
view
yeah
and
I
think
that's
an
interesting
way
to
think
about
it
in
terms
of
the
early
church
many of
them thought
what a
wonderful
way to
express
Christus
victor
Christ
the
victor
he
has
fought
this great
battle
of our
enemies
the law
death
hell
satan
and he's
defeated
them
and he
announces
his triumph
and he
rescues
his own
from hell
so that's
how they
thought
about
this
and this
sort of
thing
was very
very precious
to them
and they
emphasize it
a lot
some of
you might
be thinking
of 1st
Peter 3
where
it talks
about
this
strange
description
of
went down
and preached
to those
who were held
in captive
Jesus in spirit
went down
and preached
to those
who were held
in captive
you think
oh maybe
there's some
biblical basis
for that
it's interesting
that the
early church
fathers
writing about
this
never seemed
to connect
this descent
into hell
with that
passage
they never
did
no
I think
Augustine
is the
first
to
bring
that
connection
Augustine
but
yes
Raul
while none
of us
would certainly
want to
mute
this
victory
motif
so radiantly
present
in the
scriptures
John Calvin
took the
phrase
he descended
into hell
to be
a
referring
to
Christ's
spiritual
sufferings
that is
Christ
on the
cross
bore
the
full
agony
of
hell
that
we
his
people
deserved
that
is
the
full
weight
of
God's
wrath
rightly
do
his
elect
so
that
phrase
he
descended
into
hell
is
Christ
on
the
cross
experienced
the
full
weight
of
wrath
and all
that
spiritual
affliction
that
is
hell
what
is
hell
it
is
what
sinners
deserve
and
Christ
experienced
that
he
descended
into
that
experience
on
the
cross
and
that
is
how
John
Calvin
took
that
he
writes
in
his
institutes
the
point
is
that
Christ
endured
the
torments
of
the
damned
in
his
soul
in
order
to
redeem
us
from
them
I
don't
think
Calvin's
is
probably
the
original
meaning
of
this
but
certainly
Calvin's
is a
glorious
truth
and
deeply
edifying
and
it's
what
I
hold
in
mind
when
I
say
the
apostles
creed
the
Heidelberg
catechism
follows
Calvin
in
this
question
44
of
the
Heidelberg
catechism
why
is there
added
he
descended
into
hell
answer
that
in
my
greatest
temptations
I
may
be
assured
and
wholly
comfort
myself
in
this
that
my
Lord
Jesus
Christ
by
his
inexpressible
anguish
pains
terrors
and
hellish
agonies
in which
he was
plunged
during
all
his
sufferings
but
especially
on the
cross
has
delivered
me
from
the
anguish
and
torment
of
hell
he
descended
into
hell
Zwingli
omitted
the phrase
from the
creed
as
non-essential
or regarded
it as
redundant
simply
it just
means
death
so
there's
that
first
kind
of
novel
phrase
here's
the
second
a
brief
word
on
that
it's
the
communion
of
saints
and
it
might
seem
that
this
would
be
surely
straightforward
but
in
fact
it's
been
subject
to
some
pretty
fluctuating
meanings
that have
been
read
into
this
and
part
of
the
ambiguity
is
the
Latin
for
the
Latin
Sanctorum
can
be
taken
either
as
masculine
that is
holy
saints
or
holies
it
can
be
taken
either
as
masculine
meaning
holy
ones
people
or
neuter
meaning
holy
things
holy
things
so
it
does
seem
that
the
original
and early
meaning
was
taken
to be
the
former
the
fellowship
of
holy
persons
and
it
was
understood
expansively
as
the
fellowship
of
all
the
saints
!
across
all
ages
both
heaven
and
earth
the
whole
company
of
the
elect
maybe
even
thrown
in
some
of
the
elect
angels
so
that's
the
communion
of
the
saints
but
about
the
8th
century
there
came
to be
a
different
understanding
that was
thrust
to the
fore
based
upon
a
neuter
reading
of
saints
communion
with
the
saints
in
other
words
communion
with
holy
things
as
indicating
the
sacraments
so
some
people
thought
this
was
a
reference
to
the
sacraments
so
and there
was a
late
tendency
also
to
regard
saints
and
communion
of
saints
to be
restricted
to the
narrow
few
who were
canonized
saints
and martyrs
but
this
is
not
original
and
it's
alien
to
scriptural
usage
so
where
this
is
important
it
should
be
rejected
so
perhaps
let me
end
with a
final
word
on
its
enduring
value
Martin
Luther
writes
in his
large
catechism
this
symbol
of the
Apostolic
Apostles
Confession
this
symbol
is at
the
heart
of
the
Christian
doctrine
whoever
can
say
it
from
the
heart
has
all
that
is
necessary
for
salvation
and
Calvin
would
concur
and
writes
in his
institutes
the
creed
contains
nothing
which
is
not
drawn
from
the
pure
word
of
God
and
comprehends
the
full
sum
of
salvation
J.
D.
Kelly
the
great
scholar
of
early
Christianity
and
especially
the
creeds
writes
the
Apostles
creed
is
above
all
a
declaration
of
belief
in
the
triune
God
and
his
saving
activity
it
is
primarily
doxological
rather than
speculative
it is
certainly
so
and for
this
among other
reasons
it has
found a
lasting
place
in the
worship
of
Christian
churches
across
time
and
place
and
a
firm
place
in
the
hearts
of
the
faithful
all
right
we
better
end
yeah
we're
late
we're
late
sorry