Mor ephrem,
Sure, we can use the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed as a measuring stick of who is and who is not following the true teachings of Christ, but only up to an extent.
The reason the Creed was composed was to INDICATE what teachings was correct and what wasn't, because the Arians were imposing their OPINIONS and FALSE TEACHINGS about CHRIST'S nature. They allowed NO EXTENTS to qualify OUTSIDE of the CREED.
Not only do the Eastern Orthodox confess it, but so do the Orientals, the Nestorians, the Roman Catholics, and various Protestant groups.
The EASTERN Orthodox are distinguished as a GROUP in reference to other DENOMINATIONS. What we understand as the EASTERN Orthodox is the line of APOSTOLIC success that has PRESERVED the teachings of the APOSTLES. The other denominations have either, added or removed from the CREED.
I know more about the Roman Catholics, so I can say that they have already taught falsely, JUST in reference to the Creed. It's called the FILIOQUE. They maintain that the HOLY SPIRIT proceeds from the Father and the Son, whereas, it was established by the APOSTLES and written in the CREED that the HOLY SPIRIT proceeds from the FATHER and with the FATHER and SON, is worshipped and glorified.
When one of the bishops under the See of Rome, I believe, in Spain, started saying it that way, during the point in the liturgy of professing the faith, it caused concern in the Eastern Sees and a long, unsuccessful attempt to have the statement cease. Hence, therefore and a few years later...voila...the Great Schism. So obviously, the change in the wording, alone, of the faith caused a division. This already looks like the consequence of a bad choice.
I guarentee you that if you examine the other religions, you mentioned, under the scrutiny of the light of truth, you will see that they either, added or extracted from the CREED, which is the confession of the faith of the way Christianity should be. Thereafter, the beliefs give you a whole different result. It's like having a special recipe. You give the recipe to 5 different people, they innovate on it and the result is a totally different kind of soup. They HAD the original recipe, but decided to change it. With soup, I don't mind, as long as it's edible. With the Christian faith, it's a spiritual tragedy.
On the Creed, we can all agree.
That doesn't make any sense. If you talk to these different religious groups you mentioned, they will disagree with certain lines or add their own. So there is no agreement.
Where we disagree is on things not contained in the Creed, and so while the Creed is an expression of the Apostolic faith, it is the totality of the Apostolic faith that we must look at and use as a measuring stick.
Maybe, I'm misunderstanding you, but the Creed states "And In One, Holy Catholic, Apostolic Church." The indication of the Apostles means that these Holy Fathers were carrying on the teachings from the Apostles, that Christ, Himself, taught them.
What do you mean by the "totality" of the Apostic faith. The CREED was written down on paper or whatever, to RECORD the Apostles' teachings that these men and those before them, knew in faith and passed down by oral tradition. That's why they had to write it down...so that the people would not start getting confused because others were saying it differently. Tell me something....when you sign your name to a document, that pretty much seals the deal, doesn't it?
Now if you don't have the trust of these men who wrote the CREED to specify what the Apostles taught(which was taught to them by Christ, during all those long sessions into the morning...where I believe a man fell out of window because he fell asleep; ), then I don't think anybody's explanations will satisfy your soul.
People have made religion a forum of intellectual debate. It's not that at all, but I guess your PROFESSOR wouldn't understand that too. Coming to the faith in Christ with the true teachings is like...how can I say...an assuredness that NOW I am where I should be. Even if I am not studied in Theology, I can make definite statements about my faith, because I'm LIVING it, I'm not STUDYING it.
Nestorians do, and yet they disagree with you on other points.
Well, if it's outside of the CREED then the disagreements can go on forever. But, that is not the measuring stick to follow, because it's just a point of opinion. It can go on forever. There has to be one common denominating factor that is stable for measurement, otherwise, there is no consistency in measurement. It all becomes hypothetical...and that can drive a person crazy. We need final answers. Scientic and moral.
If your professor is more interested in philosphy, then you are in a tornado of ideas. And we all know what damage tornados can do. But, the truth is like the sun, it is ALWAYS there even if it is obscured by the clouds. WE KNOW IT IS THERE. But, unfortunately, there are people who focus just as far as the clouds and that's all they see.
And yet, that is what seems to be the case.
By whose opinion? Your comment is mis-leading. Back it up. I know you gave names of saints, outside of Orthodoxy, but where did you get those names from?
Maybe you are not clear about what Orthodoxy means. It's not established by a certain group of people. It means: "the straight path". It was used before the Great Schism. But, after the See of Rome caused the Great Schism, the Eastern Church had to distinguish themselves according to their confession. Don't look at the hierarchs in position now. They have their own agenda. The True Faith is Christian, which is upheld with the CREED. It is our guiding light through spiritual life.
Religion became a word indicating different beliefs. But, those who are of the Apostolic line of succession have always been following that straight path. The other "beliefs" have deviated away from that path. Ever get lost? Take a wrong turn? It's amazing how the words that God gave us, can be literal and metaphorical.
Joanna
I agree with you when you say:
Unfortunately, it would be months before it would do me any good as it relates to the discussion on this particular thread... did you have anything in mind that you can quote Anastasios?