-8 Min Read
Introduction
At the turn of the New Year, we arrive at the Year 2025. This places us 1700 years from the time when Emperor Constantine called a council together in Nicaea in an attempt to finish the debate over who exactly the Son of God is. This would mark one of the most significant moments in Church history by producing the Nicene Creed (click here to read). What developed 1700 years ago at the council of Nicaea would forever shape Trinitarian theology, so much so that we would refer to those who are orthodox in their understanding of the Trinity as ‘Pro-Nicene‘.
The Arian Controversy
To appreciate the Nicene Creed we need to appreciate the context in which it was born. Arianism was on the move. Arianism gets its name from Arius (256 – 336 A.D.), a pastor from Libya. Arius made his mark in 318 A.D. in Alexandria with his assertions and claims concerning the Son of God [1]. Arius began teaching that the Son of God (the Logos) is not the same in essence as the Father but was created by the Father out of nothing. He proposed that the Son is the chiefest of all beings created by the Father but is not in fact divine.
Origen of Alexandria (185 – 253 A.D.) helped advance Trinitarian theology while still contributing some errors in the process. An example would be that Origen helped formulate the term “ontological Trinity,” meaning that the Father, Son, and Spirit all share the same essence. He would write concerning the Son; “As light. . . could never exist without splendor, so neither can the Son be understood to exist without the Father” [2]. But then would teach that there were degrees of divinity in the Son [3], (making the Son less than the Father).
Not being pleased with either of Origen’s claims, Arius sought to defend the monotheism of the Scriptures (God is one) by stripping the deity of Jesus Christ the Son of God in this pursuit [4]. In Arius’ thinking, it made more sense for the Son to be a creation of God than to be truly God. Arius famously wrote that “The Son has a beginning, but. . . God is without beginning” [5]. For Origen to claim that the Son was also divine was to believe in two Gods according to Arius and his disciples [6].
Arius put forth his theories and doctrines in the form of catchy tunes and would even have dockworkers, school children, and those who were in the marketplaces singing aloud all of his controversial talking points. This came to a head in 320 A.D. when the Bishop of Alexandria, Alexander, formed a synod and had Arius condemned as a false teacher and excommunicated from the church.
But Arius had already established contacts in the East. Arius retreated to Palestine and while there found much support. Over the next few years, Arianism would begin to spread again and gain much momentum throughout the Roman Empire. A favorable reading of this time in history would show that most who “agreed” with Arius were more confused than convinced [7].
It is in this context that Constantine would call for the council of Nicaea. Constantine was aware of Arianism and its effect on the church and so sought to rectify the issue. The Arian controversy stands to be the greatest theological controversy of all Church history.
The Making of The Creed
Emporer Constantine called the first ecumenical council at Nicaea in 325. About 300 bishops were summoned to attend this synod along with even more presbyters and deacons. For Constantine, a united Church was the true symbol of unity in the Empire. The majority of these 300 bishops would travel from all over the Eastern Empire, while a few would come from the West, all to settle this dispute of who the Son of God is. Eusebius sets the scene so well.
“When the whole assembly was seated with proper dignity, silence fell on all before the emperor arrived. First, three members of his family entered in order of rank, and then others came in, heralding his own approach. These were not the soldiers or guards who usually accompanied him, but friends in the faith. Then everyone stood up as the sign was given that the emperor was about to enter; and at last, he himself made his way through the midst of the assembly, looking like some heavenly angel of God, covered in a garment which glittered as if it were radiant with light, reflecting the glow of his purple robe, adorned with the brilliant splendour of gold and precious stones. When he reached the upper end of the seats, he remained standing at first; and when a servant had brought a low chair of wrought gold for him, he did not sit down until the bishops signalled him to do so. And then the whole assembly sat down.”
– Eusebius [8]
For this council to be deemed a success would come down to whether a consensus could be made concerning the deity of Christ. Constantine, though not active in the debate of the synod, did play the role of a chairman of sorts, and with him was Hosius of Cordova. Hosius was a bishop from the West and was serving as Constantine’s advisor. Hosius, like most theologians from the West, firmly held to the full deity of the Son.
There is a legend that Saint Nicholas of Myra, (also known today as Santa Clause), was also present and slapped Arius in the face. This more than likely did not happen, given Nicholas was not mentioned to be present at the council nor is there any record of Arius or an Arian heretic being slapped. This tale pops up in writings and even paintings starting in the 14th century.
After presiding over the early sessions of the council, Constantine would speak to the 300 bishops one final time. His final instructions were for them to come to an agreement, stating that division in the church was worse than war [9]. After making this final point he retired from the council and left it in the hands of these church leaders.
The first order of business was done before the council was even assembled. Concerning the validity of the synod’s decision to condemn Arius as a heretic, (the one that Bishop Alexander called in Alexandria in 320 A.D.), there was almost total agreement in it among the 300 bishops. It appeared to be merely a formality that they called Arius to stand before them and give an account of his teachings.
Arius, who had little to almost no support, would go on to confess that he believed that the Son was a created being, who did not always exist, and was capable of changing to the level of becoming perfect and bearing sin and that He could alter his nature from divine to human. The council all declared this teaching to be blasphemous.
All that was left to do was to then form a statement. When we use the words “statement”, “confession”, or “creed”, we are to remember that the church has often used these words interchangeably. To state something that we believe is to declare what we confess. To confess what we believe is to state clearly what we hold to.
There were two statements drafted and proposed. The first one was by Eusebius of Caesarea, (church historian and bishop), and was worded in such a way that the council deemed an Arian could still affirm it. The second statement put forth is what we now have today. The language of the Nicene Creed is undeniably anti-Arian.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God.
begotten of the Father before all worlds;
God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God;
begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father,
by whom all things were made.
This statement was debated over the course of several days and the emperor’s patience had expired. Constantine demanded that the statement be adopted and thus the Nicene Creed emerged [10]. In the year of our Lord, 325, the council of Nicaea put forth a creed that to this day is a standard of orthodoxy in Roman, Eastern, and most Protestant churches throughout the world.
“Anathema”
Along with the creed, the council added a series of anathemas. Anathema comes from the Greek word anathema, which means “given over”. When someone is anathematized, it means that they are announced to be outside of the church. Though the Greek word is not found in 1 Corinthians 5:5 and 1 Timothy 1:20, the application is the same.
deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.
– 1 Corinthians 5:5 (LSB)
Among these are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan, so that they will be taught not to blaspheme.
– 1 Timothy 1:20 (LSB)
This is something much more than church discipline. Church discipline is what you do to someone who is in the church but is not behaving as a Christian. You may bar them from the Lord’s Table and even excommunicate them because of their unrepentance all the while they may still be a true believer who will return after this time of discipline. But pronouncing an anathema upon someone is saying that they are not a Christian at all and never were because of what they believe.
The anathemas that were attached to the Nicene Creed read;
“As for those who say, There was a time when He [the Logos] was not; and, He was not before He was created; and, He was created out of nothing, or out of another essence or thing; and, The Son of God is created, or changeable, or can alter – the holy, catholic and apolstolic Church anathamatises those who say such things.”
Arius was given a choice; he could either recant his heretical beliefs and sign the statement or maintain his beliefs and be declared “outside of the church.” He, along with two of his friends, Secundus of Ptolemais and Theonas of Marmarica, refused to sign the statement and were sent by Constantine into exile [11]. The rest who came in support of Arius recanted and signed the statement.
Conclusion
The Nicene Creed has fallen on hard times recently. This past year at the 2024 Southern Baptist Convention the motion to adopt the Nicene Creed never was seriously considered. Even when some of the presidential candidates were asked about adopting the creed as the official creed of the SBC, they humorously appeared afraid of the language in the creed. We need not fear it but understand it. Next week we will further discuss the theology of the creed and grow in our appreciation of it.
Works Cited
[1] Bruce L. Shelley, Church History In Plain Language, (Zondervan Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2021), 128
[2] Gregg R. Allison, Historical Theology, (Zondervan Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2011), 237
[3-4] Nick Needham, 2000 Years of Christ’s Power: Vol. 1: The Age of the Early Church Fathers – 1st to 6th Century, (Christian Focus Publications, Scotland, U.K., 2016), 137, 219
[5] Bruce L. Shelley, Church History In Plain Language, (Zondervan Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2021), 128
[6-7] Nick Needham, 2000 Years of Christ’s Power: Vol. 1: The Age of the Early Church Fathers – 1st to 6th Century, (Christian Focus Publications, Scotland, U.K., 2016), 221
[8] Bruce L. Shelley, Church History In Plain Language, (Zondervan Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2021), 130. and Nick Needham, 2000 Years of Christ’s Power: Vol. 1: The Age of the Early Church Fathers – 1st to 6th Century, (Christian Focus Publications, Scotland, U.K., 2016), 221-222
[9-10] Bruce L. Shelley, Church History In Plain Language, (Zondervan Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2021), 130,131
[11] Nick Needham, 2000 Years of Christ’s Power: Vol. 1: The Age of the Early Church Fathers – 1st to 6th Century, (Christian Focus Publications, Scotland, U.K., 2016), 223