The Nicene Creed: The Arian Controversy

The theological differences were some of the biggest reason why the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches split. The Eastern churches had theological roots in Greek philosophy and the Western churches had theologies that constructed on their Roman law (“Schism of 1054”, 2014, para. 3). A strong issue that the two churches had was the theological proposition of the placement and addition of “the Son” to the Roman creed. The Roman churches included the “Father and the Son” in the Nicene creed without consulting the Eastern church while the Eastern church only used the Father. The Orthodox Church believe it should have been written with “the Father” proceeded by the Holy Spirit.

As a result, fellowship, prayer, Bible study, worship, and most importantly salvation in its purest form can be discerned and acted upon correctly. In addition, a further understanding can be thus gained regarding the person of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. Finally, heresies and heretical groups or beliefs can lead God’s followers astray from the truth and create an improper understanding, and thus relationship with God. Positions past and present have, and are, attempting to mislead Christians about the Trinity. A skewed view of the Trinity can result in a view of God as either divinely apart from creation or simply a better version of all the best attributes of humans. Some positions even take away from the Divinity of Jesus Christ. All of these views severely diminish who God is and alters a proper and true relationship and worship. It is a necessity that these errant views be exposed as a hindrance to God in order not to mislead God’s followers. Likewise a Biblically sound explanation of the Trinity is needed. As a result, a true and pure knowledge of the concept of the Trinity is crucially needed to understand God and be obedient to the Bible.

Many believe that the writings of early Church Fathers were lectured to different sects. In fact, one may assume that there are Similarities and differences between Tertullian and Justin Martyr. Particularly, let’s compare Tertullian’s and Justin Martyr perspective of faith, reason, and philosophy! Justin Martyr is Known as the defender of the faith (Tony lane), (p.10) He looked for truth in Greek philosophy. Likewise, his apology is in defense of the Christian faith and belief of Christianity. Of the writings that subsist, his First Apology (c. 155 c.e.; English translation, 1861) contains a resilient appeal for justice lectured to Antoninus. In that work, he clarifies Christian morals to influence his reader of Christian faithfulness and honesty. However, also central to this writing is his claim that Hebrew prophecy and Greek philosophy, both informed by the divine Logos (the Word), pointed to the coming of Christ. Through such dispute, he facilitated to institute the early Christian theme which faith is greater than Greek philosophy and is the result of Judaic belief. In Justin’s awareness, merely those who were controlled by fears failed to recognize these facts. His Second Apology (c.

The Council of Nicaea, however, rejected Arianism and affirmed that Jesus was not created like all other things were. They said that Jesus and God share the same divine substance, which means that Jesus is one with God the Father. Essentially, Jesus is God. Saint Athanasius, who was a bishop of Alexandria at the time of the Nicene council, shared a similar theology to that set out in the council. Athanasius

In 325, the Council of Nicea set out to formally characterize the relationship of the Son to the Father, in light of the dubious lessons of Arius. Driven by Bishop Athanasius, the gathering confirmed the precept of the Trinity as conventionality and censured Arius ' showing that Christ was the first making of God. The ideology received by the committee depicted Christ as "God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance (homoousios) with the Father."

By the time of the third century theologian, Origen, the concept of God as espoused by Greek philosophers’ prevailed in the then current Christian theology.

In the 4th century there are different schools of thought that were developed in Antioch, were they try to literarily interpret the Scriptures with a great deal of emphasis on the historical context of Trinity. Arius who is also known as Nicene, came up with the Nicene Creed by arguing the fact that Jesus was not God, and the Father by itself is true God. Base on the fact that God created Jesus, Arius was able to support his argument with the books of (Proverbs 8:22 and John 14:28) “the Father is greater than I” as a proof.

Nonetheless, Constantine held a meeting at Nicaea in 325 and invited around 318 bishops to resolve the dispute (Hangen). The result was nothing close to what Brown claims to be a “relatively close vote” (Brown 204). Out of all the bishops, only two refused to sign the Nicene Creed that recognized Jesus as the Son of God (Barnett). Brown’s statement is absurd and clearly misleading. His assertion that questions Jesus’s divinity because of the “close vote” at the Council of Nicaea is inconsistent with historical context.

The Nicene Creed is the creed or profession of faith that was adopted in the city of Nicaea by the first ecumenical council, which met there in the year 325. At that time, the text ended after the words "We believe in the Holy Spirit", after which an anathema was added. The doctrine of the Trinity is commonly expressed as: "One God, three Persons”, but this word "Trinity" does not appear in the Bible. So the doctrine is formally defined in the Nicene Creed, which declares Jesus to be: "God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father." in 325, the Council of Nicea set out to officially define the relationship of the Son to the Father, in response to the controversial teachings of

When the Nicene Creed was created and finalized in 381 A.D., there were many heresies under the umbrella of Christianity. The Nicene Creed seeked to address these heresies and remove them from mainstream worship. One of the many heresies in this time was Arianism.

On the other hand, Athanasius, the leader of the bishops in the west, claimed that the Father and Son were equal and of the same substance. In 325, as a mediator, Constantine called together a council of bishops at Nicaea in Asia Minor. While condemning Arius and his teachings, the council declared the complete equality of God the Father and the Son. The teaching that Father and Son were made up "of one substance" became part of the Nicene Creed, the statement that helped to unite Christianity. The council addressed other issues as well, including the method for consecrating bishops.

Colossians 1:19 states, “For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell” and Colossians 2:9 states, “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily”. These verses directly refute the stance of the Arians. The Arian following became so prevalent that Constantine called the first ecumenical council, Council of Nicea. This council gave parameters that God is three persons, God is one substance, each of the three persons is fully God, and the three persons exist at the same time. In the end the Arian belief was condemned.

The third section dissects the formation of the New Testament with more historical context and views of other writings defined as Gnostic writing. Bruce explains the spoken words of the apostles carried as much authority as their written words and gives an in depth explanation how the Gospels and Pauline writings were viewed by the Church Fathers. The rest of the section demonstrates the Church Fathers and their views of what was to be considered scripture and the councils that affirmed the inspired scripture.

This heretical view is further fought against through Athanasius’ extensive focus on Jesus’ death and the implications that this had on humanity as told by the Bible (Young, 2010, p.55); Romans (10:9) explicitly states Jesus is the Lord and the only route to salvation. So it can be argued, if Jesus is not God, as Arius suggests, then it is not possible for humanity to reach salvation, which results in diminishment of the purpose of Christian faith. Thus, it is acceptable to assume that the Nicene Creed’s assertion of the homoousious relationship of God and Jesus, as a rejection of Arianism, was essential to early Christian theology because it provided certainty for the establishment of the faith.

One of the most important events in church history includes the Council of Nicea. The First Council of Nicea happened in 325 and involved the first gathering of Christian bishops and the Roman Empire not as enemies but as allies. The bishops wanted to solve the dispute over Arianism. Arianism is the belief that Christ was more than human but something less than God. Arianism taught the people that Jesus