How a 4th-century council reshaped Christianity forever, defining key doctrines, settling fierce theological debates, and uniting the church under the Roman Empire’s influence.
The Council of Nicaea, which took place in 325 AD, was one of the most important events in early Christian history. This gathering of bishops, initiated by the Roman Emperor Constantine, was meant to address growing disagreements within Christianity, primarily over the nature of Jesus Christ. The decisions made during the council would shape Christianity as we know it today, laying the foundation for church doctrine and influencing Christian beliefs for centuries to come.
At the heart of the council was a serious theological debate. Early Christians, despite sharing a belief in Jesus Christ, didn’t agree on many crucial details about his divinity. Some believed Jesus was fully divine, while others thought of him as a human being with divine attributes. This disagreement wasn’t a trivial matter; it threatened the unity of the Christian church.
Behind the Council
Before Nicaea, the Christian church was growing rapidly, especially in the Roman Empire. However, the religion wasn’t universally accepted. Many pagan traditions still held a strong influence, and various Christian groups had differing beliefs. These disagreements were partly fueled by a lack of official, universally accepted doctrine. Christianity was becoming more popular, but there was no central authority to resolve conflicts between competing views.
The conflict that led to the council was mainly about the relationship between God the Father and Jesus Christ the Son. This debate centered around a man named Arius, a priest from Alexandria in Egypt. Arius argued that Jesus wasn’t fully divine but rather a created being, distinct from God the Father. His view was known as Arianism.
Arius’s teachings spread quickly and attracted many followers, causing division in the church. On the other side of the argument were those who believed in the full divinity of Jesus Christ, like Bishop Alexander of Alexandria and his supporter Athanasius. They argued that Jesus was co-eternal with the Father, meaning that he had always existed and was fully divine, just like God.
This debate wasn’t just a theological disagreement. The Church was gaining influence, and if two major factions within Christianity couldn’t settle their differences, it would undermine the unity of the Christian community. Constantine, who had recently converted to Christianity, saw the potential for this conflict to destabilize his empire. He called for a council to settle the matter once and for all and bring peace and unity to both the empire and the church.
The Council’s Participants
The Council of Nicaea was held in Nicaea (modern-day Iznik, Turkey) in 325 AD. Constantine summoned bishops from all over the Christian world to attend and create a unified stance on the nature of Christ. Approximately 300 bishops from different regions and backgrounds participated in the council. Some of the most notable figures included Athanasius, who would become a staunch opponent of Arianism, and Hosius of Cordoba, who served as a close advisor to Constantine.
Though the bishops came from diverse regions and cultures, the emperor took a hands-on approach to the council. He encouraged discussion and debate but insisted on a decision that would end the conflict and bring about church unity.
The Nicene Creed
With the affirmation of the vast majority of bishops — around 220–250 out of 318 — the Nicene Creed was created, a statement of faith that clearly defined the nature of Jesus Christ. The Nicene Creed declared that Jesus Christ is ‘of the same substance’ (homoousios) as God the Father, directly rejecting Arianism, which argued that Jesus was a created being and not fully divine. By declaring that Jesus was of the same substance as the Father, the council established that Jesus was co-eternal with the Father and fully divine.
The Nicene Creed also made it clear that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine, emphasizing that he wasn’t merely a human being who later gained divine qualities but rather the Son of God from the beginning.
This doctrinal statement became the foundation for mainstream Christian belief. Over time, most Christian denominations adopted the Nicene Creed as the official statement of faith, and it remains central to Christian worship today. The Creed helped clarify Christian belief, settling many disputes about the nature of Christ.
The Arian Controversy Continues
Despite the Council’s efforts to settle the debate, Arianism didn’t simply disappear after Nicaea. In fact, it continued to be a source of division within the church for many years. Several emperors after Constantine, including Constantius II (Constantine’s son), were sympathetic to Arianism and worked to promote it within the Roman Empire. Arianism persisted in various parts of the empire, especially in the Eastern part, for several decades.
However, the Nicene Creed gradually gained more acceptance, and by the end of the 4th century, Arianism had largely been defeated. Key bishops, including Athanasius, played an essential role in fighting Arianism and defending the Nicene position.
The Lasting Impact of Nicaea
The Council of Nicaea was a political and social turning point, as well as a theological milestone. The decision to define Christian doctrine with the Nicene Creed helped bring stability to the rapidly growing Christian church, which was spreading throughout the Roman Empire.
In addition to resolving theological disputes, the council also set a precedent for how the church would handle future doctrinal issues. The idea of gathering bishops from around the world to discuss and resolve key matters of faith became a regular practice in the church. This set the stage for future ecumenical councils, such as the Councils of Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon, which continued to define Christian doctrine and address challenges to the faith.
The council also helped establish the role of the emperor in Christian affairs. Constantine’s involvement in the council made it clear that the state had a role in supporting and enforcing church decisions. This influence would continue for centuries, as the church and the state often worked together to maintain order and promote Christianity.
Before You Go
The Council of Nicaea was undeniably a key moment in Christian history. By settling the debate over the nature of Christ and creating the Nicene Creed, the council shaped the future of Christianity. It brought clarity to Christian doctrine, unified the church, and set the stage for the future development of Christian theology. While the Arian controversy didn’t immediately disappear, the decisions made at Nicaea ensured that the church would eventually overcome these theological divisions.
Today, the Nicene Creed continues to be a central part of Christian worship, and the legacy of the Council of Nicaea remains influential in shaping Christian belief. The council demonstrated the power of unity, both within the church and in the broader Roman Empire, and helped ensure that Christianity would continue to grow and thrive in the centuries that followed.
However, if we consider theological debates as a search for truth, doesn’t the Nicene Creed mean ‘let’s end our search and decide what the facts are,’ which may or may not reflect the truth, once and for all, to keep the church together?
Sources
- The First Council of Nicaea
https://www.britannica.com/event/First-Council-of-Nicaea-325 - Arianism
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Arianism - Nicene Creed
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Nicene-Creed - Council of Nicaea
https://www.bartehrman.com/council-of-nicaea/
Comments:
James Gleaton
When I was growing up in a Southern Baptist environment, I never heard of the Nicene Creed, or any of the other creeds. We read the Bible and were expected to believe in the inerrancy of the Bible.
At age 20, I did my own intensive study of the Bible, and realized that the doctrine of inerrancy was inherently dishonest. I left the Southern Baptist church soon thereafter.
Being exposed to the various creeds in my 20’s, starting at age 26, I soon found that I could not honestly declare them. The Apostles’ Creed, for example, skips from ‘born of the Virgin Mary’ to ‘suffered under Pontius Pilate’, omitting what, to me, is the heart of the Gospel, the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth about how to live with fellow human beings.
I cannot subscribe to any of the traditional creeds. Their omission of Jesus’ teachings is just one reason. Another reason is their emphasis on things that cannot be demonstrated to be true – the miracles, the resurrection, afterlife, etc.
My Christian faith is centered on what Jesus of Nazareth (according to the Gospel writers) taught about how to live with fellow human beings: “So always treat others as you would like them to treat you; that is the Law and the Prophets.”
Robert W Ahrens
And that faith of yours is repeated by other religions, teaching that same idea. Christianity was not the first religion to come up with that thought.
Mark
The Golden Rule – treat others as you would like to be treated – predates Christianity by as much as 2,000 years. It’s not really a christian teaching at all.
Resistance is Futile
Growing up in the Lutheran Church, we had to memorize the Apostles creed and the Nicene creed. I couldn’t tell you what either one of them said today, that was 60 years ago
Robert W Ahrens
However, if we consider theological debates as a search for truth, doesn’t the Nicene Creed mean ‘let’s end our search and decide what the facts are,’ which may or may not reflect the truth.
Let us not forget that today, there isn’t “one” church, but over 45,000 separate denominations, many with central differences.
Patrick Prescott
The conflict between Catholic, Arian and Nestorian saw much bloodshed. The Nestorians retreated out of the Roman Empire and into the Parthia/Persian empire. Mohommed learned of Christ and the Bible from Nestorians who believed Jesus was a prophet only and thus was included in the Quran.
Taminad Crittenden
Eh, no. This whole accusation that the councils “rewrote” anything ignores St Ignatius of Antioch and other early saints who clearly demonstrated the beliefs that the councils later affirmed. For a rich podcast resource that repeatedly dives into this and similar issues showing how your modernist take is ignorant of history and reality: https://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/lordofspirits/
Cam Cairns
I see by the comments here that Christians still bicker about unknowable, ineffable things of no temporal significance.
Come to think of it, doesn’t that pretty much sum up religion?
Mr. Bruce – The Black Jew – Modern Day Philosopher
Jesus is a greek/roman invention. He was not real and he never was. There is no real evidence of Jesus Christ! Why? The white man made god in HIS OWN likeness and image and called him Jesus Christ and the minorities like you believe a perfect white man in heaven is god. Man create god, not god create man. No thanks! I tend to disagree. Peace In!
Malicyoung
Thanks for reading the article! What are your thoughts on the Nicene Creed? Let me know in the comments!
Your article is an informative and timely reminder that many of the most fundamental creeds of Christianity didn’t come straight from the lips of the Almighty. They were mulled, debated and decided upon by humans.
Daniel Knight
If Jesus was begotten, how can He be co-eternal with the Father?
That never made sense to me.
It also doesn’t make sense that we should settle with what these individuals concluded was the nature of Jesus.
I believe that Jesus is God, but not while He preached. He did not fully become God until after the Resurrection, when He ascended to the right hand of the Father.
Jim Clendinen
Sorry, but as a person who studied the background of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed on a graduate level, I have to say you need better sources to draw some of the conclusions you have. You have made assertions that are subject to question, to say the least. The background to the Arian controversy is much more complex that you relate.
Graham Stuart
Excellent concise summary. Thank you
Joe Elwell
Time for another Nicene council, in my opinion. Mainstream Christianity, in the Western world, is slowly dying out and a principle cause is the insistence on believing the ‘supernatural’ aspects of Christianity – something that most people today find impossible to believe.
The worst thing, for me, is that believing in the supernatural stories is NOT required in order to understand the incredibly powerful message of Jesus.
So, time for a new Council, this time deciding more in the direction of the Arianists – Jesus was an Incredible prophet – a wise man who brought to the world a message we would all benefit by understanding.
Andy Chalkley
Well said. I am a man of logic, and struggle with all the mystical stuff. However, I reason that Christianity is an excellent religion.
I have reasoned that there is a place in the human brain for a ‘god-like’ figure. I can thus accept people’s belief in God.
The main problem I have with Christianity is that it makes people gullible. We can be propagandized into war or propagandized into our own demise.
Ps
It brought ‘clarity’ to Christian doctrine.
I don’t know if “clarity” is the right word, considering how incomprehensible the Nicaean Creed is. Perhaps “consistency” instead?
Murray Leonard Davis
Keep researching, with open minds,
Jeff Tan
Teaching authority does go a long way to explain why the creeds hold significance. The Apostles and their successors, bishops, were taught that they exercise authority. This lends a living voice that persists in every generation, as intended. “He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” (Luke 10:16 RSV-CE) “I will build my Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:18-19 RSV-CE) “But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the Church; and if he refuses to listen even to the Church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 18:16-18 RSV-CE)
Cedric Johnson, PhD
Sounds like more of a political document than a statement of faith with an emphasis on thought and dogma rather than direct experience with the Divine.
Alan Stevens
A disastrous move which defined the Christian faith in terms of, ‘what you believe,’ (orthodoxy) as opposed to following Jesus & living out your faith (orthopraxy).
Elizabeth Ann Lee French
However, if we consider theological debates as a search for truth, doesn’t the Nicene Creed mean ‘let’s end our search and decide what the facts are,’ which may or may not reflect the truth, once and for all, to keep the church together?
Exactly! Thank you!
Gregory W Johnson
Yes, we have thousands of Christian denominations. The vast majority of them actually agree on those doctrinal statements found in the Nicene Creed,. That’s amazing.
Gregory W Johnson
Really enjoyed this thoughtful article. Oh, another participant in the Council may have been Nicholas of Myra—a bishop by then—better known today as Saint Nicholas. Yes, that Saint Nicholas! There’s a lot we don’t know about those early centuries of Christianity and the individuals who played key roles. We should be thankful for their willingness to work together and hammer out the difficult doctrinal issues they faced. We could use some of that today.
Alan Macpherson
Illuminating and thought-provoking – thank you.
Dave Volek
Another “unity” feature was how the bishops were selected.
In the east and of the more Arianistic, the members of the church elected the presbyters and the presbyters elected the bishop, a two-tiered electoral structure.
At the Council, the top-down Roman approach was made mandatory for all churches.
Steve Ruis
Re “Constantine, who had recently converted to Christianity . . .” Uh, no. The “evidence” for Constantine’s conversion is largely cooked up by Christian apologists (the most popular story was that he converted on his death bed). The capper is that when Constantine died, he left explicit instructions on how he was to be deified according to the Roman cult, to become a god, too. Sound Christian to you?
And it seems at every crux in Christian theology, the stupid branch is chosen. Imagine a preexistent Jesus being squeezed out of a woman’s womb, fully cognizant and then living as an infant, shitting his nappies and suckling his mother’s breasts and all of the other experiences of a human child. Yeah, that’s believable.
The “father” was fully capable of creating fully functioning adult human beings (remember Adam and Eve?) so why would he make Jesus go through 30 years of the life of a disgusting human being in order to deliver a message an angel could have delivered (angel means messenger, remember)?
Arthur Werry
“Rewrote” here is a terrible choice of words… and contradicted by your correct use of the term “established.”
