Chapter 10: The Major Turning Point in Christian History. When the parties involved refused to drop the issue, Constantine came up with the idea of convening a council of as many bishops as possible at his summer capital of Nicaea. He hoped such a worldwide council would be able to settle the issue. Outside of the events covered in the New Testament, the Council of Nicaea was, without a doubt, the major turning point in all of Christian history. It was a much more momentous turning point than even the Reformation.
That's because it opened a Pandora's box that has never been closed. The Adequacy of Scripture. The reason Constantine convened the council was to bring Christians together, not to further divide them. So when the delegates arrived, Constantine urged them to try to find common ground they could agree on. Accordingly, different men proposed that the delegates come up with a formula of belief that everyone present could accept. Several proposals were made, using only the language of Scripture.
The supporters of Arius were agreeable to these formulas. But now events took a new turn. Even though the proposed formulas were completely orthodox and followed the language of Scripture, the party of Alexander rejected them. Why? Because they knew that in the recesses of their minds, the Arians meant something different than the party of Alexander when they were signing these formulas. The point of the council had now changed.
Its purpose was no longer to recover an Arian brother or to create a scriptural formula that would end the fighting. No. The objective now was to drive a wedge between the Arian party and the Alexandrian party by coming up with a formula that the Arians couldn't accept. At the same time, the party of Alexander realized that they had reached the limits of Scripture. Instead of accepting this limitation, they made a momentous decision. They decided that the Scriptures were simply inadequate.
The council must go beyond Scripture if it was going to force the Arians out of the Church. Constantine saw that the majority of the delegates were now supporting Alexander. To an exasperation, he himself gave up on the goal of achieving unity among all the delegates. He himself now proposed a statement of belief that would force the Arians out of the Church and end the matter. But to do this, he had to insert language in the creed that is not found in Scripture.
Constantine's proposal won the day, and it was accepted by nearly everyone at the council, except Arius and a few of his staunchest supporters.
The creed is now known as the Nicene Creed, and it reads, "We believe in one God the Father, Almighty Maker of all things visible and invisible, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten of his Father, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, being of the same substance with the Father, by whom all things were made, both that are in heaven and in earth, who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, was incarnate and was
made man.
He suffered, and the third day he rose again and ascended into heaven, and he shall come again to judge both the living and the dead, and we believe in the Holy Spirit." Now, the Nicene Creed is completely orthodox in its meaning. This is obvious from the writings of the various delegates who were at the council. These men were simply affirming that the Son is eternal and that he is of the same nature as his Father. This summarizes the historic faith, and for that reason, I subscribe to the Nicene Creed.
Nevertheless, I decry the spirit of Nicaea and the fruit that it produced. The council could have simply removed Arius from office and excommunicated him from the Church for being a divisive man and for teaching contrary to the faith once handed down. They didn't have to create a new creed to do this.
I also fault the Nicene Creed for introducing a new theological term, homoousia, in the phrase, "being of the same substance with the Father." This new term combines two Greek words, homo meaning same, and ousia meaning substance. In fact, after Nicaea, the term homoousian became the primary touchstone of orthodoxy. But there is a serious problem with the word. It nowhere appears in Scripture.
So the council was now saying to be a Christian, you now had to subscribe to a theological term that nowhere appears in the Bible. Actually, even the word ousia, which does appear in Scripture, is never used in the Bible with reference to God. So the winners at Nicaea were saying that Scripture alone is not adequate to settle disputes. They were also saying that the Bible doesn't fully explain or define certain matters that we need to know. Christianity becomes doctrinity.
The strong message that came from the Council of Nicaea is that God's grace will cover all manners of wicked living, but it will not cover theological errors. God suddenly became someone who is more concerned about our theology than our fruit. And this was despite the fact that Jesus told us, "Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him." Matthew 12:31-32.
The reality that a person bore the fruits from an obedient, love-faith relationship with Christ no longer carried any weight. On the other hand, even though someone bore none of the fruit that comes from a real relationship with Christ, he was still accepted as a Christian and was quite welcome in the Church so long as he held to the Nicene Creed.
The word heretic, which originally meant a schismatic person, now came to mean a person who held to a defined theological error, and heretics were painted as the embodiment of evil. In short, Christianity had become doctrinity.