THE NICENE CREED
Sermon • Submitted • Presented
0 ratings
· 39 viewsNotes
Transcript
-As we look at how the creeds and confessions summarize our Christian beliefs, the truth that matters for our life, we have finished an extensive study of the Apostles’ Creed which gives the briefest of summaries about the foundation of the faith. Tonight I want to look at another creed that is very similar to the Apostles’ Creed, however it has some very important and substantial additions to it. These additions were made because of false teaching and doctrine that had begun to creep into the church. This creed is a summary of how the church decided on these issues.
-It is interesting that a lot of what we believe has been defined for us as responses to false teachers and false teachings that sought to twist the faith. Just consider the Bible itself—several of Paul’s letters were written to churches to counteract false teachers and false teachings that infiltrated the churches and perverted what Paul had originally taught them. Or the book of Jude which was written in response to people sneaking into the churches and changing the faith once for all delivered to the saints. While the Apostle’s Creed was written just to summarize the basics, the Nicene Creed expands upon those beliefs to counteract false teachings that perverted what the church was given by the Holy Spirit inspired apostles.
-In the early centuries of the church, if there was a controversy or problem within the church, they would call together church leaders to a church council to work out the issue and make a decision. In the early 300s AD there was a controversy surrounding the nature of Christ—how it was that He existed and what His relation to the Father and Holy Spirit really was. The biggest uproar within the church was caused by a man named Arius who was an elder from Alexandria, Egypt. He taught that the Son of God did not always exist but was created by God the Father at some point before the universe was made. What this would mean is that Jesus, the Son of God, was not coeternal with God, and therefore really was not God at all.
-In 325 AD Roman Emperor Constantine convened a group of church leaders in the city of Nicaea to resolve the disagreements within the church over the nature of Jesus and His relationship with the Father. The Nicene Creed was then the statement that came from this Council to formulate the church’s belief about Jesus and His eternal nature, giving summary to what we would consider orthodox beliefs today. Arius and his followers were repudiated and considered heretics. The Nicene Creed would be later expanded upon at a later council, the Council of Constantinople, which expanded upon what was written about the Holy Spirit. The Nicene Creed was originally written in Greek and then translated into Latin. We might find several different translations in English that offer slight variations just depending on how they wanted to translate certain words, but the gist is mostly the same.
-Like the Apostle’s Creed, it is pretty much split into three different sections corresponding with each member of the Trinity, but includes several additions. We will only highlight some of the important additions tonight. But let’s quickly look at the first section.
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen.
-This is pretty much the same beginning as the Apostle’s Creed, just with the emphasis that anything that exists outside of God, whether it is visible or invisible, was created by God. This reminds us that in the earthly realm and the heavenly realm, everything has been created by God. But the creed continues with part of the section on Christ:
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father; through him all things were made.
-For our purposes tonight, this is the most important section because here the Council was making clear that the true belief of the Christian church is that the Son of God has the same nature as God the Father. They share in the Godhead, and yet they are unique persons within the Godhead. The only problem is trying to use human language to describe an eternal truth.
-We first notice that the creed emphasizes that Jesus was the unique Son of God (meaning there is only one, and He is it), and that he was eternally begotten of the Father. And it again emphasizes that he was begotten, not made. Jesus, God the Son, was not some creature that the Father made outside of Himself. This was part of the Arian heresy—Jesus, God the Son, was not of the same essence as the Father but was something created later by God the Father. It reminds us of what the Jehovah’s Witnesses say of Jesus—that He is the created being Michael the Archangel. But the Creed says: NO, JESUS WAS NOT A CREATED BEING. HIS HUMAN PERSON WAS BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER, BUT HE HAS ETERNALLY BEEN GOD THE SON. This is using language straight from Scripture:
16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
9 By this the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through Him.
-Here we tread lightly as we wade into the mystery of the divine nature of the Son of God and the human nature of Jesus coming together without losing the nature or essence of either. We have to tread carefully because this is where the Arian heresy went—Jesus the man, while having a divine nature of some sort, did not eternally exist, so Jesus is something less than God. Sure, the Arians believed He was A god of some sort, but He was not THE God because unlike THE God He was not eternal.
-In the best that they could do, the Council expressed that Jesus was THE God and eternally existed with the Father—meaning that God has eternally existed as Triune. Now, just to make their point, the Council expressed this truth in several different ways. They tell us that Jesus is ETERNALLY BEGOTTEN—He is eternal, and that which was eternal was born into humanity. They then state that Jesus is God from God. This reminds us of the beginning of the gospel of John:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
-The creed says that Jesus is Light from Light, true God from true God. They were trying to find every possible way to say that Jesus is God. But then we come to a very important theological phrase that is translated into English in several different ways. The translation that I have provided tonight lists the phrase as OF ONE BEING WITH THE FATHER. Other translations might say BEING OF ONE SUBSTANCE WITH THE FATHER, and still others CONSUBSTANTIAL WITH THE FATHER. This is an important phrase, because the Arians were trying to say one thing about Jesus, but the Council needed to make clear what the Bible said about Jesus.
-The strange thing is that the difference between the two sides came down to one letter in the Greek language. The Arians held to HOMOIOUSIOS while the Council believed in HOMOOUSIOS. This only difference is the letter I (iota in the Greek). Why does one letter make such a difference? The word that the Arians used means of a SIMILAR SUBSTANCE. Meaning, they believed that the Son of God was similar to (kind of like) God but was not of the same nature as God. The word that the Council uses here in the creed means BEING OF THE SAME SUBSTANCE. It declares that Jesus is of the same nature and essence as God the Father. As far as their substance is concerned (whatever makes an eternal God an eternal God) both Father and Son have it.
-Why is this important? Because if Jesus is any less than we say He is, then He would not have been able to provide salvation for humanity. If Jesus was not both eternal God and completely human, He would not be able to satisfy God’s wrath, represent humanity, or be our eternal mediator. If the Arians had their way, we would be lost, because a Savior who is similar to God but is not God is no Savior at all. And so, with the nature and person of Christ sorted out, the council was able to continue to summarize Christ’s life and ministry and sacrifice:
For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven, was incarnate from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end.
-All of this is very similar to the Apostles’ Creed. Jesus really became a human, really died, really rose, really ascended, and is really coming back. Jesus has set up an eternal kingdom that will have no end. The Creed then ends with the Holy Spirit, and here again they ensure that we understand that the Holy Spirit is as much God as the Father and Son:
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
-In this section there was one later addition centuries after the Council of Constantinople. The original creed just said that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father, but then in the 6th century church leaders added the phrase AND THE SON. I won’t go into the details about why it was originally omitted from the Greek but added to the Latin, but it had to do with the words used in the different languages that could have been heretical. But the Bible does speak of both the Father and the Son sending the Holy Spirit to believers.
26 “But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.
26 “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will bear witness about Me,
-This might not seem like too big of a deal, but it again points to Christ as being eternally God. One who is but SIMILAR to God would not be able to send the Holy Spirit.
-The person and identity of Jesus is so important—all of Christianity hangs in the balance on this one. Anyone or any group or any religion that denies Jesus being eternally God the Son is not Christian. And we need to know that Christ personally for salvation. An we need to pray for all those who don’t.
