does not receive any personally identifiable information from the search bar below.

The Council of Nicea: Part III

It's amazing how important one word can be. At the Council of Nicea, that word was homoousios. Seven centuries later one word, filioque, would create the biggest church split in history.

At the bottom of The Trinity page you will find the links to the 6-page series on the Trinity.

The study I put into these articles has resulted in a book called Decoding Nicea. Often reviewed as "interesting," it tells the story of Nicea in more detail than is possible here. Available wherever books are sold. See Amazon reviews.

What a famous word homoousios would become. I heard one pastor, who shares my avid interest in the Pre-Nicene church, say that in Alexandria there were bar fights over the word homoousios.

That's quite likely to be true, what with Arius having jingles sung in the marketplace.

What in the World is Homoousios?

Icon of the Council of NiceaIcon of the Council of Nicea

Homoousios means "one substance" or "same substance." This is really important.

Please bear with me while I explain why.

To the Greeks, substance was everything. All matter, to them, was made up of earth, wind, fire, or air. God, however, was none of those things. Everything—no, really: everything— else was.

Even angels and the spirits of men were matter by Greek thinking. In a sense, there are only two substances in the universe. One is God—whatever the substance is that constitutes God—and the other is matter. Athenagoras, a Christian apologist writing in A.D. 168, tells us:

We employ language that makes a distinction between God and matter and the natures of both. (A Plea for the Christians 24)

The question being asked at the Council of Nicea was …

Is Christ of the substance of God, or
is he made of matter like us and the angels?

That may seem strange to us modern Christians who are not used to the question at all, but at the Council of Nicea, it was everything (thus the two references to God's substance in the Nicene Creed).

Athenagoras goes on to answer that question immediately:

We acknowledge a God, and a Son his Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in substance. (ibid.)

Justin Martyr, a couple decades earlier, adds his testimony to that of Athenagoras:

I asserted that this Power [i.e., Christ] was begotten from the Father, but not by abscission [i.e., cutting off], as if the substance of the Father were divided. (Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew 128)

Many more such quotes could be found. The unity of substance between the Father and the Son, and the distinction between the Son and matter, from which all else was made, is often discussed by Pre-Nicene Christian writers.

How Homoousios Affected Nicea

All of this applied to Arius' theology at the Council of Nicea. If the Son had a beginning, as Arius was asserting, then he must be made of matter. After all, the substance of God can have no beginning.

On the other hand, if Christ is of God's substance, then he always existed.

It seems Arius was confused by the fact that the Church taught that Jesus was begotten of the Father, not just here on earth as a man, but in the beginning as the Son of God. Proverbs 8:22, in the Greek Septuagint version used by the early churches, says, "The Lord made me the beginning of his ways for his works." The early churches universally understood this to refer to the begetting of Christ from the Father in eternity past.

Arius mistakenly thought and argued that the begetting of the Son constitutes a beginning. He could not have existed before then.

The Church, however, taught that before Jesus was begotten by the Father, he already existed inside the Father as the Word, Wisdom, and Reason of the Father. The Father had always had Logos inside himself, so Jesus had always existed inside of him. (This is described thoroughly in Tertullian's Against Praxeas, ch. 5.)

Not only is this what they taught, but they claimed to have received it from the apostles. Thus, the idea that the Son has always existed qualified as apostolic tradition, which carried as much—or perhaps almost as much—authority as Scripture (Irenaeus, ibid. III:2:2). This is the tradition that Arius was disagreeing with, and this is the reason that Constantine wanted homoousios inserted in the Creed of Nicea.

Part IV: The Council Adopts a Creed with Homoousios

Or return to Part I and Table of Contents

This is an ad written by me, Paul Pavao: I get a commission if you buy Xero shoes, which does not increase your cost. Barefoot running/walking is the best thing for your feet--if we did not walk on cement, asphalt, and gravel. Normal shoes compress your toes and do a lot of the work your lower leg muscles should be doing. Xero shoes are minimalist and let your toes spread and your feet do the work they are supposed to do. More info at the link.

Enjoy this page? Please pay it forward. Here's how...

Would you prefer to share this page with others by linking to it?

  1. Click on the HTML link code below.
  2. Copy and paste it, adding a note of your own, into your blog, a Web page, forums, a blog comment, your Facebook account, or anywhere that someone would find this page valuable.

Early Church History Newsletter

You will be notified of new articles, and I send teachings based on the pre-Nicene fathers intermittently.

Back issues availabel

When you sign up for my newsletter, your email address will not be shared. We will only use it to send you the newsletter.