First Council of Nicaea

== Arian controversy ==
{{Main|Arius|Arianism|Arian controversy}}

=== The two views ===
[[File:Constantine burning Arian books.jpg|thumb|upright|The synod of Nicaea, Constantine and the condemnation and burning of Arian books, illustration from a northern Italian compendium of [[canon law]], {{circa|825}}]]

The [[Arian controversy]] arose in [[Alexandria]] when the newly reinstated presbyter [[Arius]]<ref>{{harvnb|Anatolios|2011|p=44}}</ref> began to spread doctrinal views that were contrary to those of his bishop, [[Pope Alexander I of Alexandria|Alexander of Alexandria]]. The disputed issues centered on the natures and relationship of [[God the Father|God (the Father)]] and the [[Son of God (Christianity)|Son of God (Jesus)]]. The disagreements sprang from different ideas about the [[Godhead in Christianity|Godhead]] and what it meant for Jesus to be God's Son. Alexander maintained that the Son was divine in just the same sense that the Father is, coeternal with the Father, else he could not be a true Son.<ref name="kelly1978" /><ref name="Davis 1983 52–54" />

Arius emphasized the supremacy and uniqueness of God the Father, meaning that the Father alone is almighty and infinite, and that therefore the Father's divinity must be greater than the Son's. Arius taught that the Son had a beginning and that he possessed neither the eternity nor the true divinity of the Father, but was rather made "God" only by the Father's permission and power, and that the Son was rather the first and the most perfect of God's creatures.<ref name="kelly1978" /><ref name="Davis 1983 52–54">{{harvnb|Davis|1983|pp=52–54}}</ref>

[[File:Belgrade grafiti - First Council of Nicaea.jpg|thumb|upright|A grafitti in [[Belgrade]], [[Serbia]], depicting apocryphal events at the First Council of Nicaea. The text reads "St. Nicholas at the council in Nicaea in the year 325 stops the great lie of the heretic Arius who convinced the people that Jesus Christ is not God".]] The Arian discussions and debates at the Council extended from about 20 May through about 19 June.<ref name="Davis 1983 52–54" /> According to legendary accounts, debate became so heated that at one point, Arius was struck in the face by Nicholas of Myra, who would later be [[Canonization|canonized]].<ref>{{harvnb|OCA|2014}}</ref> This account is almost certainly apocryphal, as Arius would not have been present in the council chamber because he was not a bishop.<ref>{{harvnb|González|1984|p=164}}</ref>

Much of the debate hinged on the difference between being "born" or "created" and being "begotten". Arians saw these as essentially the same; followers of Alexander did not. The exact meaning of many of the words used in the debates at Nicaea were still unclear to speakers of other languages. [[Koine Greek|Greek]] words like "essence" ({{transl|grc|[[ousia]]}}), "substance" ({{transl|grc|[[Hypostasis (religion)|hypostasis]]}}), "nature" ({{transl|grc|[[physis]]}}), "person" ({{transl|grc|[[prosopon]]}}) bore a variety of meanings drawn from pre-Christian philosophers, which could not but entail misunderstandings until they were cleared up. The word {{transl|grc|[[Homoousian|homoousia]]}}, in particular, was initially disliked by many bishops because of its associations with [[Gnosticism|Gnostics]] (who used it in their theology), and because their beliefs had been condemned at the 264–268 [[Synods of Antioch]].

=== Arguments for Arianism ===
According to surviving accounts, the presbyter Arius argued for [[Subordinationism|the supremacy of God the Father]], and maintained that the Son of God was created as an act of the Father's will, and therefore that the Son was a creature made by God, begotten directly of the infinite eternal God. Arius's argument was that the Son was God's first production, before all ages, the position being that the Son had a beginning, and that only the Father has no beginning. Arius argued that everything else was created through the Son. Thus, said the Arians, only the Son was directly created and begotten of God; and therefore there was a time that he had no existence. Arius believed that the Son of God was capable of his own [[Free will in theology#Christianity|free will]] of right and wrong, and that "were He in the truest sense a son, He must have come after the Father, therefore the time obviously was when He was not, and hence He was a finite being",<ref>{{harvnb|M'Clintock|Strong|1890|p=45}}</ref> and that he was under God the Father. Therefore, Arius insisted that the Father's divinity was greater than the Son's. The Arians appealed to Scripture, quoting biblical statements such as "the Father is greater than I" ([[John 14|John 14:28]]),<ref>{{bibleref|John|14:28}}</ref> and also that the Son is "firstborn of all creation" ([[Colossians 1:15]]).<ref>{{bibleref|Colossians|1:15}}</ref>

=== Arguments against Arianism ===
The opposing view stemmed from the idea that begetting the Son is itself in the nature of the Father, which is eternal. Thus, the Father was always a Father, and both Father and Son existed always together, eternally, coequally and consubstantially.<ref>{{harvnb|Davis|1983|p=60}}</ref> The anti-Arian argument thus stated that the [[Logos (Christianity)|Logos]] was "eternally begotten", therefore with no beginning. Those in opposition to Arius believed that to follow the Arian view destroyed the unity of the [[Godhead in Christianity|Godhead]] and made the Son unequal to the Father. They insisted that such a view was in contravention of such Scriptures as "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30)<ref>{{bibleref|John|10:30}}</ref> and "the Word was God" (John 1:1).<ref>{{bibleref|John|1:1}}</ref> They declared, as did Athanasius,<ref>On the Incarnation, ch 2, section 9, "... yet He Himself, as the Word, being immortal and the Father's Son"</ref> that the Son had no beginning but had an "eternal derivation" from the Father and therefore was coeternal with him and equal to God in all aspects.{{sfn|Athanasius|Newman|1920|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=A7ZaAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA51 51]<!--Retrieved 24 May 2014 -->}}

=== Result of the debate ===
[[File:30-manasses-chronicle.jpg|thumb|The first Council of Nicaea from the [[Constantine Manasses|Manasses Chronicle]].]]
The Council declared that the [[God the Son|Son]] was true God, coeternal with the Father and begotten from his same substance, arguing that such a doctrine best codified the Scriptural presentation of the Son as well as traditional Christian belief about him handed down from the [[Apostles in the New Testament|Apostles]]. This belief was expressed by the bishops in the Creed of Nicaea, which would form the basis of what has since been known as the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed.<ref>{{harvnb|González|1984|p=165}}</ref>