3 . How can I tell the difference between a genuine Christian church and a cult?

 — 3 —

How can I tell the difference between a

genuine Christian church and a cult?

¶ A genuine Christian church is founded on the life, death, resurrection, and Gospel of Jesus Christ. It bases its doctrine and teachings on the Bible.

In the early church, creeds were often used to identify the basic beliefs of Christians. What is known as The Apostles Creed, has been recognized as perhaps the oldest historic statement of the fundamental beliefs of orthodox Christianity. Whether it was actually composed by the Apostles as some have alleged, it can be traced back as far as the late second century where it was used as a baptismal creed in Rome.

The Apostles Creed

"I believe in God almighty [the Father almighty]

And in Christ Jesus, his only Son, our Lord

Who was born of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin Mary

Who was crucified under Pontius Pilate and was buried

And the third day rose from the dead

Who ascended into heaven

And sits on the right hand of the Father

Whence he comes to judge the living and the dead.

And in the Holy Ghost

The holy [universal] church

The remission of sins

The resurrection of the flesh

The life everlasting."

Creeds of this kind were helpful in giving a short summary of the basic essentials of Christianity, and were brief enough to be easily committed to memory. Today, most all churches have a similar expression, sometimes called a "Statement of Faith," which summarizes their basic beliefs and theological views.

The following is such a statement, typical of a modern evangelical church. Any legitimate Christian church or ministry will believe and support at least some variation of the following fundamental truths:

(1) That the Bible is the inspired and only infallible, authoritative written Word of God — It is used exclusively as the source for teaching and doctrine, not in conjunction with any other alleged sacred writings or scriptures (2 Timothy 3:15-17, 1 Thessalonians 2:13, 2 Peter 1:21, Galatians 1:8).

(2) That there is one God — who is eternal and exists in three persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost (Deuteronomy 6:4, Isaiah 43:10-11, Matthew 28:19, Luke 3:22).

(3) In the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ — that He was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, performed miracles, died a vicarious and atoning death for our sins, rose from the dead on the third day, and was exalted to the right hand of the Father (Matthew 1:23, Luke, 1:31-35, Hebrews 7:26, 1 Peter 2:22, Acts 2:22, 10:38, 1 Corinthians 15:3, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Matthew 28:6, Luke 24:39, 1 Corinthians 15:4, Acts 1:9-11, 2:33, Philippians 2:9-11, Hebrews 1:1-3).

(4) That Jesus will someday personally return — to gather His saints, and will at some future time return to the earth in power and glory to rule for a thousand years (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, Matthew 24:30-31, Revelation 20:1-6).

(5) That the only means of being saved and cleansed from sin is through repentance and faith in the precious blood of Jesus Christ — Salvation is a gift of God's grace which cannot be earned by works and comes only through faith in Jesus, the only mediator between God and man. That the Holy Spirit regenerates and indwells the heart of every true believer (Luke 24:47, John 3:3, Romans 10:13-15, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 2:11, 3:5-7, 1 Timothy 2:5, Romans 8:9b).

(6) That God hears and answers the prayers of His people — in accordance to His will (Matt. 7:7-11, 1 John 5:14-15).

(7) That there will someday be a resurrection of both the saved and the lost — the one to everlasting life in Heaven, and the other to everlasting damnation in the Lake of Fire (Matthew 25:46, Mark 9:43-48, Revelation 19:20, 20:11-15, 21:8).

(This summary does not dismiss the value of other important Biblical doctrines, taught with varying opinions, but additional teachings are not mandatory to basic Christian faith.)

Such basic beliefs are held in common agreement by thousands of Christian churches, made up of scores of denominations. If a church or minister cannot agree with the above statements, it should be assumed that they are not a Christian church, and very likely fall into the category of a cult. Don't waste your time arguing with them, but move on and find a good, Christ-centered, Bible believing church.

Because our society is peppered with cults and misguided religions, it goes without saying that persons should always thoroughly research any alleged church before getting involved with it in any way. Besides obtaining a copy of their basic beliefs or other materials (which should be thoroughly studied and compared with the Bible), ask local people in the community what they know about the group. You can seek advice from trusted Christian friends, the local ministerial association, or even a nearby Christian bookstore. And of course, there are many reliable Christian fellowships and denominations that have affiliated churches in most cities.

Many cults refer to themselves as a church, but are really not a Christian church at all. For instance, while the name "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints" (The Mormons), sounds like a legitimate Christian group, yet it is not. Neither are the Jehovah's Witnesses, which is another group that appears to have Christian similarities. Both groups are considered cults whose beliefs are not consistent with orthodox Christianity. Most of the time, a false church will publicly promote themselves as just another church, but will usually claim to have an exclusive revelation of truth that others don't have. Beware of groups who assert that they are the only ones with the right doctrine — that's a significant danger sign.

The late Dr. Walter Martin, was probably our era's best authority on the subject of cults. He defined a cult as "any religious group which differs significantly in some or more respects as to belief or practice, from those religious groups which are regarded as the normative expressions of religion in our total culture."

Author Bob Larsen says that things cults share in common are: 

"(1) a centralized authority which tightly structures both philosophy and lifestyle, 

(2) a 'we' versus 'they' complex, pitting the supposed superior insights of the group against a hostile outside culture; 

(3) a commitment for each member to intensively proselyte the unconverted; and 

(4) an entrenched isolationism that divorces the devotee from the realities of the world at large."

Here are a few of the more familiar cults listed in an encyclopedic fashion from Larsen's Book of Cults: Ananda , Astrology, Astara, Bahaism, Buddhism, Eckankar, Hare Krishna, Hinduism, Islam, Jehovah's Witness, Mormonism, New Age, Rosicrucianism, Scientology, Spiritism, Taoism, Theosophy, The Way, Transcendental Meditation, Worldwide Church of God (Armstrongism)

The word “creed” derives from the Latin word credo, which means “I believe,” the first two words of the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed. Each creed is a list of statements recognized as a profession of faith, typically recited by a congregation after the sermon in a Protestant church or after the homily in a Roman Catholic mass. The statements in the creeds summarize Scripture and are considered core tenets of Christian belief by the apostles and bishops who wrote them in the early centuries of Christianity.

What Is the Difference between the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed?

The Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed have similar origins and content. Church leaders composed the creeds to clarify the basic tenets of Christianity and assert that Christ is God. The scriptural foundation of the two documents is consistent, with a great deal of overlap in content between the two creeds.

The two creeds have similar origins and content. Both creeds were written over centuries in sections or drafts. Church leaders composed the creeds to clarify the basic tenets of Christianity and assert that Christ is God. The scriptural foundation of the two documents is consistent, with a significant overlap in content between the two creeds..

Though similar in content, there are differences in how the creeds were composed. While the authors of the Apostles' Creed are not specifically known, perhaps due to its early, original publication in 140 A.D., the Nicene Creed was formally written in seven councils of the church, beginning in 325 A.D and continuing into the ninth century. 

For almost two thousand years, these creeds have affirmed the fundamental beliefs that are shared by many Christian denominations worldwide. Many denominations include the recitation of the creeds in their liturgies. Reciting the creeds connects contemporary churches to the historic, Christian church and strengthens the faith of individual Christians. 

What Is the Apostles’ Creed? 

Saint Ambrose honored the Apostles' Creed with the words, "This Creed is the spiritual seal, our heart's meditation and an ever-present guardian; it is, unquestionably, the treasure of our soul."

The esteemed Apostles' Creed establishes in writing the Christian church’s profound beliefs. All of its statements are linked to the Bible at a time when Bibles were not readily available to lay people.

Recognized as the first formal document for all Christians (besides the Bible itself), the Apostles' Creed was originally published in 140 A.D., within memory of Christ’s life, by indefinite authors. There is evidence, however, that the creed underwent many revisions until the ninth century, when it took the form we use in worship services and mass today.

The Apostles' Creed recited today outlines the foundations of Christianity in declarative prose: there is one God, the Creator, who exists in the forms of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. After establishing God’s realm, the creed outlines the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and concludes with nods to His universal (“holy catholic”) Christian church, the forgiveness of sins, and His gift of eternal life. 

Here is the full text of the Apostle's Creed:

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,

 the Creator of heaven and earth,

 And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord,

 who was conceived of the Holy Spirit,

 born of the Virgin Mary,

 suffered under Pontius Pilate,

 was crucified, died, and was buried.

 He descended into hell.

 The third day He arose again from the dead.

 He ascended into heaven

 and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,

 from whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,

 the holy catholic church,

 the communion of saints,

 the forgiveness of sins,

 the resurrection of the body,

 and life everlasting.

Amen.

Memorizing the Apostles' Creed is a Christian tradition. Early believers without printed Bibles recited it, often after their baptism. To this date, confirmation candidates in mainline Protestant churches learn the Apostles' Creed by heart. Expressing aloud the biblical truths in the Apostles' Creed solidifies our beliefs as Christians. 

What Is the Nicene Creed? 

The Nicene Creed first appeared two hundred years after the earliest published copy of the Apostles' Creed and is similar in content. That is, the Nicene Creed also begins by declaring there is one God and describes the divine nature of His Son Jesus Christ in greater detail than the Apostles’ Creed. Much of the remaining text of the Nicene Creed also echoes the biblically-based summaries of the Apostles' Creed. 

Most likely inspired by the Apostles' Creed, an ecumenical group of Christian bishops wrote the original draft of the Nicene Creed at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., convened under the rule of Constantine the Great, the first Christian Roman Emperor. Bishops at the first council represented the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, the Church of the East, and Eastern Catholic churches. This ecumenical council, held for six weeks in present day Turkey, succeeded in establishing the deity of Christ in all of the churches of the Roman Empire by writing the Nicene Creed.

The Nicene Creed underwent revisions in six additional Roman councils. During the Second Council of 381 A.D., the revised creed emphasized the divine role of the Holy Spirit as part of the Trinity of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Later councils added text that addressed Christ’s nature as both divine and human, His mother Mary’s “God-bearing status,” and the veneration (reverence for) rather than worship of icons within the church. 

Here is a modern English version of the Nicene Creed:

I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. 

God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through Him all things were made.

For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary and became man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried and rose again on the third day 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.

 I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets.

I believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins, and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Amen.

The texts of the Nicene Creed and the Apostles’ Creed have merged in the Roman Catholic liturgy. 

Key Differences between the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed

While the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed share many spiritual ideas, the language of the Nicene Creed is more descriptive and therefore it is lengthier than the Apostles’ Creed. The following list elaborates on the resulting differences between the two creeds:

The Nicene Creed elaborates on God as the Creator, adding “of all things visible and invisible.”

The description of Christ in the Nicene Creed adds the phrases, “true God from true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father; through Him all things were made,” which reflects on the first chapter of John in the Bible. 

The Nicene Creed includes the clause that prophets have spoken for the Holy Spirit.

The Nicene Creed describes the holy, catholic church as “one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church,” a reference to the earliest apostles of Christ. 

The Apostles' Creed lists a belief in “the communion of saints,” an idea absent from the Nicene Creed. 

The Apostles' Creed affirms the forgiveness of sins, plainly stated; the Nicene Creed states baptism provides remission (forgiveness) of sins.

The Apostles' Creed states there is a “life everlasting,” which sounds like it applies to individuals, while the Nicene Creed ends with belief in “the life of the world to come,” which has a wider and more ambiguous meaning.

The additional descriptive phrases of the Nicene Creed add richness and greater understanding to the basic statements in the Apostles’ Creed.

The Filioque Clause and Other Variations (East vs. West)

As its authors revised the statements of the Nicene Creed, it came to include, “I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified.” The inclusion of the words “and the Son” (filioque in Latin) led to the Filioque Controversy. 

The controversy was based on the short but meaningful phrase “and the Son,” which Eastern Orthodox church leaders believed upset the balance of the three persons of the Trinity and reduced the importance of God the Father. The Eastern Church’s beliefs were based on Scripture found in John 15:26 and Matthew 10:20. The Western, Roman Catholic Church believed there was Scripture to support the addition of the words “of the Son” in John 16:7 and Galatians 4:6. 

The Filioque Controversy was the tipping point in religious, political, and cultural tensions between the Western and Eastern churches of the Roman Empire. As a result, the once united churches of the Roman Empire divided into two, separate entities, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox, in the Great Schism of 1054 A.D. 

How Churches Use Each Creed Today

Today, reciting the creeds in Christian worship services and masses unites Christians and connects them to the larger and historic body of Christ. Reciting the Apostles' Creed during Sunday worship—as in ancient times—is often a practice in Protestant denominations, particularly Episcopal, Lutheran, and Presbyterian churches. Newer, nondenominational churches believe in the content of the creed but do not usually recite it in worship services. A combined version of the creeds is a regular part of a Roman Catholic mass. When a church body recites the creeds, it unites people in expressing the core beliefs of their faith as recorded in the Bible.

The practice of saying the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed in a worship service or mass adheres to advice Paul gave the early church in 1 Peter 3:15: “But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.”

And as Dr. Albert R. Mohler wrote in a Christianity.com article, “Christians must return to historic Christianity, which emerged from the rich doctrinal commitments and evangelical fervor of the apostles [who] attempted to construct a worldview and theology based upon the teachings of the Bible.”

To proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ, we need to profess where we as a church stand, supported by the belief statements of the ancient but true Apostles’ Creed and Nicene Creed. 

no creed but the Bible

The phrase "no creed but the Bible" reflects a belief held by some Christian groups, particularly the Churches of Christ, emphasizing the Bible as the sole authority in matters of faith and doctrine, rejecting formal creeds. This approach suggests that individuals should interpret the Bible directly rather than relying on established creeds or confessions.

 

Understanding "No Creed But the Bible"

Definition and Origin

The phrase "no creed but the Bible" suggests that the Bible alone should be the basis for Christian belief and practice. This idea is rooted in the Reformation, emphasizing the Bible's authority and sufficiency for doctrine.

Historical Context

Historically, most Christian denominations have used creeds, such as the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed, to summarize core beliefs. These creeds have been recited for centuries, providing a unified statement of faith among Christians.

The Role of Creeds

While the phrase promotes reliance on Scripture, it raises questions about interpretation. Every Christian interprets the Bible through a lens shaped by tradition, culture, and personal beliefs. Thus, even those who claim "no creed but the Bible" often have an implicit creed based on their understanding of Scripture.

Modern Implications

In contemporary Christianity, some churches have moved away from traditional creeds, opting for personalized statements of faith. This shift reflects a broader cultural trend towards individualism, where personal interpretation can overshadow communal beliefs.

Conclusion

Ultimately, while the Bible is central to Christian faith, creeds serve as valuable tools for articulating and preserving essential doctrines. They help unify believers and provide a framework for understanding Scripture.

No Creed but the Bible?

This Isn’t in the Bible, but Almost Every Theologian Believes It

One of the central battled cries of the sixteenth-century Protestant Reformation was Sola Scripture—Scripture Alone! The Reformers rightly criticized the Roman Catholic Church’s elevation of church tradition to the level of Scripture, instead insisting that “neither the Church nor the pope can establish articles of faith. These must come from Scripture” (Martin Luther).

Yet at the same time, each of the Reformers held the historic Christian creeds in high regard, particularly considering the Nicene Creed to be a clear and even authoritative articulation of the deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity and an essential safeguard against heresies like Arianism.

So what are we to do with this? How do we reconcile the supreme authority of God’s Word over all matters of faith and practice with what almost every significant theologian in church history has believed about the necessity of historic creeds like the Nicene Creed?

Should we adopt the seemingly noble motto, “No creed but the Bible,” or should we recognize the Nicene Creed as important to what we believe?

We need look no further than the original impetus for the formation of the Nicene Creed to recognize why, although the Bible is the “norming norm which is not normed” and our supreme authority, the Nicene Creed is normative for the Christian faith, under the authority of Scripture.

Although the Bible is the “norming norm which is not normed” and our supreme authority, the Nicene Creed is normative for the Christian faith, under the authority of Scripture.

The Greatest Controversy in the History of Christianity

Without question, the greatest controversy in the history of Christianity was the threat of Arianism in the fourth century. Arius (256–336) taught that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was created by the Father and thus subordinate to the Father. “When the Son was not, the Father was God,” became his creed.

Arius was largely responding to the false views of Origen, who believed that though the Son was uncreated, he is nevertheless slightly less divine than the Father. Arius argued instead that if the Son is, indeed, less divine than the Father, then he must not be of the same substance as the Father and is simply the first created being.

While not many Christians in the West embraced Arius’s teaching, Christians in the East did. Orthodox theologians such as Alexander of Alexandria opposed Arius, but the controversy reached such an intensity that Emperor Constantine decided it was his responsibility to step into the fray and moderate the debate.

The Slap Heard Around the World

In 325, Constantine convened a council of around 300 bishops and a significantly higher number of other presbyters and deacons to debate the matter in Nicaea, located in the northwestern part of what is now Turkey.

Since Constantine’s primary theological advisor, Hosius of Cordova, was a Western bishop who was convinced of Christ’s full deity, Constantine involved himself in the council’s debates and pushed for an anti-Arian resolution.

Many theologians argued that Arianism contradicted clear teaching from Scripture, including a deacon named Athanasius and a bishop from Myra named Nicholas. Legend says that at one point in the debate, Nicholas slapped Arius across the face and called him a heretic.

Yes, I believe in St. Nicholas—he was a great, anti-Arian theologian!

What resulted is what we now refer to as “The Nicene Creed.” The version of the creed we recite today is a later development (more on that in a moment), but the key language concerning the full deity of Christ was mostly intact in 325:

We believe . . . in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father.

The most important theological development of this statement about Christ is the phrase “of one substance with the Father.” In Greek, “of one substance” is the word homoousios; in Latin it is consubstantial. The word is not a biblical word, but rather a term the Nicene theologians determined was a succinct way to articulate the biblical doctrine of Christ’s deity.

If Christ is “of the same substance” as the Father, then he can be neither created by nor subordinate to the Father. Thus, any teaching claiming that there was a time when the Son was not or that he is less divine than the Father was deemed heresy.

Yes, I believe in St. Nicholas—he was a great, anti-Arian theologian!

Debate over One Letter

The importance of this word and the creed in which it is found became immediately apparent in the fifty years following Nicaea, where debate over Christ’s deity continued with fervor in the East.

Three different factions within the Eastern Church continued to debate the matter. A small Arian faction continued to defend the idea that the Son of God was created and thus unequal to the Father. The Nicene faction argued that the Son was uncreated and equal to the Father since the Father and Son have the same essence (ousia).

However, a much larger faction who followed Origen’s teachings argued that though the Son was uncreated, he is unequal to the Father. The Origenists thought that the Nicenes were dangerously close to the Sabellian heresy, which taught that the Father and Son are the same person. They also did not like that the Nicenes had invented a non-biblical word (homoousios) to defend what they believed the Bible taught. “No creed but the Bible” was the motto of the Origenists.

The debate led to the formation of a new council in the East in Antioch (341), which created a new creed. This creed, instead of stating that the Father and Son are of the same essence (homoousios), stated that they are of a similar essence (homoiousios).

One little letter “i” made all the difference.

Athanasius’s Battle with the “Christian” Princes

Enter Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria. Athanasius had been present at Nicaea as a deacon and was one of the most articulate defenders of Christ’s full deity. He devoted his life to defend the deity of Christ and orthodox trinitarianism against Arianism.

His primary problem were the pesky emperors.

Five times different emperors exiled Athanasius, hindering his ability to fight the rise of Arianism.

Constantine exiled Athanasius from 335–337 because of false accusations raised by Arians that Athanasius had organized a dock strike in Alexandria.

Constantine’s son, Constantius, exiled Athanasius twice (339–346, 356–362). Constantius was an Arian who insisted, “Whatever I believe must certainly be true, otherwise God would not have delivered the world into my hands.”

When emperor Julian took power in the East, he denied Christianity altogether (earning him the name “Julian the Apostate”), and allowed Athanasius to return. However, when Athanasius resumed debating the Arians, Julian again sent Athanasius into exile.

When Valentinian became emperor, Athanasius once again returned, but Valentinian put his Arian brother Valens in charge of the East, who then banished Athanasius once again.

(This is the problem with giving the state power over the Church!)

Finally, Athanasius was allowed to return to Alexandria in 336, where he spent the final 7 years of his life. Athanasius’s fortitude and endurance, despite all the persecution from various emperors, is the only reason Arianism was eventually defeated.

Cappadocians at Constantinople

Athanasius’s relentless defense of orthodox trinitarianism held back the rise of Arianism until three influential theologians finally achieved unity between Nicenes and Origenists against the Arians.

Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus, bishops in the region of Cappadocia (modern-day Turkey), achieved this unity by persuading both sides to agree upon the theologial language used to describe God.

The problem was with the meaning of two terms: hypostasis and ousia. The Nicenes used both terms to mean “substance,” but the Origenists defined both terms as “persons.”

The Nicenes said that the Father and Son have one hypostasis and one ousia (substance).

But the Origenists said that the Father and Son are two hypostases and two ousiai (persons).

The Cappadocian Fathers proposed that they all agree to use one term to mean substance and the other to mean persons so that they could clearly articulate what the Bible teaches. All parties agreed to use ousia to refer to the one divine essence and hypostasis to refer to the distinct persons of Father, Son, and Spirit.

This allowed all parties to agree against the Arians: God is one ousia (substance) in three hypostases (persons).

This moved the Origenists to stop saying the Son is inferior to the Father and encouraged the Nicenes to unequivocally denounce the Sabellian heresy, uniting both parties against the heretical teaching of Arianism.

God is one ousia (substance) in three hypostases (persons).

The Final Creed Takes Form

At the Council of Constantinople in 381, this new unified anti-Arian party revised the original Nicene Creed, expanding it to also clearly affirm the deity of the Holy Spirit along with the Son. This Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed is the “Nicene Creed” we recite today (with one phrase added later in the sixth century—”and the Son”):

We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and

unseen.

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, one in being with the Father.

Through Him all things were made.

For us and for our salvation He came down from heaven. By the power of the Holy Spirit He became incarnate from 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.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son.

With the Father and the Son He is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the prophets.

We believe in one, holy, catholic,1 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.

Boundaries of Truth

The history behind the Nicene Creed’s formation illustrates its necessity: the Nicene Creed helps to protect us from unbiblical heresy by unifying us around an agreed-upon summation of the authoritative teaching of Scripture. Creeds are in no way authoritative over Scripture, but creeds like the Nicene Creed are authoritative inasmuch as they accurately reflect Scripture’s doctrine.

Creeds are in no way authoritative over Scripture, but creeds like the Nicene Creed are authoritative inasmuch as they accurately reflect Scripture’s doctrine.

Thus, we need creeds. Any time in history where certain groups have championed the creed (irony intended) “No creed but the Bible,” those groups have strayed into theological error and even heresy.

One example will suffice to illustrate the point: During the life and ministry of the great English hymnwriter Isaac Watts, Arianism once again reared its ugly head. In a noble attempt to win over the Arians to a more biblically orthodox position, Isaac Watts essentially adopted a “No creed but the Bible” posture. He thought that by avoiding the historically agreed-upon language of the creeds, such as homoousios, and instead restricting himself to only using the language of Scripture, he would be able to convince the Arians of the full deity of Christ.

Instead, Watts ended up sounding Arian (and even Unitarian) himself. Watts never denied the deity of Christ or orthodox trinitarianism, but he sounded like he did because he used language that contradicted historical creeds. And further, many of those in Watts’s day who claimed to accept no human creed ended up fully denying the Trinity, the deity of Christ, and even the sufficient atonement of Christ.

Creeds are not infallible, nor is their authority over Scripture. Nevertheless, historic creeds are essential to the unity and theological orthodoxy of Christians today.

As we have seen in the historical survey above, the particular terminology and formulas in historic creeds emerged with special care given to avoid heresy, and so we should not be surprised when, in departing from historically accepted formulas, we fall under the charge of heresy, or even actually adopt heretical views.

It is actually quite arrogant to isolate ourselves from the historic doctrinal formations of those who have come before us, assuming we are wiser than they were. If one’s doctrine of the Trinity, for example, departs from the language of the Nicene Creed, then the burden of proof lies with them to prove where the creed is in error.

Creeds are not infallible, nor is their authority over Scripture. Nevertheless, historic creeds are essential to the unity and theological orthodoxy of Christians today.