Common Misconceptions about the Council of Nicaea

Support Blogging Theology on Patreon:

Buy Me a Coffee:

My Paypal Link:

[AbelOktavian]

I don't think God needs a group of people in a council to decide whether He is God or not.

[Reewnat]

I appreciate the clear and concise outline of the the myths. Very useful and beneficial. We dont want to lose people by spouting incorrect information and thus lose credibility, alhumdulillah.

[oskrivopisa]

God’s Secret Trail by Eliot Winters is one of those books that stays with you. It changed the way I think about my spiritual journey.

[Ahtnagarp]

You've done an insane ammount of contribution to Islamic World Mr. Paul. We in Indonesia talking about you. 🙏🏻

[wasifhussain]

We are so very lucky to have you.
Thank you Paul for all you do.

[Allahistheonlygod-mj]

May Allah reward you and your family in this life and the next for your Paul

[zenlokamaya]

I translated "Archetypal Heresy: Arianism Through the Centuries" by Oxford professor Maurice Wiles into Indonesia and published here on the title "Warisan Sejarah Arianisme". It is one of the most thorough and comprehensive study about Arianism, and Nicene Creed in particular. For Maurice Wiles, the Nicene Creed was born out of the Arian conflict; they were two sides of the same coin.

[purplerain]

the Quran's critique can be seen as addressing the concept of eternal generation of the Son in a metaphysical sense, not just a literal or human one. When examining the Quranic verses that reject the idea of God "begetting" a son, there is a broader theological implication that encompasses metaphysical interpretations like the eternal generation of the Son in Trinitarian theology.

The Quranic verses, such as **Surah Al-Ikhlas (112:3)** — "He neither begets nor is born" — and **Surah An-Nisa (4:171)** — "Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son" — are not limited to a human or biological context. These verses focus on the impossibility of God having any kind of offspring or partner, whether that be in a literal, human sense or in the more abstract metaphysical sense of eternal generation.

The idea of eternal generation in Trinitarian Christology suggests that the Son is begotten, not created, and that this begetting is an eternal, necessary relationship within the Godhead. In this view, the Son's existence comes from the Father but without implying time or a temporal beginning—this relationship is eternal. However, the Quran's rejection of "begetting" seems to be a refutation of any form of origin or derivation within God's nature. By stating that God does not "beget" and is not "begotten, " the Quran essentially denies any form of origination within God’s essence, which would include the metaphysical generation of the Son in Christian thought.

In **Surah Al-Ikhlas** (112:3), the statement "He neither begets nor is born" seems to be rejecting any kind of ontological relationship that involves "begetting, " which is often used in Christian theology to describe the eternal relationship between the Father and the Son. The Quran does not limit this critique to physical or biological "begetting" but extends it to any form of origin or dependency, which would encompass the Christian idea of the Son’s eternal derivation from the Father.

From the perspective of Islamic theology, the oneness (*Tawhid*) and transcendence of God must be absolute. Any form of "generation" or "origin" would imply that God’s nature is divisible or dependent on something else, which is antithetical to the Islamic view of God's absolute unity and independence. Therefore, the Quran's rejection of the concept of "begetting" serves a broader purpose in rejecting any idea that God could have a relational or originating dynamic within Himself, whether it is understood in human terms or as an eternal, metaphysical reality like eternal generation.

The Quran was revealed in a context where many of its listeners might have understood divine "begetting" in a very literal, anthropomorphic sense.

However, the verses themselves are not limited to that interpretation. The Quran is making a theological statement that goes beyond just a critique of physical procreation and extends to a rejection of any notion of divine offspring or internal relationships within the Godhead that could imply division or dependence. This makes the Quranic critique relevant to the eternal generation concept within Trinitarian theology, even if it was not addressing it in the exact same terms.

In essence, the Quran's rejection of "begetting" is not confined to a critique of human-like, physical reproduction but extends to the rejection of any metaphysical relationship within God that would suggest any form of dependency, origin, or derivation. Therefore, the Quran can indeed be seen as addressing the doctrine of eternal generation, rejecting the notion that God could have an eternal Son who is begotten from Him in any sense—whether literal, temporal, or metaphysical. The Quran's emphasis on God's absolute oneness and transcendence makes any form of internal division or relational origination incompatible with the Islamic understanding of God's nature.

[KhalidofEngland]

Asalaam alaykum brother Paul.watching debates in speakers corner can be beneficial and other times isn't but these videos are a breath of fresh air in terms of learning about this type of thing.just examining the history and documentation and hearing your thoughts and opinions that without giving you a swollen head, are ma shaa Allah well informed

[sofekul]

Really enjoyed this part of history: Council of Nicaea.. thank you for shedding light upon this issue.

[BblahblahBlah-tebx]

I started following your channel back when almost every video you made was like this one; talking about an interesting subject you read in a book. So glad that you still continue doing these kind of videos! All the best

[Al_Ghifari_Al_Kinani]

Shukran, my dear brother Paul. May Allah bless you for your scholarship.

[entertainme]

Paul, I researched this topic years ago. I'm not a scholar and can't quote references, but if a scholarly type could verify my findings concerning myth no.4, this would be hugely beneficial to all the confused Christians out there.

From what I remember the bishops voted in majority for the Arian view (by a close margin, maybe 54%?). Constantine strong-armed the council and overruled their vote. This might have been a political move: The early Christian citizens of the Roman empire, despite severe persecution, were only growing in number and influence. By aligning the Christian theology with the pre-existent Roman pantheon of gods, using a trinity of gods, perhaps both religions could find enough commonalities to coexist, and thus prevent either from becoming a threat to the ruling class.

Calling on scholarly types to find, verify and promote this information in the name of Allah.

[SAMax]

Great summary and clarification Paul 👌🏽

[RayshiaRoman]

This Council is the biggest reason why I will NEVER be a Christian. Not that I will ever be a murtad mind you., it's just that this council really made it clear what kind of religion Christianity is. It also made clear what the churches really is, just another organisation of humans.

[mikehutton]

This is about the best video I've seen you do so far. Nicely done.

[MuhammadAbdElhalim-rf]

My brother Paul, by Allah, I love you for the sake of Allah, from Egypt. 🤍🌹

[luis_chiefa]

Thank you brother Paul! I love your channel, and content dearly. So much education, and information in your videos sir

[abdul-kareemahmed]

Paul, I wish every Church in the US could hear from you, may Allah SWT reward you for all your work, Ameen

[odeebob]

Thank you brother Paul, for the enlightenment. This verse aligns perfectly with the subject. “ Say, "O People of the Scripture, do not exceed limits in your religion beyond the truth and do not follow the inclinations of a people who had gone astray before and misled many and have strayed from the soundness of the way." - Quran 5 : 77