In his latest book installment of his Foundational Tool for Our Faith series, The Nicene Creed (Crossway, 2025), Kevin DeYoung analyzes the Nicene Creed and explains its theological and historical significance. He declares, “Without exaggeration it can be said that every church and every Christian ought to know the Nicene Creed (p. 9).” His approach toward exegeting the creed (so to speak) is viewing it from three angles: the historical approach, the theological approach, and the devotional approach (p. 10).” To elaborate, he explains what heresies the creed refutes along with the truths it upholds. Then he demonstrates the relevance of those two aspects to the church today (p. 10). The timing of the book’s release is fitting because during the month of May 2025 we celebrate the 1700th anniversary of the First Council of Nicaea which convened in 325 A. D.
The book originated from a sermon series on the Nicene Creed that he did at Christ Covenant Church. In a section called “Note on the Creed”, DeYoung clarifies that the Nicene Creed recited in churches today is actually the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed originating from the second ecumenical council of 381 AD. Unlike the first Nicene Creed ratified in 325 AD, this creed expands on subjects such as the Holy Spirit, Christ’s salvific works, and eschatology (p. 13). Every major church tradition: Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox (Eastern and Oriental) embrace the Nicene Creed.
In the first chapter, “We Believe,” DeYoung states the theological and historical relevance of creeds. He distinguishes between creeds and confessions by saying that the former explains “the God in whom we believe (p. 27)”, while the latter “are statements…about what we believe (p. 27).” From a theological standpoint, creeds are a pertinent way to contradict false doctrine and to proclaim sound doctrine (pp. 27-8). A good example is the identity of Jesus Christ (p. 28). DeYoung explains the historical background of Roman religion by saying that the chief features were exuberant worship and not much of an emphasis on doctrine (pp. 29-30).
In the second chapter, “Only Begotten,” DeYoung begins with the words, “THE MOST OBVIOUS WAY to read the Nicene Creed is in Trinitarian fashion” (p. 35). He then goes on to talk about the nature of the Father and the Son. While he dedicates the first third of the chapter to the Father, he dedicates the latter two-thirds thereof to the nature of the Son and how the church interpreted how Jesus Christ is the begotten of the Father. He describes how the description of Jesus as the monogenes (read: only begotten) came about to confute Arianism, which viewed the word “begotten” as meaning that Jesus was created by the Father. DeYoung describes the significance of the Son’s eternal generation from the Father–the doctrine that “the Father communicates the essence he shares with the Son” (p. 40).
In the third chapter, “One Substance,” DeYoung exegetes the history of the Trinitarian formulation of terms such as homoousios, hypostasis, etc., and how the Nicene council reached the conclusion of its meaning. He once again brings up the Arian controversy along with figures such as St. Athanasius of Alexandria and the Cappadocian fathers (Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Gregory Nyssa) who combated the heresies. He breaks down the different theological factions that expressed various views of the Son’s relationship with the Father.
After ending the historical background of the homoousios controversy, He concludes that the term homoousios “was deemed critical for defending what was so abundantly clear in the New Testament, name that the Son of God is fully God (p. 51).”
In the fourth chapter, “For Us and For Our Salvation,” DeYoung goes into what Christ specifically did to save humanity. He first describes the events of what he calls the state of humiliation: incarnation, suffering, death, burial, and descent into hell (p. 34). Then he delves into what he calls the state of exaltation: resurrection, ascension, session, and return (p. 35). He also goes into a brief historical excursus on the heresy Apollinarism (the belief that Christ had a human body and spirit, but had no human mind because was connected with the Logos) and how it impacted the phrase “came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man (p. 57).” While doing so, he briefly mentions the Council of Chalcedon and Diogenes of Cyzicus and the way they confronted the Apollinarian heresy. DeYoung then concludes the chapter by honing in on the phrase “whose kingdom shall have no end (59).” He states that Jesus, the eternal God, who became incarnate, will have an eternal kingdom (60).
The fifth chapter on the filioque clause, “Who Proceeds from the Father and the Son,” explores the history of the phrase and how it has served as a dividing line between the Western church and the Eastern church for many centuries up to this day. He notes how the Western church first inserted the filioque clause in the Third Council of Toledo in 589 AD. It became a source of conflict between the Western church and Eastern church in the 700s resulting in the Great Schism in the 1000s (p. 64). He summarizes the Eastern church’s theological objections to the filioque clause and summarizes the Western church’s theological support for the clause. DeYoung does a good job fairly examining the theological reasonings of both the Western and Eastern churches in their perspectives of the filioque clause. Toward the end of the chapter, he lays down his cards (so to speak), saying that the Western church was right to insert the belief of double procession in the Nicene Creed. He also sympathizes with the Eastern church’s rationale in what they want to preserve in their belief of single procession. As one who has grown up in different expressions of the Western church, I concur with him in the Western church’s notion that the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son.
In the sixth chapter, “One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church”, DeYoung delineates the significance of the church by explaining the significance of the four adjectives. One thing I did notice is that he says that the word “catholic” is not in the Bible (p. 76). He is correct to say that the early church fathers used the term (katholikos in Greek) to separate the apostles’ teachings from the heretical teachings of their time. He is also correct to note that it means “general,” and “the whole. However, in Acts 9:31 where it says “so the church throughout all Judea and Galilee, etc” (ESV), the Greek for “throughout all” is kath’hole. This sounds similar to katholikos. It seems to me that technically the word “catholic” is in the Bible. This is just a personal observation.
The seventh chapter, “One Baptism for the Remission of Sin”, demonstrates how different Christians view the efficacy of baptism. All Christians believe that Christ commanded the practice of baptism. They just differ on how it is practiced and whether it has any effect on the one being baptized or not. I definitely agree with DeYoung that baptism is tied to faith (p. 81), but I would demur with his rejection of the idea that baptism immediately takes away our sins (p. 81). I think of Acts 22:16 where Ananias told Saul of Tarsus (AKA St. Paul the Apostle), “Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling his name” (ESV). It seems to me that it sounds like baptism cleanses sins. Space forbids me to go into an in-depth description of how the meaning of the Greek literally connects baptism with the remission of sins as well as the precedence of baptismal regeneration in church history.
Overall, I believe that this book is a great reminder of how richly significant the Nicene Creed is in light of the theological depth and historical background that led to it. I believe that in the 1,700 years since its formulation, The Nicene Creed (both the book and the actual creed) serves as a crucial reminder of what Christians (regardless of whether one is Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox) believe and what distinguishes them from other groups that claim to be Christian, but contradict the creed. I agree with DeYoung in that the Nicene Creed “points us to the future” (85). I believe this book serves as a good starting point to explore the vast world that is trinitarian theology. May the words we recite in the Nicene Creed not just be mere words for us to recite each Sunday, but words to instill hope in us to eternity with Christ in the restoration of all things.
Editor’s Note: This title was received by the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
Photo credit: Crossway
Like the content you see on Reading For The Glory? Consider subscribing to our newsletter to receive updates on new articles, reviews, and podcast episodes. To learn more about the good news of Jesus Christ, please click here.
We also invite you to consider supporting the ongoing ministry of RFTG.
Discover more from Reading For The Glory
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
