A quote from Edwin Hatch in his book “The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages Upon the Christian Church” on the first page:
“It is impossible for any one, whether he be a student of history or no, to fail to notice a difference of both form and content between the Sermon on the Mount and the Nicene Creed. The Sermon on the Mount is the promulgation of a new law of conduct; it assumes beliefs rather than formulates them; the theological conceptions which underlie it belong to the ethical rather than the speculative side of theology; metaphysics are wholly absent. The Nicene Creed is a statement partly of historical facts and partly of dogmatic inferences; the metaphysical terms which it contains would probably have been unintelligible to the first disciples; ethics have no place in it. The one belongs to a world of Syrian peasants, the other to a world of Greek philosophers.”
I came across this quote today in my reading of “Rediscovering Expository Preaching” for one of my classes. It gives a very interesting insight into the Nicene Creed that I had never really thought about before. And in the past few months of interacting with those who basically accept the teaching of the church fathers who wrote after the completion of the cannon on an equal level with the cannon (the Easter Orthodox Church as tradition), I thought it insightful and that it speaks to my own observation of a very quick change in the Church as a whole once the Holy Spirit stopped inspiring additional Scripture. Anyone who reads any of the early Church fathers will note that much of what they speak of is different than that of inspired Scripture, and that many of the things they are concerned about are not much of a concern (and sometimes NOT a concern) in Scripture. A topic that I think is helpful because it shows the difference between Holy Spirit inspired Scripture and the mere ideas of men, who are striving after the truth, but are not without error.