The Greek word Logos provided an answer to Greek philosophers’ thought that a Logos or some kind of intermediary was necessary to account for the disparity between a God of perfection and the imperfect world that existed. Walker in his A History of the Christian Church sheds light on how the word Logos was understood at the time of Christ:
The Judaism of the dispersion was much influenced by Hellenism, especially by Greek philosophy, and nowhere more deeply than in Egypt. There, in Alexandria, the Old Testament was given to the reading world in Greek translation, the so-called Septuagint, as early as the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus (B.C. 285-246) . . . The most influential of the Alexandrian interpreters was Philo (B.C. 20?-A.D. 42?). To Philo, the Old Testament is the wisest of books, a real divine revelation, and Moses the greatest of teachers; but by allegorical interpretation Philo finds the Old Testament in harmony with the best in Platonism and Stoicism. The belief that the Old Testament and Greek philosophy were in essential agreement was one of far-reaching significance for the development of Christian philosophy. This allegorical method of Biblical explanation was greatly to influence later Christian study of the Scriptures. (Emphasis mine)
In the second century, Justin Martyr and, later Origin, Clement, Augustine from Alexandria would draw upon this mediator aspect of Hellenism to harmonize it with Christianity and influence how the meaning of the Word would come to be regarded.
A brief look at the neo-Platonist philosophy prevailing in Greek culture and thought can be enlightening. Plato’s concept of God was in the sense of perfect forms or ideas from which all the imperfect things in the world take their form. The Logos, from which the Word is translated, gradually became integral to Greek philosophy as a pre-existent mediator between the perfection of God and the imperfections of the world. Plato’s concept of God and creation might be best explained by the example of ripples formed by a rock thrown in the water: the further away the ripples from the rock, i.e. God in His perfection, the less they were like Him. Plato also illustrated what he considered the difference between reality (God) and illusion (this world) by picturing a people in a cave facing a wall against which shadows were cast by objects passing from light entering through a window behind them. Unable to turn and see the actual objects, the people concluded that the shadows they saw were reality rather than the actual objects. He surmised that if someone were freed from the cave, upon seeing the objects themselves, returned to the cave to share his discovery about the shadows, he would likely be ridiculed and never again be content to dwell in the cave.
Although their views regarding God and creation fell short, the rationale of the Greek thinkers and their influence should never be underestimated. They were brilliant men for their time and their writings worth studying. Often what Plato and others wrote seemed to speak of Biblical truth. The life of Socrates in his pursuit to know good and follow it, even to the point of dieing for it, has caused some to think he was a saved Christian. Be that as it may, he set an example for seeking after truth and embodying it in life. We must remember that Greek thought was not without credulity; it undoubtedly influenced the Church fathers as they wrestled with how to explain Christ. It certainly illustrates how we must guard against letting preconceptions from our culture affect our search for truth in scripture.
Finally,the error of Gnosticism has come to be well recognized. This error insisted that Christ could not be human since to come in bodily form would be evil and opposed to God’s perfection. We know John’s Gospel and his letters refuted such a view, insisting that Christ was a real flesh and blood man. Philo's error, instead of diminishing the humanity of Christ, had the opposite effect of inferring he was pre-existent and equal with God in accord with Greek philosophy. Unfortunately this error is accepted even today.
Hopefully all the foregoing helps in understanding the circumstances and presumptions of those called by Constantine to tidy up all the speculation about the nature of Christ and God for the good of Rome. Probably the closest we can come to appreciating the challenge faced by the Council might be some kind of joint session of Congress trying to hammer out vital legislation hopefully in accord with the Constitution that would be acceptable to the President without the possibility of a veto. Fine points of law, the meaning of wording used, precedents, etc. all discussed, examined, and undoubtedly compromised to gain a majority opinion and final approval. As we are so aware in our system, no matter how noble the efforts, opposite political views, even ones honestly held, make bipartisanship difficult at best. Once passed, the law of the land is established and enforced despite any dissent.