(1) The apostles were in possession of full and perfect knowledge and understanding of the faith as Ireneaus asserts in Against Heresies 3:1:
it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed perfect knowledge, as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles. For, after our Lord rose from the dead, [the apostles] were invested with power from on high when the Holy Spirit came down [upon them], were filled from all [His gifts], and had perfect knowledge: they departed to the ends of the earth, preaching the glad tidings of the good things [sent] from God to us, and proclaiming the peace of heaven to men, who indeed do all equally and individually possess the Gospel of God.
As such, the Apostles had perfect knowledge, clarity, and understanding of the faith and it is impossible to improve, develop, or clarify what the apostles themselves understood.
(2) From (1) no post-apostolic creed as such constitutes in any way, shape, or form, the essence of Christianity and are neither necessary, needed, nor required for full, perfect, and comprehensive understanding of the faith. People were confessing, living, and dying for God and his Son Jesus Christ, in full and perfect knowledge of whom they believed, centuries before the Nicene Creeds were formulated. All written records of the Nicene creed could be expunged from all history and all memory of the same scrubbed from all living humans and the Christian faith and Bible would be undiminished in its fullness, glory, and clarity. As St Hilary of Poiters himself affirms: "A Catholic about to state that the substance of the Father and the Son is one, must not begin at that point: nor hold this word all important as though true faith did not exist where the word was not used."
(3) Any "clarification" of the faith which is not aimed at discerning what's actually on the minds of the apostles themselves, cannot possibly be in relation to making the contents itself clear or developing its inner logic, since the apostles already had perfect and explicit knowledge of the faith. If it was not on their minds, it in no way, shape or form, constitutes any part of the apostolic faith.
(4) Creedal clarifications or explanations which makes use of extra-biblical philosophical concepts as such are only clarification and addresses to specific spatio-temporal historical contexts, cultures, and audiences, the par excellent activity being translating the Bible into a foreign language. Thus such clarifications are intrinsically cultural or subject relative, aimed at specific and historically delimited audiences with their own cultural and linguistic dialects and idiosyncrasies.
(5) From (4), such creedal "clarifications" as such are specifically and historically time bound, addressed to particular, specific, and delimited cultures and audiences, not as intrinsic for all time and space "clarifications" of the inner logic of Scripture to all cultures everywhere, especially when they don't even share the same language, even less culture.
(6) Therefore, creeds are justified purely by their function and pedagogical ability to make clear the Bible to their specific audience. As Aquinas puts it, it was written for "many of whom have no time for study, being busy with other affairs". However, when the creeds themselves become an object of study and focus, when we need to invest considerable energy and effort to understand the creeds themselves before it can be deployed, then they have fundamentally failed in their purpose and function to make clear the Scriptures. How can they clarify the Scriptures when they themselves need clarification? Physician, heal thyself!
(7) Whatever the value of these creeds as portable summaries or their use in ecclesiastical conventions, they have no more teaching force or normative authority than any other academic textbook, which contains truths, but which can be discarded freely in the interest of pedagogical clarity.
( 8 ) Natural Revelation and reason means that God will give, and has given, sufficient cultural and linguistic resources to every age, culture and every race to make sense of the Bible, without the need to reach back to some specific post-apostolic time or period in history to mediate our understanding the Bible, apart from the time period surrounding the events of Salvation History itself of course. It would be a denial of the universality of natural revelation and history to insist that natural reason has to be mediated by the culture or language of a specific group or culture in post-apostolic history.