Though I'm not trying to say that anyone in particular holding to the Nicene or Apostles' Creed believes in subordination, that concept is easily gleaned from the Apostles' Creed, though you went speciously to the Nicene Creed for your refutation.
The AC's first paragraph could readily shape thinking that the Father did the creating where Jesus apparently didn't, since he wasn't yet "begotten." I'm not trying to say you or any other particular believer holds to that, I'm much more pointing to the fallibility of what men have written.
I'm ready to concede that a creed can be useful, but not any moreso than I would concede than handouts for a Bible class could be useful.
Regarding being begotten, the Nicene Creed juxtaposes that with "not made" as if these are the choices one is left with regarding how Jesus came about. Again this would be a mistake, and I'm not trying to say any one person in particular hold to that, but I'll bet many communicants haven't yet sorted it out accurately from the creeds.
Jesus begotten-ness has nothing to do with Jesus' origin, only his one-time-only change in taking on the form of a bond-servant. But again, a straightforward reading of the Nicene more quickly leads one to make a mistake here, even if one could excuse the first plain old mistake of saying, "eternally begotten."
Where I've spent time, I find the frequent recitation of the creeds takes time away from the rest of Bible study. Some churches are more interested with sectarian interpretation of their founders' pet religious concerns than preparing Christians to find answers for their lives through letting the Holy Spirit bring to mind what they've read and heard from the Bible (and no, I don't think the HS brings to mind what one says in a creed when its words are not the inspired text).
IOW, a creed's typical usefulness is a most clearly as a distraction from the Bible.
HF
I'm much more pointing to the fallibility of what men have written.
Wasn't Paul a man who wrote Romans and the other epistles? Wasn't it men who wrote the books of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John.
And, out of the many versions and books written by early Christians, wasn't it men who determined which ones became part of the canon we call the New Testament?
God works through man; the Bible is very special, but not because it is untouched by men.
Not as bad as singing. Or for that matter, talking! And then there's bibliolatry. Brrrrr.