"This centrality of Christ in the faith and witness of the church arises directly out of the New Testament. There he is presented as the Savior of mankind, the head of the church, and as Lord, fully divine and fully human. The early church accepted him as a man, and confessed and worshiped him as God. It placed him on the same level as the Father and the Holy Spirit. It did this naturally and without any feeling of contradiction. The church recognized the mystery of the person of Christ, but rather than debating the mystery it adored and revered it. This mystery aspect of the person of our Lord has never been lost in genuine Christianity. However, it has often been pressed into the background. This is what happened during the fourth through eighth centuries, when the person of Jesus Christ became a subject of intense theological debate not always very spiritual in character. There were three outstanding reasons for the church's concern with the question: a. The spread of the gospel to the Gentiles introduced Greeks into the church. The educated Greek mind was highly studious and intellectual. It loved to reflect on difficult problems in theology and philosophy. b. Greek philosophy made a sharp distinction between the spiritual and the material. Becoming a Christian did not always alter this Greek way of thinking. For the Greeks the creation of the world and the incarnation of the Son of God were major religious and intellectual problems. How can God (pure spirit) create the world (matter) and become man (matter and spirit)? c. The Old Testament is strongly monotheistic. If Christ is very God, what is his relationship to God the Creator.- the God of Israel? For these reasons it was probably unavoidable that questions about the person of Jesus should arise to which the New Testament gives no direct answer. These questions were of two kinds: the first group concerned the relationship of Jesus Christ to God the Father; the second group of questions dealt with the problem of the relationship between the human nature and the divine nature of Christ. In this chapter we are concerned with the first group of questions. VARIOUS ANSWERS: The matter is put quite clearly in the first chapter of the Gospel of John: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things. were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made.... And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father. (John bore witness to him, and criedi "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me ranks before me, for he was before me." (vss. 1, 2, 14, 15) In short, how is it to be understood that the Son who in John is called the Logos (i.e., the Word), and who ' became a human being in Jesus the Messiah, is both with God and is God? How can God at the same time be one and more than one? How is the Son related to the Father? This was the question before the councils of Nicaea in 325 and Constantinople in 381. The controversy to which this question led laid the basis for the Christian doctrine of the Trinity: it is therefore generally called the Trinitarian Controversy. The church considered various answers to this question before finding a common mind. We shall briefly discuss these answers. 1. The Apostolic Fathers: The Apostolic Fathers wrote between A.D. 90 and 140. Their discussion of the person of Jesus Christ simply repeated the teaching of the New Testament. None of the Apostolic Fathers presented a definite doctrine on this point. In this respect the New Testament, the Apostolic Fathers, and the Apostles' Creed stand in one line. 2. The Apologists: With the Apologists, Greek philosophy became associated with Christianity. The best known of them was Justin Martyr, a man from Samaria whose parents were Roman. He was a student and a teacher of philosophy before his conversion. He remained a philosopher, regarding Christianity as the highest philosophy. He died a martyr for the faith between 163 and 167. Justin taught that before the creation of the world God was alone and that there was no Son. Within God, however, there was Reason, or Mind (Logos). When God desired to create the world, he needed an agent to do this for him. This necessity arose out of the Greek view that God cannot concern himself with matter. Therefore, he begot another divine being to create the world for him. This divine being was called the Logos or the Son of God. He was called Son because he was born; he was called Logos because he was taken from the Reason or Mind of God. However, the Father does not lose anything when he gives independent existence to the Logos. The Logos that is taken out of him to become the Son is like a flame taken from a fire to make a new fire. The new fire does not lessen the older fire. Justin and the other Apologists therefore taught that the Son is a creature. He is a high creature, a creature powerful enough to create the world but, nevertheless, a creature. In theology this relationship of the Son to the Father is called subordinationism. The Son is subordinate, that is, secondary to, dependent upon, and caused by the Father. The Apologists were subordinationists." (A Short History of the Early Church, Harry R. Boer, p108-110)

"Arianism: Up to this point the Trinitarian debate had taken place entirely in the West. We now move to the East, where the debate became a great controversy. It lasted sixty years, involved the entire eastern church, the western church in part, and occupied the attention of eleven emperors. The long discussion began with Arius, a presbyter in the church in Alexandria. He was a disciple of Lucian, who in turn was a student of Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch from 260 to 272. Paul was an Adoptionist (Dynamic Monarchian). He taught that the Logos or Reason of God dwelt in the man Jesus. This Logos had also been in Moses and in the prophets; in Jesus, however, it was present in much larger measure. As a result, he was united with God in a relationship of love as no other man had been. Therefore, God "adopted" Jesus after his crucifixion and resurrection and gave him a sort of deity. Three synods in Antioch dealt with Paul's teaching, and the third one (in 269) condemned and excommunicated Paul. These views deeply influenced Arius. Like the western Adoptionists, he was concerned about the unity of God. Therefore, he taught that the Father alone is without a beginning. The Son (or Logos) had a beginning; God created the Logos in order that he might create the world. Since the Logos was the first and highest of all created beings, Arius was willing to call the Logos God. But this was only a manner of speaking. The Logos was a creature. And God himself could not create the material world; indeed, Arius considered God so far removed from men that it was impossible to know him or to have fellowship with him. Arius was thoroughly Greek in his conception of God. Arius' view of Christ was much inferior to that of either Theodotus in the West or of Paul of Samosata in the East. In their view, the man Jesus whom God adopted was fully and truly human. Not so the Jesus of Arius. In his teaching, Jesus had a human body but not a human soul. The Logos took the place of the human soul in Jesus. He was therefore a creature who was neither God nor man. He was not God because the Logos that was in him was created; he was not man because he did not have a soul. Moreover, the Logos was subject to change: he could become a sinner. Such was the teaching which Arius began to set forth in about 311. Alexander, the Catholic bishop of Alexandria, convened synods which condemned his views, and he was forced to leave Alexandria. Nevertheless, he gained a great following. There were three reasons for this:' a. His views seemed to protect the unity of God against the danger of polytheism. b. They satisfied the deep-rooted Greek idea that God cannot be the creator of the material universe. c. They gave high honor to the Son or Logos of God and even declared him to be God. The controversy spread to all parts-of the East. Theologians, monks, and church leaders took sides in the debate. The common people did, not understand the issues, but nevertheless they aligned themselves with this or that view."   (A Short History of the Early Church, Harry R. Boer, p113)

"Politics and Theology: In 337, Constantine died and his three sons inherited the empire. Constantine 11 received the far western part: Britain, Gaul, and Spain. Constantius received the far eastern part: Macedonia, Greece, Thrace, Asia Minor, Palestine, Syria, and Egypt. Constans received the area lying in between:, Italy, North Africa, and Illyricum. Both Constantine 11 and Constans took the western position and supported Athanasius. Constantius supported the Arians. In 340, Constantine II was killed in battle with the forces of Constans, leaving the empire divided between Constans in the West and Constantius in the East. In 350, Constans was assassinated by the rebel German emperor Magnentius. Three years later Constantius defeated and killed the latter. Thus, by 353 the entire empire was in the hands of power of the empire, Constantius decided that the religious question should now be decided once and for all. In councils held in the West at Arles and Milan, he forced the western bishops to abandon Athanasius, and he exiled some of their leaders. In 357 a council held in Sirmium in Illyria forbade the use of ousia (nature) in speaking of the relationship between the Father and the Son. With this the homoousios of Nicaea became a dead confession. This was a complete victory [for the Arians]." (A Short History of the Early Church, Harry R. Boer, p117)

Go To Alphabetical Index Of Deceptive Quotes

Written By Steve Rudd, Used by permission at: www.bible.ca

Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA