Christological Debates in Early Church

1

UNION BIBLICAL SEMINARY,

PUNE- 411037

COURSE CODE: BTT 11

PERSON AND WORK OF JESUS, THE CHRIST

Topic: Christological debates during the Patristic Period

(Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Arius, Athanasius, and Appolinarius)

Instructor: Mr. David M Kumar

Presented by: Jeremiah Prasad, Dharma Durai, K. B. Caroline and Clinton Paul

(Group 3)

Contents

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 2

2. Definition of Christology ................................................................................................................. 3

3. Jesus as Human and Divine ............................................................................................................. 3

3.1. Jesus as human ....................................................................................................................... 3

3.2. Jesus as divine ......................................................................................................................... 3

4. Ebionitism, Docetism and Gnosticism............................................................................................. 3

4.1. Ebionitism/who were the Ebionites? ...................................................................................... 3

4.2. Docetism ................................................................................................................................. 4

4.3. Gnosticism ............................................................................................................................... 4

5. Christological Debates .................................................................................................................... 4

5.1. Irenaeus’ Debate ..................................................................................................................... 4

5.1.1. Brief Background and Development Theology of Irenaeus ............................................ 4

5.1.2. Divine .............................................................................................................................. 5

5.1.3. Human ............................................................................................................................. 5

5.1.4. Logos ............................................................................................................................... 5

5.2. Clement of Alexandria’s Debate ............................................................................................. 6

5.2.1. Logos ............................................................................................................................... 6

5.2.2. Divine and Human ........................................................................................................... 6

5.3. Origen’s Debate ...................................................................................................................... 7

5.3.1 Origen’s Understanding of Creation: ..................................................................................... 7

5.3.2 Origen’s understanding of Logos and Son of God as pure logos ........................................... 7

5.3.3 Hypostatic Union of Jesus and logos Christology............................................................ 8

5.3.4 Union of soul of Christ with Logs .................................................................................... 8

2

5.3.5 The Two Begettings of Christ .......................................................................................... 8

5.3.6 Logos is the means of creation and communication of God .......................................... 9

5.3.7 The eternal generation of son......................................................................................... 9

5.3.8 Relation between the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit according to Origen................... 9

5.3.9 Redemption consists of Imparting Divine Logos and Deification Requires Logos ........ 10

5.3.10 Mediator Christology .................................................................................................... 10

5.3.11 Chalcedonian Creed and Two Natures Jesus Christ ...................................................... 11

5.4. Christological Understanding of Contemporary theologians: .............................................. 11

5.5. Critic of Logos Christology ..................................................................................................... 12

5.5.1. Advantages of logos Christology ................................................................................... 12

5.5.2. Weaknesses of Logos Christology ................................................................................. 12

5.5.3. Implication of Logos Christology ................................................................................... 12

5.6. Arius and Athanasius............................................................................................................. 13

5.6.1. Arius (250-336) .............................................................................................................. 13

5.6.2. Athanasius of Alexandria (296 – 373) ........................................................................... 13

5.6.3. Debate between Arius and Athanasius ......................................................................... 13

5.6.4. Argument with Arianism ............................................................................................... 14

5.6.5. His Response ................................................................................................................. 14

5.6.6. Further Argument ......................................................................................................... 14

5.6.7. Athanasius Responses ................................................................................................... 15

5.6.8. Council of Nicaea (325) ................................................................................................. 15

5.7 Appolinarius .......................................................................................................................... 15

5.7.1 Appolinarius’ Argument ................................................................................................ 15

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 16

Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 16

Webliography ........................................................................................................................................ 17

1. Introduction

Philippians 2:6-8 says that “who being found in the form of God, did not consider it robbery

to be equal with God...... being found in appearance as a man, He humbled himself and

became obedient to the point of death.”

Therefore in this presentation, we shall deal with Christological debate on Jesus as fully

human or fully divine in nature. We would be focusing essentially on the Patristic period

3

especially during the era of Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Arius, Athanasius and

Appolinarius.

2. Definition of Christology

Christology is the Christian reflection, teaching, and doctrine concerning Jesus of Nazareth.

Christology is the part of theology that is concerned with the nature and work of Jesus,

including such matters as the incarnation, the resurrection, and his human and divine natures

and their relationship. Christology is that part of theology which deals with our Lord Jesus

Christ. Christology (from Greek Χριστός and λόγια) is the field of nature and person of Jesus

Christ as recorded in the canonical Gospels and the epistles of the New Testament.1

3. Jesus as Human and Divine

3.1.Jesus as human

During the second century the Christological debates focused on the divinity of Jesus Christ

and most of the church Fathers believe Jesus as Human being.2 The affirmation of Jesus as

human in clearly depicted in New Testament, the alienation of sin is different from human

being. Jesus as Jew grew in maturity, physically, spiritually and was influenced by the culture

and religious understanding of his people. Jesus experienced hunger, thirst, pain, tempted,

rejected, insulted, betrayed, tortured and crucified.3

3.2.Jesus as divine

Through the concept of Logos, we can also understand Jesus as divine as the Gospel

mentioned. Jesus resurrection is God’s victory over sin and death. The gospel describe about

Jesus’ obedience and humbleness even on the death on the cross. God was in Christ who

reconcile the world to himself (2nd Corin.5:19) the suffering of Christ is also for the Father.

The nature of forgiveness in Christ is the expression of God presenting forgiveness to human

being.4

4. Ebionitism, Docetism and Gnosticism

4.1.Ebionitism/who were the Ebionites?

The Ebionitism is derived from the Hebrew term which means “the poor one”, the Ebionitism

were a sect of Jew in the first and second centuries and they regards Jesus as an ordinary

Human Being, the son of Mary and Joseph.5 The Ebionites also emphasize on the humanity

of Jesus, the importance of the Law, and rejects the apostolic authority of Paul. They rejects

the virgin Birth, they pay special homage to John the Baptist (revered as a preacher of

repentance, the Baptizer of Jesus). Eusebius observed the two groups of Ebionites, the first

group considered the natural birth of Jesus characterized by unusual moral character. The

second group accepted the virgin birth but rejected the preexistence of the son of God. The

1 Samuel. George, Christology (Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2013), 1. 2 Veli- Matti Karkkainen. Christology: A global Introduction. (Michigan: Baker Academic. 2003), 63. 3 Samuel George Christology. (Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2003), 17. 4George Christology…….18. 5 Karkkainen. Christology: A global Introduction……….64.

4

idea of Ebionites was rejected by Christians as it contradicts the understanding of Jesus Christ

as savoir.6

4.2.Docetism

Docetism derived from Greek word “dokeo” which refers to the doctrine that the manhood of

Christ was apparent not real, a divine being was dressed as a man in order to communicate

revelation but was not really involved in the human state and withdraw before the passion.

The modern revisionist of Christologies concern is to avoid any form of Docetism.7 By the

middle of the second century, Christian Gnosticism was widespread, it was found in Asia,

Egypt, Rome, and Carthage and in Lyons. Docetic attempt is to combine an alien philosophy

with the Christian Gospel. Docetic made Jesus humanity a mere “semblance”(illusion) and

distinguished between the heavenly Christ and the early Jesus as to assert that the Heavenly

Christ came down at baptism and departed before the crucifixion so that heavenly Christ had

no share in the shame and agony of the cross.8

4.3.Gnosticism

Gnosticism was a second century heresy claiming that salvation could be gained through

secret knowledge. Gnosticism is derived from the Greek word gnosis, meaning “to know”.

They believe that Jesus Christ only appeared to have human form but that he was actually

spirit only. 9 The term is used to describe a religious movement of the early Christian

centuries which emphasis on the knowledge. Irenaeus, Tertullian and others regarded it as a

Christian heresy.10

5. Christological Debates

5.1.Irenaeus’ Debate

5.1.1. Brief Background and Development Theology of Irenaeus

Irenaeus was originated from Asia, he is important in the study of Christology because of the

way he tried to identify and stabilize true Christianity and to distinguish it from heresy and

also because of his rich theology he developed. 11 He even became the most important

theologians of the second century and remained in an orthodox tradition. The original work

of Irenaeus was lost apart from few pieces, the reason could be because of his adoption of the

view that Christ would return and reign for a thousand years on the earth. The book widely

known was Against Heresies (Latin- Adversus Heresies or Adv. Haer in short) and a short

handbook or Catechism, The demonstration of the apostolic preaching. Irenaeus came in

contact with Montanism12 and Gnosticism.

6 Karkkainen. Christology: A global Introduction……….64. 7 Francis Young, “Docetism” The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology, ed.Alan Richardson & John

Bowden.(Philadelphia: The Westminster ,1983),160. 8 Sydney Cave, The Doctrine of the Person f Christ. (London: Gerald Duckworth & Co. Ltd, 1962), 79. 9 “Gnosticism”http://christianity.about.com/od/glossary/a/Gnosticism.htm. 25/11/14, 3:21pm. 10 R. MCL. Wilson, “Gnosticism” The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology, ed. Alan Richardson &

John Bowden.(Philadelphia: The Westminster,1983), 226. 11Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church. (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans ,1991), 57. 12 who was against the life and the faith of the church.

5

5.1.2. Divine

Irenaeus writes that God is the Father of creator and lawgiver, maker of heaven and earth.

God brought it into being out of nothing and those who claim a higher god are blaspheming

him. Creatures cannot make things except by shaping a material that has already exists but

God has not only shaped the word but also made the material as well.13 Christ is both God

and man and he uses “one and the same”. Son of God and Son of Man lived, suffered and

died. Irenaeus suggested that the divine word remained impassible (untouched by

suffering).If he were not man, humanity would not be saved in him, if he were not God, he

would not have power to save. He developed the thought that God created man in his own

image and likeness. All three elements body, soul and spirit are needed for the perfect man in

likeness of God.14 Irenaeus put creation and incarnation together, in creation the whole of the

universe comes into being and in incarnation it is a single human being who comes into

existence and found to have purity which the whole world has lost. The need of the world

which God created is to be liberated from sin, and sin has no power over the man whom

Mary bore. When God becomes incarnate, he becomes man. God is destined to live life

without sin from the very beginning. In Jesus Christ there appears the one who possesses

everything that man as creature ought to have, and nothing of what Adam brought upon as a

result of his yielding to temptation.15

5.1.3. Human

Christ is God and he is also man, these are two irreconcilable truths. Very God and Very man

in one with no separation between His divinity and His humanity. In the creation, the two

hands of God were upon the world i.e. Son and the Spirit. Human being estranged from God

because of sin and so God sent his son who becomes flesh and the Holy Spirit makes his

dwelling place in a human body and soul.16Jesus Christ is true God and true man; he brings

human being to God and God to human being. The birth of Jesus by Virgin Mary was

regarded exclusively as a sign of His divinity. Like God, the son is eternal, begotten of the

Father from eternity. Irenaeus explain of God’s acts in Christ- God himself is in Christ and

offers his salvation in his incarnate son, for only the creator can save men from the devil. God

has in fact revealed himself in Christ and through him has entered human life, by his very

mercy and love to come to man in his helplessness. If Christ had been bound by sin and

defeated he would not have the power to liberate man. The humanity in Jesus is the pure

humanity which God created and the evil has no hold over it.17

5.1.4. Logos

“In God there is word and wisdom, son and spirit, through whom and in whom he made all

things, freely without help”. Word and wisdom exist with God always.18 The word created

the universe, God is always complete in itself. God being in all mind and all Logos speaks

13 Robert L. Calhoun, Scripture, creed, Theology. (Eugene: Cascade books, 2011), 135-136. 14 Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church………..63-64. 15 Gustaf Wingreen, Man and the Incarnation: A study in the Biblical Theology of Irenaeus. (Philadelphia:

Muhlenberg, 1959), 84-85. 16 Gustaf Wingreen, Man and the Incarnation……………………..86-87. 17 Wingreen, Man and the Incarnation……………………..98-102. 18 Calhoun, Scripture, creed, Theology. (Eugene: Cascade books, 2011), 135-136.

6

what he thinks and thinks what he speaks. His thoughts are Logos and Logos is mind and

mind comprehending in all things. God is Logos and Logos is God, they are one and the

same.19

5.2.Clement of Alexandria’s Debate

Alexandria was the greatest city of the East; it was a centre of Greek learning with a fine

library and Greek-speaking Judaism. 20 Clement was a Greek philosopher and later on

converted from paganism; he was a theologian and also head of the catechetical school of

Alexandria.21 Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-215) is considered important in the history of

Christian doctrine.

5.2.1. Logos

Clement of Alexandria taught about logos, God is knowable only by reason of his logos. The

logos of God are mind of God Logos is perfectly revealed in Jesus Christ, the word in which

all truth comes. The Logos is the perfect mirror of God. The son is changeless/unalterable

image of the Father in which the Father’s true being is set forth. The Logos is the coeternal

with the Father.22 He also taught that God revealed to the philosophers and to the prophets. It

is through the eternal Word that all revelation comes is from heaven. By incarnation Jesus

becomes visible; he has begotten and created his own humanity. God is absolute unity

(monas), Jesus Christ is the logos which communicates and make known about truth to

human being. The incarnation in Jesus Christ is real and final revelation of the truth. Holy

Spirit is clear/definite but plays as subordinate which communicates the truth o the scriptures

and teaching the believers inwardly.23Like Logos, Holy Spirit is active in the lives of the

prophets and the thinkers. Like the magnet holding together the iron rings, the Holy Spirit

holds together the whole universe of rational beings.

5.2.2. Divine and Human

Christ is both human and divine, God and man.24Clement is interested in the Christology;

Jesus is above all the teacher and the wisdom and word of the Father, the savior and

physician who heals body and soul. Christ is admirable in every aspect and claims Christ as

the one who possessed of beauty of both the body and soul, the beauty is true and a perfect

image, the image is of his father. Christ himself is wisdom.25 According to Clement, God is

the source of all good things and his understanding about God includes Greek philosophy.

The knowledge of God cannot be directly described but can be approached by parables and

illustrations. Faith is regarded as the first stage of learning that enables one to change from

heathen to virtue and knowledge as the developed expression of the faith.26

19 Calhoun, Scripture, creed, Theology……..137. 20 Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……95-99. 21 Samuel George, Christology. (Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2003),21. 22 Calhoun, Scripture, creed, Theology………179. 23 Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……99. 24 Cave, The Doctrine of the Person f Christ…………….86-87. 25A. N. Williams, The Divine sense the Intellect in Patristic Theology. (New York: Cambridge University,

2007), 48-52. 26 Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……99.

7

5.3.Origen’s Debate

5.3.1 Origen’s Understanding of Creation:

The most remarkable feature of the Origen’s thought is his account of creation, and the

Christology which depend upon it. Before this world existed there was a prior creation of

rational spirits or minds. 27God was never without his creation, and created just so many

minds as his providence could manage. There were pure unembodied intelligences and

remained as there as long as they were content with the contemplation God.28 But they

were free and they exercise their freedom by turning from him: the devil resisted God, and

others turned with him. Even archangels sinned, though slightly.29 The demons sinned

gravely, and particularly to Plot to ruin other creatures. Some spirits sinned less than

demons, but more than angels, and for them god provided this world. And human bodies as

punishment. But punishment for Origen is beneficial, educational, medicine for sick souls.30

5.3.2 Origen’s understanding of Logos and Son of God as pure logos

Every person coming into the world has a definite spiritual past, which accounts for the

inequality of the Birth experience. There is only one life in this world contrary to what his

enemies alleged.31 Origin does not teach the transmigration of the souls to other bodies but

ultimate destiny. After retraining process in this world and others, is to become son of God,

pure mind or logos. Free will which wrought the fall can bring about restoration. Logically all

spirits may be restored in the apokatastasis,the restoration of all (Acts3:21).32Son exists in

timeless eternity. At the same time son exists as a distinct being beside the father. Father,

son and spirit are three hypostasis and hypokeimenon.all terms for being in the objective

senses that each is a being.33 Origen certainly insisted that Jesus Christ is both God and man

a composite being with human nature and divine nature. There is a union or combination,

not merely association of two. Yet the divine word remain unchanged in being.34 To account

for this Origen postulates a created spirit as the subject of the visible, tangible Jesus who

can grow and suffer. This created mind was uniquely united with the son of God: this union

was like that of an iron- red hot in fire: it becomes indistinguishable from the fire, In the

Incarnation.35

27 Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……107 28 Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……107 29 Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……107 30 Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……107 31Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……107 32Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……107. 33Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……105 34Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……106 35Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church……106

8

5.3.3 Hypostatic Union of Jesus and logos Christology

Origen was a successor clement at the school of Alexandria. He is well known for his treatise

on theology: on first principles probably was the first systematic theology.36 His Alexandrian

background defined his stand on Christology. Human nature of Jesus is understood in the

hypostatic union as generic human nature. His Christology is better known as Logos

Christology.37

5.3.4 Union of soul of Christ with Logs

Logos Christology finds its full development in the writings of Origen.38 He taught that God

was completely transcendent, so the divine cannot mingle with flesh.39 The divine then be

mediated through soul and therefore the soul is the point of contact for the logos. In the

incarnation the human soul of Christ was united with the logos.40This closeness between

human and divine is the way for Christ human soul between to share the properties of

Logos.This union between Logos and Jesus makes him true God.41

In the patristic church Jesus unity with God was often understood as perfect

homoisistheoi.This seem to have been leading Christological idea in Origen. 42 The pre-

existent soul of the Jesus was, in distinction to the souls of the other man, completely

surrendered to the Logos and thus united with it already before they were bound together in

one body. In this sense the universal unification of the human with the divine begins with

Jesus.43

5.3.5 The Two Begettings of Christ

However to maintain the Primacy of God the father, he taught the principle of autotheos

which means God only and alone is God. He believed that the father had begotten the son by

an eternal act: therefore, Christ existed from eternity. Using John1:1 he argues that there were

two begettings of the son: one at the time of virgin birth and the other at the time of eternity

by the father.44He insists that although both Logos and father is co-eternal, the logos is sub-

ordinate to the father.45

36Alister E. Macgrath,Christian theology: An Introduction…,357 37Samuel George, Christology(Kolkatta,Sceptre,2013),23 38Samuel George, Christology…..,23 39Samuel George, Christology…..,23 40Samuel George, Christology…..,23 41 Samuel George, Christology…..,23 42Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,…,41 43Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,…,41 44Samuel George, Christology…..,24 45Alister E. Macgrath,Christian theology: An Introduction…,357

9

5.3.6 Logos is the means of creation and communication of God

Origen held God to be transcendent in a manner combining platonic and Aristotle notions,

God is pure spirit without body or parts. Origen argues that God is pure mind, and any

similarities to creatures is in their rationality, their logos. 46 In his essential self he is

indescribable, unknowable. He is the absolute unity, in contrast to the multiciplity of creation.

Altogether solitary (monas) and so to speak unitary (henas).Such a transcendent God can be

thought and known only through another ,and that the other is his wisdom, word or son.47 All

rational beings all minds reflect the thought of this primary logos; they derive their being

through him, since (being another beside God) he is the principle of multiplicity.48 The divine

logos is the means where by God creates and communicates with his creation. Without him

God could only remain unique, absolute, motionless, uncommunicated. In generation the son,

the father in principle generates everything else.49

5.3.7 The eternal generation of son

God was however always Father: he could not change from one condition (not father) to

another (father).So the son exists in Gods timeless eternity. When popular Christological

texts speak of he son being begotten by the father (as in Ps 2:7), or of the word being uttered

(Ps 45:1).It does not as for Justin imply an act or event. For Origen the father constantly

begets the son by what modern theologies call eternal generation. A favorite text is Heb1:3

where the son is called the effulgence of his Gods glory with wisdom 7:26, where wisdom

(the word/the son) is the effulgence of eternal light God cannot be without his glory.so

everlastingly possesses the son. He asserts against modalists and economic Trinitarians that

‘there is not when the son is not’.50

5.3.8 Relation between the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit according to Origen

At the same time the son exists as a distinct being beside the father, father son and the spirit

are three in hypostasis and hypokeimenon,all terms for being in the objective sense, that each

is a being. Origen makes it clear that the son is god by derivation, not intrinsically and self-

sufficiently like the father. The Gospel calls the father God in an absolute sense (Gk ho

theos,autotheos),While the son is merely God as predicate( the word was god(theos) not God

was the word. In this and other aspects the son is less than the father. The father is superior to

46Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church. (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans ,1991), 105.

47 Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church...105.

48 Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church...105. 49 Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church...105. 50 Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church...105.

10

everything (including the son) and the source of all other being: he son is superior to all the

rational creatures (including the Holy Spirit); the Holy Spirit is superior to the saints (that is

holy beings, including angels and sanctified human beings).51

5.3.9 Redemption consists of Imparting Divine Logos and Deification Requires

Logos

Athanasius in his writing about the incarnation of Logos in the fourth century explained that

man was originally created to participate in the in the divine Logos and how this destiny is

full filled through JesusChrist.52 Participation in the divine Logos has to do with rationalness

of man, corresponding to Greek definition of man as acreature that involved with

reason.53Here the rationality of man is not understood as simply as natural quality, but as

relatedness to God. However through sin man has forfeited his participation in the divine

Logos.54 Redemption consists of imparting the divine Logos. And thus his rational essence to

man again. By this means death is conquered and immortality is imparted. It was the concern

for the deification of man that made it so important.55This formula is already to be found in

Origen. The whole man would not have been saved had not logos assumed the whole man.56

5.3.10 Mediator Christology

The simplest form of mediator Christology is that in which the pre-existent heavenly being is

incorporated in Jesus is not God himself but a being that is subordinated to God but which

stands higher than man.57Such a concept probably lies at the basis of the Jewish-Christian

angel Christology of the postapostolic period. 58 Here the strict Jewish monotheism was

steadily maintained at the price of not granting full divinity to Jesus.59 The structure of

subordination of the Logos under the father in the sense that Logos is being less than the

father in being and essence is maintained for a long time from philio.60Philo characterized the

Logos is inferior to God because Logos has a beginning and has gone forth out of God.61In a

similar sense apologists called the Logos the first of God’s creatures originating from the will

of the father.62Origen also thought the same, designating the Logos as the first of God’s

51 Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church...105. 52Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,(London:scm press,1968),40 53Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man…..,40 54Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man….,40 55Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,….40 56Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man….,40 57Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man….,123 58Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,…,123 59Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man….,123 60Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man….,123 61Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man….,123 62Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man….,124

11

creatures.63 Origen spoke expressly of middle position of the Logos between the one and

many, between the God who transcends all becoming and the created things.64

5.3.11 Chalcedonian Creed and Two Natures Jesus Christ

Chalcedonian creed speaks of two natures, divine and human, existing in one person, in an

irreversible ontological union. There is free and full co-operation of the two natures without

conflict and confusion.65 During the reformed period there was a famous debate between

Lutheran and reformed theologians about the way the two natures relate to each

other.Lutherens arguedfor the principle of fintumcapaxinfiniti:the human Jesus was able to

receive and bear the infinite(including the properties of divine nature) based on the

ancientcommunicatioidiomatumrule.66 Reformed theology denied this in its belief in finitum

non capaxinfiniti which says that the infinite in and of itself cannot bear the infinite. The

word/Logos assumes flesh rather than literally become flesh.67

5.4. Christological Understanding of Contemporary theologians:

A radical challenge to the Chalcedonian view came first from classical

Liberals.FridriechSchleiermacher replaced the two nature doctrine with a doctrine of divine

human relation: Jesus Christ is not divine being in human form but rather a kind of prophetic

figure who realizes the divine nature present in all humans, an ideal and perfected human.

68Christ incarnation is neither final nor absolute.69 Similarly for A .Ritchal, incarnation was

no longer something transcendent and unique to one historical person, but rather a matter of

moral and ethical obedience: divinity denoted Jesus unique vocation. Theprogramme of

classical Liberalism was continued by 20th century liberals, Such as J.A.T. Robinson to

whom Jesus represents the human face of God among the other faces of God in religion.70

The incarnation is understood in terms of religious consciousness. This leads to a pluralistic

view in which Jesus becomes one among many other incarnations such as the many avatharas

of Hinduism.71 For example RaimonPhanikar holds that Jesus is Christ but Christ is not

Jesus. (Meaning that Jesus of Nazareth is one of the manifestations of Logos, Thechristic

principle cannot be confined to one historical person alone).Evangelicals and main line

63Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man….,124 64Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man….,124 65WillamA.Dyrness and Veli-MattiKarkkainen,GlobalDictonary of theology,(England:Inter varsity

Press:2008),173 66WillamA.Dyrness and Veli-MattiKarkkainen,GlobalDictonary of theology…,173 67WillamA.Dyrness and Veli-MattiKarkkainen,GlobalDictonary of theology,…,173 68WillamA.Dyrness and Veli-MattiKarkkainen,GlobalDictonary of theology,...,173 69 Doctrine and practice of the early church Page 105 70 Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church...105. 71Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church...105.

12

christians have offered sharp critique against both Liberals and pluralistic views in their

desire to continue affirming the Chalcedonian tradition.72

5.5.Critic of Logos Christology

5.5.1. Advantages of logos Christology

1. Logos Christology is to be seen above all it could make Jesus unity with the father and the

same time his differentiation forms him understandable73.

2. Logos doctrine of apologists consists in the fact that it is made that the divinity present in

Jesus familiar to Hellenistic society as power that was decisive for its conception of the

world. The logos theory succeeded impressively in explain the role of pre-existent son of God

in mediating creation, to which the New Testament testifies, with in a different sphere of

tradition74.

5.5.2. Weaknesses of Logos Christology

1. The unity of Logos with God cannot be so strictly conceived in the categories of platonic

cosmology. It is required by Christian interest in salvation and the idea of revelation.75

2. The precarious loosening of connection of the son’s divinity with Jesus of Nazareth, God’s

historical revelation.76

3. The Problem of Unbroken influence that the philosophical concept of God, the conception

of simple un-changeable and simple origin (arche) of the world at hand attained in the Centre

of Christian theology through the logos doctrine.77

5.5.3. Implication of Logos Christology

This subordination caused Origen later to be regarded as precursor of Arianism, and he was

attacked for it. But through this subordinationism, and the sharp distinction of the pre-existent

son from the father, look like what Arius taught, his strong doctrine of eternal generation was

exactly what Alexander upheld against Airus.78

Logos doctrine constituted the real kernel of Arian controversy. For the soteriological

reasons fathers the fathers were extremely concerned that the logos revealed in Jesus Posses

equal divinity with the father.79 Athanasius especially expressed this concern: If the most

72Stuart G Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church...105. 73Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,(London:scm press,1968),163 74Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,…,164 75Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,…,164 76Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,…,165 77Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,…,165 78 Doctrine and practice of the early church Page 106 79Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,…,164

13

High God is not present in Jesus, then also we do not share in the divine life through Jesus.

But there was little possibility of doing Justice to this soteriological concern with in the frame

work of Logos doctrine.80 The inner logic of the logos doctrine supported Arius rather than

Athanasius, because the Procession of Logos means the first step of creation and logos is the

first creature, a subordinationist tendency belonged to the platonically conceived logs

doctrine from the beginning.81

Over the centuries the logos Christology became very significant way of interpreting Christ

incarnation.82 One finds problem with Origen’s Position. It looks as if he is saying that the

divinity was in the soul of Jesus, not in his body? Also his logos had a lower degree of

divinity than the father. Origen’s Christology is complex. And that its interpretation at points

is highly problematical.83

5.6.Arius and Athanasius

5.6.1. Arius (250-336)

Arius was a Libyan Christian priest at Alexandria. He was well known for his ascetical and

moral teachings among his community. He attracted many to his teachings especially about

the absolute oneness of the divinity as the highest perfect being. His theological teachings

came to be known as Arianism where he affirmed the finite nature of Christ and was

denounced by the early church as a major heresy at the council of Nicaea in 325 CE.84

5.6.2. Athanasius of Alexandria (296 – 373)

Athanasius was born in Alexandria in 296 and received a good grounding in secular learning

and he made himself well verse in the Scriptures. He was a short, dark and a poor man from a

Coptic family in Egypt. He went on to become the Bishop of Alexandria. He was also a

renowned theologian, Church Father and an able apologist. He is particularly known for his

conflict with Arius and Arianism. His starting pointing of Christology is evidently John 1:1 it

is of the word flesh type. He writes, “The Logos has become man, and has not just entered

into man.” His Christology has a very stereological emphasis.85

5.6.3. Debate between Arius and Athanasius

Arius emphasizes the self-substance of God. God is the one and only source of all created

things, nothing exists which does not ultimately derive from God. This is clearly raises the

question of the relation of the Father to the son.86 The Father is regarded as existing before

the Son. “There was when he was not.” This decisive affirmation places Father and son on

different levels, and is consistent with Arius’ rigorous insistence that the Son is a creature.

80Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,…,164 81Wolfhartpannenberg,Jesus God and man,(London:scm press,1968),164 82 Samuel George, Christology…..,24 83 Samuel George, Christology…..,24 84 Alister,E.MeGrath, Christian Theology An Introduction. ( Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1994), 255. 85 Alister,E.MeGrath, Christian Theology An Introduction. ( Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1994), 255. 86 Henny, Bettenson, The Early Church Fathers, ( London: oxford University Press, 1974), 274.

14

Only the Father is “unbegotten,” the Son, like all other creatures, derives from this one source

of being. However, Arius is careful to emphasize that the Son is like every other creature.

There is a distinction of rank between the Son and other creatures, including human beings.87

Arius has some difficulty in identifying the precise nature of this distinction. The Son, he

argued, is “a perfect creature, yet not as one among other creatures, a begotten being, yet not

as one among other begotten beings.” The implication seems to be that the Son outranks other

creatures, while sharing their essentially created and begotten nature.

5.6.4. Argument with Arianism

If God created Jesus He could create further extensions of Himself and He would not be

constant, there would be more sons. Here is where the doctrine of the Incarnation began, and

it is very important to know Jesus was and is God.88

5.6.5. His Response

For this question Athanasius response it followings, God was not always a father. There was

a time when God was all alone, and was not yet a father; only later did he become a father.

The son did not always exist.89 Everything created is out of nothing. So the logos of God

came into existence out of nothing. There was a time when he was not. Before he was

brought into being, he did not exist. He also had a beginning to his created existence.90

An important aspect of Arius distinction between Father and Son concerns the unknowability

of God. Arius emphasizes the utter transcendence and inaccessibility of God. God cannot be

known by any other creature.91

Athanasius’s struggles with the Arian Christology, especially in his teaching on salvation,

confronted, on one hand though indirectly, the pagan teaching of Julian, and on the other

hand, it dealt with “the anathema appended to the symbol of the Nicene Council” which

expressed the opinion of Arius and his followers. Arianism “believed in a single supreme

God who made contact with the world through lower creatures such as the Son and the Spirit.

The Son was a suffering divine hero who was to be worshipped, very much like the hero gods

of the Greeks.”

5.6.6. Further Argument

we can summarize in the following manner, (i) The Son is a creature, who like all other

creatures, derives from the will of God.(ii) The term Son is thus a metaphor, an honorific

term intended to underscore the rank of the Son among other creatures. It does not imply that

Father and Son share the same being or status. (iii).The status of the Son is itself a

consequence not of the nature of the Son, but of the will of the Father.92

87 Henny, Bettenson, The Early Church Fathers, ( London: oxford University Press, 1974), 275 - 276. 88 , Bettenson, The Early Church Fathers, ( London: oxford University Press, 1974), 274. 89 Veli Matti Karkkainen, Christology A Global Introduction, ( Michigan: Baker Academic, 2003), 66 90 Henny, Bettenson, The Early Church Fathers, ( London: oxford University Press, 1974), 277. 91 Henny, Bettenson, The Early Church Fathers, ( London: oxford University Press, 1974), 278. 92 Henny, Bettenson, The Early Church Fathers, ( London: oxford University Press, 1974), 279.

15

5.6.7. Athanasius Responses

But Athanasius responding that, Jesus is God incarnate. The logic of his argument says (i) No

creature can redeem another creature. (ii) Only God can save. (iii) Jesus Christ saves. (iv)

Therefore Jesus Christ is God.93

5.6.8. Council of Nicaea (325)

The Arian controversy of the fourth century is widely regarded as one of the most significant

in the history of the Christian church. Arius teaching provoked a hostile response from

Athanasius. The Council of Nicaea was convened by Constantine, the first Christian emperor,

with a view to sorting out the destabilizing Christological disagreements within his empire.94

He was determined to re-establish doctrinal unity in the church. This was the first ecumenical

council, that is, an assembly of Christians drawn from the entire Christian world, whose

decisions are regarded as normative for the churches. Nicaea settled the Arian controversy by

affirming that Jesus was homoousios (one in being or of one substance) with the Father, thus

rejecting the Arian position in favour of a vigorous assertion of the divinity of Christ. Arius

and his followers were condemned and an official creed was formulated, it reads,95

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible;

and in One Lord Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father,

God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God, Begotten, not made of one

substance with the Father, through Whom all things were made.....

5.7 Appolinarius

Appolinarius was particularly upset with the increasing spreading of the belief that in Christ

the Logos assumed human nature totally. In that case he thought that Logos would be

contaminated by the weakness of human nature. And Jesus’ sinless nature cannot be

maintained. 96 Appolinarius was supporting Christ’s full divinity, but he was against Christ’s

full humanity.

5.7.1 Appolinarius’ Argument

After Nicea, the question was raised: If Jesus Christ be truly God, how can he be at the same

time truly man? Appolinarius tried to safeguard the unity of the person of the God-man by

denying that he had complete manhood. He assumed that man was composed of 3 parts:

Body, Soul, Intellect (nous). In Jesus, the nous or intellect was displaced by the divine Logos.

But Appolinarius was condemned at Constantinople in 381. 97 So, Appolinarius assured that

Christ’s human mind was occupied by divine logos.

Appolinarius did make a lasting contribution to orthodox theology in declaring that Christ

was consubstantial (of one substance) with the Father as regarding his divinity and

consubstantial with us as regarding his humanity. This formula, which originated with

93 Henny, Bettenson, The Early Church Fathers, ( London: oxford University Press, 1974), 280. 94 Alister,E.MeGrath, Christian Theology An Introduction. ( Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1994), 255. 95 Alister,E.MeGrath, Christian Theology An Introduction. ( Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1994), 255. 96 Samuel. George, Christology (Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2013), 26. 97 Walter. A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (U.S.A: Baker Book House Company, 2001), 242.

16

Appolinarius, later became official orthodox doctrine. Appolinarius was also one of the first

to claim that God suffered and died on the cross, a claim which received immediate

condemnation but later became acceptable in orthodox theology.98Christ was having same

substance with Father in divinity. The divine nature of the Christ’s was over emphasised by

Appolinarius.

In working out what it meant that Christ was both God and man, Appolinarius first had to

determine how these two seemingly independent conceptions could be commingled. There

was a great difficulty here, because believers can worship God, but refuse to worship a

human being, so the question of our worship of Christ could lead one to think that we both do

and we do not worship this same person, which is clearly absurd. 99 During the Era of

Appolinarius people faced difficulties in worshiping Jesus the Christ, because of the idea of

Jesus with human nature, which manipulates the complete divinity in Christ.

Conclusion

The nature of Jesus Christ is complex. For Jesus’ personality included the qualities and

attributes which constitute deity. The problem with these qualities are that they differ from

human not merely in degree but in kind. This fact reminds us that the person of Jesus was not

simply union of human and divine qualities, but His personality possesses divine

characteristics as well as sinless human nature. The debate arose because of different

understanding of Church fathers. We find difficulty in specifying the exact content of this

doctrine because it is a mystery.

Bibliography

Anatolios, Khaled. Athanasius “The Coherence of his Thought”. London: Roultledge, 2005.

Anatolios, Khaled. Athanasius, The coherence of His Thought. London: Routledge, 1998.

Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria, The Orations of St. Athanasius against the Arians

London: Griffith Farran & Co. 1980.

Bettenson, Henry. The Early Christian Fathers. London: Oxford University Press, 1974.

Boyd, R.H.S. Khiristadvaita A Theology for India. Madras: CLS, 1977.

Calhoun, Robert L. Scripture, creed, Theology. Eugene: Cascade books, 2011.

Dyrness, William A. and Veli-Matti Karkkainen. Global Dictionary of theology.

England:Inter varsity Press:2008, 173

George, Samuel. Christology. Kolkata: ESPACE, 2013.

George, Samuel. Christology. Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2003.

98 Alan Richardson, John Bowden, Eds. The Westminster Dictionary of Christian theology.(Great Britain: SCM

Press Ltd, 1983),

17

Hall G. Stuart. Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans,

1991.

Jocz, Jacob. The Jewish People and Jesus Christ: A study in the Controversy between Church

and Synagogue. London: SPCK, 1954.

John Newton, “Athanasius,” in Who’s Who in Christian History, 1992.

Karkkainen Veli- Matti. Christology: A global Introduction. Michigan: Baker Academic.

2003.

McGrath. Alister. Chritstian Theology An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1994.

Pannenberg, Wolfhart. Jesus God and man. London: scm press,1968

Williams A. N. The Divine sense the Intellect in Patristic Theology. New York: Cambridge

University, 2007.

Willis R. John. The teachings of the Church Fathers. Boston: Herder and Herder, 1966.

Wilson R. MCL. “Gnosticism” The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology, ed. Alan

Richardson & John Bowden. Philadelphia: The Westminster, 198, 226.

Wingreen Gustaf. Man and the Incarnation: A study in the Biblical Theology of Irenaeus.

Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1959.

Webliography

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01616a.htm/ accessed on 17 – 11- 2014 at 5:30 p.m