Defining Christianity: A Reflection on the Controversy and Christology of the Nicene Creed

Hannah Clark Professor Margaret Fletcher BIBL 111: Introduction to Christian History and Thought (04) February 15, 2014

Clark 1

Three hundred years after the death and resurrection of Christ, the early Christian church was still struggling to define who her Bridegroom truly was. Theologians pondered over the nature of Christs humanity and deity and his relationship to God the Father. Conflicting interpretations within Christology formed five common heresies that demanded attention. Arianisms radical monotheism maintained that God the Father was the one true God.1 Arianism denied Christs full divinity, claiming he was a finite creature made out of nothing by the Father. By suggesting God had sent a lesser creature to demonstrate His love to mankind, Arianism made a personal, intimate relationship with God through Christ impossible.2 Alternately, Macedonianism accepted Christs deity, but believed the Holy Spirit was a created creature.3 This belief contradicted the doctrine of the Trinity. The Spirit had to be divine in order for God to work in Christ and through Christians, while Paul the apostle also alluded to the Spirits deity in Romans 8.4 Apollinarianism claimed that Jesus was human only in flesh and therefore possessed no human soul. By understanding Christ as a divine spirit controlling a fleshly body, Apollinarianism meant to reconcile the unity of Christs persons in concordance with John 1:14. Nonetheless, its interpretation failed to account for Christs humanity, an aspect essential to the validity of Christs atonement. Nestorianism tried to avoid Apollinarianisms errors by emphasizing both of Christs persons equally. Consequently, Christ seemed to be two individual entities: God the Word and

Tony Lane, A Concise History of Christian Thought, Rev. ed (Michigan: Baker Academic, 2006), 28 Michael B. Thompson, Arianism: Is Jesus Christ Divine and Eternal or Was He Created? in Heresies and How to Avoid Them, ed. Ben Quash and Michael Ward (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2007), 20 3 Lane, A Concise History of Christian Thought, 40 4 Hugh T. Kerr, ed. Readings in Christian History and Thought. 2nd ed. (Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 1990), 235
2

Clark 2

Jesus the man.5 However, while God is the being with saving power, it is humanity that needs saving.6 Christs ability to atone for sin required both his divinity and humanity, so both natures had to be present simultaneously. Finally, Eutychianism believed Christs human nature was absorbed his divine nature. These natures became blurred together into what theology professor Tony Lane calls a mixture of deity and humanity . . . which is neither God nor man.7 Like Nestorianism and Apollinarianism, Eutychianism failed to recognize the equal need for both the deity and humanity of Christ. These five controversies brought the Church together on three separate occasions to establish firm confessions of the Christian faith. The first ecumenical, or universal, council gathered in the city of Nicaea in A.D. 325 at the behest of Emperor Constantine. Fifty-six years later, Emperor Theodosius convened the second council in Constantinople, and Emperor Marcian convened the final council in Chalcedon in 451. Each council addressed heresies and contributed to the formation of the Nicene Creed and the Chalcedonian Definition. The Council of Nicaea debated the deity of Christ and his relationship to God the Father. Christ was officially stated to be homoousios, or of one substance, with the Father. The Creed of Nicaea was produced and served as a sort of rough draft to what would eventually become the Nicene Creed. Unfortunately, the theological stipulations of the Creed divided the Church into

Bingham, Pocket History of the Christian Church, (Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 51 Marcus Plested, Is Jesus Christ Divine and Human or a Hybrid, a Third Thing That Is Nether Fully One nor the Other? in Heresies and How to Avoid Them, ed. Ben Quash and Michael Ward (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2007), 47 7 Lane, A Concise History of Christian Thought, 58
6

Clark 3

two major parties: the Nicene Party, which strongly supported the full deity of Christ, and the Origenists, who emphasized the slight inferiority of Christ within the Godhead.8 The Council of Constantinople condemned the three heresies of Arianism, Macedonianism, and Apollinarianism. The council made some changes to the original Creed of Nicaea and added an addendum concerning the Holy Spirit. Still, it was not until A.D. 1054 that the entire Church accepted that the Holy Spirit proceeded from both the Father and the Son, instead of from the Father through the Son.9 The Council of Chalcedon addressed the dual nature of Jesus as both God and man by refuting the Christological heresies of Arianism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, and Eutychianism. The Creed of Constantinople was ratified, thus concluding the development of the Nicene Creed. Additionally, Emperor Marcian wanted the church to write a confession of faith that would unite the churches of the divided Roman Empire. Drawing phrases from Church creeds and Leos Tome, the council created the Chalcedonian Definition, an analysis of the incorporation of Christs human and divine natures within his person.10 Over all, the divine nature of Jesus Christ is fundamental to the Christian faith, for [w]ithout it, Lane states, there is no true revelation of God in Jesus . . . [and] the Christian doctrine of salvation is undermined.11 A Christians personal conception of God is the most important aspect about him.12 Certainly, a churchs Christology must be sound if it is to present a clear Gospel message.

8 9

Lane, A Concise History of Christian Thought, 30 Ibid., 40-41 10 Kerr, Readings in Christian History and Thought, 75 11 Lane, A Concise History of Christian Thought, 31 12 A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy (New York: Harper and Row, 1961), 9-12

Clark 4

My own Baptist church follows a Christology very similar to what is presented in the Nicene Creed. According to Calvary Baptist Churchs public statement of faith, God is one being eternally existing in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.13 By this statement, we mean that Christ is indeed of one substance with the Father. Furthermore, we believe that Christ is both true God and true man, begotten of the Holy Spirit through the Virgin Mary, and that he died for the sin of the world. Consequently, any sinner who trusts Christ as his personal Savior is a born-again child of God indwelt with the Holy Spirit. These doctrines match those presented in the Nicene Creed. However, my church differs from Nicene orthodoxy on the doctrine of baptism. The Nicene Creed acknowledges one baptism is acknowledged for the remission of sins.14 This baptism is understood to bring forgiveness or lessening of sin, and is a required as a step of faith before the grace of the Holy Spirit can be received.15 However, my church strongly believes that the Nicene view of baptism is incoherent with the salvation message. According to Colossians 1:4, Christs death and resurrection was all that was necessary for redemption of sin. The purpose of baptism is then a public demonstration of faith proclaiming the dedication of ones life to God. By this declaration, a believer is welcomed into the body of Christthe church. Despite failing to provide a complete Christology, the three ecumenical councils did establish a strong definition of the Christian faith. Theology professor D. Jeffrey Bingham notes that the councils created boundaries within which we find acceptable interpretations of the

Calvary Baptist Church, What We Believe (cbcwarren.org, 2012) Accessed 15 February 2014 Kerr, Nicene Creed, Readings in Christian History and Thought, 75-76 15 Geddes MacGregor, The Nicene Creed Illumined by Modern Thought (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980), 129
14

13

Clark 5

Scriptures about the Trinity and the two natures of Christ.16 Even today, we as Christians may not have all the answers concerning our faith, but after the painstaking labor of the early Church in its search for the truth, we are comfortable in which doctrinal views we should believe and which views we should not.

16

Bingham, Pocket History of the Church, 54

Clark 6

Bibliography Behr, John. Formation of Christian Theology. Vol. 2, The Nicene Faith. New York: St. Vladimirs Seminary Press, 2004. Bingham, D. Jeffrey. Pocket History of the Church. Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 2002. Calvary Baptist Church. 2012. What We Believe. [Online]. Available from http://cbcwarren.org. 15 February 2014. Kerr, Hugh T., ed. Readings in Christian History and Thought. 2nd ed. Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 1990. Lane, Tony. A Concise History of Christian Thought. Rev. ed. Michigan: Baker Academic, 2006. MacGregor, Geddes. The Nicene Creed Illumined by Modern Thought. Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1980. Tozer, A.W. The Knowledge of the Holy. New York: Harper and Row, 1961. Quash, Ben, and Michael Ward, ed. Heresies and How to Avoid Them: Why It Matters What Christians Believe. Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2007.