Introduction
Challenging orthodox traditions, Arianism sought to abate Jesus of His divinity, rendering the Arian controversy a pivotal moment in the history of the Christian church. For this reason, Arianism often receives designation as the archetypal Christian deviation, a heresy that erodes the very foundation of historic Christianity. Unfortunately, the Arian philosophy remains prevalent in modern times, providing the basis for Christian cults in America. This paper will outline the fundamental doctrines of Arianism while demonstrating that the theological underpinnings are antithetical to Scriptural teachings and orthodox Christianity.
Background
Arius took exception to proclamations of Jesus’ divinity and equivalence with the Father
…show more content…
and began unreservedly challenging this fundamental doctrine just before AD 318. While Arius’ teachings only survive in fragments and opponent quotations, he clearly asserts that Jesus is a created (albeit exalted) being, rather than the second self-existent person of the Godhead. Arius appears to maintain a strict monotheism, developing a theological foundation from the absolute unity and transcendence of God, while concluding there is a logical or theological contradiction in ascribing certain divine attributes to Jesus. In a letter to Alexander of Alexandria, Arius writes, “We acknowledge One God, alone Ingenerate, alone Everlasting, alone Unbegun, alone True, alone possessing Immortality, alone Wise, alone Good, [and] alone Sovereign; Judge, Governor, and Providence of all, unalterable and unchangeable, just and good, God of the Law and the Prophets and the New Covenant...” In emphasizing the distinctiveness and indivisibility of God, Arius subtly precludes the extension of these divine attributes to the person of Jesus, running contrary to Trinitarian theology, which recognizes God as one in essence, and three in persons. As a result, Arianism denies the eternality, sovereignty, immutability, and divine wisdom of Christ—making Him both ontologically and metaphysically subordinate to the Father (i.e. subordinationism). Additionally, divine foreknowledge of Jesus righteousness predicates His designation as the “Son of God,” which serves as a heavenly exaltation, rather than an affirmation of Jesus’ divine nature. Although this does not represent a comprehensive explanation of Arian theology, these principles provide the fundamental core of Arianism and provide a proper foundation for further analysis. The Old Testament Indicates Plurality within the Godhead Although the term Trinity does not appear in Scripture, the doctrine provides an appropriate interpretation of special revelation, as the underlying concepts receive considerable affirmation when one analyzes the biblical text holistically.
Consistent with Arian teachings, the Bible affirms monotheism (cf. Deuteronomy 4:35; 6:4; Isaiah 43:10-11; 44:8; Nehemiah 9:6; 1 Timothy 1:17; James 2:19), declaring all other gods are mere idols (cf. Psalm 96:5). However, multiple attestations throughout the Old Testament provide indications of plurality within the Godhead. Initial indications of multiplicity occur as God refers to Himself in the plural (cf. Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isiah 6:8), first manifesting during the creation account as God says, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness” (Genesis 1:26a [emphasis …show more content…
added]). The theme of plurality continues as the Angel of the Lord is clearly identified with God, yet remains a distinct person (cf. Genesis 16:11-13; 18:1-33; Exodus 3:2-6; Judges 13:3-22). Exemplification of this principle is most readily apparent in Genesis 16, as the Angel of the Lord appears to Hagar in the wilderness (v.7). As the encounter concludes, the text equates the Angel with Yahweh (יְהוָה֙), stating, “So she [Hagar] called the Lord [Yahweh] who spoke to her: The God Who Sees, for she said, ‘In this place, have I actually seen the One who sees me?’ That is why she named the spring, ‘A Well of the Living One Who Sees Me’” (vv.13-14a). Additionally, the Scriptures accentuate the Messiah’s divine nature, identifying two separate figures as God or Lord (cf. Isaiah 9:6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; Psalm 45:6-7; 110:1). Isaiah 9:6 demonstrates this concept best, stating, “For a child will be born for us, a son will be given to us, and the government will be on His shoulders. He will be named Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.” Finally, interchangeable expressions further support the interpretation of multiplicity within the Godhead, as the terms Word, Spirit, and Lord are all utilized in articulating God’s character and actions (cf. Psalm 33:6; Isiah 48:16; 61:1). Therefore, through comprehensive consideration of the Old Testament narrative, it becomes clear that Scripture affirms monotheism, while simultaneously conveying the theological principle that plurality exists within the Godhead. The New Testament Affirms the Divinity of Jesus Although the Old Testament provides indications of plurality within the Godhead, justification for Trinitarian doctrine only results from considering the additional developments reflected in the New Testament.
While the New Testament reaffirms monotheism (cf. Mark 12:29; 1 Timothy 1:17; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Ephesians 4:6), it harmoniously demonstrates a distinctive unity between three persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (cf. Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Ephesians 4:4–6; Revelation 1:4–5a).
However, in justifying their Christological assertions, the Arians appear to isolate carefully selected passages, forcing a literal interpretation of text dissociated from its proper context (i.e. selective literalism). For example, Arius purportedly references Proverbs 8, specifically verse 22, to justify the
Conclusion
After analyzing the fundamental truth-claims of Arianism, one must conclude the theology is inconsistent with Scripture and represents an unambiguous contrast from orthodox Christianity. In denying the deity of Christ, the theological underpinnings of Arianism are antithetical to Scriptural teachings and orthodox Christianity. Acknowledgment of Jesus’ deity remains essential to Christian theology, and modern organizations that depart from Trinitarian doctrine require designation as heretical cults, rather than Christina
denominations.
One of the main principles of Christianity is the belief in both the divinity and humanity of Jesus, that these two natures are combined harmoniously in one being. In general, all modern Christians believe that Jesus was human, he was considered to be “The Word was made flesh” (John, I: 14). However, Jesus was more than just a human, despite being subjected to pain, suffering and death like all other human beings, he was sinless and also possessed the power to heal and to defy death in order to ascend, both body and spirit, into heaven. He was all man and all God, a combination of these two elements, remaining distinct but united in one being. The deity of Jesus is a non-negotiable belief in Christianity, which is referred to in many parts of scripture, “God was revealed in the flesh” (I Timothy, 3:16). The Christian faith does not perceive Jesus as God but rather a reincarnation of God, a mysterious deity who is the second person of the Holy Trinity. Throughout history, controversy has surrounded the issue of the humanity and divinity of Jesus, leading to the formation of Docetism, the belief that Jesus was fully divine but not fully human, Arianism, that Jesus was superior to all of creation, but less divine than God, and Nestorius, that there were two separate persons within Jesus. This the proportion of the divine and human within Je...
This paper will outline specific points in Saint Augustine’s Confessions that highlight religious views following the fall of Rome. Though Augustines views on religion may not reflect that of most people in his time period, it still gives valuable insight into how many, namely Neoplatonists,, viewed God and his teachings.
Hugo Meynell's book is a clear example of the growing interest in apologetics. Meynell considers four common objections to Christian doctrine, the belief in God is morally irrelevant; that there is no reason to believe in the special claims of Christianity over those of non-Christian religions. Meynell, also says no sense can be made of the doctrines of Incarnation, Atonement, and the Trinity and that Christian doctrine about life after death is based upon an indefensible view of the nature of human persons-and shows to his own views that these remarks can be met. It should be noted that Meynell on the prior assumption that God exists. This is not because Meynell takes that assumption to be indefensible or incapable of demonstration; it is rather that the existence of God is not his topic in this book.
The place and time in which Christianity developed was characterized by change and confusion in all areas of life. Political, philosophical and especially religious questions were being asked that had never been asked before, and traditional systems were not providing the answers. For nearly seven centuries, from the conquest of Alexander the Great to the establishment of Christianity as the state religion by the Roman Emperor Constantine, the ancient world sought these answers in the mystery-religions, independent groups worshipping in new and experimental ways. Ancient religious tradition had failed to fulfill the needs of this evolving and expanding society and these mystery-religions were a cultural expression of that need. Christianity grew into the midst of this world and was in fact the end result of the experiment started in the mystery-religions.
2. Orthodox Christianity has a history of trying to deceive humanity. In her book, Ellerbe proclaims that: "Orthodox Christianity fostered humanity's shift towards a world view that pays little heed to the idea of divinity." (Ellerbe 165). In addition, the Grand Inquisitor "...claims it as a merit for himself and his Church that at last they have vanquished freedom and have done so to make men happy." (Dostoevsky 1081).
"EXPLORING THEOLOGY 1 & 2." EXPLORING THEOLOGY 1 2. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 May 2014.
In David deSilva book, Honor, Patronage, Kinship, and Purity: Unlocking New Testament Culture deSilva states that context is extremely important as well as understanding the culture, without these elements one cannot properly understand the interpretation of Scripture. David deSilva gives an enlightening contextual study of first century Mediterranean culture. deSilva believes that all culture delivers the framework for all communication, and the New Testament writings is no different in how the culture provides the framework for communication.
The thesis of this paper is that, setting aside the question of moral offense that has disturbed commentators from Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason) to William Empson (Milton's God), agape to neighbor makes sense only under monotheistic or specifically Christian assumptions, and therefore, the old saw, "Christianity may not be factually true, but it has a sublime ethical teaching", is problematical.
Arianism and Apollinarianism fall under the controversy surrounding the Christ being fully divine and fully human. Arianism is the teaching of the Alexandrian presbyter Arius, and his supporters. Arius denied the full divinity of Christ. He taught that the Son of God was not of the same substance as the father and that he was created “...
...s distributed in Theology 101 at the University of Notre Dame, Fremantle on 22 April 2008.
In order to answer these questions, this paper will include an analysis of Plato’s theories as well as their influences on early Christianity. It will demonstrate to the reader that Plato’s theories are, in fact, still in use in Christian Theology and conclude with an evaluation of this assessment.
How, then, is it possible to refer to God as three separate entities but still be unified in the same breath? The immergence of the doctrine of the Trinity was a development within the movement of Christianity rather than a sudden occurrence.
Throughout the modern age the subject of Gnosticism has stood in contrast to the concepts of traditional, orthodox Christianity. The subject of Gnosticism has served to represent the ideas and practices of Christianity that were not sanctioned by orthodox Christianity. Generally, we have come to understand that the world of Christianity has been assembled and constructed in the first five centuries after the death of Christ. In a sense, events such as the Council of Nicaea represent arbitrary decisions to compile the official church-sanctioned version of Christianity. Any writings or practices that fell outside of the formal circle of Christian doctrine became candidates for the label of Gnosticism.
“Christianity, along with all other theistic belief systems, is the fraud of the age. It serves to detach the species from the natural world, likewise, each other. It supports blind submission to authority[control of the masses].”(Zeitgeist 2007) In this essay, we will explore the different roots of religion and the plagiarism that Christianity and a number of different religions have committed.
Apollinarianism is the heresy, which denied the completeness of Christ’s humanity named after Apollinarius of Laodicea born circa 312 –315 who became a bishop of Laodicea in 360. Originally, a supporter of orthodoxy against the Arians, his Christological teaching becomes a heresy among scholars, at a synod in Rome in 374-80 and by the Council of Constantinople in 381. The Christology of Apollinarius is summarised as, one hypostasis, one physis, one prosopon and one energia (activity). The intention of this essay is to examine the background of Apollinarius and his teachings.