More handpicked essays just for you.
How did religion influence the western civilization
Religious influence on western civilization
How did religion influence the western civilization
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: How did religion influence the western civilization
Chalcedon provided a consensus concerned the recognition that Christ was both divine and human, but not how the divine and human natures related to each other. (McGrath, 284) Dr. Vidu said in the lecture that the consensus did not affirm its position on the issue, but just rejected all the points from the heresies’ views on the issue of the substance of Christ. (Vidu, L4) As a result, it did not succeed in establishing a consensus throughout the entire Christian world. (McGrath, 285) There was still too much leeway for the theologians from different schools to argue about the concept. Monophysitism is one of the examples. The view believing that there is only one nature in Christ is normative within the eastern Christian churches; while the dominant view of dyophysitism (two natures in Christ) from the Chalcedonian position had big influence to the later western Christendom. …show more content…
Different approaches were developed over time trying to explore the relation between the human and divine natures of Christ within the Christian tradition under different cultural context and various philosophical systems. Historically, it is one of the different theological standpoints between eastern and western churches that form a cultural gap or disagreement between two. The cumulative dissension led to the conflict eventually between two traditions. In addition, the Chalcedonian decision also affected those Christians under the heresies. Many of the Nestorians needed to exile to other locations to avoid the condemnation of the schism. These exiles, however, became early missionary works in this
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...
Each man trying to correct from within were pushed further and outward away from the goal of unity. We would have a different story if it were only one man who rejected the idea of the Church being one with the world. The individual would have been marked as the antichrist. Instead, we see a few men take a stand for what they felt was the truth, which we had strayed. Noted, Campbell has seen the destruction with takes place when man messes with God’s desire for gathering of the Church. Campbell states, “What awful and distressing effects have those sad divisions produced! What aversions, what reproaches, what backbitings, what evil surmisings, what angry contentions, what enmities, what excommunications, even persecution!!!” (Campbell and Thomas) Campbell’s biggest fight was pulling back the reigns of the world. Campbell extends ejecting all human creeds that cause divisions among Christians. He states, “… for their faith must not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power and veracity of God. Therefore, no such deductions can be made terms of communion, but do properly belong to the after and progressive edification of the Church. Hence, it is evident that no such deductions or inferential truths ought to have a place in the Church’s confession.” (Campbell and Thomas) Reaching out to across all divisions, Campbell has to be unprejudiced. “That although the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are inseparably connected, making together but one perfect and entire revelation of the Divine will, for the edification and salvation of the Church, and therefore in that respect cannot be separated.” “From the nature and construction of these propositions, it will evidently appear, that they are laid in a designed subserviency to the declared end of our association; and are exhibited for the express purpose of performing a duty of pervious necessity, a duty loudly called for in
With this in mind, the objective of this essay is to focus on the main ideas of each theologian, and discuss how each theologian’s ideas are compensatory to the other. This is important because even though each theologian’s writings were inspired by the harsh realities of the societies, and also by the effect each writer experienced in their moment in history, their critiques specifically of Christian institutions remain a consistent amongst all three writings. Furthermore, not only are their critiques consistent, but their goals for providing new frameworks for the future of the Church and Christian discipleship are consistent as well.
The missionary expansion and their work within different nations is a dilemma of well intentions versus prosperity and power. Many missionaries remained out of politics and out of local culture and only served the communities for the better. They increased educational opportunities and provided medical care; most importantly they served to ensure the communities could actively participate in the international community. While the government and businesses reaped the rewards of increased prosperity and power, these rewards were in many ways not the purpose of missionary expansion but merely an outcome.
The direction now of my research is to begin investigating the context of the debate. To achieve this aim I will need to be consulting books of both secular and church history for the time of Jesus and the Council.
Normally, it is generally believed that the statement gap between broadminded and conventional Christian theologians is more ruthless than the statement gap between broadminded and conventional Politicians. Most of the time the Politicians are fewer forced to confront each other in elections but the broadminded and conventional Christians can spent most of their time keeping away from each other. In a book, ‘Meaning of Jesus’ the authors Marcus Borg and Tom Wright has discussed a lot of issues like resurrection. Even though Borg and Wright take different diverse methods but they has discussed each other point of view in a reasonable manner, and they both directly faced points of their discrepancy.
Benchmark Assignment: Gospel Essentials There are several aspects to consider when exploring the Christian worldview. There are many facets and denominations and they each have their own distinct beliefs and practices, but they all share the same fundamental beliefs. In this paper we will explore the character of God, His creation, humanity and its nature, Jesus’ significance to the world, and the restoration of humanity, as well as my beliefs and the way that I interact with Christianity and my personal worldview. God In the Christian worldview, God is the one and only God. He is the sovereign creator of everything.
Throughout history many different secs of Christianity have fought over whose theology was sounder then the other. In many places often resorting to violence to try and establish their views as the most dominant. However, there is one theological belief
As the developments in Eastern Christianity were happening independent of Western Christianity, the differences in approaches grew to a serious estrangement between the two (Ware 23-24). As Ware suggests, some of the more prominent differences between the eastern and western Christianity are in the approach of religious truth, the perception of sin and salvation, and the view of the Holy Spirit. For Orthodox Christians, truth must be experienced personally (Ware 132). There is thus less focus on the exact definition of religious truth and more on the practical and personal experience of truth in the life of the individual and the church. This emphasis on personal experience of truth flows into the actual definition of the word Orthodox, which essentially means the correct theological observance of religion (“orthodox”). In the Western churches sin and salvation are seen primarily in legal terms. God gave humans freedom, and if they misuse it and brake God's commandments, they deserve punishment. God's grace results in forgiveness of the transgression and freedom from bondage and punishment. The Eastern churches see the matter in a different way. For Orthodox theologians, humans were created in the image of God and made to participate fully in the divine life. The full communion with God that Adam and Eve enjoyed meant complete freedom and true humanity, because humans are most human when they are completely united with God.
One of the earliest trends in Christianity was the need for Councils to settle disagreements on the religion. There have been many times where Christians had disagreements on what to consider as the base concepts of Christianity. Some
Four movements, now heresies, of the past each adopted one of these four views mentioned previously. They are: Nestorianism, Eutychianism, Apollinarianism, and Arianism. Nestorianism and Eutychianism fall under the controversy of the relationship between the two natures. The controversy of Nestorianism arose over the propriety of the term theotokos (“God-bearing”) as a description of Mary. At the Council of Chalcedon in 428 Nestorius gave his view of theotokos to which he held and overly dividing view of the two natures of Christ. Nestorius felt that the term was of doubtful propriety unless the term anthropotokos (“human-bearing”) was also used. Nestorius was later condemned when Cyril of Alexandria; who held the belief in Christ having one nature got involved. Nestorius’ pronouncement towards the birth of Christ caused Cyril to oppose him. Nestorius said that God cannot have a mother; no woman can give birth to God. Cyril of Alexandria suggested that Nestorius was proposing that Jesus has two natures joined in a purely moral union. After Nestorianism came Eutychianism. Eutyches who was repeatedly summoned to the standing Synod of Constantinople in 448, finally appeared and stated his position whereas Christ has two natures before the incarnation, that was but one afterwards. The result of the Synod was the Eutyches was deposed and excommunicated and the one- nature doctrine rejected.
For centuries now Christians have claimed to possess the special revelation of an omnipotent, loving Deity who is sovereign over all of His creation. This special revelation is in written form and is what has come to be known as The Bible which consists of two books. The first book is the Hebrew Scriptures, written by prophets in a time that was before Christ, and the second book is the New Testament, which was written by Apostles and disciples of the risen Lord after His ascension. It is well documented that Christians in the context of the early first century were used to viewing a set of writings as being not only authoritative, but divinely inspired. The fact that there were certain books out in the public that were written by followers of Jesus and recognized as being just as authoritative as the Hebrew Scriptures was never under debate. The disagreement between some groups of Christians and Gnostics centered on which exact group of books were divinely inspired and which were not. The debate also took place over the way we can know for sure what God would have us include in a book of divinely inspired writings. This ultimately led to the formation of the Biblical canon in the next centuries. Some may ask, “Isn’t Jesus really the only thing that we can and should call God’s Word?” and “Isn’t the Bible just a man made collection of writings all centered on the same thing, Jesus Christ?” This paper summarizes some of the evidences for the Old and New Testament canon’s accuracy in choosing God breathed, authoritative writings and then reflects on the wide ranging
Lane, T. (2006). A concise history of christian thought (Completely ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
Westphal, M. (2009). Whose Community? Which Interpretation?: Philosophical Hermeneutics for the Church. Baker Academic. 107
Lutzer, Erwin. The Doctrines That Divide: a Fresh Look at the Historic Doctrines That Separate Christians. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1998.