I think it is important to understand why we should look back at the development of the doctrine of the person of Christ. The doctrines that we believe today did not come easy, but stood up under heavy debate and heretical teaching. There have been so many other ideas and philosophies on the differences in doctrinal beliefs and it is important to look back and understand how our present belief has stood the test of time. But this means looking at tradition.
Tradition is a big part in understanding our historical theology and yet it is a word that people are afraid of. All that the church has believed, taught, and understood in the past, whether it was right or wrong, it has given us a greater understanding of why we believe certain things. Tradition is not where we go to be told what the Bible means. We should never look at tradition and completely reject it, nor should we look at it with full acceptance either. We need to know where it came from and what we agree with.
It would be an arrogant statement for us to say that we do not need history or an understanding of theology. Some of our beliefs that were formed out of the tradition of the early church have stood the test of time, have stood up against many false teachings and have continued to be sufficient time and time again.
Throughout history there have been many different understandings of the person of Christ. There are heretics who stood up against the church with their own ideas of the doctrine. We need these teachings to articulate the truth of scripture in ways that are helpful and clear. As we look back through history we are able to see the development of the doctrine of Christ through many battles and misunderstandings.
Some of the earliest heretical teachings begin with the rejection of His humanity as seen in the ideas of Gnosticism. Jesus is actually an ion sent from the demiurge. Under this idea Jesus appeared to be a man and appeared to suffer but he didn’t. This became the foundational objection of the humanity of Christ, the idea that he simply appeared to be human but wasn’t really. The idea to appear is called Docetism.
Another early heretical view of the person of Christ was ebionitism. Under this view Christ was not born of a virgin, but in fact he was born fully human. It was not until his baptism that be became the Christ, but he still remained fully human. The whole purpose of Christ was to be an example for us, to show us how to obey the law and become better men like he was. The emphasis was on fulfilling the law, because if you fulfilled the law as Christ did you would become the Christ. Ebionitism denies the deity of Christ.
The School of Alexandria became another leading contender in the development of the doctrine of the person of Christ. In A.D. 200 Clement of Alexandria taught that Gods eternal word was the truth, but in it the truth was often hidden. In order to discover the truth Clement claimed that you had to interpret the scriptures allegorically. After Clement, Origen took over in the school and further developed the ideas of Clement. Origen actually coined the word “homoousious” which becomes one of the biggest issues in major controversies for the next two centuries. In the School of Alexandria they emphasized the divinity of Christ and not his humanity.
The School of Antioch arose to challenge Alexandria’s insistence on allegorical exegesis. They dismissed the allegorical interpretations and focused on the historical and grammatical meaning behind the scripture. The put their main emphasis on the humanity of Christ.
Out of Alexandria came a priest name Arius who held that Jesus was a creation of the father. “There was a time when the Son was not” claimed Arius and his followers. To them Jesus may have been the first being to be created but he was still only a creature and he was not eternal. Athanasius, Bishop Alexander’s aide, believed that by denying Christ’s deity, Arianism threatened the core of Christian faith. He claimed that the gap between sinful man and a holy God could only be bridged by God. The only way that Christ could have bridged the gap is if he is fully God and fully man. This became a major conflict as Alexander had Arius removed from his post and Arius sought and won support from other bishops.
This particular controversy led to the formation of the council of Nicea (325) in which they decided to write a creed that all should ascribe to. The creed affirmed that Jesus was “from the same substance” as the father, God from God, by using the world “homoousius” and Arius preferred the word “homoiousius”, meaning of similar substance. All but three bishops signed this creed at the council and those who did not were banished.
This council was important because it set the precedent for the other ecumenical councils that would follow it. In spite of the power struggle and political battles in the years following the council, the creed of Nicea, with its clear assertion of the deity of Christ, remains fundamental to the Church to this day.
In his attempt to further combat Arianism the Bishop of Laodicia, Apollinarius, developed another heretical position. He claimed that Christ had a human body and human soul but lacked a rational human mind and instead had only a divine mind denying that Christ was fully human.
He was condemned as a heretic in the ecumenical council of Constantinople in 381. This ecumenical council not only condemned Apollinarius and his teachings but it also confirmed the Necene creed and amended it by adding a final section regarding the Holy Spirit. The council of Constantinople affirms that Christ is fully human and fully divine and that the Holy Spirit is divine verifying the Churches stance on the trinity.
Nestorius was the next heritic that was condemned by the next ecumenical council of Ephesus. Nestonius had what is called the sandwich theory, he understood the idea of deity and humanity being joined together but not really relating to one another, like two pieces of bread. He wanted to keep the deity from the humanity to protect it. Nestorius himself asked the emperor Theodosius II to summon this council, which the emperor did in 431. During the council Nestorius was summoned three times but did not come. His teachings were examined and judged according to whether they were in conformity with the Nicene creed. At this point the writings of Cyril of Alexandria who began the council were declared by the fathers to be in agreement with Nicene creed and Nestorius was condemned. Once again the ecumenical council confirmed the Nicene creed and affirmed that Christ in one person.
Another heritic was Eutychus. He claimed that Christ is from two natures, but he is in only one nature. Eutychus said that Christ comes from two different natures but his deity overwhelms his humanity. The emperor Marcian called the council of Chalcedon in 451. This particular council rejected the idea that Christ is only one nature and affirmed that Christ is in fact two in nature.
Throughout history there have been many different ideas concerning the person of Christ and yet the idea of Christ being fully human and fully God has stayed virtually unchanged through each controversy and council. All of the issues that were faced in the past only help to confirm what we believe today.
Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man in on person, and will be so forever. Jesus was born of a virgin, which was the means in which God used to unite full deity and full humanity in one person without the inherited sin.
Jesus had a human body, he was thirsty and hungry, he grew as any other child would grow (Luke 2:40). Jesus had a human mind reviled in the fact that Jesus increased in wisdom (Luke 2:52). Jesus had a human soul, and human emotions as well, he says “my soul is troubled (John 12:27), he also marveled and wept and showed a wide array of other human emotions. In order for Christ to be our representative obedience, to be our substitute sacrifice, to be the mediator between God and men, to fulfill God’s original purpose for man to rule over creation and to be our example and pattern in life Jesus had to be fully man.
Jesus Christ was also fully God. Scripture continually directly states Jesus as being God or fully divine, “In him all the fullness of god was pleased to dwell” (Col 1:19). It is important to realize that Jesus if also fully God because only someone who is infinite god could bear the full penalty for all the sins of all those who would believe in him. Scripture continually shows that no human being could ever save man but it takes God himself. Thus if Jesus is not fully God then we have no salvation and ultimately no Christianity.
“The fact that the infinite, omnipotent, eternal Son of God could become man and join himself to a human nature forever, so that infinite God became one person with finite man, will remain for eternity the most profound miracle and the most profound mystery in all the universe.”
– Wayne Grudem “Systematic Theology.”
Pressed
