The Development of the Doctrine of the Deity of Christ :

The subject of the debate :

Many Christians never stop to think of how the major doctrines of the Faith came to us. It is presumed by most that all of these doctrines were fully developed and understood by the completion of the writing of the New Testament. This is simply not true. Doctrine developed over a period of time. The fourth, fifth and sixth centuries A.D. were periods of extensive controversies about the Deity of Christ, the Deity of the Holy Spirit, the Trinity, and how Christ was both God and man (the hypostatic union).

The doctrine of the Deity of Christ (the belief that Christ is God) was not fully developed and accepted by the Church as a whole until late in the fourth century A.D. Much of the reason that it took so long to develop doctrine was that the Christians were being persecuted by Roman Emperors such as Nero c.a. 64 A.D., Decius in 250 A.D., Valerian from 257 A.D. to 260 A.D., and Diocletian in 303 A.D. Consequently Christians spent so much of their time fearing for their lives that they could not pay much attention to developing doctrines. The efforts that the Christians did put fourth in defending the faith were predominantly aimed at refuting paganism. It was not until Constantine became emperor and signed the Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. that Christians could turn their attentions to developing doctrines. The Edict of Milan allowed Christianity to be tolerated and eventually become the official religion of the Roman Empire.

The characters of the debate :

Arius :

Arius was born in Libya or Alexandria in 256 A.D. and died in Constantinople in 336 A.D. He was a deacon and eventually became a senior presbyter in charge of Baucalis (one of the 12 parishes of Alexandria). Around 318 A.D. he clashed with Alexander, the Bishop of Alexandria (312 A.D. to 328 A.D.), who believed in the deity of Christ.

Arius was very concerned about maintaining the unity of God and he thought that Trinitarian doctrine threatened this unity. He wanted to completely avoid the pagan concepts of God which were polytheistic (i.e. the belief in many gods).

He believed that Christ was a created being, begotten by a creative act of God prior to time, therefore there was a time when the Son did not exist. He also believed that Christ was of a different (Heteros) essence or substance than the Father. This meant that Christ was not coeternal, coequal or consubstantial with the Father and therefore was not God. In Arius' mind this ideology preserved Christ as an independent subordinate being and eliminated the possibility of there being two Gods in the Godhead. However, the result ended up looking more like polytheism than monotheism (the belief in one God) because his version of Christ was a creature that was neither fully God nor fully man.

Augustus Strong in his Systematic Theology says the following of Arius' beliefs "This view originated in a misinterpretation of the Scriptural accounts of Christ's state of humiliation, and in mistaking temporary subordination for original and permanent inequality."

Arianism was the first great heresy of the Christian Church. It almost wiped out the Church in the fourth century A.D. The heresy was so widespread that Jerome said "The whole world groaned in astonishment at finding itself Arian". There were however a number of bishops that opposed Arius. This led to his banishment in 321 A.D. He was then condemned at the synod of Antioch in 325 A.D. and the council of Nicaea in the same year. He was later restored to fellowship but died on the eve of the ceremony.

Athanasius :

Athanasius was born in Alexandria about 293 A.D. and died about 373 A.D. in the same city. His clerical career began in 325 A.D. when he was ordained a deacon by Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, Egypt. In the same year he accompanied Alexander to the Council of Nicaea as his secretary. Just a few years later in 328 A.D. he was promoted to the position of Bishop of Alexandria upon the death of Alexander. In the course of the debate over the Deity of Christ he was exiled five times (335 A.D., 339 A.D., 356 A.D., 362 A.D., and 365 A.D.) for his beliefs which turned out to be orthodox. Of the forty five years that he reigned he spent fifteen years and ten months in exile.

He is regarded by many as being the most important theologian of the fourth century A.D. He abhorred the Arian belief because it approached polytheism by implying that salvation came from a creature.

Athanasius insisted on the full Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. He strongly believed that Christ had coexisted from all eternally with the Father and was not a created being as Arius believed. He argued that if Christ is not God, He can not be our saviour. One of the central themes of his belief was that Christ was of one substance with the Father. The word used to define this relationship was the Greek word "homoousious". This word was used in the Nicean Creed which the Council of Nicaea formulated and Athanasius vehemently defended. The word was extremely important in the debate because there were some who were claiming that Christ was not of one substance with the Father but of a similar substance (homoiousios) as the Father, thus distinguishing between the nature of the Father and the Son. Others claimed that Christ was merely like (homoios) the Father while others claimed He was unlike (anomoian) the Father.

He was careful to clarify that while the Father and the Son were of the same essence they were not the same person. (This was the error of Monarchianism which said that through time God, as one person, moved through three modes - first He was the Father, then the Son, and then the Holy Spirit).

Athanasius' belief about Christ was summarized in The Athanasian Creed which reads in part : "...But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son , and of the Holy Spirit, is One, the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit; the Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated; the Father infinite, the Son infinite, and the Holy Spirit infinite; the Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet not three eternals but one eternal, as also not three infinites, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one infinite. So, likewise, the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty; and yet not three almighties but one almighty."

Unfortunately he did not live long enough to see the full victory of his cause which did not come until Emperor Theodosius convened the Council at Constantinople in 381 A.D. and once for all condemned Arianism.

The result of the debate :

The Council of Nicaea

It was extremely important to emperor Constantine to maintain unity in the Roman Empire to avoid a schism which could possibly result in an overthrow of his position. He was dismayed to find that his territories were split because of a seemingly trivial debate over the deity of Christ. He sent his religious advisor Ossius to Alexandria in an attempt to reconcile the divided parties but this effort failed. Constantine then summoned a general assembly of bishops to meet in Nicaea to resolve the debate. The Council met in the Imperial palace with all expenses paid by the Roman Government. Constantine succeeded in suppressing Arianism temporarily at the council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.

We know much more about the outcome of the Council than of its proceedings. The Council condemned Arius and produced a Creed that defended Athanasius' position. The council introduced the word "Consubstantial" (homoousios) into the Creed. This implied that the Son was no less divine than the Father, just as an earthly father and son are equally human. The intention of the use of this word was to show that the Father and Son were one in a single Godhead. This ruled out the possibility of Arianism but due to the fact that this word could have more than one meaning some bishops hesitated from fear that the Creed was saying that the Father was the same person as the Son which was the error of Monarchanism mentioned earlier.

After Constantine :

The period after the Council of Nicaea was filled with discord and controversy. The dispute about the deity of Christ was influenced by other complications such as bitter antagonisms between rival bishoprics, personal conflicts between Christian leaders with colorful and abrasive personalities, and the emperor's interventions. Further confusion was added by using technical terms without biblical origins as key words in authoritative creeds. Their use contributed to the Latin-speaking West and the Greek-speeking East misunderstanding and misrepresenting each other. The result was that the conclusions drawn by the Council were out of favor with most believers.

After Constantine's death in 337 A.D. the empire was passed on to his three sons, Constantine II, Constantius, and Constans. Without the presence of Constantine on the scene there was a resurgence of Arianism. One major source of this resurgence came from Constantius (337 A.D. to 361 A.D.) who ruled in the East. The West was ruled by Constantine II and Constans. Constantine II died in 340 A.D. leaving the West to Constans who favored Athanasius. Members from both sides of the debate appealed to bishop Julius of Rome (337 A.D. to 352 A.D.). Julius declared Athanasius' view to be orthodox. This strained relations between Rome in the West and Constantinople in the East. Constantius tried to compromise by putting fourth the position that Christ was "like" the Father but this only avoided the real issue.

Although efforts to restore peace between the two sides had some success, Arianism was practically dominate in the East when Constantius died in 361 A.D. while Athanasius' view ruled in the West. However, the Nicene faith of Athanasius was about to have a major victory with the advent of three men known as "The Three Cappadocians". Basil the Great was the most prominent of the three. He was a very able speaker and administrator. Working his brother Gregory of Nyssa and their friend Gregory of Nazianzus they contributed to the final victory of the Nicene cause.

They realized that it was not enough to show that the Son was equal with the Father as Nicaea had done, for this might suggest there were two Gods. Nor could they allow for confusion that would permit the Creed to be interpreted as Monarchian in nature. They knew that they had to define more clearly the unity and diversity within the Godhead in terminology capable of expressing both sides of the issue.

Their solution was based on giving precise meanings to the terms used to describe the Trinity. They said there was one substance (ousia) and three persons (hypostaseis). This explained how the three persons of the Father, Son, and Spirit could coexist in the one God without confusing the persons or dividing the substance of the Godhead.

Their work had little impact on the controversy until Theodosius became Eastern Emperor in 379 A.D. In a decree that he issued in 380 A.D. he established Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire. In 381 A.D. he convened the Council of Constantinople which drew from the work of the Three Cappadocians to more clearly define the relationship between the Father and the Son. This Council reaffirmed the faith of Nicaea and the full deity of Jesus Christ. It condemned Arianism and brought an end to the heresy within the empire.

Glenn Robinson