The History of Christian Doctrine

The History of Christian Doctrine “History is written by the victors.”

Agenda • Tonight • Irenaeus • Tertullian • Origen • Trinitarianism • Next Tuesday • Modalism Controversy of Rome • Modalism vs Trinitarianism vs Oneness

Old Catholic Age • From AD 170 – 325 • AD 325 is significant because it was the year of the Council of Nicea • AD 325 marks the beginning of the Ecumenical Catholic Age.

Old Catholic Age • 3 Major Schools of Thought • Asia Minor – Latin • Irenaeus • Hippolytus – pupil of Irenaeus • North Africa – Latin • Tertullian • Cyprian – pupil of Tertullian • Alexandria, Egypt – Greek • Clement of Alexandria • Origen – pupil of Clement

Irenaeus • Bishop of Lyons in Gaul (ancient France) • A tradition says that Irenaeus (died c. 200) was the disciple of Polycarp, who in turn was a disciple of John, but …. Irenaeus himself simply says of Polycarp: • “whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried (on earth) a very long time.” • When he was a small lad Irenaeus probably heard the aged Polycarp preach, but his recollections are not those of a student.

Irenaeus cont’d • He wrote: • Against Heresies (c.182-88), a lengthy treatise that details and refutes a variety of Gnostic beliefs. • Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching. • Unfortunately, there is some uncertainty about the original text of both books. Against Heresies survives only in a Latin translation of the Greek original, and Demonstration has come to us in only one manuscript (1265-89) of an Armenian translation (c. 600).

Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons • Considered to be the first true theologian • He taught a comprehensive doctrinal system in opposition to Gnosticism and related heresies based on the New Testament. • A central feature of his theology is his opposition to philosophical speculation. • Even though his life overlapped the age of the Greek Apologists, he took a radically different approach from them. Instead of the Logos Doctrine he started with the Scriptures and apostolic tradition.

Manifestation of the Spirit • He believed in the working of charismatic gifts • “Those who are in truth His disciples, receiving grace from Him, do in His name perform (miracles) . . . drive out devils . . . see visions . . . utter prophetic expressions . . . heal the sick by laying their hands upon them. . . . The dead even have been raised up, and remained among us for many years. . . . It is not possible to name the number of the gifts which the Church, (scattered) throughout the whole world, has received from God, in the name of Jesus Christ. . . . Nor does she [the Church] perform anything by means of angelic invocations, or by incantations, or by any other wicked curious art; but, directing her prayers to the Lord, who made all things, in a pure, sincere, and straightforward spirit, and calling upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. . . .”

Manifestation of the Spirit • He emphasized receiving the Holy Spirit. He commented upon I Corinthians 6:9-11 and 15:49: • “Now he says that the things which save are the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of God. . . . And then, again when (do we bear) the image of the heavenly? Doubtless when he says, “Ye have been washed,” believing in the name of the Lord, and receiving His Spirit.”

Manifestation of the Spirit • “The perfect man consists in the commingling and the union of the soul receiving the Spirit of the Father.. . . For this reason does the apostle declare, “We speak wisdom among them that are perfect,” terming those persons “perfect” who have received the Spirit of God, and who through the Spirit of God do speak in all languages, as he used himself also to speak. In like manner we do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of God, whom also the apostle terms “spiritual,” they being spiritual because they partake of the Spirit.”

Baptism • He taught that baptism was necessary: • “This class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole (Christian) faith.” In this regard, Irenaeus simply enunciated what was practically the universal teaching of the first five centuries of Christianity. The leading teachers and writers all held that water baptism is necessary for salvation—effecting the washing away, remission, or forgiveness of sins.

The Baptismal Formula • Irenaeus said, “We are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions,”which indicates that he baptized in the name of Jesus. His Demonstration states, however, “We have received baptism for remission of sins in the name of God the Father, and in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became incarnate and died and was raised, and in the Holy Spirit of God.”

The Father and the Son • And through the Word Himself who had been made visible and palpable, was the Father shown forth, although all did not equally believe in Him; but all saw the Father in the Son: for the Father is the invisible of the Son, but the Son the visible of the Father. And for this reason all spake with Christ when He was present [upon earth], and they named Him God. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4:6:6.

Against Gnostics • All, therefore, are outside of the [Christian] dispensation, who, under pretext of knowledge, understand that Jesus was one, and Christ another, and the Only-begotten another, from whom again is the Word, and that the Saviour is another, whom these disciples of error allege to be a production of those who were made Æons in a state of degeneracy. Such men are to outward appear-ance sheep; for they appear to be like us, by what they say in public, repeating the same words as we do; but inwardly they are wolves. Their doctrine is homicidal, conjuring up, as it does, a number of gods, and simulat-ing many Fathers, but lowering and dividing the Son of God in many ways. Refutation of all Heresies

Tertullian (AD 150-225) • Tertullian was the first major theologian to write in Latin, and he is often called the father of Western theology. • A lawyer and teacher of rhetoric, he converted to Christianity in middle age (c. 195). • He soon became a local church presbyter in Carthage, North Africa, and began writing prolifically. • About 207 he joined the Montanists, who had been expelled from the church in 177. He opposed a bishop of Rome in his day, probably Victor, for embracing modalism and rejecting Montanism.

Tertullian • Tertullian was the first Christian writer to call God a trinity (Latin, trinitas) and the first to speak of God as three persons (tres personae) in one substance (una substantia). Consequently, church historians generally consider Tertullian to be the father of Christian trinitarianism. • Louis Berkhof, The History of Christian Doctrines (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1937), 65, 83-84. • “It may be said that he enlarged the doctrine of the Logos into a doctrine of the Trinity. . . . Tertullian was the first to assert clearly the tripersonality of God.”

Manifestation of the Spirit • “The Creator promised the gift of His Spirit in the latter days, and . . . Christ has in these last days appeared as the dispenser of spiritual gifts. . . . Let Marcion then exhibit, as gifts of his god, some prophets, such as have not spoken by human sense, but with the Spirit of God. . . . Let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer—only let it be by the Spirit, in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture, whenever an interpretation of tongues has occurred to him. . . . Now all these signs (of spiritual gifts) are forthcoming from my side without any difficulty.”

Baptism and Repentance • He only allowed a second repentance, but no more, for those who commit major sins after baptism. • “‘Unless a man have been reborn of water and Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of the heavens,’ has tied faith to the necessity of baptism.” He defended the proposition that “without baptism, salvation is attainable by none,” answering numerous objections.

Baptism and Repentance cont’d • While Tertullian affirmed justification by faith, he described repentance as earning forgiveness. …. the “satisfaction” or payment God requires in order to forgive sins at baptism and afterward. This language set the stage for the later doctrine of penance. • Tertullian counseled that the baptism of children be deferred till they are old enough to understand its significance. • After being immersed three times, there was a tasting a mixture of milk and honey immediately after baptism, and refraining from the daily bath for a whole week after baptism. He admitted that there was no scripture for these rules, even saying that triple immersion was “a somewhat ampler pledge than the Lord has appointed in the Gospel,” but he defended them on the basis of “tradition, and custom, and faith.”

His Pre-Montanist Beliefs • And the works of Tertullian, at least before his Montanist period and the treatise Against Praxeas, contained many passages in which Christ and the Spiritwere equated, as in the opening words of his treatise On Prayer: • “The spirit of God, and the Word of God, and the Reason of God – Word of Reason, and Reason and Spirit of Word – Jesus Christ our Lord, namely, who is both the one and the other .. Our Lord Jesus Christ has been approved as the Spirit of God, and the Word of God, and the Reason of God: the Spirit, by which he was mighty; the Word, by which he taught; the Reason, by which he came.” Pelikan, Volume 1

Remember Montanus? • Montanus was excommunicated because he said “I am the Paraclete.” • According to Epiphanius, Montanus said: “I am the Lord God Almighty, who have descended in a man”; and again: “It is neither an angel nor an elder that has come but I, the Lord God.” Didymus the Blind transmitted another oracle that he had heard attributed to Montanus: “I am the Father and the Son and the Paraclete.” …. Cyril of Jerusalem wrote that Montanus “had the audacity to say that he himself was the Holy Spirit.”

Subordinationism • He compared the relationship of the Father and the Son to that between the sun and rays from the sun. If we look merely at the rays we can call them the sun, but when we actually think of the sun itself we would not call the rays the sun. • Similarly, if we think only of the second person in the Godhead, we can call Him God, but when we think of both the Father and Son together, the Father is the true God and the Son is in a secondary position.

From Three to One Again • Tertullian further believed that in the age to come the distinctions in the Godhead would cease. Just as the Son and Spirit originally came out of the Father, so in the end they would be drawn back into the Father. Unlike modern trinitarians, then, he did not believe that the persons of the trinity were coequal or coeternal.

Substance • Acknowledging a similarity of belief with the Stoics, he held that every soul has both a spiritual and a bodily substance.

God’s Substance • He did speak of the three persons as sharing the one divine substance, what modern trinitarians call coessentiality or consubstantiality. Even here, however, he was not completely consistent with later trinitarianism, for he argued that the angels share in the one divine substance much as do the Son and Spirit.

God’s Substance cont’d • Tertullian’s concept was a form of tritheism (belief in three gods). • In conjunction with his idea that every spirit has a bodily substance, Tertullian indicated that each person of the trinity has his own body.

Tertullian’s Trinitas cont’d • By Tertullian’s own admission, “the majority of believers” rejected his doctrine of the trinity on the ground that it denied the cardinal Christian doctrine of monotheism (belief in one God) and contradicted the “rule of faith,”

We are the Elect not the Elite! • Tertullian retorted that his opponents were “simple,” as the majority “always” is, insinuated that they were “unwise and unlearned,” and stated that … God … is “three in one.” Tertullian went on to record that his opponents, (modalists), affirmed the absolute oneness of God and deity of Jesus Christ. • Tertullian’s position seems elitist, reminiscent of the emphasis on the superior, hidden knowledge of the spiritually minded few as taught by the Gnostics and later by Origen, another early champion of the trinity.

Tertullian’s Recap • Tertullian, more than any other person, is the originator of Christian trinitarianism, but his formulation is heretical by modern trinitarian standards. • He denied coeternity, denied coequality, and had problems defining consubstantiality. In his defense, trinitarian scholars usually say that it is not fair to judge him by the orthodoxy of a later time. • But this argument exposes the error of trinitarianism: it concedes that one cannot determine trinitarian orthodoxy by the Scriptures, which, as Protestants affirm, is the sole authority for doctrine. Rather one must trace the historical development of trinitarianism and then judge orthodoxy by various extrabiblical creeds.

Cyprian • Stephen especially valued baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, no matter who performed it, because of the Moreover, not only heretics, but many people in the church, both “Jews and Gentiles, fully believing as they ought, are in like manner baptized” by “invoking the name of the Lord Jesus.” Cyprian was the earliest advocate of baptism by sprinkling, but he still considered immersion to be the normal practice. He described baptism as a dipping but allowed sprinkling for the sick. He also advocated infant baptism on the ground that all are born in sin.

Origen (AD 185-254) • Origen was the single most important molder of Eastern theology. • Origen was excommunicated from his own local church by the bishop of Alexandria, whereupon he moved to Caesarea and continued teaching there.

Origen cont’d • He spoke of Christianity as the highest philosophy and stated that his purpose was to blend together the Bible and philosophy. • He taught the ultimate salvation of everyone (universalism).

Allegorical Interpretation • Origen’s allegorical method of interpretation stemmed from his view, shared by the Gnostics and Clement of Alexandria, that knowledge is superior to faith. • As an example, Origen doubted that the story of Christ’s purging of the Temple was “real history.” Instead, the significance of the story is that the words of Jesus will drive away “earthly and senseless and dangerous” tendencies in “the natural temple,” which is “the soul skilled in reason.” The money in the story represents “things that are thought good but are not,” while the sacrificial animals are “symbolic of earthly things” (oxen), “senseless and brutal things” (sheep), and “empty and unstable thoughts” (doves).

He What? • He castrated himself • Celibacy was thought to be a more noble way of life for a Christian (this eventually developed into the Ecclesiastical Priesthood) • The Council of Constantinople in 553 declared him heretical.

Baptism • Origen taught repentance and water baptism for the forgiveness of sins, and he advocated infant baptism. He held that forgiveness was available after baptism if a person would repent. Like Tertullian, he used the trinitarian baptismal formula, invoking the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Eschatology • Origen spiritualized heaven and hell, regarding them not as places but as conditions. He taught the ultimate salvation of everyone (universalism). Following Plato, he said every soul would undergo a time of purging. After this process,all sinners, including the devil, would ultimately be saved.

Soteriology • Besides faith in Christ there is a higher way of salvation: receiving the eternal Word, having faith in the eternal Reason (Logos) that was with God and was God before the Incarnation. In its truest form, then, Christianity proclaims wisdom and reason as the way of salvation rather than simple faith and redemption. Again, we hear an echo of Gnosticism.

Anthropology • Origen believed that human souls were preexistent spirits who fell into sin and consequently were placed in bodies of flesh. Actually, then, our life is a kind of reincarnation. Here we see the Greek philosophical influence and the kinship to Gnosticism.

Contributions to Trinitarianism • Origen introduced two related concepts that were crucial to the progressive formulation of trinitarianism: the doctrine of the eternal Son and the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son. • The Apologists and Tertullian had identified Father and Son as two persons, but they taught that the Son was begotten at a certain time before creation.

Coeternality • Origen reasoned that if the Son is truly God, He must be eternal, coeternal with the Father. Consequently, the Son’s begetting could not refer to a point in time, but to an eternal process, to an eternal relationship with the Father. There was never a time when He was not. He has always been, and is always being, begotten (generated) by the Father. (remember the Gnostics)

Subordinationism • Some statements of Origen seem to indicate that Jesus was subordinate to the Father • He said the Son “is a separate being and has a separate essence of His own,” is “a second God,” was “created” by the Father, is “inferior” to the Father, and is not “the Most High God.” Interestingly, at the Council of Nicea, both those who said the Son was inferior to the Father and those who said the Son was equal to the Father, quoted Origen in support of their position.

The “Fathers” of the Trinity • Tertullian was not a trinitarian until after his membership with a heretical cult. • Origen was declared heretical by the church. So…… Are they credible?

Huh!!!?? • “We declare that the Logos of God became man for the purpose of our salvation, so that we might receive the likeness of the heavenly One and be made God after the likeness of the true Son of God according to nature and the Son of man according to the flesh, our Lord Jesus Christ.” P233 Pelikan The Christian Tradition Vol 1

Trinitarian Proof-text • “In fact, if we concentrate on the entire body of Christian literature rather than on the apologetic corpus, it becomes evident that the basis for the fullest statement of the Christian doctrine of the divine in Christ as Logos was provided not by its obvious documentation in John 1: 1-14 but by Proverbs 8:22-31 (LXX) – which may, for that matter, have been more prominent in the background of the Johanine prologue than theologians have recognized.” Pelikan The Christian Tradition P 186

The Pre-existent Son • It has become part of the conventional scholarly wisdom that in the New Testament “Son of God” had referred to the historical person of Jesus, not to a preexistent being. Therefore “the transfer of the concept ‘Son’ to the preexistent Christ is the most significant factor in the pluralistic distortion of the Christian doctrine of God .. and the monstrosities of the Monophysitic Christology.” Pelikan The Christian Tradition

Homoousios • This came to describe the nature of the Three Persons in one. • coined by Gnostic heretics, dictated by an unbaptized emperor, jeopardized by naïve defenders, but eventually vindicated by its orthodox opponents. P 210

God is not God!!?? • In a derivative or a metaphorical sense – as passages like Psalm 82:6, interpreted through John 10:34, showed – the term “god” could be applied to creatures. But when the church applied it to Christ, it was contending” not for the name ‘God,’ for its sound or its written form, but for the substances to which the name belongs.” Pelikan The Christian Tradition Vol 1

The Name of God cont’d • “Following the instructions of Holy Scripture, we have been taught that [the nature of God] is beyond names or human speech. We say that every [divine] name, be it invented by human custom or handed on to us by the tradition of the Scriptures, represents our conceptions of the divine nature, but does not convey the meaning of that nature in itself.” And the specific “name” to which he was applying this stricture was “Godhead [qeovthV]” itself, the very title he used in his accommodation to Greek theism. Pelikan The Christian Tradition P 222

Impassible • Although he was said to suffer in the flesh, impassibility continued to be characteristic of him insofar as he was God. He was incapable of suffering of his flesh could be said to be his own. But then the question was : “In what sense does not [the impassible Logos] himself suffer?” Pelikan The Christian Tradition p231

Impassible cont’d • To the early anti-modalistic trinitarians, it is acceptable that the God the Son was incarnate in flesh and did not suffer but, if you say that God the Father was incarnate in flesh you are a patripassionist. If divinity can’t suffer how does the label patripassionist warrant any merit. It is misinformed rhetoric.

The History of Christian Doctrine