Leadership Training Center
5410 Rogers Road
San Antonio, Texas 78251
C01-2 Church History I
Lesson 4
INSTRUCTOR
Name: David Blanchard
Email: dblanchard238@gmail.com
Phone: 337.247.7077
COURSE DESCRIPTION
This course traces doctrinal developments in church history, evaluating them from an Apostolic Pentecostal perspective. It introduces the leading historical figures and movements in Christendom and conveys a basic understanding of their beliefs.
(From the book History of Christian Doctrine Vol. 1 Chapter 8 By: David K Bernard)
1. Variations on the doctrine of God:
Dynamic monarchianism
Church historians distinguish two kinds of monarchians, dynamic and modalistic.
The dynamic monarchians defended God’s oneness by saying that Jesus is not God in the fullest sense of the word. Rather, He is a human being who somehow became divine by the anointing or indwelling of God’s Spirit. Historians call their view “dynamic,” meaning “changing,” because of the idea that Christ’s nature changed over time from simple to divine humanity. This view undercuts the true meaning of the Incarnation. A modern Oneness Pentecostal author, William Chalfant, suggests that ancient and modern trinitarian writers have misunderstood the dynamic monarchians.1 Perhaps they did teach the true deity of Christ but emphasized His humanity in order to explain passages of Scripture that trinitarians relied upon. For instance, maybe they stated that the Son was inferior to the Father, meaning the humanity of Christ and not His deity. (See John 14:28.) Trinitarians could have is understood because they used the title of Son to refer to Christ’s deity. Since none of the writings of the dynamic monarchians have survived, it is difficult to know exactly what they taught. Based on the scant historical record preserved by their opponents, however, it appears that the dynamic monarchians deviated in a significant way from Oneness theology.
The leading teacher of this group was Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch. He reportedly taught that God is one, that the Logos (Word) and the Spirit are not distinct persons from the Father, and that Jesus was a man made divine by the indwelling of the Logos (divine reason). He apparently did not consider Jesus to be God in the strict sense of the word, however; his opponent Malchion alleged that “he put a stop to psalms sung in honour of Christ.”2
· Modalistic monarchianism
The second classification of people who opposed early trinitarianism—modalistic monarchianism, or modalism—was far more important. The modalists emphasized that God is absolutely one, with no distinction of persons. According to them, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not three persons but three ways, or “modes,” in which God has manifested or related Himself to the world. In particular, Jesus Christ is the manifestation of the one God, the Father. The fullness of God is incarnate in Jesus. According to renowned church historian Adolph Harnack and others, from A.D. 180 to 300 modalistic monarchianism was the most serious rival to trinitarianism.3 In fact, as Tertullian and other early trinitarians reluctantly acknowledged, during much of this time it was the view of the majority of believers.4 Before 180 there was no controversy over the doctrine of the trinity because no one explicitly taught in trinitarian terms. As discussed in chapter 2, most writings of the Post-Apostolic Age expressed biblical concepts and were compatible with Oneness doctrine. That began to change around 150 in the Age of the Greek Apologists with Justin’s doctrine of the Logos as a second divine person. Not everyone accepted this innovation, however, for Justin alluded to people who rejected his position and who insisted that the Logos is “indivisible and inseparable from the Father.”5
The modalists emerged as a group in the late second century in Asia Minor, where the church had been established in New Testament times. It appears that they adhered to earlier views on the Godhead but became identified as a group because they opposed the concept of a plurality of persons in the Godhead introduced by the Greek Apologists and further developed by early trinitarians. Irenaeus, the first prominent author of the Old Catholic Age, nowhere spoke against the modalists, although he was a contemporary from Asia Minor. As we have seen, he expressed many Oneness ideas but no clear concept of a trinity of eternal persons. He wrote against heresies, but apparently he felt no need to write against modalism because it expressed standard views of the time. The conflict between modalism and trinitarianism did not begin until around 200 because that is when clearly
trinitarian ideas were first propounded. To establish their teaching, the modalists appealed to passages in Isaiah, John 10:30, Colossians 2:9, and many other verses. Although no modalistic writings have survived intact, we have many descriptions and quotations of them by their trinitarian opponents such as Tertullian and Novatian.
How do the modalists relate to modern Oneness Pentecostals? First, there is no historical link; the two movements arose independently based on a study of Scripture.
Second, we actually know very little about the modalists, and what we know comes from their opponents. We cannot be sure about their views on various subjects or about possible differences within their ranks. Third, many speculative things have been written about them, some of which appear to be distortions or errors, and it would not be fair to link Oneness Pentecostals to such characterizations. In short, people today should study and evaluate the Oneness doctrine based on what contemporary adherents
· Creeds
Apostle’s Creed
I believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he descended into hell; on the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty; from there he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting. Amen
|
First Council of Nicea (325) |
First Council of Constantinople (381) |
|
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. |
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. |
|
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; |
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; |
|
By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; |
by whom all things were made; |
|
Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; |
who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; |
|
He suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; |
he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried, and the third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; |
|
From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. |
from thence he shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; |
|
whose kingdom shall have no end. |
|
|
And in the Holy Ghost. |
And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by the prophets. |
|
In one holy catholic and apostolic Church; we acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. |
|
|
[But those who say: 'There was a time when he was not;' and 'He was not before he was made;' and 'He was made out of nothing,' or 'He is of another substance' or 'essence,' or 'The Son of God is created,' or 'changeable,' or 'alterable'—they are condemned by the holy catholic and apostolic Church.] |
(Table from Wikipedia)
Briefly, here are the major steps in the development of trinitarianism.
1. About 150 the Greek Apologists, beginning with Justin, defined the Word to be the Son, described the Word/Son as a second divine being begotten by God the
Father at a point in time before creation, and said that the Word was subordinate to God. A threefold baptismal formula was introduced, along with some vague notions of threeness in relation to God.
2. About 210 Tertullian introduced the term trinity and formulated the concept of one God in three persons. In his trinity, the Father alone is eternal, and He is superior to the other two persons.
3. About 215-30 Origen likewise promoted trinitarianism, contributing the key doctrines of the eternal Son and the eternal generation of the Son. He thereby prepared the way to elevate the status of the second person, although he himself still taught that the Father was superior to the other two persons.
4. Under the influence of Athanasius, the Council of Nicea in 325 rejected Arianism. It declared that the Father and the Son are of the same substance, making them equal.
5. The Council of Constantinople in 381 followed the doctrine of Athanasius and the Cappadocians. It clarified the status of the Holy Spirit and placed all three persons on an equal footing.
6. Based in part on the theology of Augustine and produced sometime in the fifth to eighth centuries, the Athanasian Creed put in definitive form the doctrine of the victors of Nicea and Constantinople. It declared the coequality, coeternity, and consubstantiality of the three persons.