Arius
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
ARIANISM<br />
Who is Jesus?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
CONTENTS<br />
FOREWORD<br />
CHAPTER ONE ARIUS 1<br />
CHAPTER TWO NICEA TO CONSTANTINOPLE 32<br />
CHAPTER THREE SCRIPTURAL BASIS OF TRINITY 66<br />
CHAPTER FOUR ARIAN CHURCHES 86<br />
CHAPTER FIVE ARIANISM TODAY 94
ARIANISM<br />
Who is Jesus?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
FOREWORD<br />
Heresies had a definite function in the development of Christian Faith. Though most often they<br />
were dealt with as a criminal offense against the absolute truths their real role lay in the rational<br />
development of a theology. In the early Judaism and Christianity God was outside of human<br />
realm and material reality and the idea of God incarnating was regarded as impossible. Yet the<br />
central theme of Christian faith is just that. In fact almost all “heresies” within the church was around<br />
the theme. The heretics were those who insisted on rethinking and making God being understood.<br />
“No Blind faith” says the heretics. “Let us reason together”. As long as mankind can think, this<br />
rethinking and reasserting what has been handed down will continue. That is essentially the<br />
requirement of true faith.<br />
God is not dead yet. He will continue to reveal himself to anyone who is open to Him. Revelation<br />
is an ongoing process and in that process rationality and even heresy has its role.<br />
When Jesus came into the world and claimed to be God, the whole Abrahamic children went wild.<br />
To the monistic Abrahams this was impossible. They picked up stones to execute Jesus for<br />
blasphemy/ At every turn of history, the<br />
children of Abraham everywhere reverted or<br />
tried to revert this return to extreme monism.<br />
This is what happened in Islam in the middle<br />
east, Judaism in the lands of Jesus and<br />
Upanishadic India. The process still<br />
continues. It is in this context, the heretics<br />
are important in defining faith. Creeds were<br />
defined just because heretics came with a<br />
force into the theological arena.<br />
“Now the Berean Jews were of more noble<br />
character than those in Thessalonica, for<br />
they received the message with great<br />
eagerness and examined the Scriptures<br />
every day to see if what Paul said was true.”<br />
Act 17:11 NIV<br />
Prof.M.M.Ninan<br />
Normal, IL
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
ARIANISM<br />
Who is Jesus?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
1
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
CHAPTER ONE<br />
ARIUS<br />
Presbyter Saint <strong>Arius</strong> - remembered for his views<br />
concerning the trinity and<br />
the divinity of<br />
Christ<br />
Two centuries has passed since the Nazarene called Jesus broke into history in the religious<br />
context of the Judaism. His mother Mary claimed that he was born of the Holy Spirit of God<br />
without the intervention of a man. His cousin John proclaimed him as the Lamb of God who take<br />
away the sins of he world. He was well versed in the scriptures of the day and when he came of<br />
2
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
age, gathered up a group of people who became his constant companions for over three years.<br />
What they saw and heard was beyond their expectations and understanding and was handed down<br />
through generations. Jews who were to the core monotheists of the tradition of Abraham could<br />
not understand him or place him. Jesus certainly claimed that he was God or one with God. He<br />
antagonized the Rabbis and Priests of Judaism which resulted in his crucifixion. However his<br />
grave was found empty on the third day and his disciples claimed that he was risen from the dead.<br />
His disciples went all over the world declaring Jesus as God who took flesh. A new religion was<br />
born. It was established with signs and miracles confirming the words of the messengers.<br />
The small communes that grew in various parts of the world grew into large churches and<br />
institutional edifices came into existence with hierarchies of priests, authorities and teachers.<br />
Theological Schools formed around them.<br />
As it came into cultures that were different, they required new answers in new context. Major<br />
culture which tried to absorb Christianity was the Greco-Roman culture. They began to ask new<br />
questions.<br />
What is God? Who is this God?<br />
Who is this Jesus?<br />
Man, Angel, Messiah, God?<br />
According to Thomas F. Torrance, the Arian thought came out of the strict dualistic Greek<br />
(Hellenized) philosophy. That philosophy posited that God, being one, perfect and unchangeable,<br />
must, necessarily, be separate from and have nothing to do with physical matter (including flawed<br />
human beings). Influenced by this philosophy, some <strong>Arius</strong> reasoned that in order to remain aloof<br />
from the flawed, changing world of matter, God created angels who created and then interacted<br />
with the physical world (thus keeping God at arm's length from the world). In like manner, they<br />
reasoned that Jesus Christ (who came into the world of matter and took on flesh) must also be a<br />
created intermediary, not eternal (uncreated) God. This view was championed by <strong>Arius</strong>.<br />
This struggle to understand God and his relation to the man Jesus brought forth new ideas and new<br />
explanations based on human understanding in the cultural context of Platonic Philosophy of its<br />
time. The Church had always confessed belief in God the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ. She<br />
believed that God was divine and that Jesus was divine. Baptism was administered in the name of<br />
the Father and of the Son, and in the Apostolic Creed the Church confessed, "We believe in God<br />
the Father, Almighty . . . and in Jesus Christ, His only begotten Son, our Lord. But on the other hand<br />
she maintained a strict monotheism over against all pagan and heretical polytheism. The problem,<br />
then, was to confess both, without denying either. Sometimes they were considered pernicious and<br />
they called them heretics. But they in their turn enriched the church with their new approaches<br />
and explanations of the mysteries which remained hidden. These so called heretics put on their<br />
thinking cap and enriched the church in trying to make unknown-unthinkable a little better known<br />
and understandable even in their errors. Man, did they pay for that!!<br />
One such bold heretic was <strong>Arius</strong>.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> (256 - 336 AD) was a Libyan theologian and of Berber descent. Berbers call themselves<br />
Imazighen which in their language means "Free People" or "Freemen". His father’s name is given<br />
as Ammonius. He was educated in the theological school of Antioch (now Antakya) under the<br />
distinguished Greek scholar, Presbyter and non-trinitarian Lucian of Antioch (240-312). Lucian<br />
himself was a student of another Neo-Platonic scholar Paul of Samosata.<br />
3
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Paul of Samosata,Bishop of Antioch, was a third-century Syrian theologian and bishop of Antioch.<br />
To defend Christianity's monotheism against charges of tri-theism, Paul espoused a definition of the<br />
relationship among the three persons of the Godhead that denied the personal distinction of the<br />
divine Son and Holy Spirit in contrast to God the Father, thus contradicting the Orthodox doctrine of<br />
the Trinity.<br />
4
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Christology of Paul of Samosata<br />
"He denied the personality of the Logos and of the Holy Spirit, and<br />
considered them merely powers of God, like reason and mind in man;<br />
but granted that the Logos dwelt in Christ in a larger measure than in<br />
any former messenger of God, and taught, like the Socinians in later<br />
times, a gradual elevation of Christ, determined by his own moral<br />
development, to divine dignity. He admitted that Christ remained free<br />
from sin, conquered the sin of our forefathers, and then became the<br />
Saviour of the race" (Schaff).<br />
He taught that God, being One, could not appear substantially on earth;<br />
therefore He could not have become man in Jesus Christ, but rather<br />
filled the man, Jesus, with His Logos and power.<br />
(http://www.dividingword.net/Original%20Sin/Greek%20Philosophy.html)<br />
Paul's teaching is a form of Monarchianism, which emphasized the oneness of God. Paul taught<br />
that Jesus was born a mere man, but that he was infused with the divine Logos or word of God.<br />
Hence, Jesus was seen not as God-become-man but as man-become-God. In his Discourses to<br />
Sabinus, of which only fragments are preserved in a book against heresies ascribed to Anastasius,<br />
Paul writes:<br />
• "Having been anointed by the Holy Spirit he received the title of the anointed (i.e.<br />
Christos), suffering in accordance with his nature, working wonders in accordance<br />
with grace. For in fixity and resoluteness of character he likened himself to God;<br />
and having kept himself free from sin was united with God, and was empowered to<br />
grasp as it were the power and authority of wonders. By these he was shown to<br />
possess over and above the will, one and the same activity (with God), and won the<br />
title of Redeemer and Saviour of our race."<br />
• "The Saviour became holy and just; and by struggle and hard work overcame the<br />
sins of our forefather. By these means he succeeded in perfecting himself, and was<br />
through his moral excellence united with God; having attained to unity and<br />
sameness of will and energy (i.e. activity) with Him through his advances in the<br />
path of good deeds. This will be preserved inseparable (from the Divine), and so<br />
inherited the name which is above all names, the prize of love and affection<br />
vouchsafed in grace to him."<br />
• "We do not award praise to beings which submit merely in virtue of their nature; but<br />
we do award high praise to beings which submit because their attitude is one of<br />
5
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
love; and so submitting because their inspiring motive is one and the same, they<br />
are confirmed and strengthened by one and the same indwelling power, of which<br />
the force ever grows, so that it never ceases to stir. It was in virtue of this love that<br />
the Saviour coalesced with God, so as to admit of no divorce from Him, but for all<br />
ages to retain one and the same will and activity with Him, an activity perpetually at<br />
work in the manifestation of good."<br />
• "Wonder not that the Saviour had one will with God. For as nature manifests the<br />
substance of the many to subsist as one and the same, so the attitude of love<br />
produces in the many a unity and a sameness of will which is manifested by unity<br />
and sameness of approval and well-pleasingness."<br />
Paul was an early forerunner of Adoptionism. Possibly, the Paulicians of Armenia<br />
adhered to his teachings, and received their name from him. However, historical<br />
records show that the Paulicians were bitterly persecuted more for their gnostic and<br />
iconoclastic views than for their adherence to Adoptionism.<br />
Paul's pupil Lucian of Antioch is considered to have had a major influence on <strong>Arius</strong> the<br />
founder of Arianism.<br />
Lucian of Antioch (240-312)<br />
"the <strong>Arius</strong> before <strong>Arius</strong>."<br />
Lucian was born at Samosata, Kommagene, Syria, to Christian parents, and was<br />
educated in the neighbouring city of Edessa, Mesopotamia, at the school of<br />
Macarius. However, this tradition might be due to a conflation with his famous<br />
namesake, Lucian of Samosata, the pagan satirist of the second century.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> (Presbyter of Alexandria) along with Eusebius (Bishop of Nicomedia and<br />
Patriarch of Constantinople (d. 342)), Maris of Chalcedon and Theognis of Nicaea<br />
were students of St Lucian of Antioch (c. 240 - 312)<br />
6
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Theology of the Period - Origen Adamantius (184/185 – 253/254)<br />
Origen Adamantius (184/185 – 253/254)<br />
Child prodigy Origen Adamantius ("man of steel") was born near Alexandria around A.D. 185. The<br />
oldest of seven children in a Christian home, he grew up learning the Bible and the meaning of<br />
commitment. In 202 when his father, Leonidas, was beheaded for his Christian beliefs, Origen<br />
wanted to die as a martyr, too. But his mother prevented him from even leaving the house—by<br />
hiding his clothes.<br />
Theology in itself was in formation and one of the earliest theologian was Origen. He was a prolific<br />
writer in multiple branches of theology, including textual criticism, biblical exegesis and<br />
hermeneutics, philosophical theology, preaching, and spirituality written in Greek. He was<br />
anathematised at the Second Council of Constantinople.<br />
Origen is regarded as the greatest theologian that the Church had ever produced. He was generally<br />
thought to be orthodox at all points. As the first serious propounder of Christology his theology was<br />
riddled with problems. His analysis was probably the first on this Christological isssue.<br />
Origen was the first to speak of the eternal generation of the Son. This doctrine teaches that the<br />
Father eternally and continuously communicates the divine essence to the Son without division or<br />
change so that the Son shares an equality of nature with the Father (sharing all the attributes of<br />
deity) yet is also eternally distinct from the Father. Later the Holy Spirit also precede from the father<br />
giving us the relationship within the Holy Trinity as the Orthodox tradition defines.<br />
In connection with the divinity of Christ he recognized and pointed out the fact that the words "only<br />
begotten Son" could only mean that Jesus Christ was eternally the Son of God. If He was begotten<br />
in time He would be no different from any other creature, and then He could not be called "only<br />
begotten." Origen described the Trinity as a hierarchy, not as an equality of Father, Son, and<br />
Spirit. And though he attacked Gnostic beliefs, like them, he rejected the goodness of material<br />
creation.On the other hand, however, Origen also taught that the Son is not God in the same sense<br />
as the Father. The Father is "the God" (ò theós), while the Son is only "God" (theós). The Son, he<br />
said, is "of a different essence" (heteros tãs oúsías or tou hupokeiménou), "begotten out of the will<br />
of the Father." He called the Son "a secondary God" (deúteros theós) ) in distinction from the Father<br />
(autotheós), and thus he made the Son subordinate to the Father. In his Commentary on John, II, 6<br />
he says:<br />
“Thus, if all things were made, as in this passage also (John 13;), through the Logos, then they were<br />
not made by the Logos, but by a stronger and greater than He. And who else could this be but the<br />
Father?<br />
We consider, therefore, that there are three hypostases, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit;<br />
and at the same time we believe nothing to be uncreated but the Father. We therefore, as the more<br />
7
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
pious and the truer course, admit that all things were made by the Logos, and that the Holy Spirit is<br />
the most excellent and the first in order of all that was made by the Father through Christ.<br />
And in this connection he also speaks of the tact that the Son is begotten as an act of the Father's<br />
will.<br />
Now these two cannot be reconciled. If the Son is begotten in eternity then He cannot be begotten<br />
out of the will of the Father. If He is begotten of the Father's will then He is a creature and not the<br />
natural Son of God. If He is eternal, then He must be equal and not subordinate to the Father, for<br />
only God is eternal. If He is God, but of a different essence than the Father, then there are two<br />
Gods. But Origen did not see these contradictions, although that was in part because the distinction<br />
of essence and person had not yet been made clear.<br />
Both sides appealed to Origen's teachings in the Arian controversy.<br />
root of the Arian Controversy.”<br />
(Rev. Ronald Hanko)<br />
This, theologically, was the<br />
At Antioch, Lucian was ordained presbyter. Eusebius of Caesarea notes his<br />
theological learning and Lucian's vita (composed after 327) reports that he founded<br />
a Didaskaleion, a school. He is considered as the first head of the School of Antioch.<br />
After the deposition of Antioch's bishop Paul of Samosata, he fell under suspicion fof<br />
heresy, and was excommunicated. According to Alexander of Alexandria, he<br />
remained in schism during the episcopates of three bishops, Domnus, Timaeus and<br />
Cyril, whose administration extended from 268 to 303. Lucian was reconciled with<br />
the Church either early in the episcopate of Cyril (perhaps about 285), which seems<br />
more likely, or under Cyril's successor Tyrannus.<br />
During the persecution of Maximinus Daia, Lucian was arrested at Antioch and sent<br />
to Nicomedia, where he endured many tortures over nine years of imprisonment. He<br />
8
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
was twice brought up for examination, and both times defended himself ably and<br />
refused to renounce his Christian faith.<br />
His death is uncertain. He might have been starved to death. Another, more likely,<br />
possibility is that he was beheaded. The traditional date ascribed to his execution is<br />
January 7, 312, in Nicomedia. There is a late tradition of uncertain origin that he had<br />
been drowned in the sea and that his body was returned to land by a dolphin.<br />
He was buried at Drepanum on the Gulf of Nicomedia, He is also commemorated<br />
as a saint, with a feast day of January 7 in the Roman Catholic Church and October<br />
15 in the Orthodox Church.<br />
The Church of Antioch was established by the Apostles Paul and Barnabas in 42 A.D., with St.<br />
Peter serving for the next eight years as its first prelate. The Church of Antioch is one of the five<br />
ancient Patriarchates of the Christian Church, along with Alexandria, Constantinople, Jerusalem,<br />
and Rome. Antiochians are in full communion with other Orthodox Christian jurisdictions, such as<br />
the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America and the Orthodox Church in America, as well as many<br />
other Orthodox jurisdictions around the world.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> along with his teacher Lucians were strict monotheists and were opposed to the trinitarian<br />
concept of God. All his attempt were to return to the concept of judaism’s monotheism. The<br />
position of Jesus remained to be explained.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> is described as a tall, lean man, with a downcast brow, austere habits, considerable learning,<br />
and a smooth, winning address, but a confident unbeatable quarrelsome disposition. The silence of<br />
his enemies conclusively proves that his general moral character was irreproachable. His<br />
opponents said that he cherished a personal grudge against Alexander, because he was not<br />
himself elected bishop.<br />
Three synods were convened between 264 and 269 in the matter of Paul of Samosata ( 200 to 275<br />
AD) who was the Bishop of Antioch from 260 to 268. He was a believer in monarchianism, a<br />
nontrinitarian theology where it emphasize God as one person, in direct contrast to Trinitarianism<br />
which defines God as three persons coexisting consubstantially as one in being.<br />
9
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Men of great weight of character, and whose counsels were highly respected, were particularly<br />
desired to attend from other places, and the convening of the council was, at times, delayed in<br />
order to ensure their attendance. Origen, in this capacity, attended the council in Arabia, and, by his<br />
learning and talents, settled the point in dispute to the satisfaction of the council. The bishops of<br />
Antioch also were so much embarrassed by the learning of Paul of Samosata, whom they would<br />
convict of heresy, that they invited the attendance of bishops trom the various provinces in<br />
Asia,including Palestine and Egypt. They included —Firmilian from Cappadocia, Gregory and<br />
Athenodorus from Pontus, Helenus of Tarsus, Nieomas of lconium ; and the arehbishops<br />
Ilyrnenaeus of Jerusalem, and Theotecnus of Caesaren, together with the bishop Maxirnus, from<br />
Arabia. Paul, however, by his talents withstood them all ; and the council dispersed without gaining<br />
any advantage over him?’ Foreigners, in like manner, attended both the second and third councils<br />
which were held for the same purpose. in the last council, e presbyter, Malchion, bore a<br />
conspicuous part, and was the principal agent in putting an end to the discussion.<br />
About the same period of time other councils were held which were sometimes more than<br />
provincial synods. The council of lconium, A. D. 235, consisted of bishops from Phrygia, Gelatin,<br />
Cilicia,- and other neighboring provinces. Another council was also held in opposition to this in a<br />
neighboring town, Synnada, of‘ which we know only that it had little or no influence against the first<br />
at Iconium. But this is sufiicient to show that no established system of ecclesiastical jurisdiction at<br />
this time prevailed, even in the states of Greece, where such councils were first held.<br />
As one can notice various theological explanations were proposed and anlysed to explain the<br />
person of Jesus of History. All the versions were involved in the ongoing discussions in the<br />
synods and councils.<br />
Sabellius in attempting to avoid three gods, used the principle of modalism - that God appeared in<br />
three forms - as the Father in the Old Testament, as Creator, as the Son in the New Testament, as<br />
redeemer; and as the Holy Spirit after the Resurrection. These are not three persons but three<br />
manifestations or three modes of appearance.<br />
Two contradictory models of monarchianism have been propounded:<br />
• Modalism (or modalistic monarchianism ) considers God to be one person appearing and<br />
working in the different "modes" of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The chief<br />
proponent of modalism was Sabellius, hence the view is commonly called Sabellianism. It<br />
has also been rhetorically labeled Patripassianism (from Latin patri- "father" and passio<br />
"suffering") by its opponents, because according to them it purports that the Person of God<br />
the Heavenly Father suffered on the cross.<br />
• Adoptionism (or dynamic monarchianism) holds that God is one being, above all else, wholly<br />
indivisible, and of one nature. It reconciles the "problem" of the Trinity (or at least Jesus) by<br />
holding that the Son was not co-eternal with the Father, and that Jesus Christ was<br />
essentially granted godhood (adopted) for the plans of God and for his own perfect life and<br />
works. Different variations of Dynamism hold that Jesus was "adopted" either at the time of<br />
his baptism or his ascension. An early exponent of this belief was Theodotus of Byzantium.<br />
10
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
According to the adoptionist theology, Jesus was the son of Joseph and Mary.<br />
Thus Jesus was the son of Man.<br />
He was adoped as the Son of God at the time of baptism when the Holy Spirit engulfed Him.<br />
This is the Ebionite Theology of that period.<br />
11
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
http://www.twoagespilgrims.com/doctrine/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/portage-glacier_trinity2a.jpg<br />
12
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Socianism, Modalism or Oneness<br />
The Father alone is the only true God and alone eternal<br />
The Son did not pre-exist His humanity<br />
The Son was the plan or idea in the mind of God before His earthly life.<br />
The Son is not the Creator of the cosmos, nor was he eternal<br />
The Son received Godship and Lordship from the Father.<br />
The Son acts as God on earth<br />
The Father-Son relationship began at a point in time<br />
The Son is finite, human Messiah<br />
God the Son is not really acceptable<br />
The Son reveals or manifests the Father on earth.<br />
The Son is prayed to and Worshipped by men.<br />
As such we should sustain that at that time of the Christian history, the non-trinitarian, monotheistic<br />
understanding of God as the Father alone remains certain. They were not able to define the<br />
position of Jesus, though early church did worship Jesus even as the disciples in certain occasions<br />
did as mentioned in the gospels.<br />
As such it was not <strong>Arius</strong> who started the contoversy and it started long before him and he inherited<br />
it from Paul of Samosata who was his teacher. It was an on going theological controversy and if<br />
we look into all the church denominations, we can see that it still is continuing. History tells us that<br />
more than thirty councils were held in Antioch on this subject area alone. It is understandable that<br />
while no consensus was reached the theology of the period indeed was non-trinitarian. There were<br />
in fact over thirty such synods which could not make a final decision on the position of Jesus in<br />
relation to God of Judaism.<br />
Beginning with three synods convened between 264 and 269 in the matter of Paul of Samosata,<br />
more than thirty councils were held in Antioch in ancient times. Most of these dealt with phases of<br />
the Arian and of the Christological controversies. The most celebrated took place in the summer of<br />
341 at the dedication of the golden Basilica, and is therefore called in encaeniis (iv iyrcatviois), in<br />
13
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
dedicatione. Nearly a hundred bishops were present, all from the Orient, but the bishop of Rome<br />
was not represented. The emperor Constantius attended in person. The council approved three<br />
creeds.<br />
One of the synods condemned and excommunicated Paul, and Domnus was appointed bishop in<br />
his place. The date of this synod is ordinarily fixed at 268<br />
It was during its last phase <strong>Arius</strong> who was a powerful debater came to the scene.<br />
ARIUS<br />
<strong>Arius</strong>, a Libyan by descent, brought up at Antioch and a school-fellow of Eusebius, afterwards<br />
became Bishop of Nicomedia. Epiphanius of Salamis (c. 310–320 – 403) was bishop of Salamis,<br />
Cyprus) describes <strong>Arius</strong> as tall, grave, and winning personality with no aspersion on his moral<br />
character. He is said to have taken part (306) in the Meletian schism, and was made presbyter of<br />
the church called "Baucalis," at Alexandria, He was a staunch opponent of the Sabellians,<br />
themselves committed to a view of the Trinity which denied all real distinctions in the Supreme.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> probablly had personal differences with Patriarch Alexander whom, in public synod, he<br />
accused of teaching that the Son was identical with the Father (319). Alexander condemned <strong>Arius</strong><br />
in public in front of a great assembly. <strong>Arius</strong> found a refuge with Eusebius, the Church historian, at<br />
Caesarea and with other Lucianists. . Synods in Palestine and Bithynia were opposed to synods in<br />
Egypt.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> was a thoroughgoing Greek rationalist. He inherited the almost universally held Logos<br />
Christology of the East. He labored in Alexandria, the center for Origenist teachings on the<br />
subordination of the Son to the Father. He blended this heritage into a rationalist Christology that<br />
lost the balance Origen had maintained in his subordinationist theology by his insistence on the<br />
eternal generation of the Son. Again in the Kingdom of God, subordination of one to another is the<br />
expression of love. The greatest is the one who serve most. Jesus himself gave his life for his<br />
creation indicative of the greatest love. “God so loved the world, that He gave”. Matt. 23:11-12<br />
“The greatest among you shall be your servant. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and<br />
whoever humbles himself will be exalted”<br />
Emperor Constantine Byzantine mosaic and Roman coin with Constantine with Cross<br />
It was on July 3, 324 the Battle of Adrianople was fought as part of the Roman civil war between<br />
the two emperors Constantine I and Licinius; Licinius was defeated and Constantine became<br />
master of the Roman world. Constantine determined on restoring ecclesiastical order in the East,<br />
as he has already done in the West puttign down the Donatists at the Council of Arles.<br />
14
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Roman Pope Alexander of Alexandria’s Catholic Epistle<br />
319 A.D.<br />
(ANF, 6, 296-298.)<br />
To our beloved and most reverend fellow-ministers of the Catholic Church in every place, Alexander<br />
sends greeting in the Lord:<br />
1. Since the body of the Catholic Church is one, and it is commanded in Holy Scripture that we<br />
should keep the bond of unanimity and peace, it follows that we should write and signify to one<br />
another the things which are done by each of us; that whether one member suffer or rejoice we<br />
may all either suffer or rejoice with one another. In our diocese, then, not so long ago, there have<br />
gone forth lawless men, and adversaries of Christ, teaching men to apostatize; which thing, with<br />
good right, one might suspect and call the precursor of Antichrist. I indeed wished to cover the<br />
matter up in silence, that so perhaps the evil might spend itself in the leaders of the heresy alone,<br />
and that it might not spread to other places and defile the ears of any of the m ore simple-minded.<br />
But since Eusebius, the present bishop of Nicomedia, imagining that with him rest all ecclesiastical<br />
matters, because, having left Berytus and cast his eyes upon the church of the Nicomedians, and<br />
no punishment has been inflicted upon him, he is set over these apostates, and has undertaken to<br />
write everywhere, commending them, if by any means he may draw aside some who are ignorant<br />
to this most disgraceful and Ant;christian heresy; it became necessary for me, as knowing what is<br />
written in the law, no longer to remain silent, but to announce to you all, that you may know both<br />
those who have become apostates, and also the wretched words of their heresy; and if Eusebius<br />
write, not to give heed to him.<br />
2. For he, desiring by their assistance to renew that ancient wickedness of his mind, with respect to<br />
which he has for a time been silent, pretends that he is writing in their behalf, but he proves by his<br />
deed that he is exerting himself to do this on his own account. Now the apostates from the Church<br />
are these: <strong>Arius</strong>, Achilles, Aithales, Carpones, the other <strong>Arius</strong>, Sarmates, who were formerly priests;<br />
Euzoius, Lucius, Julius, Menas, Helladius, and Gains, formerly deacons; and with them Secundus<br />
and The onas, who were once called bishops.<br />
And the words invented by them,<br />
and spoken contrary to the mind of Scripture,<br />
are as follows:--<br />
“God was not always the Father; but there was a time when God was not the Father.<br />
The Word of God was not always, but was made ‘from things that are not;’<br />
for He who is God fashioned the non-existing from the non-existing;<br />
wherefore there was a time when He was not.<br />
For the Son is a thing created, and a thing made:<br />
nor is He like to the Father in substance;<br />
nor is He the true and natural Word of the Father;<br />
nor is He His true Wisdom;<br />
but He is one of the things fashioned and made.<br />
And He is called, by a misapplication of the terms, the Word and Wisdom, since He is<br />
Himself made by the proper Word of God, and by that wisdom which is in God, in which, as<br />
God made all other things, so also did He make Him.<br />
Wherefore,<br />
He is by His very nature ch angeable and mutable, equally with other rational beings.<br />
The Word, too, is alien and separate from the substance of God.<br />
15
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The father also is ineffable to the Son;<br />
for neither does the Word perfectly and accurately know the Father,<br />
neither can He perfectly see Him.<br />
For neither does the Son indeed know His own substance as it is.<br />
Since He for our sakes was made, that by Him as by an instrument God might create us;<br />
nor would He have existed had not God wished to make us.<br />
Some one asked of them whether the So n of God could change even as the devil changed;<br />
and they feared not to answer that He can;<br />
for since He was made and created, He is of mutable nature.”<br />
Since those about <strong>Arius</strong> speak these things and shamelessly maintain them, we, coming<br />
together with the Bishops of Egypt and the Libyas , nearly a hundred in number, have<br />
anathematized them, together with their followers. But those about Eusebius have received them,<br />
earnestly endeavouring to mix up falsehood with truth, impiety with piety. But they will not prevail;<br />
for the truth prevails, and there is no communion betwixt light and darkness, no concord between<br />
Christ and Belial.<br />
For who ever heard such things?<br />
Or who, now hearing them, is not astonished, and does not stop his ears that the pollution of these<br />
words should not touch them?<br />
Who that hears John saying, “In the beginning was the Word,” does not condemn those who say<br />
there was a time when He was not?<br />
Who that hears these words of the Gospel, “the only-begotten Son;” and, “by Him were all<br />
things made,” will not hate those who declare He is one of the things made?<br />
For how can He be one of the things made by Him?<br />
Or how shall He be the only-be gotten who, as they say, is reckoned with all the rest, if indeed He is<br />
a thing made and created?<br />
And how can He be made of things which are not, when the Father says, “My heart belched forth a<br />
good Word;” and, “From the womb, before the morning have I be gotten Thee?”<br />
Or how is He unlike to the substance of the Father, who is the perfect image and brightness of the<br />
Father, and who says, “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father?”<br />
And how, if the Son is the Word or Wisdom and Reason of God, was there a ti me when He was not?<br />
It is all one as if they said, that there was a time when God was without reason and wisdom. How,<br />
also, can He be changeable and mutable, who says indeed by Himself:<br />
“I am in the Father, and the Father in Me,”<br />
and,<br />
“I and My Father are one;”<br />
and by the prophet,<br />
“I am the Lord, I change not?”<br />
For even though one saying may refer to the Father Himself, yet it would now be more aptly<br />
spoken of the Word, because when He became man, He changed not; but, as says the apostle,<br />
“Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, and for ever.”<br />
Who hath induced them to say, that for our sakes He was made; although Paul says,<br />
“for whom are all things, and by whom are all things?”<br />
4. Now concerning their blasphemous assertion who say that<br />
the Son does not perfectly know the Father,<br />
we need not wonder: for having once purposed in their mind to wage war against Christ, they<br />
impugn also these words of His, “As the Father knoweth Me , even so know I the Father.”<br />
Wherefore, if the Father only in part knoweth the Son, then it is evident that the Son doth not<br />
perfectly know the Father. But if it be wicked thus to speak, and if the Father perfectly knows the<br />
16
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Son, it is plain that, even a s the Father knoweth His own Word, so also the Word knoweth His own<br />
Father, of whom He is the Word.<br />
5. By saying these things, and by unfolding the divine Scriptures, we have often refuted them. But<br />
they, chameleon-like, changing their sentiments, endeavour to claim for themselves that saying:<br />
“When the wicked cometh, then cometh contempt.” Before them, indeed, many heresies existed,<br />
which, having dared more than was right, have fallen into madness. But these by all their words<br />
have attempted to do away with the Godhead of Christ, have made those seem righteous, since<br />
they have come nearer to Antichr ist. Wherefore they have been excommunicated and<br />
anathematized by the Church. And indeed, although we grieve at the destruction of these men,<br />
especially that after having once learned the doctrine of the Church, they have now gone back; yet<br />
we do not wond er at it; for this very thing Hymenaeus and Philetus suffered, and before them<br />
Judas, who, though he followed the Saviour, afterwards became a traitor and an apostate.<br />
Moreover, concerning these very men, warnings are not wanting to us, for the Lord foret old: “Take<br />
heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ; and the time<br />
draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.” Paul, too, having learnt these things from the Saviour,<br />
wrote, “In the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and<br />
doctrines of devils which turn away from the truth.”<br />
6. Since, therefore, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has thus Himself exhorted us, and by His<br />
apostle hath signified such things to us; we, who have heard their impiety with our own ears, have<br />
consistently anathematized such men, as I have already said, and have declared them to be<br />
aliens from the Catholic Church and faith, and we have made known the thing, beloved<br />
and most honoured fellow-ministers, to your piety, that you should not receive any of them, should<br />
they venture rashly to come unto you, and that you should not trust Eusebius or any one else who<br />
writes concerning them. For it becomes us as Christians to turn with aversion from all who speak or<br />
think against Christ, as the adversaries of God and the destroyers of souls, and “not even to wi sh<br />
them Godspeed, lest at any time we become partakers of their evil deeds,” as the blessed John<br />
enjoins. Salute the brethren who are with you. Those who are with me salute you.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong>’ Letter to Roman Pope Alexander of Alexandria (excerpt)<br />
320 A.D.<br />
(from Athanasius, De Synodis, 16. LNPF ser. 2, vol. 4, 458)<br />
Our faith from our forefathers, which also we have learned from thee, Blessed Pope, is this:-<br />
We ackowledge One God,<br />
alone Ingenerate, alone Everlasting, alone Unbegun, alone True, alone having Immortality,<br />
alone Wise, alone Good, alone Sovereign;<br />
Judge, Governor, and Providence of all, unalterable and unchangeable, just and good, God<br />
of Law and Prophets and New Testament;<br />
who begat an Only-begotten Son before eternal times, through whom He has made both the<br />
ages and the universe;<br />
and begat Him, not in semblance, but in truth; and that He made Him subsist at His own will,<br />
unalterable and unchangeable; perfect creature of God, but not as one of the creatures;<br />
offspring, but not as one of things begotten;<br />
nor as Valentinus pronounced that the offspring of the Father was an issue;<br />
nor as Manichaeus taught that the offspring was a portion of the Father, one in essence; or<br />
as Sabellius, dividing the Monad, speaks of a Son-and-Father;<br />
17
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
nor as Hieracas, of one torch from another, or as a lamp divided in two;<br />
nor that He was was before, was afterwards generated or new-created into a Son,<br />
as thou too thyself, Blessed Pope, in the midst of the Church and in session has often condemned;<br />
but, as we say,<br />
at the will of God,<br />
created before times and ages,<br />
and gaining life and being from the Father,<br />
who gave subsistence to His glories together with Him.<br />
For the Father did not, in giving to Him the inheritance of all things, deprive Himself of what He has<br />
ingenerately in Himself; for He is the Fountain of all things.<br />
Thus there are Three Subsistences.<br />
And God, being the cause of all things, is Unbegun and altogether Sole,<br />
but the Son being begotten apart from time by the Father,<br />
and being created and founded before ages,<br />
was not before His generation,<br />
but being begotten apart from time before all things,<br />
alone was made to subsist by the Father.<br />
For He is not eternal or co-eternal or co-unoriginate with the Father,<br />
nor has He His being together with the Father, as some speak of relations, introducing two<br />
ingenerate beginnings, but God is before all things as being Monad and Beginning of all.<br />
Wherefore also He is before the Son; as we have learned also from they preaching in the midst<br />
of the Church. So far then as from God He has being, and glories, and life, and all things are<br />
delivered unto Him, in such sense is God His origin.<br />
For He is above Him, as being His God, and before Him.<br />
But if the terms “from Him,” and “from the womb,” and “I came forth from the Father, and I am<br />
come” (Rom. xi. 36; Ps. cx. 3; John xvi. 28) be understood by some to mean as if a part of Him, one<br />
in essence or as an issue, then the Father is according to them compounded and divisible and<br />
alterable and material, and, as far as their belief goes, has the circumstances of a body, Who is the<br />
incorporeal God.<br />
Pope Alexander I of Alexandria ’s Letter to Alexander of Constantinople<br />
324 A.D.<br />
requesting their cooperation in combatting what he perceived to be heresy.<br />
(ANF, 6, 291-296.)<br />
To the most reverend and like-minded brother, Alexander, Alexander sends greeting in the Lord;<br />
1. The ambitious and avaricious will of wicked men is always wont to lay snares against those<br />
churches which seem greater, by various pretexts attacking the ecclesiastical piety of such. For<br />
incited by the devil who works in them, to the lust of that which is set before them, and throwing<br />
away all religious scruples, they trample under foot the fear of the judgment of God. Concerning<br />
which things, I who suffer, have thought it necessary to show to your piety, in order that you may be<br />
aware of such men, lest any of them presume to set foot in your dioceses, whether by themselves<br />
or by others; for these sorcerers know how to use hypocrisy to carry out their fraud; and to employ<br />
letters composed and dressed out with lies, which are able to deceive a man who is intent upon a<br />
simple and sincere faith. <strong>Arius</strong>, therefore, and Achilles, having lately entered into a conspiracy,<br />
emulating the ambition of Colluthus, have turned out far worse than he. For Colluthus, indeed, who<br />
18
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
reprehends these very men, found some pretext for his evil purpose; but these, beholding his<br />
battering of Christ, endured no longer to be subject to the Church; but building for themselves dens<br />
of thieves, they hold their assemblies in them unceasingly, night and day directing their calumnies<br />
against Christ and against us. For since they call in question all pious and apostolical doctrine, after<br />
the manner of the Jews, they have constructed a workshop for contending against Christ, denying<br />
the Godhead of our Saviour, and preaching that He is only the equal of all others. And having<br />
collected all the passages which speak of His plan of salvation and His humiliation for our sakes,<br />
they endeavour from these to collect the preaching of their impiety, ignoring altogether the<br />
passages in which His eternal Godhead and unutterable glory with the Father is set forth. Since,<br />
therefore, they back up the impious opinion concerning Christ, which is held by the Jews and<br />
Greeks, in every possible way they strive to gain their approval; busying themselves about all those<br />
things which they are wont to deride in us, and daily stirring up against us seditions and<br />
persecutions. And now, indeed, they drag us before the tribunals of the judges, by intercourse with<br />
silly and disorderly women, whom they have led into error; at another time they cast opprobrium<br />
and infamy upon the Christian religion, their young maidens disgracefully wandering about every<br />
village and street. Nay, even Christ’s indivisible tunic, which His executioners were unwilling to<br />
divide, these wretches have dared to rend.<br />
2. And we, indeed, though we discovered rather late, on account of their concealment, their manner<br />
of life, and their unholy attempts, by the common suffrage of all have s cast them forth from the<br />
congregation of the Church which adores the Godhead of Christ. But they, running hither and<br />
thither against us, have begun to betake themselves to our colleagues who are of the same mind<br />
with us; in appearance, indeed, pretending to seek for peace and concord, but in reality seeking to<br />
draw over some of them by fair words to their own diseases, asking long wordy letters from them, in<br />
order that reading these to the men whom they have deceived, they may make them impenitent in<br />
the errors into which they have fallen, and obdurate in impiety, as if they had bishops thinking the<br />
same thing and siding with them. Moreover, the things which amongst us they have wrongly taught<br />
and done, and on account of which they have been expelled by us, they do not at all confess to<br />
them, but they either pass them over in silence, or throwing a veil over them, by feigned words and<br />
writings they deceive them. Concealing, therefore, their pestilent doctrine by their specious and<br />
flattering discourse, they circumvent the more simple-minded and such as are open to fraud, nor do<br />
they spare in the meanwhile to traduce our piety to all. Hence it comes to pass that some,<br />
subscribing their letters, receive them into the Church, although in my opinion the greatest guilt lies<br />
upon those ministers who venture to do this; because not only does the apostolic rule not allow of it,<br />
bat the working of the devil in these men against Christ is by this means more strongly kindled.<br />
Wherefore without delay, brethren beloved, I have stirred myself up to show you the faithlessness<br />
of these men who say that there was a time when the Son of God was not; and that He who was<br />
not before, came into existence afterwards, becoming such, when at length He was made, even as<br />
every man is wont to be born. For, they say, God made all things from things which are not,<br />
comprehending even the Son of God in the creation of all things rational and irrational. To which<br />
things they add as a consequence, that He is of mutable nature, and capable both of virtue and vice.<br />
And this hypothesis being once assumed, that He is “from things which are not,” they overturn the<br />
sacred writings concerning His eternity, which signify the immutability and the Godhead of Wisdom<br />
and the Word, which are Christ.<br />
3. We, therefore, say these wicked men, can also be the sons of God even as He. For it is written, “I<br />
have nourished and brought up children.” But when what follows was objected to them, “and they<br />
have rebelled against me,” which indeed is not applicable to the nature of the Saviour, who is of an<br />
immutable nature; they, throwing off all religious reverence, say that God, since He foreknew and<br />
had foreseen that His Son would not rebel against Him, chose Him from all. For He did not choose<br />
Him as having by nature anything specially beyond His other sons, for no one is by nature a son of<br />
God, as they say; neither as having any peculiar property of His own; but God chose Him who was<br />
of a mutable nature, on account of the carefulness of His manners and His practice, which in no<br />
19
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
way turned to that which is evil; so that, if Paul and Peter had striven for this, there would have<br />
been no difference between their sonship and His. And to confirm this insane doctrine, playing with<br />
Holy Scripture, they bring forward what is said in the Psalms respecting Christ: “Thou lovest<br />
righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of<br />
gladness above Thy fellows,”<br />
4. But that the Son of God was not made “from things which are not,”<br />
and that there was no “time when He was not,”<br />
the evangelist John sufficiently shows, when he thus writes concerning Him:<br />
“The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father.”<br />
For since that divine teacher intended to show that the Father and the Son are two things<br />
inseparable the one from the other, he spoke of Him as being in the bosom of the Father. Now that<br />
also the Word of God is not comprehended in the number of things that were created “from things<br />
which are not,” the same John says,<br />
“All things were made by Him.”<br />
For he set forth His proper personality, saying,<br />
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things<br />
were made by Him; and with out Him was not anything made that was made.”<br />
For if all things were made by Him, how comes it that He who gave to the things which are<br />
made their existence, at one time Himself was not.<br />
For the Word which makes is not to be defined as being of the same nature with the things which<br />
are made; since He indeed was in the beginning, and all things were made by Him, and fashioned<br />
“from things which are not.” Moreover, that which is seems to be contrary to and far removed froth<br />
those things which are made “from things which are not.”<br />
For that indeed shows that there is no interval between the Father and the Son, since not even in<br />
thought can the mind imagine any distance between them. But that the world was created “from<br />
things which are not,” indicates a more recent a and later origin of substance, since the universe<br />
receives an essence of this sort from the Father by the Son. When, therefore, the most pious John<br />
contemplated the essence of the divine Word at a very great distance, and as placed beyond all<br />
conception of those things that are begotten, he thought it not meet to speak of His generation and<br />
creation; not daring to designate the Creator in the same terms as the things that are made. Not<br />
that the Word is unbegotten, for the Father alone is unbegotten, but because the inexplicable<br />
subsistence of the only-begotten Son transcends the acute comprehension of the evangelists, and<br />
perhaps also of angels.<br />
5. Wherefore I do not think that he is to be reckoned amongst the pious who presumes to inquire<br />
into anything beyond these things, not listening to this saying:<br />
“Seek not out the things that are too hard for thee, neither search the things that are above thy<br />
strength.”<br />
For if the knowledge of many other things that are incomparably inferior to this, are hidden from<br />
human comprehension, such as in the apostle Paul,<br />
“Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God<br />
hath prepared for them that love Him.”<br />
As also God said to Abraham, that “he could not number the stars;” and that passage,<br />
“Who can number the sand of the sea, and the drops of rainy”<br />
How shall any one be able to investigate too curiously the subsistence of the divine Word, unless<br />
he be smitten with frenzy?<br />
20
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Concerning which the Spirit of prophecy says, “Who shall declare his generation?”<br />
And our Saviour Himself, who blesses the pillars of all things in the world, sought to unburden them<br />
of the knowledge of these things, saying that to comprehend this was quite beyond their nature,<br />
and that to the Father alone belonged the knowledge of this most divine mystery.<br />
“For no man,” says He, “knoweth the Son, but the Father: neither knoweth any man the Father,<br />
save the Son.”<br />
Of this thing also I think that the Father spoke, in the words, “My secret is to Me and Mine.”<br />
6. Now that it is an insane thing to think that the Son was made from things which are not, and was<br />
in being in time, the expression, “from things which are not,” itself shows, although these stupid<br />
men understand not the insanity of their own words. For the expression, “was not,” ought either to<br />
be reckoned in time, or in some place of an age. But if it be true that “all things were made by Him,”<br />
it is established that both every age and time and all space, and that “when” in which the “was not”<br />
is found, was made by Him. And is it not absurd that He who fashioned the times and the ages and<br />
the seasons, in which that “was not” is mixed up, to say of Him, that He at some time was not? For<br />
it is devoid of sense, and a mark of great ignorance, to affirm that He who is the cause of everything<br />
is posterior to the origin of that thing. For according to them, the space of time in which they say<br />
that the Son had not yet been made by the Father, preceded the wisdom of God that fashioned all<br />
things, and the Scripture speaks falsely according to them, which calls Him “the First-born of every<br />
creature.” Conformable to which, that which the majestically-speaking Paul says of Him: “Whom He<br />
hath appointed heir of all things. By whom also He made the worlds. But by Him also were all things<br />
created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or<br />
dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by Him, and for Him; and He is<br />
before all things.”<br />
7. Wherefore, since it appears that this hypothesis of a creation from things which are not is most<br />
impious, it is necessary to say that the Father is always the Father. But He is the Father, since the<br />
Son is always with Him, on account of whom He is called the Father. Wherefore, since the Son is<br />
always with Him, the Father is always perfect, being destitute of nothing as regards good; who, not<br />
in time, nor after an interval, nor from things which are not, hath begotten His only-begotten Son.<br />
How, then, is it not impious to say, that the wisdom of God once was not which speaks thus<br />
concerning itself: “I was with Him forming all things; I was His delight;” or that the power of God<br />
once did not exist; or that His Word was at any time mutilated; or that other things were ever<br />
wanting from which the Son is known and the Father expressed? For he who denies that the<br />
brightness of the glory existed, takes away also the primitive light of which it s the brightness. And if<br />
the image of God was not always, it is clear also that He was not always, of which it is the image.<br />
Moreover, in saying that the character of the subsistence of God was not, He also is done away<br />
with who is perfectly expressed by it. Hence one may see that the Sonship of our Saviour has<br />
nothing at all in common with the sonship of the rest. For just as it has been shown that His<br />
inexplicable subsistence excels by an incomparable excellence all other things to which He has<br />
given existence, so also His Sonship, which is according to the nature of the Godhead of the Father,<br />
transcends. by an ineffable excellence. the sonship of those who have been adopted by Him. For<br />
He, indeed, is of an immutable nature, every way perfect, and wanting in nothing; but these since<br />
they are either way subject to change, stand in need of help from Him. For what progress can the<br />
wisdom of God make? What increase can the truth itself and God the Word receive? In what<br />
respect can the life and the true light be made better? And if this be so, how much more unnatural is<br />
it that wisdom should ever be capable of folly; that the power of God should be con-joined with<br />
infirmity; that reason should be obscured by unreason; or that darkness should be mixed up with<br />
the true light? And the apostle says, on this place, “What communion hath light with darkness? and<br />
what concord hath Christ with Belial?” And Solomon says, that it is not possible that it should come<br />
to pass that a man should comprehend with his understanding “the way of a serpent upon a rock,”<br />
which is Christ, according to the opinion of Paul. But men and angels, who are His creatures, have<br />
received His blessing that they might make progress, exercising themselves in virtues and in the<br />
21
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
commandments of the law, so as not to sin. Wherefore our Lord, since He is by nature the Son of<br />
the Father, is by all adored. But these, laying aside the spirit of bondage, when by brave deeds and<br />
by progress they have received the spirit of adoption, being blessed by Him who is the Son by<br />
nature, are made sons by adoption.<br />
8. And His proper and peculiar, natural and excellent Sonship, St. Paul has declared, who thus<br />
speaks of God: “Who spared not His own Son, but for us,” who were not His natural sons,<br />
“delivered Him up.” For to distinguish Him from those who are not properly sons, He said that He<br />
was His own Son. And in the Gospel we read: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”<br />
Moreover, in the Psalms the Saviour says: “The Lord hath said unto Me, Thou art my Son.” Where,<br />
showing that He is the true and genuine Son, He signifies that there are no other genuine sons<br />
besides Himself. And what, too, is the meaning of this: “From the womb before the morning I begat<br />
thee”? Does He not plainly indicate the natural sonship of paternal bringing forth, which he obtained<br />
not by the careful framing of His manners, not by the exercise of and increase in virtue, but by<br />
property of nature? Wherefore, the only-begotten Son of the Father, indeed, possesses an<br />
indefectible Sonship; but the adoption of rational sons belongs not to them by nature, but is<br />
prepared for them by the probity of their life, and by the free gift of God. And it is mutable as the<br />
Scripture recognises: “For when the sons of God saw the daughters of men, they took them wives,”<br />
etc. And in another place: “I have nourished and brought up children, but they have rebelled against<br />
Me,” as we find God speaking by the prophet Isaiah.<br />
9. And though I could say much more, brethren beloved, I purposely omit to do so, as deeming it to<br />
be burdensome at great length to call these things to the remembrance of teachers who are of the<br />
same mind with myself. For ye yourselves are taught of God, nor are ye ignorant that this doctrine,<br />
which hath lately raised its head against the piety of the Church, is that of Ebion and Artemas; nor is<br />
it aught else but an imitation of Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch, who, by the judgment and<br />
counsel of all the bishops, and in every place, was separated from the Church. To whom Lucian<br />
succeeding, remained for many years separate from the communion of three bishops. And now<br />
lately having drained the dregs of their impiety, there have arisen amongst us those who teach this<br />
doctrine of a creation from things which are not, their hidden sprouts, <strong>Arius</strong> and Achilles, and the<br />
gathering of those who join in their wickedness. And three bishops in Syria , having been, in some<br />
manner, consecrated on account of their agreement with them, incite them to worse things. But let<br />
the judgment concerning these be reserved for your trial. For they, retaining in their memory the<br />
words which came to be used with respect to His saving Passion, and abasement, and examination,<br />
and what they call His poverty, and in short of all those things to which the Saviour submitted for our<br />
sakes, bring them forward to refute His supreme and eternal Godhead. But of those words which<br />
signify His natural glory and nobility, and abiding with the Father, they have become unmindful.<br />
Such as this: “I and My Father are one,” which indeed the Lord says, not as proclaiming Himself to<br />
be the Father, nor to demonstrate that two persons are one; but that the Son of the Father most<br />
exactly preserves the expressed likeness of the Father, inasmuch as He has by nature impressed<br />
upon Him His similitude in every respect, and is the image of the Father in no way discrepant, and<br />
the expressed figure of the primitive exemplar. Whence, also, to Philip, who then was desirous to<br />
see Him, the Lord shows this abundantly. For when he said, “Show us the Father,” He answered:<br />
“He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father,” since the Father was Himself seen through the<br />
spotless and living mirror of the divine image. Similar to which is what the saints say in the Psalms:<br />
“In Thy light shall we see light. Wherefore he that honoureth the Son, honoureth the Father also;”<br />
and with reason, for every impious word which they dare to speak against the Son, has reference to<br />
the Father.<br />
10. But after these things, brethren beloved, what is there wonderful in that which I am about to<br />
write, if I shall set forth the false calumnies against me and our most pious laity? For those who<br />
have set themselves in array against the Godhead of Christ, do not scruple to utter their ungrateful<br />
ravings against as. Who will not either that any of the ancients should be compared with them, or<br />
22
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
suffer that any of those whom, from our earliest years, we have used as instructors should be<br />
placed on a level with them. Nay, and they do not think that any of all those who are now our<br />
colleagues, has attained even to a moderate amount of wisdom; boasting themselves to be the<br />
only men who are wise and divested of worldly possessions, the sole discoverers of dogmas, and<br />
that to them alone are those things revealed which have never before come into the mind of any<br />
other under the sun. Oh, the impious arrogance! Oh, the immeasurable madness! Oh, the vainglory<br />
befitting those that are crazed! Oh, the pride of Satan which has taken root in their unholy souls.<br />
The religious perspicuity of the ancient Scriptures caused them no shame, nor did the consentient<br />
doctrine of our colleagues concerning Christ keep in check their audacity against Him. Their impiety<br />
not even the demons will bear, who are ever on the watch for a blasphemous word uttered against<br />
the Son.<br />
11. And let these things be now urged according to our power against those who, with respect to<br />
matter which they know nothing of, have, as it were, rolled in the dust against Christ, and have<br />
taken in hand to calumniate our piety towards Him. For those inventors of stupid fables say, that we<br />
who turn away with aversion from the impious and unscriptural blasphemy against Christ, of those<br />
who speak of His coming from the things which are not assert, that there are two unbegottens. For<br />
they ignorantly affirm that one of two things must necessarily be said, either that He is from things<br />
which are not, or that there are two unbegottens; nor do those ignorant men know how great is the<br />
difference between the unbegotten Father, and the things which were by Him created from things<br />
which are not, as well the rational as the irrational. Between which two, as holding the middle place,<br />
the only begotten nature of God, the Word by which the Father formed all things out of nothing, was<br />
begotten of the true Father Himself. As in a certain place the Lord Himself testified, saying, “Every<br />
one that loveth Him that begat, loveth Him also that is begotten of Him.”<br />
12. Concerning whom we thus believe, even as the Apostolic Church believes. In one Father<br />
unbegotten, who has from no one the cause of His being, who is unchangeable and immutable,<br />
who is always the same, and admits of no increase or diminution; who gave to us the Law, the<br />
prophets, and the Gospels; who is Lord of the patriarchs and apostles, and all the saints. And in<br />
one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God; not begotten of things which are not, but of<br />
Him who is the Father; not in a corporeal manner, by excision or division as Sabellius and<br />
Valentinus thought, but in a certain inexplicable and unspeakable manner, according to the words<br />
of the prophet cited above: “Who shall declare His generation?” Since that His subsistence no<br />
nature which is begotten can investigate, even as the Father can be investigated by none; because<br />
that the nature of rational beings cannot receive the knowledge of His divine generation by the<br />
Father. But men who are moved by the Spirit of truth, have no need to learn these things from me,<br />
for in our ears are sounding the words before uttered by Christ on this very thing, No man knoweth<br />
the Father, save the Son; and no man knoweth who the Son is, save the Father.” That He is equally<br />
with the Father unchangeable and immutable, wanting in nothing, and the perfect Son, and like to<br />
the Father, we have learnt; in this alone is He inferior to the Father, that He is not unbegotten. For<br />
He is the very exact image of the Father, and in nothing differing from Him. For it is clear that He is<br />
the image fully containing all things by which the greatest similitude is declared, as the Lord Himself<br />
hath taught us, when He says, “My Father is greater than I.” And according to this we believe that<br />
the Son is of the Father, always existing. “For He is the brightness of His glory, the express image<br />
of His Father’s person.” But let no one take that word always so as to raise suspicion that He is<br />
unbegotten, as they imagine who have their senses blinded. For neither are the words, “He was,” or<br />
“always,” or “before all worlds,” equivalent to unbegotten. But neither can the human mind employ<br />
any other word to signify unbegotten. And thus I think that you understand it, and I trust to your right<br />
purpose in all things, since these words do not at all signify unbegotten. For these words seem to<br />
denote simply a lengthening out of time, but the Godhead, and as it were the antiquity of the<br />
only-begotten, they cannot worthily signify; but they have been employed by holy men, whilst each,<br />
according to his capacity, seeks to express this mystery, asking indulgence from the hearers, and<br />
pleading a reasonable excuse, in saying, Thus far have we attained. But if there be any who are<br />
23
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
expecting from mortal lips some word which exceeds human capacity, saying that those things<br />
have been done away which are known in part, it is manifest that the words, “He was,” and<br />
“always,” and “before all ages,” come far short of what they hoped. And whatever word shall be<br />
employed is not equivalent to unbegotten. Therefore to the unbegotten Father, indeed, we ought to<br />
preserve His proper dignity, in confessing that no one is the cause of His being; but to the Son must<br />
be allotted His fitting honour, in assigning to Him, as we have said, a generation from the Father<br />
without beginning, and allotting adoration to Him, so as only piously and properly to use the words,<br />
“He was,” and “always,” and “before all worlds,” with respect to Him; by no means rejecting His<br />
Godhead, but ascribing to Him a similitude which exactly answers in every respect to the Image<br />
and Exemplar of the Father. But we must say that to the Father alone belongs the property of being<br />
unbegotten, for the Saviour Himself said, “My Father is greater than I.” And besides the pious<br />
opinion concerning the Father and the Son, we confess to one Holy Spirit, as the divine Scriptures<br />
teach us; who hath inaugurated both the holy men of the Old Testament, and the divine teachers of<br />
that which is called the New. And besides, also, one only Catholic and Apostolic Church, which can<br />
never be destroyed, though all the world should seek to make war with it; but it is victorious over<br />
every most impious revolt of the heretics who rise up against it. For her Goodman hath confirmed<br />
our minds by saying, “Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world.” After this we know of the<br />
resurrection of the dead, the first-fruits of which was our Lord Jesus Christ, who in very deed, and<br />
not in appearance merely, carried a body, of Mary Mother of God, who in the end of the world came<br />
to the human race to put away sin, was crucified and died, and yet did He not thus perceive any<br />
detriment to His divinity, being raised from the dead, taken up into heaven, seated at the right hand<br />
of majesty.<br />
13. These things in part have I written in this epistle, thinking it burdensome to write out each<br />
accurately, even as I said before, because they escape not your religious diligence. Thus do we<br />
teach, thus do we preach. These are the apostolic doctrines of the Church, for which also we die,<br />
esteeming those but little who would compel us to forswear them, even if they would force us by<br />
tortures, and not casting away our hope in them. To these <strong>Arius</strong> and Achilles opposing themselves,<br />
and those who with them are the enemies of the truth, have been expelled from the Church, as<br />
being aliens from our holy doctrine, according to the blessed Paul, who says, “If any man preach<br />
any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed; even though he feign<br />
himself an angel from heaven.” And also, “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to the<br />
wholesome words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; he<br />
is proud, knowing nothing,” and so forth. These, therefore, who have been anathematized by the<br />
brotherhood, let no one of you receive, nor admit of those things which are either said or written by<br />
them. For these seducers do always lie, nor will they ever speak the truth. They go about the cities,<br />
attempting nothing else but that under the mark of friendship and the name of peace, by their<br />
hypocrisy and blandishments, they may give and receive letters, to deceive by means of these a<br />
few “silly women, and laden with sins, who have been led captive by them,” and so forth.<br />
14. These men, therefore, who have dared such things against Christ; who have partly in public<br />
derided the Christian religion; partly seek to traduce and inform against its professors before the<br />
judgment-seats; who in a time of peace, as far as in them lies, have stirred up a persecution against<br />
us; who have enervated the ineffable mystery of Christ’s generation; from these, I say, beloved and<br />
like-minded brethren, turning away in aversion, give your suffrages with us against their mad daring;<br />
even as our colleagues have done, who being moved with indignation, have both written to us<br />
letters against these men, and have subscribed our letter. Which also I have sent unto you by my<br />
son Apion the deacon, being some of them from the whole of Egypt and the Thebaid, some from<br />
Libya and Pentapolis. There are others also from Syria , Lycia , Pamphylia, Asia, Cappadocia , and<br />
the other neighbouring provinces. After the example of which I trust also that I shall receive letters<br />
from you. For though I have prepared many helps towards curing those who have suffered injury,<br />
this is the especial remedy that has been devised for healing the multitudes that have been<br />
deceived by them, that they may comply with the general consent of our colleagues, and thus<br />
24
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
hasten to return to repentance. Salute one another, together with the brethren who are with you. I<br />
pray that ye may be strong in the Lord, beloved, and that I may profit by your love towards Christ.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong>’ Letter to the Emperor Constantine<br />
327 A.D.<br />
(from Sozomen, Ecclesiastical History, 2, 27. LPNF, ser. 2, vol. 2, 277.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> and Euzoius, presbyters, to Constantine , our most pious emperor and most beloved of God.<br />
According as your piety, beloved of God, commanded, O sovereign emperor, we here furnish a<br />
written statement of our own faith, and we protest before God that we, and all those who are with us,<br />
believe what is here set forth.<br />
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, and in His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, who was<br />
begotten from Him before all ages, God the Word, by whom all things were made, whether things in<br />
heaven or on earth; He came and took upon Him flesh, suffered and rose again, and ascended into<br />
heaven, whence He will again come to judge the quick and the dead.<br />
We believe in the Holy Ghost, in the resurrection of the body, in the life to come, in the kingdom of<br />
heaven, and in one Catholic Church of God, established throughout the earth. We have received<br />
this faith from the Holy Gospels, in which the Lord says to his disciples, “Go forth and teach all<br />
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” If we do<br />
not so believe this, and if we do not truly receive the doctrines concerning the Father, the Son, and<br />
the Holy Ghost, as they are taught by the whole Catholic Church and by the sacred Scriptures, as<br />
we believe in every point, let God be our judge, both now and in the day which is to come.<br />
Wherefore we appeal to your piety, O our emperor most beloved of God, that, as we are enrolled<br />
among the members of the clergy, and as we hold the faith and thought of the Church and of the<br />
sacred Scriptures, we may be openly reconciled to our mother, the Church, through your<br />
peacemaking and pious piety; so that useless questions and disputes may be cast aside, and that<br />
we and the Church may dwell together in peace, and we all in common may offer the customary<br />
prayer for your peaceful and pious empire and for your entire family.<br />
Constantine’s Letter to Alexander and <strong>Arius</strong> Requesting Reconciliation<br />
But Constantine treated the controversy as an idle dispute about words and<br />
compromise between the two.<br />
proposed a<br />
The Victor Constantine, the Great Augustus, to Alexander and <strong>Arius</strong>;<br />
(1.) I call God to witness, as is fitting, who is the helper of my endeavors and the preserver of all<br />
men, that I had a twofold reason for undertaking this duty which I have now performed.<br />
My design then was first to bring the various beliefs formed by all nations about God to a condition<br />
of settled uniformity.<br />
25
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Secondly I hoped to restore to health the civil liberties of the empire, then suffering under the<br />
malignant power of an angry tyrant. Keeping these objects in view, I sought to accomplish the one<br />
by thought, which is hidden from the eye, while the other I tried to rectify by the power of military<br />
authority. For I was aware that, if I should succeed in establishing, according to my hopes, a<br />
common harmony of sentiment among all the servants of God, the general course of affairs<br />
would also experience a change corresponding to the pious desires of all.<br />
(2.) So when I found that an intolerable spirit of mad folly had overcome the whole of Africa, through<br />
the influence of those who with heedless frivolity had presumed to divide the religion of the people<br />
into diverse sects, I was anxious to stop the course of this disorder. After I had removed the<br />
common enemy of mankind [Licinius] who had interposed his lawless sentence which prohibited<br />
your holy synods, I could discover no other remedy equal to the occasion, except to send some of<br />
you churchmen to aid in restoring mutual harmony among the disputants.<br />
(3.) I naturally believed that you in the East would be the first to promote the salvation of other<br />
nations, since the power of Divine light and the law of sacred worship, which proceeded in the first<br />
instance through the favor of God, from the bosom, as it were, of the East, have illumined the world<br />
by their sacred radiance. So I resolved with all energy of thought and diligence of enquiry to seek<br />
your aid. As soon, as I had secured my decisive victory and unquestioned triumph over my enemies,<br />
my first enquiry was concerning that object which I felt to be of paramount interest and importance.<br />
(4.) But, O glorious Providence of God! How deep a wound did not my ears only, but my very<br />
heart receive when it was reported that divisions existed among yourselves more grievous<br />
still than those which continued in that country [Africa, i.e. the Donatist schism]! You, through<br />
whose aid I had hoped to procure a remedy for the errors of others, are in a state which needs<br />
healing even more than theirs. And yet, now that I have made a careful enquiry into the origin<br />
and foundation of these differences, I have found the cause to be of a truly insignificant<br />
character, and quite unworthy of such fierce contention.<br />
I feel compelled to address you in this letter, and to appeal at the same time to your unity and<br />
discernment. I call on Divine Providence to assist me in the task, while I interrupt your dissension<br />
as a minister of peace. (5.) I have hope for success: Even in a great disagreement I might expect<br />
with the help of the higher Power, to be able without difficulty, by a judicious appeal to the pious<br />
feelings of those who hear me, to recall them to a better spirit. How can I help but to expect a far<br />
easier and more speedy resolution of this difference, when the cause which hinders general<br />
harmony of sentiment is intrinsically trifling and of little importance?<br />
(6.) I understand that the origin of the present controversy is this. When you, Alexander, demanded<br />
of the priests what opinion they each maintained respecting a certain passage in Scripture, or<br />
rather, I should say, that you asked them something connected with an unprofitable question. You<br />
then, <strong>Arius</strong>, inconsiderately insisted on what ought never to have been speculated about at all, or if<br />
pondered, should have been buried in profound silence. Hence it was that a dissension arose<br />
between you, fellowship was withdrawn, and the holy people were rent into diverse factions, no<br />
longer preserving the unity of the one body.<br />
(7.) And so I now ask you both to show an equal degree of consideration for the other, and to<br />
receive the advice which your fellow-servant impartially gives. What then is this advice? It was<br />
wrong in the first instance to propose such questions as these, and also wrong to reply to them<br />
when they were presented.<br />
(8.) For those points of discussion are not commanded by the authority of any law, but are rather<br />
the product of an argumentative spirit which is encouraged by the idle useless talk of leisure. Even<br />
though they may be intended merely as an intellectual exercise, they ought certainly to be confined<br />
26
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
to the region of our own thoughts, and not hastily produced in the popular assemblies, nor<br />
unadvisedly entrusted to the ears of the general public. For how very few are there able either<br />
accurately to comprehend, or adequately to explain subjects so sublime and difficult to comprehend<br />
in their nature? Or, granting that one were fully competent for this, how many people will he<br />
convince? Or again, who in dealing with questions involving such subtle distinctions as these can<br />
be sure he is not dangerously departing from the truth in some point? We ourselves may be unable,<br />
through the weakness of our natural abilities, to give a clear explanation of the subject before us, or,<br />
on the other hand, our hearers understanding may prevent them from arriving at an accurate<br />
understanding of what we say. Lest that be the case, it is our obligation to be sparing with our words,<br />
so that neither of these situations will cause the people to be reduced either to blasphemy or to<br />
schism.<br />
(9.) Now forgive one another for both the careless question and the ill-considered answer.<br />
The cause of your difference has not been any of the leading doctrines or precepts of the Divine law,<br />
nor has any new heresy respecting the worship of God arisen among you. You are really of one and<br />
the same judgment; and so it is fitting for you to join in communion and fellowship.<br />
(10.) As long as you continue to contend about these small and very insignificant questions, it is<br />
not fitting that so large a portion of God’s people should be under the direction of your judgment,<br />
since you are thus divided between yourselves. In my opinion, it is not merely unbecoming, but<br />
positively evil, that such should be the case. Let me arouse your minds by the following little<br />
illustration. You know that philosophers, though they all adhere to one system, are yet frequently at<br />
issue on certain points, and differ, perhaps, in their degree of knowledge. Yet they are brought back<br />
to harmony of opinion by the uniting power of their common teachings. If this be true, is it not far<br />
more reasonable that you, who are the ministers of the Supreme God, should be of one mind in the<br />
profession of the same religion? Let us still more thoughtfully and with closer attention examine<br />
what I have said, and see whether it be right: On the ground of some trifling and foolish verbal<br />
difference between ourselves, should brothers assume towards each other the attitude of<br />
enemies? Should the honorable synod be torn in two by profane disunion, because of you who<br />
wrangle together on points so trivial and altogether unessential? This is vulgar, and more<br />
characteristic of childish ignorance, than consistent with the wisdom of priests and sensible men.<br />
(11.) Let us withdraw ourselves with a good will from these temptations of the devil. Our great God<br />
and our common Savior has granted us all the same light. Permit me, who am his servant, to<br />
successfully bring my task to conclusion, under the direction of his providence, that I may be<br />
enabled, through my exhortations, diligence, and earnest warning, to recall his people to<br />
communion and fellowship.<br />
(12.) You have, as I said, only one faith, and one opinion about our religion, and the Divine<br />
commandment in all its parts imposes upon us all the duty of maintaining a spirit of peace. Because<br />
of this, you should not let the circumstance which has led to a slight difference between you cause<br />
any division or schism among you, since it does not affect the validity of the whole.<br />
(13.) I say this without in any way desiring to force you to a complete unity of judgment in regard to<br />
this truly idle question, whatever its real nature may be. For the dignity of your synod can be<br />
preserved, and the communion of your whole body can be maintained unbroken, no matter how<br />
wide a difference exists among you about unimportant matters. We are not all like-minded on every<br />
subject, nor is there such a thing as one universal disposition and judgment.<br />
(14.) As far, then, as regards Divine Providence, let there be one faith, and one understanding<br />
among you, one united judgment concerning God. But as to your subtle disputations on questions<br />
of little or no significance, though you may be unable to harmonize in opinion, such differences<br />
should be confined to your own private minds and thoughts. And now, let the preciousness of<br />
27
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
common affection, let faith in the truth, let the honor due to God and to the observance of his law<br />
remain immovably among you. Resume your mutual feelings of friendship, love, and respect.<br />
Restore to the people their customary embraces; and you yourselves purify your souls, as it were,<br />
and once more acknowledge one another. For it often happens that when a reconciliation is<br />
effected by the removal of the causes of hostility, friendship becomes even sweeter than it was<br />
before.<br />
(15.) Restore me then my quiet days, and untroubled nights, that the joy of undimmed light, the<br />
delight of a tranquil life, may be my portion from here on. Otherwise I will be forced to mourn with<br />
constant tears, and I will not be able to pass the remainder of my days in peace. While the people<br />
of God, whose fellow-servant I am, are so divided among themselves by an unreasonable and<br />
wicked spirit of contention, how is it possible that I shall be able to maintain a tranquil mind? And I<br />
will give you a proof how great my sorrow has been in this regard. Not long ago I visited Nicomedia,<br />
and had intended to proceed immediately from that city to the East. It was while I was hurrying<br />
towards you, and had already finished the greater part of the journey, that the news of this matter<br />
reversed my plan, so that I would not be forced to see with my own eyes that which I felt myself<br />
scarcely able even to hear. So open for me by your unity of judgment that road to the regions of the<br />
East which your dissensions have closed to me, and permit me speedily to see you and all other<br />
peoples rejoicing together. Render due acknowledgment to God in the language of praise and<br />
thanksgiving for the restoration of general peace and liberty to all.<br />
Translation from NPNF 2 vol. 1, pp. 515-8, adapted by AJW<br />
Sections 6-15 also found translated in NPNF2 vol. 2, pp. 6-7 and New Eusebius, no. 287<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> and his supporters would not yield.<br />
In the East these different representations were discussed and found advocates, and a synod at<br />
Antioch (268) rejected the doctrine that the Father and Son were of the same substance. Through<br />
the Antiochian School the doctrine of the subordination of the Son was worked out. Lucian, the<br />
teacher of <strong>Arius</strong> and of Eusebius of Nicomedia, exercised a controlling influence on the views of<br />
<strong>Arius</strong>; Harnack calls Lucian "the <strong>Arius</strong> before <strong>Arius</strong>."<br />
Alexander & Athanasius<br />
The first opponent of <strong>Arius</strong> was Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and the greatest doctrinal<br />
opponent of the Arian Christology was Athanasius.<br />
28
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Athanasius<br />
“The Black Dwarf” is what his enemies called him. Athanasius was a dark-skinned Egyptian bishop<br />
who had few friends and plenty of enemies. He was exiled from the church five times by four<br />
Roman emperors, spending almost half of his 45 years as bishop of Alexandria in exile.<br />
The reason for Athanasius’ exile-upon-exile was his persistence in declaring Arianism, the church’s<br />
most cherished theological thought of the day, as a heresy.<br />
During the spread of this false doctrine, Athanasius was serving Jesus and His church as the chief<br />
deacon assistant to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria. These two men contended against <strong>Arius</strong>,<br />
exposing that his views denied the Trinity. Opposing <strong>Arius</strong>’ notion that Christ had an origin and<br />
came out of the Father, Alexander and Athanasius argued that Christ and the Father have always<br />
been eternally united as one in the Godhead (Colossians 1:16, Hebrews 1:1-2, etc.).<br />
The Trinity: an essential doctrine<br />
Athanasius contended that the doctrine of the Trinity was no minor, non-essential matter. Only one<br />
who was both fully human and fully God could atone for our our sin and depravity and hold the<br />
power to save us. The Christian understanding of salvation was at hand. Athanasius famously<br />
argued, “Those who maintain that there was a time when the Son was not rob God of His Word, like<br />
plunderers.”<br />
According to Socrates, Alexander gave the first impulse to the controversy by insisting, in a meeting<br />
of presbyters and other clergy, on the eternity of the Son; whereupon <strong>Arius</strong> openly opposed, and<br />
charged him with Sabellianism. He reasoned thus:<br />
29
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
"If the Father begat the Son, he must be older than the Son, and there was a time<br />
when the Son was not; from this it further follows that the Son has his subsistence<br />
(hypostaaie) from nothing."<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> was condemned by a synod at Alexandria in 320 or 321, and was forced to leave city. But<br />
was kindly received both by Eusebius of Cesarea (He became the bishop of Cesarea around 313<br />
and was head of the Council of Nicea in 325, supposedly. He seems to have temporarily Fallen out<br />
of favor of Constantine. Surviving letters show that Constantine advised the city of Antioch not to<br />
elect Eusebius as their bishop. Eusebius wrote everything down, but little ofhis speech is known.<br />
His eath is placed somewhere between 337 and 340) and Eusebius of Nicomedia (Eusebius of<br />
Nicomedia (died 341) was the man who baptised Constantine the Great. He was a bishop of<br />
Berytus (modern-day Beirut) in Phoenicia, then of the See of Nicomedia, where the imperial court<br />
resided, and finally of Constantinople from 338 up to his death. Like <strong>Arius</strong>, he was a pupil of Lucian<br />
of Antioch ), and it was evident that not a few of the Asiatic churches favored his ideas.<br />
A reconciliation was brought about between him and Alexander; but hardly had he returned to<br />
Alexandria before the strife broke out again, and with still greater violence. In spite of his many and<br />
powerful friends, <strong>Arius</strong> was defeated at the Council of Nicæa (325), and banished to Illyria.<br />
• Soon, however, a reaction in his favor set in. The Eusebian party espoused his cause more openly, and<br />
through Constantia, the sister of the emperor, he got access to the court. He was formally recalled from<br />
banishment; and all the chiefs of the Eusebians were assembled in Constantinople to receive him back<br />
into the bosom of the Church, when he suddenly died the day before the solemnity at the age of over<br />
eighty years, at a time and in a manner that seemed to the orthodox to be a direct interposition of<br />
Providence, and a condemnation of his doctrine; while his friends attributed his death to poison.<br />
Outbreak of the Controversy<br />
In 320 or 321 Alexander convened a synod of about a hundred Egyptian and Lybian bishops at<br />
Alexandria, which excommunicated <strong>Arius</strong> and his followers.<br />
30
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> found powerful friends in Eusebius of Nicomedia, Eusebius of Casarea, Paulinus of Tyre,<br />
Gregory of Berytus, Aetius of Lydda, and other bishops who either shared his view, or at least<br />
considered it viable alternate perspective<br />
He took refuge with Eusebius at Nicomedia,and presented his teachings in half-poetic work, Thalia<br />
(" The Banquet"), of which Athanasius has preserved fragments.<br />
The attention of the Emperor Constantine was called to the controversy, and in a letter to<br />
Alexander and <strong>Arius</strong> be pronounced it a mere battle of words, a wrangle over things<br />
incomprehensible; he also sent Hosius of Cordova to Egypt to mediate between the contending<br />
parties. From political considerations, however, at the suggestion of certain bishops, he called the<br />
first ecumenical council of the Church, to settle the Arian controversy together with the question of<br />
the time of celebrating Easter and the Meletian schism in Egypt.<br />
31
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
CHAPTER TWO<br />
NICEA TO CONSTANTINOPLE<br />
Council of Nicea<br />
The opposing thoughts caused so much controversy that the newly converted Emperor<br />
Constantine the Great intervened in 325 A.D. to call the Council of Nicea. He was cited as saying,<br />
“Division in the church is worse than war.” The council, comprised of around 300 bishops, drafted<br />
the first copy of the Nicene Creed. Athanasius had grown to be the most prolific writer on Nicene<br />
orthodoxy and orthodox Trinitarian doctrine. He saw major flaws in <strong>Arius</strong>’ writings and called his<br />
heresy the “forerunner of the Antichrist” (Athanasius, Orations Ar. 1:1).<br />
The council ultimately condemned <strong>Arius</strong> as a heretic, exiled him from the church, and considered it<br />
illegal to possess his writings. Finally, peace was restored in the church and orthodox Christian<br />
beliefs were unified. Athanasius was hailed as a “noble champion for Christ.”<br />
32
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Santa Claus (Nicholas) slapping <strong>Arius</strong> at Nicea<br />
"Well, at Nicea, <strong>Arius</strong> began telling the pastors that Jesus wasn't really God but, instead, that the<br />
Father had created him, just like the angels. Now they knew that he was telling lies because Jesus<br />
is our savior and only God can save us. Plus, he forgave sins, which only God can do. And the<br />
Bible calls him the creator, but there aren't any creators other than God. The pastors also knew that<br />
we should worship Jesus, but it doesn't make sense to worship anybody besides God. So, Nicholas<br />
listened quietly but, after a while, all the lies made him really angry. When he couldn't take it<br />
anymore, sweet Nicholas stood up, walked over to <strong>Arius</strong>, and punched him in the face! I know that's<br />
not a nice thing to do, but <strong>Arius</strong> was being a really, really big dork”<br />
33
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
34
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
A fresco from the Sistine Chapel depicting the Council of Nicaea<br />
A council was, therefore, assembled in Nicaea, in Bithynia, which has ever been counted the first<br />
ecumenical, and which held its sittings from the middle of June, 325. .<br />
It is commonly said that Hosius of Cordova presided.<br />
The Emperor Constantine himself was present.<br />
The Pope, St. Silvester, was represented by his legates,<br />
and 318 Fathers attended,<br />
almost all from the East.<br />
Unfortunately, the acts of the Council are not preserved.<br />
35
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The emperor, who was present, paid religious deference to a gathering which displayed the<br />
authority of Christian teaching in a manner so remarkable.<br />
From the first it was evident that <strong>Arius</strong> could not reckon upon a large number of patrons among the<br />
bishops.<br />
Alexander was accompanied by his youthful deacon, the ever-memorable Athanasius who<br />
engaged in discussion with the heresiarch himself, and from that moment became the leader of the<br />
Catholics during well-nigh fifty years.<br />
The Fathers appealed to tradition against the innovators, and were passionately orthodox; while a<br />
letter was received from Eusebius of Nicomedia, declaring openly that he would never allow Christ<br />
to be of one substance with God. This avowal suggested a means of discriminating between true<br />
believers and all those who, under that pretext, did not hold the Faith handed down.<br />
The debate<br />
keyed in on four main words<br />
Homoousians- Son is of the same substance as the Father<br />
Homoiousians- Son is of similar substance to the Father<br />
Homoeans- the Son is of likeness to the Father<br />
Anomoeans- the Son is unlike the Father<br />
The first of the four is the word adopted by the Council of Nicaea and was supported by Athanasius<br />
(east), Hilary of Poitiers (west), and with some reservation the bishop of Rome which made it<br />
official catholic dogma.<br />
A creed was drawn up on behalf of the Arian party by Eusebius of Caesarea in which every term of<br />
honour and dignity, except the oneness of substance, was attributed to Our Lord.<br />
36
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Finally a statement with “Jesus is "consubstantial" with God” was accepted, with only thirteen<br />
bishops dissenting, and these were speedily reduced to seven. The Nicene Creed's central term,<br />
used to describe the relationship between the Father and the Son, is Homoousios (Ancient Greek:<br />
ὁμοούσιος), or Consubstantiality, meaning "of the same substance" or "of one being"<br />
The council consisted of three hundred and eighteen bishops (about one-sixth of all the bishops<br />
of the Greco-Roman Empire), resulted in the formal condemnation of <strong>Arius</strong>, and the adoption of the<br />
"Nicene Creed," which affirms in unequivocal terms the doctrine of the eternal deity of Christ in<br />
these words:<br />
THE NICENE CREED<br />
We believe in one God the Father Almighty,<br />
maker of all things visible and invisible:<br />
And in one Lord Jesus Christ,<br />
the Son of God,<br />
37
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
begotten of the Father,<br />
only-begotten,<br />
that is, of the substance of the Father,<br />
God of God,<br />
Light of Light,<br />
true God of true God,<br />
begotten not made,<br />
of one substance with the Father,<br />
through whom all things were made,<br />
both those in heaven and those on earth:<br />
who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh,<br />
and entered humanity and suffered,<br />
and rose the third day,<br />
ascended into heaven, I<br />
s coming to judge the living and the dead:<br />
And in the Holy Spirit.<br />
But as for those who say<br />
that there was a time when He was not,<br />
and that before He was begotten He was not,<br />
and that He came into being from things that were not,<br />
or who affirm that the Son of God is of a different subsistence or essence,<br />
or created, subject to change or alteration,<br />
them the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes.<br />
Every bishop made this declaration except six, of whom four at length gave way.<br />
Nicaea's "in one Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only-begotten,<br />
that is from the substance of the Father"<br />
was to offset <strong>Arius</strong>'s central assertion that God was immutable, unique, unknowable, only one.<br />
Therefore Arians felt no substance of God could in any way be communicated or shared with any<br />
other being.<br />
The council's "true God from true God, begotten not made"<br />
set aside <strong>Arius</strong>'s contention that, since God was immutable and unknowable, Christ had to be a<br />
created being, made out of nothing by God, first in the created order certainly, but of it. This limited<br />
the concept of the preexistence of Christ even while adapting the dominant Logos Christology to<br />
Arianism. The Logos, first born, created of God, was incarnate in the Christ but, asserted <strong>Arius</strong>,<br />
"there was when he was not."<br />
Nicaea's "of one substance with the Father"<br />
made the Greek term homoousios the catchword of the orthodox.<br />
38
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
39
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Eusebius of Nicomedia withdrew his opposition to the Nicene term, but would not sign the<br />
condemnation of <strong>Arius</strong>.<br />
THE CREED OF EUSEBIUS, CAESAREA (A.D. 325)<br />
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible:<br />
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God of God, Light of Light, Life of Life, the<br />
only-begotten Son, first-born of all creation, begotten of God the Father before all worlds, through<br />
whom also all things were made; who for our salvation was made flesh, and lived his life among<br />
men; and suffered, and rose on the third day; and ascended to the Father; and will come again in<br />
glory to judge the living and the dead:<br />
And in one Holy Spirit. vWe believe that each of these is and exists, the Father truly father, and the<br />
Son truly son, and the Holy Spirit truly holy spirit; even as our Lord, when sending forth His<br />
disciples to preach, said: "Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them into the name of the<br />
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."<br />
And concerning these things we affirm that we so hold and so think, and have of old so held, and<br />
will so hold till death, and stand steadfast in this faith, anathematizing all ungodly heresy. We testify<br />
before Almighty God and our Lord Jesus Christ that we have thought all this in heart and soul ever<br />
since we knew ourselves, and we now so think and speak in truth, being able to show by evidence<br />
and to convince you that we in past times so believed and preached accordingly.<br />
By the emperor, who considered heresy as rebellion, the alternative proposed was subscription or<br />
banishment; and, on political grounds, the Bishop of Nicomedia was exiled not long after the<br />
council, involving <strong>Arius</strong> in his ruin. <strong>Arius</strong> who is now pronounced by the council as a heretic were<br />
exiles to Illyria.<br />
The creed was signed by nearly all the bishops, Hosius at the head, even by Eusebius of<br />
Caesarea, who, before and afterward, occupied a middle position between Athanasius and <strong>Arius</strong>.<br />
This is the first instance of such signing of a doctrinal symbol. Eusebius of Nicomedis and Theognis<br />
of Nicæa signed the creed, but not the condemnatory formula appended, and for this they were<br />
deposed, and banished for a short time.<br />
Two Egyptian bishops-Theonas and Secundus-persistently refused to sign, and were banished,<br />
with <strong>Arius</strong>, to Illyria. This is the first example of the civil punishment of heresy, and opened the long<br />
and dark era of persecution for all departures from the catholic or orthodox faith.<br />
40
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Emperor burns all the writings and documents of <strong>Arius</strong> to destroy the heresy.<br />
This has become a practice since then.<br />
Emperor Constantine also ordered a penalty of death for those who refused to surrender the Arian<br />
writings:<br />
"In addition, if any writing composed by <strong>Arius</strong> should be found, it should be handed<br />
over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated,<br />
but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public<br />
order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by<br />
<strong>Arius</strong>, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his<br />
penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offence, he shall be<br />
submitted for capital punishment. ... "<br />
— Edict by Emperor Constantine against the Arians<br />
The books of <strong>Arius</strong> were burnt, and his followers branded as enemies of Christianity.<br />
As a result almost all original documents are lost and we depend only on the writings of the<br />
opponents of Arianism to reconstruct the doctrine and even what happenned.<br />
But this was only the beginning of the problem as politics took over the theology. . While the plain<br />
Arian creed was defended by few, those political prelates who sided with Eusebius carried on a<br />
double warfare against the term "consubstantial", and its champion, Athanasius. This greatest of<br />
the Eastern Fathers had succeeded Alexander in the Egyptian patriarchate (326). He was not more<br />
than thirty years of age; but his published writings, antecedent to the Council, display, in thought<br />
and precision, a mastery of the issues involved which no Catholic teacher could surpass. His<br />
41
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
unblemished life, considerate temper, and loyalty to his friends made him by no means easy to<br />
attack.<br />
Eusebius, by his scholarship and personality won over Constantine in 328 and a period of Arian<br />
reaction set in.<br />
Eustathius of Antioch was deposed on a charge of Sabellianism (331), and the Emperor sent his<br />
command that Athanasius should receive <strong>Arius</strong> back into communion. The saint firmly declined. In<br />
325 the <strong>Arius</strong> was absolved by two councils, at Tyre and Jerusalem, while in the council of Tyre<br />
Athanasius was depose from his position on false grounds of personal misconduct and was<br />
banished to Trier for a period of an year and a half.<br />
Meanwhile, Constantia, the Emperor's sister, had recommended <strong>Arius</strong>, whom she thought an<br />
injured man, to Constantine's leniency. Her dying words affected him, and he recalled the Lybian,<br />
extracted from him a solemn adhesion to the Nicene faith, and ordered Alexander, Bishop of the<br />
Imperial City, to give him Communion in his own church (336). According to tradition Alexander<br />
prayed for a divine verdict by taking the life of his own or that of <strong>Arius</strong>, before the ceremony took<br />
place the next day. That evening <strong>Arius</strong> died suddenly.<br />
The Nicene Creed has outlived all the subsequent storms, and, in the improved form recognized at<br />
Constantinople in 381, it remains to this day the most generally received creed of Christendom; and,<br />
if the later Latin insertion, the filioqua, be omitted, a bond of union between the Greek, the Roman,<br />
and the orthodox Protestant Churches.<br />
But this didn’t last long.<br />
Athanasius exiled<br />
Within months, <strong>Arius</strong>’ supporters convinced Emperor Constantine into ending <strong>Arius</strong>’ exile. When<br />
Athanasius conversely defended the doctrine of the Trinity and refused to recognize <strong>Arius</strong> and his<br />
writings back into God’s church, <strong>Arius</strong> and others began to spread false charges against him,<br />
including sorcery and treason. This accusation of treason forced Constantine to exile Athanasius<br />
from the land.<br />
At the First Synod of Tyre in AD 335, they brought accusations against Athanasius, now bishop of<br />
Alexandria, the primary opponent of <strong>Arius</strong>. After this, Constantine had Athanasius banished since<br />
he considered him an impediment to reconciliation. In the same year, the Synod of Jerusalem<br />
under Constantine's direction readmitted <strong>Arius</strong> to communion in AD 336. <strong>Arius</strong> died on the way to<br />
this event in Constantinople. Some scholars suggest that <strong>Arius</strong> may have been poisoned by his<br />
opponents. Eusebius and Theognis remained in the Emperor's favor, and when Constantine, who<br />
had been a catechumen much of his adult life, accepted baptism on his deathbed, it was from<br />
Eusebius of Nicomedia.<br />
42
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
After Constantine's death in 337, open dispute resumed again. Constantine's son Constantius II,<br />
who had become Emperor of the eastern part of the Empire, actually encouraged the Arians and<br />
set out to reverse the Nicene creed. His advisor in these affairs was Eusebius of Nicomedia, who<br />
had already at the Council of Nicea been the head of the Arian party, who also was made bishop of<br />
Constantinople.<br />
The third Council of Sirmium in 357 was the high point of Arianism. The Seventh Arian Confession<br />
(Second Sirmium Confession) held that both homoousios (of one substance) and homoiousios (of<br />
similar substance) were unbiblical and that the Father is greater than the Son. (This confession was<br />
later known as the Blasphemy of Sirmium.)<br />
Constantius used his power to exile bishops adhering to the Nicene creed, especially St Athanasius<br />
of Alexandria, who fled to Rome. In 355 Constantius became the sole Emperor and extended his<br />
pro-Arian policy toward the western provinces, frequently using force to push through his creed,<br />
even exiling Pope Liberius and installing Antipope Felix II.<br />
But by this time, Arianism had become the dominant position of the day. He was banished and<br />
exiled four more times over the next several years.<br />
By the time he was in his 70s, elderly Athanasius was permanently restored to his position in the<br />
church at Alexandria. During his exile, Athanasius wrote many books, including a biography on St.<br />
Antony that is considered the most historically reliable to this day. God used this biography to help<br />
lead many unbelievers to belief in Christ including St. Augustine. It also put him back in favorable<br />
light with the church.<br />
Among his writings, Athanasius wrote a list of what he believed were the 27 divinely-inspired books<br />
of the New Testament. By the grace of God, his list is the one that the church eventually adopted<br />
and agreed with. And as far as Arianism is concerned, its lack of biblical basis led to its own demise.<br />
And as God has always been faithful to do, the gospel truths of Scripture prevailed throughout the<br />
ages, including the doctrine of the Trinity, which Athanasius so faithfully defended for so many<br />
years.<br />
43
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
No Christological heresy of ancient Christianity was more widely accepted or tenacious. During a<br />
part of the fourth century it was the ruling creed in the Eastern Church, though there were constant<br />
and vigorous protests by the orthodox party. It was also the form of Christianity to which most of the<br />
barbarian Teutonic races were at first converted.<br />
After the Nicean Synod<br />
AD<br />
“Not long after the Nicene Council an Arian and semi-Arian reaction took place, and acquired for a<br />
time the ascendency in the empire. Arianism now entered the stage of its political power. This was a<br />
period of the greatest excitement in Church and State: Council was held against council; creed was<br />
set up against creed; anathema was hurled against anathema." The highways,"says the impartial<br />
non-Christian historian, Ammianus Mascellinus, "were covered with galloping bishops." The<br />
churches, the theaters, the hippodromes, the feasts, the markets, the streets, the baths, and the<br />
shops of Constantinople and other large cities were filled with dogmatic disputes. In intolerance and<br />
violence the Arians even exceeded the orthodox. The interference of emperors and their courts<br />
only poured oil on the flames, and heightened the bitterness of contest by adding confiscation and<br />
exile to the spiritual punishment of synodical excommunication.<br />
The unflinching leader of the orthodox party was Athanasius, a pure and sublime character, who<br />
had figured at the Council of Nicæa as a youthful archdeacon, in company with Alexander, whom<br />
he succeeded as bishop (326); but he was again and again deposed by imperial despotism,<br />
and spent twenty years in exile. He sacrificed everything to his conviction, and had the courage<br />
44
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
to face the empire in arms (hence the motto: Athanasius contra mundum - “Athanasius against the<br />
world.” ). He was a man of one idea and one passion,-the eternal divinity of Christ, which he<br />
considered the cornerstone of the Christian system.<br />
The -politico- ecclesiastical leader of the Arian party was Eusebias of Nicomedia (the Arian) who,<br />
probably owing to the influence of the Emperor Constantine, was recalled from exile and<br />
baptised Constantine on his deathbed. Constantine was turned favorably to <strong>Arius</strong>, accepted<br />
a confession he prepared, recalled him from exile, and ordered him to be solemnly restored<br />
to the communion of the catholic Church at Constantinople; he even demanded his restoration<br />
in Alexandria by Athanasius; but, on the day preceding his intended restoration, the heretic<br />
suddenly died (336).<br />
In the year following, Constantine himself died, and his son Constantine II. recalled Athanasius<br />
from his first exile.<br />
In the West the Nicene statement found universal Acceptance.<br />
But in the East, when Constantius, the second son of Constantine the Great, ruled,<br />
opposition to the Nicene formula was well-nigh universal, and was maintained with fanatical zeal<br />
by the court and by Eusebius of Nicomedia, who was transferred to Constantinople in 338.<br />
Athanasius was attacked on personal charges with great vehemence by the Eusebians, who<br />
sought to supersede the doctrine of the homoousia by indirect methods. He was banished to Gaul<br />
in 335.<br />
Eustathius of Antioch, A supporter of Athanasius, had been deposed at a synod at Antioch in 330,<br />
the charge being that he advocated Sabellianism.<br />
First Synod of Tyre<br />
Accused of mistreating Arians and Meletians, Athanasius answered those charges at a gathering of<br />
bishops in Tyre, the First Synod of Tyre, in 335.<br />
Athanasius, who had succeeded Alexander as Bishop of Alexandria, was deposed by the First<br />
Synod of Tyre in 335 and Marcellus of Ancyra followed him in 336.<br />
At the First Synod of Tyre in AD 335, they brought accusations against Athanasius, now bishop of<br />
Alexandria, the primary opponent of <strong>Arius</strong>; after this, Constantine had Athanasius banished since<br />
he considered him an impediment to reconciliation.<br />
Marcellus of Ancyra, another vigorous defender of the Nicene symbol, was also deposed at a<br />
synod in Constantinople.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong>'s death occurred a little later, but the work of punishing his opponents went on. Athanasius<br />
was deposed a second time (339), and took refuge with Julius of Rome, who, with the great<br />
body of the Western Church, believed him a martyr.<br />
It is unnecessary to follow the varying fortunes of the two parties, and the history of councils, which<br />
neutralized one another, without materially advancing the points in dispute.<br />
The most important are the synod of Antioch, 341, which set forth an orthodox creed, but deposed<br />
Athanasius;<br />
the orthodox synod of Sardica, which declared Athanasius and Marcaus orthodox,<br />
and the Arian counter-synod of Philippopolis, 343; the synods of Sirmium, 351, which protested<br />
45
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
against Athanasius's reinstatement at Alexandria;<br />
Arles, 353; Milan, 355, which condemned Athanasius in obedience to Constantine;<br />
the second synod at Sirmium, 357; the third, 358; at Antioch, 358; at Aneyra, 368; at Constantinople,<br />
360; at Alexandria, 362.<br />
Aided by Constantius, Arianism, under the modified form represented by the term homoiousios ("<br />
similar in substance," as distinct from the Nicene homoourios "same in substance" and the strictly<br />
Arian heteroousios "different in substance"), gained the power in the empire; and even the papal<br />
chair in Rome was for a while desecrated by heresy during the Arian interregnum of Felix II.<br />
But the death of Constantius in 361, the indifference of his successor, the Emperor Julian, to all<br />
theological Disputes (the exiled bishops were at liberty to return to their sees, though he afterward<br />
banished Athanasius), the toleration of Jovian (d. 364), and especially the internal dissensions of<br />
the Arians, prepared the way for a new triumph of orthodoxy.<br />
The Eussebians, or semi-Arians, taught that the Son was similar in substance (homoiousios) to the<br />
Father; while the Aetians (from Aetius, a deacon of Antioch who revived Arianism) and the<br />
Eunomians (from Eunomius, Bishop of Cyzicus in Mysia) taught that he was of a different<br />
substance (heteroousios), and unlike the Father in everything. A number of compromising synods<br />
and creeds undertook to heal these dissensions, but without permanent effect.<br />
I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD,<br />
Creator of Heaven and earth,<br />
And of all things visible and invisible.<br />
The Arian Catholic Creed<br />
And in his Spiritual Son, Yeshua the Messiah,<br />
Whom was born of Mary and Joseph,<br />
Was not consubstantial nor co-eternal with God the Father almighty,<br />
Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, died, and was buried.<br />
On the third day His Spirit was resurrected.<br />
He ascended into Heaven,<br />
And sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty.<br />
Whence he shall come again to judge the living and the dead,<br />
Of whose Kingdom there shall be no end.<br />
46
And I believe in the Holy Spirit,<br />
The Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church,<br />
The communion of saints,<br />
The forgiveness of sins,<br />
The resurrection of the Spirit,<br />
And life everlasting.<br />
Amen.<br />
Defenders of Nicene Creed<br />
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The Cappadocian Fathers:<br />
Basil the Great, Gregory of Naziansus and Gregory of Nyssa.<br />
On the other hand, the defenders of the Nicene Creed, Athanasius, and, after his death in 373, the<br />
three Cappadocian bishops, Basil the Great (329-379), Gregory of Naziansus (c. 329-390) and<br />
Gregory of Nyssa ( C335 - C394) triumphantly vindicated the catholic doctrine against all the<br />
arguments of the opposition. The Cappadocians made the homoourios the starting point of their<br />
discussions, as is apparent from the correspondenoe of Basil with Apollinaris. Damasus, the<br />
Roman bishop, true to the general policy of his predecessors and of Julius in particular, had<br />
47
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Arianism condemned at two Roman synods, 369, 377. When Gregory of Nazismus was called to<br />
Constantinople in 379, there was but one small congregation in the city which had not become<br />
Arian; but his able and eloquent sermons on the deity of Christ, which won him the title of "the<br />
Theologian," contributed powerfully to the resurrection of the catholic faith. The rising influence of<br />
monasticism, especially in Egypt and Syria, was bound up with the cause of Athanasius and the<br />
Cappadocians; and the more conservative portion of the semi-Arians gradually approached the<br />
orthodox in spite of the persecutions of the violent Arian emperor, Valens.<br />
Constantius, who nominally governed the East, was himself the puppet of his empress and the<br />
palace-ministers. He obeyed the Eusebian faction; his spiritual director, Valens, Bishop of Mursa,<br />
himself supported the Arian dogmas.Constantine had postponed his baptism with the false<br />
understanding that baptism will absolve all sins. On his death bed he called Eusebius of<br />
Nicodemia and got himself baptised giving the Arian theologiansan edge over in the christological<br />
issue. He died in AD 337. In 339 or 340, nearly one hundred bishops met at Alexandria, declared<br />
in favor of Athanasius, and vigorously rejected the criticisms of the Eusebian faction at Tyre. Plus,<br />
Pope Julius I wrote to the supporters of <strong>Arius</strong> strongly urging Athanasius's reinstatement, but that<br />
effort proved in vain. Pope Julius I called a synod in Rome in 340 to address the matter, which<br />
proclaimed Athanasius the rightful bishop of Alexandria.<br />
In 341 the celebrated Antiochene Council of the Dedication a second time degraded Athanasius,<br />
who now took refuge in Rome. There he spent three years.<br />
Over fourteen councils were held between 341 and 360, in which every shade of heretical<br />
subterfuge found their expression. Five times Athanasius of Alexandria was driven into exile,<br />
spending a total of seventeen years as a bishop in exile, interrupting his long episcopate. A series<br />
of synods repudiated the Nicene symbol in various ways, Antioch in 341, Arles in 353; and in 355<br />
Liberius of Rome and Ossius of Cordoba were exiled and a year later Hilary of Poitier was sent to<br />
Phrygia. In 360 in Constantinople all earlier creeds were disavowed and the term substance (ousia)<br />
was outlawed. The Son was simply declared to be "like the Father who begot him."<br />
Emperor Julian the Apostate (331- 362)<br />
When the vacillating Emperor died (361), Julian, known as the Apostate, suffered all alike to<br />
return home who had been exiled on account of religion. A momentous gathering, over which<br />
Athanasius presided, in 362, at Alexandria, united the orthodox Semi-Arians with himself and the<br />
West. Four years afterwards fifty-nine Macedonian, i.e., hitherto anti-Nicene, prelates gave in their<br />
submission to Pope Liberius. But the Emperor Valens, a fierce heretic, still laid the Church waste.<br />
Athanasius died in 373. While the politics of Arianism and Trinitarianism went on by the year 381<br />
of the Second General Council in which Meletius of Antioch presided Arianism lost its place within<br />
the Christendom. .<br />
48
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The Council of Constantinople, 381<br />
Fresco depicting the First General Council of Constantinople in the narthex<br />
of St. Athanasius church on Mount Athos<br />
The final triumph of the Nicene Orthodoxy came up when Theodosius the Great, a Spaniard by<br />
birth, and reared in the Nicene faith on entering Constantinople removed the Arians from the<br />
charge of the churches and substituted the orthodox party. During his reign (379-395) he completed<br />
externally the spiritual and intellectual victory of orthodoxy already achieved. He convened the<br />
second ecumenical council at Constantinople in 381, which consisted of only one hundred and fifty<br />
bishops, and was presided over successively by Meletius, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Nectarius of<br />
Constantinople.<br />
Theodosius I, (347-395)<br />
also known as<br />
Theodosius the Great,<br />
was Roman Emperor from AD 379 to AD 395.<br />
Theodosius was the last emperor to rule over both the eastern and the western halves of the Roman Empire.<br />
49
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The council condemned the Pneumatomachian heresy (which denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit),<br />
the Sabellians, Eunomians, Apollinarians, and virtually completed the orthodox dogma of the Holy<br />
Trinity. The Nicene Creed now in common use (with the exception of the Latin clause filioque, which<br />
is of much later date and rejected by the Greek Church) can not be traced to this synod of<br />
Constantinople, but existed at an earlier date; it is found in the Ancoratus of Epiphanius (373), and<br />
derived by him from a still older source, namely, the baptismal creed of the Church of Jerusalem. It<br />
is not in the original acts of the Council of Constantinople, but was afterward incorporated in them<br />
and may have been approved by the Council. Dr. Hort derives it mainly from Cyril of Jerusalem,<br />
about 362-364. The emperor gave legal effect to the doctrinal decisions and disciplinary canons,<br />
and in July, 381, he enacted a law that all church property should be given up to those who believed<br />
in the equal divinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Bishops like Ambrose of Milan<br />
supported the emperor and did much to bring the Nicene doctrine into complete acceptance.<br />
Comparison of of the Creeds of Nicaea and Constantinople<br />
First Council of Nicaea (325) First Council of Constantinople (381)<br />
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty,<br />
Maker of all things visible and invisible.<br />
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God,<br />
begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is,<br />
of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light<br />
of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not<br />
made, being of one substance with the Father;<br />
by whom all things were made [both in heaven<br />
and on earth];<br />
who for us men, and for our salvation, came down<br />
and was incarnate and was made man;<br />
he suffered, and the third day he rose again,<br />
ascended into heaven;<br />
from thence he shall come to judge the quick and<br />
the dead.<br />
And in the Holy Ghost.<br />
[But those who say: 'There was a time when he<br />
was not;' and 'He was not before he was made;'<br />
and 'He was made out of nothing,' or 'He is of<br />
another substance' or 'essence,' or 'The Son of<br />
God is created,' or 'changeable,' or<br />
'alterable'—they are condemned by the holy<br />
catholic and apostolic Church.]<br />
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of<br />
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.<br />
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of<br />
God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons),<br />
Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made,<br />
being of one substance with the Father;<br />
by whom all things were made;<br />
who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from<br />
heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the<br />
Virgin Mary, and was made man;<br />
he was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered,<br />
and was buried, and the third day he rose again,<br />
according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven,<br />
and sitteth on the right hand of the Father;<br />
from thence he shall come again, with glory, to judge the<br />
quick and the dead;<br />
whose kingdom shall have no end.<br />
And in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who<br />
proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the<br />
Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by<br />
the prophets. In one holy catholic and apostolic Church;<br />
we acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins;<br />
we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the<br />
world to come. Amen.<br />
50
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The truth which was expressed at Nicea was the basis of all subsequent developments in<br />
Christology. But this doctrine of the divinity of the Son of God is also the foundation of the whole<br />
Christian faith. It was the substance of Christianity which was the issue at Nicea in 325. Faith in a<br />
God Who sovereignly saves His people by Himself making an atonement for their sins in the<br />
Person of His own Son is the heart of the Christian religion. Take away the truth of a divine Son of<br />
God from the Christian faith and you have nothing left.<br />
Historically this period also marks several firsts.<br />
In this period we see, for the first time, the Church officially recognized by the civil government.<br />
Until then the Church of Christ everywhere were a persecuted church.<br />
The Council of Nicea, the first Ecumenical Council. All other Synods and Councils before it had<br />
been local in character.<br />
As the Council, so also its creed is ecumenical, even today. The Creed of Nicea (with its<br />
subsequent revisions by the Council of Constantinople) is the only creed which is accepted by all of<br />
Christendom, Eastern and Western, Roman and Protestant.<br />
51
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
This document which is normally referred to as the Nicene Creed is the Nicene Creed modified by<br />
Synod.<br />
Constantinople<br />
The Later Arianism<br />
After Theodosius, Arianism ceased to exist as an organised moving force in theology and church<br />
history; but it reappeared from time to time as an isolated theological opinion, especially in England.<br />
Emlyn, Whiston, Whitby, Samuel Clarke, Lardner, and many who are ranked among Socinians and<br />
Unitarians, held Arian sentiments; but Milton and Isaac Newton, though approaching the Arian view<br />
on the relation of the Son to the Father, differed widely from Arianism in spirit and aim.<br />
At the turn of the fourth century <strong>Arius</strong> was already known to hold strong views on theology and was<br />
a close associate of Lucian and Meletius (an Egyptian schismatic against Peter I), however<br />
following reconciliation in AD 306 <strong>Arius</strong> was ordained as a Deacon by Peter I (Patriarch of<br />
Alexandria: AD 300 - 311). Further disputes led the Bishop (Peter I) to excommunicate <strong>Arius</strong>, who,<br />
however, gained the friendship of Achillas, Peter’s successor. <strong>Arius</strong> was re-instated and then<br />
ordained by Achillas (Patriarch of Alexandria 312 - 313) as the Presbyter of the district of Baucalis<br />
52
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
in Alexandria in AD 313, but when Achillas died that same year <strong>Arius</strong> was denied the Patriarchate of<br />
Alexandria (to which he aspired) by Alexander I of Alexandria (a Sebellianist heretic).<br />
<strong>Arius</strong>’s most important work was “Thalia” (The Banquet, 323), a work comprising both prose and<br />
poetry, in which he defended his beliefs. The document was destroyed by the trinitarians and is no<br />
longer extant, and knowledge of most of <strong>Arius</strong>’s writings comes only from the works of his critics,<br />
who, in condemning him, revealed much information.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> continued to campaign against trinitarianism. He was excommunicated locally in 321 AD. He<br />
was declared orthodox in Asia Minor, where he had fled (323), but he was anathematised by the<br />
Council of Nicaea (324) and banished by the Roman Emperor Constantine I (325). But in the<br />
reaction after Nicaea, where <strong>Arius</strong> gained support from Clergy across all Europe especially in the<br />
east and at one point Arians outnumbered the trinitarians, he came into imperial favour. The<br />
emperor had ordered the Athanasians at Alexandria to receive him at communion when he<br />
suddenly died under suspicious circumstances immediately after having an audience with the<br />
Emperor at the imperial palace. Arians believed that <strong>Arius</strong> had been poisoned.<br />
“The Mysterious Sudden Death of St. <strong>Arius</strong><br />
The triumphant vindication of Athanasius at that council belong rather to the history of Athanasius<br />
than of <strong>Arius</strong>. However, Eusebius proved ultimately to be master of the situation. With consummate<br />
dexterity the wily tactician contrived fresh charges of interference with the secular affairs of the<br />
empire. By now, Constantine was weary of the strife. His only object had been the settlement of the<br />
question; the shape that settlement took was to him a secondary matter. He now turned fiercely<br />
upon those he believed were responsible for the continuing unrest. Athanasius was exiled to Trier,<br />
and Alexander of Constantinople was ordered to receive <strong>Arius</strong> back into church communion.<br />
Alexander was in dire perplexity. He dared not disobey the command, neither dare he obey it. In his<br />
extremity he asked the prayers of the Orthodox that either he or <strong>Arius</strong> might be removed from the<br />
world before the latter was admitted to communion. The prayer was, the very reverend Henry Wace<br />
notes, a strange one. Meanwhile <strong>Arius</strong> was ordered to appear before the Emperor, and asked<br />
whether he was willing to sign the Nicaene decrees. He replied, without hesitation, that he was<br />
ready to do so. And yet, the very day before he was to be readmitted to communion, <strong>Arius</strong> died<br />
suddenly, and in a most remarkable manner, as Socrates Scholasticus (c380 - c450 A.D.), whose<br />
account was written nearly a century after <strong>Arius</strong>’ death, describes:<br />
It was then Saturday, and . . . going out of the imperial palace, attended by a crowd of<br />
Eusebian [Eusebius of Nicomedia is meant] partisans like guards, he [<strong>Arius</strong>] paraded<br />
proudly through the midst of the city, attracting the notice of all the people. As he<br />
approached the place called Constantine’s Forum, where the column of porphyry is<br />
erected, a terror arising from the remorse of conscience seized <strong>Arius</strong>, and with the<br />
terror a violent relaxation of the bowels: he therefore enquired whether there was a<br />
convenient place near, and being directed to the back of Constantine’s Forum, he<br />
hastened thither. Soon after a faintness came over him, and together with the<br />
evacuations his bowels protruded, followed by a copious haemorrhage, and the<br />
descent of the smaller intestines: moreover portions of his spleen and liver were<br />
brought off in the effusion of blood, so that he almost immediately died. The scene of<br />
this catastrophe still is shown at Constantinople, as I have said, behind the shambles<br />
in the colonnade: and by persons going by pointing the finger at the place, there is a<br />
perpetual remembrance preserved of this extraordinary kind of death.<br />
53
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Was <strong>Arius</strong> murdered?<br />
After struggling against the Orthodox church for sixteen years, did <strong>Arius</strong> really acknowledge the<br />
Nicene (Nicaean) decrees so readily?<br />
<strong>Arius</strong>’s legacy however has lived on in spite of its condemnation by the Council of Constantinople<br />
(381). Arianism was reinstated by Constantine I who was Baptised as an Arian Christian on his<br />
deathbed, and was supported by his son Constantius II who even raised St Felix II as the Arian<br />
bishop of Rome. The Arian controversy itself lasted for over 250 years until it was driven<br />
underground. Throughout the dark and middle ages trinitarians have brutally attempted to<br />
stamp-out Arianism, even the Spanish Inquisition could not quell <strong>Arius</strong>’s beliefs. As Roman<br />
Catholicism began to decline in central Europe, Arianism rose again, even in the Church of England!<br />
Today Arianism has returned to the fore with the Arian-Catholic Church lead by the Primus Inter<br />
Pares (First Among Equals): Rev Dr Brian B. Michael-John Mackenzie-Hanson.<br />
Two Roman emperors, Constantius II and Valens, became Arians or Semi-Arians, as did prominent<br />
Gothic, Vandal, and Lombard warlords both before and after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> was recognised as a Saint and Martyr by the Arian Catholic Church on 16th June 2006, which<br />
has become his memorial day.<br />
The heretical <strong>Arius</strong> being swallowed by the Great Beast<br />
A mural at the Monastery church of Agia Paraskevi which is situated some 2 km west and downhill from Kato Doli.<br />
There is a vivid depiction on the left of the altar which portrays the figure of <strong>Arius</strong> being condemned to the flames of<br />
hell.This corresponds well with that in the church of the Zoodokos Pigi in Zarnata (by the same painters) and shows the<br />
'whale' as a great sea beast engulfed in flames. In the Zarnata version the <strong>Arius</strong>/Jonah is a Mussulman in turban but<br />
here the figure is an Orthodox priest in his stove pipe hat and is linked to the adjacent painting of St. Peter of Alexandria<br />
and depict his arch rival, the heretic <strong>Arius</strong>, author of the 4th century Arian Heresy which denied the divinity of Christ. It is<br />
a relatively common theme in 18th century Maniate church paintings but is often covered by drapery and altar cloths.<br />
Council of Constantinople<br />
It was not until the co-reigns of Gratian and Theodosius that Arianism was effectively wiped out<br />
among the ruling class and elite of the Eastern Empire. Theodosius' wife St Flacilla was<br />
instrumental in his campaign to end Arianism. Valens died in the Battle of Adrianople in 378 and<br />
54
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
was succeeded by Theodosius I, who adhered to the Nicene creed. This allowed for settling the<br />
dispute.<br />
Two days after Theodosius arrived in Constantinople, 24 November 380, he expelled the<br />
Homoiousian bishop, Demophilus of Constantinople, and surrendered the churches of that city to<br />
Gregory Nazianzus, the leader of the rather small Nicene community there, an act which provoked<br />
rioting. Theodosius had just been baptized, by bishop Acholius of Thessalonica, during a severe<br />
illness, as was common in the early Christian world. In February he and Gratian had published an<br />
edict[33] that all their subjects should profess the faith of the bishops of Rome and Alexandria (i.e.,<br />
the Nicene faith), or be handed over for punishment for not doing so.<br />
Although much of the church hierarchy in the East had opposed the Nicene creed in the decades<br />
leading up to Theodosius' accession, he managed to achieve unity on the basis of the Nicene creed.<br />
In 381, at the Second Ecumenical Council in Constantinople, a group of mainly Eastern bishops<br />
assembled and accepted the Nicene Creed of 381,[34] which was supplemented in regard to the<br />
Holy Spirit, as well as some other changes: see Comparison between Creed of 325 and Creed of<br />
381. This is generally considered the end of the dispute about the Trinity and the end of Arianism<br />
among the Roman, non-Germanic peoples.<br />
PRINCIPAL EVENTS BETWEEN A.D. 325 AND A.D. 381,<br />
IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER<br />
(Approximate)<br />
256 Birth of <strong>Arius</strong>.<br />
274 Birth of Constantine the Great.<br />
295 Birth of Athanasius.<br />
306 Death of Constantine Chlorus, father of Constantine the Great.<br />
312 Battle of the Milvian Bridge. Alexander becomes Bishop of Alexandria.<br />
313 Edict of Milan (Third Edict of Toleration).<br />
318 First outbreak of Arianism.<br />
323 Battle of Chrysopolis; Constantine becomes sole Emperor.<br />
Council at Alexandria deposes <strong>Arius</strong>.<br />
A council in Bithynia vindicates <strong>Arius</strong>.<br />
1. From A.D.325 to 337<br />
325. (From June 19 to August 25.) COUNCIL OF NICÆA.<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> and his partisans anathematized and banished,<br />
<strong>Arius</strong> to Illyricum. The Eusebians subscribe to the Homoüsion.<br />
326. Athanasius raised to the See of Alexandria at the age of about 30.<br />
328-9. Eusebius of Nicomedia in favour with Constantine. Death of Alexander.<br />
Consecration of Athanasius.<br />
329 Synod at Antioch, Eustathius deposed.<br />
330. An Arian priest gains the ear of Constantine, who recalls <strong>Arius</strong> from exile to Alexandria.<br />
331. Athanasius refuses to restore him to communion.<br />
Eustathius deposed by the Eusebians on a charge of Sabellianism; other Bishops deposed.<br />
334. Council of Cæsarea against Athanasius, who refuses to attend it.<br />
335. Council of Tyre and Jerusalem, in which <strong>Arius</strong> and the Arians are formerly readmitted.<br />
Athanasius, forced by the emperor to attend, abruptly leaves it in order to appeal to<br />
Constantine.<br />
55
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
THE EUSEBIANS DEPOSE ATHANASIUS,<br />
AND CONSTANTINE BANISHES HIM TO TREVES.<br />
336. Eusebians hold a Council at Constantinople to condemn Marcellus on the ground of his<br />
Sabellianism; and to recognize <strong>Arius</strong>.<br />
DEATH OF ARIUS.<br />
337. DEATH OF CONSTANTINE.<br />
The Eusebian Constantius succeeds him in the East, the orthodox Constans and<br />
Constantine in the West.<br />
Death of Constantine the Great, accession of his three sons. Restoration of Athanasius.<br />
2. From 337 to 342<br />
338 Exiles recalled by the three new Emperors.<br />
(End of June.) Athanasius leaves Treves for Alexandria.<br />
339 Eusebius sends to Pope Julius for a Council.<br />
Council at Alexandria vindicates Nicene doctrine. Second exile of Athanasius.<br />
340 COUNCIL OF ALEXANDRIA DEFENDS ATHANASIUS TOTHE POPE.<br />
Papal Legates sent to Antioch from Rome.(Early in year) Athanasius goes to Rome.<br />
Papal Legates, &c.(End of year) Athanasius returns to Alexandria.<br />
Murder of Constantine II.<br />
341 COUNCIL OF THE DEDICATION AT ANTIOCH(four creeds).<br />
(Lent) THE ARIAN GREGORY IN ALEXANDRIA.<br />
(March-May.) ATHANASIUS ESCAPES TO ROME,<br />
after the Council of the Dedication, immediately before or after the Papal Legates set<br />
out from Rome.<br />
COUNCIL OF ROME. THE POPE'S LETTER TO THE EUSEBIANS<br />
Death of Eusebius of Nicomedia.<br />
Council at Rome vindicates Athanasius.<br />
342 (End of year) Athanasius returns to Alexandria.<br />
(Or beginning Lent.) THE ARIAN GREGORY IN ALEXANDRIA.<br />
The Papal Legates arrive at Rome.<br />
ATHANASIUS ESCAPES TO ROME shortly after the Roman Council there.<br />
343 Councils at Sardica and Philipopolis.<br />
3. From 342 to 351<br />
(Mainly from Tillemont.)<br />
345. COUNCIL OF ANTIOCH (Eusebian), at which the Macrostich is drawn up.<br />
346 Council of Milan.<br />
347. GREAT COUNCIL OF SARDICA, at the instance of the orthodox Constans.<br />
Restoration of Athanasius.<br />
Council of Milan against Photinus. Ursacius and Valens sue for reconciliation to the Church.<br />
349. Council of Jerusalem, at which Athanasius is present. Athanasius returns to Alexandria.<br />
Ursacius and Valens recant, and are reconciled at Rome.<br />
Council at Sirmium or at Rome against Photinus.<br />
350. DEATH OF CONSTANS. The Eusebian Constantius sole Emperor.<br />
351. GREAT COUNCIL OF SIRMIUM, at which Photinus is deposed. First Sirmian creed, &c.<br />
4. From 351 to 361<br />
353 Constantius becomes sole Emperor. Second Council of Arles.<br />
355 Second Council of Milan, Athanasius deposed.<br />
56
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
356 George of Cappadocia made Bishop of Alexandria. Beginning of Athanasius' third exile.<br />
357 Second Council of Sirmium, (the second creed of Sirmium).<br />
358 Third Council of Sirmium (the Dated Creed). Expulsion of George from Alexandria.<br />
359 Double Council at Ariminium and Selucia.<br />
Council at Nice.<br />
Beginning of Macedonianism.<br />
360 Dedication Council at Constantinople.<br />
361 Death of Constantius, accession of Julian the Apostate.<br />
Great Council of Sirmium<br />
Photinus deposed<br />
First Sirmian Creed (Semi-Arian)<br />
Signed by Pope Liberius with a condemnation of Athanasius<br />
Council of Arles (Eusebian) Athanasius condemned<br />
Great Council of Milan (Eusebian) Athanasius condemned<br />
Rise of the Eunomians<br />
Syrianus in Alexandria, and George in Cappadocia<br />
Council of Beziers. Hilary deposed and banished<br />
Fresh Council or Conference at Sirmium<br />
Second Sirmian Creed, the blasphemy of Potamius and Hosius (Homœan, if not<br />
Anomœan)<br />
Signed by Hosius, but without condemning Athanasius<br />
Signed by Liberius, with a condemnation of Athanasius<br />
Another or an altered Creed signed by Liberius with condemnation of Athanasius<br />
Council of Antioch in favour of Eunomius Its Creed (Anomœan)<br />
Council of Ancyra of 12 Bishops<br />
Its Creed (Semi-Arian) against both the Homoüsian and the Anomœan, signed by Liberius<br />
Fresh Council or Conference at Sirmium<br />
Third Sirmian. Creed (Homœan) drawn up by Semi-Arians<br />
Signed by Liberius<br />
BI-PARTITE COUNCIL OF ARIMINUM (Homœan) and of Seleucia (Semi-Arian)<br />
Council of Constantinople (Homœan)<br />
Council of Antioch (Anomœan)<br />
DEATH OF CONSTANTIUS<br />
5. From 361 to 381<br />
362. COUNCIL OF ALEXANDRIA.Restoration of Athanasius. Council at Alexandria.<br />
Fourth exile of Athanasius. Outbreak of Apollinarianism.<br />
363 Death of Julian, accession of Jovian.<br />
364 Restoration of Athanasius. Death of Jovian, accession of Valentinian (West) and Valens (East).<br />
365. Council of Lampsacus (Semi-Arian or Macedonian).Fifth exile and restoration of Athanasius.<br />
366. Macedonian Bishops reconciled to the Church at Rome.<br />
367. Council of Tyre for the same purpose.<br />
373. DEATH OF ATHANASIUS.<br />
375 Death of Valentinian, accession of Gratian.<br />
378 Death of Valens, accession of Theodosius.<br />
381. SECOND ŒCUMENICAL COUNCIL AT CONSTANTINOPLE.<br />
383 Death of Gratian, accession of Valentinian II.<br />
57
Short Summary of Events<br />
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Semi Arians: Homoian Arianism<br />
Arianism had several different variants, including Eunomianism and Homoian Arianism.<br />
The Anomoeans, also spelled "Anomeans" and known also as Heterousians, Aëtians, or<br />
Eunomians, were a sect that upheld an extreme form of Arianism, that Jesus Christ was not of the<br />
58
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
same nature (consubstantial) as God the Father nor was of like nature (homoiousian), as<br />
maintained by the semi-Arians.<br />
The word "anomoean" comes from Greek ἀ(ν)- 'not' and ὅμοιος 'similar': "different; dissimilar". In<br />
the 4th century, during the reign of Constantius II, this was the name by which the followers of<br />
Aëtius and Eunomius were distinguished as a theological party.<br />
The semi-Arians condemned the Anomoeans in the Council of Seleucia, and the Anomoeans<br />
condemned the semi-Arians in their turn in the Councils of Constantinople and Antioch; erasing the<br />
word ὅμοιος from the formula of Rimini and that of Constantinople and protesting that the Word had<br />
not only a different substance but also a will different from that of the Father. From that, they were<br />
to be called ἀνόμοιοι.<br />
In the 5th century, the Anomoean presbyter Philostorgius wrote an Anomoean Church history.<br />
Homoeanism (also from hómoios) declared that the Son was similar to God the Father, without<br />
reference to substance or essence. Homoian Arianism is associated with Akakius and Eudoxius.<br />
Homoian Arianism avoided the use of the word ousia to describe the relation of Father to Son, and<br />
described these as "like" each other. Hanson lists twelve creeds that reflect the Homoian faith:<br />
The Second Sirmian Creed of 357<br />
The Creed of Nice (Constantinople) 360<br />
The creed put forward by Akakius at Seleucia, 359<br />
The Rule of Faith of Ulfilas<br />
The creed uttered by Ulfilas on his deathbed, 383<br />
The creed attributed to Eudoxius<br />
The Creed of Auxentius of Milan, 364<br />
The Creed of Germinius professed in correspondence with Valens and Ursacius<br />
Palladius' rule of faith<br />
Three credal statements found in fragments, subordinating the Son to the Father<br />
59
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
THE FIRST CREED OF ANTIOCH (A.D. 325)<br />
CREEDS THROUGH HISTORY<br />
The faith is as follows:<br />
to believe in one God, the Father Almighty, incomprehensible, immutable and unchangeable,<br />
protector and ruler of the universe, just, good, maker of heaven and earth and of all the things in<br />
them, Lord of the law and of the prophets and of the new covenant;<br />
and in one Lord Jesus Christ, only begotten Son, begotten not from that which is not but from the<br />
Father, not as made but as properly an offspring, but begotten in an ineffable, indescribable manner,<br />
because only the Father Who begot and the Son Who was begotten know (for ‘no one knows the<br />
Father but the Son, nor the Son but the Father'), Who exists everlastingly and did not at one time<br />
not exist. For we have learned from the Holy Scriptures that He alone is the express image, not<br />
(plainly) as if He might have remained unbegotten from the Father, nor by adoption (for it is impious<br />
and blasphemous to say this); but the Scriptures describe Him as validly and truly begotten as Son,<br />
so that we believe Him to be immutable and unchangeable, and that He was not begotten and did<br />
not come to be by volition or by adoption, so as to appear to be from that which is not, but as it<br />
befits Him to be begotten; not (a thing which it is not lawful to think) according to likeness or nature<br />
or commixture with any of the things which came to be through Him, but in a way which passes all<br />
understanding or conception or reasoning we confess Him to have been begotten of the<br />
unbegotten Father, the divine Logos, true light, righteousness, Jesus Christ, Lord and Saviour of all.<br />
For He is the express image, not of the will or of anything else, but of His Father's very substance.<br />
This Son, the divine Logos, having been born in flesh from Mary the Mother of God and made<br />
incarnate, having suffered and died, rose again from the dead and was taken up into heaven, and<br />
sits on the right hand of the Majesty most high, and will come to judge the living and the dead.<br />
Furthermore, as in our Saviour, the holy Scriptures teach us to believe also in one Spirit, one<br />
Catholic Church, the resurrection of the dead and a judgment of requital according to whether a<br />
man has done well or badly in the flesh.<br />
And we anathematize those who say or think or preach that the Son of God is a creature or has<br />
come into being or has been made and is not truly begotten, or that there was when He was not.<br />
For we believe that He was and is and that He is light. Furthermore, we anathematize those who<br />
suppose that He is immutable by His own act of will, just as those who derive His birth from that<br />
which is not, and deny that He is immutable in the way the Father is. For just as our Saviour is the<br />
image of the Father in all things, so in this respect particularly He has been proclaimed the Father's<br />
image.<br />
THE SECOND CREED OF ANTIOCH (A.D. 341)<br />
We believe, conformably to the evangelical and apostolical tradition, in one God, the Father<br />
Almighty, the Framer, and Maker, and Provider of the universe, from whom are all things.<br />
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, His Son, Only-begotten God (John 1:18), by whom are all things,<br />
who was begotten before all ages from the Father, God from God, whole from whole, sole from sole,<br />
perfect from perfect, King from King, Lord from Lord, Living Word, Living Wisdom, true Light, Way,<br />
Truth, Resurrection, Shepherd, Door, both unalterable and unchangeable; exact image of the<br />
Godhead, Essence, Will, Power, and Glory of the Father; the first-born of every creature, who was<br />
60
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
in the beginning with God, God the Word, as it is written in the Gospel, "and the Word was God"<br />
(John 1:1); by whom all things were made, and in whom all things consist (Col 1:17); who in the last<br />
days descended from above, and was born of a virgin according to the Scriptures, and was made<br />
man, Mediator between God and man, and Apostle of our faith, and Prince of life, as He says, "I<br />
came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me" (John 6:38); who<br />
suffered for us and rose again on the third day, and ascended into heaven, and sat down on the<br />
right hand of the Father, and is coming again with glory and power, to judge quick and dead.<br />
And in the Holy Ghost, who is given to those who believe for comfort, and sanctification, and<br />
initiation, as also our Lord Jesus Christ enjoined His disciples, saying, "Go ye, teach all nations,<br />
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost" (Matt 28:19); namely, of<br />
a Father who is truly Father, and a Son who is truly Son, and of the Holy Ghost who is truly Holy<br />
Ghost, the names not being given without meaning or effect, but denoting accurately the peculiar<br />
subsistence, rank, and glory of each that is named, so that they are three in subsistence, and in<br />
agreement one.<br />
Holding then this faith, and holding it in the presence of God and Christ, from beginning to end, we<br />
anathematise every heretical heterodoxy. And if any teaches beside the sound and right faith of the<br />
Scriptures, that time, or season, or age, either is or has been before the generation of the Son, be<br />
he anathema. Or if anyone says that the Son is a creature as one of the creatures, or an offspring<br />
as one of the offsprings, or a work as one of the works, and not the aforesaid articles one after<br />
another, as the Divine Scriptures have delivered, or if he teaches or preaches beside what we have<br />
received, be he anathema. For all that has been delivered in the Divine Scriptures, whether by<br />
prophets or apostles, do we truly and reverently both believe and follow.<br />
THE FOURTH CREED OF ANTIOCH (A.D. 341)<br />
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Creator and Maker of all things; from whom all<br />
fatherhood in heaven and earth is named (Eph 3:15).<br />
And in His Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who before all ages was begotten from<br />
the Father, God from God, Light from Light, by whom all things were made in the heavens and on<br />
the earth, visible and invisible, being Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and Life, and True Light; who<br />
in the last days was made man for us, and was born of the Holy Virgin; who was crucified, and dead,<br />
and buried, and rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into heaven, and sat<br />
down on the right hand of the Father; and is coming at the consummation of the age, to judge quick<br />
and dead, and to render to everyone according to his works; whose kingdom endures indissolubly<br />
into the infinite ages; for He shall be seated on the right hand of the Father, not only in this age but<br />
in that which is to come.<br />
And in the Holy Ghost; that is the Paraclete; which having promised to the apostles, He sent<br />
forth after His ascension into heaven, to teach them and to remind of all things; through whom also<br />
shall be sanctified the souls of those who sincerely believe in Him.<br />
But those who say that the Son was from nothing, or from some other substance and not from God,<br />
and there was time when He was not, the Catholic Church regards as aliens.<br />
THE DATED CREED OF SIRMIUM (A.D. 358)<br />
We believe in one Only and True God, the Father Almighty, Creator and Framer of all things.<br />
And in one Only-begotten Son of God, who, before all ages, and before all origin, and before all<br />
conceivable time, and before all comprehensible essence, was begotten impassibly from God:<br />
61
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
through whom the ages were disposed and all things were made; and Him begotten as the<br />
Only-begotten, Only from the Only Father, God from God, like to the Father who begat Him,<br />
according to the Scriptures; whose origin no one knoweth save the Father alone who begat Him.<br />
We know that He, the Only-begotten Son of God, at the Father's bidding came from the heavens for<br />
the abolishment of sin, and was born of the Virgin Mary, and conversed with the disciples, and<br />
fulfilled all the Economy according to the Father's will, was crucified and died and descended into<br />
the parts beneath the earth, and regulated the things there, whom the gate-keepers of hell saw<br />
(Job 38:17) and shuddered; and He rose from the dead the third day, and conversed with the<br />
disciples, and fulfilled all the Economy, and when the forty days were full, ascended into the<br />
heavens, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and is coming in the last day of the<br />
resurrection in the glory of the Father, to everyone according to his works. And in the Holy Ghost,<br />
whom the Only-begotten of God Himself, Jesus Christ, had promised to send to the race of men,<br />
the Paraclete, as it is written: "I go to My Father, and I will ask the Father, and He shall send you<br />
another Paraclete, even the Spirit of Truth, He shall take of Mine and shall teach and bring to your<br />
remembrance all things" (John 14:16, 17, 26; 16:14). But whereas the term "essence" has been<br />
adopted by the Fathers in simplicity, and gives offence as being misconceived by the people,<br />
because it is not contained in the Scriptures, it has seemed good to remove it, that no mention of<br />
"essence" with regard to God should be made at all in the future, because the Divine Scriptures<br />
nowhere mention "essence" of the Father and Son. But we say the Son is like the Father in all<br />
things, as also the Holy Scriptures say and teach.<br />
THE CREED OF CONSTANTINOPLE (A.D. 381)<br />
We believe in one God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible<br />
and invisible:<br />
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten of His Father before all worlds, (God of God),<br />
Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made being of one substance with the Father,<br />
through whom all things were made who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven<br />
and made flesh of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary, and entered humanity; and crucified also for<br />
us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried, and rose again the third day, according to the<br />
Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and shall come<br />
again with glory to judge the living and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end.<br />
And in the Holy Spirit, the lord and Giver of Life, who proceedeth from the Father (and the Son),<br />
who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spake through the<br />
Prophets in the catholic and apostolic Church.<br />
We acknowledge one baptism unto remission of sins. We look for the resurrection of the<br />
dead; and the life of the world to come.<br />
62
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
St.Athanasius<br />
the defender of the Trinitarian Faith.<br />
The Athanasian Creed<br />
This Creed is named after Athanasius, allthough Athanasius did not write this Creed. It was probably written in the sixth<br />
century. Roman and Anglican Churches used to chant this Creed in public worship<br />
(1) Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith;<br />
(2) Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish<br />
everlastingly.<br />
(3) And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;<br />
(4) Neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance.<br />
(5) For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the Holy Spirit.<br />
(6) But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the<br />
majesty co-eternal.<br />
(7) Such as the Father is, such is the Son and such is the Holy Spirit.<br />
63
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
(8) The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Spirit uncreate.<br />
(9) The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.<br />
(10) The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.<br />
(11) And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal.<br />
(12) As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensibles, but one uncreated and one<br />
incomprehensible.<br />
(13) So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty;<br />
(14) And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty.<br />
(15) So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;<br />
(16) And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.<br />
(17) So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord;<br />
(18) And yet they are not three Lords, but one Lord.<br />
(19) For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every person by himself to<br />
be God and Lord;<br />
(20) so are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say: There are three Gods or three Lords.<br />
(21) The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten.<br />
(22) The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten.<br />
(23) The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but<br />
proceeding.<br />
(24) So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three<br />
Holy Spirits.<br />
(25) And in this Trinity none is afore, nor after another; none is greater, or less than another.<br />
(26) But the whole three persons are co-eternal, and co-equal.<br />
(27) So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be<br />
worshipped.<br />
(28) He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.<br />
(29) Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation<br />
of our Lord Jesus<br />
Christ.<br />
(30) For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is<br />
God and man.<br />
(31) God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and made of the substance of<br />
His mother, born in<br />
the world.<br />
(32) Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.<br />
(33) Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His<br />
manhood.<br />
(34) Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.<br />
(35) One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the manhood into God.<br />
(36) One altogether, not by the confusion of substance, but by unity of person.<br />
(37) For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ;<br />
(38) Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead;<br />
(39) He ascended into heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty;<br />
(40) From thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.<br />
(41) At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;<br />
(42) And shall give account of their own works.<br />
(43) And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into<br />
everlasting fire.<br />
(44) This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.<br />
Formated by James Richardson 4/04/2016.<br />
You can Download Christian Confessions, Creeds,<br />
64
The Chalcedonian Creed<br />
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The Chalcedonian Creed was adopted in A.D. 451 at the Fourth Ecumenical Council in Chalcedon (Located in what is<br />
now Istanbul). It primarily establishes the Orthodox doctrine of Christology.<br />
We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same<br />
Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God<br />
and truly man, of a reasonable soul and body; consubstantial with the Father according to the<br />
Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without<br />
sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for<br />
us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one<br />
and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, unconfusedly,<br />
unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by<br />
the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person<br />
and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only<br />
begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ; as the prophets from the beginning have declared<br />
concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy<br />
Fathers has handed down to us.<br />
65
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
CHAPTER THREE<br />
SCRIPTURAL BASIS OF TRINITY<br />
It is often alleged that the doctrine of the Trinity is not a biblical doctrine and that even the word<br />
‘Trinity’ itself is not found in the Bible. However over 700 reference text will testify to the validity of<br />
this theological construct. There are a large number of websites that detail the explanations of how<br />
Trinity is embeded throughout the Bible. The following are only a few that help.<br />
How the concept of Trinity as defined in the Nicean Creed came about from the Scripture.<br />
1. There Is One God<br />
1. One God: Explicit Statements<br />
1. OT: Deut. 4:35; 4:39; 32:39; 2 Sam. 22:32; Isa. 37:20: 43:10; 44:6-8; 45:5;<br />
45:14; 45:21-22; 46:9<br />
2. NT: John 5:44; Rom. 3:30; 16:27; 1 Cor. 8:4-6; Gal. 3:20; Eph. 4:6; 1 Tim. 1:17;<br />
1 Tim. 2:5; James 2:19; Jude 25<br />
2. None like God (in his essence)<br />
1. Explicit statements: Ex. 8:10; 9:14; 15:11; 2 Sam. 7:22; 1 Kgs. 8:23; 1 Chr.<br />
17:20; Psa. 86:8; Isa. 40:18, 40:25: 44:7; 46:5, 46:9; Jer. 10:6-7; Micah 7:18<br />
2. Being like God a Satanic lie: Gen. 3:5; Isa. 14:14; John 8:44<br />
3. Fallen man become "like God" only in that he took upon himself to know good<br />
and evil, not that he acquired godhood: Gen. 3:22<br />
3. Only one true God: 2 Chr. 15:3; Jer. 10:10; John 17:3; 1 Thess. 1:9; 1 John 5:20-21<br />
4. All other "gods" are therefore false gods (idols), not gods at all: Deut. 32:21; 1 Sam.<br />
12:21; Psa. 96:5; Isa. 37:19; 41:23-24, 41:29; Jer. 2:11; 5:7; 16:20; 1 Cor. 8:4;<br />
10:19-20<br />
5. Demons, not gods, are the power behind false worship: Deut. 32:17; Psa. 106:37; 1<br />
Cor. 10:20; Gal. 4:8<br />
6. How human beings are meant to be "like God"<br />
66
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
1. The image of God indicates that man is to represent God and share his moral<br />
character, not that man can be metaphysically like God: Gen. 1:26-27; 5:1; 1<br />
Cor. 11:7; Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10<br />
2. The goal of being like Christ has the following aspects only:<br />
1. Sharing His moral character: 1 John 3:2; Rom. 8:29<br />
2. Being raised with glorified, immortal bodies like His: Phil. 3:21; 1 Cor.<br />
15:49<br />
3. Becoming partakers of the divine nature refers again to moral nature ("having<br />
escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust"), not metaphysical nature: 2<br />
Pet. 1:4; see also Heb. 12:10; on the meaning of "partakers," See 1 Cor. 10:18,<br />
10:20; 2 Cor. 1:17; 1 Pet. 5:1<br />
7. Are mighty or exalted men gods?<br />
1. Scripture never says explicitly that men are gods<br />
2. Powerful, mighty men are explicitly said not to be gods: Ezek. 28:2, 28:9; Isa.<br />
31:3; 2 Thess. 2:4<br />
3. Men and God are opposite, exclusive categories: Num. 23:19; Isa. 31:3; Ezek.<br />
28:2; Hosea 11:9; Matt. 19:26; John 10:33; Acts 12:22; 1 Cor. 14:2<br />
4. Moses was "as God," not really a god: Ex. 4:16; 7:1<br />
5. Ezek. 32:21 speaks of warriors or soldiers as "mighty gods," but in context they<br />
are so regarded by their pagan nations, not by God or Israel; cf. Ezek. 28:2,<br />
28:9<br />
6. The elohim before whom accused stood in Exodus was God Himself, not<br />
judges, as many translations incorrectly render: Ex. 22:8-9, 22:28; compare<br />
Deut. 19:17<br />
7. The use of elohim in Psalm 82:1, probably in reference to wicked judges, as<br />
cited by Jesus in John 10:34-36, does not mean that men really can be gods.<br />
1. It is Asaph, not the Lord, who calls the judges elohim in Psa. 82:1, 82:6.<br />
This is important, even though we agree that Psa. 82 is inspired.<br />
2. Asaph's meaning is not "Although you are gods, you will die like men,"<br />
but rather "I called you gods, but in fact you will all die like the men that<br />
you really are"<br />
3. The Psalmist was no more saying that wicked judges were truly gods<br />
than he was saying that they were truly "sons of the Most High" (Psa<br />
82:6 b)<br />
4. Thus, Psa. 82:1 calls the judges elohim in irony. They had quite likely<br />
taken their role in judgment (cf. point 5 above) to mean they were<br />
elohim, or gods, and Asaph's message is that these so-called gods<br />
were mere men who would die under the judgment of the true elohim<br />
(vss. Psa. 82:1-2, 82:7-8)<br />
5. Christ's use of this passage in John 10:34-36 does not negate the<br />
above interpretation of Psalm 82<br />
6. The words, "The Scripture cannot be broken," means "the Scripture<br />
cannot go without having some ultimate fulfillment" (cf. John 7:23; Matt.<br />
5:17). Thus Jesus is saying that what the OT judges were called in irony,<br />
He is in reality; He does what they could not do, and is what they could<br />
never be (see the Adam-Christ contrasts in Rom. 5:12-21 and 1 Cor.<br />
15:21-22, 15:45 for a similar use of OT Scripture)<br />
7. The clause, "those against whom the word of God came" (John 10:35)<br />
shows that this "word" was a word of judgment against the so-called<br />
gods; which shows that they were false gods, not really gods at all<br />
8. Finally, these wicked men were certainly not "godlike" or "divine" by<br />
nature, so that in any case the use of elohim to refer to them must be<br />
seen as figurative, not literal<br />
67
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
8. Even if men were gods (which they are not), this would be irrelevant to Jesus,<br />
since He was God as a preexistent spirit before creation: John 1:1<br />
8. Are angels gods?<br />
1. Scripture never explicitly states that angels are gods<br />
2. Demonic spirits are not gods, 1 Cor. 10:20; Gal. 4:8; thus, being "mighty<br />
spirits" does not make angels gods<br />
3. Satan is therefore also a false god: 2 Cor. 4:4<br />
4. Psalm 8:5 does not teach that angels are gods<br />
1. Psa. 8:5 is paraphrased in Heb. 2:7, not quoted literally (cf. Psa. 68:18<br />
with Eph. 4:8). In Psa. 8:5, elohim certainly means God, not angels,<br />
since Psa. 8:3-8 parallels Gen. 1:1, 1:8, 1:16, 1:26-28. Note that the<br />
Psalmist is speaking of man's exalted place in creation, whereas<br />
Hebrews is speaking of the lower place taken by Christ in becoming a<br />
man. Thus, Heb. 2:7 may not mean to equate angels with gods at all.<br />
2. Even if Heb. 2:7 does imply that angels are "gods," in the context of<br />
Hebrews 1-2 these angels would be those falsely exalted above Christ:<br />
Note Heb. 1:6 (which quotes Psa. 97:7, which definitely speaks of<br />
"gods" in the sense of false gods); and cf. Col. 2:16 on the problem of<br />
the worship of angels.<br />
5. Elsewhere in the Psalms angels, if spoken of as gods (or as "sons of the<br />
gods"), are considered false gods: Psa. 29:1; 86:8-10; 89:6; 95:3; 96:4-5;<br />
97:7-9 (note that these false gods are called "angels" in the Septuagint); Psa.<br />
135:5; 136:2; 138:1; cf. Ex. 15:11; 18:11; Deut. 10:17; 1 Chr. 16:25; 2 Chr. 2:5.<br />
6. Even if the angels were gods (which the above shows they are not), that would<br />
be irrelevant to Jesus, since He is not an angelic being, but the Son who is<br />
worshiped by the angels as their Creator, Lord, and God: Heb. 1:1-13.<br />
9. Conclusion: If there is only one God, one true God, all other gods being false gods,<br />
neither men nor angels being gods, and none even like God by nature - all of which<br />
the Bible says repeatedly and explicitly - then we must conclude that there is indeed<br />
only one God.<br />
2. This One God Is Known in the OT as "Jehovah/Yahweh" ("The Lord")<br />
1. Texts where Jehovah is said to be elohim or el: Deut. 4:35, 4:39; Psa. 100:3; etc.<br />
2. Texts where the compound name "Jehovah God" (Yahweh Elohim) is used: Gen.<br />
2:3; 9:26; 24:3; Ex. 3:15-18; 4:4; 2 Sam. 7:22, 7:25; etc.<br />
3. Only one Yahweh/Jehovah: Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29<br />
4. Conclusion: Jehovah is the only God, the only El or Elohim<br />
From the beginning of creation in Genesis to the end of times in Revelation, God refers to Himself<br />
as "us" or "our" and thus describes the doctrine of the Trinity. The word trinity comes from "tri"<br />
meaning three and "unity" meaning one. God is three distinct individuals - God the Father, the Son<br />
Jesus, and the Holy Spirit - in one true God.<br />
While El denotes one God, Elohim is a plural form which is used all the time whenever God is<br />
mentioned.Even the Shema of Israel literally reads the unity is the word used for unity in plurality.<br />
68
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Shema Ysrael YHVH Elohenu YHVH echad<br />
Hear O Israel, YHVH Our Gods, YHVH is United One<br />
3. God Is a Unique, Incomprehensible Being<br />
1. Only one God, thus unique: See I.A.<br />
2. None are even like God: See I.B.<br />
3. God cannot be fully comprehended: 1 Cor. 8:2-3<br />
4. God can only be known insofar as the Son reveals Him: Matt. 11:25-27; John 1:18<br />
5. Analogical language needed to describe God: Ezek. 1:26-28; Rev. 1:13-16<br />
6. God is transcendent, entirely distinct from and different than the universe, as the<br />
carpenter is distinct from the bench<br />
1. Separate from the world: Isa. 40:22; Acts 17:24<br />
2. Contrasted with the world: Psa. 102:25-27; 1 John 2:15-17<br />
3. Created the world: Gen. 1:1; Psa. 33:6; 102:25; Isa. 42:5; 44:24; John 1:3;<br />
Rom. 11:36; Heb. 1:2; 11:3<br />
4. Is God One Person?<br />
1. God is one God (cf. I above), one Yahweh, one Lord (cf. II above), one Spirit (John<br />
4:24)<br />
2. However, the Bible never says that God is "one person"<br />
1. Heb. 1:3 KJV speaks of God's "person," but the word used here, hupostasis, is<br />
translated "substance" in Heb. 11:1 KJV; also in Heb. 1:3 "God" refers<br />
specifically to the Father<br />
2. Gal. 3:20 speaks of God as one party in the covenant between God and man,<br />
not as one person<br />
3. Job 13:8 KJV speaks of God's "person," but ironically the Hebrew literally<br />
means "his faces"<br />
3. The use of singular and plural pronouns for God<br />
1. Over 7000 times God speaks or is spoken of with singular pronouns (I, He,<br />
etc.); but this is proper because God is a single individual being; thus these<br />
singular forms do not disprove that God exists as three "persons" as long as<br />
these persons are not separate beings<br />
2. At least three times God speaks of or to himself using plural pronouns (Gen.<br />
1:26; 3:22; 11:7), and nontrinitarian interpretation cannot account for these<br />
occurrences.<br />
1. A plural reference to God and the angels is possible in Isa. 6:8, but not<br />
in the Genesis texts: in Gen 1:26 "our image" is explained in Gen 1:27,<br />
"in God's image"; in Gen 3:22 "like one of us" refers back to Gen 3:5,<br />
"like God."<br />
69
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
2. The "literary plural" (possibly, though never clearly, attested in Paul) is<br />
irrelevant to texts in which God is speaking, not writing.<br />
3. The "plural of deliberation" (as in "Let's see now…") is apparently<br />
unattested in biblical writings, and cannot explain Gen. 3:22 ("like one of<br />
us").<br />
4. The "plural of amplitude" or of "fullness" (which probably does explain<br />
the use of the plural form elohim in the singular sense of "God") is<br />
irrelevant to the use of plural pronouns, and again cannot explain Gen.<br />
3:22.<br />
5. The "plural of majesty" is possibly attested in 1 Kgs. 12:9; 2 Chron. 10:9;<br />
more likely Ezra 4:18; but none of these are certain; and again, it cannot<br />
explain Gen. 3:22; also nothing in the context of the Genesis texts<br />
suggests that God is being presented particularly as King.<br />
4. The uniqueness of God (cf. III above) should prepare us for the possibility that the<br />
one divine Being exists uniquely as a plurality of persons<br />
5. The Father of Jesus Christ Is God<br />
1. Explicit statements: John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; etc.<br />
2. The expression, "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ": 2 Cor. 1:3; Eph. 1:3; 1<br />
Pet. 1:3<br />
6. Jesus Christ Is God<br />
1. Explicit statements<br />
1. Isa. 9:6; note Isa. 10:21. Translations which render "mighty hero," are<br />
inconsistent in their rendering of Isa. 10:21. Also note that Ezek. 32:21 is (a)<br />
not in the same context, as is Isa. 10:21, and (b) speaking of false gods, cf.<br />
I.G.5. above.<br />
2. John 1:1 Even if Jesus is here called "a god" (as some have argued), since<br />
there is only one God, Jesus is that God. However, the "a god" rendering is<br />
incorrect. Other passages using the Greek word for God (theos) in the same<br />
construction are always rendered "God": Mark 12:27; Luke 20:38; John 8:54;<br />
Phil 2:13; Heb. 11:16. Passages in which a shift occurs from ho theos ("the<br />
God") to theos ("God") never imply a shift in meaning: Mark 12:27; Luke<br />
20:37-38; John 3:2; 13:3; Rom. 1:21; 1 Thess. 1:9; Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 4:10-11<br />
3. John 1:18. The best manuscripts have "the unique God" (monogenês,<br />
frequently rendered "only-begotten," actually means "one of a kind," "unique,"<br />
though in the NT always in the context of a son or daughter). Even if one<br />
translates "only-begotten," the idea is not of a "begotten god" as opposed to an<br />
"unbegotten god."<br />
4. John 20:28. Compare Rev. 4:11, where the same construction is used in the<br />
plural ("our") instead of the singular ("my"). See also Psa. 35:23. Note that<br />
Christ's response indicates that Thomas' acclamation was not wrong. Also<br />
note that John 20:17 does show that the Father was Jesus' "God" (due to<br />
Jesus becoming a man), but the words "my God" as spoken by Thomas later<br />
in the same chapter must mean no less than in John 20:17. Thus, what the<br />
Father is to Jesus in His humanity, Jesus is to Thomas (and therefore to us as<br />
well).<br />
5. Acts 20:28: "the church of God which He purchased with His own blood." The<br />
variant readings (e.g. "the church of the Lord") show that the original was<br />
understood to mean "His own blood," not "the blood of His own [Son]" (since<br />
70
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
otherwise no one would have thought to change it). Thus all other renderings<br />
are attempts to evade the startling clarity and meaning of this passage.<br />
6. Rom. 9:5. While grammatically this is not the only possible interpretation, the<br />
consistent form of doxologies in Scripture, as well as the smoothest reading of<br />
the text, supports the identification of Christ as "God" in this verse.<br />
7. Titus 2:13. Grammatically and contextually, this is one of the strongest<br />
proof-texts for the deity of Christ. Sharp's first rule, properly understood,<br />
proves that the text should be translated "our great God and Savior" (cf. same<br />
construction in Luke 20:37; Rev. 1:6; and many other passages). Note also<br />
that Paul always uses the word "manifestation" ("appearing") of Christ: 2<br />
Thess. 2:8; 1 Tim. 6:14; 2 Tim. 1:10; 4:1, 4:8.<br />
8. Heb. 1:8. The rendering, "God is your throne," is nonsense - God is not a<br />
throne, He is the one who sits on the throne! Also, "God is your throne," if<br />
taken to mean God is the source of one's rule, could be said about any angelic<br />
ruler - but Hebrews 1 is arguing that Jesus is superior to the angels.<br />
9. 2 Pet. 1:1. The same construction is used here as in Titus 2:13; see the<br />
parallel passages in 2 Pet. 1:11; 2:20; 3:2, 3:18.<br />
10.1 John 5:20. Note that the most obvious antecedent for "this" is Jesus Christ.<br />
Also note that the "eternal life" is Christ, as can be seen from John 1:2.<br />
2. Jesus is Jehovah/Yahweh<br />
1. Rom. 10:9-13: Note the repeated "for," which links these verses closely<br />
together. The "Lord" of Rom. 10:13 must be the "Lord" of Rom. 10:9, 10:12.<br />
2. Phil. 2:9-11. In context, the "name that is above every name" is "Lord" (Phil.<br />
2:11), i.e., Jehovah.<br />
3. Heb. 1:10: Here God the Father addresses the Son as "Lord," in a quotation<br />
from Psa. 102:25 (cf. Psa. 102:24, where the person addressed is called<br />
"God"). Since here the Father addresses the Son as "Lord," this cannot be<br />
explained away as a text in which a creature addresses Christ as God/Lord in<br />
a merely representational sense.<br />
4. 1 Pet. 2:3-4: This verse is nearly an exact quotation of Psa. 34:8 a, where<br />
"Lord" is Jehovah. From 1 Pet. 2:4-8 it is also clear that "the Lord" in 1 Pet. 2:3<br />
is Jesus.<br />
5. 1 Pet. 3:14-15: these verses are a clear reference to Isa. 8:12-13, where the<br />
one who is to be regarded as holy is Jehovah.<br />
6. Texts where Jesus is spoken of as the "one Lord" (cf. Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:29): 1<br />
Cor. 8:6; Eph. 4:5; cf. Rom. 10:12; 1 Cor. 12:5.<br />
It will be said on that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him so that he<br />
might save us. This is YHWH for whom we have waited; let us be glad and rejoice<br />
in his salvation.' (Isa. 25:9)<br />
Then YHWH will go forth and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of<br />
battle. On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives … Then YHWH my<br />
God will come , and all the holy ones with him … And YHWH will become king<br />
over all the earth; and on that day YHWH will be one and his name one. (Zech. 14:3<br />
ff.)<br />
This form of Christology finds particularly vivid expression in Lk. 19:41 ff., wherein Jesus, near the<br />
end of his ministry, rides into Jerusalem on a colt, crying over the city that did not recognize your<br />
visitation from God. (vs. 44)<br />
71
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The use of 'God' for Jesus that is attested in the early 2d century was a continuation of a usage that<br />
had begun in NT times. There is no reason to be surprised at this.<br />
'Jesus Christ is Lord' was evidently a popular confessional formula in NT times, and in this formula<br />
Christians gave Jesus the title kyrios which was the Septuagint translation for YHWH. If Jesus<br />
could be given this title, why could he not be called 'God' (theos), which the Septuagint often used<br />
to translate Elohim? The two Hebrew terms had become relatively interchangeable, and indeed<br />
YHWH was the more sacred term. (Ray Brown : An Introduction to New Testament Christology).<br />
3. Jesus has the titles of God<br />
1. Titles belonging only to God<br />
1. The first and the last: Rev. 1:17; 22:13; cf. Isa. 44:6<br />
2. King of kings and Lord of lords: 1 Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16<br />
2. Titles belonging in the ultimate sense only to God<br />
1. Savior: Luke 2:11; John 4:42; 1 John 4:14; Titus 2:13, cf. Titus 2:10; etc.;<br />
cf. Isa. 43:11; 45:21-22; 1 Tim. 4:10; on Jesus becoming the source of<br />
salvation; Heb. 5:9, cf. Ex. 15:2; Psa. 118:14, 118:21<br />
2. Shepherd: John 10:11; Heb. 13:20; cf. Psa. 23:1; Isa. 40:11<br />
3. Rock: 1 Cor. 10:4; cf. Isa. 44:8<br />
4. Jesus received the honors due to God alone<br />
1. Honor: John 5:23<br />
2. Love: Matt. 10:37<br />
3. Prayer: John 14:14 (text debated, but in any case it is Jesus who answers the<br />
prayer); Acts 1:24-25; 7:59-60 (cf. Luke 23:34, 23:46); Rom. 10:12-13; 1 Cor.<br />
1:2; 2 Cor. 12:8-10 (where "the Lord" must be Jesus, cf. 2 Cor. 12:9); 2 Thess.<br />
2:16-17; etc.<br />
4. Worship (proskuneô): Matt. 28:17; Heb. 1:6 (cf. Psa. 97:7); cf. Matt 4:10<br />
5. Religious or sacred service (latreuô): Rev. 22:13<br />
6. Doxological praise: 2 Tim. 4:18; 2 Pet. 3:18; Rev. 1:5-6; 5:13<br />
7. Faith: John 3:16; 14:1; etc.<br />
5. Jesus does the works of God<br />
1. Creation: John 1:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16-17; Heb. 1:2; Rev. 3:14 (where archê<br />
probably means ruler); on "through" and "in" cf. Rom. 11:36; Heb. 2:10; Acts<br />
17:28; cf. also Isa. 44:24<br />
2. Sustains the universe: Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3, 1:11-12<br />
3. Salvation:<br />
1. In General: See C.2.a. above<br />
2. Forgives sins: Matt. 9:1-8; Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26; note that Jesus<br />
forgives sins not committed against Him.<br />
4. All of them: John 5:17-29 (including judgment, cf. Matt. 25:31-46; 2 Cor. 5:10)<br />
6. Jesus has all the incommunicable attributes of God<br />
1. All of them: John 1:1; Phil. 2:6; Col. 1:15; 2:9; Heb. 1:3<br />
2. Self-existent: John 5:26<br />
3. Unchangeable: Heb. 1:10-12 (in the same sense as YHWH); Heb. 13:8<br />
4. Eternal: John 1:1; 8:58; 17:5; Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:2<br />
5. Omnipresent: Matt. 18:20; 28:20; John 3:13; Eph. 1:23; 4:10; Col. 3:11<br />
6. Omniscient: John 16:30; 21:17; cf. John 2:23-24<br />
7. Incomprehensible: Matt. 11:25-27<br />
7. Jesus is "equal with God"<br />
1. John 5:18: Although John is relating what the Jews understood Jesus to be<br />
claiming, the context shows they were basically right: In John 5:17 claimed to<br />
be exempt from the Sabbath along with His Father, and in John 5:19-29 Jesus<br />
72
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
claimed to do all of the world of the Father and to deserve the same honor as<br />
the Father<br />
2. Phil. 2:6: Jesus did not attempt to seize recognition by the world as being<br />
equal with God, but attained that recognition by humbling himself and being<br />
exalted by the Father (Phil. 2:7-11)<br />
8. Jesus is the Son of God<br />
1. "Son" in Scripture can mean simply one possessing the nature of something,<br />
whether literal or figurative (e.g. "Son of man," "sons of thunder," "sons of<br />
disobedience," cf. Mark 3:7; Eph. 2:1).<br />
2. Usually when "son of" is used in relation to a person (son of man, son of<br />
Abraham, son of David, etc.) the son possesses the nature of his father.<br />
3. Jesus is clearly not the literal Son of God, i.e., He was not physically<br />
procreated by God.<br />
4. On the other hand, Jesus is clearly the Son of God in a unique sense (cf.<br />
"only-begotten son," John 1:14; 3:16, 3:18; 1 John 4:9) and in a preeminent<br />
sense (i.e. the term is more fitting for Him than for anyone else).<br />
5. Scripture is explicit that the Son possesses God's essence or nature (cf. F.<br />
above).<br />
6. Jesus' repeated claim to be the Son of God was consistently understood by<br />
the Jewish leaders as a blasphemous claim to equality with God, an<br />
understanding Jesus never denied: John 5:17-23; 8:58-59; 10:30-39; 19:7;<br />
Matt. 26:63-65.<br />
7. Jesus is therefore by nature God's Son, not God's creation or God's servant;<br />
Jesus is God's Son who became a servant for our sake and for the Father's<br />
glory (John 13:13-15; 17:4; Phil. 2:6-11; Heb. 1:4-13; 3:1-6; 5:8; etc.).<br />
9. Objections<br />
1. Prov. 8:22: This text is not a literal description of Christ, but a poetic<br />
personification of wisdom (cf. all of Prov. 1-9, esp. Prov. 8:12-21; Prov. 9:1-6),<br />
poetically saying that God "got" His wisdom before He did anything - i.e., that<br />
God has always had wisdom.<br />
2. Col. 1:15: Does not mean that Christ is the first creature, since He is here<br />
presented as the Son and principal heir of the Father (cf. Col. 1:12); thus<br />
"firstborn" here means "heir" (cf. Gen. 43:33; 48;14-20; Ex. 4:22; 1 Chron.<br />
5:1-3; Psa. 89:27; Jer. 31:9); note that Col. 1:16 speaks of the Son as the<br />
Creator, nor creature (cf. E.1. above).<br />
3. Rev. 3:14: "Beginning" (archê) in Rev. as a title means source or one who<br />
begins, i.e. Creator (cf. Rev. 1:8; 21:6; 22:13); elsewhere Christ is called the<br />
archê in the sense of "ruler," Col. 1:18, cf. plural archai, "rulers," in Col. 1:16;<br />
2:10, 2:15, also Luke 12:11; Rom. 8:38; Eph. 3:10; 6:12; Tit. 3:1; cf. Luke<br />
20:20; Jude 6; 1 Cor. 15:24; Eph. 1:21.<br />
4. 1 Cor. 11:3; 15:28: Jesus is still subordinate to God, but as the Son to the<br />
Father; i.e., they are equal in nature, but the Son is subordinate relationally to<br />
God.<br />
5. John 20:17; Rom. 15:6; 1 Cor. 15:24; 2 Cor. 1:3; Rev. 1:6; 3:12: Jesus calls the<br />
Father "My God" because He is still man as well as God; note the distinction<br />
between "My God" and "your God" in John 20:17 (i.e., Jesus never speaks of<br />
"our God" including Himself with the disciples).<br />
6. Mark 13:32: Jesus' statement that He did not know the time of His return is to<br />
be explained by His voluntary acceptance of the humble form and likeness of a<br />
man (Phil. 2:7); in fact Jesus, as God, did know all things (John 16:30), and<br />
after His resurrection He does not including Himself as not knowing (Acts<br />
1:6-7).<br />
73
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
7. Mark 10:17-18: Jesus does not deny being God, but simply tells the man that<br />
he has no business calling anyone "good" in an unqualified sense except God.<br />
8. Heb. 5:14: Jesus was tempted, cf. James 1:13; but note that Jesus could not<br />
sin, John 5:19.<br />
9. John 1:18: No one has seen God, but men have seen Jesus, e.g. 1 John 1:1-2;<br />
but note that no man can see the glorified Jesus either, 1 Tim. 6:16, and to see<br />
Jesus is to see the Father, John 14:9.<br />
10.1 Tim. 1:17: God cannot die, but Jesus did, e.g. Phil. 2:8; but note that no one<br />
could take Jesus' life from Him, He could not remain dead, and He raised<br />
Himself: John 10:18; Acts 2:24; John 2:19-22.<br />
11.1 Cor. 8:6: Father called God, Jesus called Lord: but here "God" and "Lord" are<br />
synonymous (cf. 1 Cor. 8:5; cf. also Rom. 14:3-12 for a good example of "God"<br />
and "Lord" as interchangeable); moreover, this text no more denies that Jesus<br />
is God than it does that the Father is Lord (Matt. 11:25); cf. Jude 4, where<br />
Jesus is the only Lord.<br />
12.1 Tim. 2:5: Jesus here supposedly distinct from God; but Jesus is also distinct<br />
from (fallen) men, yet is Himself a man; likewise Jesus is distinct from God (the<br />
Father), but is also God.<br />
13.Deut. 4:12, 4:15-25; God not appear in a human form to Israel, lest they fall<br />
into idolatry; but this does not rule out His appearing in human form later after<br />
they had learned to abhor idolatry.<br />
14.In many texts Jesus is distinguished from God: He is the Son of God, was sent<br />
by God, etc.; in all these texts "God" is used as a name for the person most<br />
commonly called God, i.e., the Father.<br />
7. The Holy Spirit Is God<br />
1. Equated with God: Acts 5:3-4; 2 Cor. 3:17-18<br />
2. Has the incommunicable attributes of God<br />
1. Eternal: Heb. 9:14<br />
2. Omnipresent: Psa. 139:7<br />
3. Omniscient: 1 Cor. 2:10-11<br />
3. Involved in all the works of God<br />
1. Creation: Gen. 1:2; Psa. 104:30<br />
2. Incarnation: Matt. 1:18, 1:20; Luke 1:35<br />
3. Resurrection: Rom. 1:4; 8:11<br />
4. Salvation: Rom. 8:1-27<br />
4. Is a person<br />
1. Has a name: Matt. 28:19; note that even though "name" might be used of a<br />
nonperson, here, in conjunction with the Father and the Son, it must be used of<br />
a person<br />
2. Is the "Helper"<br />
1. Is another Helper: John 14:16, cf. 1 John 2:1; note also that "Helper"<br />
(paraklêtos) was used in Greek always or almost always of persons.<br />
2. Is sent in Jesus' name, to teach: John 14:26.<br />
3. Will arrive, and then bear witness: John 15:26-27.<br />
4. Is sent by Christ to convict of sin, will speak not on his own but on behalf<br />
of Christ, will glorify Christ, thus exhibiting humility: John 16:7-14.<br />
3. Is the Holy Spirit, in contrast to unholy spirits: Mark 3:22-30, cf. Matt. 12:32; 1<br />
Tim. 4:1; 1 John 3:24-4:6.<br />
4. Speaks, is quoted as speaking: John 16:13; Acts 1:16; 8:29; 10:19; 11:12; 13:2;<br />
16:6; 20:23; 21:11; 28:25-27; 1 Tim. 4:1; Heb. 3:7-11; 10:15-17; 1 Pet. 1:11;<br />
Rev. 2:7, 2:11, 2:17, 2:29; 3:6, 3:13, 3:22.<br />
5. Can be lied to: Acts 5:3<br />
74
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
6. Can make decisions, judgments: Acts 15:28<br />
7. Intercedes for Christians with the Father: Rom. 8:26<br />
8. "Impersonal" language used of the Spirit paralled by language used of other<br />
persons<br />
1. The Holy Spirit as fire: Matt. 3:11; Luke 3:16; cf. Ex. 3:2-4; Deut. 4:24;<br />
9:3; Heb. 12:29<br />
2. The Holy Spirit poured out: Acts 2:17, 2:33; cf. Isa. 53:12; Phil. 2:17; 2<br />
Tim. 4:6<br />
3. Being filled with the Holy Spirit: Eph. 5:18, etc.; cf. Eph. 3:17, 3:19; 4:10<br />
8. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit Are Distinct Persons<br />
1. Matt. 28:19<br />
1. "the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit": use of definite article before<br />
each personal noun indicates distinct persons unless explicitly stated<br />
otherwise; compare Rev. 1:17; 2:8, 2:26<br />
2. The views that "Father" and "Son" are distinct persons but not the Holy Spirit,<br />
or that the Holy Spirit is not a person at all, or that all three are different offices<br />
or roles of one person, are impossible in view of the grammar (together with<br />
the fact that in Scripture a "spirit" is a person unless context shows otherwise).<br />
3. Does singular "name" prove that the three are one person? No; cf. Gen. 5:2;<br />
11:14; 48:6; and esp. Gen. 48:16<br />
4. "Name" need not be personal name, may be title: Isa. 9:6; Matt. 1:23. If a<br />
single personal name is sought, the name shared by all three persons is<br />
"Yahweh" or "Jehovah."<br />
2. Acts 2:38 and Matt. 28:19<br />
1. Neither passage specifies that certain words are to be spoken during baptism;<br />
nor does the Bible ever record someone saying, "I baptize you in the name<br />
of…"<br />
2. Those said to be baptized in the name of Jesus (whether or not the formula "in<br />
the name of Jesus" was used) were people already familiar with the God of the<br />
OT:<br />
1. Jews: Acts 2:5, 2:38; 22:16<br />
2. Samaritans: Acts 8:5, 8:12, 8:16<br />
3. God-fearing Gentiles: Acts 10:1-2, 10:22, 10:48<br />
4. Disciples of John the Baptist: Acts 19:1-5<br />
5. The first Christians in Corinth were Jews and God-fearing Gentiles: Acts<br />
18:1-8; 1 Cor. 1:13<br />
3. Trinitarian formula for baptism (if that is what Matt. 28:19 is) was given in<br />
context of commissioning apostles to take the gospel to "all the nations,"<br />
including people who did not know of the biblical God<br />
3. God the Father and the Son Jesus Christ are two persons<br />
1. The salutations: Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3; Eph. 1:2; 6:23; Phil.<br />
1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1-2; 1 Tim. 1:1-2; 2 Tim. 1:2; Tit. 1:4; Phm. 3;<br />
James 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:2; 2 John 3<br />
2. Two witnesses: John 5:31-32; 8:16-18; cf. Num. 35:30; Deut. 17:6; 19:15<br />
3. The Father sent the Son: John 3:16-17; Gal. 4:4; 1 John 4:10; etc.; cf. John 1:6;<br />
17:18; 20:21<br />
4. The Father and the Son love each other: John 3:35; 5:20; 14:31; 15:9;<br />
17:23-26; cf. Matt. 3:17 par.; Matt. 17:5 par.; 2 Pet. 1:17<br />
5. The Father speaks to the Son, and the Son speaks to the Father: John<br />
11:41-42; 12:28; 17:1-26; etc.<br />
6. The Father knows the Son, and the Son knows the Father: Matt. 11:27; Luke<br />
10:22; John 7:29; 8:55; 10:15<br />
75
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
7. Jesus our Advocate with the Father: 1 John 2:1<br />
4. Jesus is not God the Father<br />
1. Isa. 9:6: "Father of eternity" means eternal; compare other names formed with<br />
word "father": Abialbon, "father of strength" = strong (2 Sam. 23:31); Abiasaph,<br />
"father of gathering" = gatherer (Ex. 6:24); Abigail, a woman's name(!), "father<br />
of exultation" = exulting (1 Chron. 2:16).<br />
2. John 10:30<br />
1. Jesus did not say, "I am the Father," nor did He say, "the Son and the<br />
Father are one person."<br />
2. The first person plural esmen ("we are") implies two persons.<br />
3. The neuter word for "one" (hen) is used, implying essential unity but not<br />
personal unity (compare John 17:21-23).<br />
3. John 5:43: Jesus' coming in His Father's name means not that He was the<br />
Father because He had the Father's name, but that, while others come in their<br />
own name (or their own authority), Jesus does not; He comes in His Father's<br />
name (on His Father's authority).<br />
4. John 8:19; 16:3: Ignorance of Jesus is indeed ignorance of the Father, but that<br />
does not prove that Jesus is the one He calls "My Father."<br />
5. John 14:6-11<br />
1. Jesus and the Father are one being, not one person.<br />
2. Jesus said, "I am in the Father," not "I am the Father."<br />
3. The statement, "the Father is in Me," does not mean Jesus is the Father;<br />
compare John 14:20; 17:21-23.<br />
6. John 14:18: An older adult brother can care for his younger siblings, thus<br />
preventing them from being "orphans," without being their father.<br />
7. Colossians 2:9: Does not mean that Jesus is the Father, or that Jesus is an<br />
incarnation of the Father; rather, since "Godhead" (theotês) means Deity, the<br />
state of being God, the nature of God, Jesus is fully God, but not the only<br />
person who is God. "The Godhead" here does not = the Father (note that<br />
Jesus is in the Father, John 10:38; 14:10, 14:11; 17:21), but the nature of the<br />
Father.<br />
8. The Father and the Son are both involved in various activities: raising Jesus<br />
(Gal. 1:1; John 2:19-22), raising the dead (John 5:21; 6:39-40, 6:44, 6:54, 1<br />
Cor. 6:14), answering prayer (John 14:13-14; 15:16; 16:23), sending the Holy<br />
Spirit (John 14:16; 15:26; 16:7), drawing people to Jesus (John 6:44; 12:32),<br />
etc. These common works do prove that the two persons are both God, but not<br />
that Jesus is the Father<br />
5. The Son existed before his Incarnation, even before creation<br />
1. Prov. 30:4: This is not predictive prophecy; "prophecy" in Prov. 30:1 translates<br />
massa, which is rendered elsewhere as "burden."<br />
2. The Son created all things: See VI.E.1<br />
3. Jesus was "with" (pros or para) God the Father before creation: John 1:1; 17:5;<br />
pros in John 1:1 does not mean "pertaining to," although it does in Hebrews<br />
2:17; 5:1 (which use pros with ta).<br />
4. Jesus, the Son of God, existed before John the Baptist (who was born before<br />
Jesus): John 1:15, cf. John 1:14-18, 1:29-34<br />
5. Jesus, the Son, came down from heaven, sent from the Father, and went back<br />
to heaven, back to the Father: John 3:13, 3:31; 6:33; 6:38, 6:41, 6:46, 6:51,<br />
6:56-58, 6:62; 8:23, 8:42; 13:3; 16:27-28; cf. Acts 1:10-11; cf. the sending of<br />
the Holy Spirit, John 16:5-7; 1 Pet. 1:12<br />
6. Jesus, speaking as the Son (John 8:54-56), asserts His eternal preexistence<br />
before Abraham: John 8:58<br />
7. The Son explicitly said to exist "before all things": Col. 1:17, cf. Col. 1:12-20<br />
76
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
8. These statements cannot be dismissed as true only in God's foreknowledge<br />
1. We are all "in God's mind" before creation; yet such passages as John<br />
1:1 and John 17:5 clearly mean to say something unusual about Christ.<br />
2. To say that all things were created through Christ means that He must<br />
have existed at creation.<br />
3. No one else in Scripture is ever said to have been with God before<br />
creation.<br />
9. Texts which speak of the Son being begotten "today" do not mean He became<br />
the Son on a certain day, since they refer to His exaltation at the resurrection<br />
(Acts 13:33; Heb. 1:3-5; 5:5; cf. Psa. 2:7; cf. also Rom. 1:4).<br />
6. Jesus is not the Holy Spirit<br />
1. The Holy Spirit is "another Comforter": John 14:16; compare 1 John 2:1.<br />
2. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit: John 15:26; 16:7.<br />
3. The Holy Spirit exhibits humility in relation to, and seeks to glorify, Jesus (John<br />
16:13-14).<br />
4. The Son and the Holy Spirit are distinguished as two persons in Matt. 28:19.<br />
5. The Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus: Luke 3:22.<br />
6. Is Jesus the Holy Spirit?<br />
1. 2 Cor. 3:17: the Spirit is here called "Lord" in the sense of being<br />
Yahweh or God, not Jesus (cf. 2 Cor. 3:16, citing Ex. 34:34; cf. 2 Cor.<br />
3:17 in the Revised English Bible); note Acts 28:25-27, cf. Isa. 6:8-10.<br />
2. 1 Cor. 15:45: Jesus is "a life-giving Spirit," not in the sense that He is<br />
the Holy Spirit whom He sent at Pentecost, but in the sense that He is<br />
the glorified God-man; and as God He is Spirit by nature. All three<br />
persons of the Trinity are Spirit, though there are not three divine Spirits;<br />
and only one person is designated "the Holy Spirit."<br />
3. Rom. 8:27, 8:34: the fact that two persons intercede for us is consistent<br />
with the fact that we have two Advocates (John 14:16; Rom. 8:26; 1<br />
John 2:1).<br />
4. John 14:18: Jesus here refers to His appearances to the disciples after<br />
the resurrection (compare John 14:19), not to the coming of the Spirit.<br />
5. Jesus and the Holy Spirit are both involved in various activities: raising<br />
Jesus (John 2:19-22; Rom. 8:9-11), raising the dead (John 5:21;<br />
6:39-40, 6:44, 6:54, Rom. 8:9-11), dwelling in the believer (John 14:16;<br />
2 Cor. 13:5; Col. 1:27), interceding for the believer (Rom. 8:26; Heb.<br />
7:25), sanctifying believers (Eph. 5:26; 1 Pet. 1:2), etc. These works<br />
prove that the two persons are both God, but not that Jesus is the Holy<br />
Spirit.<br />
7. The Father is not the Holy Spirit<br />
1. The Father sent the Holy Spirit: John 14:15; 15:26.<br />
2. The Holy Spirit intercedes with the Father for us: Rom. 8:26-27.<br />
3. The Father and the Holy Spirit are distinguished as two persons in Matt. 28:19.<br />
4. Is the Father the Holy Spirit?<br />
1. Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35: It is argued that the Holy Spirit is the Father of the<br />
incarnate Son of God; this argument ignores the fact that the<br />
"conception" is not a product of physical union between a man and a<br />
woman!<br />
2. The Father and the Holy Spirit are both said to be active in various<br />
activities; the resurrection of Jesus (Gal. 1:1; Rom. 8:11), comforting<br />
Christians (2 Cor. 1:3-4; John 14:26), sanctifying Christians (Jude 1; 1<br />
Pet. 1:2), etc. The most these facts prove is that the two work together;<br />
they do not prove the two are one person.<br />
77
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
9. Conclusion: The Bible teaches the Trinity<br />
1. All the elements of the doctrine are taught in Scripture.<br />
1. One God<br />
2. The Father is God.<br />
3. The Son is God.<br />
4. The Holy Spirit is God.<br />
5. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three persons (i.e., they are not each<br />
other, nor are they impersonal; they relate to one another personally).<br />
2. The New Testament presents a consistent triad of Father, Son, Holy Spirit (God,<br />
Christ, Spirit): Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:3-4; also Luke 1:35; 3:21-22 par.; Luke 4:1-12;<br />
John 4:10-25; 7:37-39; 7:14-16; 20:21-22; Acts 1:4-8; 2:33, 38-39; 5:3-4, 5:9, 5:30-32;<br />
7:55-56; 10:36-38, 10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:8-11; 20:38; 28:25-31; Rom. 1:1-4; 5:5-10;<br />
8:2-4, 8:9-11, 8:14-17; 1 Cor. 6:11; 12:4-6, 12:11-12, 12:18; 2 Cor. 1:19-22; 3:6-8,<br />
3:14-18; Gal. 3:8-14; 4:4-7; Eph. 1:3-17; 2:18, 2:21-22; 3:14-19; 4:4-6, 4:29-32;<br />
5:18-20; Phil. 3:3; 1 Thess. 1:3-6; 2 Thess. 2:13-14; Tit. 3:4-6; Heb. 2:3-4; 9:14;<br />
10:28-31; 1 Pet. 1:2; 1 John 3:21-24; 4:13-14; Jude 20-21; Rev. 2:18, 2:27-29.<br />
3. Therefore, the Bible does teach the Trinity.<br />
This is how we represent trinity showing all the attributes described above<br />
They are one in essence, Three Persons, always One in Thought, Deed and Purpose.<br />
10.What Difference Does the Doctrine of the Trinity Make?<br />
1. Sovereignty: Because the three persons have each other, we can be assured that<br />
God created us only to share the love they have and not as a means to His own end:<br />
Acts 17:25; John 17:21-26.<br />
2. Mystery: The triune God is totally unlike anything in our world, and therefore greater<br />
than anything we can comprehend: Rom. 11:33-36; Isa. 40:18.<br />
78
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
3. Salvation: God alone planned our salvation, came to save us, and dwells in us to<br />
complete our salvation: 1 Pet. 1:2; Eph. 1:3-18; etc.<br />
4. Prayer: We pray to the Father through the Son, and also pray to the Son directly, in<br />
the Spirit: John 14:13-14; Eph. 2:18; etc.<br />
5. Worship: We worship Father and Son in the Spirit: John 4:23-24; Phil. 3:3; Heb. 1:8;<br />
etc.<br />
6. Love: The love among the three persons is the basis and model for our love for one<br />
another: John 17:26.<br />
7. Unity: The unity of the three persons is the basis and model for the unity of the<br />
church: John 17:21-23.<br />
8. Humility: As the persons of the Trinity seek the glory of each other, so we should<br />
seek the interests of others above our own: Phil. 2:5-11; John 16:13-14.<br />
9. Sonship: We are "sons of God" as we are united with the Son of God by the work of<br />
the Holy Spirit and the adoption of the Father: John 1:12-23; Rom. 8:14-17.<br />
10.Truth: All those who wish to worship and love God must seek to know Him as He is in<br />
truth, for God, as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is truth: John 4:24; 14:6, 14:17; 15:26;<br />
16:13.<br />
The Most Holy Trinity: Model of Marital and Familial Love And Unity<br />
When couples begin to look upon themselves and their relationship in Trinitarian light, upon their<br />
bond of love which is sealed in the sacrament of matrimony, the depth and meaning of the lifetime<br />
commitment they have made to one another takes on a profound significance. This is so because<br />
marriage is to be modeled after the three divine Persons of the Trinity whose gift of themselves is<br />
one of totality, unity, and fidelity. Thus marriage should reflect these same traits:<br />
"The characteristic traits of marriage are: totality, by which the spouses give themselves to each<br />
other mutually in every aspect of their person, physical and spiritual; unity which makes them "one<br />
flesh" (Gen 2:24); indissolubility and fidelity which the definitive mutual giving of self requires; the<br />
fruitfulness to which this naturally opens itself" (CSDC, No. 217).<br />
As we reflect on the Holy Trinity one of the first things we notice is the inseparable relationship<br />
between the three distinct Persons who are the one God. The Father loves the Son, the Son loves<br />
the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and Son. We might say that the life of the<br />
Triune God is the highest and supreme principle of familial relationship. This profound bond of unity<br />
among the three divine Persons makes them "inseparable in what they are," and "inseparable in<br />
what they do" (CCC No. 267). This inseparable unity also occurs in matrimony: that Christian<br />
marital bond between man and wife which is established and sealed by God himself (see CCC Nos.<br />
1639-1640).<br />
The Christian family is a communion of persons, a sign and image of the communion of the Father<br />
and the Son in the Holy Spirit.<br />
79
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
When we think of a family, we can see how a father, mother, and child can be distinct persons and<br />
yet possess the same nature (human), just as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct<br />
persons who each possess the same nature (divine).<br />
The weakness, of course, is that in God each person possesses the one infinite and immutable<br />
divine nature, and is therefore, one being. Our analogous family consists of three beings. Again, no<br />
analogy is perfect.<br />
"Let US make man in OUR image":<br />
Three plural pronouns, (We, Us, Our) used 6 different times in four different passages:<br />
Gen 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isa 6:8.<br />
Family is the image of God - Father , Mother and Children<br />
Ruach in Hebrew is feminine gender and it is the spirit that give life.<br />
In fact the whole creation is within God as one. Only they are not one in essence. The<br />
creation is part of the emanation and not essence.<br />
The following chart should help you understand how the Trinity doctrine is derived.<br />
Father Son Holy Spirit<br />
Called God Phil. 1:2 John 1:1,14; Col. 2:9 Acts 5:3-4<br />
Creator Is. 64:8; 44:24 John 1:3; Col. 1:15-17 Job 33:4,26:13<br />
Resurrects 1 Thess. 1:10 John 2:19, 10:17 Rom. 8:11<br />
Indwells 2 Cor. 6:16 Col. 1:27 John 14:17<br />
Everywhere 1 Kings 8:27 Matt. 28:20 Ps. 139:7-10<br />
All knowing 1 John 3:20 John 16:30; 21:17 1 Cor. 2:10-11<br />
Sanctifies 1 Thess. 5:23 Heb. 2:11 1 Pet. 1:2<br />
Life giver Gen. 2:7: John 5;21 John 1:3; 5:21 2 Cor. 3:6,8<br />
Fellowship 1 John 1:3 1 Cor. 1:9 2 Cor. 13:14; Phil. 2:1<br />
Eternal Ps. 90:2 Micah 5:1-2 Rom. 8:11; Heb. 9:14<br />
A Will Luke 22:42 Luke 22:42 1 Cor. 12:11<br />
Speaks Matt. 3:17; Luke 9:25 Luke 5:20; 7:48 Acts 8:29; 11:12; 13:2<br />
Love John 3:16 Eph. 5: 25 Rom. 15:30<br />
Searches the heart Jer. 17:10 Rev. 2:23 1 Cor. 2:10<br />
We belong to John 17:9 John 17:6<br />
Savior 1 Tim. 1:1; 2:3; 4:10 2 Tim. 1:10; Tit. 1:4; 3:6<br />
We serve Matt. 4:10 Col. 3:24<br />
80
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Believe in John 14:1 John 14:1<br />
Gives joy John 15:11 Rom. 14:7<br />
Judges John 8:50 John 5:21,30<br />
Charts of Christian Theology and Doctrine, H. Wayne House, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publ.<br />
House, 1992), pp. 48-49<br />
https://bible.org/node/15556<br />
1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for<br />
whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and<br />
through whom we live.<br />
2 Corinthians 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is<br />
freedom.<br />
2 Corinthians 13:14 May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the<br />
fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.<br />
Colossians 2:9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,<br />
Isaiah 9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his<br />
shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father,<br />
Prince of Peace.<br />
Isaiah 44:6 “This is what the LORD says— Israel’s King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am<br />
the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.<br />
John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the<br />
glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.<br />
John 10:30 I and the Father are one.<br />
Luke 1:35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High<br />
will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.<br />
Matthew 1:23“The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”<br />
(which means “God with us”).<br />
Matthew 28:19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the<br />
Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,<br />
Ephesians 4:4-6 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope<br />
when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all,<br />
who is over all and through all and in all.<br />
Colossians 1:15-17 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over<br />
all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth,<br />
visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all<br />
81
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
things have been created through him and for him.<br />
and in him all things hold together.<br />
He is before all things,<br />
John 14:9-11 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such<br />
a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say,<br />
‘Show us the Father’? Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the<br />
Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority.<br />
Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. Believe me when I<br />
say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the<br />
evidence of the works themselves.<br />
Philippians 2:5-8<br />
In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ<br />
Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God<br />
something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself<br />
nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.<br />
And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming<br />
obedient to death— even death on a cross!<br />
John 10:30-36 I and the Father are one.” Again his Jewish opponents picked<br />
up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many<br />
good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?” “We are<br />
not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because<br />
you, a mere man, claim to be God.” Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in<br />
your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods” ’? If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the<br />
word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— what about the one<br />
whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then<br />
do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?<br />
Jesus echoes the "I AM" statements in Isaiah chapters 40-55.<br />
I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness And will not turn<br />
back, That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance. Isaiah 45:23-24<br />
But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will<br />
go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of<br />
eternity. Micah 5:2<br />
Mark 2:5-12Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but<br />
God alone?<br />
John 1:1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He<br />
was in the beginning with God.<br />
John 5:18For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not<br />
only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal<br />
with God.<br />
John 8:58"Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." The Jews<br />
therefore said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" Jesus said to<br />
82
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." Therefore they picked up<br />
stones to throw at Him.<br />
John 19:7The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He<br />
made Himself out to be the Son of God."<br />
The jews understood Jesus as declaring himself as God and so they took stones for the<br />
blasphemy.<br />
John 10:33"I and the Father are one." The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. ... Has it<br />
not been written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'?"<br />
John 12:41 + Isaiah 6A simple reading of the context of John 12 makes it clear that John is saying<br />
that Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus Christ himself in Isaiah 6. This proves Jesus is Yahweh.<br />
Romans 14:11For it is written, "As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, And every<br />
tongue shall give praise to God."<br />
This sort of thing occurs over and over in the Bible: equivalent characteristics in many respects are<br />
applied to all three Divine Persons:<br />
1. Who raised Jesus from the dead? Well, it was God the Father (Gal 1:1; 1 Thess 1:10); it was also<br />
Jesus Himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18); and it was the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:11).<br />
2. Who gave the new covenant? The Father (Jer 31:33-34); Jesus (Heb 8:1-13; 10:29; 12:24;<br />
13:20); the Holy Spirit (Heb 10:15-17).<br />
3. Who sanctifies believers? The Father (1 Thess 5:23); Jesus (Heb 13:12); the Holy Spirit (1 Pet<br />
1:2).<br />
4. Who is the creator? The Father (Gen 1:1; Is 44:24; Acts 17:24; Eph 3:9); Jesus (Jn 1:3; Col 1:16;<br />
Heb 1:8, 10); the Holy Spirit (Job 33:4).Job 33:4.<br />
5. Who indwells believers? The Father (1 Cor 3:16a; 2 Cor 6:16; 1 Jn 3:24); Jesus (Jn 6:56; Rom<br />
8:10; Eph 3:17); the Holy Spirit (Jn 14:16-17; Rom 8:9, 11; 1 Cor 3:16b). The Bible even describes<br />
this in terms of different combinations: Father and Son (Jn 14:23); Father and Holy Spirit (Eph<br />
2:21-22; 1 Jn 3:24); Son and Holy Spirit (Gal 4:6).<br />
(1) The Father is called God (John 6:27; 20:17; 1 Cor. 8:6; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 4:6; Phil. 2:11; 1 Pet.<br />
1:2).<br />
(2) Jesus Christ, the Son is declared to be God. His deity is proven by the divine names given to<br />
Him, by His works that only God could do (upholding all things, Col. 1:17; creation, Col. 1:16, John<br />
1:3; and future judgment, John 5:27), by His divine attributes (eternality, John 17:5; omnipresence,<br />
Matt. 28:20; omnipotence, Heb. 1:3; omniscience, Matt. 9:4), and by explicit statements declaring<br />
His deity (John 1:1; 20:28; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:8).<br />
(3) The Holy Spirit is recognized as God. By comparing Peter’s comments in Acts 5:3 and 4, we<br />
see that in lying to the Holy Spirit (vs. 3), Ananias was lying to God (vs. 4). He has the attributes<br />
which only God can possess like omniscience (1 Cor. 2:10) and omnipresence (1 Cor. 6:19), and<br />
He regenerates people to new life (John 3:5-6, 8; Tit. 3:5), which must of necessity be a work of<br />
God for only God has the power of life. Finally, His deity is evident by the divine names used for the<br />
Spirit as “the Spirit of our God,” (1 Cor. 6:11), which should be understood as “the Spirit, who is our<br />
God.”<br />
83
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Ryrie writes: “Matthew 28:19 best states both the oneness and threeness by associating equally<br />
the three Persons and uniting them in one singular name. Other passages like Matthew 3:16-17<br />
and 2 Corinthians 13:14 associate equally the three Persons but do not contain the strong<br />
emphasis on unity as does Matthew 28:19.”<br />
84
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Some of the websites that gives details of scriptural references to Trinity:<br />
https://bible.org/article/trinity-triunity-god<br />
http://www.christianity.com/god/trinity/god-in-three-persons-a-doctrine-we-barely-understand-11634405.html<br />
https://www.everystudent.com/forum/trinity.html<br />
https://www.everystudent.com/features/faith.html<br />
https://www.thelordsnewchurch.org/trinity-explained.html<br />
http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-is-the-doctrine-of-the-trinity<br />
https://bible.org/node/15556<br />
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/explaining-the-trinity<br />
https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/bowman_robert/trinity/trinity.cfm give the following references:<br />
http://www.tektonics.org/guest/psnicea.html<br />
85
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
CHAPTER FOUR<br />
Among medieval Germanic tribes<br />
ARIAN CHURCHES<br />
The ceiling mosaic of the Arian Baptistry.<br />
During the time of Arianism's flowering in Constantinople, the Gothic convert Ulfilas (later the<br />
subject of the letter of Auxentius cited above) was sent as a missionary to the Gothic barbarians<br />
across the Danube, a mission favored for political reasons by emperor Constantius II.<br />
Arianism Among the Barbarians<br />
The church legislation of Theodosius was confined, of course, to the limits of the Roman Empire.<br />
Beyond it, among the barbarians of the West, who had received Christianity in the form of Arianism<br />
during the reign of the Emperor Valens, it maintained itself for two centuries or longer, though more<br />
as a matter of accident than choice and conviction.<br />
The Ostrogoths remained Arians till 563;<br />
the Visigoths, till the Synod of Toledo in 584;<br />
the Suevi in Spain, till 560;<br />
the Vandals, who conquered North Africa in 429,<br />
and furiously persecuted the catholics, till 534, when they were expelled by Belisarius;<br />
the Burgundians, till their incorporation in the Frank Empire in 534;<br />
the Lombards in Italy, till the middle of the seventh century.<br />
Alaric, the first conqueror of Rome, Genseric, the conqueror of North Africa, Theodoric the Great,<br />
86
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
King of Italy, were Arians; and the fast Teutonic translation of the Scriptures of which important<br />
fragments remain came from the Arian or semi-Arian missionary Ulfilas.<br />
Ulfilas' (c. 311–383) (Gothic Wulfila, literally "Little Wolf") parents were of non-Gothic<br />
Cappadocian Greek origin. Ulfilas, was the grandson of one female Christian captive from<br />
Sadagolthina in Cappadocia. This supposedly took place in 264.<br />
Ulfilas was ordained a bishop by Eusebius of Nicomedia and returned to his people to work as a<br />
missionary. He served in this position for the next seven years. In 348, one of the remaining Pagan<br />
Gothic kings (reikos) began persecuting the Christian Goths, and he and many other Christian<br />
Goths fled to Moesia Secunda in the Roman Empire. He continued to serve as bishop to the<br />
Christian Goths in Moesia until his death in 383 AD, according to Philostorgius.Raised as a Goth,<br />
he later became proficient in both Greek and Latin. Ulfilas converted many among the Goths and<br />
preached an Arian Christianity, which, when they reached the western Mediterranean, set them<br />
apart from their orthodox neighbours and subjects.<br />
In 348, in order to escape religious persecution by a Gothic chief, probably Athanaric Ulfilas<br />
obtained permission from Constantius II to migrate with his flock of converts to Moesia and settle<br />
near Nicopolis ad Istrum in modern northern Bulgaria.<br />
There, Ulfilas translated the Bible from Greek into the Gothic language and devised the Gothic<br />
alphabet. Fragments of his translation have survived, notably the Codex Argenteus held since 1648<br />
in the University Library of Uppsala in Sweden. A parchment page of this Bible was found in 1971 in<br />
the Speyer Cathedral.<br />
87
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Between 348 and 383, Ulfila translated the Bible from Greek into the Gothic language.Ulfilas<br />
developed the Gothic alphabet in order to translate the Bible. Ulphilas translated the Scriptures<br />
into Maeso-Gothic, taught the Goths across the Danube an Homoean theology.<br />
The creed of Arian Ulfilas (c. 311 – 383), which concludes a letter praising him written by Auxentius,<br />
distinguishes God the Father ("unbegotten"), who is the only true God from Son of God<br />
("only-begotten"), who is Lord/Master; and the Holy Spirit, the illuminating and sanctifying power,<br />
who is neither God the Father nor Lord/Master:<br />
I, Ulfila, bishop and confessor, have always so believed, and in this, the one true faith,<br />
I make the journey to my Lord; I believe in only one God the Father, the unbegotten<br />
and invisible, and in his only-begotten son, our Lord/Master and God, the designer<br />
and maker of all creation, having none other like him. Therefore, there is one God of<br />
all, who is also God of our God; and in one Holy Spirit, the illuminating and sanctifying<br />
power, as Christ said after his resurrection to his apostles: "And behold, I send the<br />
promise of my Father upon you; but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be<br />
clothed with power from on high" (Luke 24:49) and again "But ye shall receive power,<br />
when the Holy Ghost is come upon you" (Acts 1:8); Neither God nor Lord/Master, but<br />
the faithful minister of Christ; not equal, but subject and obedient in all things to the<br />
Son. And I believe the Son to be subject and obedient in all things to God the Father.<br />
As a result Arian kingdoms arose in Spain, Africa, Italy. However these were taken over by the<br />
sword by Clovis under the Roman papacy and were totally taken over to Catholic faith by force.<br />
Ulfilas' initial success in converting this Germanic people to an Arian form of Christianity was<br />
strengthened by later events. When the Germanic peoples entered the provinces of the Western<br />
Roman Empire and began founding their own kingdoms there, most had been Arian Christians for<br />
more than a century.<br />
The conflict in the 4th century AD had seen Arian and Nicene factions struggling for control of the<br />
Church. In contrast, among the Arian German kingdoms established in the collapsing Western<br />
Empire in the 5th century, there were entirely separate Arian and Nicene Churches with parallel<br />
hierarchies, each serving different sets of believers. The Germanic elites were Arians, and the<br />
Romance majority population was Nicene.<br />
88
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Most Germanic tribes were generally tolerant of the Nicene beliefs of their subjects. However, the<br />
Vandals tried for several decades to force their Arian beliefs on their North African Nicene subjects,<br />
exiling Nicene clergy, dissolving monasteries, and exercising heavy pressure on non-conforming<br />
Nicene Christians.<br />
The apparent resurgence of Arianism after Nicaea was more an anti-Nicene reaction exploited by<br />
Arian sympathizers than a pro-Arian development. By the end of the 4th century it had surrendered<br />
its remaining ground to Trinitarianism. In western Europe, Arianism, which had been taught by<br />
Ulfilas, the Arian missionary to the barbarian Germanic tribes, was dominant among the Goths,<br />
Lombards and Vandals.<br />
After 493, the Ostrogothic Kingdom included two areas, Italy and much of the Balkans, which had<br />
large Arian churches. Arianism had retained some presence among Romans in Italy during the time<br />
between its condemnation in the empire and the Ostrogothic conquest.[5] However, since Arianism<br />
in Italy was reinforced by the (mostly Arian) Goths coming from the Balkans, the Arian church in<br />
Italy had eventually come to call itself "Church of the Goths" by the year 500.<br />
By the 8th century it had ceased to be the tribes' mainstream belief as the tribal rulers gradually<br />
came to adopt Nicene orthodoxy. This trend began in 496 with Clovis I of the Franks, then<br />
Reccared I of the Visigoths in 587 and Aripert I of the Lombards in 653.<br />
The Franks and the Anglo-Saxons were unlike the other Germanic peoples in that they entered the<br />
empire as pagans and converted to Chalcedonian Christianity directly, guided by their kings, Clovis<br />
and Æthelberht of Kent. The remaining tribes – the Vandals and the Ostrogoths – did not convert as<br />
a people nor did they maintain territorial cohesion. Having been militarily defeated by the armies of<br />
Emperor Justinian I, the remnants were dispersed to the fringes of the empire and became lost to<br />
history. The Vandalic War of 533–534 dispersed the defeated Vandals.[38] Following their final<br />
defeat at the Battle of Mons Lactarius in 553, the Ostrogoths went back north and (re)settled in<br />
south Austria.<br />
89
From the 5th to 7th century<br />
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Much of south-eastern Europe and central Europe, including many of the Goths and Vandals<br />
respectively, had embraced Arianism (the Visigoths converted to Arian Christianity in 376), which<br />
led to Arianism being a religious factor in various wars in the Roman Empire. In the west, organized<br />
Arianism survived in North Africa, in Hispania, and parts of Italy until it was finally suppressed in the<br />
6th and 7th centuries. Grimwald, King of the Lombards (662–671), and his young son and<br />
successor Garibald (671), were the last Arian kings in Europe.<br />
St. Apollinare in Classe, 549 AD,<br />
Bishop Maximian, San Vitale, 547 AD & Dome of the Arian Baptistry, 500 AD<br />
Islam is the largest descendant of Arianism<br />
Archbishop Dmitri of the Orthodox Church in America said Islam is the largest descendant of<br />
Arianism today. Theologically there is almost identity between Islam and the extreme Arianic<br />
position. There is some superficial similarity in Islam's teaching that Jesus was a great prophet, but<br />
very distinct from God, although Islam sees Jesus as a human messenger of God without the<br />
divine properties that Arianism attributes to Christ. Islam sees itself as a continuation of the Jewish<br />
and Christian traditions and reveres many of the same prophets, though Islam denies the<br />
crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus and historical Arians claimed it.<br />
There is a historical tradition where Mohamed when he was boy of 12 years met with an Arian<br />
monk called Bahira who lived in Syria. The story goes that Bahira identified Mohammed as a<br />
90
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
future prophet. Mohammed apparently was tutored in the Arian theology and the Tanak and the<br />
Christian Bible by him. In the Christian tradition Bahira became a heretical monk, whose errant<br />
views inspired the Qur'an. Bahira is at the center of the Apocalypse of Bahira, which exists in Syriac<br />
and Arabic which makes the case for an origin of the Qur'an from Christian apocrypha. Certain<br />
Arabist authors maintain that Bahira's works formed the basis of those parts of the Qur'an that<br />
conform to the principles of Christianity, while the rest was introduced either by subsequent<br />
compilers such as Uthman Ibn Affan or contemporary Jews and Arabs." The names and religious<br />
affiliations of the monk vary in different Christian sources.<br />
In the Christian tradition Bahira became a heretical monk, whose errant views inspired the Qur'an.<br />
Bahira is at the center of the Apocalypse of Bahira, which exists in Syriac and Arabic which makes<br />
the case for an origin of the Qur'an from Christian apocrypha. Certain Arabist authors maintain that<br />
Bahira's works formed the basis of those parts of the Qur'an that conform to the principles of<br />
Christianity, while the rest was introduced either by subsequent compilers such as Uthman Ibn<br />
Affan or contemporary Jews and Arabs. The names and religious affiliations of the monk vary in<br />
different Christian sources.<br />
For example, John of Damascus states that Muhammad "having chanced upon the Old and New<br />
Testaments and likewise, it seems, having conversed with an Arian monk, devised his own heresy."<br />
John states:<br />
"From that time to the present a false prophet named Mohammed has appeared in their midst. This<br />
man, after having chanced upon the Old and New Testaments and likewise, it seems, having<br />
conversed with an Arian monk, devised his own heresy. Then, having insinuated himself into the<br />
good graces of the people by a show of seeming piety, he gave out that a certain book had been<br />
sent down to him from heaven. He had set down some ridiculous compositions in this book of his<br />
and he gave it to them as an object of veneration." http://orthodoxinfo.com/general/stjohn_islam.aspx<br />
Sometimes Bahira is called a Jacobite or an Arian. The early Christian polemical biographies of<br />
Muhammad share in claiming that Bahira was a secret, religious teacher to Muhammad and most<br />
of the quoran was derived from those teachings handed down by Bahira.<br />
The story of Muhammad's encounter with Bahira is found in the works of the early Muslim<br />
historians Ibn Hisham, Ibn Sa'd al-Baghdadi, and Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari, whose versions<br />
differ in some details.<br />
https://www.al-islam.org/kamaaluddin-wa-tamaamun-nima-vol-1-shaykh-saduq/chapter-14-report-bahira-monk<br />
91
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Within Islam,a concept of plurality within God is a denial of monotheism and foreign to the<br />
revelation found in Muslim scripture. Shirk, the act of ascribing partners to God – whether they be<br />
sons, daughters, or other partners – is considered to be a form of unbelief in Islam. The Qur'an<br />
repeatedly and firmly asserts God's absolute oneness, thus ruling out the possibility of another<br />
being sharing his sovereignty or nature.<br />
Three Qur'anic verses may directly refer to this doctrine. Possible Qur'anic references to the<br />
doctrine of "Trinity" are verses 4:171, 5:73, and 5:116.<br />
“People of the Book, do not go to excess in your religion, and do not say anything about God<br />
except the truth: the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was nothing more than a messenger of God, His<br />
word, directed to Mary, a spirit from Him. So believe in God and His messengers and do not speak<br />
of a 'Trinity'—stop, that is better for you—God is only one God, He is far above having a son,<br />
everything in the heavens and earth belongs to Him and He is the best one to trust.” — Qur'an, sura<br />
4 (An-Nisa), ayat 171<br />
“Those who say, "God is the Messiah, son of Mary," have defied God. The Messiah himself said;<br />
"Children of Israel, worship God, my Lord and your Lord." If anyone associates others with God,<br />
God will forbid him from the Garden, and Hell will be his home. No one will help such evildoers.<br />
Those people who say that God is the third of three are defying [the truth]: there is only One God. If<br />
they persist in what they are saying, a painful punishment will afflict those of them who persist. Why<br />
do they not turn to God and ask his forgiveness, when God is most forgiving, most merciful? The<br />
Messiah, son of Mary, was only a messenger; other messengers had come and gone before him;<br />
his mother was a virtuous woman; both ate food. See how clear We make these signs for them; see<br />
how deluded they are”.— Qur'an, sura 5 (Al-Ma'ida), ayat 72-75<br />
“And when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother<br />
as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say, "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I<br />
have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not<br />
know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen.” — Qur'an, sura 5<br />
(Al-Ma'ida), ayat 116<br />
Furthermore, verses 19:88-93, 23:91, and 112:1-4 are relevant to the doctrine of "Trinity":<br />
“They say: "(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!" Indeed ye have put forth a thing most<br />
monstrous! At it the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall<br />
down in utter ruin, that they should invoke a son for (Allah) Most Gracious. For it is not consonant<br />
with the majesty of (Allah) Most Gracious that He should beget a son. Not one of the beings in the<br />
heavens and the earth but must come to (Allah) Most Gracious as a servant.” — Qur'an, sura 19<br />
(Maryam (sura)), ayat 88-93<br />
92
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
“No son did Allah beget, nor is there any god along with Him: (if there were many gods), behold,<br />
each god would have taken away what he had created, and some would have lorded it over others!<br />
Glory to Allah! (He is free) from the (sort of) things they attribute to Him!” — Qur'an, sura 23<br />
(Al-Mumenoon), ayat 91<br />
“Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He<br />
begotten; And there is none like unto Him.”— Qur'an, sura 112 (Al-Ikhlas), ayat 1-4<br />
Obviously one can see the deep rooted Arian teaching with firmer note in Islam today. Islam was<br />
actually a going back onto rigid monism of Judaism which all Abrahamic tradition attempts<br />
whenever they are threatened.<br />
93
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
CHAPTER FIVE<br />
ARIANISM TODAY<br />
From the 16th century<br />
The teachings of the first two ecumenical councils – which entirely rejected Arianism – are held by<br />
the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian<br />
Church of the East and all churches founded during the Reformation in the 16th century or<br />
influenced by it (Lutheran, Reformed/Presbyterian, and Anglican). Also, nearly all Protestant<br />
groups (such as Methodist, Baptist, most Pentecostals) entirely reject the teachings associated<br />
with Arianism.<br />
John Assheton<br />
Following the Protestant Reformation from 1517, it did not take long for Arian and other<br />
non-trinitarian views to resurface. The first recorded English antitrinitarian was John Assheton who<br />
was forced to recant before Thomas Cranmer in 1548. At the Anabaptist Council of Venice 1550,<br />
the early Italian instigators of the Radical Reformation committed to the views of Miguel Servet<br />
(died 1553), and these were promulgated by Giorgio Biandrata and others into Poland and<br />
Transylvania.<br />
The antitrinitarian wing of the Polish Reformation separated from the Calvinist ecclesia maior to<br />
form the ecclesia minor or Polish Brethren. These were commonly referred to as "Arians" due to<br />
their rejection of the Trinity, though in fact the Socinians, as they were later known, went further<br />
94
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
than <strong>Arius</strong> to the position of Photinus. The epithet "Arian" was also applied to the early Unitarians<br />
such as John Biddle though in denial of the pre-existence of Christ they were again largely<br />
Socinians not Arians.<br />
In the 18th century the "dominant trend" in Britain, particularly in Latitudinarianism, was towards<br />
Arianism, with which the names of Samuel Clarke, Benjamin Hoadly, William Whiston and Isaac<br />
Newton are associated. To quote the Encyclopædia Britannica's article on Arianism: "In modern<br />
times some Unitarians are virtually Arians in that they are unwilling either to reduce Christ to a mere<br />
human being or to attribute to him a divine nature identical with that of the Father." However, their<br />
doctrines cannot be considered representative of traditional Arian doctrines or vice versa.<br />
A similar view was held by the ancient anti-Nicene Pneumatomachi (Greek: Πνευματομάχοι,<br />
"breath" or "spirit" and "fighters", combining as "fighters against the spirit"), so called because they<br />
opposed the deifying of the Nicene Holy Ghost. However, the Pneumatomachi were adherents of<br />
Macedonianism, and though their beliefs were somewhat reminiscent of Arianism, they were<br />
distinct enough to be distinguishably different.<br />
The Iglesia ni Cristo is one of the largest groups that teaches a similar doctrine, though they are<br />
really closer to Socinianism, believing the Word in John 1:1 is God's plan of salvation, not Christ.<br />
So Christ did not preexist.<br />
There a large number various Christian group which has now teaching the various ‘heresies’ of the<br />
early christian period. Here I have given ten groups which are representative of the current<br />
Christian groups which are in varying shades of early ‘heretic’ teachings.<br />
In terms of number of adherents, nontrinitarian denominations comprise a small minority of modern<br />
Christianity. By far the three largest nontrinitarian Christian denominations are The Church of<br />
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ("Mormons"), Jehovah's Witnesses and the Iglesia Ni<br />
Cristo, though there are a number of other smaller groups, including Christadelphians, Christian<br />
Scientists, Dawn Bible Students, Living Church of God, Oneness Pentecostals, Members<br />
Church of God International, Unitarian Universalist Christians, The Way International, The<br />
Church of God International and the United Church of God.<br />
Nontrinitarian views differ widely on the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Various<br />
nontrinitarian philosophies, such as Adoptionism, Monarchianism, and Subordinationism.<br />
Nontrinitarianism was later renewed by Cathars who believed in dual powers - a good God and an<br />
evil God. They flourished in the 11th through 13th centuries. Then there was the Unitarian<br />
movement during the Protestant Reformation, in the Age of Enlightenment of the 18th century, and<br />
recently in some groups arising during the Second Great Awakening of the 19th century.<br />
95
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
I<br />
Founded By: Charles Taze Russell, 1879. Succeeded by Joseph F. Rutherford, 1917 Early names<br />
include the Millennial Dawn People, Russellites (after their founder Charles Taze Russell), and<br />
International Bible Students (which is actually still an independent organization of sorts).<br />
Jehovah's Witnesses believe that God is one person, Jehovah. Jesus was Jehovah's first creation.<br />
Jesus is not God, nor part of the Godhead. He is higher than the angels but inferior to God.<br />
Jehovah used Jesus to create the rest of the universe. Before Jesus came to earth he was known<br />
as the archangel Michael. The Holy Spirit is an impersonal force from Jehovah, but not God.<br />
96
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Jehovah's Witnesses emphasize use of the name Jehovah—a representation of God's name<br />
based on the Tetragrammaton. They believe that Jehovah is the only true God, the creator of all<br />
things, and the "Universal Sovereign". They believe that all worship should be directed toward him,<br />
and that he is not part of a Trinity; consequently, the group places more emphasis on God than on<br />
Christ. They believe that the holy spirit is God's applied power or "active force", rather than a<br />
person.<br />
Jehovah's Witnesses believe God is the Creator and Supreme Being. Witnesses reject the Trinity<br />
doctrine, which they consider unscriptural. They view God as the Father, an invisible spirit "person"<br />
separate from the Son, Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit is described as God's "active force", rather<br />
than the third part of the Trinity. They believe God, whose personal name is Jehovah, is "infinite, but<br />
approachable"; he is not omnipresent, but has a location in heaven; it is possible to have a personal<br />
relationship with him as a friend; he is kind and merciful, and would not eternally "torture" wicked<br />
people. Being respectful of the principle of free will, he does not force his sovereignty on people,<br />
choosing to save only those who want to serve him, even though the course of mankind in general<br />
may lead them to harm.<br />
Witnesses teach that God must be distinguished by his personal name—Jehovah. The name is a<br />
common modern Latinized form of the Hebrew Tetragrammaton, or four-letter name, transliterated<br />
as YHWH. The use of his personal name is regarded as vital for true worship, and Witnesses<br />
usually preface the term God with the name Jehovah. The title, LORD (Greek: Kyrios), is rarely<br />
used by Witnesses when speaking about God. Because no other religion uses the name Jehovah<br />
with the same prevalence, they believe that only Jehovah's Witnesses are making God's name<br />
known.<br />
Jesus Christ<br />
Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Jesus is God's "only-begotten Son", and that his life began in<br />
heaven. He is described as God's first creation and the "exact representation of God", but is<br />
believed to be a separate entity and not part of a Trinity. Jesus is said to have been used by God in<br />
the creation of all other things. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the Archangel, Michael, "the<br />
Word" of John 1:1, and wisdom personified in Proverbs 8 refer to Jesus in his pre-human existence<br />
97
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
and that he resumed these identities after his ascension to heaven following his death and<br />
resurrection. They also identify him with the "rider of the white horse" at Revelation 6 and 19. His<br />
birth on earth was accomplished when he willingly allowed himself to be transferred, by God, from<br />
heaven to the womb of the virgin, Mary. While on earth, Jesus was executed as a sacrifice to atone<br />
for mankind's sins, becoming the "eternal father" to the human family.<br />
They believe that after his death, Jesus appeared to his disciples, convinced them of his<br />
resurrection, and then ascended into heaven to sit at Jehovah's right hand until he would become<br />
the promised king of God's heavenly kingdom. Jesus acts as the mediator of a "new covenant"<br />
referred to in Jeremiah 31:31, Luke 22:20, and Hebrews 9:15; 12:24, directly mediating only for<br />
those going to heaven (the 144,000). Those with an earthly hope are said to be beneficiaries of that<br />
covenant. Even as king of God's kingdom, Jesus remains subordinate to God. Witnesses reject the<br />
doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary, who they believe bore more children after Jesus.<br />
Now there are also some differences between the Christology of <strong>Arius</strong> and that of the Jehovah's<br />
Witnesses.<br />
For instance, whereas <strong>Arius</strong> would teach that Jesus' human element is merely the material with the<br />
Logos being the soul (no human soul), the Jehovah's Witnesses would teach that Jesus was purely<br />
man, and as such, he did not possess a soul but he was a living soul.<br />
Also, <strong>Arius</strong> believed Jesus should be worshipped whereas the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that<br />
since one is to worship God alone Jesus should not be worshipped, since he is merely a creature.<br />
However, as demonstrated above, in the most important of doctrines in the Church, Christology,<br />
there is more than enough similarity between the two to leave no doubt that the Jehovah's<br />
Witnesses are the Arians of our day.<br />
Jehovah's Witnesses are often referred to as "modern-day Arians" or sometimes<br />
"Semi-Arians", usually by their opponents. While there are some significant similarities in theology<br />
and doctrine, the Witnesses differ from Arians by saying that the Son can fully know the<br />
Father (something <strong>Arius</strong> himself denied), and by their denial of personality to the Holy Spirit.<br />
The original Arians also generally prayed directly to Jesus, whereas the Witnesses pray to God,<br />
through Jesus as a mediator.<br />
The Witnesses have developed their own bible translation, but it is unknown what principles that<br />
they used or who actually translated the work. In John 1.1, the New World Translation read, In the<br />
beginning the Word was, and the word was with God, and the Word was a god.<br />
Most Adventists groups, included the above two, deny the immortality of the soul, the force of the<br />
adversary, and the existence of hell. It is not these doctrines that are the most controversial, but the<br />
denial of the deity of Christ. The Trinitarians and Modalists will disagree as to the nature of the Deity,<br />
but in the end, we both agree that Christ was Deity. The issue with these people is that they deny<br />
the that since the time of the Apostles, the Messiah, Jesus Christ, has been worshiped as God, and<br />
His preexistence has been accepted.<br />
http://unsettledchristianity.com/arianism-revisted-the-ancient-heresy-in-modern-denominations/<br />
98
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
II<br />
The Church of God (7th day) - Salem Conference may be considered to be Arian:<br />
“We believe in one true God who is the creator of all. He is omnipotent, omniscient,<br />
and omnipresent. He sent his son to Earth to be a sacrifice for our sins. He is a<br />
separate being from his son, Jesus. The Holy Spirit is the power of God and not a<br />
separate being with a separate consciousness. We do not believe in the teaching of<br />
the Trinity, in which the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three parts of a single being<br />
who is God. We believe the Father and the Son are separate beings with separate<br />
consciousnesses and that the Holy Spirit is not a conscious being but instead the<br />
power of God.” — FAQs – Does the Church of God (7th Day) believe in the Trinity?<br />
“We believe in one true God who is the creator of all. He is omnipotent, omnicient,<br />
and omnipresent. He sent his son to Earth to be a sacrifice for our sins. He is a<br />
separate being from his son, Jesus. The Holy Spirit is the power of God and not a<br />
separate being with a separate consciousness”<br />
”We do not believe in the teaching of the Trinity, in which the Father, Son, and Holy<br />
Spirit are three parts of a single being who is God. We believe the Father and the<br />
Son are separate beings with separate consciousnesses and that the Holy Spirit is<br />
not a conscious being but instead the power of God”.<br />
http://www.churchofgod-7thday.org/FAQs.html<br />
It is noteworthy, that although the doctrinal beliefs among the different Churches of God (7th Day)<br />
or (Seventh Day) are very similar, some major points of disagreement still remain, either<br />
concerning christological beliefs or Church organization.<br />
99
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Outlining some beliefs of the Churches of God (7th Day), the Statement of Faith of the General<br />
Conference of the Church of God (Seventh Day) - Denver Conference states the following:<br />
<br />
Christology has been a long debated issue in the Churches of God (7th Day). Gilbert Cranmer,<br />
the founder of the Church of God (Seventh Day), left the Methodist Church to join the<br />
Christian Connection "over the doctrine of the Trinity". Gilbert Cranmer was a Biblical Unitarian.<br />
He did not believe Jesus preexisted his birth and he "believed the Father alone is God" Today,<br />
according to the Denver Conference, God is revealed in Scripture as Father and Son. From<br />
eternity the Son existed with Father and shared His glory (Section 2). This christological belief<br />
is a departure from their long held doctrinal beliefs in that regard. The Denver Conference, part<br />
of the greatest Church of God (7th Day) movement had an Arian Christology for much of the<br />
twentieth century, before leaving part of his heritage and reverting to a more classical view of<br />
Christ. NOTA BENE: The Salem Conference, the Churches previously affiliated or linked to<br />
the Jerusalem Conference and a number of independent Churches of God (7th Day) still<br />
believe that Jesus Christ, as the Word of God, is a created being.] Some independent churches<br />
or individuals retain a Biblical Unitarian Christology. A position paper written by the Jerusalem<br />
Conference states the following:<br />
"The Amen, the faithful and the true witness is no one else but Jesus Christ and<br />
speaking of himself he said, he is "the beginning of the creation of God" i.e. the very<br />
first manifested act of YHWH was the creation of his son Yehoshua (Jesus). Do other<br />
scriptures support this? Col 1:15 "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn<br />
of every creature". A creature is life which has been created, whether terrestrial or<br />
celestial: Colossians support Revelation, it says of Christ he is "the firstborn of every<br />
creature:"<br />
A recent published book by individuals related to the Churches of God (7th Day) movement<br />
affirms that:<br />
“There is a lot of confusion in Christendom concerning Yeshua the Messiah. Some<br />
believe Yeshua to be one and the same with the Father. Others believe in a triune<br />
God. To make Yeshua equal to God is actually the equivalent of breaking the first of<br />
the Ten Words, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" “(Exod. 20:3).<br />
According to the Denver Conference, salvation is by God's grace, received by faith<br />
in Jesus<br />
100
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
III<br />
John Thomas (1805 - 1871)<br />
The movement was founded by physician John Thomas (1805-1871) who had left the Disciples of<br />
Christ in 1844, because of a number of theological disagreements. He started a periodical that<br />
same year, called "The Herald of the Future Age". Thomas wrote a book in 1848, titled "Elpis Israel<br />
- An Exposition of the Kingdom of God." He founded a number of groups, starting in 1848. They<br />
were commonly referred to as the Thomasites. His motivation was to return to what he believed to<br />
be the beliefs of the very early Christian church. In 1864, the group adopted a formal name, the<br />
Christadelphians (Brothers of Christ).<br />
The movement survived the death of its founder in 1871. However, a conflict started during the<br />
1880's in the US over the topic of resurrectional responsibility and it split as two groups.:The<br />
Unamended group believes that only the deceased who are "in Christ" will be raised from the dead<br />
and have eternal life; the rest will simply remain dead, without conscious existence. The Amended<br />
group believes that all who are responsible will be raised from the dead at the time of the Final<br />
Judgment. The "responsible" are those who have been exposed to the Gospel. The righteous<br />
among the responsible ones will be judged according to their works, rewarded appropriately, and<br />
live forever. The wicked will be annihilated, and cease to exist. Those who are not responsible,<br />
since they had never heard the Gospel, will not be raised.<br />
“Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is not the ‘second person’ of an eternal Trinity.”<br />
101
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Doctrinal Summary<br />
God: One Person only (Unitarian)<br />
Jesus: A created being in need of redemption.<br />
Holy Spirit: The impersonal power of God.<br />
Trinity: A pagan teaching.<br />
Salvation: By faith in Christ and works of righteousness.<br />
Man: A physical being without an immortal soul.<br />
Sin: Transgression of God’s law.<br />
Satan: Synonym for sin; any adversary.<br />
Second coming: Jesus will return to reign on earth.<br />
Fall: Sexual in nature.<br />
Bible: The Word of God, the final authority for faith and practice.<br />
Death: Unconsciousness or annihilation.<br />
Hell and Heaven: Myths.<br />
Founded By: Dr. John Thomas, 1864.<br />
“Christadelphians believe God is one indivisible unity, not three distinct persons existing in one God.<br />
They deny the divinity of Jesus, believing he is fully human and separate from God. They do not<br />
believe the Holy Spirit is the third person of the trinity, but simply a force—the "unseen power" from<br />
God.<br />
The Christadelphians believe that Jesus the Christ is the son of God, who came to fulfill the Old<br />
Testament promises and covenants of God with mankind, primarily the covenants with Eve,<br />
Abraham and David.<br />
We believe that Jesus is a man, who was tried and tempted as we are, yet who resisted sin even till<br />
death. Three days later, the only true God, the Father raised him to eternal life, after which Christ<br />
ascended to his Father's side to await the appointed time of his return.<br />
The Christadelphians embrace the hope of resurrection to eternal life at the return of Christ. We<br />
believe that this will take place soon. At that time the kingdom of God will be established from<br />
Jerusalem, growing to encompass the whole world, offering freedom, hope and salvation to all<br />
mankind. The people of Israel, as the literal descendants of Abraham, will have a special place in<br />
this kingdom.<br />
The Christadelphians believe that salvation is attained through faith in Christ. It is through faith that<br />
we are baptized into Christ for forgiveness of sins, and thereby participate in the promises to<br />
Abraham: to inherit the earth forever.<br />
102
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Doctrinally, the Christadelphians are unique in Christendom in our understanding of the nature of<br />
Christ, and the way in which we are redeemed by his death. “We reject as unbiblical the idea that<br />
Christ could die as a replacement sacrifice for us, thus covering all our sins forever with that one act.<br />
Certainly it is through his sacrifice that we may be forgiven, but only if we walk the path of<br />
self-denial that he marked out for us.”<br />
The Christadelphians (Brothers of Christ) are strictly unitarian, teaching that<br />
Christ was not preexistent, but born of Mary by the power of God.<br />
Humanity is mortal, but eternal life will come only to the righteous.<br />
The unrighteous will either never rise, or as the Amended believe, rise and then be annihilated.<br />
They believe that God is the creator of all things and the father of true believers,<br />
that he is a separate being from his son, Jesus Christ,<br />
and that the Holy Spirit is the power of God used in creation and for salvation.<br />
They believe Christ is the Son of Man,<br />
in that he inherited sin-prone human nature from his mother,<br />
and the Son of God by virtue of his miraculous conception by the power of God.<br />
Although he was tempted, Jesus committed no sin,<br />
and was therefore a perfect representative sacrifice to bring salvation to sinful humankind.<br />
They believe that God raised Jesus from death and gave him immortality, and he ascended to<br />
Heaven.<br />
They also believe that the phrase Holy Spirit sometimes refers to God’s character/mind,<br />
depending on the context in which the phrase appears.<br />
IV<br />
MORMONISM - LATTER-DAY SAINTS<br />
103
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Founded By: Joseph Smith, Jr., 1830.<br />
Mormons believe that God has a physical, flesh and bones, eternal, perfect body. Men have the<br />
potential to become gods as well. Jesus is God's literal son, a separate being from God the Father<br />
and the "elder brother" of men. The Holy Spirit is also a separate being from God the Father and<br />
God the Son. The Holy Spirit is regarded as an impersonal power or spirit being. These three<br />
separate beings are "one" only in their purpose, and they make up the Godhead.<br />
Because their official belief is that the Father, Son, and Spirit are each gods in one godhead,<br />
Mormonism is said to hold a form of tri-theism. Mormons believe that God created Christ, that he is<br />
subordinate to God the Father and that Christ created the universe. Some view Mormonism as<br />
a form of Arianism. Mormons assert that both God and the resurrected Christ have perfected<br />
glorified, physical bodies, but do not otherwise classify deity in terms of substance. While Mormons<br />
regard God the Father as the supreme being and literal father of the spirits of all humankind, they<br />
also teach that Christ and the Holy Spirit are equally divine in that they share in the Father's<br />
"comprehension of all things". The Members Church of God International believes in the divinity of<br />
Christ but rejects the doctrine of Trinity. They believe in a Subordationist viewpoint[citation needed]<br />
in which Jesus Christ, is the Father's only begotten son (in Romanized Greek: monogenestheos,<br />
meaning "only-begotten god").<br />
The concept of man growing into its fullness to form godhood is new to the Mormonism.<br />
God Is An Exalted Man<br />
God is the same essence as Man who evolved into the present status.<br />
Every Man is potentially a God.<br />
104
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Mormon General Authorities teach that God was not always God, but was once a mortal man.<br />
”God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man... I am going to tell you how God<br />
came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute<br />
that idea... He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an<br />
earth.”<br />
Joseph Smith - Mormonism founder<br />
Ensign, April 1971, p.13-14<br />
”Remember that God, our heavenly Father, was perhaps once a child, and mortal like we<br />
ourselves, and rose step by step in the scale of progress, in the school of advancement; has moved<br />
forward and overcome, until He has arrived at the point where He now is.”<br />
Orson Hyde - Mormon apostle;<br />
Journal of Discourses 1:123<br />
”He is our Father-the Father of our spirits, and was once a man in mortal flesh as we are, and<br />
is now an exalted Being. How many Gods there are, I do not know. But there never was a time<br />
when there were not Gods and worlds, and when men were not passing through the same ordeals<br />
that we are now passing through.”<br />
Brigham Young - Mormon prophet<br />
Journal of Discourses 7:333<br />
”God is a natural man... Where did he get his knowledge from? From his Father, just as we get<br />
knowledge from our earthly parents.”<br />
Heber C. Kimball - First Presidency Counselor<br />
Journal of Discourses 8:211<br />
”But if God the Father was not always God, but came to his present exalted position by<br />
degrees of progress as indicated in the teachings of the prophet, how has there been a God from<br />
all eternity? The answer is that there has been and there now exists an endless line of Gods,<br />
stretching back into the eternities.”<br />
B. H. Roberts - Mormon Seventy and LDS church historian<br />
New Witness for God 1:476<br />
“God is an exalted Man... The Prophet taught that our Father had a Father and so on.”<br />
Joseph Fielding Smith - Mormon prophet<br />
Doctrines of Salvation 1:10,12<br />
105
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
V<br />
ARMSTRONGITES<br />
(The Worldwide Church of God)<br />
Herbert W. Armstrong Garner Ted Armstrong (1970)<br />
(Philadelphia Church of God, Global Church of God, United Church of God)<br />
Founded By: Herbert W. Armstrong, 1934.<br />
Traditional Armstrongism denies a Trinity, defining God as "a family of individuals."<br />
Original teachings say Jesus did not have a physical resurrection and the Holy Spirit is an<br />
impersonal force.<br />
The Doctrine of the ‘God Family’<br />
The God Family doctrine holds that the Godhead is not limited to God (the Creator) alone, or even<br />
to a trinitarian God of three persons, but God is a divine family into which every human who ever<br />
lived may be spiritually born, through a master plan being enacted in stages.<br />
The Godhead now - temporarily - consists of two co-eternal individuals (Binitarianism)<br />
= Jesus the Messiah, as the creator and spokesman (The Word or Logos), and<br />
Christ the Son and God the Father are co-eternal<br />
106
= God the Father.<br />
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Thus originally there was a co-eternal "Duality", God and the Word.<br />
Holy Spirit is not God since the Holy Spirit is not a person it is the Spirit (Soul) within Gods.<br />
Armstrong theology holds that God is a "Family" and that "God reproduces Himself",<br />
According to this doctrine, humans who are called by God's Holy Spirit to repentance, and who<br />
accept this call willingly and hope to inherit the gift of eternal life, it is made possible by Jesus'<br />
sacrifice. But they should commit to live by "every word of God" (i.e. biblical scripture), and who<br />
"endure to the end" (i.e. remain faithful to live according to God's way of life until either the end of<br />
their own lifetime or the second coming of Jesus. At Jesus' return, these will be "born again" into<br />
the family of God as the literal spiritual offspring or children of God.<br />
VI<br />
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE<br />
Founded By: Mary Baker Eddy, 1879.<br />
Christian Scientists believe the trinity is life, truth, and love.<br />
As an impersonal principle, God is the only thing that truly exists.<br />
Everything else (matter) is an illusion.<br />
Jesus, though not God, is the Son of God.<br />
He was the promised Messiah but was not a deity.<br />
The Holy Spirit is divine science in the teachings of Christian Science.<br />
107
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The movement known as Christian Science is a religion "emphasizing divine healing as practiced<br />
by Jesus Christ." It is officially known as The Church of Christ, Scientist (CCS) (with headquarters<br />
in Boston, Massachusetts), founded in 1879 by Mary Baker Glover Patterson Eddy (1821-1910).<br />
Eddy claim that sickness, death, and even our physical bodies do not exist, but are only imagined.<br />
Based on this absurdity, Mary Baker Eddy formulated her unique interpretations of Scripture upon<br />
which Christian Science was founded (and recorded in Eddy's 1875 book, Science and Health with<br />
Key to the Scriptures. [HJB] In essence, Christian Science is a revival of ancient Pantheism. Jesus’<br />
healing techniques were based on this.<br />
Christian Science clearly repudiates the Trinitarian Godhead:<br />
"The theory of three persons in one God (that is, a personal Trinity or Tri-unity) suggests polytheism,<br />
rather than the one ever-present I Am" (Science and Health, p. 256). I<br />
nstead, "Life, Truth, and Love constitutes the triune Person called God ... God the Father-Mother;<br />
Christ the spiritual idea of sonship; divine Science or the Holy Comforter" (Science and Health, p.<br />
331-332).<br />
Christian Science teaches that the Biblical concept of the Trinity suggests "heathen gods" (Science<br />
and Health, p. 152). God is thus viewed as an impersonal "Divine Principle," a conception of one's<br />
mind (Science and Health, pp. 361, 469).<br />
On page 465 in another of Mrs. Eddy's "authoritative" books, entitled Miscellaneous Writings, she<br />
wrote: "God is incorporeal, divine, supreme, infinite, mind, spirit, soul, principle, life, truth,<br />
love," but devoid of any personality. [HJB]<br />
Jesus Christ.<br />
Christian Science denies that the incarnation of Christ was the fullness of deity dwelling in human<br />
flesh, denies the perfection of the man Jesus, and attempts to explain away the historical death and<br />
bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ (Science and Health, pp. 336, 29, 332, 53, 398, 313, 593;<br />
Miscellaneous Writings, p. 201) Christian Science believes that Mary's conception of Jesus was<br />
spiritual -- on pages 332 and 347 of Science and Health, the virgin birth of Christ is described and<br />
explained: "Jesus was the offspring of Mary's self-conscious communion with God. ... Mary's<br />
conception of him was spiritual." Christian Science believes that the names "Jesus" and "Christ" do<br />
not refer to the same person -- that Jesus is the human man and Christ is the "divine idea" (i.e.,<br />
"dualism"). They teach that the spiritual (good) cannot dwell in material bodies because they are<br />
evil; thus Jesus could not have been both God and man. [To the contrary, the Bible teaches that<br />
Jesus Christ is not the divine idea of God but was God uniquely manifested in the flesh, truly God<br />
and truly man, one divine Person with two indivisible natures, who is the only Savior and the only<br />
truth and Lord (John 1:1-3,14; Col. 2:9; Phil. 2:6-7; John 14:6).] Christian Science believes that<br />
Jesus was not God and the only way to heaven, but only the "wayshower" (cf. Jn. 20:31; I Jn.<br />
4:2,3).<br />
Christian Science not only denies that Jesus Christ is God incarnate, it also denies that Jesus is<br />
one Person with two natures -- fully God and fully man. Christian Science presents Jesus Christ in<br />
terms of a Gnostic duality: "The spiritual Christ was infallible: Jesus as material manhood was not<br />
Christ'' (Miscellaneous Writings, p. 84). "Christ as the true spiritual ideal, is the ideal of God now<br />
and forever ..." (Science and Health, p. 361). "The Christ is incorporeal, spiritual ..." while, "The<br />
corporeal [physical] man Jesus was human only (Science and Health, p 332). Yet "matter is mortal<br />
error … matter is the unreal and temporal" (Miscellaneous Writings, p. 21). So what Christian<br />
Science actually concludes is that the physical humanity of Jesus was an illusion, ''as it seemed to<br />
mortal view" (Science and Health, p. 315).<br />
108
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Concerning the blood atonement of Jesus Christ: "The material blood of Jesus was no more<br />
efficacious to cleanse from sin when it was shed upon 'the accursed tree,' than when it was flowing<br />
in his veins ..." (Science and Health, p. 25). Christian Science teaches that the death of Jesus<br />
Christ for sin was a "man-made" theory, and that Jesus was alive in the tomb, demonstrating the<br />
"power of Spirit to overrule mortal, material sense" (Science and Health, p. 44). Eddy states, "Christ<br />
was not crucified ... Jesus, being the man who possessed the Christ consciousness, was the one<br />
who went to the cross and who appeared to die." Thus, according to the theology of Christian<br />
Science, the Bible only appears to say that Jesus died on the cross and His body was laid in the<br />
tomb; it must instead be understood that Jesus actually never died, but was rather in the tomb<br />
denying death's reality!<br />
Holy Spirit. Christian Science denies that the Holy Spirit is a personal being. It teaches that the<br />
Holy Spirit is Christian Science. -- "This Comforter I understand to be Divine Science" (Science and<br />
Health, p. 55). It is the unfolding of the thoughts and infinite mind of God (pp. 502-503). [cf. Jn.<br />
16:13-14] Thus, God, the Holy Spirit, cannot indwell a person (Science and Health, p. 336).<br />
The Resurrection. It is obvious that if Jesus never physically died on the cross to atone for sins<br />
that mankind cannot commit (Science and Health, pp. 45-46), then the resurrection must also have<br />
a unique meaning in Christian Science. Eddy explains, "When Jesus reproduced his body after its<br />
burial, he revealed the myth or material falsity of evil; its powerlessness to destroy good and the<br />
omnipotence of the Mind that knows this: he also showed forth the error of nothingness of<br />
supposed life in matter, and the great somethingness of the good we possess, which is of Spirit,<br />
and immortal" (Miscellaneous Writings, p. 201). Jesus resurrection was thus the manifestation of<br />
the error of evil. He demonstrated that sin and death are illusions and that if one wishes to rid<br />
themselves of these illusions, they only need to deny their reality.<br />
https://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Cults/science.htm<br />
Instead of preachers (the CCS has no ordained clergy), Christian Science's Sunday services<br />
consist mainly of prescribed readings from the Bible, followed by interpretive readings from Science<br />
and Health with Key to the Scriptures (which Eddy thought was divinely inspired -<br />
109
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
VII<br />
UNITY SCHOOL OF CHRISTIANITY<br />
Founded By: Charles and Myrtle Fillmore, 1889.<br />
Similar to Christian Science, Unity adherents believe God is an unseen, impersonal principle, not a<br />
person. God is a force within everyone and everything. Jesus was only a man, not the Christ. He<br />
simply realized his spiritual identity as the Christ by practicing his potential for perfection. This is<br />
something all men can achieve. Jesus did not resurrect from the dead, but rather, he reincarnated.<br />
The Holy Spirit is the active expression of God's law. Only the spirit part of us is real, matter is not<br />
real.<br />
Unity does not affirm any Christian creeds. Unity holds five basic beliefs:<br />
1. "God is the source and creator of all. There is no other enduring power.<br />
2. God is good and present everywhere.<br />
3. We are spiritual beings, created in God's image. The spirit of God lives within each person;<br />
therefore, all people are inherently good.<br />
4. We create our life experiences through our way of thinking. There is power in affirmative<br />
prayer, which we believe increases our connection to God.<br />
5. Knowledge of these spiritual principles is not enough. We must live them."<br />
Baptism and communion are practiced as symbolic acts. Many Unity members are vegetarians.<br />
110
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
VIII<br />
ONENESS PENTECOSTALS<br />
Founded By: Frank Ewart, 1913.<br />
Oneness Pentecostals believe that there is one God and God is one. Throughout time God<br />
manifested himself in three ways or "forms" (not persons), as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.<br />
Oneness Pentecostals take issue with the Trinity doctrine chiefly for its use of the term "person."<br />
They believe God cannot be three distinct persons, but only one being who has revealed himself in<br />
three different modes. It is important to note that Oneness Pentecostals do affirm the deity of Jesus<br />
Christ and the Holy Spirit. The Son is God manifest in flesh. The term Son always refers to the<br />
Incarnation, and never to deity apart from humanity." Jesus was "Son" only when he became flesh<br />
on earth, but was the Father prior to being made human. They refer to the Father as the "Spirit" and<br />
the Son as the "Flesh".<br />
Oneness of God - God is one, manifested in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. He manifested himself<br />
as Jehovah in the Old Testament; as Jesus Christ, God and man, in the New Testament; and as the<br />
Holy Spirit, God with us and in us in our regeneration. This doctrine opposes the Tri-unity of God, or<br />
three distinct persons within one God.<br />
111
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
IX<br />
UNIFICATION CHURCH<br />
Sun Myung Moon(1920-2012) and his wife Hak Ja Han - the true mother - forming true parents<br />
112
Founded By: Sun Myung Moon, 1954.<br />
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The official title of the Unification Church is The Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World<br />
Christianity. Moon claims that in 1936, when he was 16, Jesus Christ appeared to him on Easter<br />
morning on a mountainside in Northwestern Korea and told him that God had chosen him for the<br />
mission of establishing the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, a mission that Christ had only begun.<br />
Christ supposedly told Moon that he would be "the completer of man's salvation by being the<br />
Second Coming of Christ" (Sun Myung Moon and The Unification Church, James Bjornstad, p. 9).<br />
After World War II, Moon returned to Pyongyang, the capital of communist North Korea, where he<br />
set up his first church (1945). It was officially founded in 1954 by Sun Myung Moon (which has led<br />
to the referring of his followers as "Moonies") and moved to America in 1959, where he established<br />
his international headquarters.<br />
Sun Myung Moon translates as "One who has clarified the Truth" . Unification adherents believe<br />
that God is positive and negative, male and female. The universe is God's body, made by him.<br />
Jesus was not God, but a man. He did not experience a physical resurrection. In fact, his mission<br />
on earth failed and will be fulfilled through Sun Myung Moon, who is greater than Jesus. The Holy<br />
Spirit is feminine in nature. She collaborates with Jesus in the spirit realm to draw people to Sun<br />
Myung Moon.<br />
Moonies deny the deity of Jesus Christ; instead they claim He was just a man, not God.<br />
"God is just like you and me. All human traits originate in God." -- Moon, Christianity in Crisis, p. 4;<br />
"He can by no means be God Himself." -- Divine Principle, pp. 210-211.<br />
They teach that Jesus was not virgin born, but was the bastard offspring of Zechariah and Mary!<br />
They also claim that Jesus failed in His earthly mission (Divine Principle, pp. 143-145), and that<br />
Christ's purpose in coming was to marry and to produce perfect children. However, He was killed<br />
before He could fulfill His mission<br />
"The Cross is the symbol of defeat of Christianity," Moon, 1973).<br />
Moonies believe that John the Baptist was responsible for the death of Jesus (by failing to convert<br />
his audience into a power bloc for Jesus) and that Christ's death on the cross was not an original or<br />
essential part of God's plan of redemption ("... however devout a man of faith may be, he cannot<br />
fulfill physical salvation by redemption through Jesus crucifixion alone." -- Divine Principle, p. 148),<br />
but that God merely used it to provide an incomplete, spiritual salvation. They do not believe that<br />
Jesus was physically resurrected (cf. 1 Cor. 15:12-20), but that He returned as a spirit, and that a<br />
"third Adam" must come to fulfill God's plan for physical salvation by marrying and producing the<br />
sinless race. The Unification Church has given titles to Moon that indicate it considers him to be this<br />
"third Adam." [HJB]<br />
113
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
"In Unification theology the main point is that the Holy Spirit is not a separate entity, a being<br />
different from God the Father. The Holy Spirit simply refers to God's redemptive activity." Further,<br />
the Holy Spirit, "... appears feminine, masculine and impersonal. ... Like God Himself, the Spirit is<br />
invisible and incorporeal -- a bright light or a field of magnetic energy" (Unification Theology, pp.<br />
201-202). Moonies also teach that the Holy Spirit is a "female spirit" -- the "True Mother" and<br />
spiritual wife of Jesus (Divine Principle, p. 215). "She" also cleanses the sins of the people in order<br />
to restore them, thus indemnifying the sin committed by Eve.<br />
Moonies deny the Biblical concept of the Trinity. They teach that the "third Adam," his bride, and<br />
God constituted the first "trinity," and that mankind will be restored by forming trinities with God<br />
through marriage. [HJB]<br />
X<br />
American Unitarian Conference started as a reply to Unitarian Universalism becoming 'too<br />
theologically liberal'. They refrain from social activism and believe religion and science can<br />
improve the human condition.<br />
Unitarians, strictly speaking, are those Christians who reject the Church doctrine of the Trinity,<br />
and do not believe that Jesus is God the Son, equal with the Father, or that he is the Supreme<br />
Being. Unitarians also usually agree in rejecting the system of doctrines known as<br />
Orthodox, As these doctrines constitute a logical system, of which the doctrine of the Trinity is<br />
the keystone, when that is removed the arch falls.<br />
If, according to Christ and his Apostles, there is no such God as the "Trinity," it must be wrong to<br />
appear to worship this God, who is unknown to the Scriptures of the New Testament.<br />
http://www.americanunitarian.org/manual.htm<br />
114
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
XI<br />
Edward Cooney (1867-1960)<br />
Edward Cooney was a noted preacher during the 1890s and early 20th century. He joined William<br />
Irvine's new movement as an itinerant evangelist.It seems that an orthodox understanding of the<br />
Trinity is not held to by Cooneyites, with the Father and the Son regarded as separate beings, and<br />
the Holy Spirit being merely a force/power coming from God.<br />
XII<br />
IGLESIA NI CRISTO<br />
Iglesia ni Cristo (Tagalog for Church of Christ) views Jesus as human but endowed by God<br />
with attributes not found in ordinary humans, though lacking attributes found in God. They<br />
contend that it is God's will to worship Jesus. INC rejects the Trinity as heresy, adopting a<br />
version of unitarianism.<br />
115
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
The Iglesia ni Cristo believes that it is the one true church founded by Jesus Christ[ and was<br />
restored by Felix Manalo in the last days. They believe that the first century church apostasized in<br />
that century, or in the 4th century due to false teachings. INC says that this apostate church is<br />
the Roman Catholic Church. Meanwhile, its reestablishment is seen as the signal for the end of<br />
days.<br />
116
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Felix Y. Manalo (1886 - 1963) is said to be the restorer of the church of Christ, and "God's last<br />
messenger" (sugo in Tagalog). INC says that Manalo is the "angel from the east", mentioned in<br />
Revelation 7:1–3<br />
They believe that the Iglesia ni Cristo is the fulfillment of the Bible verse, Isaiah 43:5, where "east"<br />
refers to the Philippines where the Church of Christ would be founde<br />
The Iglesia ni Cristo believes that God the Father is the creator deity and the only true God. INC<br />
rejects the traditional Christian belief in the Trinity as heresy, adopting a version of unitarianism.<br />
They believe that this position is attested by Jesus Christ and the Apostles.<br />
Christ and the Apostles are united in teaching how many and who is the real God.<br />
Similar to other true Christians, according to Apostle Paul, there is only one God, the<br />
Father—not the Son and more so not the Holy Spirit. The Apostles also did not teach<br />
that there is one God who has three personas who are also Gods. ... It [Trinity] is not<br />
found in the Holy Scriptures or the Bible, and if [Catholic] priests ever use the Bible<br />
to prove this teaching of theirs, all are based only on suppositions and presumptions.<br />
—trans. from Pasugo (November 1968)<br />
The church believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the mediator between God the<br />
Father and humanity, and was created by God the Father. God sanctified him to be without sin,<br />
and bestowed upon him the titles "Lord" and "Son of God". The church sees Jesus as God's<br />
highest creation, and denies the deity of Jesus. Adherents profess Jesus' substitutionary role in<br />
the redemption of humankind. He is believed to have been "foreordained before the foundation of<br />
the world" and sent by God "to deal with sin". Members "are saved by Christ's blood" who died<br />
because of his "self-sacrificing love". INC believes that the Holy Spirit is the power of God and also<br />
not a deity, being sent by God the Father and Jesus Christ to guide God's people<br />
117
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
XIII<br />
Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772) of Sweden<br />
Christian denominations that developed as a new religious movement, informed by the writings of<br />
Swedish scientist and theologian Emanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772). Swedenborg claimed to<br />
have received a new revelation from Jesus Christ through continuous heavenly visions which he<br />
experienced over a period of at least twenty-five years.<br />
Swedenborg held that God is one person revealed in Jesus Christ, which was later<br />
independently expressed by modern-day Oneness Pentecostalism. He stated that the doctrine of a<br />
trinity of three persons originated in the fourth century with the adoption of the Nicene Creed to<br />
combat the heresy of Arianism, but this was unknown to the early Apostolic Church, as shown by<br />
the Apostles' Creed which preceded the Nicene Creed , "It is a universal principle of faith that God<br />
is one in essence and in person, in whom is a Divine trinity, and that He is the Lord God the Savior<br />
Jesus Christ.<br />
Divine Trinity is defined as:<br />
"the three essentials of one God, and they make one as soul, body, and operation make one in<br />
man. Before the world was created this Trinity was not; but after creation, when God became<br />
incarnate, it was provided and brought about; and then in the Lord God the Redeemer and Savior<br />
Jesus Christ."<br />
As a trinity of soul, body and spirit exists in every man, so in Jesus this became the Holy Trinity. It is<br />
this doctrine of one God as one person which distinguishes the New Church from other Christian<br />
churches.<br />
118
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
In the New Church, monotheism is defined as one God who is one in person, and the immediate<br />
consequence of this doctrine is that only the Lord is worshipped, who is Jehovah. Worship and faith<br />
in Jesus is not placing worship in a created being: although born with a human body, His soul was<br />
the Divine from eternity. When He rose from the dead, He put off the human body he inherited from<br />
Mary, and put on a human body from the Divine within Him, which is known in the New Church as<br />
the Divine Human.<br />
The Father is the inmost Divine which became outwardly manifest in a human form, known as the<br />
Son. As the Lord is one with the Father, the Lord's Prayer is directed to the Lord only. In the phrase<br />
Our Father, who art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy name the word "name" is everything by which God<br />
is worshipped, especially His Divine Human, the Son, by which He is approached.<br />
In scripture it is known that Jesus at times prayed to the Father, and at other times declared Himself<br />
one with the Father. This was because during His life Jesus progressed towards God by gradually<br />
making the human body he inherited at birth one with the Divine: the progress towards union with<br />
the Divine was his state of exinanition (see Kenosis), and the unification itself was His state of<br />
glorification. It was this progress towards unification, completed by the passion on the cross, that<br />
is the means by which all of humanity was saved from hell.<br />
119
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Prof. Madathilparampil Mammen Ninan B.Sc., B.Ed., M.Sc., M.Ed., Ph.D.,<br />
Web Site: http://www.talentshare.org/~mm9n<br />
Email: mm9n@hotmail.com<br />
Prof. Ninan was born in Kozhencheri, Kerala, India in a Syrian Christian Family which claims descent from one of<br />
the four families to whom St.Thomas the apostle of Jesus entrusted the gospel. His father Late.Mr.M.M.Mammen<br />
was a publisher Freedom fighter and Christian Reformer. His eldest Brother is the well known theologian Late<br />
Dr.M.M.Thomas, who was the Chairman of the World Council of Churches, the Governor of Nagaland, India and<br />
the Chairman of the Christian Institute of Study of Society and Religion. He belongs to the Malankara Mar Thoma<br />
Church, a reformed church holding the theology of the Eastern Churches which claims a 2000 year old heritage.<br />
He is by profession a Professor of Theoretical Physics and had been a teacher in various universities around<br />
world including Ethiopia, Ghana, Jamaica, Sudan, Yemen, India and United States of America. He retired as the<br />
President of the Hindustan Academy of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Affiliated to the University of<br />
Bangalore, India.<br />
He was the first Moderator of the International Christian Fellowship, Sanaa, Yemen and<br />
the Co-founder of the Sudan Pentecostal Church and The Sudan Theological College. He has published over<br />
hundred books in History of Religions, Hinduism and Theology. Mrs. Ponnamma Ninan was a Sociologist and<br />
Teacher who taught in many different countries along with her husband.<br />
120
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Published Books<br />
by Prof.M.M.Ninan<br />
www.mmninan.com<br />
A Study On Baptism<br />
Acts of the Apostle Thomas.<br />
Ambedkar's Philosophy of Hinduism and Contemperory Critiques<br />
Angels, Demons and All the Hosts of Heaven and Earth<br />
Apocryphal Thomas<br />
Apostle Paul Architect and Builder of the Church: Life and Mission<br />
Bible Canon<br />
Christ vs. Krishna<br />
Comparitive study of Kuku and Hebrew<br />
Cosmos - The Body of God<br />
Created in the Image of God<br />
Cultural Anthropology.for Missions..<br />
Dalit Theology<br />
Flying Together<br />
Foundations of Faith in Jesus<br />
Four Gospels<br />
Hinduism: A Christian Heresy; What Really Happened in India<br />
History of Christianity in India<br />
Honeymoon in Ethiopia<br />
I AM: Symbols Jesus Used to explain himself<br />
Introduction to Revelation<br />
Introduction to Biblical.Hermeneutics..<br />
Introduction to Revelations<br />
Isavasya Upanishad:The doctrine of the Immanence of Jesus<br />
Jamaica: The Land We Love<br />
James & John: Sons of Thunder<br />
Jiva, Jada & Isvara<br />
Joys of Ghana Col<br />
Katha Upanishad - The Complete...<br />
Kingdom Parables<br />
Krishna Yajur Veda<br />
Laws of Manu<br />
Life and Legacy of M.M.Thomas<br />
Life, Legacy and Theology.of M.M.Thomas..<br />
Lord's Appointed Festivals<br />
Paintings of Ninan-Life of Christ<br />
Perspectives On The Lord's Table.<br />
Peter and Andrew: The First.Disciples.<br />
Prester John, the Kalabhras.and Mahabali.<br />
Quantum Theology<br />
121
ARIANISM: WHO IS JESUS?<br />
PROF. M. M. NINAN<br />
Reincarnation and Resurrection<br />
Resurrections and Judgments<br />
Rewriting Hindu History: How..do they do it?.<br />
Riddles In Hinduism<br />
Rig Veda<br />
Samaveda<br />
Secrets Of The Prayer Shawl<br />
Semiotics Of Sacraments<br />
Seven Churches<br />
Shukla Yajur Veda<br />
Sin, Death and Beyond<br />
Soteriology<br />
Sri Purusha Suktham: The fullness of Him - With commentary<br />
The Apostles<br />
The Biblical Concept of Man<br />
The Book of Revelation<br />
The Christian Understanding.of Trinity..<br />
The Development Of Hinduism<br />
The Development Of Mariolatory<br />
The Emergence Of Hinduism.from Christianity..<br />
The Four Gospels<br />
The Genealogy of Jesus<br />
The Historic Jesus<br />
The Mysteries of the Tallit, Titzit and Teklet<br />
The Mysteries of the Tallit...<br />
The Mystery of Melchizedek<br />
The Name<br />
The Principles of Prosperity in the Kingdom of God<br />
The Prophecy Of Daniel<br />
The Sudan: New Dimensions<br />
The Word Became Flesh<br />
Theodicy<br />
Theology of Paul<br />
Thinking loud on Theodicy, Soteriology,Trinity and Hermeneutics<br />
Thy Kingdom Come<br />
Tilak and the Aryan Origins<br />
Time Line Of Church History<br />
Understanding Sacraments<br />
Waiting for the Redemption...<br />
Wedding Blessings<br />
When was Jesus Born?<br />
Who is the Angel of the Lord?<br />
122