The Development of Christology and Its Relevance for Contemporary Christianity - Essay Example

?Introduction Christology is one of Christian theological disciplines that comprehensively examine the development of the doctrine in various dimensions including its limitations and legitimacy. Since the inception of Christianity, the church proclaimed that reconciliation between man and God occurs only through Jesus Christ (Dunn 2003, 13). This pronouncement compelled the church to reexamine its faith to enhance the understanding of the doctrine. One of the most pertinent questions that originated from the proclamation is who exactly Jesus is in relation to the sinful man and God (Sung 2009, 32). It is through this interrogation that Christological doctrine developed. This paper examines the development of Christology up to Chalcedon and its importance to the modern Christianity. Christology is a branch of Christian theology concerned with the study of Jesus Christ (Meier 2001, 51). The discipline examines the nature, identity and personality of Jesus Christ in relation to the Christianity faith. Christianity has been in existence for about 2000 years. According to Stephen (2008, 70), the belief that Jesus Christ is man, God, and the Son of God are the foundations of the faith. The Holy Bible asserts that Jesus Christ is the savior whom all Christians should worship. However, the emergence of different and unconventional Christian doctrines in the recent past about Jesus Christ has presented a significant challenge to the mainstream Christian teachings. The earliest interrogation of the personality and identity of Jesus Christ dates back to AD 90-140 (O’ Collins 1995, 107). During this time, Christian spiritual leaders indentified and emphasized on both the divinity and humanity of Jesus. Some of the earliest teachings by established apostolic fathers at the time such as Clement and Ignatius addressed and considered the dual nature of Christ as both divine and human at the same time (Philip, 1893: 52). According to Philip (1893: 59), Ignatius approved the dual nature of Jesus by referring Him as “Jesus Christ our Lord”. Similarly, Philip (1893, 83) notes that Clement challenged early Christians to consider “Christ as both God and the adjudicator of both the dead and the living.” The emphasis of both the deity and humanity of Christ in early church are demonstrated by Melito of Sardis (AD 165-175). According to Berkhof (1969, 19), Melito categorically stated Christ was both man and God. He argued that Jesus’ burial after crucifixion demonstrates He is man while his resurrection three days later showed He is God. However, other apostolic teachers such as Justin Martyr, though acknowledging Jesus as both man and God believed that Christ was lesser than the highest God (Bauckham 1991, 86). Although early teachings acknowledged both the humanity and divinity of Christ, the interrogation was largely superficial and lacked clarity and adequate conviction from early theological critics. Docetism and adoptionism are some of the earliest theological ideologies that questioned both the humanity and divinity nature of Jesus Christ. Adoptionism rejected the divinity of Christ and some theological critics argued that He was not born by a virgin woman (Dunn 2003, 63). According to Ferguson and Wright (1988, 58), adoptionism acknowledged that Jesus was man, who was adopted by God to fulfill a particular or specific role. Hence, the ideology attested that Jesus became the savior only by his strict adherence of God’s commands and his good deeds toward humanity. In the process, Jesus became aware of his divine character that was confirmed when he received the Holy Spirit at his baptism (Davidson 2001) Docetism on the other hand affirmed that Jesus was not human at all but divine (Bray 1983, 44). According to Bray (1983, 49), Docetists argued that Jesus did not have physical body, but he just appeared to have flesh and blood. Some of the proponents of Docetism in the 2nd century included Gnosticism but Ignatius, an early apostolic leader vehemently denied that Jesus Christ was not human as proclaimed by Docetists (Wright1988; 62). The second century witnessed the emergence of unorthodox theological teachings pertaining to the nature of Jesus Christ. Besides Gnosticism, Monarchism emerged as a prominent Christian theological influence. Gnosticism acknowledged that the supreme God was beyond human understanding and smaller or lesser gods originated from him (Meier 2001, 33) Dopp and Wilhelm (2000: 38) notes that some of the current Christian theological teachings originated from Gnosticism. In addition, Gnosticism contented that Jehovah in the Old Testament is the lowest of all deities originating from the Supreme, while Jesus Christ is the highest. Other beliefs of Gnosticism include the wickedness of all matter in the world (Hubert 1980, 94). Bauckham(1991, 130) argues that Gnosticism was inclined to Docetism because it regarded Jesus Christ as spirit, with temporary man’s likeness and as an extraordinary messenger sent to the earth to save mankind from sin. Gnosticism’s opinion on the New Testament was equally controversial and they attracted opposition from early Jesuit apostles including John and Paul. The mainstream church opposition to Gnosticism resulted to the emergence of orthodox Christology (Karkkainen 2003, 253). Some of the prominent anti –Gnostists such as Origen asserted that Christ is the Devine reason that mediates between the flesh (man) and God (McGrath 1995, 28). O’ Collins (1995, 66) noted that Origen believed that Jesus was the same or equivalent to the Father, although he also contented that Christ was inferior to the Supreme God. Origen used the Greek term homoousios that means the same to describe the similarity between Jesus Christ and the Supreme God (O’ Collins, 1995: 38). At the same time, Irenaeus another prominent apostolic preacher emphasized the unity of God and Jesus Christ, arguing that Christ was both man and God. Berkhof (1969, 75) notes that Irenaeus was a follower of the restoration theory in relation to salvation of Jesus Christ. Other early ideologies of Christological doctrine included Tertullian that asserted that Jesus Christ is wholly God and man at the same time. This school of thought held that the “Logos” exists independently as a “Person”, who came from God (Habets 2003, 206). This implies that Tertullian ideal held that Jesus came after God and suggesting the possibility that Jesus was lesser than the Supreme God. Therefore the second century witnessed in depth assessment of Christological doctrine with great emphasis on differentiating and harmonizing both Christ and the Supreme God. From 190-272 AD, Monarchainism another Christological doctrine emerged that objected Trinity by asserting that God existed as one being (Sung 2009, 77). Monarchianism had two categories, namely modalistic and dynamic. Theodotus and Samosata are some of the earliest prominent proponents of dynamic Monarchianism. Dunn (2003, 162) notes that Theodotus proclaimed that Jesus was an ordinary man, but with extraordinary and highest moral standards. In addition, Theodotus claimed that Jesus Christ received dynamic powers during his baptism. Therefore, in Theodotus opinion, the Holy Spirit was a dynamic power. This supposition was criticized by synod of Antioch and Hyppolitus in about 269AD (Dunn 2003, 174). Similarly, Samosota held the same opinion with Theodutus and this lead to him being expelled from the church in about 269 AD. Praxeas developed Modalistic Monarchianism and one of the most prominent followers of this doctrine at the time was Sabellius. This Christological doctrine presumed that the father and the son are different names of the same Devine power. Modalistic Monarchianism supposed that the God the father transformed into a man, and suffered pain at the cross during his crucifixion (Davidson 2001, 119). This ideology attracted intense criticism from among others Tertullian who clarified and distinguished the humanity as well as the divinity of Jesus Christ. Tertullian explanation of Christology is one of the most clear in the period. According to Hubert, 1980, 95), Tertullian proclaimed, “Christians believed of one God, through whom the Son came from as His Word”. In addition, Tertullian argued that Christian trust that God the father sent Jesus into the womb of Virgin Mary who bore Him as God and man, a son of man and God, and was named Jesus Christ (Hubert 1980, 105). In the fourth century, the Arian Christology doctrine emerged. The doctrine perpetuated the controversy about the relation between God the Son and God the Father. According to O’ Collins (1995, 38), Arius emphasized that there is only one God that was “neither begotten nor with an origin”. Moreover, Arian doctrine emphasized that there exist a significant difference between God the Son and the Father. The doctrine stressed that Jesus Christ was neither a man nor God but his character were in between a human and divine (O’Collins, 1995). In this respect, the Arian contested that the Son is a creation, who has beginning, end and hence a mortal or changeable being. This assertion contradicted with character of God the Father, who is immutable. In 321 AD, the council of Alexander vehemently opposed Arianism. Arianism continued gaining popularity even after Arian was excommunicated from the church and this prompted the Constantine to intervene through the council of Nicea in 325 AD. This was the first ecumenical council meeting convened to chart the way forward about the Christological doctrine (Bauckham 1991, 193). The Council on Nicea resolved to use the Greek word homoiousios, which means that the Jesus Christ or the Son is of the same spirit as the Supreme God (Philip 1893, 358). The word Homoiousios replaced homoousios, which meant that the Jesus Christ and the supreme God are similar in essence (Philip 1893, 296). Theologians consider this statement of faith at Nicea as the foundation of the Orthodox Christianity because it acknowledged that Jesus was fully divine, unlike Arianism that contested otherwise. The Nicea declaration explicitly affirms that the Supreme Father is similar in essence to Jesus Christ (Philip 1893, 83). However, the application of the term homoiousios continued eliciting criticism because it is not biblical and it had been used before the Nicea ecumenical council. The declaration at Nicea did not completely eradicate the influence of pro-Arianism factions. The Nicene Christian orthodox faced stiff opposition and Athanasius, the most prominent vocal supporter encountered harassment from the Arianism faction. Later the death of Constantine resulted into the split of the Roman Empire into two regions, east and west (Hubert 1980, 83). The eastern part governed by Constantius was pro Arianism, while the western part under the leadership of Constans and the council of Sardica approved the Nicea creed in about 343 AD. However, the death of Constans made Constantius the sole emperor of the entire Roman Empire. The new emperor who was pro- Arianism embarked on a mission to force the entire Roman Empire accept his faith with assistance from councils from Sirmium and the Synod of Milan and Arles. However, his attempt did not succeed because Arianism had split into two factions (Hubert 1980, 93). Hence, the entire Roman Empire had three camps with diverse Christological doctrines. These included the Nicea orthodox that ascribed to homoousios, fanatical Arians believing in heteroousios and moderate Arians supporting homoiousios (Dopp and Wilhelm 2000, 88). The controversy between the three factions continued until Cappadocian fathers reevaluated the Nicea orthodox doctrine. The Cappadocian fathers’ contribution was the declaration of three “hypostasis” instead of single divine God, “ousia” (Dunn 2003, 60). In this regard, their contribution introduced the Trinity that clarified that God in essence is one, but three in persons. The subsequent clarification resulted into the approval of Nicene Creed by the council of Constantinople in 381 AD. This approval marked the victory of the Nicea orthodox, and in the modern Christian practice, the Nicene Creed forms an important component of indoctrination (Dunn 2003, 69). Besides the aforementioned Christological controversies, other schools that challenged the divinity and humanity of Christ in the 4th and 5th century included the Alexandrian and Antiochian schools of thought. Alexandrian was inclined to the unity of both characters of Jesus Christ but with greater emphasis on the divinity of Christ. The Antioch ideology differentiated of both natures of Christ, with more emphasis on the humanity aspect (Berkhof 1969, 115-117). This created two major controversies, namely Nestorian and Appollinarian. Appollinarian controversy occurred from 362-381 AD. Apollinarius believed that Christ had a human body and soul but lacked human spirit. Hence, Jesus Christ did not commit sins like man because God inspired his morals (O’ Collins, 1995). The Nestorian controversy which occurred from 428-431AD focused on Virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ. Referring Mary with Greek term, theotokos, which means God bearer was challenged because the school of though believed that Jesus as divine being could not be born by man (Philip 1893, 118). However, theotokos was approved as the title of Mary at the council of Ephesus in 431 AD. This marked the end of controversy as it demonstrated the union of human and divine aspects of Jesus Christ. The Eutychian controversy then emerged in 449AD and it asserted that Jesus Christ had only the divine nature after resurrection. The council of Chalcedon was convened in 451 AD and it condemned the Eutychian ideology of Christological doctrine. The Chalcedon convention supported the orthodox Christological doctrines from Nicea and Constantinopolitan belief (Philip 1893, 175). The Chalcedonian convention established four aspects to elaborate the relationship between the divinity of Christ and his humanity. These included no confusion, no change, no separation and no division (Philip 1893, 180). Chalcedon established four important elements about the nature of Christ. First, Jesus Christ is truly god and truly man in one person. Secondly, Jesus Christ is the genuine incarnation and there was nor conversion between the humanity and divinity aspects of Jesus. The third element is that Jesus Christ is a permanent association with man and God. Finally, Chalcedon declared that Christ has both God and Human nature permanently but the ideal hypostatical union of human and divine (Philip 1893: 186-91). These resolutions form the basics of orthodoxy Christology. Conclusion Currently, different interpretations of Christology continue eliciting controversies in the modern Christian faith. The controversy about the divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ has caused emergence of numerous Christian denominations just as it did in the early history of Christianity. In spite of the diverse interpretations, the Chalcedon declarations remain the most refined orthodox doctrine applied in mainstream churches today. References Bauckham, R. 1991. “Moltmann’s messianic Christology”. Scottish Journal of Theology, 44: 515-530. Berkhof, L. 1969. The history of Christian doctrines. London: Banner of truth Trust Publishers. Bray, G.1983. “The Filioque clause in history and theology.” Tyndale, Bulletin 34: 90-145. Davidson, I. 2001. “Theologizing the human Jesus: An ancient and modern approach to Christology reassessed.” International Journal of Systematic Theology 3(2): 45-87. Dopp, S., and Wilhelm, G. 2000. Dictionary of the early Christian literature. New York: Crossroad. Dunn, J. 2003. Christology in the making. 2nd edition. Grand Rapids: WB Eerdmans Publishing Company. Ferguson, S and Wright, D. (Eds). 1988. New dictionary of theology. England: Inter-Varsity Press. Habets, M. 2003. “Spirit Christology: Seeing in stereo”. Journal of Pentecostal Theology 11(2): 197-230. Hubert, J. 1980. History of the church, Volume II. New York: Seabury Press. Karkkainen, V. 2003. Christology: A global introduction. Grand Rapids: Baker. McGrath, A. 1995. The Christian theology reader. Cambridge: Blackwell. Meier, J. 2001. A marginal Jew, Volumes 1-3. New York: Doubleday. O’ Collins, G. 1995. Christology: A biblical, historical and systematic study of Jesus Christ. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Philip, S. 1893. History of the Christian church Vol III Nicene and post Nicene Christianity. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Stephen, N.2008. Truly divine and truly human. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishing. Sung, P. 2009. Triune Atonement: Christ’s healing for sinners, victims and the whole creation. London: Westminster John Knox. Read More