Athanasius's Doctrine of Christ in Response to Arius

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction....1 Dilemma of Arianism ........1 Early Church Fathers and the Deity of Christ....3 Athanasius of Alexandria..4 Council of Nicaea............5 Athanasius' Work and Response.7 The Eternality of Christ...........9 The Perfection of Christ.........11 Conclusion....13 Bibliography.....14

1 Introduction

The Council of Nicaea became the first ecumenical council of the church's history. It covered numerous issues that had developed into key concerns for the early church. Of all the subjects discussed and set in stone, none of the issues was as controversial as the topic of the nature of Jesus Christ. This subject even continues to be disputed today by many world religions including several western Christian cults. As prolific as Nicaea was, it alone was not able to resolve this disagreement as it had hoped. Athanasius of Alexandria assumed a leading role in the defense of the deity of Jesus Christ against Arianism. Arius' claim denied Jesus Christ's eternality, His perfection, and thus His deity. From the examination of both views, I will demonstrate that Athanasius's doctrine of the nature of Jesus Christ is sufficient to biblically refute the claims of Arianism. I will also establish that this doctrinal battle was a necessary stand for Athanasius to take for the sake of justification.

Dilemma of Arianism

When speaking of the topic of the deity of Jesus Christ, one normally thinks in terms of the Trinity. The Trinity is the concept that God is one God who exists or consists as three equal persons. This modern term for understanding of the nature of God has a significantly complex past. It should be made more aware that those in the church's history did not always agree with this doctrine and some fought vigorously to reject it. The battle raged to the extent that, as Gregory of Nyssa (331-395) wrote,

2 All the affairs of the city are full of this stuff! The alleys, the markets, the wide avenues, and the neighborhood streets! The clothing merchants, the bankers, and those who sell us food! If you ask someone for a penny, he philosophizes to you about the Begotten and the Unbegotten. If you should inquire about the estimated price for a loaf of bread, he answers, The Father is greater, and the Son is subordinate. And if you ask, Is the bath suitable? the attendant declares that the Son is derived out of non-being.1 Arius, in particular, was one such person leading what would become the chief position disputing the deity of Christ. Arius (250-336) was a presbyter in the church at Alexandria Egypt. His teachings on the nature of Jesus Christ generally differed from orthodoxy specifically on His relationship with God the Father. It surrounded the question of "How the unity of their relationship be accepted?" The basic premise put forth by Arius was dependent upon the uniqueness of God in all aspects of His divine nature. Arius focused the strength of his arguments on God's substance, eternality, and immutability. Is it possible for God to share His glories with another? Is Jesus Christ almighty God? Arius' conclusion was that Jesus Christ, whoever He is, is anything but God. Much of Arianism was dependant on the Scripture passages that used the wording "begotten." This was the staple used by Arians to support their argument that Jesus had a beginning. Arius recognized Jesus as a non-eternal and created being; yet consubstantial with the father based on the premise that God simply cannot share or divide His divine nature because it does not consist of elements or components. Arius thought that since Jesus Christ cannot be

St. Gregory of Nyssa, "Oration on the Deity of the Son and the Holy Spirit" (4th c.), quoted in Bryan M. Litfin, Getting to Know the Church Fathers: an Evangelical Introduction (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Brazos Press, 2007), 171.

3 eternal than He had a definite beginning by way of His creation or discovery by Father God. In a letter written to the Roman Historian Eusebius (263-339), Arius wrote, The Son is not unbegotten, nor in any way part of the unbegotten; and that He does not derive His subsistence from any matter; but that by His own will and counsel He has subsisted before time, and before ages, as perfect God, only begotten and unchangeable, and that before He was begotten, or created, or purposed, or established, He was not. For He was not unbegotten. We are persecuted, because we say that the Son has a beginning, but that God is without beginning. This is the cause of our persecution, and likewise, because we say that He is of the non-existent. And this we say, because He is neither part of God, nor of any essential being. For this are we persecuted; the rest you know.2 To put it simply, Arianism's glorification of Jesus' nature only went as far as to say He was a created god-like being.

Early Church Fathers and the Deity of Christ

The early church fathers from the earliest sources used terminology that referred to Jesus Christ as God. Their reading of the plain biblical text brought them to an understanding that, in some way, Jesus Christ possessed all the attributes of the Father. Clement of Rome writes, "Brethren, it is fitting that you should think of Jesus Christ as of God,--as the Judge of the living and the dead. And it does not become us to think lightly of our salvation; for if we think little of Him, we shall also hope but to obtain little [from Him]."3 Ignatius of Antioch agreed writing, " There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then

Philip Schaff,. "Chapter IV.The Letter of Arius to Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia." Christian Classics Ethereal library . http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf203.iv.viii.i.v.html?highlight=arius,letter,to,eusebius (accessed September 30, 2013). Clement of Rome. "2 Clement" Early Christian Writings. Chapter 11. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/2clement-roberts.html (accessed September 30, 2013).
3

4 impossible, even Jesus Christ our Lord."4 Early Christian apologist and philosopher, Justin Martyr understood that Jesus Christ must be God, "For Christ is King, and Priest, and God, and Lord, and angel, and man."5 Irenaeus of Lyons too writes, "Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spake to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers."6 No doubt, the early church fathers were in awe of the power, and supremacy of Jesus Christ that were attributed to Him in the Scriptures. All they could write in response was that this Christ certainly possessed divine attributes. Nevertheless, no church father suffered and endured the backlash of this doctrine nor was more influential than Athanasius of Alexandria.

Athanasius of Alexandria

Athanasius of Alexandria (296-373) likely grew up provided with a theological education provided by his wealthy parents in Alexandria, Egypt, which at that time was a popular theological hub. He was taken under the wing and teaching of Alexander, the admired Bishop of Alexandria and blossomed into one of the most vital defenders of one of the churches most fundamental doctrines. Louth explains, "Athanasius was present at the Council of Nicaea as a young deacon in the entourage of the patriarch of Alexandria"7 Another author puts it, "Young
4

Ignatius of Antioch. "The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians." Early Christian Writings. Chapter 7. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-ephesians-roberts.html (accessed September 30, 2013). Justin Martyr, "Dialogue With Trypho." Early Christian Writings. Chapter 34. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-dialoguetrypho.html (accessed September 30, 2013). Irenaeus of Lyons, "Against Heresies" Early Christian Writings. Book 4, Chapter 5. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-book4.html (accessed September 30, 2013).
7 6 5

Jonathan Hill, Zondervan Handbook to the History of Christianity (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Lion Hudson,

2007), 82.

5 Athanasius accordingly, after a further course of elementary studies, was handed over to the bishop to be brought up, like Samuel, in the Temple of God."8

Council of Nicaea

It was Alexander, around 318, who initially launched the attack against the heretical teachings of Arius. Because Alexander lived in the same city as Arius, who was a presbyter, he witnesses his teachings denying the deity of Christ. Alexander, up to this moment, respected Arius and therefore held a gathering with Arius and other clergy members to command him to reject his opinions and teachings. That respect was about to change. Arius boldly challenged Alexander's views and even went as far as to call him a heretic.9 Douglas explains, "Alexander himself chaired the discussion. Arius defended his position, but the others (joined belatedly by Alexander) contended that the Son is consubstantial and coeternal with the Father. Arius was not prepared to do so, and in 319 he was officially anathematized."10 Bishop Alexander excommunicated Arius who then fled to Palestine yet Arian theology continued to spread like wild fire. The church in an upheaval, and with Constantine as Emperor, needed a compelling solution. Constantine, in order to extinguish the controversy so that he could bring unity for the sake of his empire, convened the first ecumenical council in Nicaea in

Philip Schaff, "NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters." Christian Classics Ethereal Library. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.v.ii.i.html (accessed October 2, 2013). Bryan M. Litfin, Getting to Know the Church Fathers: an Evangelical Introduction (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Brazos Press, 2007), 173. J.D. Douglas, "Arius", Who's Who in Christian History, ed. J.D. Douglas and Philip W. Comfort (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1992). 36.
10 9

6 325 A. D. It was a colossal theological roundtable. Bishops from all over the empire attended the council including Bishop Alexander and a young 29-year-old Athanasius. With Alexander and Athanasius leading the council, the bishops did not allow any doctrinal proposal that implied a creation or beginning to Christ. They then began to create a creed in order to unite and verbalize the concepts of faith to include the deity of Jesus Christ. The creed would be later finalized and reaffirmed at the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D., however the original creed read as such, We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ , the Son of God, begotten of the Father the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance (homoousion) with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. But those who say: 'There was a time when he was not;' and 'He was not before he was made;' and 'He was made out of nothing,' or 'He is of another substance' or 'essence,' or 'The Son of God is created,' or 'changeable,' or 'alterable' they are condemned by the holy catholic and apostolic Church.

The Arians were frustrated with the council and the creed. The phrase "of one substance (homoousios) with the Father" was unacceptable to them and they loathed it. Arianism hailed that the word (homoousios) could not be used in the argument nor in the creed because the word itself was an unbiblical term. Nevertheless, the council heavily sided with Bishop Alexander and his apprentice Athanasius. "At the same time, the bishops condemned anyone who said that there was a time when the Son did not exist one of Arius's key doctrines."11 Arius was

11

Jonathan Hill, Zondervan Handbook to the History of Christianity (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Lion Hudson,

2007), 81.

7 immediately banished by Emperor Constantine himself. Unfortunately, this victory would not last. Bishop Alexander died three years later in 328 A.D. and Athanasius succeeded him as bishop of Alexandria. By 336, Arius had gained a great deal of support for his doctrine of a nondivine Christ, and the pursuit to remove the homoousion doctrine the church. Arius gained so much support, that Emperor Constantine reversed his banishment on Arius and the decision of the Council of Nicaea. In turn, Athanasius became the opponent of the Church and was charged with several false accusations and then exiled to Trier. This was only the first of his five exiles he would experience over a 30-year period. Arius unexpectedly died in 336 followed by Emperor Constantine in 337. It was Athanasius against a heavily Arianistic Church. He was almost continuously on the run for his life both in and out of exile. As the phrase later became known, "Athanasius contra mundum" or "Athanasius against the World".

Athanasius' Work and Response Athanasius spent his life writing, teaching, and defending the incarnation of Christ. Athanasius believed that Jesus Christ possessed the exact nature of God the Father. This meant that Jesus Christ is as eternal, unchanging, and almighty as is God the Father. For Athanasius, (homoousios) was a matter of justification. Because Jesus Christ is almighty God, He was able to absorb and satisfy the Father's wrath.

8 In His work On the Incarnation, he explained that God took on a human nature to redeem humanity to God. This is mainly the reason Athanasius sought to destroy the Arian heresy. He taught, You must understand why it is that the Word of the Father, so great and so high, has been made manifest in bodily form. He has not assumed a body as proper to His own nature, far from it, for as the Word He is without body. He has been manifested in a human body for this reason only, out of the love and goodness of His Father, for the salvation of us men.

It is because of Who Jesus Christ is that mattered to these church fathers. Athanasius was aware that a person's faith is essential however, the object of that faith is most vital. Whom a sinner's faith is in determines the validity of that person's faith. Faith in a Jesus Christ who does not exist is completely useless. To Athanasius, a created, non-eternal, and non-divine Jesus Christ could never absorb the Father's wrath and save sinful humankind; this Jesus never even existed. Throughout his arguments, Athanasius used Scripture as his theological consistency and urged that all follow Scripture regardless how weather it could be fully understood. He writes, One cannot see all the waves with one's eyes, for when one tries to do so those that are following on baffle one's senses. Even so, when one wants to take in all the achievements of Christ in the body, one cannot do so, even by reckoning them up, for the things that transcend one's thought are always more than those one thinks that one has grasped. As we cannot speak adequately about even a part of His work, therefore, it will be better for us not to speak about it as a whole.12 It appears that Athanasius recognized what it meant to be a slave to Scripture. It was his understanding that a true God and Christ is one with a nature that cannot be fully encompassed by a finite mind and should cause one to stand enthralled and speechless. In contrast, a God that
Athanasius, St. Archbishop of Alexandria. "On the Incarnation of the Word." Christian Classics Ethereal Library (c.296-c.373), http://www.ccel.org/ccel/athanasius/incarnation.ix.html (accessed October 2, 2013).
12

9 could be fully defined, explained, and encompassed by a finite human mind would and should be a warning or red flag that this being is manmade and thus false or a hoax.

The Eternality of Christ As I mentioned earlier, much of Arianism was dependant on the Scripture passages that used the wording "begotten." This was the staple used by Arians to support their argument that Jesus had a beginning. Grudem writes, The Arians depended heavily on texts that called Christ God's "only begotten" Son (John 1:14; 3:16; 1 John 4:9). If Christ were "begotten" by God the Father, they reasoned, it must mean that he was brought into existence by God the Father (for the word "beget" in human experience refers to the father's role in conceiving a child).13

Athanasius combated this belief with powerful scriptural passages that supported Jesus Christ eternality. He used the terminology and phraseology of the biblical text to demonstrate that Jesus was not created nor originated. He largely accomplished this by the usage of the word "Father" which bonds the nature of the Father to the Son. It was Athanasius' stance that Jesus was begotten from the Father yet with no beginning. This he claimed in the very beginning of his Expositio Fidei. (Statement of Faith) which he penned as he succeeded Alexander as the bishop of Alexandria in 328 A.D., "We believe in one Unbegotten God, Father Almighty, maker of all things both visible and invisible, that hath His

Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: an Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1994), 243.

13

10 being from Himself. And in one Only-begotten Word, Wisdom, Son, begotten of the Father without beginning and eternally"14 The scriptural reference of God as Father implies Sonship and because God is eternal and unchanging, it follows that the Son is equally eternal. Widdicombe did well explaining, God is eternally Father, the attribute of fatherhood is not adventitious to him, and, correspondingly, the Son is eternally Son. Because they are characteristics which are true of God, as Scripture testifies, fatherhood and sonship are fully and perfectly realized in the godhead, permanent and unchanging. Furthermore, a son always and universally possess the same essence and nature of the father.15 The eternality of the Father is, by default, ascribed to the Son. It could be said that all sons have the same exact nature as that of their father. Jesus Christ never had a beginning but existed, as God, with the Father from eternity past. Athanasius also invested his time teaching the deity and eternality of Jesus Christ from the approach of Jesus being the Creator. Jesus Christ created all things and Athanasius showed this by use of John 1:3, "All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." His use of Scripture tied together the fact that God exclusively created all things in Genesis yet Jesus is included as this God who "without him was not anything made that was made" (Matthew 19:4). Athanasius rejected Arius' claim that Jesus was God's first creation and that through Jesus everything else was created. On Jesus' own description of creation Athanasius reasons,

Athanasius, St. Archbishop of Alexandria. "Statement of Faith." Christian Classics Ethereal Library (c.296-c.373 http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.x.ii.html (accessed October 2, 2013). Peter Widdicombe, "Athanasius and the Making of the Doctrine of the Trinity." Pro Ecclesia 6, no. 4 (September 1, 1997): 456-478. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 2, 2013).
15

14

11 For instance, the Lord, having reminded the Jews of the statement in Genesis, "He Who created them in the beginning made them male and female . . . ," and having shown that for that reason a man should leave his parents and cleave to his wife, goes on to say with reference to the Creator, "What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder." How can they get a creation independent of the Father out of that?16

The Perfection of Christ Athanasius' held that, since Jesus Christ is God, than His nature is one of divine perfection. This attributes of this nature is unchangeable, immaterial, incorporeal, incorruptible, and totally sinless. "His part it was, and His alone, both to bring again the corruptible to incorruption and to maintain for the Father His consistency of character with all. For this purpose, then, the incorporeal and incorruptible and immaterial Word of God entered our world."17 Concerning Arianism's opposing view, Athanasius writes, "Someone asked them whether the Word of God could turn to evil, like the devil has. And they were not afraid to answer, Yes, he could. Since he is begotten, his nature is able to change.18 To Athanasius this was horrendous. He believed that it was absolutely essential that Jesus Christ be God in order that a perfect sinless sacrifice might be accomplished. The question Athanasius wanted to skeptics to ask is "If Jesus Christ is not God, how could He satisfy the infinitely just and holy wrath of God that rest upon mankind?" It took God
Athanasius, St. Archbishop of Alexandria. "On the Incarnation of the Word." Christian Classics Ethereal Library (c.296-c.373), http://www.ccel.org/ccel/athanasius/incarnation.ix.html (accessed October 2, 2013).
17 16

Ibid,, chapter 2.

Athanasius, of Alexandria. "Letter of Alexander* of Alexandria to all bishops (Henos smatos)." Fourth Century Christianity. http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/urkunde-4b (accessed October 2, 2013).

18

12 Himself taking the place of sinners on the cross in order to bear the infinite weight of God the Father's wrath. He thought that attributing anything less to Christ, as Arianism did, was "worshipping the creature rather than the Creator."19 It was simply blasphemous. Athanasius realized that the central problem of Arianism was the disconnection amid the divine nature of the Son of God and the human nature, which He took up. The limitation applied to Christ humanity is one reason that kept Arius from accepting a Christ that is the "same substance" homoousios with His Father. Athanasius submitted, You must understand, therefore, that when writers on this sacred theme speak of Him as eating and drinking and being born, they mean that the body, as a body, was born and sustained with the food proper to its nature; while God the Word, Who was united with it, was at the same time ordering the universe and revealing Himself through His bodily acts as not man only but God.20

This concept, which later became named the Trinity, was accepted after Athanasius' death in 373 after a full-dedicated sacrifice to supporting and defending the biblical truth of the doctrine of Jesus Christ. The Nicene Creed was recomposed and reaffirmed at the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. The word homoousios "same substance" remained in the creed to express the doctrine that Jesus Christ and the Father are both fully and eternally God. Grudem concludes, "The controversy over Arianism was drawn to a close by the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381"21

Athanasius, St. Archbishop of Alexandria. "On the Incarnation of the Word." Christian Classics Ethereal Library (c.296-c.373), http://www.ccel.org/ccel/athanasius/incarnation.ix.html (accessed October 2, 2013).
20

19

Ibid., Chapter 3.

Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: an Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1994), 245.

21

13 Conclusion Arianism gained strength and popularity quickly however, because of its untruthfulness in the light of Scripture, it became wobbly and eventually dismantled. The argument of Christ's deity was not simply a hobby-like debate or a leisure pursuit. To homoousians like Athanasius, it was a matter of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Faith in a Jesus who does not exist is simply useless. It is because of Who Jesus Christ is that mattered to these church fathers. Who a sinner's faith is in determines the validity of that person's faith. The issue of justification was the summary of Athanasius's Doctrine of Christ in Response to Arius. Athanasius' courage and faith is surely a testimony to Christians today to stand boldly today for our faith even in the midst of nearly total opposition. Although we esteem him as a great hero against a dangerous heresy, The Lord and Savior Jesus Christ was Athanasius' greatest treasure and reward.

14 Bibliography

Athanasius, of Alexandria. "Letter of Alexander* of Alexandria to all bishops (Henos smatos)." Fourth-Century Christianity. http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/urkunde-4b (accessed October 2, 2013). Athanasius, St. Archbishop of Alexandria. "On the Incarnation of the Word." Christian Classics Ethereal Library (c.296-c.373), http://www.ccel.org/ccel/athanasius/incarnation.ix.html (accessed October 2, 2013). Athanasius, St. Archbishop of Alexandria. "Statement of Faith." Christian Classics Ethereal Library (c.296-c.373 http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.x.ii.html (accessed October 2, 2013). Clement of Rome. "2 Clement" Early Christian Writings. Chapter 11. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/2clement-roberts.html (accessed September 30, 2013). Douglas, J.D. "Arius", Who's Who in Christian History, ed. J.D. Douglas and Philip W. Comfort (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1992). 36. Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: an Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1994), 243,245. Hill, Jonathan. Zondervan Handbook to the History of Christianity (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Lion Hudson, 2007), 82. Ignatius of Antioch. "The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians." Early Christian Writings. Chapter 7. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-ephesians-roberts.html (accessed September 30, 2013). Irenaeus of Lyons, "Against Heresies" Early Christian Writings. Book 4, Chapter 5. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-book4.html (accessed September 30, 2013). Justin Martyr, "Dialogue With Trypho." Early Christian Writings. Chapter 34. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-dialoguetrypho.html (accessed September 30, 2013). Litfin, Bryan M. Getting to Know the Church Fathers: an Evangelical Introduction (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Brazos Press, 2007), 173. Schaff, Philip. "Chapter IV.The Letter of Arius to Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia." Christian Classics Ethereal library . http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf203.iv.viii.i.v.html?highlight=arius,letter,to,eusebius (accessed September 30, 2013).

15 Schaff, Philip. "NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters." Christian Classics Ethereal Library. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.v.ii.i.html (accessed October 2, 2013). St. Gregory of Nyssa, "Oration on the Deity of the Son and the Holy Spirit" (4th c.), quoted in Bryan M. Litfin, Getting to Know the Church Fathers: an Evangelical Introduction (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Brazos Press, 2007), 171. Widdicombe, Peter. "Athanasius and the Making of the Doctrine of the Trinity." Pro Ecclesia 6, no. 4 (September 1, 1997): 456-478. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 2, 2013).