|
HISTORICAL JESUS |
|
Is it True that
Jesus’ Divinity was Invented
by Constantine at the Council
of Nicea?
by
Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. John Weldon |
|
"Indeed," Teabing said. "…During this fusion of religions,
Constantine needed to strengthen the new Christian tradition,
and held a famous ecumenical gathering known as the Council of
Nicaea."…
"At this gathering," Teabing said, "many aspects of
Christianity were debated and voted upon—the date of Easter,
the role of the bishops. The administration of sacraments, and
of course, the divinity of Jesus."
[Sophie] "I don’t follow. His divinity?"
"My dear," Teabing declared, "until that moment in
history, Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal
prophet… a great and powerful man, but a man
nonetheless. A mortal."
"Not the Son of God?"
"Right," Teabing said. "Jesus’ establishment as ‘the Son of
God" was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of
Nicaea."
"Hold on. You’re saying Jesus’ divinity was the result of a
vote?"
Was
Christ’s Deity Invented by the Christian Church in the 4 th
Century?
In
response to the charge made above, we want to begin by quoting
from a letter that Eusebius of Caesarea sent back from
Nicea to his diocese. He says,
…We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of all
things visible and invisible. And in One Lord Jesus Christ,
the Word of God, God from God, Light from Light, Life from
Life, Son Only-begotten, first-born of every creature, before
all the ages, begotten from the Father, by Whom also all
things were made; Who for our salvation was made flesh, and
lived among men, and suffered, and rose again the third day,
and ascended to the Father, and will come again in glory to
judge the quick and dead. And we believe also in One Holy
Ghost: believing each of these to be and to exist, the Father
truly Father, and the Son truly Son, and the Holy Ghost truly
Holy Ghost, as also our Lord, sending forth His disciples for
the preaching, said, "Go teach all nations, baptizing them in
the Name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
Concerning Whom we confidently affirm that so we hold, and so
we think, and so we have held aforetime, and we
maintain this faith unto the death, anathematizing every
godless heresy. That this we have ever thought from our
heart and soul, from the time we recollect ourselves,
and now think and say in truth, before God Almighty and our
Lord Jesus Christ do we witness, being able by proofs to shew
and to convince you, that, even in times past, such has
been our belief and preaching. 2
Remember, Eusebius was a participant in the Council of Nicea.
His conclusion was that the Council merely affirmed what the
Church had always believed and taught about Jesus’ divinity.
In
spite of testimony like this, many liberal theologians maintain
that Jesus’ divinity, and the related doctrine of the trinity
were not part of the teachings of Jesus and the apostles,
but merely invented by the church centuries later. For example,
in a sermon given in August, 1964, at New York City, liberal
theologian James A. Pike declared, "The Trinity is not
necessary. Our Lord never heard of it. The apostles knew nothing
of it." Victor Paul Wierwille, founder of "The Way
International," claims in his book, Jesus Christ Is Not God,
that the early church (to 330 A.D.) never believed in the
Trinity or in Christ’s deity. He argues,
Certainly, during this time, church leaders spoke of the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but they never referred to them
as co-equal.… In fact, the opposite was the case. They spoke
of the Father as supreme, the true and only God…and of the son
as inferior… having a beginning, visible, begotten,
immutable. 3
But
is this really what we find when we carefully examine the
writings of the earliest Christian leaders, or is this
allegation merely an invention by those who, for whatever
reason, choose not to believe in the Trinity?
The
following chronological examples show that the early church
clearly did believe that Jesus Christ was God long before
the Council of Nicea (325 A.D.):
Ignatius (30-107 A.D.), who was born
before Christ died, consistently spoke of the deity of Jesus
Christ. Consider a few examples: In To the Ephesians, and
other letters, we find references such as the following: "Jesus
Christ our God"; "who is God and man"; "received knowledge of
God, that is, Jesus Christ"; "for our God, Jesus the Christ";
"for God was manifest as man"; "Christ, who was from eternity
with the Father"; "from God, from Jesus Christ"; "from Jesus
Christ, our God"; "Our God, Jesus Christ"; "suffer me to follow
the example of the passion of my God"; "Jesus Christ the God"
and "Our God Jesus Christ." 4
The fact that Ignatius was not rebuked, nor branded as teaching
heresy by any of the churches or Christian leaders he sent
letters to proves that the early church, long before 107 A.D.,
accepted the deity of Christ.
Polycarp (69-155 A.D.) possibly spoke
of "Our Lord and God Jesus Christ." 5
Justin Martyr (100-165 A.D.) wrote of
Jesus, "who,… being the first-begotten Word of God, is even
God." 6 In
his Dialogue with Trypho, he stated that "God was born
from a virgin" and that Jesus was "worthy of worship" and of
being "called Lord and God."7
Tatian (110-172 A.D.), the early
apologist wrote, "We do not act as fools, O Greeks, nor utter
idle tales when we announce that God was born in the form of
man." 8
Irenaeus (120-202 A.D.), wrote that
Jesus was "perfect God and perfect man"; "not a mere man…but was
very God"; and that "He is in Himself in His own right…God, and
Lord, and King Eternal" and spoke of "Christ Jesus, our Lord,
and God, and Saviour and King" 9
Tertullian (145-220 A.D.), said of
Jesus "Christ is also God" because "that which has come forth
from God [in the virgin birth] is at once God and the Son of
God, and the two are one…in His birth, God and man united." 10
Caius (180-217 A.D.), a Roman
Presbyter, wrote of the universal Christian attestation to the
deity of Christ in his refutation of Artemon, who maintained
that Christ was only a man. Note that before 217 A.D., Caius
appealed to much earlier writers, all of whom taught Christ’s
deity: "Justin and Miltiades, and Tatian and Clement, and many
others,—who is ignorant of the books of Irenaeus and Melito, and
the rest, which declare Christ to be God and man? All the
psalms, too, and hymns of brethren, which have been written
from the beginning by the faithful, celebrate Christ the
Word of God, ascribing divinity to Him…. [This] doctrine of the
Church, then, has been proclaimed so many years ago,…" 11
Gregory Thaumaturgus (205-265 A.D.)
declared in On the Trinity, that "All [the persons] are
one nature, one essence, one will, and are called the Holy
Trinity; and these also are names subsistent, one nature in
three persons, and one genus [kind]." 12
Novatian (210-280 A.D.) wrote in his
On The Trinity, of Jesus being truly a man but that "He
was also God according to the Scriptures…. Scripture has as much
described Jesus Christ to be man, as moreover it has also
described Christ the Lord to be God." 13
(Note then, that in the 200’s we already had discourses on the
Trinity.)
Athanasius (293-373 A.D.), the keen
defender of New Testament teaching against the early Arian
heresy, which taught that Jesus Christ was not God, declared of
Jesus, "He always was and is God and Son" and "He who is
eternally God,… also became man for our sake." 14
Alexander of Alexandria spoke in
reference to Jesus of "his highest and essential divinity" and
that he was "an exact and identical image of the Father." 15
Eusebius of
Caesarea stated that "the Son of God bears no resemblance to
originated creatures but…is alike in every way only to the
Father who has begotten [Him] and that he is not from any other
hypostasis and substance but from the Father." 16
Augustine declared that Christians
"…believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God, maker
and ruler of the whole creation: that Father is not Son, nor
Holy Spirit Father or Son; but a Trinity of mutually related
Persons, and a unity of equal essence" and that therefore, "the
Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit God; and all
together are one God." 17
Origen stated that Christ was "God and
man." 18
Tertullian wrote of Jesus that "He is
God and man…. We have here a dual condition—not fused but
united—in one person, Jesus as God and man." 19
Proclus wrote, "He was born of woman,
God but not solely God, and man but not merely man…. Christ did
not by progress become God—heaven forbid!—but in mercy he became
man, as we believe. We do not preach a deified man; we confess
an incarnate God…him alone who was born of a virgin, God and
man." 20
Cyril of Alexandria wrote of Jesus,
"For he remained what he was; that is, by nature God. But…he
took it on himself to be man as well" and "There is nothing to
prevent us from thinking of Christ as being the one and only Son
at once both God and man, perfect in deity and perfect in
humanity…he is conceived of as God and is God,..." 21
These are only a few of the references that could be cited.
In
conclusion, from the very first, church leaders—immediately
after the time of the apostles up to the Council of Nicaea in
the 4 th
century and beyond—had consistently believed and taught that
Jesus Christ is God. Therefore, Dan Brown and others are clearly
mistaken when they maintain that the divinity of Jesus was
"invented" by Christians in the 4th century.
Only
one logical explanation can be given for this abundant early
testimony to the deity of Jesus Christ: early church leaders
were simply declaring what was already declared by Jesus Christ
and the apostles in Holy Scripture—that Christ was indeed God.
As Gregory of Nazianzus stated in his "Third Theological Oration
Concerning the Son," "From their [the apostles] great and
exalted discourses we have discovered and preached the deity of
the Son." 22
The
truth is that for those today who deny Christ’s deity—as for the
early Arians—the concept that Jesus could be God, part of the
Trinity, is simply a stumbling block to their rationalism. What
they cannot fully comprehend, they will not accept. However, the
doctrine of the Trinity cannot be rejected on biblical or
historical grounds because the testimony for it is too abundant.
It can only be rejected on philosophical and personal grounds
which have no merit.
How
influential was Constantine at Nicea?
From
the above information, it should be clear that Constantine did
not "invent" the deity of Jesus. But how much influence did he
have on what happened at the Council of Nicea? According to one
account,
Constantine did play an important role at the Council.
Eusebius of Caesarea reports that he played a key part in
calming, convincing, and bringing all to agreement on
contested points. The account of Eusebius fairly glows in
regard to the Emperor, and he is portrayed as a key figure. It
is nowhere suggested, however, that he was permitted to vote
with the bishops nor that he used any form of force to obtain
an outcome….
The Church was willing to accept the help of an emperor, to
listen to what he had to say, but not to accept the rule of an
emperor in matters of faith. However one describes the role of
Constantine at the Council of Nicea, it must be remembered
that the Creed of Nicea expressed what the great majority of
bishops at the council found to be traditional, Biblical,
and orthodox of the Christian faith, a faith in which they
believed so firmly that they were willing to die for it.
23
One
other point needs to be made: In The Da Vinci Code,
Teabing declares that Jesus’ divinity was decided by a "close
vote". Is this true?
It
is not accurate to say that there was a "vote" at Nicea
regarding the divinity of Jesus. As one source reveals, "And
there certainly was no vote to determine Jesus’ divinity: this
was already a matter of common knowledge among Christians, and
had been from the early years of the religion. 24
The
Bishops did, however, have to decide whether or not to sign the
statement the Council drafted which clarified their
understanding of the historical and biblical teaching concerning
Jesus’ nature. If this is what Brown—and his alter ego Teabing—meant
by a "vote", then it wasn’t very close: "Only two out of
more than 300 bishops failed to sign the creed!" 25
Notes
1 Dan Brown, The Da
Vinci Code ( ), p. 233.
2 http://www.ccel.org/fathers/NPNF2-04/v2/A3.HTM,
emphasis added
3 Victor Paul Wierwille,
Jesus Christ Is Not God (New Knoxville, OH: American
Christian Press, 1975), emphasis added.
4 Kirsopp Lake, trans.,
The Apostolic Fathers, Vol. 1, Loeb Classical Library,
Harvard University Press, 1965, To the Ephesians I,
Greeting; I:I; vii.2; xvii.2; xviii.2; xix.3; To the
Magnesians, xiii.2; To the Trallians, vii.1; To
the Romans, Greeting; iii.3; vi.3; To the Smyrnaeans
I.I; To Polycarp, viii.3, respectively.
5 The Epistle of
Polycarp to the Philippians, Chapter 6, in Alexander
Roberts, James Donaldson (eds.), The Ante-Nicene Fathers
Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325
(Vol. 1 The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus)
(Grand Rapids, MI: Erdmans, 1977), 34.
6 Justin Martyr, "The
First Apology," Chapter 63, in Roberts and Donaldson, The
Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1 184.
7 Justin Martyr,
"Dialogue of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr, with Trypho, a
Jew," Chapters 64, 68, in Roberts and Donaldson, The
Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol 1, 231-233.
8 Tatian the Assyrian,
"Address of Tatian to the Greeks," Chapter 21, in Roberts and
Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, 74.
9 Irenaeus, "Against
Heresies" Book III, Chpt. 16, Title; Chpt. 19, Title, para.2;
Book I, chapt. 10, para. 1, in Roberts and Donaldson (eds.),
The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, 440, 448-49.
10 Tertullian (Quintus
Tertullianus), "A Treatise on the Soul," Chapter 41, and
"Apology," Chapter 21, in Roberts and Donaldson, The
Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3, Latin Christianity: Its Founder,
Tertullian (Grand Rapids, MI: Erdmans, 1978), 221, 34-35,
respectively.
11 Caius, "Against the
Heresy of Artemon" in "Fragments of Caius" in Roberts and
Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Fathers of the Third
Century, Vol. 5, 601, emphasis added.
12 Gregory Thaumaturgus,
"On the Trinity," para. 2, in Roberts and Donaldson, The
Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 6: Fathers of the Third Century
(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1975), 48.
13 Novatian, a Roman
Presbyter, "A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity,"
Chapter 11, in Roberts and Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene
Fathers: Fathers of the Third Century, Vol. 5, 620.
14 Athanasius, "Against
the Arians," III, para.29, 31, in Maurice Wiles and Mark
Santer (eds.), Documents in Early Christian Thought
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 52, 54.
15 "Alexander of
Alexandria’s Letter to Alexander of Thessonalica," para.37, in
William G. Rusch (trans./ed.), The Trinitarian Controversy,
(Philadelphia: For tress Press, 1980), 40, 42.
16 "Eusebius of
Caesarea’s Letter to His Church Concerning the Synod at Nicaea,"
para.13 in Rusch, 59.
17 Augustine, "On the
Trinity," IX, para.1; XV, para.28, in Wiles and Santer,
Documents in Early Christian Thought, 36-37, 91.
18 Origen, "Dialogue
with Heraclides," 1-4 in Wiles and Santer, Documents in
Early Christian Thought, 23.
19 Tertullian, "Against
Praxeas," Chapter, 27, in Wiles and Santer (eds.), 46.
20 Proclus, "Sermon I,"
paragraphs 2, 4 in Wiles and Santer, Documents in Early
Christian Thought, 62-64.
21 Cyril of Alexandria,
"Second Letter to Succensus," 2, 4, in Wiles and Santer,
Documents in Early Christian Thought, 67, 69-70.
22 Gregory of Nazianzus,
"Third Theological Oration Concerning the Son," 17 in Rusch
(trans./ed.), The Trinitarian Controversy, 143.
23 http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/sbrandt/nicea.htm,
emphasis added.
24 Bart D. Ehrman,
Truth and Fiction in The DaVinci Code (Oxford University
Press), from http://beliefnet.com/story/168/story_16806_1.html
25 http://www.reachouttrust.org/articles/relatedsubjects/davinci.htm,
emphasis added.
|
|
