Showing posts with label Heresy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Heresy. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Heresy ALERT!! Rob Bell - Love Wins
If you go to the actual youtube site (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDLCN8GwBHE&feature=channel_video_title) of this video and read the comments.. You will see how many have a desire to have there ears tickled (2 Timothy 4:3) and Rob Bell has truly shaking the heresy tree and many have fallen out of the tree and are feeling vindicated at believing that a God of love will not send anyone to hell...
Approach all teach cautiously and declare it truth only when it unites with the word of God (The 66 Book Canon ~ Genesis - Revelation) and that not according to your "interpretation" but be diligent enough to align that conclusion of agreement with the bible with church history.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
The Church of Oprah Exposed!!
Counterfeit Christianity
False forms of Christianity have become increasingly popular in our culture and it seems there is a resurgence of interest in things "spiritual." The media has been compliant with its recent offerings of everything from Brad Pitt scaling a Tibetan mountainside in search of divine inspiration to Nothing Sacred, the controversial TV drama that features a sometimes fallible priest. Joan Osborne sings "What if God Was One of Us," while Michael Jordan, jogging in Tibet in a Gatorade commercial, encounters a holy man who tells him "Life is a sport: drink it up."
Then there are the millions throughout the world who are involved in the occult, astrology, witchcraft, spiritism and Satanism. The Harry Potter series of seven fantasy novels promoting witchcraft among children, written by English author J. K. Rowling. have sold more than 325 million copies and have been translated into more than 64 languages.
Millions of Americans look to Oprah Winfrey and her new age advisors such as Marianne Williamson and Eckhart Tolle for counsel about their lives as they reject the saving grace of God.
The most obvious sign of the spiritual decline of the church is apathy - apathy towards the house of God, the Word of God and the presence of God. Apathy sometimes overtakes a believer - even an entire body of believers - before they are even aware anything is wrong. The fruit of apathy is apostasy.
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 2 Timothy 4:3-4
Despite the clear declaration by God that His statutes, laws and judgements are everlasting, many have chosen their own way dismissing God's commandments as being meaningless in light of the end of the Old Testament sacrificial system and the destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70.
“It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God". - Matthew 4:4
It's rare to hear a preacher teach from "every word that comes from the mouth of God," calling his flock to fully obey God and even more rare for them to warn their flock of the consequences of their rebellion. For these and many others, they choose to practice a system laid out in the 10 planks of communism rather than the 10 Commandments system ordained by God. Some have already aligned themselves with the Antichrist system to prepare their flock to accept the mark of the beast. The appearances of these false gospels, false Christ's and false prophets is only a prelude to the final apostasy. They are only preparing the way for the ultimate antichrist who will set himself up in the temple and declare himself to be God. You might say he is preparing his followers to accept his ultimate lie.
False forms of Christianity have become increasingly popular in our culture and it seems there is a resurgence of interest in things "spiritual." The media has been compliant with its recent offerings of everything from Brad Pitt scaling a Tibetan mountainside in search of divine inspiration to Nothing Sacred, the controversial TV drama that features a sometimes fallible priest. Joan Osborne sings "What if God Was One of Us," while Michael Jordan, jogging in Tibet in a Gatorade commercial, encounters a holy man who tells him "Life is a sport: drink it up."
Millions of Americans look to Oprah Winfrey and her new age advisors such as Marianne Williamson and Eckhart Tolle for counsel about their lives as they reject the saving grace of God.
The most obvious sign of the spiritual decline of the church is apathy - apathy towards the house of God, the Word of God and the presence of God. Apathy sometimes overtakes a believer - even an entire body of believers - before they are even aware anything is wrong. The fruit of apathy is apostasy.
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 2 Timothy 4:3-4
Despite the clear declaration by God that His statutes, laws and judgements are everlasting, many have chosen their own way dismissing God's commandments as being meaningless in light of the end of the Old Testament sacrificial system and the destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70.
“It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God". - Matthew 4:4
It's rare to hear a preacher teach from "every word that comes from the mouth of God," calling his flock to fully obey God and even more rare for them to warn their flock of the consequences of their rebellion. For these and many others, they choose to practice a system laid out in the 10 planks of communism rather than the 10 Commandments system ordained by God. Some have already aligned themselves with the Antichrist system to prepare their flock to accept the mark of the beast. The appearances of these false gospels, false Christ's and false prophets is only a prelude to the final apostasy. They are only preparing the way for the ultimate antichrist who will set himself up in the temple and declare himself to be God. You might say he is preparing his followers to accept his ultimate lie.
Originally Posted @ www.jeremiahproject.com
Friday, April 8, 2011
Monday, January 24, 2011
Know Your Heretics: Nestorius
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
John Calvin said in his Institutes of the Christian Religion that Nestorius “devised a double Christ!”
The early church taught that Jesus Christ was one person with two natures: a divine nature and a human nature.
Nestorius (c. 381-451) was a monk from Antioch before he became the bishop of Constantinople in 428. He so emphasized the two natures that Nestorius basically turned Jesus Christ into two persons. Wanting to avoid any “mixing” of the divine and human natures of Christ (as Eutyches did), Nestorius over-emphasized their distinctness.
He argued that there are places in the Gospels where the human nature of Jesus is being described, and others where his divine nature is the subject. In doing this, it seems as if Nestorius has made two persons exist in Christ—two acting subjects, two “he’s".
Christ is two natures in one person
Cyril of Alexandria was the main proponent of orthodox theology in response to Nestorius. Cyril condemned Nestorius’ stance of two subjects present in Christ because it meant there were also two persons—a human and a divine—present in Christ. In response to Nestorius’ position, Cyril wrote: “If any one distributes between two characters or persons the expressions used about Christ in the gospels, etc…applying some to the man, conceived of separately, apart from the Word, others exclusively to the Word, let him be anathema.”
“Nestorius’ under-emphasis of the unity between the two natures of Christ is dangerous because Jesus Christ is the one and only mediator between God and humanity.
”Both the councils of Ephesus (431) and Chalcedon (451) condemned Nestorius. He claimed later that he was simply misunderstood and he believed in Christ’s two natures in one person.
Stephen Nichols notes of the Chalcedonian Creed, “In affirming Christ as two natures in one person, the Creed repudiates directly and explicitly the teachings of Apollinarius, Eutyches, and Nestorius…Against Nestorius, the Creed holds Christ to be two natures in one person without division or separation. It denies that Christ is two persons, two ‘he’s.’” [1]
Why the unity of Jesus matters
Nestorius’ under-emphasis of the unity between the two natures of Christ is dangerous because Jesus Christ is the one and only mediator between God and humanity.
This unity of the one person of Jesus Christ is called the hypostatic union. It is important that we get this union right—Jesus Christ is the God-man. It is precisely in the unity of the person of Jesus Christ and his sinless life, death, and resurrection that God reconciles lost humans with his perfect self.
Two natures, without separation
A disjoining of the two natures would result in a failure in the means of Christians’ salvation. This is why the Chalcedonian Creed says, “our Lord Jesus Christ...for us men and for our salvation…[is] recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated in two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God, the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ.” [2]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] For Us and Our Salvation [2] Documents of the Christian Church
Originally Posted By Justin Holcolmb from http://www.theresurgence.com/
Friday, December 31, 2010
Know Your Heretics: Mani
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
A self-appointed "helper of Jesus"
Manichaeism is based on the teachings of Mani (216–c.277), who founded a Gnostic-like, highly dualistic religion. He rejected all of the Old Testament and much of the New Testament. Mani claimed his religion to be the unadulterated form of Christianity. He referred to himself as “Mani, an Apostle of Jesus Christ by the appointment of God the Father,” thinking himself to be the "helper" to whom Jesus alluded in John 14:16.
"Battle between light and dark"
The Manichean religion is a fusion of aspects of Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, and Gnostic versions of Christianity—a pantheistic hodgepodge. Central to Manichaeism is the belief in a primordial feud between the powers of light and darkness. Mani taught that behind the universe lay two ultimate principles: God the Father reigns over the Kingdom of Light, which is spiritual, and a horrible prince rules over the Kingdom of Darkness, which is material. Both kingdoms are eternal and in perpetual conflict.
Too spiritual for the Resurrection
All material things, including the physical body, were viewed as evil and restrictive. This led the Manicheans to reject the biblical concept of the resurrection of the dead, the content of Christian hope.
In striving for release from their finite bodies through the obedience of simple moral laws, Manicheans were taught to hope for reincarnation as members of the elect who would eventually be delivered from the world cycle through the process of transmigration. Church historian J.N.D. Kelly describes this strange belief:
As he exists, man is tragically involved in the material order; he is fallen and lost. Actually, however, he is a particle of Light, belonging to, though exiled from, the transcendent world. He is of the same essence as God, and human souls are fragments of the divine substance. His salvation lies in grasping this truth by an interior illumination which may be spontaneous, but usually comes in response to initiation into the Manichean fellowship; and in the process of salvation, God is at once redeemer and redeemed.
Too spiritual for the Incarnation
The Manichean view of Christ is seriously different from the Bible’s. Due to the dualism of the religion, the body, being natural and material, is considered evil. For the Son of God to take on our nature would be to contaminate himself with evil. The Incarnation, a contradiction to this dualistic belief, was considered outlandish and implausible.
Perhaps the most famous Manichean was St. Augustine, who adhered to this religion for 10 years while he was at Carthage and then at Rome before he converted to Christianity.
Augustine wrote against Manichaeism in his Confessions and Against Faustus the Manichaean. (Faustus was the chief theologian of Manichaeism).
Christ above all
Manichaeism is clearly contrary to orthodox Christianity in that it insists there is no omnipotent God who is the creator of all things. Rather, the eternal struggle between good and evil places the force of good on equal footing with the force of evil. In contrast, orthodox Christianity asserts there is one God who existed prior to, and separate from, creation. God is not one with the world (as pantheism states), nor is he unable to defeat evil. On the contrary, Colossians asserts that Christ is above every earthly power and his victorious resurrection serves as the ultimate answer to the problem of evil.
“Contrary to Manichaeism, Christianity does not ascribe evil to creation, for the book of Genesis describes everything created by God as good and untainted by sin before the fall of Adam.”
Manichaeism today
The Manichean religion finds continuity with much contemporary new age spiritualism. The idea that “God is in everything and everything is in God” pervades culture, and the concept of reincarnation is prevalent. Contrary to reincarnation, Christianity teaches that salvation does not lie in overcoming evil through moral behavior and upright living. Rather, it consists in acknowledging one’s inability to do so and clinging to the one who has—the God-man, Jesus Christ.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Know Your Heretics: Docetism
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
Docetism was a heresy about Jesus that gained in popularity in the third century among those committed to Greek philosophy. Docetism is a term for a set of beliefs that were found in a number of heresies, including Marcionism and Gnosticism.
“Jesus Felt No Pain”
Unlike many early heresies that denied the divinity of Jesus, Docetism eliminates his humanity. Suggesting that Jesus only appeared to be human though he was in fact not, Docetism derives its name from the Greek word dokeo, which means “to seem or appear.”
Those holding to Docetism believed that there was one eternal father who was eternally transcendent and therefore unable to experience any sort of human emotion of suffering. The idea that Jesus became human flesh (John 1:14) and experienced life as a human was unthinkable and offensive to this philosophy.
The Gospel of Peter, an apocryphal book, illustrates a Docetic view. It says that during his crucifixion, Jesus “kept silence, as one feeling no pain,” which implied, as church historian J.N.D. Kelly notes, “that His bodily make-up was illusory.”
Jesus Truly Suffered
The orthodox early church was strongly opposed to Docetism.
Irenaeus thought the teaching was so dangerous that he wrote a five-volume work (Against Heresies) against one of Docetism’s prominent teachers, Valentinus (c. 136–c. 165).
Ignatius said that it would have been foolish for him to have been imprisoned for proclaiming one who merely appeared to suffer for his sake:
Turn a deaf ear therefore when any one speaks to you apart from Jesus Christ, who was of the family of David, the child of Mary, who was truly born, who ate and drank, who was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, was truly crucified and truly died….But if, as some godless men, that is, unbelievers, say, he suffered in mere appearance (being themselves being mere appearances), why am I in bonds?
Polycarp makes the strongest possible charge against the Docetists by saying that “everyone who does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is an anti-Christ,” echoing 1 John 4:2-3.
Jesus Came in the Flesh
As theologian Stephen Nichols points out, much contemporary popular theology tends to “view Jesus as sort of floating six inches off the ground as he walked upon the earth.” Downplaying or rejecting the true humanity of Jesus is common today, but it does not fit with the biblical picture of Jesus given to us in the Gospels.
While on earth, Jesus experienced hunger (Matt. 4:2) and thirst (John 19:28), showed compassion (Matt. 9:36), was tired (John 4:6), felt sorrow to the point of weeping (John 11:35), and grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52). Yet, in all of his humanness, Jesus never sinned (Heb. 4:15).
Like Us in Every Way, Yet Without Sin
Avoiding Docetism is important because, as the author of Hebrews writes, Jesus “had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people” (Heb. 2:17).
It is because Jesus was tempted as we are that he is able to sympathize with us in our weakness. Put bluntly, the whole of the atonement rests on Docetism being false. On this point, T. F. Torrance writes: “Any docetic view of the humanity of Christ snaps the lifeline between God and man, and destroys the relevance of the divine acts in Jesus for men and women of flesh and blood.”
If Docetism is true and he was so heavenly that he only appeared human, then we no longer can place our confidence in Jesus Christ, who as truly God and truly man serves as the mediator between God and men.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Know Your Heretics: Photinus
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
Questioning the Trinity
After the Council of Nicaea in 325, the orthodox understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity as three persons sharing one divine essence was not universally agreed upon. One theologian who disagreed was Photinus, the Bishop of Sirmium and the disciple of Marcellus.
Did God Choose a Man to Become His Son?
The theology of Photinus veered close to adoptionism by suggesting that the man Jesus was chosen by God to be his Son when he was in Mary’s womb. Photinus denied the doctrine of the pre-existence of the Son.
“Photinus elevates man to the place of Son...”
Ambrose described Photinus’ theology in his De Fide: “We say that God is One, not as does Photinus, holding that the Son first came into existence in the Virgin’s womb.”
Hilary of Poitiers also spoke of the theology of Photinus in his De Trinitate:
Sabellius denies that there is a Son of God; against him Photinus elevates man to the place of Son. Photinus will hear nothing of a Son born before the worlds… Our present adversaries are ranted in the matter of the Divine nature of the Son… Photinus is convicted of ignorance, or else of falsehood, in his denial of the Son’s birth before the worlds…Photinus maintains His manhood, though in maintaining it he forgets that Christ was born as God before the worlds.
In other words, Photinus did not believe that the second person of the Trinity—the divine Word, the Son of God—existed with the Father in eternity past. He believed there is no second person of the Trinity that existed before the human person Jesus of Nazareth.
The Word Was With God in the Beginning
The most straightforward response to this denial of the pre-existence of the Son is found in John 1:1-3. This passage explicitly expresses the fact that the Word, Jesus—who “became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14)—existed from before creation with the Father. Indeed, it was through him that all things were created.
Hilary of Poitiers cites John 5:17-19 to show that the works of the Father are often executed by the Son. Hilary argued that because the Son has the power to do the same things as the Father, he must have the same nature.
“The Word existed from before creation with the Father”
Contrary to Photinus’ teaching, the Father and the Son co-existed in complete equality from eternity past, and it was the second, eternally-existing person of the Trinity who took on flesh and became incarnate in Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
Contemporary Relevance: Jesus Is Fully God
The error of Photinus is important for several reasons. If the Son did not exist eternally with God the Father, then he cannot be fully and completely God. If the Son is merely a man chosen by God to be his son, then Jesus cannot be fully God and fully man.
This error would obliterate the doctrine of the atonement. The reason that Christ can satisfy the wrath of God is that he is fully God, and the reason that he can represent humanity is that he is fully man. Without the doctrine of the pre-existence of the Son, Jesus is merely a man who lived a good life as a spiritual teacher here on earth but can in no way be the savior of the world.
Originally Posted By Justin Holcolmb from http://www.theresurgence.com/
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Know Your Heretics: Eutyches
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
Historical Background: Eutyches
Eutyches (378-454) was in charge of the monastery at Constantinople and was second in command, only lower than the Bishop, in terms of authority there.
Is Jesus a Blend of God & Man?
The early church taught that Jesus Christ was one person with two natures—a divine nature and a human nature.
Eutyches was guilty of over-emphasizing the fact that Jesus Christ was one person and blurred the distinction between his divine and human natures. This was opposite of Nestorius’ heresy.
About Eutyches, church historian Stephen Nichols writes: “To him Christ was a third thing (the Latin expression is tertium quid)….One new and different person fashioned out of two natures is how he liked to put it. That is a theological way of saying yellow and blue makes green.”
When asked by Florentius if he believed there were two natures in Christ, Eutyches argued that there was only one nature in Christ after the incarnation:
Florentius: “Do you or do you not admit that our Lord who is of the Virgin is consubstantial [with us] and of two natures after the incarnation?”
Eutyches: “I admit that our Lord was of two natures before the union, but after the union one nature.”
Orthodox Response: Jesus Is Fully God & Fully Man
In his Tome, Leo the Great offers a beautiful response to the thought of Eutyches: “For just as the God [deity] is not changed by his compassion, so the man [manhood] is not swallowed up by the dignity [of the Godhead].” The human nature and the divine nature in Christ remain distinct and unmixed in the incarnation so that Jesus is truly God and truly man.
Flavian, who was the Bishop of Constantinople, called a synod that met at Constantinople in 448 at which the teachings of Eutyches were deemed heretical. In the Chalcedonian Creed there are phrases directed toward Eutyches: Christ is “to be acknowledged in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one person and one subsistence, not parted or divided in two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ.”
Jesus Is Our Representative
Stephen Nichols clearly describes the problem with Eutyches’ teachings: “The problem with stressing the unity without the counterbalance of the two intact natures, as Eutyches does, is that Christ loses his human and divine identity. As such, he is not truly our representative. The Christ of Eutyches falls short of Paul’s teaching of Christ as the last Adam (Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:42-49).”
The orthodox theologians of the first several centuries saw an intimate connection between the incarnation and the atoning work of Christ.
This is why Leo the Great writes:
Without detriment therefore to the properties of either substance which then came together in one person, majesty took on humility, strength weakness, eternity mortality; and for the paying off of the debt belonging to our condition, inviolable nature was united with passible nature, and true God and true man were combined to form one Lord, so that, as suits the needs of our case, one and the same Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, could both die with the one and rise again with the other.
Originally Posted By Justin Holcolmb from http://www.theresurgence.com/
Friday, September 24, 2010
Know Your Heretics: Marcion
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
The Most Formidable of Heretics
Marcion is one of the most significant heretics in Christian history. His teachings captivated many for centuries after him. Henry Chadwick called Marcion "the most radical and to the church the most formidable of heretics."
Marcion's Two Gods and Gutted Bible
Marcion taught that there were two Gods: Yahweh, the cruel God of the Old Testament, and Abba, the kind father of the New Testament. Because of this belief, he eliminated the Old Testament as Scriptures and kept only 10 letters of Paul and two-thirds of Luke's gospel for his version of the New Testament. He also deleted all references to Jesus' Jewishness. Marcion's "New Testament"—the first to be compiled—forced the church to decide on a core of what was considered Scripture: the four Gospels and the letters of Paul.
Making the Bible "More Spiritual"
Marcion's heretical teachings destroyed the humanity of Christ and assaulted the Christian Scriptures. Because Marcion interpreted Christianity through the lens of a Gnostic philosophy that saw all created things as evil, he wanted to dismiss anything from the Bible that was concerned with the earthly realm. This caused him to cut from the Bible most of the Old and New Testament birth narratives. In his book Antitheses he made a list of what he saw as contradictions between the Old and New Testaments. He saw the God of the Old Testament as the creator of a miserable world, as the author of evil, and as nothing like the Father of Jesus. Because of his disdain for the material world, Marcion argued that any divine redeemer could not be born of a woman. For this reason, he rejected the story of Jesus' birth.
Tertullian and Irenaeus Lead the Charge Against Marcion
Marcion's heresy prompted the church to push back and officially recognize the Old Testament as Scripture. Furthermore, his rejection of the humanity of Jesus energized the church to develop a complete defense of it. Tertullian did exactly this in his work Against Marcion in 207-208. Tertullian saw Marcion's denial of Christ's humanity as detrimental to Christianity: "The sufferings of Christ will be found not to warrant faith in him. For he suffered nothing [if he] did not truly suffer; and a phantom could not truly suffer. God's entire work therefore is subverted. Christ's death, wherein lies the whole weight and fruit of the Christian name, is denied." Irenaeus also challenged Marcion, saying:
He mutilated the Gospel according to Luke, removing all the narratives of the Lord's birth, and also removing much of the teaching of the discourses of the Lord wherein he is most manifestly described as acknowledging the maker of this universe to be his father. Thus [Marcion] persuaded his disciples that he himself was more trustworthy than the apostles, who handed down the Gospel; though he gave to them not a Gospel but a fragment of a Gospel.
Irenaeus writes: Marcion "says that salvation will be of our souls only, of those souls which have learned his teaching; the body, because... it is taken from the earth, cannot partake in salvation." While Marcion was excommunicated from the church in Rome in 144, because he was a wealthy man, he was able to establish quite a following through the next several centuries.
Marcion's Views Alive Today
Marcion is relevant today because some contemporary wacky teachings about Jesus and the Bible are merely a restating of his ancient heresies. In his book The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins writes:
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
This view is quite similar to that of Marcion and still wreaks havoc in the church today. Tertullian was right that if Christ was not truly human then he could not truly suffer, and if he did not truly suffer, then he cannot be the one who has identified with us as fallen human beings, winning our salvation by his atoning death and life-giving resurrection.
Originally Posted By Justin Holcolmb from http://www.theresurgence.com/
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Know Your Heretics: Monothelitism
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
Did Jesus Have a Human Will?
After the Nicene (325) and Chalcedonian (451) declarations of classical, orthodox, dual-nature Christology, a stream of thought known as Monophysitism (the belief that there is only one nature in Christ) still existed, based on the ideas of Apollinarius. In the seventh century, there was a misguided attempt to reconcile the Monophysites with orthodox thought. This view proposed that "while Christ had two natures, he had only a single 'activity'…or, better, only a single, divine will" (Henry Chadwick, The Early Church).
This belief, known as Monothelitism, was proposed by Vigilius and unfortunately accepted by Honorius I (the Pope from 625-638). It was not until the Lateran Council in Rome in 649 and then later at the sixth ecumenical council at Constantinople in 680-681 that Monothelitism was condemned as heretical.
The Monothelitist View of Jesus
Monothelitism, most staunchly defended by Sergius I of Constantinople, is the teaching that Jesus Christ had only one will. After Chalcedon, the Monothelites were worried that those who posited two wills in Christ (Diothelitism) were guilty of edging ever-so-close to Nestorianism (the belief that there are two persons in Christ, as opposed to simply two natures). If Jesus had both a divine will and a human will, it is difficult, said the Monothelites, to see how he is not indeed two persons—a teaching condemned by Chalcedon. So the Monothelites argued that Jesus had no human will of his own, but was controlled by a divine will from above.
The Fight for the Humanity of Jesus
During the period when Monothelitism was accepted by the church, many wondered whether the teaching remained faithful to the Chalcedonian formula. One theologian, however, stood against much opposition and eventually gave his life for the orthodox teaching of the New Testament as stated at Chalcedon. His name was Maximus the Confessor (c. 580-662). According to Maximus, the Monothelite error provided (like Apollinarianism) a weak view of the human nature. If normal human persons have a rational will, then Christ too—if he is fully human—must have a rational will. He saw Chalcedon as rightly maintaining the scriptural balance of the divinity and humanity of Christ while allowing the mystical union of the human and divine to exist in Christ. Maximus was imprisoned and tortured for his view, and this punishment eventually led to his death.
Yet, his stand for orthodoxy in the face of intense opposition was later vindicated. According to the Sixth Ecumenical Council of the Church in Constantinople (AD 680-681), there are two wills and two centers of action in Christ, but not two persons:
We likewise declare that in him [Christ] are two natural wills (dyo physika theleseis) and two natural operations (dyo physikas energeias) indivisibly, inconvertibly, inseparably, inconfusedly, according to the teaching of the holy Fathers. And these two natural wills are not contrary the one to the other (God forbid!) as the impious heretics assert, but his human will follows and that not as resisting and reluctant, but rather as subject to his divine and omnipotent will. (Oliver Crisp, Divinity and Humanity)
Why Jesus' Human Will Matters
While the primary relevance of this discussion concerns Christology, there is also practical relevance for the Christian life wrapped up in this nuanced debate. Namely, how are we to understand the activity of Jesus in the Gospels? "Did the Lord to whom and through whom Christians pray, pray himself?" (The Early Church)
If Jesus had only one divine/human will, he would seem to have no use for prayer. On the other hand, if Jesus had a truly and completely human will alongside of his divine will, prayer would take on a significant importance for the person of Christ. In the foreground, moreover, rings Gregory of Nazianzus' maxim that that which he did not assume he did not redeem. Once again, if Jesus is the one eternal Son of the Father who for us and our salvation became man, then he must be fully man if he is to serve as the one mediator between God and men.
Originally Posted By Justin Holcolmb from http://www.theresurgence.com/
Friday, June 25, 2010
Know Your Heretics: Apollinarius
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
Apollinarius
Historical Background
In the years following the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., the church was wrestling with many questions about the person and work of Christ. At Nicaea, the deity of Christ was established as orthodox Christian teaching, but many questions concerning the person of Christ remained.
Apollinarius, named the Bishop of Laodicea in 362 A.D., is responsible for Apollinarianism. This view compromises the full humanity of Jesus by suggesting that the eternal logos (Word) replaced the human soul of Jesus and served as the life-giving principle in the body of Christ.
Apollinarius’ View of Jesus
Apollinarius says, “The flesh, being dependent for its motions on some other principle of movement and action…is not of itself a complete living entity, but in order to become one enters into fusion with something else. So it united itself with the heavenly governing principle [the Logos] and was fused with it…Thus out of the moved and the mover was compounded a single living entity—not two, nor one compound of two complete, self-moving principles” (Apollinarius, “Fragment 107”).
J.N.D. Kelly, a prominent scholar of doctrinal history, writes, “The presupposition of this argument is that the divine Word was substituted for the normal human psychology in Christ.” Put differently, the humanity that was assumed in the incarnation was not a complete humanity but lacked a significant component of personhood. Apollinarius believed, then, that Jesus was only partially human.
The Orthodox Response
The teaching of Apollinarius was condemned at Antioch in 378 and 379 and by the Council of Constantinople in 381. The primary defender of theological orthodoxy was Gregory of Nazianzus, a 4th century Eastern theologian and the Archbishop of Constantinople.
He saw Apollinarius as compromising the saving work of Jesus: “If anyone has put his trust in him as a man without a human mind, he is really bereft of mind, and quite unworthy of salvation. For that which he has not assumed he has not healed; but that which is united to his Godhead is also saved. If only half Adam fell, then that which Christ assumes and saves may be half also; but if the whole of his nature fell, it must be united to the whole nature of Him that was begotten, and so be saved as a whole” (“To Cledonius Against Apollinarius”).
In other words, if all of Adam was lost and ruined by the Fall, then Christ, the second Adam, must put on all that Adam possessed in order to restore human nature and live the life that Adam failed to live. These issues regarding salvation motivated Gregory to articulate a Christology faithful to the Bible.
Why Does All This Matter?
If Apollinarius is right and the “Word” replaced the human soul of Jesus, we are left wondering how Christ can be fully human. Far from lacking a normal human psychology, the Gospels depict Jesus as being completely human in the way he experienced sorrow, pain, and other genuinely human experiences. Certainly Jesus Christ was fully God, as the council of Nicea maintained, but he was also fully man. And it was his deity—as well as his humanity—that allowed him to be our perfect substitute, the mediator between God and humanity for us and for our salvation.
Originally Posted By Justin Holcolmb from http://www.theresurgence.com/
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Know Your Heretics: Pelagius
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
Pelagius
Historical Background
In the early 5th century a debate arose between Pelagius, a British monk, and Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo in North Africa. They disagreed over the relationship between human nature after the Fall and saving, divine grace in Jesus Christ.
When Pelagius arrived in Rome and saw the city’s dim view of morality, he developed a reputation for being a spiritual director who urged people to reform their behavior and live lives as upstanding, moral citizens.
Pelagius’ View of Sin
Pelagius rejected the doctrines of original sin, substitutionary atonement, and justification by faith.
Pelagius emphasized unconditional free will and the ability to better oneself spiritually without grace. This was in direct contrast to Augustine, who believed that humanity was completely helpless in Adam’s sin and in desperate need of grace. Specifically, Pelagius took issue with Augustine’s prayer in his Confessions, which asked God to grant humans grace to act in accordance with his divine commands: “Grant what you command and command what you will.” (Confessions, X. 40).
Pelagius rejected the teaching of “original sin,” the results of the Fall upon humanity. According to him, Adam’s sin in no way made humans corrupt, but instead “over the years our sin gradually corrupts us, building an addiction and then holding us bound with what seems like the force of nature itself.” (Letter to Demetrias, VIII). Humans by nature have a clean slate, and it is only through voluntary sin that humans are made wicked. Potentially, then, one could live a sinless life and merit heaven.
Pelagius thought that God commanding a person to do something that he lacked the ability to do would be useless: “To call a person to something he considers impossible does him no good.” (Letter to Demetrias, I). If God called humans to live moral lives, Pelagius thought, it should be within their power to carry out such commands.
Orthodox Response
Pelagius’ error was deemed heretical in 416 by the Council of Carthage. Originally Adam, Augustine said, possessed freedom—the ability not to sin. After the Fall, all human beings participate in Adam’s sin, which renders them not able not to sin. After the mediation of divine grace in Jesus Christ humans are once again given the ability not to sin.
Augustine replied to Pelagius’ views in two treatises: On the Grace of Christ and On Original Sin. Augustine writes: “We must realize that Pelagius believes that neither our will nor our action is helped by divine aid…he believes that God does not help us to will, that he does not help us to act, that he helps us only to be able to will and to act.”(On the Grace of Christ, V.6).
Augustine saw Pelagius’ teaching to be a clear denial of Philippians 2:12-13, because Pelagius located the capacity “to will and to do” what pleases God in human nature rather than in God’s grace.”(On the Grace of Christ, V.6 and VI.7).
Why Does All This Matter?
Ignoring the consequences the Fall has on everyone leads to a diminishment of the multifaceted work of Christ. In his ministry Jesus not only bore our sins on the cross, but lived a perfect life in obedience to the Father through the power of the Holy Spirit—the life that Adam failed to live—in order to restore fallen humans to their original state of grace.
It is not only through the grace of God that humans are initially saved but also through this grace that they are sustained. As Augustine put it, God “guards the weak so that by his gift the saints unfailingly choose the good and unfailingly refuse to abandon it.”(On Rebuke and Grace, 38).
Without understanding the magnitude of sin and the plight of humanity, the gracious work of Jesus for us and our salvation seems superfluous. 1 Peter 1:18-19 says: “You were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ.”
Because of sin, humans are not naturally good—that's why we need Jesus.
Originally Posted By Justin Holcolmb from http://www.theresurgence.com/
Know Your Heretics: Sabellius
Justin Holcomb Director of the Resurgence
Know Your Heretics series
Sabellius
The Historical Background
Sabellius, a third-century theologian and priest, was a proponent of modalism. Modalism is a non-Trinitarian heresy claiming that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are simply different modes of God and not distinct persons within the Godhead. Little is known about Sabellius, who was excommunicated in 220 AD, but the teaching attached to his name became infamous and is still with us today.
Sabellius’ View of God
The modalists were rightly concerned with maintaining the oneness of God as well as the full deity of Christ. However, this led them to the error of seeing any suggestion that the Son was a distinct person from the Father as creating a duality within the Godhead.
Early historian Hippolytus summarized the modalist position as one in which the names “Father,” “Son,” and “Holy Spirit” did not stand for real distinctions in the Godhead, but rather mere names that described the actions of the one God at different times in history. In other words, “Father,” “Son,” and “Spirit” are merely adjectives describing how the one divine Being acts and is perceived.
Sabellius used the analogy of the sun to explain his position. In the same way that the sun gives off both light and heat, so also the single divine being radiates in history in different fashions. In creation, the divine Being acts as Father; in redemption, as Son; in the lives of believers, as the Holy Spirit.
The Orthodox Response
The orthodox response to the heresy of Sabellius (and other modalists) came from Tertullian, the African theologian. In Against Praxeas, Tertullian argued that Scripture reveals that the Godhead is three who are at the same time one. He rightly considered this an essential doctrine of Christianity.
In the Sabellian modalist view, the three are not anything real, but rather just different manifestations of the one. Therefore, Tertullian proposed that we speak of the Godhead as “one substance (substantia) consisting in three persons (persona).” This terminology would serve as the basis for future Latin theology, and it is from Tertullian’s pen that the important Christian word “Trinity” (trinitas) was first inked.
Why Does All This Matter?
Sabellianism is one of the heresies in Christendom that keeps appearing again and again in different forms. Anyone who has sat in a Sunday School class and heard that God’s Tri-unity is like water in that it appears to us in three forms (liquid, steam, and ice) has been exposed to a contemporary variation of modalism. God is not one person that exists in three different forms at three different times, but three distinct persons concurrently sharing one common essence.
Modalism also reared its ugly head in the classic liberal theology of Friedrich Schleiermacher, and it is even seen today in the “Oneness” sect of Pentecostalism, which clearly denies the doctrine of the Trinity. What is at stake in the debate is not merely fancy theological terminology, but our understanding of God himself. For example, if Sabellian modalism were true, the intimate relationship that existed between the Father and the Son from all eternity (John 17) would be irrational.
Modalism undercuts the atoning work of Jesus Christ, as well. If there is only one God who works in different modes of being throughout history, one must question whether Jesus Christ was truly a man, or if he only appeared to be such, as the heresy of Docetism declares. If Jesus Christ is not fully God and fully man, then he cannot be the one mediator between God and man. It is for this reason that the heresy of Sabellian modalism must be rejected, and the biblical doctrine of the Trinity must be affirmed.
Originally Posted By Justin Holcolmb from http://www.theresurgence.com/
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Know Your Heretics: Arius
Academic Dean of Re:Train
Know Your Heretics series:
Arius
Historical Background
Arius (256-336 A.D.) is the most famous heretic of Christian theology. He was born in Libya and died in Constantinople. Arius held a prominent position as a priest in the Church of Alexandria when he started a theological controversy in 318. Arius denied the eternal deity of Christ and his equality with the Father. He argued that Christ was created by the Father.
Since the age of the Apostles, Jesus had always been considered divine by his followers, but his precise relation to the Godhead had not yet been defined. Thanks to Arius, the Trinitarian controversy regarding the status of Jesus Christ erupted.
Arius’ View of Jesus
Arius did not believe that the Father and the Son were of the same substance. Instead, he believed in the eternal functional and ontological subordination of the Son to the Father—that the Son was a lower being than the Father.
According to Arius, the Son was created before time. In other words, he was not co-eternal with the Father. As he put it, “Before he was begotten or created or appointed or established, he did not exist; for he was not unbegotten” (Letter to Eusebius). Furthermore, the Son was not of one divine substance with the Father. He was rather of a similar substance with the Father (homoiousios). On this view, the divine qualities of the Son are given to him by the Father.
Arius claimed that when the Scriptures speak of Jesus as the “Son” of God, it is merely a title of honor—a title given to Jesus as the one on whom the Father had lavished a special grace. Thus, Arius says, “He is not God truly, but by participation in grace…He too is called God in name only” (Early Christian Doctrines).
Orthodox Response
The theology of Arius became so controversial that Constantine intervened in 325, calling the Council of Nicaea. Athanasius, the leading defender of Nicene orthodoxy and the most prolific writer of orthodox Trinitarian doctrine in the fourth century, saw a major flaw in the writings of Arius and called his heresy the “forerunner of the Antichrist” (Athanasius, Or. Ar. 1:1).
According to Athanasius, the Son was eternally begotten from the Father such that he can be said to be of the same essence (homoousios) with the Father: “The Son is other in kind and nature than the creatures, or rather belongs to the Father’s substance and is of the same nature as He.” (Athanasius, Contra Arianos, III).
Why Does All This Matter?
There are some today who repeat Arius’ views. However, Jesus claimed to be God and the Christian tradition has held that there is an intimate connection between salvation and the deity of Christ.
We are saved from God by God. Only a divine Savior can bear the weight of God’s wrath in atonement. Only Jesus as the God-man can satisfy the enormous debt and penalty caused by human sin against God. No mere human could bridge that gap. Only a divine Savior can pay the costly price of redeeming us from our bondage to sin and death. Only the God-man can conquer all his people’s enemies. Our salvation rests on the infinite capacities of our savior, Jesus Christ.
Originally Posted By Justin Holcolmb from http://www.theresurgence.com/
Heresy Defined (www.Carm.org)
Heresy
"Error, indeed, is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed, it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in on attractive dress, so as, by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced (ridiculous as the expression may seem) more true than truth itself." Irenaeus Against Heresies 1.2
The word "heresy" comes from the Greek hairesis which means "choosing," or "faction." At first, the term heresy did not carry the negative meaning it does now. But, as the early church grew in its scope and influence throughout the Mediterranean area, various teachers proposed controversial ideas about Christ, God, salvation, and other biblical themes. It became necessary for the church to determine what was and was not true according to the Bible. For example, Arius of Alexandar (320 AD) taught that Jesus was a creation. Was this true? Was this important? Other errors arose. The Docetists taught that Jesus wasn't human. The Modalists denied the Trinity. The Gnostics denied the incarnation of Christ. Out of necessity, the church was forced to deal with these heresies by proclaiming orthodoxy. And in so doing, condemnation upon these heresies and the heretics became a reality.
Unfortunately, some of those who attempted to defend and establish the truth did so by killing those who disagreed with them. What would prompt such hostile actions against those who merely had "differences of opinion" on biblical subjects? The answer may not ever be fully known, but I offer this explanation.
Culturally, when Christianity arose, it arose in the midst of a hostile environment. Judaism and the Roman Empire both warred against its people and its teaching. Persecutions arose and Christians were killed for their faith. In the Diaspora (dispersion) of the late first century, Christians were scattered throughout the Mediterranean area due to the persecutions in Israel. The Roman Empire with its theology of many gods was not friendly to Christianity's monotheism. Therefore, Christians were further persecuted.
Theologically, the Bible teaches condemnation upon false doctrines and false teachers. Gal. 1:8-9 says, "But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed" (NASB). See also 11 Cor. 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:1315; 1 Tim. 1:18-20; Titus 3:10. Why is this taught in the Bible? The reason is simple. Christians are saved by faith in the work of Jesus on the cross. But faith in itself is not enough. Faith is not a substance you can put in a jar. It is belief in something. Faith is only as good as who it is placed in. If you put your faith in a false God, you are lost because a false god cannot save anyone. This is why God says in Exodus 20:3, "You shall have no other gods before Me." Faith is not what saves, but faith in the true God is what saves.
I suspect that it is a combination of the cultural and theological contexts that resulted in Christians seeking to "do away with" the heretics. Heresy has the ability to damn because they have the ability to confuse the gospel sufficiently to make it powerless. For this reason, I suspect that to many ancient Christians, heresy became one of the most serious of offenses.
Essential verses nonessential
It becomes necessary to define those doctrines which separate Christian from non-Christian. It would make no sense to persecute anyone over a doctrine that is not essential to the faith. Such nonessentials, in my opinion, would include baptism of infants, pre or post-trib rapture, worship on Saturday or Sunday, musical instruments in the church, the charismatic gifts, worship styles, dress codes, etc. These kinds of subjects do not affect one's salvation. Unfortunately, the disagreements that arise around these subjects result in denominational fragmentation.
Essentials of the faith would include who God is, who Jesus is, salvation by grace, and Jesus' resurrection. From these subjects we have derived doctrines known as the Trinity and the hypostatic union (Jesus' two natures: God and man). The Bible tells us that these doctrines concerning God, Christ, salvation, and resurrection are essential to the faith. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that Christians know their faith and know how to defend it against the doctrines that compromise the essentials.
List of Heresy floating around today
•Adoptionism - God granted Jesus powers and then adopted him as a Son.
•Albigenses - Reincarnation and two gods: one good and other evil.
•Apollinarianism - Jesus divine will overshadowed and replaced the human.
•Arianism - Jesus was a lesser, created being.
•Docetism - Jesus was divine, but only seemed to be human.
•Donatism - Validity of sacraments depends on character of the minister.
•Gnosticism - Dualism of good and bad and special knowledge for salvation.
•Kenosis - Jesus gave up some divine attributes while on earth.
•Modalism - God is one person in three modes.
•Monarchianism - God is one person.
•Monophysitism - Jesus had only one nature: divine.
•Nestorianism - Jesus was two persons.
•Patripassionism - The Father suffered on the cross
•Pelagianism - Man is unaffected by the fall and can keep all of God's laws.
•Semi-Pelagianism - Man and God cooperate to achieve man's salvation.
•Socinianism - Denial of the Trinity. Jesus is a deified man.
•Subordinationism - The Son is lesser than the Father in essence and or attributes.
•Tritheism - the Trinity is really three separate gods.
Article written by Rev. Matt Slick from www.carm.org
"Error, indeed, is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed, it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in on attractive dress, so as, by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced (ridiculous as the expression may seem) more true than truth itself." Irenaeus Against Heresies 1.2
The word "heresy" comes from the Greek hairesis which means "choosing," or "faction." At first, the term heresy did not carry the negative meaning it does now. But, as the early church grew in its scope and influence throughout the Mediterranean area, various teachers proposed controversial ideas about Christ, God, salvation, and other biblical themes. It became necessary for the church to determine what was and was not true according to the Bible. For example, Arius of Alexandar (320 AD) taught that Jesus was a creation. Was this true? Was this important? Other errors arose. The Docetists taught that Jesus wasn't human. The Modalists denied the Trinity. The Gnostics denied the incarnation of Christ. Out of necessity, the church was forced to deal with these heresies by proclaiming orthodoxy. And in so doing, condemnation upon these heresies and the heretics became a reality.
Unfortunately, some of those who attempted to defend and establish the truth did so by killing those who disagreed with them. What would prompt such hostile actions against those who merely had "differences of opinion" on biblical subjects? The answer may not ever be fully known, but I offer this explanation.
Culturally, when Christianity arose, it arose in the midst of a hostile environment. Judaism and the Roman Empire both warred against its people and its teaching. Persecutions arose and Christians were killed for their faith. In the Diaspora (dispersion) of the late first century, Christians were scattered throughout the Mediterranean area due to the persecutions in Israel. The Roman Empire with its theology of many gods was not friendly to Christianity's monotheism. Therefore, Christians were further persecuted.
Theologically, the Bible teaches condemnation upon false doctrines and false teachers. Gal. 1:8-9 says, "But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed" (NASB). See also 11 Cor. 16:22; 2 Cor. 11:1315; 1 Tim. 1:18-20; Titus 3:10. Why is this taught in the Bible? The reason is simple. Christians are saved by faith in the work of Jesus on the cross. But faith in itself is not enough. Faith is not a substance you can put in a jar. It is belief in something. Faith is only as good as who it is placed in. If you put your faith in a false God, you are lost because a false god cannot save anyone. This is why God says in Exodus 20:3, "You shall have no other gods before Me." Faith is not what saves, but faith in the true God is what saves.
I suspect that it is a combination of the cultural and theological contexts that resulted in Christians seeking to "do away with" the heretics. Heresy has the ability to damn because they have the ability to confuse the gospel sufficiently to make it powerless. For this reason, I suspect that to many ancient Christians, heresy became one of the most serious of offenses.
Essential verses nonessential
It becomes necessary to define those doctrines which separate Christian from non-Christian. It would make no sense to persecute anyone over a doctrine that is not essential to the faith. Such nonessentials, in my opinion, would include baptism of infants, pre or post-trib rapture, worship on Saturday or Sunday, musical instruments in the church, the charismatic gifts, worship styles, dress codes, etc. These kinds of subjects do not affect one's salvation. Unfortunately, the disagreements that arise around these subjects result in denominational fragmentation.
Essentials of the faith would include who God is, who Jesus is, salvation by grace, and Jesus' resurrection. From these subjects we have derived doctrines known as the Trinity and the hypostatic union (Jesus' two natures: God and man). The Bible tells us that these doctrines concerning God, Christ, salvation, and resurrection are essential to the faith. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that Christians know their faith and know how to defend it against the doctrines that compromise the essentials.
List of Heresy floating around today
•Adoptionism - God granted Jesus powers and then adopted him as a Son.
•Albigenses - Reincarnation and two gods: one good and other evil.
•Apollinarianism - Jesus divine will overshadowed and replaced the human.
•Arianism - Jesus was a lesser, created being.
•Docetism - Jesus was divine, but only seemed to be human.
•Donatism - Validity of sacraments depends on character of the minister.
•Gnosticism - Dualism of good and bad and special knowledge for salvation.
•Kenosis - Jesus gave up some divine attributes while on earth.
•Modalism - God is one person in three modes.
•Monarchianism - God is one person.
•Monophysitism - Jesus had only one nature: divine.
•Nestorianism - Jesus was two persons.
•Patripassionism - The Father suffered on the cross
•Pelagianism - Man is unaffected by the fall and can keep all of God's laws.
•Semi-Pelagianism - Man and God cooperate to achieve man's salvation.
•Socinianism - Denial of the Trinity. Jesus is a deified man.
•Subordinationism - The Son is lesser than the Father in essence and or attributes.
•Tritheism - the Trinity is really three separate gods.
Article written by Rev. Matt Slick from www.carm.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
