Accompanied by a few of his
partisans, the haughty priest strolled through the streets of Constantinople.
The year was 336 A.D. Arius had been condemned and exiled, but now was
recalled by the Emperor Constantine himself. He smugly reflected on his
sly triumph over his opponents, for tomorrow he was to be vindicated! Feeling
unwell, he excused himself to turn aside momentarily, when excruciating pain
seized him. Crying out in agony, he suddenly fell to the ground, and died.
Was this divine retribution? Read
the history of Arius and decide.
In the age following the apostles
of the Lord, many letters and other writings were circulated dealing with the
practical aspects of Christian life and describing the joy, blessing, and
salvation as found in Christ. "Church Fathers," so-called, such as
Polycarp, Clement, Irenaeus, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Origen, and others
confessed their faith and their fervent wish to impart it to others through the
gospel. But even in the apostles’ day, John had written:"As you have
heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists" (1
John 2:18; see also 2 Tim. 4:3,4; 2 Pet. 2:1; 1 John 4:1-3). The religious
leaders at His cross demanded Jesus’ death, "Because He made Himself the
Son of God" (John 19:7). The unbelief that first challenged mankind’s
faith in God’s Word in the Garden of Eden was, and is, as deadly as ever
(Gen. 3:1-6).
During the second and third
centuries, discussions and correspondence on theological subjects began to
drift away from "the simplicity that is in Christ" (2 Cor. 11:3),
moving toward Greco-Roman philosophy, Judaic legalism, and pagan mythology.
Certain church leaders, in their defense of the "faith that was once
delivered unto the saints," composed the statement of faith known as
"The Apostles’ Creed" that briefly summarized their basic beliefs.
Originally dating from about 100 A.D., it had been memorized and passed down
orally for many years until being put into written form in 340 A.D. Hilary of
Poitiers, a faithfully opponent of Arianism, has wisely written this concerning
the making of creeds:"We are compelled to attempt what is unattainable,
to climb where we cannot reach, to speak what we cannot utter. Instead of the bare
adoration of faith, we are compelled to entrust the deep things of religion
to the perils of human expression."
By the end of the third century,
theologians were laboring to construct a statement faithfully delineating the
doctrine concerning the divine nature, especially as to the true deity of Jesus
Christ. Meanwhile, certain contentious voices found a champion in Arius.
In 318 A.D. Arius was a presbyter
in charge of a church in Alexandria. He was a man of learning and a shrewd
reasoner. His bishop, Alexander, had been teaching the eternal co-existence of
the Son with the Father. Arius protested, saying that God alone is eternal, and
therefore the Son must have had a beginning, created "out of nothing"
by divine fiat. Some thought that Arius merely intended to refute what he
assumed to be Sabellian teaching. (Sabellius, around 220 A.D., had denied that
the Son possessed a personality distinct from that of the Father, and had
taught that God manifests Himself in three modes without any distinction of
identity, thus denying the Trinity.)
Following the theories of Lucian,
his teacher, Arius held that the Logos ("Word," John 1:1) was a created
being, sent forth into the world, assuming a human nature in order to reveal
the Father. Arius said of the Son:"There was a time when He was not"
and that as the Son, Jesus only attained sinless perfection by firmly
maintaining a virtuous life. He said that the Son is not "one" with
the Father, a denial of John 10:30. He taught an inaccessible, unknowable God,
beyond the reach of mere humans, thus denying the mediation, atonement, and
redemption of Christ. To Arius, Jesus Christ was only an "example" to
be followed, not God the Son, who gave Himself a ransom for all (1 Tim. 2:6).
Although Arius’ personal popularity and his shrewd exploitation of his
doctrines gained him followers even among bishops, his teachings have been
called "pagan to the core" by orthodox Christians.
The true, scriptural concept of
divine redemption by the eternal Son was rescued from this pagan heresy, thanks
mainly to the devotion of one man, Athanasius. He wrote that it is futile as
well as irreverent blasphemy to reason from earthly relationships to the
mysteries of the Divine (1 Tim. 3:16). He wrote:"If they were disputing
concerning any man, then let them reason in this human way, both concerning his
word and his son; but if they argue concerning God, who created man, no longer
let them entertain human thoughts, but others, which transcend human
nature…. Nor, again, is it right to inquire how the Word is from God,
or how He is God’s radiance, or how God begets, and what is the manner of His
begetting. A man must be beside himself to venture on such points, since he
demands to have explained in words a thing ineffable and proper to God’s
nature, and known only to Him and to the Son…. Greatly do they err in
entertaining material notions about that which is immaterial."
Athanasius also pointed out that
if the "Son" were not eternal, neither could the "Father"
be eternal. Like present-day Jehovah’s Witnesses, the early leaders of Arianism
had no systematic, overall view of Scripture. Their method was to quote Bible
texts piecemeal, isolated, and out of context, not discerning their true
meaning. As Athanasius wrote:"Laying down their own impiety as a sort of canon
of interpretation, they wrest the whole of the divine Oracle into accordance
with it." (See Psa. 56:5; 2 Pet. 3:16.)
As a clever scheme to further
popularize his heresies, Arius composed a collection of songs, called Thalia
("Spiritual Banquet") for workmen, travelers, and common use. This
led to ignorant and irreverent groups using sacred language in familiar terms,
twisting the meanings into profane jokes in theaters and on the streets. In a
teaching that would later be echoed by Apollinaris (about 326-392 A.D.), Arius
denied that Christ had a human soul, its place being taken by the Logos.
Although these teachings were strongly
condemned by Alexander, Athanasius, and others, they continued to spread,
causing great controversy among the people. Emperor Constantine, anxious for
peace throughout his recently united Empire, tried to mend what he considered
"insignificant" differences among the theologians. Unsuccessful, he
called for a General Council to meet at Nicea in 325 A.D. A large number
attended, including 300 bishops. Athanasius strongly defended the need to
accept divine revelation by faith, and he protested again against asking
"How?" in regard to the Son of God being the "brightness of His
glory, and the express image of His person" (Heb. 1:3). He said,
"Such illustrations and such images Scripture has set before us in order
that, considering the incapacity of human nature to comprehend God, we might be
able even from these, to form some idea, so far as it is attainable, however
inadequately and dimly."
After much deliberation, the
Council adopted a creed (Latin credo, "I believe"), a unified
statement of doctrine. The Nicene Creed is still used in many churches today.
Arius was condemned and banished, spending the next few years in Illyria. His writings were burned. Only he and five other bishops refused to sign the
Council’s "Confession." Their stumbling block was Athanasius’ use of
the Greek word homoousios (expressing the "consubstantiality"
of the Father and the Son, God and Man united in Christ, "one substance"
with the ultimate and only God). Arius and his partisans maintained that Christ
was the incarnation of a secondary deity who was "like" the
Father, but not "one" with Him. Athanasius said, of the Word
becoming flesh:"This Mystery, which the Jews traduce, the Greeks deride,
but we adore … [brought about] the renewal of creation, wrought by the
self-same Word who made it in the beginning."
The results of the Nicene Council
were far from being a victory for orthodoxy. Several diverse parties began to
form; Constantine assumed both political and ecclesiastical power for what
became the state church; the Arians (still active) broke up into three major
groups. The extreme party, "Anomoeans" (or "dissimilar")
emphasized the differences between Father and Son; the "Homoeans" (or
"similar") aimed to avoid dogmatic precision; and the
"Semi-Arians" expressed both the similarities and distinctions
between the first two Persons of the Trinity. About 50 years later, Jerome
wrote of this period:"The whole world groaned and marveled to find itself
Arian." The new emperor, Constantius, openly embraced Arianism, and Athanasius
was exiled to Treves. An imperial order was issued to Arius’ old bishop,
Alexander, to receive Arius back to holy communion the following Sunday.
Alexander prayed:"O let me die before Arius comes into the Church; but if
Thou wilt have pity on Thy Church, prevent this crime, that heresy may not
enter the Church together with Arius."
On Saturday, the day before his
anticipated success, the arrogant Arius strolled with his followers, discussing
their strategies. But before Sunday’s sunrise, Arius lay dead on a Constantinople street. (His death has been described as similar to that of Judas in Acts
1:18.) The baneful influence of Arianism gradually diminished, but not for
several more centuries. The enemy of souls is always busy and has since used
many other human instruments to attack the Person of Jesus Christ. To name a
few:Eutyches and Nestorius, Socinius, Kant and Hegel, Søren Kierkegaard,
Charles Taze Russell, Frederick Raven and James Boyd, the James Taylors, father
and son, and Harry Fosdick. In this present day, prominent leaders of large,
"mainline" denominations such as the presiding bishop of the
Episcopal Church USA and the moderator of the United Church of Canada are
denying the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The apostle Paul told the Ephesian
elders, "Of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to
draw disciples after them" (Acts 20:30). Every age has had its heretics.
To the end of his life in 373
A.D., Athanasius remained faithful in insisting on what he regarded as the heart
of the gospel. The so-called Creed of Athanasius reads, in part:
"For there is one Person of
the Father, another of the Son, another of the Holy Ghost.
"But the Godhead of the
Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one:the glory co-equal, the
majesty co-eternal.
"Such as the Father, such is
the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.
"The Father uncreate, the Son
uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate.
"The Father eternal, the Son
eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal.
"And yet there are not three
eternals, but One eternal.
"So the Father is God, the
Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God.
"And yet they are not three
gods, but one God."
Of the 46 years of his
"official" life, Athanasius spent at least 20 in exile.
"I suppose we may account
Athanasius as a sufficient champion of the true divinity of the blessed Lord.
Of all ancient writers he is known to be the undaunted and suffering defender
of this truth against the whole body of Arians, the Emperor and all, and died
an exile for this truth" (J.N. Darby in Collected Writings, Vol.
34).
Where, today, shall we find that
"bare adoration of faith" of which Hilary of Poitiers wrote?
(Jude 3,4).