A Man You Should Know - Athanasius: Defender of the Incarnation

Have you ever heard someone talk about the “Church Fathers” but have no idea who they meant? Are they referring to the Apostles or others? In general, this term is understood to refer to the great male writers, teachers, and bishops of the church during the three centuries after the apostolic era, as the church was in its theologically formative period. These men – along with many women who have not received the recognition they deserve – were instrumental in helping to define what is considered to be orthodox belief; that is, those doctrines which are held to be true by the Christian Church.

One of these men was Athanasius of Alexandria (Egypt) who lived at the beginning of the fourth century A.D. Nicknamed “the black dwarf” by his enemies because of his short stature and dark skin, “Athanasius was a theological giant,” says Justo Gonzalez in The Story of Christianity (p. 200). His great intellect, along with his love for the Lord and his church, had tremendous impact upon the Christian faith that continues today.

It is important to understand how the early doctrines of the faith developed. It was not the case that beliefs in the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus were clearly spelled out from the beginning. Instead, the early church wrestled through how to understand their faith based on the Gospel witness to Jesus and the teachings of the Apostles. As they lived out their faith in the context of local churches, these groups would come to common understandings about various beliefs, such as who Jesus was in relation to the Father. Then these views would “bump up against” the views of other groups and together the community would work toward a consensus based upon the writings that were affirmed by the larger faith community as inspired by God (see my earlier post: How Did We Get the Bible?). But sometimes the differing views did more than just “bump up against” one another; sometimes they resulted in outright controversy and charges of heresy. Such was the case with a man named Arius, and Athanasius could not remain silent.

Today we take for granted the orthodox belief in the Incarnation – Jesus is fully human and fully God in one person – although I dare say we all still struggle to understand how this works. This is one of the issues the early church had to work through. The Apostles were pretty clear that Jesus was God (Jn 1:1; Col 1:15-16) but they were also pretty clear that he was human (Matt 1; Phil 2:5-8). This was a problem because Judaism, and therefore Christianity, is a monotheistic religion; that is, there is a commitment to belief in only ONE God. How, then, could the early church reconcile the belief that Jesus is God?

Various answers were suggested: Jesus was God the Father but in a different form (a belief called modalism); Jesus was a human whom God the Father “adopted” as the Son of God (adoptionism); and Arius’ suggestion that Jesus was created by God the Father prior to the creation of the world and that he was more than human but less than God (Arianism). There were other explanations, as well, but you can see that the early church struggled to understand and come to consensus about the nature of Jesus. And this was no small matter!

Before we get too hard on Arius for his heretical view, we need to understand that he was very passionate about defending the orthodox belief in one God. For him, to suggest that Jesus was equal to God the Father was blasphemy. Yet, Athanasius was equally passionate about Jesus being the very presence of God in human flesh. “By virtue of that visit from God in Jesus Christ, [Athanasius insisted that] we are free to be what God intends us to be – that is, beings capable of living in communion with the divine” (Gonzalez, p. 201). For him, the Incarnation was the very core of the Christian faith and he would defend it with all his energy.

The Arian controversy lasted for nearly seventy years, from Arius’ beginnings as a church leader around 313 A.D. until a church-wide statement in 381 that finally condemned Arianism as heretical. Athanasius, as the secretary to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, was involved in this controversy from the very start. During this period, a number of Ecumenical Councils were called. These councils were gatherings of the bishops of the Christian Church from every region where churches were established. They represented the consensus beliefs of the entire Church.

The First Ecumenical Council at Nicaea was called by Emperor Constantine in 325 in hopes of resolving this controversy which was disturbing the peace of his empire. Since Athanasius was not yet a bishop, he did not attend, though Bishop Alexander used much of his work to defeat Arianism. It was at this council that the bishops composed the Nicene Creed, which includes the phrase that Jesus is “of one substance” with the Father. Arius was declared a heretic and Athanasius and the other church leaders thought the matter was settled. But nothing is that easy.

Over the next fifty years, Arianism resurged with the support of the emperor, a number of other councils were called, and Athanasius was falsely accused of horrendous crimes and banished from Alexandria five different times. It was only after his death in 373 that the orthodoxy he had fought for in the doctrines of the Incarnation and the Trinity was reaffirmed for the final time and has now stood throughout the rest of church history.

So, the next time you are reciting the Nicene Creed or celebrating the Incarnation during Christmas, give thanks for the passion and determination of Athanasius, the man who would not give up his conviction that God had become present in the world in human flesh!

How Did We Get the Bible?

The Bible. Most of us have multiple copies of it on our bookshelves. We have multiple translations to choose from. We read it at home on our own, with our loved ones, and hear it read and interpreted in church each week.

But did you ever stop to ask yourself where it came from? You may answer, “God, of course!” And that is true. But God did not send the completed book that we have now down to earth via a heavenly messenger and plop it in the lap of early Christians. It was a much more “earthy,” human process, inspired by God’s Spirit. And this is what we would expect, given that this is God’s usual mode of interacting in the world – through humanity – with the supreme example being Jesus, God in human flesh!

So, come along with me as we explore the “earthy” process of canonization – the fancy theological word describing which writings were to be received by the church as authoritative for its life and thought.

Why Bother?

Why was it important for the church to have a list of accepted writings? There are at least two compelling reasons. First, early followers of Jesus already had the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures, what we call the Old Testament. The books of the law (the Torah), the Prophets, and the Writings, were fully recognized by Jewish authorities as God’s revealed word, and Jesus often referred to and quoted them. God had given God’s people guidance, nourishment, and promises of a king to come through the written word across centuries and it was expected God would continue to communicate this way after Jesus announced the coming of his kingdom.

Second, from early in the second century certain groups formed and made claims that contradicted the commonly accepted apostolic teachings. One of these groups was started by a man named Marcion. Marcion rejected the Old Testament. He believed the God of the Old Testament was vindictive and punishing, clearly different from the loving Father of Jesus. He claimed that the only writings that were suitable for Christians were the letters of Paul and the Gospel of Luke. This was the first time anyone had suggested a list of approved books. This caused the early church to begin examining more closely how they decided which writings were to be used by the church.

The Gospels and Acts

In the decades following Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, and ascension, those who had been with him and witnessed these things began writing them down. One of the “tests” that the early church used to discern which writings would be read in their public worship was that they had to be written by recognized apostles or witnesses, or someone associated with them. This is why the Gospels were the writings that gained the earliest acceptance by the church as inspired scripture. Acts, which was written by Luke as an extension to his Gospel, also received early recognition.

Justo Gonzalez, in his book, The Story of Christianity, points out that churches in various regions used particular Gospels associated with their tradition. “As contact among these churches developed, they began sharing their manuscripts and traditions, and thus the acceptance and use of a variety of Gospels came to be seen as a sign of the unity of the church” (p. 75). This was extremely important in the face of groups such as the Marcionites and Gnostics who claimed to have special revelation or who wanted to reject one or more of the recognized Gospels because it didn’t fit their theology. The convictions of the early church “were not based on the supposed witness of a single apostle or Gospel, but on the consensus of the entire apostolic tradition” (p. 76).

Paul’s Letters

The writings of Paul were also recognized very early in the life of the church as Spirit-inspired scripture. Paul wrote his letters to specific churches, usually to address questions they had about proper worship practices or to correct misunderstandings and even outright sin in the congregation. Copies of these letters were then circulated and read in surrounding churches. This practice met one of the other “tests” for canonicity: that of being widely accepted by the church and its leaders as inspired by God. The reason these letters made it into the Bible we have today is not because a few church leaders decided they contained the theology they wanted taught in the church. Instead, the theology of the church was formed by its use of these texts that had wide consensus among the people of God as being the standard for their life of faith.

The Other Letters and Revelation

By the end of the second century, within about 150 years of Jesus’ resurrection, the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s letters were firmly established as the core of the New Testament canon. The remaining books that we have in our New Testament today all had widespread usage throughout the church although there was no specific list agreed upon. In texts of the third and fourth centuries, leaders in the church wrote about and referred to the entire range of books we have now, though some had lists that left off one or two. It was in AD 367, that Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, wrote a letter that included the authoritative list of canonical books we have in our Bible today. There was little debate, however. Our New Testament came to us through the Spirit-inspired consensus and worship practice of the church at large, not through the decision of a select group of men.