There were many different views taken on the deity of Christ. The Council of Nicea, the Council of Constantinople, and the Council of Chalcedon were three Councils of this time which discussed different views on the deity of Christ. Each Council was based on what others had already discussed so whatever group shared the same beliefs as you, that was the Council you went with. The first Council was the Council of Nicea. The Council of Nicea was “the first Ecumenical Council.” This council met on the teaching of Arius, a presbyter of Alexandria. Arius’s belief was that “the Father is greater than the Son, who in turn is greater than the Holy Spirit.” This belief is a “radical monotheism” saying that the Father and the Father alone is God.
…show more content…
As a creature, he is not eternal but had a beginning. ‘There was once when he was not.’
They believe in the Trinity, but not that the Trinity is one. The Council of Constantinople “came to be seen as the second of the ecumenical councils.” There were three heresies that were condemned by the Council of Constantinople.
Arianism: ‘one Godhead, power and substance of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, whose dignity is equal and majesty co-eternal, who are in three perfect hypostases or three perfect persons’
Macedonianism: ‘they believed in the deity of the Son but held the Holy Spirit to be a creature’
Apollinarianism: ‘denied that Jesus Christ had a human soul’
Beliefs were different in the East and the West. In the East the belief “was and is that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son.” In the West the belief “grew that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.” The Council of Chalcedon was the “fourth ecumenical council.” The Council of Chalcedon believes in one person in two …show more content…
There was constant debate of how Christ became to be. According to Lane, “the Definition is seen as primarily positive, as an exposition of the Creeds of Nicea and Constantinople.” There was positive light shone on the Chalcedonian Definition and there were things that needed to be reaffirmed. For example, the acceptance of the Nicene Creed as it was.
Four major controversies had provoked the Chalcedonian definition: (a) Arianism, which denied the full deity of Christ; (b) Apollinarianism, which denied the full humanity of Christ; (c) Nestorianism, which denied the union of the two natures; (d) which denied the distinction of the two natures. In my personal experience, I have always been taught that the Trinity is a whole; that God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are one. My church believed that you should not question whether Christ was fully God or fully man or neither of the two. John 1:12 says, “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.” You have the right to be a child of God, but that can change if you are constantly questioning the
As a creature, he is not eternal but had a beginning. ‘There was once when he was not.’
They believe in the Trinity, but not that the Trinity is one. The Council of Constantinople “came to be seen as the second of the ecumenical councils.” There were three heresies that were condemned by the Council of Constantinople.
Arianism: ‘one Godhead, power and substance of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, whose dignity is equal and majesty co-eternal, who are in three perfect hypostases or three perfect persons’
Macedonianism: ‘they believed in the deity of the Son but held the Holy Spirit to be a creature’
Apollinarianism: ‘denied that Jesus Christ had a human soul’
Beliefs were different in the East and the West. In the East the belief “was and is that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son.” In the West the belief “grew that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.” The Council of Chalcedon was the “fourth ecumenical council.” The Council of Chalcedon believes in one person in two …show more content…
There was constant debate of how Christ became to be. According to Lane, “the Definition is seen as primarily positive, as an exposition of the Creeds of Nicea and Constantinople.” There was positive light shone on the Chalcedonian Definition and there were things that needed to be reaffirmed. For example, the acceptance of the Nicene Creed as it was.
Four major controversies had provoked the Chalcedonian definition: (a) Arianism, which denied the full deity of Christ; (b) Apollinarianism, which denied the full humanity of Christ; (c) Nestorianism, which denied the union of the two natures; (d) which denied the distinction of the two natures. In my personal experience, I have always been taught that the Trinity is a whole; that God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are one. My church believed that you should not question whether Christ was fully God or fully man or neither of the two. John 1:12 says, “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.” You have the right to be a child of God, but that can change if you are constantly questioning the