HISTORY
OF THE DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE NATURE OF GOD
IN THE EARLY CENTURIES OF CHRISTIANITY
Part 17
SUMMARY - by Don Barnett
Christianity inherited the Monotheism of Israel, and through the teachings of
Jesus, the apostles, and the Scriptures claimed that Jesus was the God of
Israel who was manifested in the flesh, received up into Glory, and who came as
the Holy Spirit. The doctrine was preached everywhere, and was the dominant
doctrine on the Godhead during the first three centuries.
Christian Philosophers united the concepts of Judaism, Greek Philosophy, and
Christianity to form a Logos-Christology doctrine that denied the divinity of
Jesus.
Hippolytus, a strong advocate of the Logos-Christology doctrine, vigorously
opposed the Apostolic doctrine that God is one person in three manifestations
(later called "Modal Monarchianism"). Sabellius, the leading defender
of Monarchianism, was excommunicated in 217 by the Bishop of Rome, who devised
a compromise doctrine.
Tertullian developed and defined the doctrine of Logos-Christology as three
persons in a Trinity, but one God, in which Jesus was subordinate to the Father.
And yet, he used the legal Latin term for "persons" meaning "manifestations"
or "masks," rather than "personalities." The Holy Spirit
was said to proceed from the Father, through the Son.
While this compromise doctrine was cementing two rival factions together, two
splits had developed: (1) Some Monarchians had been influenced by Logos- Christology
until a Monarchian developed in which Jesus was said to be without Deity until
His baptism. This group, known as Dynamic Monarchianism, never
became large, percentage-wise. (2) Many Logos-Christology disciples instead of
following the evolution to Trinitarianism, led by Tertullian, Athanasius
and Augustine, joined themselves to Arius. Arius imbibed some Monarchianism, some
theories of Origen, and invented some of his own -- all of which he built
upon the Logos-Christology foundation. This doctrine, called Arianism, taught that
Christ was human, created by God out of nothing, and made into a lower
god.
The Emperor Constantine ordered a council at Nicea to resolve the difference in
theology on the Godhead. This council developed into a heated battle that ended
in a victory for the Trinitarians. The Trinitarian position was then
strengthened by a new Nicean Creed that was carefully worded to prohibit any
Arianism or Monarchianism (then called Sabellianism) and to strengthen the
Trinitarian conceptions. No other views were allowed.
Arianism was not dead, however, and continued to reappear (several times as
victors, banishing Trinitarian Bishops) until the reign of Theodosius. Monarchianism
never again became predominant in the West, but the scriptural teaching of one
God in three manifestations has reappeared many times in many generations, and
exists even today in numbers in the hundreds of thousands.
In 381, the Nicean Creed was again modified to include the consubstantiality of
the Holy Spirit in the doctrine of the Trinity, and to assert the pre-existence
of the Son of God. This tenet, adopted by the General Council in 451 as a
dogma, is the "Nicean Creed" of today, which we call the
"doctrine of the Trinity."
That the doctrine of the Trinity was a long, slow, hotly-contested development
is quite evident from church history. That the present doctrine of the Trinity
was the teaching of the early church in the first century is an absurdity in
the face of church history. It would be impossible for the
When the Apostolic Age closed, the doctrine of Logos-Christology, Arianism and
the Trinity were not yet invented or developed. At the end of the first century
the Christian world believed that the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit were
manifestations of one person: God.
The Protestant churches for the most part inherited the doctrines of Catholicism, and although Luther and other reformers took up the cry "back to the Bible," none of them found their way completely back to the Apostolic doctrines. Traditions are difficult to overturn; especially if they are tied in with religion -- and especially if the tradition is "said" to be both biblical and essential. This is even more true if the doctrine is claimed to be a mystery that can't be understood, is not rational, and yet must be believed without question. Such is the doctrine of the Trinity..