Archive for Jesus Christ

One’s justification and thus atonement before God is realized solely by one’s faith or trust in and union with Christ Jesus (which is akin to Reformation and Calvinistic theology, and very much unlike Roman Catholic doctrine proper). The following is Arminius’s Christology, and what he teaches on the union of believers with Jesus Christ:
    I. As Christ is constituted by the Father the Saviour of those that believe, who, being exalted in heaven to the right hand of the Father, communicates to believers all those blessings which He has solicited from the Father, and which He has obtained by His obedience and pleading; but as the participation of blessings cannot be through communication unless where there has previously been an orderly and suitable union between him who communicates and those to whom such communications are made; it is therefore necessary for us to treat, in the first place, upon the union of Christ with us, on account of its being the primary and immediate effect of that faith by which men believe in Him as the only Saviour.

    II. The truth of this thing, and the necessity of this union, are intimated by the names with which Christ is signally distinguished in a certain relation to believers: Such are the appellations [the act of calling by name] of Head, Spouse, Foundation, Vine, and others of a similar kind. From which, on the other hand, believers are called members in His body which is the entire church of believers, the spouse of Christ, lively stones built on Him, and young shoots or branches: By these epithets is signified the closest and most intimate union between Christ and believers.1

One of the aspects of Arminius’s theology that I appreciate most is his attention given to one’s union with Jesus Christ. It affects election, predestination, atonement, justification, sanctification, and the perseverance of the one in union with Him. As Jesus in no uncertain terms conditionally states: “I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit” (John 15:1-2 NKJV). He further insists: “If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned” (John 15:6 NKJV).

The apostle Paul informs the believer of the same: “Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off” (Rom. 11:22 NKJV). Arminius’s theology is Bible-centered and Christological by nature. He continues:

    III. We may define or describe it to be that spiritual and most strict and therefore mystically essential conjunction, by which believers, being immediately connected, by God the Father and Jesus Christ through the Spirit of Christ and of God, with Christ Himself, and through Christ with God, become one with Him and with the Father, and are made partakers of all His blessings, to their own salvation and the glory of Christ and of God.2

Notice that Arminius does not cower from admitting a measure of mystery in the believer’s union with God the Father through Jesus Christ. Indeed there must exist some measure of mystery in the Christian faith, for everything has not been revealed to us. However, too much mystery in one’s theology lends itself to fostering “a persistent ignorance of what is factual, coherent, and true in light of how God’s word relates to the evidence of life.”3 So, the believer must maintain a balance to the notion of mystery or he or she will end up not knowing much of anything. Arminius continues:

    IV. The author of this union is not only God the Father, who has constituted His Son the Head of the Church, endued Him with the Spirit without measure, and unites believers to His Son; but also Christ, who communicates to believers that Spirit whom He obtained from the Father, that, cleaving to Him by faith, they may be one Spirit. The administrators are Prophets, Apostles, and other dispensers of the mysteries of God, who lay Christ as the foundation, and bring His spouse to Him.

    V. The parties to be united are 1) Christ, by whom God the Father has constituted the Head, the Spouse, the Foundation, the Vine, &c., and to whom He has given all perfection, with a plenary power and command to communicate it: 2) And sinful man and therefore destitute of the glory of God, yet a believer and owning Christ for his Saviour.

    VI. The bond of unity must be considered both on the part of believers, and on the part of God and Christ. (1) On the part of believers, it is faith in Christ and God, by which Christ is given to dwell in our hearts. (2) On the part of God and Christ, it is the Spirit of both, who flows from Christ as the constituted Head, into believers, that He may unite them to Him as members.

    VII. The Form of union is a compacting and joining together, which is orderly, harmonious, and in every part agreeing with itself by joints fitly supplied according to the measure of the gifts of Christ. This conjunction receives various appellations, according to the various similitudes which we have already adduced. With respect to a foundation and a house built upon it, it is a being built up into [a spiritual house]. With respect to a husband and wife, it is a participation of flesh and bones. With respect to a vine and its branches . . . it is an ingrafting and implanting.

    VIII. The proximate and immediate End [or goal] is the communion of the parts united among themselves; this also is an effect consequent upon that union, but actively understood as it flows from Christ; and positively, as it flows into believers, and is received by them. The cause of this is that the relation is that of disquiparancy [long elaboration] where the foundation is Christ, who possesses all things and stands in need of nothing; the Term or Boundary is the believer in want [need] of all things. The Remote End is the eternal salvation of believers and the glory of God and Christ.

    IX. But not only does Christ communicate His blessings to the believers who are united to Him, but He likewise considers, on account of this most intimate and close union, that the good things bestowed and the evils inflicted on believers are also done to Himself. Hence arise commiseration [sympathy] for His children and certain succour [assistance]; but anger against those who afflict, which abides upon them unless they repent; and beneficence [generosity, good] towards those who have given even a draught of cold water in the name of Christ to one of His followers.4

1 James Arminius, “Seventy-Nine Private Disputations: Disputation XLVI. On the Communion of Believers with Christ, and Particularly with His Death,” in The Works of Arminius, three volumes, trans. James and William Nichols (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996), 2:401-02.


2 Ibid., 2:402.

3 Udo Middlemann, The Innocence of God (Colorado Springs: Paternoster Publishing, 2007), 27.

4 Arminius, 2:402-03.

Comments (0)
One of the greatest wars of all times was fought with pens, speeches, councils, ridicule and exile. It was the battle to define the central doctrine of Christianity: who Christ is in relation to God the Father.

The battles raged for most of the fourth century. Bishop [technically not a bishop but a presbyter] Arius claimed that Christ was a created being and that there was a time when Christ was not. This view became known as Arianism. The Council of Nicea rejected it, saying that Christ is of the same substance and essence as God the Father; in other words, Christ is God.

Arius had gained a strong following, and although Emperor Constantine had supported the creed of Nicea while he lived, some of his successors did not. They fell under the spell of Arian advisors. Arians appointed their own bishops throughout the empire, and Arianism maintained a strong footing.

However, there were many voices raised for unity. They felt that the empire could tear itself apart over theology. As crazy as it may sound, theologians tried to work out formulas that would satisfy both sides. Logically, Christ either is truly God who took on the form of a man, or He is a created being. However, the theologians used their formulas to try to get around this with vague wording.

One attempt at compromise took place on this day in 359 at Sirmium in the eastern empire. A council that did not represent the entire Church, consisting mostly of a number of bishops who leaned toward Arianism, issued a creed. While on the surface it condemned Arianism, it objected to the creed of Nicea for saying that Christ was of the same essence as God the Father. Christ, said this new creed, was begotten of the Father — but how or when we do not know. Jesus is only “like” God, it said.

However, the writers of the new creed made a tactical mistake: In their preface, they stated, “The Catholic [Universal] Faith was published . . . on May 22.” This opened them to ridicule since everyone knew that the faith had already been around for three centuries. Those who favored the Nicene Creed, with its clear statement of Christ’s divinity, heaped ridicule on the new creed, nicknaming it the “Dated Creed.” That is the name it goes by to this day.

Pressures for unity were great, from the emperor on down, and so churches east and west signed on to the new creed, although some made changes in its wording first. On the whole, the Dated Creed wasn’t much different than the Nicene Creed, except for a few lines. However, the Dated Creed did not stand. Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, and other pro-Nicene theologians refused to accept any compromise that made the Son less than equal to God the Father. Later, Church councils settled the matter once again in favor of the divinity of Christ.

In the end, orthodox logic won: As someone has remarked, God the Father could not be eternally a Father unless God the Son were eternally a Son.

This Day in Christian History: 366 Compelling Events in the History of the Church, eds. A. Kenneth Curtis and Daniel Graves (Camp Hill, PA: Christian Publications, Inc., 2005), entry May 22.

Comments (0)
Jan
26

A Defense of the Deity of Christ

Posted by: Matt | Comments (0)

Islam claims Jesus was a mere human being, a prophet of God, superseded by Muhammad who was the last and greatest of the prophets. Christianity insists Jesus is God in human flesh. Whatever other points of commonality there may be between these two forms of monotheism, there is no adjudicating this conflict. Both beliefs are at the heart of their system, and each is diametrically opposed to the other. Since we have already considered the evidence for Muhammad’s claim, it remains to examine the Christian claim that Christ is the very Son of God.

Read More→

Comments (0)

A commonplace of contemporary trinitarian theology is the priority it grants to the narrative and symbolic discourse of Christian worship and proclamation over the leaner, conceptual discourse of theological theory itself. Theology continues to employ conceptual forms of thought in probing the meaning of Trinity, but recently deepened appreciation of the more spontaneous discourse of lived Christian praxis—both biblical and ongoing in the life of the church—suggests a more conscious subordination of trinitarian theory to what might be called the “semantic aim” of Christian proclamation and worship.

Read More→

Comments (0)
Jan
01

Ways Of Describing The Holy Trinity

Posted by: Matt | Comments (0)

In this article I want to distinguish distinctions between three ways of speaking of the Lord who is “The Trinity.” These are the biblical presentation(s) of God as a unity in plurality; the church dogma of God as the “immanent” Trinity and the teaching of theologians of God as the “economic” Trinity.

Read More→

Comments (0)

The doctrine of the Trinity requires explanation. Over almost two millennia and throughout the world it has been one of the most central and distinctive elements of Christian faith. Yet the word “Trinity” does not appear in the Bible, and for that reason pastors who follow a rigidly expository method in their preaching may never find themselves preaching on the Trinity. Churches that observe the framework of the Christian year should hear about the Trinity annually when Trinity Sunday comes around. Nevertheless, many churches that cordially assent to the historic creeds as well as Reformation and post-Reformation confessions appear to have a tenuous awareness of this fundamental doctrine.

Read More→

Comments (0)

Among the greatest achievements of the early church is the forging of the doctrine of the Trinity. It received classical expression in the fourth-century creedal statement known to history as the Nicene Creed, in which Jesus Christ is unequivocally declared to be “true God” and “of one being (homoousios) with the Father” and the Holy Spirit is said to be the “Lord and Giver of life,” who “together with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified.”1 Some historians have argued that this document represents the apex of the Hellenization of the church’s teaching, in which fourth-century Christianity traded the vitality of the New Testament church’s experience of God for a cold philosophical formula. Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. The Nicene Creed served to sum up a long process of reflection that had its origins in the Christian communities of the first century. As Douglas Ottati, an American professor of theology who teaches at Union Theological Seminary in Richmond, Virginia, has recently put it: “Trinitarian theology continues a biblically initiated exploration.”2 Or, in the words of an earlier twentieth-century orthodox theologian Benjamin B. Warfield: the “doctrine of the Trinity lies in Scripture in solution; when it is crystallized from its solvent it does not cease to be scriptural, but only comes into clearer view.”3

Read More→

Comments (0)

Among the many things that ought to humble us is how little we know about God. We may measure this ignorance in several ways. First, we must feel keenly how little we know of the revelation of God that we have in the Scriptures. We have found Augustine’s oft-quoted maxim true: “The Scriptures are a river in which an infant may wade and an elephant may swim.”1 Some of us who once hoped to be elephantine in mastering the Book have, in fact, demonstrated the clumsiness of an elephant while wading in its fringes.

Read More→

This section will focus on what the Epistle of Hebrews displays concerning the triune God. First, each Person of the Trinity will be surveyed to find out a common ground that speaks of the Trinitarian presence in Hebrews. Due to the author’s Christological emphasis, God the Son1 will be discussed extensively. Then, the analysis will concentrate on God the Father, and God the Holy Spirit, respectively. How does the Book of Hebrews speak of the second Person of the triune God?

God the Son

From the very outset, Hebrews speaks of Jesus Christ as God’s Son, Heir, Creator, Sustainer, Savior, and Ruler, who sits at the right hand of God (1:2–3). Heb. 1:1–2 introduces a contrast of God’s revelation to the fathers in the prophets (ἐν τοῖς προφήταις), and His revelation “to us in His Son” (ἐν υἰῶ). This

Read More→

Comments (0)

Learn Theology

We desire to provide a wide variety of theological articles and information that will be able to help chrisitans deepen and strengthen their faith. We all have a belief system...are yours Biblical or Un-Biblical?

Professional Web Designs

If you need a web site designed or a data management solution, contact Matthew at CData for quality work at a fair price. Critical Data Solutions (CData) can meet all of your business website design and data management needs.