On CCEL Article "What do Christians believe about the Incarnation? Was Jesus really God?"

gordythomas's picture

Re: What do Christians believe about the Incarnation? Was Jesus really God?

http://www.ccel.org/node/7393

Tim Perrine, CCEL Staff Writer writes (regarding The Incarnation):

"Traditionally, Christianity has also held that Christ was one person, with two natures. These two natures—one human, one divine—are “joined” together, not “mixed” together. This implies that Christ is both fully God and fully man. This formulation of the doctrine of the Incarnation was most clearly developed in 451 by the Chalcedon Council. Although this doctrine is not explicitly taught in Scripture, it represents the best synthesis of biblical teaching and theology"

First, from a Christian perspective, the title of the article should read "...IS Jesus really God?..."

Second, Perrine talks first of the "doctrine" of The Trinity, then talks of its "formulation" at Chalcedon, then says "...this doctrine is not explicitly taught in Scripture..."

In the latter sense, does he mean doctrine or formulation of doctrine?

For certainly The Gospel according to The Apostle Saint John teaches The Incarnation of The Word (who was/is God) by stating:

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (KJV)

When understood through the lens of Holy Apostolic Tradition, there is simply no need to formulate this further.

It is a clear and direct teaching of The Incarnation of Christ Jesus.

There is a great and prevalent misunderstanding of how and why doctrine was established through the Councils of The Church:

In this age of theologising for the sake of theologising, we assume that The Councils were also engaged in the same activity, with the same motivations and source materials.

We refer to what Scripture teaches without considering that it was those very same councils which ultimately canonized Scripture.

It is important to understand that, in doing so, The Councils of The Church relied on both The Hebrew Bible as well as Holy Apostolic Tradition: simply put, that which The Church already knew it believed, in accordance with the teachings passed on from Christ Jesus, through the Holy Apostles and on through The Apostolic Fathers.

How else would the Bishops of The Church--inspired of The Holy Spirit--know what to canonize and what not to canonize?

It simply wasn't the practice of The Church to codify everything it believed, for She already knew what She believed, long before the Ecumenical canonization of The New Testament by the pre-schismatic Universal Church.

The development of codified doctrine was ALWAYS in response to heresy.

As heretics codified their heresies, it then became incumbent on The Church to codify that which She already believed.

Otherwise, the products of The Councils deserve none of our respect, for then those doctrines would be nothing more than unfounded, self-motivated theologising.




Advertisements