DOCSLIB.ORG

The Doctrine of the Two-Natures of Christ CHAPTER 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Doctrine of the Two-Natures of Christ CHAPTER 1 Digital Commons @ George Fox University Western Evangelical Seminary Theses Western Evangelical Seminary 1-1-1992 The oD ctrine of the Two-Natures of Christ: A Historical and Critical Analysis Amos Yong THE DOC TRINE OF THE TWO-NATURES OF CHRIST: A HI STORICAL AND CRI TI CAL ANALYSIS by Am os Yong A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requ irements of the degree of Master of Arts in the Division of Chr ist ian History and Th ought Western Evange lical Seminary October 1992 MURDOCK LEARNING RESOURCE CENTER GEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY NEWBERG, OR 97132 @ 1992 Amo s Yong ALL RIGHTS RESERVED TABLE OF CONTENTS page Acknowledgments . v Preface . vi Introduction viii Part One : The Hi storical Development of the Doctrine of the Two-Natures of Christ 1. Th e New Testament and the Person of Christ 2 Th e Deve lopment of New Testament Christology 3 Johannine Christology and the Incarnation 7 2. From the Apostolic Age to the First Council of Constantinople (381) ..... 13 Second Century Christologies 13 Te rtu llian and the Monarchian Controversies . 16 The Development of Alexandrian Christology . 20 Chr istology from Nicea to Constantinople 25 3. Christ as "Logos-Anthropos" . 32 Antecedents to the "Logos-Anthropos" Christology 33 Theodore of Mopsuestia and the Antiochene School 35 The Christology of Nestorius 39 4. The Road to Chalcedon . 46 The Nestorian-Cyril lian Debates . 46 From the Council of Ephesus to the "Robber Synod" 51 The Counc il of Chalcedon 53 iii 5. The Defense of the Chalcedonian Creed . 60 The Monophysite Re je ction of Chalcedon 61 The Triumph of Orthodox Christology . 66 The Monothelite Controversies 72 6. From the Med ieva l Period to the Reformation . 78 Christology in the Middle Ages . 78 The Reformers and the Eucharistic Controversy . 82 7- Christology in the Modern Era . 87 The Christology of Theologica l Liberalism 88 The Kenotic Theories . 97 Twentieth-Century Christology in England and the United States . 102 Re cent Thought on the Incarnation . 115 Part Two : An Evaluation of the Doctrine of the Two-Natures of Chr ist for Contemporary Theology 8. The Failure of the Chalcedonian Definit ion . 127 Cha lcedon and the New Testament Witness . 128 Chalcedon and the History of Dogma . 131 Chalcedon and the Current Crisis . 135 9. A Preliminary Christological Re construct ion . 141 Chalcedon and Christological Models . 142 The Standard of Scripture . 146 Towards a Modern Christology . 150 Appendix : The Definition of Chalcedon, 451 . 156 Bibliography . 157 iv Acknowledgements Th e labor of theological research is an exhausting process . Special thanks to the library staff at both Fort Vancouver Regional Library and Western Evangelical Seminary who assisted in locating and making accessible many works important to this study . I am greatful to my father , Rev . Joseph Yong, who bore with my periodical rambling and helped me to synthesize my various theological discoveries. I have also been priviliged to sit under the teaching and mentorship of Dr . W. Stanley Johnson, who took time out from the exacting demands of pastoral ministry to supervise this thesis. Th anks also to Dr . Susie Stanley and Dr . Irv Brendlinger , who were both part of my thesis comm ittee, and whose knowledge of church history and theology contributed to inform and direct my research and writing . I am especially indebted , however, to my wife--with whom I celebrated our fifth year anniversary while completing the initial manuscript--who endured patiently as well as supported me generously in every way throughout this project; and to my now twenty-two month old son for inviting me to take "time-out " dur ing some of the hectic and pressured moments throughout the writing of this thesis. It is to them that this work is dedicated . v Preface During the spring term of 1991 , whi le studying the develop­ ment of Christ ian thought in the modern period under Dr . W. Stanley Johnson , I began research for my M.A. thesis on the Christology of Oneness Pentecostalism following a suggestion by Dr . Susie Stanley made in light of my background as a Pente­ costal . Almost immediately , I came upon the definit ive work of David Reed, "The Origins and Development of the Th eology of Oneness Pentecostalism in the Un ited States'' (Ph.d Diss. , Boston University , 1978), wherein he identified Oneness Chr istology as pr imarily Nestorian in character , thus introduc ing me to the de cisive christological controversies of the patristic age . Over the the next six months, while wrestling with his work , I did further research in an attempt to determine the validity of his thesis. Wh en I finally submitted my initial proposal to the faculty of We stern Evangelical Seminary , my intention was to undermine the validity of the Oneness view of the Godhead by exposing the fallacious christological premises--basically Nestorian , following Reed--upon which it was enacted; this I sought to do by way of a historical evaluation of the Nestorian heresy , both in its ancient as well as in its modern dress. At th is point , the thesis committee recognized the importance of the history of doctrinal development to my study , and requested that I work closely with Dr . Johnson in completing vi this project . In view of his expertise and interest in the history of the devel opment of ideas--which was transferred to me as a student in the spr ing term of 1991 as noted above--I received this turn of events as a sign of divine graciousness and attention to my theological devel opment . While the following purports to be nothing more than a historical survey-analysis of the doctrine of the person of Christ , it is presented with the ant icipation that it is ju st the beginning of a lifetime of investigation into the fascinat ing subject of the development of ideas and doctrine , both in the area of Chr ist ian theology and ph ilo sophy as we ll as in the history of religions . vii Introduction The doctrine of the two natures of Christ formulated at the Council of Chalcedon (451) has long been understood by church historians and theologians to be , on the one hand , the terminal po int of the christological controversies of the patristic age and , on the other , the source of theological confusion which has since called for continuous clarificat ion . The explication of the mystery of the incarnation using the two-nature model of Chalcedon has therefore sought to steer the narrow course between the Scylla of Ap o llinarianism and Eutychianism on the one hand , and the Charybdis of Nestorianism on the other . Al though orthodox Christianity has traditionally been measured by the standard of Chalcedon , its formulat ion based upon philosophical and metaphysical categories foreign to both the biblical as well as modern world necessitates a reasse ssment of its validity for contemporary theology . Central to this study , therefore , will be the demonstrat ion of the numerous insuperable difficulties of the two-nature dogma as evidenced by its development in the history of christological thought wh ich will undermine its value for the modern age . This paper will therefore be divided into two main parts . The pr imary method to be employed will be that of historical analysis. Th is will comprise the first , longer, part wh ich will be a survey of the history of the two-nature doctrine itself , viii beginn ing with the New Testament . Considerab le attention will be devoted to the patristic formation of the doctrine leading up to Chalcedon and the ensuing christological debates extending through the Third Council of Constantinople (681) due to the crucial nature of both periods to a proper understanding of the issue s surrounding the two-nature doctrine . Important christo- logical developments during the middle ages and the Reformat ion will be highlighted before focusing on the numerous problems posed by the rat ionalist re sponse of enlightenment theology . Both the impasse created by the Chalcedonian definition and the failures of the speculative metaphysics of the Greek fathers wi ll be de l ineated throughout this study . Other theoretical and dogmat ic deve lopments in christological thought will be commented on primari ly as they inform the two-nature doctrine central to th is study . The historical survey in part one will demonstrate the need for a critical re assessment of the two-nature dogma which will be the focus of part two . Here , the ontological incompatability of Ch alcedonianism with the twenty-first century will be argued using biblical , historical , linguist ic , and philosophical criteria. As A. N. S. Lane has commented, "valuable though the Chalcedonian Definition may be , it is neither necessary nor 1 desirab le nor possible to accept it unreservedly. " This paper 1. A. N. S. Lane , "Christology Beyond Chalcedon ," in Ch ri st the Lord; Studies in Christo logy presented to Donald Guthrie , Harold H. Rowden , ed. (Downers Grove : Inter-Varsity Press, 1982), 258 . We will return to Lane Js criticism of Ch alcedon in Ch apter 8. ix wil l conclude with suggest ions for a preliminary reconstruction of the doctrine of the person of Christ which wil l seek to stay faithful to biblical and historic Christianity wh ile attempt ing to avoid the various difficulties which have been posed by the Chalcedonian dogma of the two natures of Christ . X PART ONE The Historical Devel opment of the Doctrine of the Two-Natures of Christ CHAPTER 1 The New Testament and the Person of Christ The fact that the Chalcedonian Fathers considered their adherence to biblical orthodoxy as fundamental to their under- standing of Christ as one person in two natures necessitates an analysis of the development of New Testament christology at the beginning of this study .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ernst Lohmeyer's Kyrios Jesus Revisited
    Ernst Lohmeyer’s Kyrios Jesus Revisited Colin Brown September 19, 1996 marked the fiftieth anniversary of the judicial murder of one of the great NT scholars of our time, Ernst Lohmeyer. In an early memorial tribute Oscar Cullmann observed that all future study of Phil. 2:6-11 must take as its starting point the insights of Lohmeyer’s Kyrios Jesus (1928). Lohmeyer’s identification of Phil. 2:6-11 as a pre- Pauline psalm is well known. However, the form-critical analysis which led to this conclusion was by no means the sole contribution of his monograph. Lohmeyer proceeded to suggest theories concerning its place in the eucharistic worship of the primitive Jerusalem church, its role in the development of primitive christology, and its relationship to other literature of the New Testament. All this was done within the context of a metaphysic which Lohmeyer saw not only as the key to understanding the humiliation and exaltation of the servant figure in the psalm, but as the motivating force of Christian living. Lohmeyer divided the passage into two strophes each consisting of three three-line stanzas ( Kyrios Jesus , 5-6; Lohmeyer, KEK 9 [1930], 90): (1) 6 [The one] existing in the form of God [ evn morfh/| qeou/] considered it not plunder [ ouvc a`rpagmo.n ] to be like God [ to. ei=nai i;sa qew/|], (2) 7 but sacrificed himself [ avlla. e`auto.n evke,nwsen ], having taken the form of a slave, having become an image of humanity; (3) and [though] being found “as Son of Man [ w`j a;nqrwpoj ]” 8 he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death [death on a cross].
    [Show full text]
  • "Historical Roots of the Death of God"
    Portland State University PDXScholar Special Collections: Oregon Public Speakers Special Collections and University Archives 7-2-1968 "Historical Roots of the Death of God" Thomas J.J. Altizer Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/orspeakers Part of the History of Religion Commons, and the Philosophy Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Altizer, Thomas J.J., ""Historical Roots of the Death of God"" (1968). Special Collections: Oregon Public Speakers. 57. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/orspeakers/57 This Article is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Special Collections: Oregon Public Speakers by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Thomas J. J. Altizer "Historical Roots of the Death of God" July 2, 1968 Portland State University PSU Library Special Collections and University Archives Oregon Public Speakers Collection http://archives.pdx.edu/ds/psu/11281 Transcribed by Nia Mayes, November 25, 2020 Audited by Carolee Harrison, February 2021 PSU Library Special Collections and University Archives presents these recordings as part of the historical record. They reflect the recollections and opinions of the individual speakers and are not intended to be representative of the views of Portland State University. They may contain language, ideas, or stereotypes that are offensive to others. MICHAEL REARDON: We’re very fortunate today to have Dr. Altizer, who is teaching on the summer faculty at Oregon State in the department of religion there, give the first in a series of two lectures.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation of the Idea of Nestorian Crosses— Based on Fa Nixon's
    QUEST: Studies on Religion & Culture in Asia, Vol. 2, 2017 INVESTIGATION OF THE IDEA OF NESTORIAN CROSSES— BASED ON F. A. NIXON’S COLLECTION Chen, Jian Andrea Published online: 1 January 2017 ABSTRACT It is generally agreed that the study of the Nestorian Cross (a kind of bronze piece believed to be an early Chinese Christian relic), has great significance both for the developing study of Jingjiao and for ethnographic studies of the Nestorian Mongol people. The most important question that we should ask, however, is, “Are these so-called Nestorian Crosses part of the Mongolian Nestorian heritage?“ In other words, before starting to interpret the pieces in question, we need to ask if the identification, made at the first step of examination, is convincing enough as a basis upon which to build the interpretation. This paper focuses on issues concerning all aspects of the concept of Nestorian Crosses, looking first into the history of such an idea, then investigating its inner logic, and finally challenging its hard evidence. It is hoped that the conclusions of this paper will initiate a paradigm shift in the current study of this topic. Introduction to the Study The Jingjiao and the Yelikewen The name “Nestorian Crosses” clearly reveals that the religious dimension has been the primary consideration in the existing identification of these items, an identification which subsumes them as relics of Chinese Nestorianism, or more accurately, of the Jingjiao and the Yelikewen. Although controversies surround the identity of Nestorianism, the most commonly accepted description is as follows: At the Ephesus Council of 431 A.D., the Patriarch Nestorius was deemed heretical and his teaching anathematized due to his insistence that Mary should be called “Christotokos (Christ-bearer)” instead of “Theotokos (God-bearer).” This insistence is thought to emphasize a distinction between Christ’s divine and human natures instead of their unity.
    [Show full text]
  • Sermon Notes: June 7, 2020 Focus: Trinity Sunday Lectionary Readings Trinitarian Images Are Everywhere in Our Liturgy
    Sermon Notes: June 7, 2020 Focus: Trinity Sunday Lectionary Readings Trinitarian images are everywhere in our liturgy. At the same time, there are many Christian groups who reject the Trinity. Pentecostal churches (Church of God, independent Pentecostals); Jehovah’s Witness; Mormons and denominations that you’ve never heard of don’t believe “In the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” If you forget most of this sermon, just remember that Trinity is a relationship. I want to get into some theology; but my primary goal is to give you a reason to care about the Trinity or to know why you don’t care. There are lots of small pieces that one could use to cobble together a scriptural understanding of the Trinity. This is found especially in the beginning of Genesis and when people get baptized. The most explicit verse is at the end of Matthew. Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. There is also a reference in 1st John - For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. It’s a stretch to build the Trinity upon these and other oblique references, but that is exactly what the church in history has tried to do. Here are some historical “heresies” around the Trinity. I am willing to bet that one of them is your favorite. Sabellianism, Noetianism and Patripassianism Trinity is expressed in Could not find an image reference, but it leans to modal and tritheistic sensibility different “modes.” Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not distinct, but rather different faces God.
    [Show full text]
  • Nestorianism 1 Nestorianism
    Nestorianism 1 Nestorianism For the church sometimes known as the Nestorian Church, see Church of the East. "Nestorian" redirects here. For other uses, see Nestorian (disambiguation). Nestorianism is a Christological doctrine advanced by Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople from 428–431. The doctrine, which was informed by Nestorius' studies under Theodore of Mopsuestia at the School of Antioch, emphasizes the disunion between the human and divine natures of Jesus. Nestorius' teachings brought him into conflict with some other prominent church leaders, most notably Cyril of Alexandria, who criticized especially his rejection of the title Theotokos ("Bringer forth of God") for the Virgin Mary. Nestorius and his teachings were eventually condemned as heretical at the First Council of Ephesus in 431 and the Council of Chalcedon in 451, leading to the Nestorian Schism in which churches supporting Nestorius broke with the rest of the Christian Church. Afterward many of Nestorius' supporters relocated to Sassanid Persia, where they affiliated with the local Christian community, known as the Church of the East. Over the next decades the Church of the East became increasingly Nestorian in doctrine, leading it to be known alternately as the Nestorian Church. Nestorianism is a form of dyophysitism, and can be seen as the antithesis to monophysitism, which emerged in reaction to Nestorianism. Where Nestorianism holds that Christ had two loosely-united natures, divine and human, monophysitism holds that he had but a single nature, his human nature being absorbed into his divinity. A brief definition of Nestorian Christology can be given as: "Jesus Christ, who is not identical with the Son but personally united with the Son, who lives in him, is one hypostasis and one nature: human."[1] Both Nestorianism and monophysitism were condemned as heretical at the Council of Chalcedon.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Nestorian' Church: a Lamentable Misnomer
    THE 'NESTORIAN' CHURCH: A LAMENTABLE MISNOMER S.P. BROCK THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE, UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD According to a very widespread understanding of church history the christological controversies of the fifth century were brought to a happy conclusion with the Definition of Faith issued at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. This definition was accepted as normative by both Greek East and Latin West (and hence, subsequently, by the various Reformed churches of the West). Only a few obstinate Orientals (so this conventional picture would have it) refused to accept the Council's Definition of Faith, whether it be out of ignorance, stupidity, stubbornness, or even separatist nationalist aspirations: these people were, on the one side of the theological spectrum, the Nestorians, and at the other end, the Monophysites - heretics both, the former rejecting the Council of Ephesus (431) and believing in two persons in the incarnate Christ, the latter rejecting the Council of Chalcedon and holding that Christ's human nature was swallowed up by the divine nature. It need hardly be said that such a picture is an utterly pernicious caricature, whose roots lie in a hostile historiographical tradition which has dominated virtually all textbooks'of church history from antiquity down to the present day, with the result that the term 'Nestorian Church' has become the standard designation for the ancient oriental church which in the past called itself 'The Church of the East', but which today prefers a fuller title 'The Assyrian Church of the East'. Such a designation is not only discourteous to the modern members of this venerable church, but also - as this paper aims to show - both inappropriate and misleading.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 84 Number 3–4 July/October 2020
    teach the faithful, reach lost, and care for all. Forming servants in Jesus Christ who CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY THEOLOGICAL CONCORDIA CONCORDIA Fort Wayne, IN 46825-4996 Fort Wayne, 6600 North Clinton Street THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Volume 84 Number 3–4 July/October 2020 Sacrificial Atonement by Jesus and God’s Wrath John W. Kleinig Reckoned among the Lawless July/Oct 2020 Peter J. Scaer The Cross, the Atonement, and the Eucharist Arthur A. Just Jr. Penal Substitutionary Atonement? Walter A. Maier III Justification as the Starting Point of Doing Theology? David P. Scaer Good Works and the Law’s Exhortation and Accusation 84:3–4 Gifford A. Grobien ORGANIZATION Berne, IN 46711 NON-PROFIT NON-PROFIT Introduction to Luther’s “Antinomian Disputations” Permit No. 43 U.S. Postage PAID Jeffrey G. Silcock and Christopher Boyd Brown An Embarrassment of Riches: Choosing What to Sing Paul Grime Theopaschism as Love Alexey Streltsov US ISSN 0038-8610 Concordia Theological Quarterly Concordia Theological Quarterly, a continuation of The Springfielder, is a theological journal of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, published for its ministerium by the faculty of Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne, Indiana. Editor: David P. Scaer ([email protected]) Associate Editor: Charles A. Gieschen ([email protected]) Assistant Editor: Benjamin T.G. Mayes ([email protected]) Book Review Editor: Peter J. Scaer ([email protected]) Members of the Editorial Committee Adam C. Koontz, John G. Nordling, and Lawrence R. Rast Jr. Editorial Assistant: Nathaniel S. Jensen The Faculty James G. Bushur Naomichi Masaki Ryan M. Tietz Carl C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Christological Function of Divine Impassibility: Cyril of Alexandria and Contemporary Debate
    The Christological Function of Divine Impassibility: Cyril of Alexandria and Contemporary Debate by David Andrew Graham A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Wycliffe College and the Theological Department of the Toronto School of Theology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael's College © Copyright by David Andrew Graham 2013 The Christological Function of Divine Impassibility: Cyril of Alexandria and Contemporary Debate David Andrew Graham Master of Arts in Theology University of St. Michael’s College 2013 Abstract This thesis contributes to the debate over the meaning and function of the doctrine of divine impassibility in theological and especially christological discourse. Seeking to establish the coherence and utility of the paradoxical language characteristic of the received christological tradition (e.g. the impassible Word became passible flesh and suffered impassibly), it argues that the doctrine of divine apatheia illuminates the apocalyptic and soteriological dimension of the incarnate Son’s passible life more effectively than recent reactions against it. The first chapter explores the Christology of Cyril of Alexandria and the meaning and place of apatheia within it. In light of the christological tradition which Cyril epitomized, the second chapter engages contemporary critiques and re-appropriations of impassibility, focusing on the particular contributions of Jürgen Moltmann, Robert W. Jenson, Bruce L. McCormack and David Bentley Hart. ii Acknowledgments If this thesis communicates any truth, beauty and goodness, credit belongs to all those who have shaped my life up to this point. In particular, I would like to thank the Toronto School of Theology and Wycliffe College for providing space to do theology from within the catholic church.
    [Show full text]
  • A:Cts of the Apostles (Revised Version)
    THE SCHOOL AND COLLEGE EDITION. A:CTS OF THE APOSTLES (REVISED VERSION) (CHAPTERS I.-XVI.) WITH BY THK REV. F. MARSHALL, M.A., (Lau Ezhibition,r of St, John's College, Camb,idge)• Recto, of Mileham, formerly Principal of the Training College, Ca11narthffl. and la1ely Head- Master of Almondbury Grammar School, First Edition 1920. Ten Impressions to 1932. Jonb.on: GEORGE GILL & SONS, Ln., MINERVA HOUSE, PATERNOSTER SQUARE, E.C.4. MAP TO ILLUSTRATE THE ACTS OPTBE APOSTLES . <t. ~ -li .i- C-4 l y .A. lO 15 20 PREFACE. 'i ms ~amon of the first Sixteen Chapters of the Acts of the Apostles is intended for the use of Students preparing for the Local Examina­ tions of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge and similar examinations. The Syndicates of the Oxford and Cambridge Universities often select these chapters as the subject for examination in a particular year. The Editor has accordingly drawn up the present Edition for the use of Candidates preparing for such Examinations. The Edition is an abridgement of the Editor's Acts of /ht Apostles, published by Messrs. Gill and Sons. The Introduction treats fully of the several subjects with which the Student should be acquainted. These are set forth in the Table of Contents. The Biographical and Geographical Notes, with the complete series of Maps, will be found to give the Student all necessary information, thns dispensing with the need for Atlas, Biblical Lictionary, and other aids. The text used in this volume is that of the Revised Version and is printed by permission of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, but all editorial responsibility rests with the editor of the present volume.
    [Show full text]
  • Evangelism and Capitalism: a Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship
    Digital Commons @ George Fox University Faculty Publications - Portland Seminary Portland Seminary 6-2018 Evangelism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship Jason Paul Clark George Fox University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/gfes Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, and the Christianity Commons Recommended Citation Clark, Jason Paul, "Evangelism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship" (2018). Faculty Publications - Portland Seminary. 132. https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/gfes/132 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Portland Seminary at Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications - Portland Seminary by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EVANGELICALISM AND CAPITALISM A reparative account and diagnosis of pathogeneses in the relationship A thesis submitted to Middlesex University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Jason Paul Clark Middlesex University Supervised at London School of Theology June 2018 Abstract Jason Paul Clark, “Evangelicalism and Capitalism: A reparative account and diagnosis of pathogeneses in the relationship.” Doctor of Philosophy, Middlesex University, 2018. No sustained examination and diagnosis of problems inherent to the relationship of Evangeli- calism with capitalism currently exists. Where assessments of the relationship have been un- dertaken, they are often built upon a lack of understanding of Evangelicalism, and an uncritical reliance both on Max Weber’s Protestant Work Ethic and on David Bebbington’s Quadrilateral of Evangelical priorities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chalcedonian Christology of St John Damascene : Philosophical Terminology and Theological Arguments
    Durham E-Theses The Chalcedonian Christology of St John Damascene : philosophical terminology and theological arguments Metallidis, George How to cite: Metallidis, George (2003) The Chalcedonian Christology of St John Damascene : philosophical terminology and theological arguments, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/1085/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 UNIVERSITY OF DURHAM DEPARTMENT OF THEOLOGY GEORGE METALLIDIS The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without his prior written consentand information derived from it should be acknowledged. The Chalcedonian Christology of St John Damascene: Philosophical Terminology and Theological Arguments PhD Thesis/FourthYear Supervisor: Prof. ANDREW LOUTH 0-I OCT2003 Durham 2003 The ChalcedonianChristology of St John Damascene To my Mother Despoina The ChalcedonianChristology of St John Damascene CONTENTS Page ABBREVIATIONS 7 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 12 INTRODUCTION 14 CHAPTER ONE TheLife of St John Damascene 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Kyrios Christos Wilhelm Bousset the Princeton Theological Review 12:636-645
    Kyrios Christos Wilhelm Bousset The Princeton Theological Review 12:636-645. [1914] A treatise on the term kurioj as applied to Jesus would seem to deal with a sufficiently specialized subject. But, as the subtitle of Dr. Bousset’s work informs us, we receive in it no less than a “History of Christological Faith from the Beginnings Down to Irenaeus.” And even this scarcely covers what the book actually offers, for in reality it approaches to being a sketch of the earliest history of Christian belief in general, including some aspects that are not technically Christological, although the author in the Preface disavows this wider purpose on the ground that the time is not ripe as yet for describing the origin of Christianity in the milieu of the Hellenistic-Roman civilization. The value of the book—and it is great, irrespective of one’s agreement or disagreement with its conclusions—is due largely to this breadth of outlook proceeding from a point that by common consent was of central importance and of propelling force in the earliest development of Christianity, the view taken of and the relation sustained toward Christ as Lord. As might be expected, Dr. Bousset writes as a consistent “religionsgeschichtler.” He repudiates the distinction between biblical theology and history of doctrine not merely, but is eager to obliterate the lines of demarcation between the Christian religion and the surrounding spheres of faith and practice in the midst of which it grew up. He further brings to the front more seriously than has been attempted by anybody before, at least in such a comprehensive way, the principle that the forms of religious belief to a large extent took their rise and shape from the cultus, in other words that doctrine grew out of worship, rather than the reverse, as is usually assumed to have been the case.
    [Show full text]