2. A very interesting feature of the first half of the 2nd cent, is the rise of the Apologists, men of learning who had exchanged heathenism for Chris- tianity, and who addressed heathen readers in justification or explanation of their new faith, (a) Aristides the philosopher (about A.D. 125), address- ing the emperor Hadrian, speaks of Jesus Christ
vol.. ir. — 54
849
850
CHRIST IN THE EARLY CHURCH
as ' God ' who ' came down from lieaven, and from a Hebrew virgin took and clad Himself with flesh ; and in a daughter of man there dwelt the Son of
[b] Justin Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trypho
the Jew, traces not only prophecies of Christ in
the OT, but identifies Him with the God, or the
' angel of the Lord,' who appeared in the OT
theophanies, and with the Divine Wisdom of Pr 7,
etc. Justin practically anticipates the Nicene
formula o^ooyo-tos ry Harpi (128), though, as in the
case of Hernias, some of his statements are vague,
and, if pressed verbally, might appear inconsistent
\\'ith later definitions. There can be no question,
however, that he teaches the pre-existence and the
Divinity of Christ, and that Ids writings were
deeply influenced by the Logos doctrine of St.
John. .^ , „ ,
(c) One of the most beautiful as well as most
intellectual productions of the early Church is the
anonymous Epistle to Diognetus. Here Christ is
spoken of as ' the very Artificer and Creator of the
Universe'; and the Father sent Him into the
world, ' as sending God,' ' as a king might send
his son who is a king ' (7).
3. It was, however, the necessity of meeting both outside attacks on Christianity, and miscon- ceptions of it from within, that gradually forced Christian writers to define more clearly and ex- actly the nature of Christ. This process of theo- logical definition, which began towards the end of the 2nd cent., culminated in the decisions of the great Councils. Early in the 2nd cent, had begun to appear the curious half-heathen travesties of Christianity which are classed under the general name of Gnosticism. These may be described as attempts to combine Christian ideas and phrase- ology with ideas drawn from Greek and Oriental religions. The Gnostic systems really differed from Christianity on first principles, as they were gener- ally dualistic, and assumed the essential evil of matter. They denied in consequence the perfect Immanity of Christ (a tendency alluded to in the later writings of the NT ; cf. 1 Jn 42'), and the true union of human nature with the Divine nature in one Person. The Gnostic Christ was not really born of Mary, nor did He truly suffer.
(a) The first and chief opponent of Gnosticism, one of the most extensive writers of the early Church, was Irenseus, bishop of Lyons from 177- 202(?). He meets the Gnostic systems by stating what was definitely believed about Christ in the Christian Church, which is the repository of truth, —truth inherited from the Apostles, preserved by the Church, and the same in all parts of the Church (i. 10, iii. 1, 4, 24). Irena^us states this faith of the Church in language very similar to that of the later Creeds. The Church, he says, believes m ' one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation ; . . . and the ascen- sion into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His future manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father to gather all things in one, and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord and God and Saviour and King, every knee should bow,' etc. (i. 10). Irenseus clearly teaches the pre-existence of Christ, that He was begotten and not created (iii. 18) ; that His hu- manity is perfect, sinless, yet absolutely real and not Docetic (ib.); and that He is God and man in one Person (iii. 16). Perhaps the most remark- able contribution of Irenseus to Christology is his teaching that all mankind is gathered together and summed up in the Incarnation ('in seipso recapitulavit,' iii. 18, etc.).
(b) In the East, Gnosticism was met by the great writers of the School of Alexandria, Clement
and Origen, who further developed the conception of Christ as the Logos who is immanent in the Universe. Origen Avas in some respects a thinker in advance of his age, and his teaching was undoubtedly misunderstood by his successors. Whether his doctrine of Christ was altogether in harmony with the later definitions of the Coun- cils has often been questioned. That it was really so has been maintained strongly by Bishop Bull in his Defence of the Nicene Creed, and by Bishop Westcott. Origen certainly taught the eternal generation of the Son of God {de Princ. i. 2), which doctrine supplies the basis of the reply to the Arian quibbles about the posteriority of the Son to the Father ; the reality of the Incarnation (de Princ. ii. 6) ; and he spoke of Christ as the God-man [dedvdpijjiros).
4. The 3rd cent, is marked by a series of heresies which from different points of view attacked the doctrine which, as we have seen, had been con- sistently held in the Church, though at times vaguely stated, of the unique relationship of the Son to the Father, in other words, of the Divinity of the historic Christ. How, it was asked, could the Divinity and the eternal pre-existence of Christ be reconciled with the unittj of God? There were two principal heretical answers to this problem, and they may be called ' heretical ' in a sense that Gnosticism was not, because they arose within the Church itself, and claimed to be the original doctrine.