# The Deification of Jesus

*Exported from [Holy-Writings.com](https://www.holy-writings.com/) on 2026-06-20 — 1 clipping.*

---

> Source: Bahá'í Library Online (bahai-library.com), curated by Jonah Winters. Used by permission of the curator. Original citation: Jack McLean, The Deification of Jesus, bahai-library.com.
> ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
> 
> The Deification of Jesus
> BY JACK McLEAN
> 
> D      espite the growing numbers of encounters in recent years of the world
> religions in forums of exchange Christianityl continues to set itself apart
> through a firm belief in the uniqueness of its founder, Jesus Christ. While
> individual Christians may acknowledge the inspitational nature of the non-
> Christian founders of religions, adherents of the major branches of Christianity
> are united in the belief that Christ has no equal. This conviction in the
> uniqueness of Jesus has become the unassailable fbrtress of Christian belief.
> Such a belief is the product of historical and theological developments in
> the early church. Through a series of creeds baseli on theological speculation
> Jesus the Son was declared to be the very essenc~ of Divinity walking upon
> the earth, the Godhead Itself united with a deified Holy Spirit in a trinitarian
> theology. These creeds, far from descending upon Ithe church fathers as divine
> revelation, underwent a long historical development that was not uncontested.
> They were finally elaborated in their present f~rm after four centuries of
> acrimonious theological quarreling that necessitate~ four world councils of the
> church-those       of Nicaea, Ephesus, Constantin<Dple, and Chalcedon-that
> brought in their wake bloody warfare among ChrThtian factions. These chrisro-
> logical controversies resulted in the fragmentation of the churches of Asia
> Minor from those of Greek Orthodox ConstandlOple, a fragmentation that
> has continued to this day.                            I
> The writings of the Apostle Paul were a great factor in this deification
> of Jesus. Paul's interpretation of the Christ figure ~Iears the unmistakable stamp
> of a savior figure of the Greek mystery religions into whose form Jesus was
> cast. The statements of Jesus Himself, however, dp not support His exaltation
> to the Godhead. As the Son, Christ clearly saw Himself in a role subordinate
> to that of the Father.
> In this paper I offer a three-dimensional studyl of the historical, doctrinal,
> and comparative aspects of the deification of Jesus. I will first examine Paul's
> I
> interpretation of Jesus to Gentile Christians together with a contrasting inter-
> pretation set forth by Christ Himself. I will als6 include the Gnostic Jesus,
> which touches indirectly on the christological qubstion. Third, I will review
> two major christological controversies: (1) thJ schism of Arius and the
> development of the notion of trinity; and (2) t~e God-man debate of Cyril
> and Nestorius. These movements spanned a fopr-hundred year period. In
> my comparative study I will present a Baha'i perspective on the deification
> of Jesus and, where possible, make comparisons with the Baha'I Faith on
> relevant issues.                                     I
> Baha'i-Chrisrian studies are by no means n9w in the literature of the
> BaM'i Faith. They promise, however, to be ofI continuing interest as the
> Christian world comes to grips with the serious claims made by Baha'u'Ilah
> to the followers of the Gospel.
> :1
> II   24      WORLD ORDER: SPRING/SUMMER          1980
> ~l
> I
> 
> St. Paul and the Deification of Jesus!
> IN CHRISTIANITY the writings of Paul have had a determining        role in trans-
> mitting a characteristic understanding of Christ. With the gradual demise of
> the Jewish wing of ChristianifY Paul's Christology came to the forefront in
> the Christian understanding on Jesus. His glorification of Christ's divinity has
> played a major role in the deification of Jesus. If Christ taught the kingdom,
> it is true to say Paul taught Chrlist.
> While generally enjoying +idespread acclaim among Christians, Paul has
> not escaped being a subject o~ great controversy, both for his contemporaries
> and ours. His missionary journeys to Greece and Asia Minor, coupled with a
> sizeable corpus of theologicaf writings, have earned him the adulations of
> some Christians as "the second founder of Christianiry.t'f Other more critical
> theologians have been less enfuusiastic in their acclamation of Paul. 3 Basing
> his view on a study of Paul's Jpistles, one comparative religionist has referred
> to him as "The problem figuke of primitive Christianity" who became em-
> broiled with the pillars of the Imother church at Jerusalem-Peter, James the
> Lord's brother, and John--D"ier the teaching and admission of the Gentile
> Christians into the new faith'i The first council of the primitive church, the
> 
> 1. This section was written before the discussion that has emerged in World Order
> on the role of St. Paul in the early church. (See "A Forum: Concerning St. Paul,"
> World Order, 13, No.4        [Summer 1979], 5-12; letter from Juan Ricardo Cole,
> World Order, 13, No. 2 [Winte~ 1978-79], 7-8; and book review by William S.
> Hatchet, "The Quest for the MeAphysical Jesus," Wo"ld Order, 12, No.4 [Summer
> 1978],35-42.)     I have no purpose in promoting or discouraging the view that Paul
> was either a "usurper" or in some sense the breaker of a Christian covenant. My
> primary purpose is to elucidate pLl's special brand of Christology, which conrributed
> in large measure to the fixation bf I
> Christ as God. It does touch incidentally on the
> differences that Paul had with the leaders of the Jerusalem church. That these differences
> occurred Paul himself admits (Gal. 2); they are also set forth in Acts 15 in a diHering
> version. Thus they are a matter df historical record. Aside from that, since both the
> New Testament and Baha'i sources are equivocal on the matter, I do not see how
> anyone can seriously argue from   J   srrictly partisan point of view.
> 2. Quoted in John B. Noss, !Man's Religions, 3d ed. (New York: Macmillan,
> 1963), p. 620. Fully five of thel fourteen epistles are not Paul's according to New
> Testament textual exegesis (Ephesians, Hebrews I and II, Timothy, and Tirus ), Colos-
> sians is also questioned. Howard iClark Kee, Franklin W. Young, Karlfried Froelich,
> Understanding the New Testament,- 2d ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,
> 1957),pp.164-66.                   I
> 3. Udo Schaefer and Huschmand    I
> Sabet refer to the following theologians, all of
> whom have been critical of Pauli's special brand of Christianity: Albert Schweitzer,
> Hans Joachim Schoeps, Karl-Heinz Deschner, Wilhelm Nestle, E. Meyer Schonfield,
> Steinheim E. Grimm. These men lare not obscure by any means and have made some
> of the most outstanding contributions in the field of theology and comparative religion.
> See Udo Schaefer, The Light Shi'neth in Darkness: Five Studies in Revelation after
> Christ, rrans. Helene Momtaz N~ri and Oliver Colburn (Oxford: George Ronald,
> 1977) and Huschmand Saber, 7Jlhe Heavens Are Cleft Asunder (Oxford: George
> Ronald, 1975). Christopher Buck notes that the following theologians endorse primi-
> tive Ebionite Christianity as opposed to the Gentile Christianity of St. Paul: Harris
> Hirschberg, Shlomo Pines, David iFlusser, James Dunn, Cardinal Danielou, and Gilles
> Quispel. See "A Forum: Concerning St. Paul," World Order, 13, No.4              (Summer
> 1979),9.
> 4. S. G. F. Brandon, "Saint Paul, the Problem Figure of Primitive Christianity," in
> Religion in Ancient History: St4dies in Ideas, Men and Events (London: George
> THE DEIFICATION OF JESUS           25
> 
> In of Jesus!        Jerusalem Council, was _convened in the holy cicy (A.D. 49) to resolve the
> ole in trans-       controversy. 5                                      I
> II demise of           The writings of the Apostle Paul effected a great transformation of Jesus
> forefront in        from the Jesus of the synoptic gospels and of non-Pauline epistles in the
> divinity has       New Testament. Paul recast Jesus of Nazareth, the Jewish Messiah of Israel,
> ae kingdom,        .into a deified Lord bearing all the traces of a savior-god of a Greek mystery
> cult. Styling himself Apostle "among the Gentiles" (Gal. 1:16; Acts 9:15),
> as, Paul has        Paul determined to adapt his presentation of Jesus to the Greek Gentile
> aternporarres       world in which he lived, a radically different religious milieu from the
> ipled with a        Jewish one. What is often overlooked, however, in Paul's claim to mission to
> dulations of       the Gentiles is that Peter claimed precisely this mission for himself at the
> more critical       Jerusalem Council, a mission he states he had "in the early days."6
> aul. 3 Basing         For Paul to have preached Christ as the Jewish Messiah to the Greek-
> has referred       speaking Gentiles would have been futile. The messiahship was a virtually
> became em-         meaningless concept to the Gentile world that Paul determined to evangelize.
> -r, James the       To them there was no long-standing tradition of a davidic kingship that
> the Gentile       promised an anointed of .God who would rise up and vindicate Israel. Further-
> ~church, the        more, certain of the Ebionite Christians, who were dominant in the apostolic
> church until Romano-Pauline Christianity emerged, reconciled their faith in
> World Order       Christ with temple worship as well as with circumcision and dietary and
> ing St. Paul,"
> purification laws." Accordingly, he preached "another Jesus," one whom those
> Ricardo Cole,
> Iy W illiarh S.     living in the Greek-Gentile world could understand and to whom they
> J. 4 [Summer        could relate. 8
> ·iew that Paul         The Jesus that Paul preached was a deihed savior, One Who could rescue
> covenant. My       a hapless humanity from the power of sin. It was precisely this presentation
> ch contributed
> of Jesus as redeemer of men's sins and purveyor bf immortality to those who
> enrally on the
> ese differences
> in a differing   Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1969), pp. 310-23.
> .ince both the        5. The point at dispute was the observance of Mosaic law by Gentile converts. Acts
> not see how     15: 29 states that Paul with his party and the Jerusal~m church agreed on exhorting
> Gentile converts to abstain from unchastity, food offerJd to idols, blood, and strangled
> c: Macmillan,      animals. In a differing account of the same incident !Paul states that he reached no
> .ding to New       compromise with the Jerusalem elders: "to them we did not yield even for a moment"
> Titus). Colos-      (Gal. 2: 5 ). Biblical quotations are from the Revised Standard version.
> fried Froelich,       6. The complete verse by Peter reads: "Brethren, you know that in the early days
> Prentice-Hall,    God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word
> of the gospel and believe" (Acts 15: 7). Paul claimed that he was converted to
> ogians,   all of   Christianity by a vision of the resurrected Christ on the road to Damascus. During this
> .rt Schweitzer,    experience, Christ commissioned him to teach the Gentiles. Paul, however, mentions
> rer Schonfield,    nowhere in his letters that Peter also made the same claim at the Jerusalem Conference,
> ve made some       a conference he attended.
> :ative religion.       7. Along with the Nazarenes they are the earliest of Jewish Christian communities.
> eoeletion after    The Ebionites were the Jerusalem Christians, brought into the Faith by Christ Himself
> eorge Ronald,      and the Apostles. Before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, they emigrated to
> cford:   George    the Gentile town of Pella east of the Jordan River, where they survived until the
> mdorse primi-      third cenrury (some date their survival to the fifth century). Their Christology, which
> Paul: Harris     resembles in some ways Baha'i prophetology, is discussed later in this section.
> au, and Gilles         8. The phrase is from Paul himself (2 Cor. 11: 4). In this chapter Paul speaks of
> . 4 (Summer        his "divine jealousy" for the Corinthian community) Brandon (Religion in Ancient
> History, p. 315) thinks that his warnings to the Corinthians of "another Jesus" and
> aristianiry," in   "another gospel" (Gal. 1: 6) are veiled references to the Jerusalem apostles, Peter,
> adon : George      James, and John, with whom he had fundamental                differences.
> 26     WORLD ORDER: SPRING/SUMMER          1980
> 
> accepted Him in a personalized      faith that has prevailed in western Christendom
> ever smce.
> The religious background of the Gentiles explains why Paul's approach
> was so successful. The Greek~speaking Gentiles whom Paul addressed held
> that the flesh was a degraded fo)m of spirit, a "tomb" as Plato had taught,
> from which the spirit longed to escape. Its liberation was only final and
> complete with death, and there the prospects of Hades were dark and terrify-
> ing.? The Gentiles, then, had blekk prospects for the future life and longed
> for deliverance from sinful corporeal existence. In search of solace they had
> turned to the Greek mystery cults that promised them a means of escape. The
> mystery religions held that by choosing and worshiping a personalized deity,
> a savior, a man could escape death and win eternal life. 10 The personalized
> worship of a savior was accompa9ied by sacramental rituals that bear striking
> resemblances to Christian sacraments. 11 - Through such savior worship and
> sacramental observances the devotee could be Lat. renatus 'born again' into
> a new spiritual existence. Thus, like the mystery religions, Pauline Christianity
> offered itself as a religion of bondage and liberation, through a deified savior.
> As such 'it thoroughly satisfied the Gentile penchant for personal religion.
> The presentation of Christ to the Gentiles as the redeemer of their sins
> and purveyor of immortality was one of Paul's central themes, a theme known
> otherwise as "vicarious atonement"     (at-one-ment),  man's reconciliation with
> God through the sacrificial death of Jesus: "Since all have sinned and fall
> short of the glory of God, they are justified by His grace as a gift, through
> the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation
> by his blood, to be received by faith" (Rom. 3:23-25 ). Paul's writings are
> thoroughly imbued with the consciousness of men's sins, a concern that
> occupies the opening chapters of the Epistle to the Romans. Although St.
> Augustine fully elaborated the doctrine, Paul's understanding of the Genesis
> account of the fall of Adam (Gen. 3) qualifies him as the originator of the
> doctrine of original sin (Rom. 5: 12-21). Whatever one may think of Paul's
> other doctrines, his preoccupation with sin has, in my view, stamped Chris-
> tianity with much of the morbidity that is sometimes found in it.
> 
> 9. During the life of Christ Hellenistic ideas about life after death were in flux.
> The common people mostly believed in Hades, although it held little promise for a
> better life. Hope for a blessed life after death developed among the religious sect of
> Orpheus, who looked for their reward in the Elysian fields of the West. The mysteries
> also promised a hereafter.
> 10. The Hellenistic-Roman period of Christ's lifetime was a period of great spiritual
> curiosity very much like that of today. The mysteries had to compete with various
> schools of Greek philosophy, Gnosticism, magic, and astrology to quench the people's
> spiritual restlessness.
> 11. The cult of Mithra, the Persian god of light, also mentioned by Shogi Effendi
> (The World Order of Bahd'u'lldh: Selected Letters, 2d rev. ed. [Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'I
> Publishing Trust, 1974], p. 184), hJd an eucharistic style communal meal. The cult
> of Attis had an animal blood baptism and celebrated the god's resurrection on 25
> March. The cult of Isis, the Egyptian mother-goddess, used holy water from the Nile
> and held processions and litanies. The mysteries also used altar-pieces and cult
> images. One statue of Isis depicts her nursing her holy child, not unlike the statues of
> the Virgin with the baby Jesus.
> -,--
> 
> THE DEIFICATION OF JESUS         27
> 
> · Christendom                 In a bold departure from Judaism Paul taught that faith in Christ's sacri-
> ficial death freed the believer from the constraints lof Jewish law (Rom. 7: 6) .
> ul's approach              Paul, however, was inconsistent in his stand on the law. At the request of
> ddressed held              James he observed the rites of purification in the temple as a proof of his
> ) had taught,             Jewish orthodoxy to the Jewish-Christians        of Jerusalem (Acts 21:21-26).
> 11y final and              The Acts version of the Jerusalem Council alsol states that Paul agreed to
> k and terrify-             Jewish dietary laws. However, in a differing account Paul states that he
> e and longed               reached a compromise with the Jerusalem elders lonly on the point of main-
> lace they had              taining contributions to the mother church in Jerusalem. To a more orthodox
> f escape. The              group at Jerusalem, probably the Judaizers, Paul levels the charge of "false
> nalized deity,             brethren" and states that "to them we did not yield submission even for a
> personalized           moment" (Gal. 2:5) .
> bear striking              Paul's teaching of the bodily resurrection of Jesus also paralleled the
> worship and              mystery cults. Like the resurrected saviors, Isis, Artis, or Mithra, Paul taught
> n again' into            Christ's bodily resurrection mystery as a proof of His deity. Mystical union
> = Christianity           with Jesus was offered to the believer through the !ritual of immersion baptism,
> leified savior.          from which the neophyte Christian emerged a new spiritual being, as Christ
> l religion.              had emerged immortal from the grave (Rom. 6:1-11).                .
> of their sins              Paul's interpretation   of Christ to the Gentiles contained another radical
> heme known               departure from Israelite religion. This was his presentation of Christ as God.
> :iliation with           Paul presents Christ as God through two main modes: by blurring the distinc-
> ned and fall             tion between Christ and God, and by conferring upon Jesus attributes normal-
> gift, through             ly reserved for God alone.
> an expiation                In the Greek version of the Torah, the Septuagint, the most common
> writings are            name for God was kyrios 'Lord'. The mystery clrlts also called their saviors
> :oncern that             "Lord." Paul, in his epistles, freely applies the term to Jesus. For example,
> <\.lthough St.           the promise of the Jewish prophet Joel that "Everyone who calls upon the
> the Genesis             name of the Lord will be saved" (2:32) Paul transposes and applies to
> inaror of the            Jesus (Rom. 10:9). For Paul Christ's prophetic station not only eclipsed
> 'nk of Paul's            that of Moses, "Jesus has been counted worthy of as much more glory than
> mped Chris-              Moses" (Heb. 3: 3 ), but it took on a cosmological function reserved for God
> it.                    alone, that of creation itself. Christ was the one in whom "all things were
> created, in heaven and in earth . . . all things were created through and
> for him" (Col. 1:16).
> were in flux.
> promise for a                 Paul more clearly identified Christ with God through his teaching of the
> igious sect of             incarnate sons hip, the belief that God the Father became incarnate in Christ
> The mysteries              the Son: "For in him the whole fullness of deiryldwells bodily" (Col. 2:9, d.
> 2 Cor.' 5: 19 and Col. 1: 15). The term "Son of God" was not new to the
> great spiritual            Jews. The term had an ancient usage that was abplied to Israel's sacral king,
> with various
> 1 the people's
> the Messiah (Ps. 2: 7) .12 In applying it to Christ Paul did not use the
> term primarily in its Judaic sense but rather in its mythological hellenistic
> Shogi Effendi              sense of the Son of God as an incarnation of the Deity.
> e, Ill.: Baha'i                In spite of Paul's preferred usage of the term "Son of God" this was not
> leal. The cult
> the term with which Christ primarily designated Himself. Christ most often
> ection on 25
> rom the Nile
> ces and cult                 12. Oscar CuUmann gives a complete discussion of this christological title in
> the statues of             The Cbristology of the New Testament, trans. Shirley C. Guthrie and Charles A. M.
> Hall (London: SCM Press, 1959), pp. 270-305.
> 28       WORLD ORDER: SPRING/SUMMER    1980
> 
> refers to Himself as Heb. bar nasha 'Son of Man', a title that not only
> designates Christ's perfect humanity, a standard interpretation, but primarily
> the Heavenly Man, a divine adamic prototype, created at the beginning of
> time, who would usher in a spiritual rather than a political kingdom.v" Such
> a description fits Jesus. Christ rarely refers to Himself as "Son of God," in all
> probability because His Jewish opponents interpreted this designation in the
> mythological sense that Yahweh had generated offspring. In any case, to them
> it signified a blasphemous identification with God worthy of His condemnation
> and death (John 5: 18). But of the two terms, "Son of Man" is charged more
> fully with potency and significlnce.
> What is so extraordinary about the affirmations of Christ's deity made in
> the writings of Paul and the creeds is how little account such declarations
> take of the pronouncements of Jesus about Himself. A careful examination of
> certain passages impels us to make a serious reevaluation of what is stated
> in the trinitarian theology of the creeds and the writings of Paul. While cer-
> tain statements of Jesus clearly indicate that their author regarded Himself
> as a Divine Manifestation revealing the will of the Father (John 10:30; cf..
> John 8:19,14:7), taken as a whole, they reveal that Christ clearly sub-
> ordinated Himself to the essence of Divinity.
> Paul's assertion that "Jesus has been counted worthy of as much more
> glory than Moses" (Heb. 3: 3) has led Christians to uphold a radical dis-
> continuity between Christ and the Prophets of Israel and Judah. Though
> Christians assent to ChrIst's own declaration that He fulfilled the Jewish law
> (Matt. 5: 17), they insist that, on the basis of Christ's divinity, He is dis-
> qualified even to assume the title of prophet.
> Not only did Christ refer to Himself as a "prophet" on occasion, but He
> did so in the context of linking His own suffering and rejection with that of
> the prophetic figures of Israel and Judah. After His rejection by fellow
> Galileans at Nazareth, He remarked that "A' prophet is not without honor,
> except in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house"
> (Mark 6: 4). Christ further est1blished His prophetic function by linking His
> own coming to the prophecy of Moses, the greatest of His Hebrew predeces-
> sors, that "The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from
> among you" (Deut. 18: 15 ). Christ indicated that He was the prophet
> promised by Moses (John 5 :45-47).
> Christ's identification of Himself as the "Prophet" promised by Moses
> was precisely the christological understanding held by the earliest group of
> Jewish Christians, the Ebionites. The Ebionite understanding of Jesus as the
> "Prophet" or the "True Prophet" is contained in "The Preaching of Peter"
> (Kerygmata Petrov ), which forms a part of the uncanonical "Pseudo-Clemen-
> tine Novel." True-prophet Christology is also found in the apocryphal "Gospel
> of the Hebrews," which was used by the Nazarene Christians. St. Jerome wrote
> that they regarded it as the original Aramaic Matthew. The parallels between
> the Jewish-Christian belief in Christ as the "True Prophet" Who appeared at
> the end of an Adamic cycle df prophetic figures and the Baha'i concept of
> progressive revelation show basic similarities. The Jews who awaited the "True
> 
> 13. Ibid., p, 142.
> THE DEIFICATION OF JESUS          29
> 
> iat not only          Prophet" believed in a cycle of prophetic figures beginning with Adam Who
> Jut primarily         would appear until a period of great decay had set in. At that time the
> beginning of          "True Prophet," the great Teacher culminating the cycle would appear and
> ;dom.13 Such           inaugurate a spiritual kingdom.
> God," in all             At the first and second ecumenical councils of the church at Nicaea and
> nation in the        . Constantinople, it had been laid down that Christ was of the same essence
> case, to them          with the Father and that the Godhead consisted of three divine persons.
> :ondemnation           St. Paul, with his doctrine of incarnate sonship, also put forth the notion of the
> :harged more           coequality of Christ with the Father. As to the Nicene affirmation of His being
> of one essence with the Father, Christ was silent on that particular issue. The
> .eity made in          terms "essence" and "substance" were concepts borrowed from Greek philoso-
> I declarations         phy and not biblical. Eusebius of Caesarea and other conservatives had op-
> :amination of          posed the Nicene creed on that account. As far as trinitarian theology is con-
> rhat is stated         cerned, Christ declared to a scribe who had come to question Him that the
> 1. While cer-          belief in the divine unity was the greatest of the commandments:      "The first is,
> :ded Himself           'Hear, 0 Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one'" (Mark 12:29). By His
> III   lO:30; d.        affirmation that there was only one Lord-that        is, God-Christ   was lending
> clearly   sub-     His approval te the Jewish declaration of faith, the Sbema, the belief that
> God is one. Jesus also referred to His Father as "the only true God" (John
> much more             17: 3). Jesus indirectly repudiated the incarnation theology that God could
> l  radical dis-        take human form by declaring that "God is spirit" (John 4:24) and that
> :lah. Though           "His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen" (John 5: 37).
> ~ Jewish law           Furthermore, Christ's coequality with God, which was also affirmed at Con-
> t, He is dis-          stantinople, was something that he had emphatically denied on several oc-
> casions in His encounters with the Jews.
> sion, but He               In an exchange with the Pharisees in which He established His station
> with that of          of Sonship Christ declared that both His mission and genesis were the
> n by fellow            Father's doing, not His, thereby clearly dispelling any notion that He was
> .thout honor,          equal in power with the Father: "If God were your Father, you would love
> own house"           me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord
> r linking His          but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say?" (John 8:42-43) .
> ew predeces-           He revealed His dependence on the Father in another context. This occurred
> ike me from            at a time when Christ's fame as a healer had spread throughout Palestine.
> the prophet           Since He had healed on the Sabbath, the Pharisees had accused Him of
> breaking Mosaic law. The Jews understood Christ's reference to God as His
> d by Moses             Father in a mythological sense that implied identification with The Godhead.
> est group of           Such an identification caused the monotheistic Jews to level the charge of
> Jesus as the          blasphemy against Christ. His response was: "Truly, truly, I say to you, the
> ag of Peter"           Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father
> udo-Clemen-            doing; for whatever he does, that the Son does likewise" (John 5: 19). Christ
> ohal "Gospel           clarified His dependency on Divine Omnipotence in other passages: "I can
> erome wrote           do nothing on my own authority; as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is
> .lels between           just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me" (John
> . appeared at           5:30). Shortly before His arrest, Jesus spoke these words to Judas, the
> i concept of           brother of James (not Iscariot), in reference to His return: "Y ou hear me
> ed the "True           say to you, 'I go away, and I will come to you: If you loved me, you would
> have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than 1"
> (John 14:28).
> ~               ~c:.~:'i'l
> 
> 30      WORLD ORDER: SPRING/SUMMER          1980
> 
> By His own admission, Christ established His relationship to the Father
> as that of Servant, a qualification that Baha'u'Ilah also applied on occasion
> to His own station: "Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than
> his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him" (John
> 13: 16). Christ even went so far as to eschew Himself as a model of moral
> perfection in order to illustrate the sanctified nature of the Divinity: "Why
> do you call me good? No one is good but God alone" (Mark 10: 18). Not
> only did Christ indicate that the Father was more perfect and more powerful
> than He but that the Divinity possessed a knowledge He did not fully share.
> This is reflected in one of Christ's statements on the second coming: "But of
> that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the
> Son, but the Father only" (Matt. 24: 36) .
> The Gnostic Jesus
> AT THE SAME TIME       that St. Paul was elaborating his exalted and mystical
> notions of Jesus, there were other Christians who held obscure beliefs of
> Christ and who were finally pronounced unorthodox by the Fathers of the
> Church. These were the Gnostics.J" Gnosticism was one of those "popular
> cults" and "fashionable and evasive philosophies" mentioned by Shoghi
> Effendi as one of a group of hybrid religions and philosophies in the Roman
> Empire that threatened to engulf infant Christianiry.I" Entire Christian com-
> munities on occasion adopted Gnosticism as their creed.16 The Church
> Fathers, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and especially Irenaeus, Bishop of
> Lyons, arose to combat it fiercely in their writings.!?
> Gnostic Christians compromised the unique soteriological role of Jesus
> with their indiscriminate belief in a host of savior figures (Gk. Soter 'savior').
> Christ was in fact often placed below other saviors and lesser divinities (Gk.
> aeons). This was the case for the Gnostic churches of Tarsus, Paul's native
> city, which worshiped the supernatural powers of the Greek hero Heracles
> in an annual ceremony celebrating his death and resurrection. Gnostic Chris-
> 
> 14. Gnosticism is strictly speaking a doctrinal, not a christological heresy. Since
> the movement is mentioned in BaM.'; literature, and since Gnostics had their own,
> 11:
> albeit imperfect, understanding of Jesus, I have included it as a matter of interest.
> 15. Shoghi Effendi, "The Unfoldment of World Civilization," World Order of
> Bahd'u'lldh, p. 184. Gnosticism was one of the more widely spread syncretistic religions
> in the Hellenistic-Roman period. Its complex origins have been traced to Iran (Mani-
> chaeism, Mandaeism ) , to Syria and Egypt, and to ancient Greece (Orphism, Platonism).
> Gnosticism was a religious philosophy of the nature and destiny of man. As such, it
> aimed at explaining the origin of evil in the world and man's deliverance from it.
> Its conflicting sects proffered contending mythologies by way of explanation. Gnosti-
> cism's conceptual framework paralleled in some ways Judaeo-Christian          thought. It
> contained creation myths, an account of the fall of a primal man, and his redemption
> through a savior figure. Philosophically, it was markedly dualistic.
> 16. The churches at Corinth and Collasae had both been rent by Gnostic heresies.
> At Corinth a spiritual aristocracy had developed that prided itself on esoteric knowl-
> edge. The church at Collasae wanted to amalgamate Christianity with the mystery
> cub and heterodox Judaism (Col. 2:8-23 and 1 Cor. 18-31; 1 Cor. 2:6-13).
> 17. Irenaeus' best work was titled Refutation      and Overthrow of Gnosis Falsely
> So-Called, more commonly known as Against Heresies. See Ante-Nicene               Fathers
> (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, n.d.) , I, 315-58.
> THE DEIFICATION OF JESUS             31
> 
> • the Father    tians also compromised Christ's soteriology in another way. For those Chris-
> on occasion    tians who accepted Christ alone as Lord, salvation was a matter of faith in
> greater than     Christ's sacrificial death on the cross. Gnostics held that salvation was won
> him" (John       through gnosis (Gk. 'knowledge, insight'), which was viewed to be a higher
> lel of moral     state than faith. Their own form of gnosis was esoteric enough, sometimes
> inity: "Why      held to be a secret knowledge transmitted by Christ to the Apostles and in
> 0:18). Not      turn to the leaders of Gnostic culrs.I" Shoghi Effendi's description        of
> Ire powerful     Gnosticism as "evasive" indicates that the Gnostic community never held
> fully share.   to fixed tenets of belief.!?
> ng: "But of          Lacking a widely circulated scripture, the church at Rome formulated the
> 'en, nor the     first of the creeds, an orthodox doctrinal statement, to combat the Gnostic
> heresy (Gk. hairesis 'party, school'). The Apostles' Creed, composed between
> nostic Jesus     A.D. 150-75, alluded      to the uniqueness of Jesus as the "only Son, our
> Lord," to counteract Gnosticism's submerging of Jesus in a host of other
> .nd mystical     deiries.P" To combat further the evasive teaching of esoteric Gnostic leaders,
> e beliefs of     the Church Fathers recognized as authoritative teaching only the New Testa-
> :hers of the     ment, which had derived directly from apostolic reaching.U
> se "popular
> by Shoghi                                                    The Christological     Controversies
> the Roman       The Schism of Arius and the Development of the Trinity. By the end of the
> ristian com-     second century the force of the Gnostic movement with its competing savior
> be Church        figures was well-nigh spent. In the second, third, and fourth centuries
> , Bishop of      Christology continued to occupy the central place in the writings of the
> Fathers. But christological writing at this stage was characterized by greater
> le of Jesus      controversy than in earlier generations, controversy that finally escalated into
> er 'savior').    open warfare between sectarians.
> inities (Gk.        In the second and third centuries the church experienced dissension over the
> aul's native     Monarchian controversy. Although this christological controversy provoked
> ro Heracles      great debate, it did not seriously disturb Christian unity and died quietly
> ostic Chris-     toward the end of the third century.22
> 
> ieresy. Since       18. Simon the Magician was one of the Gnostic cult leaders. He received the
> I their own,     condemnation of St. Peter by attempting to buy his spirirual powers from the
> interest.        Apostles (Acts 8:9-25). The Egyptian Basilides and Valentinus of Rome, although
> Id Order    of   closer to orthodox Christianity, founded docetic (Gk. dokesis 'illusion') Gnostic
> stic religions   heresies that exalted Christ's spiriruality to the point that they denied His physical
> fran (Mani-      reality.
> Platonism) .       19. Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Bahd'u'lldh, p. 184.
> As such, it        20. Later tradition attributes this creed to the Apostles. It was composed not only
> nee from it.     to combat the Gnostic heresy but was used primarily as a summary statement of
> ion. Gnosti-     questions and answers, requisite knowledge of catechumens prior to their being bap-
> thought. It     tized. Helmer Ringgren and Ake V. Strom, The Religions of Mankind; Today and
> redemption      Yesterday, ed. J. c. G. Greig, trans. Niels L. Jensen (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
> 1967), p. 149.                                          I
> stic heresies.      21. The Gnostics put forth their mythologies in literature of their own. "The
> teric knowl-     Gospel of Truth" and "Book of Baruch" are among their works.
> the mystery         22. Monarchianism was a theological controversy arising out of concern for main-
> 6-13).           taining the "monarchia" or divine unity. It expressed this concern in two movements
> iosis Falsely    that were fundamentally different. "Adoptionism" wished to stress the divine unity
> ene Fathers      to the point that it taught that Christ was only an inspired man. Christ was,
> so to speak, adopted by God's Spirit. The other movement, "rnodalism," stressed
> 32     WORLD ORDER: SPRING/SUMMER         1980
> 
> The fourth century, however, witnessed a shock wave of major proportions
> that was felt throughout Christendom. 'Abdu'l-Baha has referred to its disas-
> trous effects on the unity of the Christian faith:
> Even after Christ, Arius, the well-known patriarch, was the cause of a
> widespread schism in the Cause of God and intense agitation among the
> believers. His followers numbered even three million, and he as well
> as his successors exerted the utmost effort in order to produce a split and a
> widespread commotion in the religion of God.23
> Aside from naming Arius as a violator of Christianity, 'Abdu'l-Baha clearly
> indicates that Arius essentially used a theological pretext for achieving power,
> a connivance common to violators in all dispensations.P"
> Arius was a learned priest from Alexandria who quarreled with his bishop,
> Alexander. The disputation began with Arius' assertion that the Son, even
> as the Logos, the Divine Word, was inferior to the Father. He held that
> Christ, like other beings, was created ex nihilo by God and was, therefore, a
> created and finite being. He also! argued that Christ had a beginning whereas
> the Father was eternal: "We are persecuted because we say the Son has a
> beginning whereas God is without beginning."25 Alexander took issue with
> Arius, holding to the orthodox belief that the Son as Logos was eternal, un-
> created, and of the same essence or substance as God. The most serious offense
> of Arius' teaching in orthodox eyes was its debasing subordination of Jesus.
> Arius argued that Christ was liable to change in regard to His divine nature
> and even to sin. The appellation "Son of God" was for the Arians a courtesy
> title rather than an indication of Christ's divine origin.
> Alexander summoned a provincial synod and had Arius excommunicated
> in A.D. 321. The banished Arius refused to submit and won a large following
> in Palestine. His supporters spread the controversy frOID Palestine all over
> the eastern Greek episcopates (bishoprics). Constantine, the newly converted
> Christian king, anxious to preserve the empire from schism, summoned the
> first ecumenical council of the church at Nicaea, across the Bosphorus from
> Constanrinople.P" 'Abdu'l-Baha's commentary on Constantine speaks favorably
> of his great spirituality and administrative skill: "He spared no efforts, dedi-
> cating his life to the promotion of the principles of the Gospel, and he solidly
> 
> Christ's divinity to the extent that it did not distinguish Him in any way from
> the Godhead.
> 23. 'Abdu'l-fsaha, "'The Covenant of God shall remain stable and secure': Recent
> Tablet to Roy C. Wilhelm," in Star of the West, 10 (5 June 1919),95. In the same
> passage 'Abdu'l-Baha assures Mr. Wilhelm that the Baha'i covenant will remain in-
> violate.
> 24. Nicolas Zernov quotes church historian Socrates Scholasticus (d. A.D. 450),
> who said that "from love of controversy" Arius opposed his bishop in the discussion.
> See Eastern Christendom: A Study of the Origi« and Development of the Eastern
> Orthodox Church (New York: Putnam's, 1961), p. 45n.
> 25. Arius, quoted in J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (London: Adam &
> Charles Black, 1958), p. 228. This passage on Arius' teaching has been gleaned
> from pp. 226-31.
> 26. Constantine was converted to Christianity by a vision of the cross superimposed
> on the midday sun. The accompanying message read, "By this sign conquer." Against
> all odds and good judgment Constantine made a rapid invasion of Italy and defeated
> his rival, Maxentius, at the battle of the Milvian Bridge at Rome (A.D. 312).
> THE DEIFICATION      OF JESUS        33
> 
> proportions       established the Roman government, which in reality had been nothing but
> to its disas-     a system of unrelieved oppression, on moderation and justice."27 'Abdu'l-
> Baha's favorable assessment of Constantine is not shared by all historians,
> cause of a        some of whom view his intervention in spiritual matters as a means of gain-
> among the         ing ascendency over his political opponents. 28
> he as well          . The point at issue at Nicaea was whether Christ was simply like the Father,
> split and a       much in the same way as an image would resemble its perfect archetype, or
> whether He was of the same essence or substance as God, the very matter of
> 3aM clearly        Divinity. The 220 delegate bishops were separated quite literally by a mere
> ving power,        letter of the Greek alphabet (Gk. homoousios 'of the same substance';
> bomoiousios 'of like substance'). Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria and his
> . his bishop,      party defended Christ's full divinity and coequality with the Father, a position
> !  Son, even       deriving from Logos theology. Eusebius of Caeserea, "father of church history,"
> e held that        stood by the dictum "Sola Scriptura" and argued for the bomoiousios since
> therefore, a       ousia (Gk. 'substance, essence') was not a biblical term at all but one
> ing whereas        drawn from Greek philosophy.P" Eusebius argued further that favoring the
> Son has a        homoousios would risk compromising the sovereignty of God and his oneness.
> : issue with          Constantine took his stand against the Arians at Nicaea and argued force-
> eternal, un-       fully in favor of the homoousios. The creed was adopted almost universally
> ious offense        (only four bishops refused to sign it) and with great jubilation. The Jesus
> III of Jesus.      of Nazareth Who had begun His christological journey in the mind of the
> vine nature        early church as the "suffering servant" messiah-figure of Deutero-Isaiah
> ; a courtesy       emerged from Nicaea as a deified being, consubstantial with God.30
> The promulgation of the Nicene Creed, far from bringing the spiritual
> nmunicated         peace that Constantine had sought, inaugurated a second stage of vitriolic
> e following        struggle between Nicenes and Arians that was to rage for the next half
> ae all over        century. !I 1 During this second phase of the contest, the Arian party witnessed
> Y' converted       a momentary victory. By a series of skillful diplomatic maneuvers, Arian
> unoned the         bishops were able to win the support of Constantius I, Constantine's son and
> horus from
> :s favorably
> fforts, dedi-         27. 'Abdu'l-Baha, The Secret of Divine Civilization, trans. Marzieh Gail and
> Ali-Kuli Khan, 2d ed. (Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1970), p. 85. 'Abdu'l-
> I he solidly       Baha's statement is borne out by the full weight of history. Constantine systematically
> altered the legislation of the Empire to accord it with Gospel teaching. He punished
> Y'    way from     sexual offenders; no longer penalized celibates; tightened divorce laws; facilitated
> the liberation of slaves; protected prisoners, widows, and orphans; and gave bishops
> ure': Recent       certain magisterial powers.
> In the same          28. Among these historians are Gibbon, Burckhardt, Schwartz, and Harnack. See
> remain in-       Zernov, Eastern Christendom, p. 39n.
> 29. John Courtney Murray, S.]., The Problem of God; Yesterday and Today
> A.D. 450),     (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1964), p. 47.
> e discussion.         30. Oscar Cullmann believes that the most ancient chrisrological title applied to Jesus
> the Eastern   was that of the "servant." Acts 3:26 and 4:30 ascribe its usage to St. Peter, who
> was greatly impressed by the suffering of his beloved Master. Peter protested when
> n: Adam &          warned by Christ of His impending death (Mark 8: 32). Isaiah's prophecy speaks of
> een gleaned        the coming servant's suffering as a propitiatory death: "when he makes himself an
> offering for sin" (53: 10). Christo logy of the New Testament, p. 74.
> zperimposed            31. When the Arian bishop, Macedonius, was returned to office in Constantinople,
> er." Against       over three thousand people lost their lives in the fighting. More Christians were slain
> md defeated        by fellow Christians in this one contest alone than had died during the last terrible
> 312 ).             persecution of Roman emperor Diocletian (311).
> _L        .__    .__-.__   .__.   _
> 
> 34     WORLD    ORDER:         SPRING/SUMMER         1980
> 
> ruler of the eastern states, who abandoned his father's policy of standing be-
> hind the Nicene Creed. At the Synod of Constantinople in A.D. 360, held
> during the dedication of the Hagia Sophia, the Nicene Creed was abrogated
> and replaced with an Arian creed, declaring the Son to be simply "like the
> Father, as the Holy Scriptures call Him and teach."32 It seemed that Christen-
> dom had gone Arian.
> During this second phase of the Arian controversy a third force along
> with the Father and Son was introduced into the debate. This was the Holy
> Spirit. The turn of the century was destined to witness not only the destruc-
> tion of the Arian party but also the formulation in church council of
> Christendom's most central doctrine, the trinity.
> The sources for the Christian belief in the Holy Spirit are Judaic. In the
> Bible the dynamic spirit of God (Heb. ruach Yahweh) was active especially
> at creation (Gen. 2: 7) but was also evident in the mission of the Hebrew
> prophets who were sustained through God's spirit and spoke through the
> authority of His word: "Thus says the Lord."
> In early Christian literature this understanding was reflected in the writ-
> ings of the apologist Justin Martyr who referred to the Holy Spirit as the
> "prophetic spirit.":13 The Fathers, Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons; Tertullian of
> Carthage; and Origen of Alexandria had given place in their writings to the
> Holy Spirit in reference to the Godhead. By the fourth century a movement
> had been gradually building to deify the Holy Spirit. The writings of Hilary
> of Poiriers and especially those of the fourth-century Cappadocian fathers, St.
> Basil the Great, his brother Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory Nazianzus, were
> instrumental in winning support for the teaching of a deified Holy Spirit.
> Augustine, building on a trinitarian tradition four centuries old, gave final
> expression to the doctrine by writing, over a twenty-year period, De Trinitate,
> a work setting forth arguments and analogies to explain the mystery of the
> trinity. 34
> Judaism,· however, was rigidly monotheistic. For the triune expression of
> the Godhead one must look to ancient Egypt. From the time of the Old King-
> dom (2770-2270 B.C.) until Christian times, Osiris, one of the "Ennead"
> or Nine of the. Egyptian pantheon of gods, was worshiped alternatively as
> three gods and as one. In his triune form, Osiris was worshiped as Serapis;
> Isis, the wife of Osiris; and Horus, their son. In a papyrus dating from the
> time of Alexander the Great the trinitarian formula, "Thus from one god I
> become three gods," is recorded as Horus' self-description.s" Tertullian of
> Carthage, also writing from North Africa, produced almost identical wording
> in his own formulation of the Christian trinity with his celebrated phras~
> 
> 32. Quoted in Noss, Man's Religions, p. 637n. This Arian creed is sometimesre-
> ferred to as the "Dated Creed."It was later abrogatedat the Council of Constantinople
> (A.D. 381) when the churchrerurnedto Nicenetheology.
> 33. Justin Martyr, quoted in Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, p. 102.
> 34. St. Augustine, "On Trinity," A Select Library of Nicene and Poss-Nicene
> Pasbers, Vol. III (New York: The Christian Literature Company, 1886-90).
> 35. Francis Legge, Forerunners and Rivals of Christianity: From 330 B.C. to
> 330 A.D. (New York: University Books, 1964), I, 88.
> THE DEIFICATION OF JESUS         35
> 
> inding be-
> "All three are one.":l6 Coincidentally, the strongest supporters of trinitarian
> 360, held          theology, Athanasius and Cyril, were both bishops of Alexandria, the breeding
> abrogated
> ground of Egyptian tritheism. It is to this "Alexandrian cult" of the worship
> r "like the
> of the triune Osiris that Shoghi Effendi refers in his discussion of those move-
> t Christen-
> ments that threatened the early church. 3 7
> That the doctrine of the trinity itself underwent a historical development
> irce along
> is readily apparent. It was to appear early in the writings of the Church
> the Holy
> Fathers and apologists, but its exegesis was by no means uniform. It was cau-
> re desrruc-
> tiously circumscribed in its early stages by a respect for Jewish monotheism
> :ouncil of
> but witnessed the gradual development        of three divine and consubstantial
> persons within the Godhead. Justin Martyr, referred to earlier, formulated a
> lie. In the
> triad of God, the Word, and the Holy Spirit. He wrote of the Word as being
> especially         "another God" beside God. 11 R The Logos (Word)       in time came to be super-
> ie Hebrew
> seded by the Son.
> tough the
> A contemporary of Justin, Theophilus of Antioch, was the first to use the
> word "triad" in his writings in relationship to the Godhead. Theophilus' triad
> the writ-
> had a novel twist in that the Holy Spirit was replaced by Wisdom, to consist
> irit as the
> of Father, Son, and Wisdom.:{!l Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, reaffirmed the tri-
> rtullian of
> une Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, teaching that the Son (Word)            was in
> ngs to the
> eternal generation and was, therefore, coexistent with the Father. Since He
> movement            shared God's eternity, Irenaeus argued that the Son was also God: "The
> of Hilary         Father is God and the Son is God, for whatsoever is begotten by God is
> fathers, St.        God."40 Hippolytus of Rome first used the word pet'Jona (Latin for 'mask,'
> nzus, were          as used in Greco-Roman theater; hence 'appearance, manifestation, aspect')
> oly Spirit.         in relation to the three aspects of the Godhead and taught that, although
> gave final          single, God was multiple in respect to His fourfold attributes of Word, Wis-
> , Trinitate,
> dom, Power, and Counsel. 41 Tertullian of Carthage coined the famous "three
> ery of the          in one" formula referred to above and was also the first to use the word
> trinitas in his writings, thereby giving impetus to the independent subsistence
> .ression of         of the three divine persons." 2
> Old King-               The writings of Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Tertullian constitute a water-
> "Ennead"
> shed in the development of the trinity. It is in their writings that the first
> iatively as         tensions appear between the unity of the divine monarchia and the independent
> is Serapis;         subsistence of the three persons. Overall, however, the ascendancy was given
> . from the          to the Divine Unity with the three persons being "manifestations"           (Lat.
> one god I           species) or "aspects" (Lat. formae) of the Godhead, a theology called "eco-
> rtullian of         nomic trinitarianism," because it wished to stress the paucity of the three per-
> II wording          sons compared with the monarchia 'Divine Unity.'43 The major contribution
> :ed phrase
> 36. Henry Chadwick, "The Early Church," in The Pelican History of the Church,
> ed. O. Chadwick (Harmondsworth, England: Penguin, 1967), I, 89.
> 37. Shoghi Effendi, World Order of BahJ'u'llJh, p. 184.
> netimes re-
> 38. Chadwick, "The Early Church," p. 85.
> israntinople
> 39. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, p. 104.
> 40. Ibid., p. 107. In one analogy of the trinity Irenaeus used a word that is
> very familiar to Baha'is. He spoke of the Son and the Spirit as God's "hands," for
> Post-Nicene
> )0) .
> him the vehicles or forms of His self-revelation.
> 41. Ibid., p. 111.
> 30      B.C.   to
> 42. Ibid., p. 113.
> 43. Ibid., p. 108. The term "economy" or "Divine Economy" is also used by
> 36     WORLD ORDER: SPRING/SUMMER         1980
> 
> of this theology was its vocabulary. The words persona and trinitas became
> standard for future discussionsand took on meanings that were not originally
> intended by their authors.
> This second phase of the Arian crisis, complicated by disputes over emerg-
> ing trinitarian theology, necessitated the second ecumenical council of the
> church, held at Constantinople in A.D. 381. It was presided over by Emperor
> Theodosius I, a solid supporter of the Nicene Creed. At Constantinople trini-
> tarian theology was formally canonized. It was laid down that God, Christ,
> and the Holy Spirit are all of the same substance but manifest themselves in
> three divine persons.t "
> Following the Council of Constantinople, the Arian parry, now divided
> into contending sects, collapsed with astonishing speed, As for Arius, fate was
> to decree that he would not live to see the momentary victory of his party. He
> died quite suddenly, in misery and obscurity, in the streets of Constantinople,
> possibly a victim of poisoning, having been discarded by his own party who
> had gone on to quarrel with the Nicenes:
> He had been left out in the cold, almost forgotten. At length, sick and old,
> he had pleaded with Constantine to allow him the benefits of the sacraments
> before he died, sadly complaining that his powerful friends like Eusebius
> of Nicomedia could np longer be bothered to do anything for him." 5
> To the circumstances of Arius' unhappy ending an ominous ring is lent by
> the following comment of 'Abdu'l-Baha that serves as warning to those who
> divide the religion of God for personal gain, regardless of their theologies:
> "But eventually the power of Christ exterminated and utterly destroyed them
> all to the extent that no trace (of them) has been left."46
> The God-Man Debate-Cyril        and Nestorius. like the hydra of Greek myth-
> ology that grew a new head for each of its severed ones, the councils of Nicaea
> and Constantinople generated rather than silenced further controversy about
> the person of Jesus. Scarcelyhad the canonization of trinitarian theology taken
> place at the council of Constantinople when a new issue in the christological
> debate plunged the church deeper into dissension. This was the relationship
> between the divine and human natures of Jesus.
> Not only did this new phase of the christological battle prove to be by far
> the most bloody, but it also had fatal consequences for the unity of the
> Byzantine empire. A new and divisive force was added to the dimensions of
> the theological quarreling-the expression of nascent nationalism. The as-
> piration toward national autonomy in Syria and Egypt found expression in
> theological creeds that were used as a tool to throw off the imperial mantle of
> 
> Irenaeus. Shoghi Effendi's use of the same term (World Order of Bahd'u'lldh, pp. 19,
> 20, 22, 24, 61) would appear to coincide exactly with its early Christian usage.
> His usage of "Divine Economy" had nothing to do with Baha'i teachings on economics
> but rather indicated the Divine Plan or redemptive World Order, a parallel with early
> Christian usage of the term. (See Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, pp. 110-11.)
> 44. It was the Council of Constantinople rather than Nicaea that proclaimed
> trinitarian theology. The creed proclaimed in 381 is called the Niceno-Constantinopol-
> itan creed since it incorporated elements of the two councils.
> 45. Chadwick, "The Early Church," p. 136.
> 46. 'Abdu'l-Baha, .. 'The Covenant of God shall remain stable and secure;" p. 95.
> THE DEIFICATION OF JESUS          37
> 
> Constantinople.    These potent movements        of religious nationalism     spelled
> 'Zitas became
> permanent schism for the church, and the dislocation of a once proud empire,
> lot originally
> making it easy for the Muslim conqueror in the seventh century to overrun.
> The quasi-miraculous preservation of church unity that had prevailed during
> over emerg-
> the Arian crisis finally failed under the onslaught of these new separatist
> uncil of the
> forces.
> by Emperor
> The quarrel flared up initially between two patriarchs of great rival sees,
> tinople trini-
> Nestorius of Constantinople and Cyril of Alexandria. Both men had proved
> God, Christ,
> to be unduly harsh in their treatment of dissident groups, and their confronta-
> hemselves in
> tion had disastrous effects for the church. 4 7
> Nestorius had been called by Theodosius II from his native see of Antioch
> now divided
> to serve as preacher to the court of Constantinople. Nestorius' Christo logy is
> jus, fate was
> sometimes referred to as "duophysitism" or two-natured Christology (Gk. physis
> his party. He
> 'nature') since he believed that the divine and human natures of Jesus op-
> .nstantinople,
> erated in a loosely knit unity or "conjunction," as he wrote.48 But as a learned
> n party who
> exponent of antiochene theology Nestorius laid emphasis on the humanity of
> Jesus, a long-standing tradition reflective of its Judaic origins. For Nestorius
> sick and old,
> Christ's humanity was crucial to his soteriological role. To win the salvation
> .e sacraments
> of men Christ had made use of His free will and the power of His rational
> ike Eusebius
> soul, attributes He shared with other men. His sacrifice was not compelled.
> ir him.45
> Christ wanted to show the ordinary believer that salvation could be won only
> g is lent by
> by willingly accepting God's will, as He Himself had willingly accepted the
> o those who
> cross.
> r theologies:
> At the heart of the controversy between Cyril and Nestorius was the philo-
> itroyed them
> sophical problem of reconciling duality with oneness. Any talk of a two-
> natured Jesus was unsettling to Cyril and his Alexandrian school. Nestorius'
> 3-reek myth-
> emphasis on the humanity of Jesus led Cyril to charge him with denying the
> ils of Nicaea
> divinity of Christ. Nesrorius' too careful distinctions between the divinity and
> oversy about
> manhood of Jesus led Cyril to charge that Nestorius had in a sense mutilated
> eology taken
> the unity of Christ's person that had been fused through the LogoS.49 Cyril's
> :hristological
> teaching is usually referred to as "Monophysire" since it stressed one nature
> relationship
> in Jesus, His divinity. For Cyril there was no such thing as Christ's humanity
> in the ordinary sense. All His human attributes were divine, since they served
> to be by far
> as vehicles for the Logos, Christ's eternal divinity. Cyril carried the implications
> miry of the
> of his beliefs to the extreme. The baby Jesus was nothing less than God in the
> rnensions of
> flesh and Mary the Gk. theotokos 'mother of God,' a notion that was for him
> sm. The as-
> sacrosancr.P" Unlike Nestorius, who argued that the humanity and divinity
> xpression in
> al mantle of
> 47. Cyril's intolerance had led to the murder of Hypatia, "a virtuous and clever
> woman" who had taught Nee-platonism         at Alexandria (Chadwick, "The Early
> l'ildh, pp. 19,   Church," p. 194). Kelly (Early Christian Doctrines, p. 318) justifies Cyril's char-
> ristian usage.
> acter with the remark that "he was also inspired by motives of a purely theological
> on economics
> character."
> leI with early
> 48. Ibid., p. 320.
> 110-11.)
> 49. These dualistic differences Nestorius would emphasize when he taught, for
> .t proclaimed
> example, that it was the man Jesus that wept and died but that it was the God Jesus
> msrantinopol-
> that stilled the storm (Chadwick, "The Early Church," p. 197).
> 50. Nestorius with his antiochene theology was offended by the term "Mother of
> God," which he felt to be degrading. He caused a riot among the monks of Con-
> He;" p. 95.
> 38     WORLD ORDER: SPRING/SUMMER        1980
> 
> of Jesus were distinct, Cyril argued that they formed a "hypostatic union," a
> God-Man union, not unlike the platonic unity of body and soul, "the single
> unique Christ out of two different natures."51 Cyril's teaching contributed
> in large measure to the theology of the incarnation.
> The distinctions between the two theologies were, indeed, dubious. As often
> happens in confrontations, ironically, the disputants seemed to be saying exactly
> the same thing, "one out of both," for Cyril, and "twofold in his being God and
> man," for Nestorius." 2 It was hair-splitting theology at its worst, suiting per-
> fectly Christ's characterization of pharisaic discussions as "straining at a gnat"
> and "swallowing a camel" (Matt. 23:24). There were clearly other motives
> at work than a sheer concern for theological truth.
> The quarrel escalated with an exchange of pastoral letters between the
> patriarchs. Having won the support of Pope Celestine and convinced that he
> would be vindicated at a general council of the church, Cyril used his influence
> on Emperor Theodosius II to summon the third world council of the church
> at Ephesus in A.D. 431. 5:{ While inclement weather delayed the arrival of
> Nestorius' delegation, Cyril and sixty Alexandrian bishops went ahead and
> unilaterally excommunicated Nestorius, "the new Judas."54 A tragicomedy
> ensued. Upon arriving four days later Nestorius and his delegation held their
> own rival synod and excommunicated Cyril and his ally, Memnon, the Bishop
> of Ephesus. The exasperated emperor confirmed the excommunications of the
> rival councils and ordered both Cyril and Nestorius out of office.
> In a turnabout Neseorius' Oriental bishops withdrew their support after
> learning of his excommunication, something he must have felt as a cruel
> betrayal. Banished to the Egyptian desert, Nesrorius died a solitary and tragic
> figure in A.D. 450. Cyril, through bribery at the court, retained his bishopric
> until his death in A.D. 444. It was Cyril's theology that was ultimately declared
> canonic at Ephesus.
> The successors to both parties persisted in their fanaticism, thus necessitating
> a second council at Ephesus in A.D. 449, dubbed "The Robber Synod" by Pope
> Leo 1. Here the princes of the Monophysite Egyptian church resorted to mur-
> der to vindicate their theology. The Nestorian patriarch of Constantinople,
> Flavian, was arbitrarily condemned, dragged from the altar by a group of
> Alexandrian monks, and beaten so badly that he died within days. The same
> church councils that the fathers had insisted were inspired by the breaths of the
> Holy Spirit had now become the arena for the murder of a patriarch. 5 5 His
> crime was that he had subscribed to a different theology.
> 
> stantinople by daring to suggest that the term be discontinued and replaced with
> "Christ bearer."
> 51. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, pp. 322, 320.
> 52. Ibid., pp, 320,314.
> 53. Ephesus, on the Asian side of the Aegean sea, is in ruins today. A great
> harbor city in irs day, the silting up of its port gradually rendered it useless.
> 54. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, p. 327.
> 55. Dioscorus, the Monophysite chairman of this "Robber Synod," railroaded the
> proceedings. He gave Flavian no chance of self-defense. At the dose of the council
> the Monophysite victors shouted: "Those who contradict Dioscorus blaspheme
> against God. God has spoken through our Patriarch; the Holy Spirit has inspired
> him. All who keep silence are heretics" (Zernov, Eastern Christendom, p. 62).
> THE DEIFICATION OF JESUS         39
> 
> atic union," a          The murder of Flavian threatened not only the unity of the church but the
> il, "the single     Byzantine empire itself. In a last-ditch attempt to preserve the church-state
> g contributed       from schism, the fourth ecumenical council was convened at Chalcedon, near
> Constantinople, in A.D. 451. Its aim was to produce a universal christological
> ious. As often      statement that would weld together the Egyptian Monophysite and Nestorian
> saying exactly    . theologies of the church thereby subduing the flames. of separatism that
> eing God and        threatened to disrupt the empire. Subsequent history revealed, however, that
> t, suiting per-     the factions were unwilling to compromise.        •
> ng at a gnat"           The theological formula produced at Chalcedon was that of divine in-
> other motives       carnation. It stated in its basic outline that Christ was both perfect God and
> perfect man, made known in two distinct natures in a hypostatic union without
> between the       confusion or admixture. Of necessity the Chalcedon formula had to be a com-
> inced that he      promise mosaic of the theologies of Antioch and Alexandria. Statements of
> . his influence     Roman theology were also written in.
> )f the church           As a compromise, however, Chalcedon failed to please the churches
> he arrival of       either of Egypt or Syria. Monophysire Egypt rejected Chalcedon. Adopting
> It ahead and        "one nature" as her new creed, the church of Egypt, after a series of bloody
> tragicomedy      revolts, broke with Constantinople in A.D, 575 and formed a separate church,
> on held their       now known as the Coptic church. In Syria imperial forces from Constantinople
> [1, the Bishop      restored order only after a bloody battle with armed Monophysite monks.
> .ations of the      Jacob Baradaeus founded the Syrian Jacobite church by traveling around the
> country disguised as a beggar and ordaining Monophysite bishops. 5 6 The
> support after       followers of Nestorius later migrated to Persia, hom where they sent rnis-
> t as a cruel        sionaries to India, Ceylon, and even as far as China.
> ry and tragic           The alienation had grown so great between Copt and Greek orthodox that
> his bishopric       the Christians of Egypt threw open the gates of their cities to the Muslim
> .tely declared      invaders in A.D. 641, welcoming them as liberators from the sway of Con- .
> stantinople. Like the blowing sands of the Arabian desert from which it was
> necessitating      borne, Islam quietly buried the religious war waged between the Greek Ortho-
> lad" by Pope        dox and Egyptian Monophysite Christians. 5 7
> .rted to rnur-
> nstantinop Ie,                                 A BahtfJ(Perspective on the Deification of Jesus
> a group of       I DO NOT INTEND that the foregoing should be taken merely as a lesson in
> 's. The same       the contortions of early Christian theology. Along with the specifics of the deity
> reaths of the      of Jesus, about which more shall be said, the christological controversies lead
> .iarch." 5 His     us to a greater understanding of the problems of a growing religion.
> The early church fell into disharmony and ultimately warfare over the
> person of Jesus because of three closely related factors: (1) the lack of a
> replaced with      unified system of belief; (2) the lack of a clearly authorized interpretation
> of doctrine; and (3) the lack of clearly defined roles in the administration
> of the churches. It might prove of interest to compare these Christian devel-
> day. A great       opments with parallel elements in the Baha'i Faith.
> se1ess.               During the first century, Christians had no canonical scripture. The Old
> 
> ailroaded the
> f the council         56. It was not only the Syrian Jacobite and Egyptian Monophysite churches that
> s blaspheme        broke with Greek Orthodox Constantinople. The Ethiopian and Armenian churcbes
> has inspired      also rejected the Chalcedon formula.
> p. 62).               57. The analogy is partially borrowed from Zernov, Eastern Christendom, p, 84.
> 40      WORLD ORDER: SPRING/SUMMER        1980
> 
> Testament in the Septuagint version continued to be used as the only au-
> thorized Holy Writ. The teachings of Jesus circulated in diverse oral traditions
> throughout the communities. The church recognized the necessity of a fixed
> New Testament canon to combat the Gnostic heresies, but no order of books
> was agreed upon until the end of the second century. 5 8 Even with the tentative
> fixing of the canon the Arian crisis raised once more the question of authori-
> tative doctrine. Without a clearly designated interpreter of Christ's teachings,
> individual bishops put forth their own interpretations    of christological ques-
> tions as inspired by the Holy Spirit and made their teachings binding upon the
> faithful in their care, bringing about confrontations between bishops. 5 9 An-
> other complicating factor was the role of philosophy. By the time of the Arian
> schism philosophy was in the mainstream of the intellectual life of the church.
> The fathers used philosophical concepts and schemes to elucidate and buttress
> theological argument. This naturally involved a great deal of speculation and
> individual interpretation that ultimately fostered heresy. The key word in the
> Nicene creed homoousios was borrowed from philosophy. How different from
> the earlier days of the church when only New Testament teaching had been
> the rule, as it was in the struggle with the Gnostics, who had proven them-
> selves masters in "esoterica."
> The excessive decentralization of the church only exacerbated the fragmen-
> tation over doctrinal issues. Until the time that Pope leo I (440-61) as-
> serted the primacy of Rome over other sees, bishops were on an equal footing
> as sole rulers of their congregations. When Nesrorius and Cyril waged theo-
> logical warfare, the whole congregations of Constantinople        and Alexandria
> were perforce brought into the fray, and no supreme head was able to compose
> differences. The Baha'i Faith, on the contrary, has been fortunate enough, by
> . virtue of its written convenants, to have had only one clearly designated
> leader at any given time in its history as well as, from the very beginnings of
> the Revelation, a written body of scripture that was universally accepted. Its
> administrative     order strives to strike the balance between the excesses of
> overcentralizarion    and decentralization.P" Generally speaking, in the Baha'i
> Faith, institutional expansion has followed in an orderly fashion the transmis-
> sion of the Revelarion.v ' In the early Christian church the institutions were
> being expanded while doctrinal and scriptural questions were being completed
> in the midst of major schism. In the Baha'i Faith "Unity of doctrine" was
> maintained from the very beginning by authentic texts of scripture as well
> II        as their authorized interpretation by 'Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi. "Unity
> II        of administration" is assured by the Universal House of Justice.62
> ,II
> i       58. A council in Rome under Pope Damascus drew up the first canonical list of
> 'IJ       books in A.D. 382.
> i       59. This was the claim made for the Monophysite bishop of Alexandria at the
> second council of Ephesus in A.D. 449 (see n. 55 ).
> 60. Shoghi Effendi, Baha'i Administration: Selected Messages 1922-1932, 7th
> rev. ed. (Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1974), p. 142.
> 61. Under the leadership of Shoghi Effendi the insrirutions of the Baha'i Adminis-
> trative Order were developed from 1922 until 1936. Systematic prosecution of
> 'Abdu'l-Baha's Divine Plan began with the Seven Year Plan (1937).
> 62. The Universal House of Justice, Wellspring of Guidance: Messages 1963-
> 1968, Ist rev. ed. (Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1976), p. 53.
> 
> -   -~'.-C-   -.--
> THE   DEIFICATION   OF   JESUS   41
> 
> ie only au-         The christological controversies reveal the tragedy of religious controversy.
> al traditions    Contrived beliefs in the infallible guidance of the Holy Spirit in church coun-
> , of a fixed     cil justified fratricidal warfare waged on fellow Christians because they did
> er of books      not share the same theology. One is also struck by the gap between Christian
> he tentative     morality and theology, between virtue and learning. How different from
> of authori-    Baha'u'llah's teaching in which the teacher's divine wisdom can only be re-
> s teachings,     flected to the degree that he practices the spiritual virtues recommended by
> ogical ques-     the Manifesrarion.v" Baha'u'llah has warned of the destructive force in re-
> Ig upon the      ligious dissension: "Religious fanaticism and hatred are a world-devouring
> IOpS.59   An-    fire, whose violence none can quench."64 Even the mighty Constantine could
> If the Arian     not still the roaring flames of the Arian schism. The fatal consequences of
> the church.     the God-man debate for the Byzantine empire have already been alluded to.
> ind buttress     At the same time, Baha'u'llah reminds us of the essential purpose of religion
> ulation and      so denatured by religious strife: "Oh people of the world! The religion of
> vord in the      God is to create love and unity; do not make it the cause of enmity and
> ferent from      discord."65 Further, in "The First Glad Tidings," Baha'u'llah specifically
> g had been       abolishes religious warfare, which had been accepted in previous dispensa-
> oven them-       tions. 66 In the "Tablet of the Wodd" Baha'u'Ilah abrogates what He calls
> the "four words," all of which figured in the christological controversies: (1)
> e fragmen-       "Destroying men's lives"; (2) "Burning the Books"; (3) Shunning other
> 10-61)   as-     nations"; and (4) "Exterminating other communiries.?"?
> ual footing         Baha'u'llah's prohibition of religious discord and His exhortations to fel-
> raged theo-      lowship are not only for the purposes of maintaining the social peace. They
> Alexandria       have a much deeper impact on the epistomological implications of mankind's
> to compose       intellectual life. As I see it, harmony and unity in religion are the preconditions
> enough, by       that will lead man to the discovery of new spiritual truths. 'Abdu'l-Baha has
> designated      written: "The fact that we imagine ourselves to be right and everybody
> ~innings of      else wrong is the greatest of all obstacles in the path towards unity, and unity
> :cepted. Its     is essential if we would reach Truth, for Truth is one."68 This quotation sug-
> excesses of      gests a plurality of meanings in any theological construct or dialogue.
> the Baha'i          The other lesson to be gained from the christological controversies is that
> e transrnis-     man must recognize the limitations of his own knowledge. Christians allowed
> .tions were      themselves to tamper with highly abstract, speculative theological issues that
> completed       were clearly beyond their capacity to comprehend. The first four ecumenical
> trine" was       councils of the church necessitated by the controversies reveal a deep-seated
> re as well       preoccupation with definition and analysis as a solution to doctrinal issues.
> idi. "Unity      Where the requisite spiritual attributes are lacking, this approach is clearly
> 
> 63. Bah3.'u'lLih, in Bah3.'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-'Baha,    "The First Tajalli," Baha'i World
> rical list of    Faith: Selected   Writings     of Baha'u'llah   and 'Abdu'l-Baha, rev. ed. (Wilmette, Ill.:
> Baha'i Publishing Trust,     1976), p. 188.
> dria at the         64. Baha'u'Ilah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, trans. Shoghi Effendi,
> 2d rev. ed. (Wilmette,    Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1976), p. 288.
> -1932,     7th      65. Baha'u'Ilah, in Baha'u'Ilah    and 'Abdu'l-Baha,  "Kitab-i-'Ahd,"  Baha'i World
> Faith, p. 209.
> 'i Adminis-         66. Ibid., p. 191.
> recution    of      67. Ibid., pp. 177-78.
> 68. 'Abdu'l-fsaha, quoted in J. E. Esslernont, Bahd'u'lldh and the New Era: An
> iges 1963-       Introduction to the Baha'i Faith, 4th rev. ed. (Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust,
> >3.              1980), p, 201.
> 42       WORLD ORDER:     SPRING/SUMMER     1980
> 
> not a means of solution. The leaders of the church passed beyond the bounds
> of "intellectual honesty and humility" and put forth doctrines that reflected
> their own imperfect understanding         as perfect reflections of the will of the
> Holy Spirit."? Baha'is have also been warned about the same dangers: "In
> past dispensations many errors arose because the believers in God's revelation
> were overanxious to encompass the Divine Message within the framework of
> their limited understanding ... to argue that something was true because it
> appeared desirable and necessary." 7 0
> Christian affirmations about the divinity of Jesus would warrant several
> observations. First, it seems clear that the deification of Jesus belies the oft-
> repeated Christian affirmation that revelation is static. The deification issue
> evolved as a historical process, both biblically and in the creeds. New Testament
> exegesis of Christ's earliest christological titles as the "Suffering Servant" and
> the "True Prophet" contrasted with later incarnation theology clearly indi-
> cates this. The Apostles' Creed, the first of the extrabiblical creeds, devised
> by the church of Rome as a reaction to Gnosticism, in no way even hints at
> Christ's identification with the Godhead. The deification itself did not occur
> until Nicaea in A.D. 325, the doctrine being later ratified as trinitarian theology
> at Constantinople in A.D. 381.
> Though it would be quite wrong in Baha'i terms to subordinate Christ to
> other mythological redeemers as the Gnostic heresy had done, one can still
> clearly discern how much of the Gnostic theological substratum Paul used
> in his own presentation of Christ. Paul's thematic presentation of the fall of
> man and his enslavement to the evil powers, "rulers of this age" (1 Cor. 2: 8) ,
> and his victorious redemption by the Christ savior, all reveal features of a
> cosmic drama that is quite Gnostic. 71
> It was the Arian schism, however, that brought the whole question of
> Christ's divinity into the forefront of the debate. It is tempting for Baha'is to
> see in Arius an ally of the Baha'i view that basically subordinates the prophetic
> figure to God. Upon closer examination,           however, Arius' subordinationist
> Christology reveals itself to be at variance with Baha'i teaching. Unlike Arius
> who taught that Christ was properly a phenomenon, a created and finite Being,
> Baha'I theology teaches that the Divine Manifestations are eternal in their
> station of the Logos-that   is, preexistent to their human condition. 7 2 Naturally,
> the physical vehicle is phenomenal like that of other men. Baha'i teaching
> also holds to the "essential sinless ness" of the Divine Manifestation, whereas
> Arius indicated that Christ was liable not to change alone but also to sin." 3
> The three major councils of the church-Nicaea,         Constantinople, and Chal-
> cedor; -that evolved successively the deification, trinitarian, and incarnation
> 
> 69. The Universal House of Justice, Wellspring of Guidance, p. 87.
> 70. Ibid., pp, 87-88.
> 71. Brandon in "The Gnostic Problem in Early Christianity" states that by the
> phrase "rulers of this age" Paul does not intend the temporal authorities but demonic
> beings who had control of the lives of men. He also discusses other Gnostic influences
> in Paul. Religion in Ancient History, pp. 324-36.
> 72. 'Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, comp. and trans. Laura Clifford
> Barney, rev. ed. (Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1964), p. 174. Orthodox
> theology of the early church also taught the preexistence of the Logos.
> 73. Ibid., p. 197.
> THE DEIFICATION OF JESUS          43
> 
> :l the bounds       aspects of Christian doctrine all have the common and objectionable feature
> that reflected      of compromising the Divine Unity. The Divine Unity is one of the "major
> will of the       beliefs" of the Baha'i Faith, "the integrity of which," Shoghi Effendi states,
> dangers: "In        "no one of its followers should allow to be compromised." 74 All of these
> :l's revelation     creeds tampered with the Divine Unity by recasting Christ's relationship to
> ramework of         the Father in its pagan mythological meaning, which was that God had
> ue because it       generated offspring. The wording of the creeds, as well as Cyril's pantheistic
> theotokos (mother of God) clearly indicate this.75 Baha'u'Ilah, however,
> rrant several       specifically rejects the belief that the Manifestation of God can somehow
> elies the oft-      share in God's essence as the homoousisos of Nicaea held, or coinhabit the
> fication issue      Divine essence in a triune Godhead as the Constantinopolitan doctrine of
> :w Testament        trinity maintained: "If any be set up by His side as peers, if they be regarded
> Servant" and        as identical with His Person, how can it, then, be maintained that the Divine
> clearly indi-      Being is One and Incomparable, that His Essence is indivisible and peerless"
> eeds, devised        (my emphasis)? 76 As for the incarnation, first outlined in Paul's theology
> even hints at       and canonized at Chalcedon, it has been qualified by Shoghi Effendi as a
> lid not occur       "crude and fantastic" "theory." 7 7
> rian theology           The question then is raised. If Christ is not all these things, what in the
> Baha'i understanding is He? Only the briefest outline can be offered here;
> ate Christ to       but the answer, I believe, is clearly in complete harmony both with Gospel
> one can still       teaching and with much Christian scholarship. Paul's writings do not con-
> en Paul used        stitute divine revelation for a Baha'i. This, of course, would meet with major
> )f the fall of      objections from Christians who believe that all scripture is divinely inspired
> 1 Cor. 2:8),        (2 Tim. 3: 16).
> features of a           The Baha'i writings indicate that each Divine Manifestation is "known by
> a different name" and "fulfills a definite mission."78 Baha'i recognition of
> question of       Christ's sonship would apply equally to "Son of Man," the more common of
> or Baha'is to       the titles used by Christ, and to the term "Son of God." As I pointed out earlier,
> the prophetic        Christ is "Son of God" not in any mythological sense as in a sharing of God's
> oordinationist      divine essence but in terms of His messiahship or spiritual kingship. Christians
> Unlike Arius         have fastened almost exclusively upon the mythological meaning of the term,
> finite Being,      that Christ is God's offspring, and have ignored the counterpart implied in
> mal in their         the term, that the "Son" is one who above all shows obedience and humility
> 72 Naturally,       to the Father-that     is, the "Son" does the Father's will. The term "Son of
> ha'I teaching        Man" contains paradoxical assertions that the Christ figure would achieve the
> tion, whereas        redemption of mankind by suffering a humiliating death and yet at the same
> ilso to sin. 7 3     time indicates a cosmological figure of paramount importance who would
> le, and Chal-       usher in a spiritual kingdom promised from the beginning of the world. 7 9
> I incarnation       The Baha'i writings are in harmony with these views since they recognize the
> sacrificial death of Jesus "as a ransom for the sins and iniquities of all of the
> 
> s that by the        74. Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Bahd'u'lldh, p. 114.
> s but demonic        75. The Nicene Creed reads, for example: "begotten from the Father ...        true
> istic influences   God from true God ...      from the substance of the father." Kelly, Early Christian
> Doctrines, p. 232, passim.
> Laura Clifford       76. Baha'u'Ilah, Gleanings, p. 70.
> l 74. Orthodox       n. Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Baha'u'ltah, p. 112.
> 78. Baha'u'Ilah, Gleanings, p. 52.
> 79. Cullmann, Cbristology of the New Testament, pp. 158, 142.
> 44     WORLD ORDER: SPRING/SUMMER          1980
> 
> peoples of the earth" and His having ushered in a spiritual kingdom. 8 0
> The later Christian obsession with Christ as God, due mainly to the theology
> of Paul and the councils, is belied by the New Testament itself, which re-
> veals a variety of christological titles. The Christ figure of the New Testament,           j
> notwithstanding the preeminence of the title of sonship, is depicted as a mosaic            j
> 
> of christological images, each with its own history rooted in a different tradi-            1
> tion. For early Christians Christ was the True Prophet, the Suffering Servant of
> Deutero-Isaiah (Heb. ebed Yahweh 'the Righteous One'). There are also tradi-
> tions of Jesus as the High Priest, Jesus as Lord, and so on.S1 Such a mosaic
> is consistent with Baha'u'llah's explanation that the prophetic figute reveals
> a wide range of spiritual attributes, from the state of servitude at one end of
> the scale, "a servitude the like of which no man can possibly attain," and
> covering successively the stages of Apostleship, Guardianship, Messengership,
> Prophethood, Lordship, reaching ultimately to Divinity, "the Call of God Him-
> self."82
> In addition to this prophetic mission, Baha'i teaching points to the pre-
> existent or' metaphysical reality of Christ. However, rather than restricting
> this preexistent reality to Jesus alone, Baha'i scripture attributes it to all of
> iri   the Founders of the world's great religions. This is the reality of the Divine
> "
> 
> Word (Logos) or Divine Manifestation: "Therefore the reality of prophet-
> hood, which is the Word of God and the perfect state of manifestation, did not
> have any beginning, and will not have any end.... "83 Not only does Baha'I
> teaching accord with the preexistence of the Word as stated in the prologue
> to St. John's Gospel (John 1), but also Christian scholarship has interpreted
> '!H
> the passage to mean that the Logos means God's self-revelation, a view that
> coincides perfectly with Baha'i teaching. 84
> Further, the hellenistic notions of the term, which are implicit in John's
> usage, are also pertinent to the comparative aspects of the two religions. For
> the pre-Socratics and the Stoics as well as the Jewish philosopher, Philo of
> Alexandria, the Logos was an intermediary between God and man. For the
> I!~i
> 
> 80. Baha'u'Ilah, Gleanings, p. 76. In view of this text of Baha'u'Ilah I feel that
> it is proper for a Baha'i to speak of the blood sacrifice of Jesus. However, a Baha'i
> ~Ii   would not link this notion to a belief in original sin as it is in Christian theology.
> The church's aggregate condemnation of the whole human race prior to Christ's coming
> has been qualified as "superstitious" by 'Abdu'l-Baha (The Reality of Man: Excerpts
> from W"itings of Bahd'u'lkih and 'Abdu'l-Bahd, rev. ed. [Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Pub-
> lishing Trust, 1962]), p. 47. Baha'u'llah reminds us, though, that there are limits
> :li   to the intellectual understanding of the mystery of sacrifice. See Gleanings, p. 76;
> cf. Baha'u'Ilah, The Kitdb-i-[qan:    The Book of Certitude, trans. Shoghi Effendi, 3d
> ed. (Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1974), p. 129.
> 81. See Cullmann, Cbristology of tbe New Testament.
> 82. Baha'u'llah, Gleanings, p. 55.
> 83. 'Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 174.
> 84. Cullmann, Cbristology of the New Testament, pp. 265-66. Because of Baha'u'-
> llah's and 'Abdu'l-Baha's endorsement of Logos theology, I cannot concur with those
> who look to Ebionite Christology as being closer to the Baha'i concept of the Manifesta-
> tion. It is in some ways; however, the Johannine Logos that is endorsed in the
> Baha'i Faith and that is also used by Paul was rejected by the Ebionites. Ebionites also
> rejected the virgin birth, which is espoused in the Baha'i Faith.
> THE DEIFICATION OF JESUS        45
> 
> ~dom.80              Gnostics the Logos as intermediary was finally personalized in the form of a
> the theology        Savior. There are direct parallels here with Baha'i belief, which also points
> .f, which re-        to the Divine Word as an intermediary between God and man. However, one
> v Testament,         reservation must be stated here. John's Gospel depicts the very act of creation
> Ias a mosaic         as being ascribed to the Logos. In Baha'i teaching God is the creator. 85
> fferent tradi-
> 19 Servant of          85. Baha'u'Ilah, Kitdb.i-[qan, p. 103.
> .re also tradi-
> ich a mosaic
> igure reveals
> t one end of
> attain," and
> essengership,
> )f God Him-
> 
> to the pre-
> .n  restricting
> it to all of
> f the Divine
> of prophet-
> uion, did not
> , does Baha'i
> the prologue
> .s interpreted
> a view that
> 
> cit in John's
> .eligions. For
> rer, Philo of
> nan. For the
> 
> ah I feel that
> ever, a Baha'i
> itian theology.
> .hrist's coming
> Man: Excerpts
> .: Baha'I Pub-
> iere are limits
> mings, p. 76;·
> hi Effendi, 3d
> 
> ise of Baha'u'>
> :ur with those
> the Manifesta-
> dorsed in the
> Ebionites also
>
> — *The Deification of Jesus (Used by permission of the curator)*