The Deification of Jesus

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