Church History: Examining the Creeds and Confessions of the Church Through the Ages and Why They Matter.
Lesson 5: The Athanasian Creed
So far, in our study of church history we have seen:
An overview of the last 2,000 years of church history.
The creeds which are found within the Bible itself.
The early church documents called the Didache and the Apostles’ Creed.
The Council of Nicea and the Nicene Creed in AD325.
The Council and Confession of Chalcedon in AD451.
Tonight, we are going to examine the life of Athanasius and also the creed which bears his name.
The Life and Death of Athanasius
There is a story about the early life of Athanasius which tells us a bit about his zeal from a very young age.
Alexander, the Bishop of Alexandria, was gazing out his window one day when he happened to see a group of boys playing near the water.
This was not unusual, of course, but their activity caught his eye because it was apparent that they were actually acting out a baptismal service.
Alexander, concerned about the boy’s apparent act of sacrilege, went and confronted them.
The one who was organizing the group was a young man named Athanasius.
The Bishop inquired what he was doing, and he said that he was pretending to be a bishop and that the other boys were his catechumens.
What began as a rebuke became an endearing relationship between Alexander and Athanasius, and after Athanasius’ parents agreed, he became his assistant.
At the age of 23, he was ordained as a deacon and continued to work closely with Alexander. (Robin Philips: http://atgsociety.com/2010/02/against-the-world-the-legacy-of-saint-athanasius/)
We have already seen that Athanasius, along with Alexander, was instrumental in the events which occurred at the Council of Nicaea.
Following Nicaea, in AD328 he was elected to succeed Alexander as the Bishop of Alexandria.
His episcopate lasted 45 years.
But Athanasius’ ministry was not an easy one.
17 of his 45 years of ministry, he was in exile as a result of his battles regarding doctrine.
As we noted last week, a famous quote came from this time period:
Athanasius Contra Mundum
Athanasius Against the World!
He was exiled 5 times by different emperors.
He was exiled once by Emperor Constantine for 2.5 years.
He was exiled under Emperor Constantius twice.
Once for 7.5 years.
Second for 6 years.
He was exiled by Emperor Julian (the Apostate) for 10 months.
He was exiled by Emperor Valens for 4 months.
Athanasius was accused of many things, from defiling the altar, to selling church grain for his own personal gain, to engaging with prostitutes, to even violence and murder to suppress dissent.
In the situation with Constantine (the first exile), it was obvious that his accusers were bringing falsehoods against him.
They brought in a prostitute to accuse Athanasius of having raped her. During the trial, Timotheus, the friend of Athanasius, stepped forward and said, “Was it I who entered your house?” to which she answered in the affirmative, demonstrating that she had never even met Athanasius. The Bishops who had put her up to it were demonstrated to be deceivers.
During this same event, Athanasius was accused of murdering a fellow Bishop named Arsenius, and taking his severed hand as a prize. They produced the severed hand to accuse him. Athanasius, knowing of their accusation beforehand, decided to destroy their accusation in he best way possible: He produced Arsenius... with both of his hands.
When these failed, they accused Athanasius of having prevented corn from being exported from Alexandria, and believing them Constantine went forward with his exile.
These are just a few of the incidents wherein it seemed that Athanasius was “against the world”.
Yet, even with all of the controversy surrounding his life and ministry, Athanasius left an indelible mark on the Christian Church.
He stood for truth, when so many others faltered.
In that he is an example to us of Christian fortitude and commitment.
In AD366, he was able to resume his position as Bishop for the last time, holding it until his death in 373 at the age of 78.
C.S. Lewis commented on the life of Athanasius saying:
“He stood for the Trinitarian doctrine, ‘whole and undefiled,’ when it looked as if all the civilized world was slipping back from Christianity into the religion of Arius – into one of those ‘sensible’ synthetic religions which are so strongly recommended today and which, then as now, included among their devotees many highly cultivated clergymen. It is his glory that he did not move with the times…”
The 39th Festal Letter
Some believe the most influential of the writing of Athanasius to be his 39th Festal Letter, in AD367.
It was customary that after the Epiphany each year (the festival held twelve days after Christmas) that the Bishops of Alexandria would write a letter which would fix the dates for Lent and Resurrection Sunday and the other important festivals of the church.
What made the 39th letter so important was that Athanasius included within it a listing of the New Testament books.
This list coincides with the list of 27 books we still use today.
As a result, many people look to the 39th Festal Letter as the first authoritative statement on the Canon of the New Testament.
Athanasius states that “in these [27 writings] alone the teaching of godliness is proclaimed. No one may add to them, and nothing may be taken away from them.” (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/1990/issue28/2812.html)
It is important to note that the church “recognizing” the canon is not the same as the church “creating” the canon.
The church does not have the power to create canon.
The canon is an artifact of revelation; it exists because God had His word written by men.
The church cannot create revelation; the church can only recognize revelation.
Likewise, Athanasius did not make these books part of the Bible; he simply recognized them as revelation from God, bearing the marks of inspiration.
It was a blessing for the church to make his recognition because in doing so it separated he true Word of God from the errant teachings of men like Marcion (who tried to cut out parts of Scripture) and the Gnostics who tried to pervert the truth.
The Athanasian Creed
When we use the term “Athanasian Creed” the assumption is that it was written by Athanasius.
Some people do believe him to be the author, but many others do not.
Those who say it did not reference the fact that it deals with certain theological issues which did not arise until after his death.
In either case, the creed which bears the name of Athanasius does also bear testimony to his theology; to agree with it, is to agree with him.
It is considered by some to be the third “universal” creed of the church.
The other two would be The Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed.
It can be divided into two sections:
Lines 1-28 regard the Doctrine of the Trinity
Lines 29-44 regard the Doctrine of Christology
“Whoever wants to be saved should above all cling to the catholic faith. Whoever does not guard it whole and inviolable will doubtless perish eternally. Now this is the catholic faith:
“We worship one God in trinity and the Trinity in unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the divine being. For the Father is one person, the Son is another, and the Spirit is still another. But the deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, equal in glory, coeternal in majesty. What the Father is, the Son is, and so is the Holy Spirit. Uncreated is the Father; uncreated is the Son; uncreated is the Spirit. The Father is infinite; the Son is infinite; the Holy Spirit is infinite. Eternal is the Father; eternal is the Son; eternal is the Spirit: And yet there are not three eternal beings, but one who is eternal; as there are not three uncreated and unlimited beings, but one who is uncreated and unlimited. Almighty is the Father; almighty is the Son; almighty is the Spirit: And yet there are not three almighty beings, but one who is almighty. Thus the Father is God; the Son is God; the Holy Spirit is God: And yet there are not three gods, but one God. Thus the Father is Lord; the Son is Lord; the Holy Spirit is Lord: And yet there are not three lords, but one Lord.
“As Christian truth compels us to acknowledge each distinct person as God and Lord, so catholic religion forbids us to say that there are three gods or lords. The Father was neither made nor created nor begotten; the Son was neither made nor created, but was alone begotten of the Father; the Spirit was neither made nor created, but is proceeding from the Father and the Son. Thus there is one Father, not three fathers; one Son, not three sons; one Holy Spirit, not three spirits. And in this Trinity, no one is before or after, greater or less than the other; but all three persons are in themselves, coeternal and coequal; and so we must worship the Trinity in unity and the one God in three persons. Whoever wants to be saved should think thus about the Trinity.
“It is necessary for eternal salvation that one also faithfully believe that our Lord Jesus Christ became flesh.
“For this is the true faith that we believe and confess: That our Lord Jesus Christ, God's Son, is both God and man. He is God, begotten before all worlds from the being of the Father, and he is man, born in the world from the being of his mother—existing fully as God, and fully as man with a rational soul and a human body; equal to the Father in divinity, subordinate to the Father in humanity. Although he is God and man, he is not divided, but is one Christ. He is united because God has taken humanity into himself; he does not transform deity into humanity. He is completely one in the unity of his person, without confusing his natures. For as the rational soul and body are one person, so the one Christ is God and man.
“He suffered death for our salvation. He descended into hell and rose again from the dead. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again to judge the living and the dead. At his coming all people shall rise bodily to give an account of their own deeds. Those who have done good will enter eternal life, those who have done evil will enter eternal fire. This is the catholic faith. One cannot be saved without believing this firmly and faithfully.”
A word comes to mind when reading this creed: THOROUGH
It goes to great lengths to ensure what we should and should not believe in regard to the Trinity.
It may seem repetitious; but it is intended to leave no issue unanswered in regard to the full deity of Christ.
This creed also makes the bold statement that “One cannot be saved without believing this firmly and faithfully”.
This claim of exclusivity might seem difficult to accept, since the creed itself contains so much that it really beyond the mind’s ability to comprehend.
Yet, we must understand the reasoning for such exclusive language.
This was a time of severe division within the church regarding true and right doctrine.
And to believe and teach wrongly regarding Christ was - and still is - a grievous error.
It would not do to simply make this creed a suggestion... it must stand firm as a rule... subordinate in every way to Scripture, but a rule nonetheless.
Today, there are some who call themselves Christians who would reject this historic creed.
The false teachings it seeks to denounce may have changed their names, but they are very much alive in groups like Oneness Pentecostalism.
Those who reject the Trinity reject not just this creed and others, but they also reject the consistent teaching of Scripture.
To stand for truth, as Athanasius did, means also to stand against error; and we should stand against those who reject this creed.
CONCLUSION: Year ago, I had the opportunity to sit on a board to ordain a man to Gospel ministry. I was invited by the man himself, and was invited to ask questions. During the event, I asked this question: “If a man came to you as a pastor, who had grown up as a Jehovah Witness, how would you explain to him the proper biblical understanding of the Trinity?”
He was unable to really answer the question, even though he was a seminary student.
But what made the situation memorable was that the other pastors and deacons present berated me for having asked the question, stating that this question was “just too hard” to expect a good answer.
Perhaps they were shielding the man’s feelings for being woefully ignorant of a very basis tenant of theology.
But I think the actual reason for their being upset was that they are a product of a culture of anti-intellectualism which has infected the church.
Beloved, if our Christian forefathers like Athanasius took the time to think through and lay out their beliefs about the foundational doctrines of our faith, should not we also invest ourselves mentally in understanding them as well?
We mustn’t succumb to the dumbing-down of our faith.
Rather instead we ought to be inspired by men like Athanasius to know what we believe and be able to properly articulate it.
