Anthropomorphites, Audius, and Mormons

 In the broader context of the early church there was a group of people called the anthropomorphites who took the Bible “literally” which led them to believe and teach that God has a body.  Since the Bible talks about God’s right hand, his footsteps, his eyes, (etc.) they thought that God was some sort of majestic and divine giant.  Audius was a prominent leader of this group, therefore sometimes the anthropomorphites are called Audians. 

Cyril (d. 444), Jerome (d. 420), and many other early orthodox Christian leaders were quick to condemn the group for this heresy, which opened the door to a host of other heresies.  For example, if God had a body he could not be omnipresent nor could he be simple (simplicitas Dei; without parts or composition) both of which the Bible clearly does teach.  If God had a body, he would be subject to time; he would be contingent and part of creation – all of which the Bible clearly does not teach.  The modern-day Audians include Latter Day Saints (Mormons) who say that ”the Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s” (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22).  There is nothing new under the sun.

So what do we do we make of the parts of the Bible that speak of God’s eyes, hands, feet, etc.?  Well, we view the Bible for what it is: God’s word to fallen, sinful humans – for us and our salvation.  God doesn’t speak to humans in “God-language,” but in “human-language.”  This means he accommodates himself to us by using our language - words and concepts we can understand.  I like how Herman Bavinck stated this.  He put it in the category of God’s grace towards sinners.

“If God were to speak to us in a divine language, not a creature would understand him.  But what spells out his grace is the fact that from the moment of creation God stoops down to his creatures, speaking and appearing to them in human fashion.  This is why all the names by which God calls himself and allows us to call him are derived from earthly and human relations.” (H. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics II.100)

The church fathers realized this too.  Frances Young summarizes Ephrem the Syrian’s (b. 306) views on accommodation.

“It is only because of God’s condescension and accommodation to the human level that we can speak of God at all.  Ephrem offers as an analogy an amusing picture of someone trying to teach a parrot to talk and hiding behind a mirror so that the parrot imagines it is talking to one of its own kind; that is the kind of thing God did, bending down from on high and acquiring our own habits from us.  God clothed the divine self in metaphors: scripture speaks us of God’s ears to teach us that God listens to us, of God’s eyes to show us that God sees us.”  (F. Young, From Nicaea to Chalcedon, p. 182)

This is a basic teaching of Christianity: the eternal, infinite, omniscient, and omnipresent invisible God – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – graciously adapted his communication to the level of our understanding.  Though we cannot fully comprehend him, we can apprehend him through his word, which is able to give us sufficient knowledge and faith for salvation.

shane lems

Didymus the Blind (d. 398 AD)

 Among the great church fathers stands Didymus, who was born in Alexandria around 313 AD.  When he was just four years old he lost his sight.  Although his eyes didn’t work, his mind sure did: he taught himself to read by way of feeling carved letters.  He also had a photographic memory and was brilliant in all areas of education, from music to poetry to arithmetic to rhetoric.  Theologically, Didymus was of Nicene orthodoxy and probably associated with Athanasius.  He wrote many biblical commentaries, tracts, treatises, and letters and even in his own day he was viewed as a great Christian leader and teacher.  Some of his works include On the Trinity, On the Holy Spirit, and Against the Manichees.

One patristic scholar says that as far as teaching goes, Didymus was in the “mimetic” tradition: the teacher would live like the student should live.  But he was also in the “scholastic” tradition, which means learning, reasoning, and thinking about the truths of Christianity.

Here’s how Frances Young summarizes Didymus the Blind.

“Didymus was a scholar and a teacher; but for all his academic attainments, he was essentially a pious monk and a conservative churchman.  His scholarship was entirely devoted to the elucidation of scripture and the doctrines of the Church.  In these areas of specialty, he displayed little originality, though he undoubtedly contributed to the consolidation of the orthodox position.  His main source-book, his real inspiration, was the Bible, and in the long-term, it was as an exegete that he had some abiding influence.”

Didymus is one of the many gifted teachers in the history of Christianity - one for whom we can be thankful.  I agree with St. Jerome, who called him Didymus the Seeing rather than Didymus the Blind. 

The above information and quote can be found in Frances Young, From Nicaea to Chalcedon, pages 91-101.

shane lems

From Nicaea to Chalcedon by Frances Young

  I’m thoroughly impressed with this excellent scholarly work on early church history: From Nicaea to Chalcedon (second edition) by Frances M. Young.  I don’t have time to explain the entire thing here, but I do want to recommend it for those of you who need a comprehensive resource for studies of the Nicene and Chalcedonian eras of Christianity.  Here’s one section about Theodoret, bishop of Antioch in the 5th century.  In some ways Theodoret was an apologist and historian like Eusebius.  Here’s how Young summarizes Theodoret’s view of the Arian controversy.

“For [Theodoret], the Arian heresy was simply explicable as a work of the devil, inspired by jealousy at the sight of the Church prosperous, peaceful and successful under Constantine: Satan was ‘unable to bear the sight of the Church sailing on with favourable winds’ and ‘eager to sink the vessel steered by the Creator and Lord of the universe.’  As Christians, the Greeks had given up worshipping the creature instead of the Creator, so, not daring to declare open war on God, the evil one insidiously set about reducing the Creator to a creature, by playing on the ambition of Arius and instigating his heresy.  Like Eusebius, Theodoret saw history as the triumph of the true Church against enemies, external or internal, in league with the evil powers” (p. 36).

This book is easy to use for studies because it is outlined well, organized clearly, and written in an engaging manner.  It certainly is not for the average layperson, since it is around 400 pages of small print, containing tons of details about these years in the early church as well as a lengthy biography.  It is, however, for those of you who want a detailed and scholarly discussion of the era of church history from Nicaea to Chalcedon.  Highly recommended!

shane lems

Sabbath and the First Day (Athanasius)

 Athanasius (4th C. AD) has some great words about the 7th-to-1st-day change from the old covenant to the new covenant.  This is one great reason why Christians worship on the first day of the week instead of the last day of the week.

“In the time of the old covenant, the sabbath was highly revered.  Now under the gospel the sabbath has been recast, now viewed as the Lord’s resurrection day.  The sabbath formerly had pertained to the pedagogy and rudiments of the law.  When the great master himself came and fulfilled them all for us, all that had prefigured his coming was transformed.  The old sabbath was like a candle lit in the night before the rising and appearing of the sun.”

This quote was taken from page 240 of the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture NT Volume II.

shane lems

Cyprian on a Teachable Spirit

   In Epistle LXXIII, Cyprian writes to Pompey about heretics and baptism.  In this letter, he also mentions the beauty of a teachable spirit (cf. 2 Tim. 2.24), which heretics generally do not have.  I love these lines.

“Now he is teachable who is meek and gentle to the patience of learning.  For it behoves a bishop not only to teach, but also to learn; because he also teaches better who daily increases and advances by learning better.”

Found on page 389 of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, volume 5.  By the way, I saw that CBD has many of these individual volumes on sale for around three bucks.  Go there and get volume 5 if you want to read Cyprian’s excellent letters and treatises. 

shane lems