Jesus became God at the council of Nicene

 

The discussion around the deity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit in early Christianity involves complex historical, theological, and doctrinal developments. Here's an analysis based on available sources:

Early Christian Views and Debates:

• Historical Context: In the earliest days of Christianity, the nature of Jesus and the Holy Spirit was not uniformly agreed upon. Various interpretations existed, some of which did not align with what would later become orthodox Trinitarian doctrine. For instance, early Christian writings, including those from the Apostolic Fathers, show a diversity in understanding Christ's divinity.
• Theological Development: The concept of Jesus as divine was present from the New Testament, but the precise formulation of this divinity in relation to the Father and the Holy Spirit evolved over time. The New Testament texts like John's Gospel emphasize Jesus' divinity, but there was no uniform doctrinal statement on the Trinity until later church councils.
• Church Councils: The Council of Nicaea (325 AD) and the Council of Constantinople (381 AD) were pivotal in defining the Trinitarian doctrine. These councils were convened partly because of controversies like Arianism, which questioned the full divinity of Christ. The Nicene Creed was formulated to affirm that Jesus was "of the same substance" (homoousios) with the Father, addressing the Arian claim that Jesus was a created being, albeit exalted. Similarly, the divinity of the Holy Spirit was explicitly affirmed at Constantinople, leading to the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed's declaration of the Holy Spirit as "Lord and Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father" (with the later addition "and the Son" in the Western Church).

Apologists' Arguments:

• Continuity vs. Development: Christian apologists often argue for a continuity of belief from the earliest Christian community to the doctrines formalized by the councils. They might assert that the essence of Trinitarian belief was latent in earlier teachings, and the councils merely clarified or defended what was already implicitly believed against heresies. This perspective posits that the deity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit was recognized, but the exact theological language and defense against heretical interpretations needed to be established.
• Role of Councils: Apologists might argue that councils like Nicaea and Constantinople did not invent new doctrines but rather protected the Church from deviation by clearly articulating what was believed by many to be true from the teachings of the apostles. They see these councils as corrective rather than innovative.

Critique and Contradictions:

• Diverse Early Beliefs: The presence of Christological controversies (like Arianism, Nestorianism, and others) suggests that the deity of Jesus was not universally accepted in one form. If it were, there would have been no need for such extensive debates and councils.
• Evolution of Doctrine: The need for councils to define terms like "homoousios" indicates an evolution or at least a clarification of doctrine, which contradicts the notion that these beliefs were static since creation. The councils reflect a moment in doctrinal development, not merely a reiteration of always-agreed-upon facts.
• Implications for Modern Doctrine: This historical development does pose challenges to the narrative of an unchanging doctrine from the beginning. It suggests that Christian theology, particularly regarding the Trinity, evolved in response to theological debates, cultural contexts, and philosophical influences, especially from Greek philosophy.

In conclusion, while Christian apologists might argue for an implicit belief in the Trinity from the start, the necessity for church councils to define and defend these doctrines against various interpretations clearly indicates that such beliefs were not universally accepted or understood in the same way before these councils. This historical complexity continues to influence theological discussions and interpretations within Christianity today.