Posted by Chris on October 09, 19100 at 07:44:58:
In Reply to: Re: Arian heresy posted by Mira on October 08, 19100 at 13:37:16:
: I am writing an essay title 'how fair is the judgement that Athanasius' Christ saves humanity and that of Arius does not?' for my A level theology and I am interested in any views on the matter. Which is more important: His humanity or divinity? Is he eternal? Is He created? Most importantly who was right? much thanks.
Before one can begin to ague a position from scripture, one must establish from where that scripture comes. If one is to base their whole argument on that document, then one must be assured that it is a valid document.
Although it is commonly believed that the whole of scripture was completed by the year 100 AD, that is not to say that what we accept today as scripture was available at that time. Far from it; not only was there much more available for people and churches to use, there was continual debate over what was and was not to be accepted as inspired writing and therefore to be included into one canon. The history of the Church and its councils will revel the unfolding of this development. If the Church had the authority and divine inspiration to separate the inspired from the corrupted writings of the time, and compile them into a definitive canon, then why would people question that same Church's authority to difinitively teach from those writings? If one accepts the scriptures as autoratative, then one must also accept the Church that presented those writings as authoratative. In answer to your question about the Arian Heresy, since the Church has spoken definitively on the issue, the question is settled.
Copyright © Quartz Hill School of Theology. All Rights Reserved.