Adoptionism is a minority Christian belief that Jesus was born merely human and that he
became divine later in his life. By these accounts, Jesus earned the title Christ through his sinless devotion to the will of
God, thereby becoming the perfect sacrifice to redeem humanity. Adoptionists typically portray two key points in Jesus' life as
stages in Jesus' theosis: his baptism and his resurrection. They consider God to have given
Jesus his miraculous power and divine authority after Jesus proved his holiness. Adoptionism arose among early Christians seeking to reconcile the claims that Jesus was the son
of God with the radical monotheism of Judaism[citation needed].
Adoptionism was common before it was first declared heresy at the end of the 2nd century. Some scholars see adoptionist
concepts in the Gospel of Mark and in the Pauline
epistles.[citation needed]
Adoptionism was condemned by the church as heresy at
various times, most explicitly at the First Council of Nicaea. The belief
contradicts the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, which identifies Jesus as eternally God.
Adoptionism is also called adoptianism or dynamic monarchianism.
Adoptionism and Christology
Adoptionism is one of two main forms of monarchianism (the other is modalism, which regards "Father" and "Son" as two aspects of the same subject). Adoptionism (also known as
dynamic monarchianism) denies the pre-existence of Christ and although it does not deny his
deity many Trinitarians claim that it does. Under Adoptionism Jesus is currently divine and has been since his adoption, although
he is not equal to the Father.
Adoptionism was one position in a long series of Christian disagreements about the precise nature of Christ (see
Christology) in the developing dogma of the Trinity, an
attempt to explain the relationship between Jesus of Nazareth, both as man and (now) God, and God the Father while maintaining
Christianity's monotheism. It differs significantly from the doctrine of the Trinity that was
later accepted by the ecumenical councils.
History of adoptionism
In The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture Bart D. Ehrman argues that the
adoptionist view may date back almost to the time of Jesus and this view is shared by many other
scholars. In academic circles some consider both Paul the Apostle and the
Gospel of Mark to have adoptionist Christologies, although they differ in that Paul is
generally said to have placed the adoption at the Resurrection while Mark places it at Jesus' Baptism (orthodox Christianity
would accept neither of these interpretations as accurate). In the 2nd century, adoptionism
was one of two competing doctrines about the nature of Jesus Christ, the other (as in the Gospel of John) being that he pre-existed as a divine spirit (Logos)[1].
Historically, there were three waves of Adoptionist speculation if we exclude the hypothetical beliefs of the primitive church
that cannot be determined with certainty. The first, which dates from the 2nd century, differs significantly from the subsequent
two (dating respectively from the 8th and the 12th century), which follow the definition of the dogma of the Trinity and
Chalcedonian Christology.
Second century: pre-Nicene Christology
The first known exponent of Adoptionism in the second century is Theodotus of
Byzantium. He taught[2] that Jesus was a man born of
a virgin according to the counsel of the Father, that He lived like other men, and was most pious; that at His baptism in the
Jordan the Christ came down upon Him in the likeness of a dove, and therefore wonders (dynameis) were not wrought in Him
until the Spirit (which Theodotus called Christ) came down and was manifested in Him. The belief was declared heretical by Pope Victor I.
The second-century work Shepherd of Hermas also taught that Jesus was a
virtuous man filled with the Holy Spirit and adopted as the Son[3]. While Shepherd of Hermas was popular and sometimes bound with the canonical scriptures, it never
achieved canonical status.
In the 3rd century, Paul of Samosata, Patriarch of Antioch, promoted adoptionism. He said Jesus had been a man who kept himself sinless
and achieved union with God. His views, however, did not neatly fit in either of the two main forms of Monarchianism.[citation needed]
Eight century: Hispanicus error
The second movement of adoptionism, called Hispanicus error, in the late 8th century maintained by Elipandus, bishop of Toledo in the Caliphate of Cordoba and by Felix, bishop of
Urgell in the foothills of the Pyrenees; Alcuin, the leading
intellect at the court of Charlemagne was called in to write refutations against both of the bishops. Against Felix he wrote:
- "As the Nestorian impiety divided Christ into two persons because of the two natures,
so your unlearned temerity divided Him into two sons, one natural and one adoptive"
Beatus of Liébana, from the Kingdom of
Asturias, also fought Adoptionism, which was a cause of controversy between Christians under Muslim rule in the former
Visigothic capital of Toledo and the peripherical
kingdom. The doctrine was condemned as heresy by the Council of Frankfurt (794).
12th century and later: neo-adoptionism
A third wave was the revived form ("Neo-Adoptionism") of Abelard in the 12th century.
Later, various modified and qualified Adoptionist tenets of some theologians from the 14th century. Duns Scotus (1300) and Durandus of Saint-Pourçain (1320)
admit the term Filius adoptivus in a qualified sense. In more recent times the Jesuit Gabriel Vásquez, and the Lutheran divines Georgius Calixtus
and Johann Ernst Immanuel Walch, have defended the Adoptionists as
essentially orthodox.
Notes
- ^ "Jesus was either regarded as the man whom God hath chosen, in whom the
Deity or the Spirit of God dwelt, and who, after being tested, was adopted by God and invested with dominion, (Adoptian
Christology); or Jesus was regarded as a heavenly spiritual being (the highest after God) who took flesh, and again returned to
heaven after the completion of his work on earth (pneumatic Christology)." Adolf von
Harnack, History of Dogma [1]
- ^ Hippolytus of Rome,
Philosophumena, VII, xxxv.
- ^ "The Holy Pre-existent Spirit. Which created the whole creation, God made
to dwell in flesh that He desired. This flesh, therefore, in which the Holy Spirit dwelt, was subject unto the Spirit, walking
honorably in holiness and purity, without in any way defiling the Spirit. When then it had lived honorably in chastity, and had
labored with the Spirit, and had cooperated with it in everything, behaving itself boldly and bravely, He chose it as a partner
with the Holy Spirit; for the career of this flesh pleased [the Lord], seeing that, as possessing the Holy Spirit, it was not
defiled upon the earth. He therefore took the son as adviser and the glorious angels also, that this flesh too, having served the
Spirit unblamably, might have some place of sojourn, and might not seem to have lost the reward for its service; for all flesh,
which is found undefiled and unspotted, wherein the Holy Spirit dwelt, shall receive a reward." [2]
References
See also
External links
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
