If the one born in Bethlehem was ‘a creature’ (as says Arius) and yet did not sin, then why was the first humanity (Adam) not so created?
score:3
In order to answer "What do we know of the doctrine of Arius that would demonstrate he had a solution to this doctrinal problem [i.e. why the one born of Mary in Bethlehem was not another attempt by God to get human creation correct second time around]? - we would have to find a doctrine of Arius about that.
A problem here is that virtually all the writings about Arius focus on his explanations as to the created status of Christ, 'the last Adam'; not the first human Adam. Finding anything Arius said about the creation of Adam, with his sinless state swiftly becoming sinful, is a near-impossible task. For a start, hardly anything from the pen of Arius survives. Then all that is ever said about Arius and his teachings deals with his teachings about the nature and being of Christ. If Arius never faced up to the dilemma you show, then he will not have written about it. The question here posed does not require discovering anything Arius might have taught about free will. It requires him considering the distinct liability the created first Adam suffered in light of the advantage Christ had in being of a similar essence to God.
If he did teach anything about it, then his followers might be expected to have said something. The nearest we seem to get is from the Semi-Arians. They "proposed a middle way between Arianism and orthodoxy: although the Son is not of the same essence (hommoousios), he is of similar essence (h*m*iousios)" as that of God. (1) Yet that says nothing about the created Adam. Arius (or his later followers) never speak of the created Adam as neither having or not having a similar essence to God. But given the massive emphasis they place on the Son of God created with a similar essence as that of God, if they though the first man, Adam, was on a par with the second man, the last Adam, they would have said so. The silence is resounding.
Arius does not have a good record of correctly understanding the theology of his day, facing up to it and responding to it accurately. For instance, he "claimed Origen as the source of his [Arius's] subordinationism of the Son in which he declared that 'there was when the Son was not'. Anyone who reads Origen carefully cannot miss his strong declaration of the eternity of the Logos, the Son, with the Father." (2)
Whatever the theological failings of Origen, he could never be accused of providing Arius with grounds for saying the Son, at one point, did not exist! For Arius to claim support from Origen here demonstrates a lack of facing up to theological arguments that exposed his own. This, I suggest, might mean we search in vain for what you seek - Arius offering any solution to the problem of Christ being a second, successful humanity that got round the problem of the created Adam being a first, failed humanity.
Conclusion: There seems to be no reason to think that Arius had a solution to the problem of why the created Adam was inferior to (as per his teaching of a created Christ) the last Adam who did not fail.
Quotes: (1) Pilgrim Theology, p 178, Michael Horton, Zondervan, 2011
(2) The Story of Christian Theology, pp 109-110, Roger E. Olson, Apollos 1999
Upvote:-2
Did Arius state that Jesus was a mere human being? No person that knows anything about Arius would say such a thing. Arius wrote that the Son was “begotten timelessly by the Father … before aeons … begotten timelessly before everything” (RPC Hanson - The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God - The Arian Controversy 318-381, page 8). “He who has begotten the only-begotten Son … through whom also he made the aeons and everything” (page 7).
Why did God not create Adam without the ability to sin? Because God created mankind with the freedom to choose between good and evil. To create people without the ability to do evil is to create pre-programmed robots. But God created something much, much better.
Was Jesus able to sin? I say He was, otherwise His whole mission and Satan's efforts to get Him to sin were a farce.
But then, why did Jesus not Sin? The purpose of His mission to earth was to show that the Son of God would not sin, even when tempted to the utmost. It was a test. Satan said He would sin. The Son was willing to become a human being, to be tested and to suffer all possible loss. His purpose was to validate the credibility of the Saviour, without which no sinner can be saved. Jesus did not sin because the Son of God is able to disobey God but He never will. That was shown at the Cross.
Upvote:1
Answers here must necessarily be speculative because so little survives from Arius' own pen, and what we have is filtered through the minds of his opponents. That said, the answer is probably simple: Adam misused his free will and failed to keep God's commandment; Jesus did not.
Fault with the creator?
It is not fair to say that Arius "found fault with the creator." It is true to say that the Arian view implies that God's first attempt (with Adam and Eve) to create a true humanity did not come to fruition. Either way, an Arian could counter the idea that Arius found fault with God by referring to examples from providential history in which God's plan seems at first to have failed but later succeeds. For example, in 1 Kings 11:36 God promised "David my servant will always have a lamp before me in Jerusalem." But when the kings of Judah failed, God promised to send the messiah to restore David's kingdom. As a result, Jews expected the messiah to re-establish the throne of David, but this did not occur. Christians of nearly all types explain that this was not God's fault, because the throne of David would be established at Christ's second coming. Similarly, and Arian could argue that it was not God's fault that Adam sinned, necessitating a new Adam to arrive to restore Adam's fall.
Predestination
Underlying this problem are the issues of Original Sin and predestination. We do not know Arius' view on this. But we can speculate that Arius' view was more Pelagian (although neither Augustine nor Pelagius was on the scene yet), believing that God had not predestined Jesus' obedience any more than he had predestined Adam's. If so, then Jesus could have sinned as Adam did, but he aligned his will with that of the Father, thus maintaining his status as God's Son. To the objection that his is a form of works-righteousness, an Arian might respond that we are not saved by works, but Jesus did save us by his works, if we have faith in his atoning sacrifice. This does imply, however, that if Jesus had sinned in a way that compromised his providential status, he would be disqualified from Sonship. However, we do not have enough information on the Arian doctrine to know this for certain.
Merely another creature?
Finally, it is also inaccurate to say that Arius thought of Christ as "merely another creature." He affirmed the Son to have pre-existed with the Father as the first of God's creations after God created the Word. Jesus was an incarnation of the pre-existing Son, not a mere human being. A letter of Arius summarized [whether accurately or not] by Eusebius of Nicomedia states:
The Son... was made on our account, in order that God might create us by him, as by an instrument; nor would he ever have existed, unless God had wished to create us.
Did this apply also to Adam, in Arius' though? Not enough of Arius' actual teachings have survived for us to know. The same may be said of some of the other issues raised in the OP. But as far as the main question goes, a simple answer is possible: Arius might answer that both Adam and Jesus were created with free will, either to sin or not. Adam and Eve did sin. Jesus did not, at least not in a way that disqualified him from Sonship.
More post
- 📝 Why is the term Immanuel/Emmanuel considered to be a title rather than a proper name?
- 📝 When was the Old Testament Canon defined?
- 📝 Is there a book that details what the popes said against reformation leaders?
- 📝 "Conciliated your heavenly affections"
- 📝 Who were the Sons of God who seem to have begat the Nephilim?
- 📝 Why is masturbation a sin? (without human arguments, Pentecostalism)
- 📝 What are Christian theologeans referring to when they talk about "God's glory"?
- 📝 How does the Catholic church deal with the differences between the God described in the old and new Testaments?
- 📝 What scriptural support do Latter-day Saints find for their moral agency doctrine?
- 📝 Did Casting Crowns ever say why they chose their name?
- 📝 What are the biblical arguments that the Bible canon is closed?
- 📝 What's the first ancient document composed by a non-Christian denying the resurrection?
- 📝 Did the Jews use icons and images to help them worship as Catholics or Orthodox worshippers do?
- 📝 What was the real cause of the split between the Greek Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church?
- 📝 Repetition of "and he begat sons and daughters:"
- 📝 Do Biblical Unitarians believe in Creatio Ex-nihilo (creation out of nothing)?
- 📝 Is there a verse about "big" and "small" lies being the same in God's kingdom?
- 📝 According to Catholicism, are we deserving or worthy of God's love in any way?
- 📝 For Eastern Orthodox churches, what are the main references concerning Biblical Interpretation methodology?
- 📝 Does Catholicism have a stance on horoscopes?
- 📝 Is the Orthodox canon right?
- 📝 Are there any christian denominations that think having concubines is sin and why?
- 📝 Who changed the Sabbath to Sunday according to the Seventh Day Adventists?
- 📝 Biblical Prophecy and Fulfillment
- 📝 good ways to deal with "It's just a pagan holiday, he wasn't even born then"
- 📝 Christian view on chimeras
- 📝 Was Paul's Relationship with Jewish Leadership Close Enough to Act as Their Agent?
- 📝 Byzantine Chant vs. Gregorian Chant: What are the differences in goals as far as attitude and concepts between these two chanting styles
- 📝 Why did Clement of Alexandria say that the name of Jesus, Iesous, has a Greek origin, not a Hebrew one?
- 📝 What is the Catholic Church's position on recreational marijuana use?
Source: stackoverflow.com
Search Posts
Related post
- 📝 If the one born in Bethlehem was ‘a creature’ (as says Arius) and yet did not sin, then why was the first humanity (Adam) not so created?
- 📝 According to those holding that Lazarus was literally raised from the dead, why did Matthew, Mark, and Luke not mention it?
- 📝 How could Jesus be born during the reign of Herod, and when Quirinius was governor of Syria, if those periods were not contemporary?
- 📝 Why did the Jews comment that Jesus was not yet fifty years of age?
- 📝 Within the Catholic Church, when and by whom did the story that Jesus was born in a house arise?
- 📝 In John 1:45–51, did Jesus prophesy that Nathanael was one of the 144,000 Jews in Revelation 7 and 14?
- 📝 According to those holding that Jesus was literally born of a virgin, why did Paul not mention it?
- 📝 What is the basis for the belief that the wise men did not arrive in Bethlehem until several months after the birth of Jesus?
- 📝 When did the Orthodox and Catholic Churches distinguish the manner in which the Sign of the Cross was to be made?
- 📝 When and how was the doctrine of the one divine will established?
- 📝 How did the Born Again teaching be associated with one first believing in Jesus Christ?
- 📝 Since when did the Catholic church accept Protestant baptism, and what was the original rationale for accepting?
- 📝 Why (and when) did the Apostles stop requiring exactly twelve apostles? Why was James not replaced?
- 📝 Why did God not want man to have the knowledge of good and evil?
- 📝 When was Jesus anointed and who did the anointing?
- 📝 If we will have free will and be sinless in Heaven at the same time, then why did God not create a world with sinless free creatures to begin with?
- 📝 If Jesus was Sinless and had Free Will, how is the rest of creation not a mistake?
- 📝 Does the theology of Arians and Jehovah's Witnesses admit that God was at one point ἄλογος?
- 📝 How was sin not counted before the law?
- 📝 What was the "Sect of Nicolaus" and did elements of it's influence carry down to our day?
- 📝 What was St. Thomas Aquinas's view on the difference between punishment accorded to original sin and punishment accorded to individual sin?
- 📝 Why was Esther not sinning when she broke the law and approached the king?
- 📝 Did Rahab sin by hiding the Hebrew spies and lying to the leaders of Jericho? (Catholic/Protestant overview)
- 📝 According to the Jehovah's Witnesses, why was Jesus likely not born in December because of Levite temple service schedule?
- 📝 How can Jesus be both root and offspring of David if he was only a man and did not pre-exist his incarnation?
- 📝 Did the apostle James the Greater travel to Spain and was he martyred in Jerusalem?
- 📝 When did sin and evil in the universe first appear?
- 📝 Did the midwives in Exodus 1 sin by disobeying and lying to Pharaoh? (Catholic/Protestant overview)
- 📝 According to Eastern Orthodoxy why did we inherit the sin of Adam and Eve?
- 📝 Was there a time when bishops were not appointed to other sees and did not generally ever relocate?