By the end of this lesson, the student should:

(1) Recognize the importance of early theologians in defining Christian doctrine.

(2) Beware of the dangers of heresy for the church of the second century and today.

(3) Know the importance of the New Testament canon and early creeds for defining Christian doctrine.

(4) Understand the role of church authority in defending orthodoxy.

Lesson 2 addressed two of the challenges faced by the second generation of the church, persecution and evangelism. In Lesson 3, we will study some additional challenges.

The challenges discussed in this lesson may have been even more difficult than persecution. Persecution comes from outside. The challenges in this lesson came from inside. The church of the second and third centuries faced heresies, conflicts between believers, and the dangers of apostasy and backsliding.  Each of these challenges raised new questions for the church:

• False doctrine. Would the church remain true to the “faith which was once delivered unto the saints?”[1]
• Conflict between believers. As the gospel spread, would the church remain united in spite of cultural differences?
• Backsliding and apostasy. If a Christian fell through fear of persecution or through moral failure, could they be restored to fellowship in the church?

[1] Jude 1:3

Bruce Shelley wrote, “Theology is using our own language and our own way of thinking to explain God’s truth.”[1] This is one reason for the different theological statements in the church; each culture has found a different way of expressing biblical truth to their world.

During the second and third centuries, Christians struggled to communicate the gospel to a changing world. The first generation of Christians were Jews who shared an Old Testament understanding of God and His world. Beginning in the second century, most Christians came from pagan Gentile cultures. These new believers did not share the theological foundation of Jewish converts. During these centuries, Christian theologians struggled to define core Christian beliefs in a way that was both faithful to Scripture and intelligible to their world.

The term orthodoxy means right belief, or right doctrine. Heresy is wrong doctrine, doctrine that contradicts the essential teachings of the Bible. It is important to realize that not every doctrinal disagreement involves heresy. We should apply this term only to teachings that deny the true gospel.

Early Christians knew that external enemies such as Rome were a threat to the church. They soon learned that an even greater danger came from inside, the danger of false teaching. Much of our theological understanding today comes from the church’s response to heresy. When false teachers denied core doctrines of the faith, Christians worked to define biblical teaching in a way that all Christians could understand. The church relied on three sources of authority in responding to heresy: the canon (the collection of inspired Scripture), church leaders (when representing the whole church), and creeds (summaries of orthodox doctrine).

The earliest heresies concerned the nature of Jesus Christ. John’s gospel showed that Jesus is both fully divine and fully human. John wanted his readers to know that Jesus was fully God; “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God….”[2] He also wanted his readers to know that Jesus was fully human; he pointed to the blood that flowed from Jesus’ side on the cross, the nail prints in Jesus’ hands, and Jesus’ hunger.

While some early heresies denied Jesus’ deity,[3] the most common heresies denied his humanity. These heretics denied the reality of the Incarnation; they said that Jesus only appeared to be man.

Gnosticism

One of the most dangerous heresies in the early church was Gnosticism. Gnosticism was based on a philosophy that taught that the world is divided between two forces, good and evil.[4] Borrowing from ancient Greek philosophers like Plato, Gnostics taught that only the spiritual world is pure; everything physical is corrupt. Although some Gnostics claimed to be Christians, their teachings contradicted the essential truths of the Christian faith.

First, the Gnostics claimed that salvation comes through secret knowledge.[5] Gnostics taught that this special knowledge transported their followers to a purely spiritual realm which was no longer limited by the material world, and that provided a special relationship to a God who was too perfect to be known in a physical world. This contradicted the biblical teaching that salvation is available to all people - by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.[6] Rather than secret knowledge, the knowledge necessary to salvation is found through the Bible.

Second, because they believed that the physical world is evil, Gnostics taught that the God of the Old Testament was an evil god who created the material world, while the Jesus of the New Testament was a spiritual being. According to this teaching, an “unknowable God” who had nothing to do with the physical universe was the true God. The God of the Old Testament was an evil God who created the world and kept humans in bondage to matter. This God prevents mankind from returning to the spirit world. Deliverance from the physical world is available only through the secret knowledge of the Gnostics.

This teaching contradicted the teaching of Genesis 1 that the world God created was “good.” It contradicted the biblical teaching that God is holy. And it contradicted the teaching of John 1:1-3 that Jesus is God and that “all things were made through him.”

Third, Gnostics denied the truth of John 1:14, “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.”  There were two forms of Gnosticism – both of which contradicted John 1.

One form of Gnosticism said that Jesus was divine and that he only appeared to have a human form. This form of Gnosticism taught that Jesus was only spirit. This teaching denied the reality of the incarnation. It denied the full humanity of Jesus Christ.

A second form of Gnosticism said that Jesus was an ordinary person who was filled with the divine spirit at baptism. This divine spirit departed before the crucifixion. This teaching denied the full deity of Jesus Christ.

Either form of the Gnostic heresy denied a biblical doctrine of the atonement. The atonement required that Jesus be truly God and truly human. As the sacrifice for our sin, Jesus suffered a real physical death on the cross. To be a substitute for man, Jesus had to be man.[7] Gnosticism denied the reality of the atonement.

The New Testament writers reacted strongly against the false teaching of Gnosticism. In Colossians, Paul condemned those who practiced asceticism, claimed superior knowledge, and denied the resurrection. He bluntly warned Timothy, “Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called ‘knowledge.’”[8]

John responded to those who denied Jesus’ humanity, “That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands….”[9] He assured his readers that Jesus was truly human. Later, he warned that any spirit that does not confess Jesus “is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist.”[10]

Several “Gnostic Gospels” were written in the second century. These writings, such as “The Gospel of Thomas,” “The Gospel of Mary,” “Acts of Peter,” and “Acts of Thomas” were known and rejected by the early church fathers. They were never accepted as part of the New Testament canon.

► The ideas of Gnosticism have become popular in the early twenty-first century. Writers have returned to the idea that secret knowledge was hidden by the early church. Some of the Gnostic Gospels are taught in universities. Are Gnostic ideas affecting the society in which you minister? If so, which ones?

Docetism

One of the most influential Gnostic groups was led by Marcion, the son of a wealthy church elder. In A.D. 140, Marcion was excommunicated from his father’s church for false doctrine and immoral behavior. Marcion went to Rome where no one knew of his past. He made a large donation to the church in Rome, joined the church, and soon began to teach a heretical doctrine that combined Gnosticism and Christianity.

Marcion’s teaching said that the God of the Old Testament was a wrathful God, not the father of Jesus. Marcion said that the father of Jesus was a higher God of grace and love. He taught that the Old Testament was not a sacred book. Another part of Marcion’s heresy is called Docetism, which means that Jesus only seemed to be human. This teaching denied the reality of the Incarnation. Like other Gnostics, Marcion believed that physical matter was evil. Because of this, he could not accept that a holy God would take on human form.

When the church in Rome recognized Marcion’s heresy, they removed him from the church’s fellowship. He then planted heretical churches in Italy and Asia Minor.

Modalism

Modalism denies the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. It denies that the three persons of the Trinity coexist eternally. Instead, modalism teaches that God is one person who has revealed himself in three forms (or modes).

According to modalism, God manifested himself in the mode of the Father in the Old Testament. In the incarnation, He manifested himself in the mode of the Son. After the ascension, He is manifested to the church in the mode of the Holy Spirit. Modalism teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit do not exist at the same time. This denies the New Testament teaching of the Trinity.[11]

In the third century, Tertullian, from North Africa, defended orthodoxy against modalism. Because of his clear explanations, Tertullian is called the “Father of Latin Theology.” To explain the nature of the Trinity, Tertullian used the phrase “one substance, three persons.” This showed that God is truly three persons, not simply three forms of one person.

Tertullian also helped Christians to understand the mystery of the incarnation by describing Jesus as “one person and two substances.” In one person, Jesus was both fully divine and fully human.

…From Then to Now…

Occasionally, someone claims to discover an ancient text that contradicts the Bible. Recent discoveries include Gnostic gospels such as the “Gospel of Thomas” and the “Gospel of Judas.” Each time, skeptics proclaim, “This discovery proves that the New Testament story of Jesus is false.” However, these discoveries are not new.

In the first century, Paul wrote that Hymenaeus and Alexander had “shipwrecked” their faith. These men were teaching a false doctrine of “myths” and “speculations” rather than teaching the gospel of faith. [12] Late in the first century, Ignatius of Antioch wrote seven letters in which he argued against the heresies that would later be known as Gnosticism.

False books such as the Gospel of Thomas were known and rejected in the second century. Christians who lived soon after the events of the Gospels knew these false stories; but more importantly, they knew the true gospel. In the second century, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian all referred to these Gnostic teachings. They knew that these writings were false.

Do not let false gospels shake your confidence. Jude warned that, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions. It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit.” The Christian response is simple: “Build yourselves up in the faith, pray in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, and save those who doubt.”[13] The “Gnostic gospels” are not new. They are old heresies in new packages. The gospel is still the only good news![14]

Response to Heresy: The Canon

When Marcion denied the incarnation and the authority of the Old Testament, he was faced with a problem: the four Gospels clearly taught Jesus’ humanity and other New Testament books referred to the Old Testament books that Marcion rejected. His solution was simple: accept only the books that agreed with him! It was a short list: part of Luke (omitting the story of Jesus’ birth) and ten of the Pauline epistles.

To show that Marcion’s message was not biblical, it was necessary to agree on the question, “Which sacred books are truly the Word of God?”  Marcion’s false teaching inspired the church to establish a New Testament canon.

The term “canon” means measuring stick or standard of measurement. The biblical “canon” refers to the books inspired by God. The church asked three questions:

• Is it apostolic? Is this book connected to an apostle?[15]
• Is it universal? Do churches from all areas of the known world accept this book?
• Is it consistent? Does this book agree with what we know about God from the Old Testament? The Word of God will not contradict itself.

The early church fathers did not create our Bible; the church fathers simply recognized the biblical books that had been inspired by the Holy Spirit. Just as the Holy Spirit inspired the writing of Scripture, the Spirit supervised the selection of the canon.

By A.D. 190, the Muratorian Canon included most of our present New Testament. This list was not complete, and it includes two books that were later rejected. However, the Muratorian Canon shows that the majority of the canon was accepted in the second century. The canon was finalized by the fourth century. In A.D. 367, Bishop Athanasius from Alexandria wrote an Easter letter that contained a complete list of New Testament books. In A.D. 393 and 397, church councils at Hippo and Carthage confirmed the same canon.

The false teaching of Marcion showed the necessity of defining the canon. The New Prophet movement led by Montanus showed the necessity of closing the canon. In the middle of the second century, the church was in need of revival. The enthusiasm of the early church was fading; some Christians lived little differently than the world. As the church tried to evangelize the pagan culture, some Christians began to think and act like the pagan world.

In A.D. 160, Montanus, a Christian from Asia Minor (modern day Turkey) began to call the church to a return to discipline and a renewed emphasis on the Holy Spirit. If the message of Montanus had been only a call to separation from the world, self-discipline, and openness to the leadership of the Holy Spirit, he could have inspired genuine revival. However, he and two female “prophetesses” (Prisca and Maximilla) began making prophesies and falling into a state of ecstasy in which they claimed that the Holy Spirit spoke through them. Montanus and his followers became known as the “New Prophets.”

Two problems arose with the Montanists:

• The New Prophets made false predictions. Based on Deuteronomy 18:20-22, it became clear that the Holy Spirit was not the source for their prophecies.
• The demands of the New Prophets exceeded the moral standards of the Bible. Like the Gnostics, the Montanists banned marriage. They required extreme fasts and ascetic practices in preparation for the return of Jesus.

Some churches considered Montanus to be a heretic like Marcion; others refused to call him a heretic.[16] However, the church as a whole rejected the teachings of Montanus and his followers. The New Prophets’ claim of new revelation gave another motivation for the creation of a New Testament canon. By “closing the canon” (on the basis that no further apostolic books could be written), the church prevented men like Montanus from putting personal prophecies above Scripture.

The church rejected the false claims of Montanus and his followers. It did not reject the work of the Holy Spirit. Instead, the church recognized the difference between the Spirit’s work in the first century and later centuries. In the Apostolic period, the Holy Spirit inspired the writing of Scripture; “men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”[17] In later times, the Holy Spirit illuminated Scripture to the minds of readers; “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth.”[18]

Response to Heresy: Church Order

In his letters, Paul wrote about the offices of deacon, overseer, and elder.[19] These officers provided leadership for the local churches. Churches usually met in private homes, and there was little organizational structure beyond the local church.

In the second and third centuries, churches became more highly organized. Instead of meeting in private homes, congregations began to build church buildings. A bishop (sometimes called overseer) supervised all the churches in a city, and elders were appointed for each local church. The bishops became known as “popes” (Latin for “fathers”).[20] They were responsible to guide the church to faithful obedience to Scripture. Controversies such as the fight over Gnosticism gave greater control to the bishops, because they were seen as the final authority in matters of doctrine.

From the perspective of later history, we see both the benefit and the danger of this increased authority. The benefit is the preservation of orthodoxy against the attacks of heretics. Irenaeus wrote, “The tradition of the apostles is protected by the successions of elders.”[21] He believed that the truth of the gospel could best be protected by the bishops and church leaders. When false teachers such as Arius gained popularity in the fourth century, orthodox bishops such as Athanasius defeated his heretical teaching.

However, there is danger when any human being is given unlimited power. Bishops were given power to decide doctrinal disputes; they were given power to forgive sins; they were considered the mediators between laymen and God. This went far beyond the role of bishops and elders in the New Testament church.

Since the Reformation, there have been three views regarding the authority of bishops.

• Some “back to the Bible” movements insist that the church today should return to the model of the apostolic church. This provides a system of elders for each local church, but no denominational structure beyond the local church.
• Some Christians argue that church structure must change to meet the needs of each new generation. They say that the model of Acts was appropriate for the first century church but is not a model for today.
• Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox leaders teach that the authority of the bishops was guided by the Holy Spirit and is permanently binding for the church.

Response to Heresy: The Creeds[23]

A third response to heresies such as Gnosticism and Docetism was to carefully define Christian doctrine for new converts. New Testament statements such as “Jesus is Lord” and “God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory” are apostolic summaries of Christian belief.[22] These statements may have been part of the baptismal liturgy in the first century.

After the conflict with Marcion, Christian leaders began to ask more detailed questions of baptismal candidates to ensure that they understood the essential doctrines of the Christian faith. These statements of faith became known as the “Rule of Faith” or a “Creed.” The most common creed used today is the Apostles’ Creed, which first appeared as a baptismal confession in second century Rome.

Another summary of early Christian beliefs was the symbol of the fish. The Greek word for fish was ἰχθύς (ichthus). Each letter reminded early Christians of some aspect of belief about Jesus of Nazareth. The fish symbol became a simple “creed” for early Christians: Jesus Christ, God’s Son and our Savior.

[24]

ἰ = Iesous (Jesus)
χ = Christos (Christ)
θ = Theou (God’s)
ύ = Uios (Son)
ς = Soter (Savior)

[1] Bruce L. Shelley, Church History in Plain Language, 3rd ed. (USA: Thomas Nelson, 2008), 48

[2] John 20:31

[3] The most common of these was a group known as the Ebionites. They taught that Jesus was a mere man who became the Messiah through careful obedience to the Law.

[4] This philosophy is called dualism.

[5] The word “gnostic” comes from a Greek word, gnosis, meaning “to know.”

[6] Ephesians 2:8-9

[7] Hebrews 2:14-17

[8] 1 Timothy 6:20

[9] 1 John 1:1

[10] 1 John 4:3

[11] The reality of the Trinity (three persons acting simultaneously) is seen in scriptures such as Matthew 3:16-17. At the baptism of Jesus, all three persons of the Trinity were involved. The Son was baptized by John, the Spirit descended like a dove, and the Father spoke from heaven saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

[12] 1 Timothy 1:3-7, 20

[13] Jude 1:18-22

[14] If you want to study more about a biblical answer to these false gospels, you can read Darrell L. Bock, The Missing Gospels (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Books, 2006).

[15] Most New Testament books were written by apostles. The exceptions are books that are closely related to apostles: Mark traveled with Peter and recorded his memories; Luke traveled with Paul; Timothy was a disciple of Paul; James and Jude were half-brothers of Jesus and were accepted with the apostles.

[16] Even Tertullian, a defender of orthodox theology, became a follower of Montanus. He was attracted to Montanus’ emphasis on revival and self-discipline.

[17] 2 Peter 1:21

[18] John 16:13       

[19] 1 Timothy 3:1-13; 5:19

[20] Eventually the pope of the church in Rome was considered the highest authority in the Roman Catholic Church. This pope claimed authority over the bishops of local churches.

[21] Quoted in Timothy Paul Jones, Christian History Made Easy (CA: Rose Publishing, 2009), 28

[22]  Philippians 2:11 and 1 Timothy 3:16

[23]"Do you believe in Christ Jesus, God’s Son, who was born by the Holy Spirit through the virgin Mary, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, died and was buried, and rose again on the third day, alive from the dead, and ascended into heaven, sat at the Father’s right hand, and will come again to judge the living and the dead? Do you believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy church, and the resurrection of the flesh?”
- An early form of the Apostle’s Creed

[24]Image: "ICTHUS", retrieved from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ICTHUS.gif, public domain.

Irenaeus was a pastor in what is now Lyons, France. As a young man, he studied from Polycarp and later from Justin Martyr.

[1]

In A.D. 177, Irenaeus was living in Lyons when Marcus Aurelius authorized the massacre of Christians in that region. At the time, Irenaeus was away from home, carrying a letter to Rome concerning the heresy of Montanus. Because of this, he escaped martyrdom. Forty-eight Christians from Lyons were tortured and killed during this persecution. When he returned, Irenaeus was appointed bishop of Lyons and began to rebuild the church.

Irenaeus believed he had two primary responsibilities as pastor: to disciple his flock and to strengthen them against heresy. He did not try to create new doctrines; instead, he sought to be faithful to the gospel that he had received from John through Polycarp.

Why is Irenaeus important in church history?

(1) Irenaeus confirmed the importance of the New Testament canon.

Irenaeus was one of the first writers to state that all four Gospels are biblical texts. He did this in response to Marcion’s rejection of Matthew, Mark and John. Irenaeus’s writings quote from twenty-one of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament. Contrary to modern critics who claim that the New Testament canon was “invented” much later, Irenaeus shows that the canon was known very early in the history of the church.

(2) Irenaeus valued the unity of the church.

Irenaeus pointed to two defenses against heresy: the canon of the New Testament and the authority of church leaders. He said that the unity of the bishops served as a defense against false doctrine.

Irenaeus valued the unity of the church. In the conflict over the date of Easter, Irenaeus asked the bishop of Rome to accept eastern Christians who celebrated Easter on a different date than the western church.

Irenaeus' best-known book was Against Heresies, a response to the Gnostic heresy. Gnostics claimed to have a secret oral tradition from Jesus; Irenaeus responded that the only true Christian tradition was the gospel that was passed from the Apostles through the bishops.

Unfortunately, Irenaeus’ writings on church authority were later used to argue that the Roman Catholic Church was the final authority for all Christians. Roman Catholic writers took Irenaeus’ ideas far beyond what Irenaeus himself taught. For Irenaeus, the authority of the church was based on its faithfulness to the doctrines taught in the New Testament. Later Roman Catholic popes reversed this and claimed authority even when they abandoned the doctrines of the New Testament. This was a terrible misuse of Irenaeus’ teaching.

(3) Irenaeus taught the importance of the doctrine of the Incarnation.

Gnostics taught that God did not come in human form. Irenaeus responded that the Incarnation is central to the gospel. By becoming one of us, God made it possible for us to become like Him. More than being “counted” right before God, Irenaeus taught that God’s children can be “made” righteous. God’s promise to make us in His image can be a reality because of the Incarnation. In a day when liberal theologians argue that we can follow the ethical teachings of Jesus without believing that He is the Son of God, Irenaeus reminds us that the life and the teaching of Jesus cannot be separated.

The life and ministry of Irenaeus shows how leaders in the second century responded to heresy. They responded by pointing to the truth of the New Testament and by affirming the authority of the Christian church. In the next century, these teachings will be confirmed in formal church creeds. Together, these three authorities (canon, church order, and creeds) became the church’s defense against false teaching.

► Which of the three responses to heresy (the canon, church authority, or the creeds) has the biggest impact on your church today?

[1]Image: "Bildnis des S. Irenaevs, Episcopvs Lvgdunensis", retrieved from the Leipzig University Library https://www.flickr.com/photos/ubleipzig/16848157170/, public domain.

As the church expanded, conflicts arose due to different cultural backgrounds in the early days of the church. Greek-speaking Jews complained that their widows did not receive the same care as the Hebrew-speaking Jews.[1] With the spread of the church into the Gentile world, conflicts grew even larger. A church council met in A.D. 49 to discuss issues related to Gentile conversion.[2]

By the third century, a number of differences had arisen in the church. Among these were:

Baptism

• In some churches, new believers were baptized soon after conversion.
• In many churches, new believers received a year of instruction before baptism.
• In some churches, infants were baptized.

Observance of Easter

In the second century, Christians argued about the proper date for the observance of Easter. Christians in the eastern part of the Roman Empire celebrated the Resurrection during the Jewish Passover. Christians in the western part of the Empire celebrated the Resurrection on the Sunday after Passover. 

Two bishops, Polycarp (from the east) and Anicetus (from Rome), met to discuss this issue. They did not reach an agreement about the date, but they agreed that their differences would not divide their churches. Sadly, later bishops were not as committed to unity; for a time the eastern and western churches rejected each other over the date of Easter. A church built on faith in the Resurrection divided over the date of the Resurrection celebration!

The church recognized different degrees of disagreement. Some issues (such as Gnosticism and Docetism) involved rejection of biblical truth. The church refused to tolerate these heresies. Some issues (baptism practices and the observance of Easter) involved differences of Bible interpretation. For these issues, Christians usually tolerated alternate views. They might worship separately in order to fellowship with believers who shared their convictions, but they did not deny the faith of their opponents.

► Facing disagreements regarding doctrine or practice, Christians in the first centuries had to decide, “Is this heresy or an acceptable difference of opinion?” What differences of interpretation divide churches today? How do you remain faithful to your understanding of Scripture, while maintaining unity in the body of Christ?

[1] Acts 6

[2] Acts 15

Apostasy in the Face of Persecution

In the year 247, the city of Rome was one thousand years old. A three day birthday festival included sacrifices to many pagan gods. Of course, Christians did not participate in the sacrifices. Later in the year, a plague swept through Rome. The Romans blamed Christians for the plague. They believed that the gods were angry because the Christians had refused to make sacrifices to the pagan gods.

In response, Emperor Decius began to persecute Christians who refused to sacrifice to the gods. Everyone was required to obtain a “sacrifice certificate” verifying that they had made a sacrifice to the gods. Many Christians were killed during a four year period of persecution that ended with Decius’ death in 251.

To escape martyrdom, many Christians went into hiding. Others obtained forged certificates, or even committed apostasy by sacrificing to the gods. The church later argued about how to restore a person who repented after giving up his faith.

Backsliding Due to Willful Sin

In the second century, the Roman official Pliny told Emperor Trajan that he was unable to find anything morally wrong in the Christians he examined. Similarly, Justin said that the purity of the Christians convinced him of the truth of the gospel.

However, by the third century, things had changed. While Montanus was wrong in some of his teachings, he was right to insist that the church needed revival. Many Christians were less committed than Christians in the first centuries; this led to problems of sin and backsliding.

Some church members abandoned the faith in order to avoid persecution; others were guilty of sexual immorality or other serious sins. While Christians had always faced the temptation to backslide, the church of the third century was weaker than the early church. This weakness is seen in increased backsliding.

The Church’s Response to Apostasy and Backsliding

The return of members who denied Christ in the face of persecution or who committed serious willful sins raised difficult questions for the church. Church leaders asked:

• Is the forgiving grace of God greater than the worst of men’s sins?
• Are there sins for which there is no forgiveness?
• If a person is forgiven by God, are they immediately restored to the church?
• If the church allows repentant backsliders to return, will the church become tolerant of willful sin?

While Christians agreed that God would forgive a repentant backslider, many churches in the first two centuries refused to restore membership to those who had committed any of three sins: sexual immorality, murder, or apostasy. People who committed these sins were not allowed to return to the Lord’s Supper even after repentance.

In the third century, bishops began to change this policy. Callistus, the bishop of Rome from A.D. 217 to 222, accepted repentant church members who had committed adultery. He claimed authority to do this by arguing that the church at Rome was given authority to bind and loose sins. This was a major step in the formation of the “Roman Catholic Church” in which the bishop of Rome would claim authority over all Christianity.

While the persecution of Decius lasted only four years, it raised issues that remained much longer. After the death of Decius, some church members who had committed apostasy wanted to return to the church. Many Christians believed that those who had committed apostasy during persecution should not be allowed to return to the church.

However, Cyprian, who served as bishop of Carthage from 249 to 258, asked the church to re-admit anyone who showed sincere repentance. He proposed a system in which those who sacrificed to gods only after torture were quickly restored to the church. Those who sacrificed to the gods without being tortured received more severe punishment, including public confession before the congregation.

Cyprian’s proposal led to the development of a system of penance[1] before a person was allowed to return to the Lord’s Supper. Ultimately, this grew into the Roman Catholic system of penance and led to the practice of indulgences that Martin Luther opposed.

► What process do you follow to restore a backslidden church member? Do you have a process that recognizes the seriousness of willful, ongoing sin and that provides for restoration when a backslider truly repents?

Apostasy by Church Leaders: The Donatist Controversy

An even greater conflict involved bishops who committed apostasy during the persecutions of Diocletian (303-312). Donatus, who served as bishop of Carthage beginning in 313, insisted that backslidden clergy (called traditors[2]) must be rebaptized. Until this happened, he insisted that their ministry was invalid; baptisms performed by these bishops should not be recognized by the church. This was a serious issue for church members. They feared their baptism could be rejected by the church because their pastor was not qualified.

The “Donatist controversy” caused a division in the church which lasted for several decades. While the Donatists argued that a baptism or communion by a “false bishop” was invalid, most churches decided that the authority for baptism or communion came from the church, not the individual pastor. Because of this, a person who had been baptized by a traditor was still baptized in God’s eyes; no ‘rebaptism’ was necessary. This became the practice through the history of the church.

[1] Penance is a system where a person must do certain actions to qualify for forgiveness.

[2] The Latin word comes from the same root as ‘traitor.’ These bishops had betrayed the faith.

Some of the greatest threats to the church come from within. As the church faced heresies taught by some of her own members, she learned that she must remain faithful to the apostolic message of the New Testament.

The early church fathers condemned teachers like Marcion who turned to heresy. Men like Marcion believed they could teach part of the Bible message while ignoring other parts. The creeds show that belief in the historical Jesus was a test of true Christian belief.

These challenges are faced once again in the twenty-first century. Once again, some scholars say they believe Jesus’ teaching, but they deny the historical facts of his life, death, and resurrection. Once again, some scholars use false “gospels” such as the “Gospel of Thomas” to teach a Gnostic message that deceives many.

Today, the church must again stand strong against this false message. Like the church fathers, we must hold to the truths of Christianity and reject heresies that undermine the faith. The church fathers faced martyrdom rather than deny the faith; Christians today are called to follow their example, remaining faithful even to death.

Irenaeus (ca. 130-202). One of the most influential early church leaders. His Against Heresies attacked Gnosticism. He contributed to the formation of the canon and to the doctrine of the incarnation.

Justin Martyr (100-165). The most important early Christian apologist. He used Greek philosophy to explain Christianity to unbelievers.

Marcion (died 160). Promoted a form of Gnosticism. His heresy inspired church leaders to establish the New Testament canon.

Montanus (died ca. 175). Leader of the “New Prophets.” He emphasized the need for revival and spiritual discipline. He also made prophetic predictions which proved false.

Origen (185-254). Bishop of Alexandria. Although he rejected Gnosticism, he accepted many Greek philosophical ideas that inspired the Gnostics. He used allegorical interpretation to explain difficult passages in the Bible.

Tertullian (160-225). North African church leader. He defended orthodoxy against modalism – the teaching that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not distinct persons.

(1) Take a test on this lesson. The test will include dates from the “Lesson 3 Key Events in Church History” timeline (100-313).

(2) Prepare a biographical summary of one of the following Christian leaders: Irenaeus or Tertullian. Your summary should include four parts:

• Biography: When did he live? Where did he live? When and where did he die?
• Events: What are the most important events in his life?
• Influence: What was his lasting influence on the Christian church?
• Application: What is one lesson for today’s church from this leader?

You have two options for presenting this summary:

• Submit a 2 page written paper to your class leader.
• Give a 3-5 minute oral presentation to your class.

(1) The heresy called ________________ taught that all physical matter is evil.

(2) The heresy called Docetism was taught by _____________.

(3) The “Father of Latin theology” was ___________________.

(4) The three “rules” for the New Testament canon were:

• Is it ___________________?
• Is it ___________________?
• Is it ___________________?

(5) In the second century, __________________ led a movement that called for discipline and a renewed emphasis on the Holy Spirit. However, he made false prophecies that discredited his movement.

(6) A movement led by ______________ argued that communion or baptisms performed by apostate bishops were not valid.

(7)  _____________________ was a second century church leader who contributed to the confirmation of the canon and who taught the importance of the incarnation.

(8) In 367, Bishop __________________ wrote an “Easter Letter” that listed the books of the New Testament canon.