What do you think?
Rate this book
Scripture in Doctrinal Dispute: Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity, vol. 2
How did we get from Scripture to creed? Historical criticism has revealed a gap between Scripture and the mainstream doctrines that define Christianity today. Not the least of these are the Trinity and two natures of Christ—widely accepted since the fifth century, but seemingly unfounded in historical readings of Scripture. How did these dogmas become so integral to the faith in the first place? Frances M. Young tackles this monumental question in a culmination of decades of biblical and patristic research. The second of two volumes, Scripture in Doctrinal Dispute illuminates the role of biblical hermeneutics in the debates that forged Christian dogma on the nature of God. Young shows how the theological commitments to God as the sole creator of all else from nothing shaped fourth- and fifth-century disputes over Christology and the Trinity. Played out in the great councils of the fourth century and beyond, these conflicts drove the need to discern doctrinal coherence in Scripture. The different sides relied on different prooftexts, and the rule of faith served as the criteria by which scriptural interpretation was measured—thereby forming the basis of the creeds. Nuanced and ecumenical, Scripture in Doctrinal Dispute completes Young’s magnum opus, closing the gap between Scripture and Christian tradition. Young’s magisterial study holds widespread implications for not only patristics but also exegesis and systematic theology.
384 pages, Hardcover
Published August 13, 2024
4 people are currently reading
14 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
December 22, 2024
It is often assumed that early Christian theology, especially from the fourth century onward, was focused on philosophical categories. It is even suggested that it was the heterodox folk (e.g. Arians) who were the true biblical theologians. The truth is that theologians including Cyril of Alexandria, the Cappadocians, and Augustine, sought to ground their theologies in Scripture. Now, it is true that they did not employ modern historical-critical methods, but they appealed to Scripture in their disputes. The question often hung on the interpretation of texts.
Scripture in Doctrinal Dispute is the second volume of a two-volume work by Frances M. Young that is titled "Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity." The first volume is titled Scripture, the Genesis of Doctrine: Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity, vol 1.. I have yet to read or even skim the first volume, which I will admit puts me at a disadvantage in reading/reviewing this volume. Nevertheless, this volume illuminates the important debates that took place in the fourth and fifth centuries, from Nicea to Chalcedon. While Nicea and Constantinople focused on the Trinity, the disputes that took place in the years following Constantinople, focused on Christology. All the disputants in the fifth century accepted the Nicene-Constantinople Creed's ruling on the Trinity. What they debated was how Christ could be both human and divine.
Foundational to this discussion is pedagogy, such that the church is seen as a school, with the major church leaders/theologians serving as teachers. Thus, the nature of the disputations is rooted in pedagogy. These teachers sought to interpret and apply theologically Scripture, which by this time had reached its canonical completion. These debates emerged out of disputes taking place in the second and third centuries about the nature of God. The conclusion leading into the fourth century was that God is One, such that there is no distinction between the Creator and the God of Jesus. With that assumed, the fourth-century debates that included Arius and Athanasius, leading to Nicea focused on the nature of the incarnation. As Young notes, "The fundamental issue between Athanasius and the Arians was whether the Logos incarnate in Jesus belonged to the divine or created order, a question that was bound to shatter the traditional Logos-theology and create what we know as the christlogical problem" (p. 26). In this volume, Young explores how scripture was deployed in seeking a solution to this problem.
After setting the scene in Chapter 1, in Chapters 2 and 3, Frances Young focuses on the debate over the Trinity. These chapters are titled "Three Names, One God?" Chapter 2 is Part 1 while Chapter 3 is Part 2. In Part 1 (Chapter 2), Young focuses on the debates between Arius and Athanasius. She does this by exploring the literature that emerged during the controversies that led up to Nicea. These sources include Athanasius's "Orations against the Arians" (340s), which according to Young "effectively constructed 'Arianism' ---sharpening up the issues at stake in the complex debates of the time by turning tensions into a binary conflict, tracing its roots back to the pre-Nicene dissension between Arius and his bishop." What these disputes did was demand new concepts that moved beyond the old Monarchian solutions to the doctrine of God the Creator. Then in Chapter 3, Young focuses more specifically on the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, especially by the Cappadocians. She writes that these two chapters, taken together "confirm that the articulation of this doctrine [Trinity] was a process of argument and that that argument was not least about the fundamental meaning of scripture" (p. 108). While the council at Constantinople resolved the question of the Trinity, it opened up more questions regarding the incarnation. Thus the question was: "How could one homoousios with the Father, truly God in every sense so as to be utterly transcendent and not a creature, accept change, become a creature, be incarnate, be born, suffer, and die?" (p. 108). These questions led to the next stage of debate, which led to Chalcedon.
Chapters 4 and 5 focus on "Two Natures, One Christ? This discussion is divided into two chapters (parts 1 and 2). In Chapter 4, the focus is on the diverging exegeses that emerged after the church embraced a doctrine of the Trinity. Two parties emerged, the Antiochene and the Alexandrian. Young points out that both sides had soteriological concerns. On the one hand, there is the Alexandrian position that has roots in the theology of Athanasius that led to the miaphysite formula (one nature). The key figure on the Alexandrian side was Cyril of Alexandria. A key Antiochene figure was John Chrysostom. They both offered exegetical works. John on Hebrews and Cyril on the Gospel of John. The two sides shared many things in common but had differences of interpretation, the differences become starker in Part 2, The focus here is on the debates that centered on the break between Nestorius and Cyril over whether Mary was the mother of God (Theotokos) or only the mother of the human Jesus (Christotokos). Both rested their views on the Nicene Creed, but interpreted Scripture differently, with different assumptions. Nestorius would be declared a heretic, but the debate continued. The issue centered on whether Christ had one nature (divine) or two natures (human and divine), and if the latter how this occurred. Was it a union of natures (one nature) or a conjunction? Ultimately, both sides sought to defer to Scripture, but the question hinged on how one properly interpreted Scripture. The differences often centered on differing texts. But when they appealed to the same passages, such as Philippians 2, they would emphasize different parts. Theodoret, the Antiochene theologian, focused on Paul's statement that the one in the form of God took the form of a slave, while Cyril focused on kenosis (emptying himself). Chalcedon sought to provide a solution, but it did not resolve the question for all.
In the final chapter, Chapter 6, Young explores the relationship between doctrine and scripture, which had emerged in the earlier disputes. She focuses on Augustine's book On the Trinity, What Augustine demonstrated was that "for early Christian thinkers in general correct doctrine determined the right reading of scripture" (p. 271). This includes appeals to Christological readings of the Old Testament theophanies. The guide to right interpretation was the Rule of Faith. But it works in the reverse as these theologians, including Augustine, used proof texts to prove their points.
The point of the book is not to determine who was correct in their interpretations but to show how the disputants made use of Scripture in their debates. We might not accept their interpretive methods today, and yet they offer us insight into how doctrines emerged and developed. This volume is scholarly and dense. Yet, Young does an excellent job bringing out the variances such that we gain a better insight into the methods and concerns of these early theologians.
Scripture in Doctrinal Dispute is the second volume of a two-volume work by Frances M. Young that is titled "Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity." The first volume is titled Scripture, the Genesis of Doctrine: Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity, vol 1.. I have yet to read or even skim the first volume, which I will admit puts me at a disadvantage in reading/reviewing this volume. Nevertheless, this volume illuminates the important debates that took place in the fourth and fifth centuries, from Nicea to Chalcedon. While Nicea and Constantinople focused on the Trinity, the disputes that took place in the years following Constantinople, focused on Christology. All the disputants in the fifth century accepted the Nicene-Constantinople Creed's ruling on the Trinity. What they debated was how Christ could be both human and divine.
Foundational to this discussion is pedagogy, such that the church is seen as a school, with the major church leaders/theologians serving as teachers. Thus, the nature of the disputations is rooted in pedagogy. These teachers sought to interpret and apply theologically Scripture, which by this time had reached its canonical completion. These debates emerged out of disputes taking place in the second and third centuries about the nature of God. The conclusion leading into the fourth century was that God is One, such that there is no distinction between the Creator and the God of Jesus. With that assumed, the fourth-century debates that included Arius and Athanasius, leading to Nicea focused on the nature of the incarnation. As Young notes, "The fundamental issue between Athanasius and the Arians was whether the Logos incarnate in Jesus belonged to the divine or created order, a question that was bound to shatter the traditional Logos-theology and create what we know as the christlogical problem" (p. 26). In this volume, Young explores how scripture was deployed in seeking a solution to this problem.
After setting the scene in Chapter 1, in Chapters 2 and 3, Frances Young focuses on the debate over the Trinity. These chapters are titled "Three Names, One God?" Chapter 2 is Part 1 while Chapter 3 is Part 2. In Part 1 (Chapter 2), Young focuses on the debates between Arius and Athanasius. She does this by exploring the literature that emerged during the controversies that led up to Nicea. These sources include Athanasius's "Orations against the Arians" (340s), which according to Young "effectively constructed 'Arianism' ---sharpening up the issues at stake in the complex debates of the time by turning tensions into a binary conflict, tracing its roots back to the pre-Nicene dissension between Arius and his bishop." What these disputes did was demand new concepts that moved beyond the old Monarchian solutions to the doctrine of God the Creator. Then in Chapter 3, Young focuses more specifically on the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, especially by the Cappadocians. She writes that these two chapters, taken together "confirm that the articulation of this doctrine [Trinity] was a process of argument and that that argument was not least about the fundamental meaning of scripture" (p. 108). While the council at Constantinople resolved the question of the Trinity, it opened up more questions regarding the incarnation. Thus the question was: "How could one homoousios with the Father, truly God in every sense so as to be utterly transcendent and not a creature, accept change, become a creature, be incarnate, be born, suffer, and die?" (p. 108). These questions led to the next stage of debate, which led to Chalcedon.
Chapters 4 and 5 focus on "Two Natures, One Christ? This discussion is divided into two chapters (parts 1 and 2). In Chapter 4, the focus is on the diverging exegeses that emerged after the church embraced a doctrine of the Trinity. Two parties emerged, the Antiochene and the Alexandrian. Young points out that both sides had soteriological concerns. On the one hand, there is the Alexandrian position that has roots in the theology of Athanasius that led to the miaphysite formula (one nature). The key figure on the Alexandrian side was Cyril of Alexandria. A key Antiochene figure was John Chrysostom. They both offered exegetical works. John on Hebrews and Cyril on the Gospel of John. The two sides shared many things in common but had differences of interpretation, the differences become starker in Part 2, The focus here is on the debates that centered on the break between Nestorius and Cyril over whether Mary was the mother of God (Theotokos) or only the mother of the human Jesus (Christotokos). Both rested their views on the Nicene Creed, but interpreted Scripture differently, with different assumptions. Nestorius would be declared a heretic, but the debate continued. The issue centered on whether Christ had one nature (divine) or two natures (human and divine), and if the latter how this occurred. Was it a union of natures (one nature) or a conjunction? Ultimately, both sides sought to defer to Scripture, but the question hinged on how one properly interpreted Scripture. The differences often centered on differing texts. But when they appealed to the same passages, such as Philippians 2, they would emphasize different parts. Theodoret, the Antiochene theologian, focused on Paul's statement that the one in the form of God took the form of a slave, while Cyril focused on kenosis (emptying himself). Chalcedon sought to provide a solution, but it did not resolve the question for all.
In the final chapter, Chapter 6, Young explores the relationship between doctrine and scripture, which had emerged in the earlier disputes. She focuses on Augustine's book On the Trinity, What Augustine demonstrated was that "for early Christian thinkers in general correct doctrine determined the right reading of scripture" (p. 271). This includes appeals to Christological readings of the Old Testament theophanies. The guide to right interpretation was the Rule of Faith. But it works in the reverse as these theologians, including Augustine, used proof texts to prove their points.
The point of the book is not to determine who was correct in their interpretations but to show how the disputants made use of Scripture in their debates. We might not accept their interpretive methods today, and yet they offer us insight into how doctrines emerged and developed. This volume is scholarly and dense. Yet, Young does an excellent job bringing out the variances such that we gain a better insight into the methods and concerns of these early theologians.
March 18, 2025
Summary: A study of how scripture was used in the doctrinal controversies concerning the Trinity and Christology.
One of the challenge early teachers in the church faced was how to articulate the evidence of the biblical text when discussing the nature of God as well as the nature of Christ as the Incarnate Son of God. These questions came to a head in the fourth and fifth centuries. The Council of Nicea in 325 AD and Constantinople in 381 AD articulated the church’s doctrine of the Trinity, of God’s singular nature subsisting in three persons. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD addressed the nature of the Incarnate Christ as the person of the divine Son, who subsisted in two natures, divine and human.
What Frances M. Young does in this second volume of her study of doctrine and scripture in early Christianity is show how the scriptures were used by the different parties to these controversies. The book begins in setting the stage with the discussions on the nature of God in the earliest centuries where the Oneness of God was affirmed but also the three persons of the Godhead. The ambiguities that remained led to further controversy.
Chapters 2 and 3 focus on the discussions of the Trinity. Chapter 2 addresses the challenge of Arius and his use of scripture and the response of Athanasius and Basil of Caesarea. Chapter 3 focuses on the Cappadocians and the decisive work of Gregory of Nyssa leading up to Constantinople. Chapters 4 and 5 turn to the unresolved questions about Christology. Chapter 4 contrasts the exegesis of Hebrews by Chrysostom and the interpretation of the Gospel of John by Cyril of Alexander. Chapter 5 centers on the polemic between Cyril and Nestorius over whether Mary was theotokos (Cyril) or christotokos (Nestorius).
Then Chapter 6 summarizes Young’s findings of the use of scripture. One was the importance of the Rule of Faith and baptismal creeds as summaries of scripture. These didn’t resolve controversy but pushed the church to articulate clearly the nature of the Godhead, Father, Son and Spirit, in whose name new converts were baptized and the person of the Lord Jesus Christ who they confessed. Young also observes how the process of “prooftexting” and the effort to express the overall teaching called for extrabiblical terms to express the mind of scripture, terms like ousia (substance) and hypostases (persons). Citing Augustine, Young notes both how doctrine informs right reading of scripture and the wrestling with the body of scripture leads to refined doctrinal understanding. She concludes that it is in worship where scripture and doctrine coinhere.
I would say in reading Young, one has to work to keep the forest in view with all the “trees” in the discussion. In addition to keeping a thumb in the detailed table of contents, it might have helped to have some summaries in tabular form. Absent these, the studious reader may want to take their own notes and outline.
Young describes a process far “messier” than many of us might like. Even after the councils, not all agree, as is the case with the Nestorians. Her discussion also underscores that everyone here treated scripture as authoritative and appealed to the Rule of Faith. As I personally consider the outcomes of the Councils, I see not a power struggle with winners and losers but a process superintended by God that led to wise formulations that guide us well to this day in articulating the sense of scripture.
_____________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.
One of the challenge early teachers in the church faced was how to articulate the evidence of the biblical text when discussing the nature of God as well as the nature of Christ as the Incarnate Son of God. These questions came to a head in the fourth and fifth centuries. The Council of Nicea in 325 AD and Constantinople in 381 AD articulated the church’s doctrine of the Trinity, of God’s singular nature subsisting in three persons. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD addressed the nature of the Incarnate Christ as the person of the divine Son, who subsisted in two natures, divine and human.
What Frances M. Young does in this second volume of her study of doctrine and scripture in early Christianity is show how the scriptures were used by the different parties to these controversies. The book begins in setting the stage with the discussions on the nature of God in the earliest centuries where the Oneness of God was affirmed but also the three persons of the Godhead. The ambiguities that remained led to further controversy.
Chapters 2 and 3 focus on the discussions of the Trinity. Chapter 2 addresses the challenge of Arius and his use of scripture and the response of Athanasius and Basil of Caesarea. Chapter 3 focuses on the Cappadocians and the decisive work of Gregory of Nyssa leading up to Constantinople. Chapters 4 and 5 turn to the unresolved questions about Christology. Chapter 4 contrasts the exegesis of Hebrews by Chrysostom and the interpretation of the Gospel of John by Cyril of Alexander. Chapter 5 centers on the polemic between Cyril and Nestorius over whether Mary was theotokos (Cyril) or christotokos (Nestorius).
Then Chapter 6 summarizes Young’s findings of the use of scripture. One was the importance of the Rule of Faith and baptismal creeds as summaries of scripture. These didn’t resolve controversy but pushed the church to articulate clearly the nature of the Godhead, Father, Son and Spirit, in whose name new converts were baptized and the person of the Lord Jesus Christ who they confessed. Young also observes how the process of “prooftexting” and the effort to express the overall teaching called for extrabiblical terms to express the mind of scripture, terms like ousia (substance) and hypostases (persons). Citing Augustine, Young notes both how doctrine informs right reading of scripture and the wrestling with the body of scripture leads to refined doctrinal understanding. She concludes that it is in worship where scripture and doctrine coinhere.
I would say in reading Young, one has to work to keep the forest in view with all the “trees” in the discussion. In addition to keeping a thumb in the detailed table of contents, it might have helped to have some summaries in tabular form. Absent these, the studious reader may want to take their own notes and outline.
Young describes a process far “messier” than many of us might like. Even after the councils, not all agree, as is the case with the Nestorians. Her discussion also underscores that everyone here treated scripture as authoritative and appealed to the Rule of Faith. As I personally consider the outcomes of the Councils, I see not a power struggle with winners and losers but a process superintended by God that led to wise formulations that guide us well to this day in articulating the sense of scripture.
_____________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews