“The Alexandrian Christological School: Apollinarian Controversy”
According to Alexandrian Christology, God must be one with human nature, so human’s can share a life with God. (McGrath 46). Therefore, God became human to be able to relate to humanity. Apollinaris of Laodicea had a different view; he believed “Christ’s human mind and soul were replaced with a divine, pure mind” (McGrath 47). His argument against Alexandrian Christology was that Jesus’ actions would not be Christ with a human mind. If Christ were human, he would possess a dirty, weak mind and be vulnerable to sinning.
Gregory of Nazianzus challenged Apollinaris’ idea with the question: “How could human nature be redeemed, if only part of human nature had been assumed by Logos?”
According to Alexandrian Christology, God must be one with human nature, so human’s can share a life with God. (McGrath 46). Therefore, God became human to be able to relate to humanity. Apollinaris of Laodicea had a different view; he believed “Christ’s human mind and soul were replaced with a divine, pure mind” (McGrath 47). His argument against Alexandrian Christology was that Jesus’ actions would not be Christ with a human mind. If Christ were human, he would possess a dirty, weak mind and be vulnerable to sinning.
Gregory of Nazianzus challenged Apollinaris’ idea with the question: “How could human nature be redeemed, if only part of human nature had been assumed by Logos?”