The issue about words is a very important issue. It is not just that a word may mean something; it is that it does mean something. But even more, one word can mean multiple things. Some words have more than just a definition. They have concepts, philosophical and theological issues wrapped up in them. With some words it is virtually impossible to deal with the word just as a word but instead it must be dealt with as a concept or theology. That is true of the word “responsibility.” It is no longer just what this word has meant, but it has to do with what the meaning of this word is in the context it is used and then the theology behind the word. There are other words in history that have been used like this.
During the Reformation and ever since the Reformation the word “justify” has been an issue. During the Reformation the pioneer Reformers and Roman Catholics did battle over that word. Roman Catholics said that the word had to do with what God accounted to the person according to each person’s works. A person could only be justified if the person did enough works to be justified. The Reformers said that the word “justify” had a legal or forensic meaning in Scripture and so God justified sinners by declaring them just based on the righteousness of Christ. That issue is still with us today.
Another word that was battled over in the Reformation was the word “alone.” Martin Luther in particular said that a person was justified by faith alone. Roman Catholics argued that Luther’s view was false and that a person had to have works to be justified. Luther said that Scripture taught that a person was justified by faith apart from works and so that is one side of what he meant by faith alone. Another aspect of the word “alone” is that a person is justified by faith alone in order that it may be by grace alone. Unless a person is declared just by God through faith alone, justification and salvation are not by grace alone. If justification is not through faith alone and by grace alone, it will not be by Christ alone either. It would also not be to the glory of God alone. That one little word “alone” is a shining little word that is necessary to defend the Gospel of grace alone and Christ alone. It was not and is not wrangling about words, it is about the Gospel.
Going back into history over one millennium earlier than the Reformation, we find another word that split Christendom into pieces and caused much squabbling and suffering. In reality, however, there was a truth and a theology that had to be defended with a word. This was during the time of Arianism which taught that Jesus Christ was a created being and not of the same substance as the Father. Modern day Arians are known as the Jehovah’s Witnesses in that they teach more or less the same thing about Christ. The Council of Nicea was convened by Constantine in the year 325 and was the first ecumenical council. It was attended by 318 bishops and many others. While Arianism did not have many committed followers at this council, he did have Eusebius of Nicomedia who had much influence with and over Constantine. The chief opponent of Arianism was Athanasius. The council decided on a statement that in part that had some important words (highlighted & italicized) for the history of the Church:
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible, and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance (ousias) of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one substance (homoousion) with the Father, through whom all things were made…
This creed (just part of it listed above) was signed and Arius was banished. Constantine decreed the death penalty for those who would not agree to this creed. While it appeared that the battle was over, it was not. Eusebius of Nicomedia signed the creed and retained his status with Constantine. The political wrangling began and Arius was allowed to return. Athanasius was ordered to reinstate Arius at Alexandria and was banished when he refused to do so. The political and religious wrangling continued but we must understand that the truth of the Gospel was at stake. Athanasius was banished five times and would not give in though the whole world seemed to be against him. He fought this battle until he died.
What Athanasius began to see, however, is that the word homoousion was not adequate in and of itself. While it meant that the Father and the Son were one substance, which Athanasius was willing to die for, it did not protect the equally important teaching that the Father and the Son are in some way different. What they had to do, then, was to adopt the word homoiousion. If you read the words carefully, you will notice that there is only a one letter difference (“i”) between the two words. That one letter, however, changes the word from meaning the “same substance” to “of similar substance.” In fighting Arianism that one letter meant the difference between truth and heresy. In fighting other issues the word that was heresy in one sense (homoiousion) was needed to preserve the truth in another sense.
Another group of theologians came on the scene and were called “The Great Cappadocians.” They were Gregory of Nazianzus, Basil of Caesarea, and Gregory of Nyssa. They were instrumental in helping people wrestle with the difference between the Greek and the Latin which was causing some problem in understanding. They called attention to the distinction between ousia (the Greek equivalent of “substantia”) and hypostasis (translated into Latin as “persona”). The teaching basically boiled down to this: In God there is only one ousia (substance), and that one substance or ousia is shared by the three hypostases (Persons) of Father, Son, and Spirit. In other words, these great battles over words were actually great battles over the nature of the Trinity and the full deity of Christ. The orthodox understanding and teaching of the Trinity and the deity of Christ rest on those battles to a large degree.
The battle for the Gospel is continuing today. One word that we must grasp and understand is “responsibility.” We must understand what it means and what it means in its written context and its theological context. Some may think that this is just wrangling over words, but it is not. There are huge theological issues that revolve on this word in the sense that they revolve around its meaning. The understanding of justification by grace alone through faith alone rests in some way on how this word is understood. How we understand the character of God is in some way influenced by this word. How we understand the depravity of man and the will is greatly influenced by how we understand this word. Perhaps it is best to say that how we understand this word is determined by what we really believe about other things. This is not wrangling over words and trying to make a mountain out of a molehill, this already is a mountain that is set before us in Scripture and in history. We must not ignore what is going on by the use of slippery language. We must defend the Gospel at all costs.
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment