You can see here how Orthodox history lies. They think they can have Jesus without his great command.
Heresies: The Image of Christ in the Mirror of Heresy, Brown, 1984 pp. 430 –432:
“The creed of the Council of Chalcedon inaugurated the age of Orthodox Christology in 451. Not everyone agreed with Chalcedon's characteristic formulation of the mystery of Christ, expressed in terms of full deity, full humanity, and a single person. But for 15 centuries the formula of Chalcedon defined the limits of Christological concerns. Of course, there was orthodoxy in the sense defined by the Chalcedonian Creed before Chalcedon. The thesis of this work is the contention that faith in Jesus Christ as true God and true man, one person, has always been the decisive characteristic of the community of faith he established.
It took the early church four centuries to arrive at its definitive formulation of Christological doctrine. That formulation has lasted well; its 1500th anniversary was celebrated in 1951. The 1980s are far too close to 1951 to write a definitive opinion on that celebration. Yet it is beginning to look as though that tremendous anniversary which marked the epchal triumph of a complex creed that has stood the test of 15 centuries must be seen as a commemoration rather than the celebration. The year 451 marked the beginning of the defined orthodoxy, with respect to the doctrine of Christ, within Christendom....
For 1500 years the Chalcedonian Creed was the standard of Christian teaching about the person of the Lord. Not only did it provide the standard, but with its limiting terms, it set the boundaries for Christological discussion and controversy. In the Reformation era, when some of the more radical thinkers deviated from the principles of Chalcedon, they were rapidly expelled from the Christian community. Today, only three decades after the sesquimillennial celebration the standard appears to be forgotten. Not only is Chalcedon no longer the touchstone; teaching and discussion about Christ hardly even fit into the framework erected at Chalcedon.
For those who seek to be and remain fully Orthodox, Evangelical, Catholic, the loss of the Chalcedonian Creed as a standard may not be a disaster, but it causes tremendous disorientation. It involves a transformation the magnitude of which cannot be ignored. This goes beyond anything that has happened so far in the history of Christianity with its constant interplay of heresy and orthodoxy. The great historians of the faith may contend, from their various viewpoints, that the development of early Catholic, medieval, or Reformation theology represented a distortion of the New Testament message. The conflict of orthodoxy with the Enlightenment and the varieties of liberalism it engendered was long and fierce, and is not yet entirely past. But the eclipse of Chalcedon whether it is permanent or only transitory, is more ominous than anything that has happened so far.
Historians of Christianity and its relationship to society often claim that Constantine created Christian Europe, or Christendom, but that now we are in the post Constantine in area. In theology, we have to say that we now seem to have entered a post-Chalcedonian era. The Transformation this development portends is greater than anything that has yet happened within Christianity. It can be compared only to the transition within biblical monotheism itself. from the unitary monotheism of Israel [0f Jesus] to the trinitarianism of the Council of Chalcedon. The difference is symbolized by the transition from the prayer [of Jesus], the Shema, of Deuteronomy 6:4 (“Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord” to the confession of the Athanasian Creed": we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in unity."
Was the transition [transformation] from the personal monotheism of Israel [and of Jesus] to the tri-personal theism of Nicaea a legitimate development of Old Testament revelation? [WAS IT LEGITIMATE TO ABANDON THE Creed OF Jesus?]. Christians affirm that it is. [OK to abandon Jesus], holding that Nicaea represents a fuller unfolding, not a distortion, of the self-disclosure of the God of Israel. [The God of Israel disclosed himself in the teaching of Jesus as the God of the Shema which Jesus said was the Great Commandment]. Indeed the trinitarianism of Nicaea and the Christological definitions of Chalcedon are seen as the valid and necessary interpretation of the claims of Jesus Christ [abolishing the words of Jesus] in the context of the Old Testament witness to the God who is one. Indeed without Nicaea and Chalcedon, it would not have been possible to maintain that Christianity is a biblical religion the legitimate daughter of Old Testament Judaism [Though Jesus said nothing of the sort. He claimed as his God the God of Israel] [Jesus said that Christianity is the legitimate daughter of OT by underlining the OT creed of Judaism]... Christianity took four centuries to formulate its witness to the deity and humanity of Christ in the context of the one God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob in such a way that is preserved a coherent approach to the unity of truth. It is taken 15 centuries more to forget Chalcedon again. As it loses touch with Chalcedon Christian world is in the process of losing coherence. It is in fact losing conviction that there is any final truth about the one who said "I am the way the truth and the life" John 14:6
[Why is it coherent and not disorienting to deny Jesus the right to define God from the OT?]
