Examining the Doctrines of the Trinity and the Person of Jesus Christ in the Eyes of the Apostolic and Ante-Nicene Father
By Hal Flemings
September 1990
The Christian Greek Scriptures are candid in predicting a general apostasy
within the Christian church following the death of the apostles of Jesus'
Christ. That being the case, these questions can be legitimately raised: Was the
doctrine that -"Jesus Christ is the Almighty God" taught by the apostles and
their associates, or did it have its Genesis later? And was the doctrine that
there are three divine persons in the one God, the Trinity, taught by the
apostles and their spiritual companions, or did it have its origin later? This
paper will survey the period beginning immediately after the death of the last
living apostle, John, and ending before the Council of Nicea in an attempt to
provide some answers to the foregoing' questions. This does not mean that we do
not recognize the value of looking at either the time of the apostles or the
Post-Nicene "Fathers" in addressing the same questions. Those periods will be
examined in a different work.
Before we consider, in detail, the principal questions before
us, let us first establish that a systemic corruption of the early church was
predicted in the Christian Greek Scriptures.
The Apostle Peter penned this warning in or about 62 C.E.* "But there were false
prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They
will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Sovereign Lord
who bought them -,bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow
their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their
greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their
condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been
sleeping." (2 Peter 2:1-3) In his last meeting with the Christian elders of
Ephesus, the Apostle Paul alerted them as follows: "I know that after I leave,
savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from
your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away
disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three years, I
never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears." (Acts 20:29-31)
Continuing, in his second epistle to the Christians at Thessalonica, the Apostle
Paul attempted to quell rumors that the second advent of Christ was imminent and
stated. "Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered
to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some
prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of
the Lord has already come. Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day
will not come, until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is
revealed, the man doomed to destruction." (2 Thessalonians 2:1-3) The Amplified
New Testament renders verse 3 of 2 Thessalonians 2 this way: "Let no one deceive
or beguile you in any way, for that day will not come except the apostasy comes
first - that is, unless the (predicted) great falling away of those who have
professed to be Christians has come - and the man of lawlessness (sin) is
revealed, who is the son of doom (of perdition)." Other passages speak of a
coming apostasy, as well, among them are Jude 1-25 and 1 Timothy 4:1-6.
-------------------------------------------------
* All quotations will be from the New International Version (NIV) unless otherwise stated.
-------------------------------------------------
With all of the other apostles dead, the aged Apostle John noted that the
general apostasy of the church was in progress and that its end had arrived. His
comments at 1 John 2:18-20, written about 98 C. E., are most interesting: "Dear
children, this is the last hour and as you have heard that the antichrist is
coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last
hour. They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they
had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed
that none of them belonged to us. But you have an anointing from the Holy One,
and all of you know the truth." This "last hour" occurred near the end of the
First Century C.E. The emergence of an alternative "Christianity" was in motion.
A number of individuals professing to be Christians living primarily after the
apostles had died produced certain writings considered to be authoritative that
shed light on "Christian" practices and doctrines of their respective times.
These individuals have come to be called the "Church Fathers". They are now our
focus as we address the questions raised at the beginning of this article. Those
who lived and wrote before 120 C.E. have been labeled the "Apostolic Fathers",
while those who lived and wrote after 120 C.E. but before 325 C.E. have been
called the "Antenicene Fathers".
* Time line presenting some of the "Fathers".
| 30 - 100 C.E. Clement of Rome | 40 - 115 C.E. Ignatius | 69 - 155 C.E. Polycarp | 70 - 150 C.E. Papias |
| 110 - 164 C.E. Justin Martyr | 110 - 180 C.E. Tatian | 125 - 203 C.E. Irenaeus | 145 - 220 C.E. Clement of Alexandria |
| 160 - 230 C.E. Tertullian |
185 - 253 C.E. Origen |
200 - 257 C.E. Cyprian |
240 - 325 C.E. Lactantius |
-------------------------------------------------
* The dates assigned to each of the "Fathers" vary with the source. The dates
above are not to be viewed as uncontestable. It is also worth noting that none
of the original writings of these men has been identified, so that the sources
we are considering are really copies.
-------------------------------------------------
Clement of Rome is our first source. It is believed that his
life intersected that of apostles of the Christ and that he died in or about 100
C.E. In the material alleged to have been written by him, he makes no comment
about the Trinity either directly or indirectly. Here are some quotes* from his
writings that may be helpful in getting a feel on his concept of who Jesus was:
From the First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians:
Chapter I: "...Grace unto you, and peace, from Almighty God through Jesus
Christ, be multiplied."
Chapter XLII: "The apostles have preached the gospel to us from the Lord Jesus
Christ; Jesus Christ (has done so) from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by
God, and the apostles by Christ."
Chapter LVIII: "May God, who seeth all things, and who is the ruler of all
spirits and the Lord of all flesh - who chose our Lord Jesus Christ and us
through him to be a peculiar people - grant to every soul that calleth upon his
glorious and holy name, faith, fear, peace, patience, long-suffering...".
Leaving eisegesis alone and letting the material speak for itself, there is
nothing suggesting that Jesus is the Almighty God or that he is equal to him.
The Almighty God is presented in contradistinction to Jesus Christ. Furthermore,
the Almighty God is pictured as superior to Christ, "sending him forth" and
"choosing him" for a specific purpose.
We next move to Ignatius of Antioch of whom M'Clintock and
Strongs Cyclopaedia, Vol. IV., p. 490, states, "We have no trustworthy accounts
of the life and ministry of Ignatius. The chief authority is the Martyrium
Ignatii, but even those who assert the genuineness of that work admit that
it is greatly interpolated."
One authority** had this to say about Ignatius' view of Jesus Christ, "Jesus is
called 'God' in neither of the two letters concerned with the Judaizing heresy (Magnesians,
Philadelphians), but in the others there are eleven definite examples of this
usage:
|
Eph.Inscr. |
"Jesus Christ our God" |
|
1:1 |
"The blood of God" |
| 7:2 | "In man, God" |
|
15:3 |
"Our God" |
| 18:2 | "Our God, Jesus the Christ" |
| 19:3 | "God was manifest as man" |
| Rom. Inscr. | "Jesus Christ our God" (twice) |
| 3:3 | "Our God Jesus Christ" |
| 6:3 | "The passion of my God" |
| Smyrn. 1:1 | "Jesus Christ, the God who.." |
| Polyc. 8:3 | "Our God, Jesus Christ" |
-------------------------------------------------
* All of the quotes from the "Fathers", unless otherwise stated, are from The
Ante-Nicene Fathers; Roberts and Donaldson, Editors; American Reprint of The
Edinburgh Edition; Wm.B. Eerdman Publishers, 1967.
** Robert M. Grant, The Apostolic Fathers - A New Translation and Commentary, Volume 4, "Ignatius of Antioch", page 7, Thomas Nelson and Sons Publishers, 1966
For this authority and others such statements indicate that this man, whose life possibly overlapped that of the apostles, believed that Jesus Christ was, in fact, the Almighty God. The same source* added, "What Ignatius means by 'God' is not confined to what he could find in the Old Testament or early Christian tradition. God, and Christ as God is 'Eternal', 'Invisible', 'Intangible', 'Impossible'. (Polyc. 3:2) This is to say that Ignatius, or other Christians shortly before his time, had introduced into their theology some of the conceptions current in Greek philosophical theology."
Let us place before us some of the aforementioned citations**:
To the Ephesians:
1:1: "You are imitators of God, and after rekindling, by the blood of God, the task natural to you, you have completed it perfectly."
18:2: "Our God, Jesus the Christ was conceived by Mary in accordance with the plan of God - of the seed of David and of the Holy Spirit; He was born and was baptized to purify the water by the passion."
To the Romans:
Inscr.: "Ignatius ... to her who has obtained mercy by the greatness of the Father Most High and of Jesus Christ his only Son, to the church beloved and enlightened by the will of him who willed all things that exist, in accordance with the love of Jesus Christ our God... Jesus Christ, Son of the Father...".
3:3: "Nothing that appears is good, for our God, Jesus Christ appears all the more clearly because he is in the Father...".
Polycarp:
8:3 "I bid you farewell always in our God Jesus Christ...".
-------------------------------------------------
* IBID. Page 8
** Translation in The Apostolic Fathers - A New Translation and Commentary, by Robert M. Grant, Volume 4, "Ignatius of Antioch".
-------------------------------------------------
Interestingly, a subordinated Christ seems to be depicted in
these Ignatian citations:
Magnesians 13:2: "Be subject to the bishop and to one another, as Jesus Christ
was subject to the Father, and the apostles were subject to Christ, so that
there may be unity both fleshly and spiritual."
Magnesians 8:2: "There is one God who manifested himself through Jesus Christ
his Son, who is his Word which proceeded from silence and in every respect
pleased him who sent him."
On balance, there is, at least, a sense that maybe Ignatius of Antioch
considered Jesus Christ to be the Almighty God or a second God. But there are
some other considerations; the matter does not end here.
One authority on the "Fathers" reveals the following about the Ignatian
writings, "The epistles ascribed to Ignatius have given rise to more controversy
than any other documents connected with the primitive church. As is evident to
every reader on the very- first glance at these writings, they contain numerous
statements which bear on points of ecclesiastical order that have long divided
the Christian world; and a strong temptation has thus been felt to allow some
amount of prepossession to enter into the-discussion of their authenticity or
spuriousness. At the same time, this question has furnished a noble field for
the display of learning and acuteness, and has, in the various forms under which
it has been debated, given rise to not a few works of the very highest ability
and scholarship... There are, in all fifteen epistles which bear the name of
Ignatius, these are the following: One to the Virgin Mary, two to the Apostle
John, one to Mary of Cassobelae, one to the Tarsians, one to the Antiochians,
one to Hero, a Deacon of Antioch, one to the Philippians; one to the Ephesians,
one to the Magnesians, one to the Trallians, one to the Romans, one to the
Philadelphians, one to the Smyrneans, and one to Polycarp. The first three exist
only in Latin; all the rest are extant also in Greek. It is now the universal
opinion of critics, that the first eight of these professedly Ignatian: letters
are spurious. They bear in themselves indubitable proofs-of being the production
of a later age than that in which Ignatius lived. Neither Eusebius nor Jerome
make the least reference to them; and they are now by common consent set aside
as forgeries; which were at various dates, and to serve special purposes, put
forth under the name of the celebrated Bishop of Antioch. But after the question
has been thus simplified, it still remains sufficiently complex. Of the seven
epistles which are acknowledged by Eusebius (Hist. Ecll., iii, 36), we possess
two Greek rescensions, a shorter and a longer. It is plain that one or other of
these exhibits a corrupt text, and scholars have for the most part agreed to
accept the shorter form as representing the genuine letters of Ignatius... But
although the shorter form of the Ignatian
letters had been generally accepted in preference to the longer, there was still
a pretty prevalent opinion among scholars, that even it could not be
regarded as absolutely free from interpolations, or as of undoubted
authenticity." - Ignatius, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume I, Alexander
Roberts and James Donaldson, Editors.
Under the cloud of later additions to the text, we do not dare lean heavily on the letters attributed to Ignatius in order to get a pulse on Ignatius' views. The Ignatian comments about "God" may not be from Ignatius of Antioch.
Polycarp now commands our attention. According to M'Clintock and Strong Cyclopedia, Vol. III, page 362, "There is extant only one short treatise by this Father, προς φιλππησιους επιστολη Ad Philippenses Epistola. That he wrote such an epistle, and that it was known in their time, is attested by Irenaeus (Adv. Hoeres. iii,3 and Epistol. Ad Florinum, Apud Euseb. H.E. IV, 14 and V, 20), Eusebius (H.E. iii, 36; iv, 14), Jerome (DeViris Illustr. C. 17), and later writers... Our present copies have been received by the great majority of critics as substantially genuine. Some have suspected the text to be interpolated...." Not much is presented in Polycarp's material that helps us with our questions. However, let us look at the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, Chapter 12 verse 2, which relates, "Now may the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Eternal High Priest himself, the Son of God, Jesus Christ, build you up in faith and truth...". If this tells us anything about the "Christology" of Polycarp, it tells us that Polycarp saw Jesus as a subordinate to the Almighty' God who was his God and his Father. The introduction of the same epistle says, "...Mercy to you and peace from God Almighty and from the Lord Jesus Christ, our Savior be multiplied... Similar to what we encountered in the works of Clement of Rome, we see a Jesus described who is distinct from the Almighty God and not described as a person within the being of God.
The work of the next "Father", Papias, is fragmentary and does
not provide us much to address our questions.
When we arrive at the major figure after Papias, namely Justin Martyr, we find
much information to investigate.
A number of writings are attributed to Justin Martyr. Let us look at what is
called The First Apology of Justin Martyr. The following quotes from this
work will be helpful:
Chapter VI: "Hence we are called Atheists and we confess that we are Atheists,
so far as gods of this sort are concerned, but not with respect to the Most True
God, the Father of righteousness and temperance and the other virtues, who is
free from all impurity. But both Him, and the Son (who came forth from Him and
taught us these things, and the host of the other good angels who follow and are
made like to him) and the prophetic spirit, we worship and adore..."
Chapter XXI: "And when we say also that the Word, who is the firstbirth of God,
was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was
crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound
nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of
Jupiter. For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribed to Jupiter:
Mercury... Aesculapius... Bacchus... Hercules..."
Chapter XXIII: "...That Jesus Christ is the only proper Son who has been begotten by God, being his Word and first-begotten, and power..."
Chapter XLVI: "...We have been taught that Christ is the
first-born of God and we have declared above that he is the Word of whom every
race of men were partakers..."
Chapter LXIII "Now the Word of God is his Son, as we have before said and he is
called Angel and Apostle... But so much is written for the sake of proving that
Jesus the Christ is the Son of God and his Apostle, being of old the Word, and
appearing in the form of fire, and sometimes in the likeness of angels... For
they who affirm that the Son is the Father, are proved neither to have become
acquainted with the Father, nor to know that the Father of the Universe has a
Son, who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even (a) god. And of old
he appeared in the shape of fire and in the likeness of an angel to Moses and to
the other prophets..."
In the First Apology, Justin Martyr has cast Jesus Christ
as a son to Jehovah God in the same way that Mercury, Bacchus, etc. were sons to
Jupiter. Also Justin states that Jesus Christ is God's "first-begotten", his
"first-born". And, though Jesus Christ is a god, he is nonetheless subordinate
to Jehovah, his Father and Producer.
In Justin Martyr's Dialogue With Trypho, we discover more as we shall
see:
Chapter XXXIV: "For Christ is King, and Priest and (a) god and lord, and angel
and man and captain..."
Chapter XXXVII: "Moreover in the diapsalm of the forty-sixth (47) Psalm,
reference is thus made to Christ, 'God went up with a shout, the Lord with the
sound of a trumpet. Sing ye to our God'... and Trypho said.... 'For when you say
that this Christ existed as (a) god before the ages, then that he submitted to
be born and became man, yet 1 that he is not of man this appears to be not
merely paradoxical but also foolish'... 'Now assuredly, Trypho,' I continued,
'The proof that this man is the Christ of God does not fail... that he existed
formerly as Son of the Maker of all things, being (a) god, and was born a man by
the virgin..."
Chapter LV: "And Trypho answered, 'We shall remember this your exposition, if
you strengthen (your solution of) this difficulty by other arguments; but now
resume the discourse, and show us that the spirit of prophecy admits another
God besides the Maker of all things..."
Chapter LVI: "Then (Justin) replied, 'I shall attempt to persuade you, since you
have understood the Scriptures (of the truth) of what I say, that there is, and
that there is said to be, another God and Lord subject to the Maker of
all things; who is also called an Angel, because he announces to man whatsoever
the Maker of all things above whom there is no other God - wishes to announce to
them...'. Then (Justin) replied, 'Reverting to the Scriptures, I shall endeavour
to persuade you, that he who is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob,
and to Moses and who is called "God" is distinct from Him who made all things -
numerically, I mean, not (distinct) in will'... 'For I affirm that he has never
at any time done anything which he who made the world - above whom there is no
other god - has not wished him both to do and to engage himself with'."
Chapter LXI: "I shall give you another testimony, my friends,' said I, 'from the
Scriptures, that God begat before all creatures a beginning (who was) a certain
rational power (proceeding) from himself, who is called by the holy spirit, now
the glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, (a) God, and
then Lord and Logos... He speaks by Solomon the following, "If I shall declare
to you what happens daily, I shall call to mind events from everlasting, and
review them. The Lord made me the beginning of his ways for his works. From
everlasting he established me in the beginning before he had made the earth"..."
Chapter LXII: "...Even as the Scripture by Solomon has made clear, that he whom
Solomon calls Wisdom, was begotten as a beginning before all his creatures and
as offspring of God..."
Chapter LXIII: "(Re: Heb. 1:8,9) Therefore these words testify explicitly that
he is witnessed to by him who established these things as deserving to be
worshipped as (a) god and as Christ."
Chapter LXIV: "Here Trypho said, 'Let him be recognized as Lord and Christ and
(a) God..."
Chapter LXVIII: "...They (Jews) agree that some Scriptures which we mention to
them, and which expressly prove that Christ was to suffer, to be worshipped, and
(to be called) 'God'..."
Chapter CII: "For if the Son of God evidently states that he can be saved
(neither) because he is a son, nor because he is strong or wise, but that
without God he cannot be saved, even though he be sinless, as Isaiah
declares in words to the effect that even in regard to his very language he
committed no sin (for he committed no inequity or guile with his mouth), how do
you or others who expect to be saved without this hope, support that you are not
deceiving yourselves?"
Chapter CXXIV: "...Let the interpretation of the Psalm (Psalm 82) be held just
as you wish yet thereby it is demonstrated that all men deemed worthy of
becoming 'gods' and of having power to become sons of the Highest and shall be
each by himself judged and condemned like Adam and Eve. Now I have proved at
length that Christ is called (a) god."
What have we learned from Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho? That
Jesus was "another god" apart from "the Maker of all things". That Jesus, as a
"god", was "distinct from him who made all things". Also, Justin reported that
Proverbs 8:22-31 applies to Jesus and hence that Jesus had a beginning, that he
"was begotten as a beginning". Additionally, Justin informed us that Christ
depended upon God 'to be saved', that he could not save himself. Justin Martyr's
Christ is not equal in power, station or age to God the Father.
Another Second Century "Father" is Hermas. His main work, apparently widely read
and quoted in the Second and Third Centuries, was called The Pastor from
which these quotations come:
The Pastor - Book First - Visions
Chapter 2: "For the Lord hath sworn by his Son, that those who denied Lord have
abandoned their life in despair..."
The Pastor - Book Second - Commandments
Commandment Tenth, Chapter I: "Wherefore remove grief from you, and crush not
the Holy Spirit which dwells in you, lest he entreat God against you, and he
withdraw from you."
Commandment Eleventh: "...Nor when man wishes the spirit to speak does the Holy
Spirit speak, but it speaks only when God wishes it to speak..."
The Pastor - Book Third - Similtudes
Similtude Fifth, Chapter 6: "God planted the vineyard, that is to say, he
created the people, and gave them to his Son and the Son appointed his angels
over them to keep them..."
Similtude Ninth, Chapter 12: "First of all, Sir, I said, 'Explain this to me:
What is the meaning of the rock and the gate?' 'This rock', he answered, 'and
this gate are the Son of God.' 'How, sir?', I said, 'The rock is old, and the
gate is new!' 'Listen', he said, 'and understand, 0 ignorant man. The Son of God
is older than all his creatures, so that he was a fellow-councillor with the
Father in his work of creation: for this reason is he-old..."
Hermas does not say anything that would lead us to believe that he saw three
persons in one God nor does he tell us that Jesus was the Almighty God. The Holy
Spirit and the Son are pictured as subordinates, not equals. And the Son is
identified as a being distinct from God.
We arrive at Tatian (110 - 180 C.E.), a man Church historians say fell away from Christianity in his old age. The only extant work of Tatian is his Address to the Greeks, in which we find these statements:
Chapter 5: "God was' in the beginning; but the beginning we-have
been taught, is the power of the Logos. For the Lord of the Universe, who is
himself the necessary ground of all being, inasmuch as no creature was yet in
existence, was alone; but inasmuch as he was all power, himself the necessary
ground of things visible and invisible, with him were all things; with him, by
Logos-power the Logos himself also, who was in him, subsists. And by his simple
will the Logos springs forth; and the Logos, not coming forth in vain, becomes
the first-begotten work of the Father. Him (the Logos) we know to be the
beginning of the world. But he came into being by participation, not by
abscission; for what is cut off is separated from the original substance, but
that which comes by participation, making its choice of function, does not
render him deficient from whom it is taken... and as the Logos, begotten in the
beginning, begat in turn our world, having first created for himself the
necessary matter, so also I in imitation of the Logos, being begotten again
(baptism?) and having become possessed of the truth, am trying to reduce to
order the confused matter which is kindred with myself."
Tatian's Christ or Logos was produced out of the being of God without affecting
or diminishing God in the doing. He, the Logos, was "the beginning of the
world". Just as the Logos begat the world so did God begat the Logos. Tatian
does not discuss the Holy Spirit as though it was an equal personality in this
process.
Theophilus of Antioch (115 - 181 C.E.?) now attracts our
attention. His work called Theophilus to Autolycus may help us get his
thinking:
Book I, Chapter 4: "(God) is without beginning, because he is unbegotten..."
Book II, Chapter 10: "And first, they taught us with one consent that God made
all things out of nothing, for nothing was coeval with God... God, then having
his own Word internal within his own bowels, begat him, emitting him along with
his own wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things
that were created by him, and by him he made all things."
Book II, Chapter 22: "...John says, 'In the beginning was the Word and the Word
was God', showing that at first God was alone, and the Word in him. Then he
says, 'The Word was God, all things came into existence through him; and apart
from him not one thing came into existence.' The Word then being (a) god, and
being naturally produced from God, whenever the Father of the universe wills, he
sends him to any place..."
Theophilus has painted a picture of the Logos that is similar to that of Tatian.
The Logos was taken from God's "bowels" and came to be a being to himself. He
participates in divinity by being produced from God's substance but he is placed
in a subordinate position coming and going at the pleasure of the Father. Again,
the Holy Spirit is not given the status assigned to the Logos; there is no
indication that Theophilus believed in three equal persons in one God or two
equal persons out of one God.
We come now to the prolific Irenaeus (120 - 202.C.E.?). He provides much insight
on his thinking about God, the Logos and the Holy Spirit as we shall see in
several of his works:
Irenaeus Against Heresies, Book I
Chapter 9: "The fallacy, then, of this exposition is manifest. For when John,
proclaiming one God, the Almighty, and one Jesus Christ, the only-begotten, by
whom all things were made, declares that this was the Son of God, this the
only-begotten, this the former of all things, this the true light who
enlightenth every man, this the creator of the world..."
Chapter 10: "The Church (believes) ... in one God, the Father Almighty... in one
Christ Jesus, the Son of God... and in the Holy Spirit who proclaimed through
the prophets the dispensations of God..."
Book II
Chapter 28:6: "But beyond reason inflated (with your own wisdom), ye
presumptuously maintain that ye are acquainted with the unspeakable mysteries of
God; while even the Lord, the very Son of God, allowed that the Father alone
knows the very day and hour of judgement, when he plainly declares, 'But of that
day and that hour knoweth no man, neither the Son, but the Father only. If then
the Son was not ashamed to ascribe the knowledge of that day to the Father only,
but declared what was true regarding the matter neither let us be ashamed to
reserve for God those greater questions which may occur-to us."
Chapter 28:8: "For if any one should inquire the reason why the Father, who has
fellowship with the Son in all things, has been declared by the Lord alone to
know the hour and the day (of judgement), he will find at present
no more suitable, or becoming, or safe reason than this (since, indeed, the Lord
is the only true Master), that we may learn through him that the Father is above
all things. For 'the Father', says he, 'is greater than I' ... The Father,
therefore, has been declared by our Lord to excel with respect to knowledge..."
From Irenaeus Against Heresies Books I and II, we have learned that
Irenaeus' view was that the Logos was not equal to the Father in knowledge and
that he was the "only begotten", while the Father was "the one God, the
Almighty". Also, Irenaeus saw the Holy Spirit as one that "proclaimed through
the prophets the dispensations of God
We continue:
Irenaeus Against Heresies, Book III
Chapter 6: "...For the spirit designates both. (of them) by the name of God -
both him who is anointed as Son, and him who does anoint, that is, the Father.
And again: 'God stood in the congregation of the gods, he judges among the
gods'. He (here) refers to the Father and the Son, and those who have received
the adoption; but these are the church... of whom he again speaks, 'The God of
gods. The Lord hath spoken, and hath called the earth'. Who is meant by 'God'?
He of whom he has said 'God shall come openly, our God, and shall not keep
silence. That is, the Son, who came manifested to men, who said, 'I have openly
appeared to those who seek me not'. But of what gods (does he speak)? (Of those)
to whom he says, 'I have said, 'Ye are gods, and all sons of the Most High'. To
those, no doubt, who have received the grace of the 'adoption by which we cry,
Abba, Father'."
Chapter 8: "For that all things, whether angels, or archangels,
or thrones, or dominions were both established and created by him who is God
over all, through his Word, John has thus pointed out... so that he indeed who
made all things can alone, together with his Word, properly be termed God and
Lord..."
Chapter 9: "...But inasmuch as he (Jesus) was (a) god, he did not judge
according to glory, nor reprove after the manner of speech..."
Chapter 16:7: "...The only begotten of the Father, Christ, who was announced,
and the Word of God, who became incarnate when the fulness of the time had come,
at which the Son of God had to become the Son of Man."
BOOK IV
Preface: "...On behalf of which I have proved, in a variety of ways, that the
Son of God accomplished the whole dispensation (of mercy) and have shown that,
there is none other called God by the Scriptures except the Father of all, and
the Son, and those who possess adoption."
Chapter 1: "...Therefore, this is sure and steadfast that no other God or Lord
was announced by the spirit, except Him, who, as God, rules over all, together
with his Word, and those who received the spirit of adoption..."
Chapter 6: "...And through the Word himself who had been made visible and
palpable, was the Father shown forth... but all saw the Father in the Son for
the Father is the invisible of the Son, but the Son the visible of the Father.
And for this reason all spake with Christ when he was present (upon earth) and
they named him God."
BOOK V
Chapter 17:3: "Therefore, by remitting sins, he did indeed heal man, while he
also manifested himself who he was. For if no one can forgive sins but God
alone, while the Lord remitted them and healed men, it is plain that he was
himself the Word of God made the Son of Man, receiving from the Father the power
of remission of sins; since he was man and he was (a) god, in order that since
as man he suffered for us, so as (a) god he might have compassion on us, and
forgive us our debts..."
Chapter 18:2: "...The Father is indeed above all, and he is the head of Christ,
but the Word is through all things, and is himself the head of the Church; while
the Spirit is in us all, and he is the living water..."
This last set of quotations from Irenaeus reveals that for him many could be
called "God": the Father, the Logos and those "who have received the grace of
the adoption". The Holy Spirit was not included. Both those adopted and the
Logos are subordinate to the Father, not at all equal to him. For Irenaeus there
is no Trinity and Jesus Christ as a divinity has the Father as his head.
We come now to Clement of Alexandria (145 - 220 C.E.). Clement was originally a
pagan philosopher before converting to the Christianity of his time. One of his
famous pupils was Origen whom we will consider shortly. We now look at Clement's
writings:
EXHORTATION TO THE HEATHEN, CHAPTER I:
"Well, inasmuch as the Word was from the first, he was and is the divine source
of all things... This Word, then, the Christ, the cause of both our being at
first (for he was in God) and of our well-being, the very Word has now appeared
as man; he alone being both god and man..."*
THE INSTRUCTOR, BOOK I:
Chapter 2: "Now, 0 you, my children, our instructor is like his Father, God,
whose Son he is sinless, blameless and with a soul devoid of passion (a) god in
the form of man... The Word who is (a) god, who is in the Father... and with the
form of God is (a) god..."
Chapter 8: "But 'no one is good' except his (Jesus') Father."
THE STROMATA, BOOK 7:
Chapter 2: "For ignorance applies not to the god, who before the foundation of
the world, was the counsellor of the Father. For he was 'wisdom'** in which the
Sovereign God 'delighted'. For the Son is the power of God, as
being the Father's most ancient Word before the production of all things, and
his wisdom."
-------------------------------------------------
* Also in this chapter we read, "And now the Word himself
clearly speaks to this, shaming thy unbelief; yea, I say, the Word of God became
man that thou mayest learn from man how man may become (a) god." Clement thus
does not limit the term "god" to the Father and the Son but extends it to
believers. Irenaeus wrote similarly.
** See Proverbs 8:30.
-------------------------------------------------
Clement of Alexandria argues that the Word was "in God"
originally. This reminds us of Tatian who said that the Word was, at first, in
God and then proceeded from God to assume his own unique identity. His being
"God" or "a god" arises out of his being produced out of God. Furthermore, the
Logos is identified with the "wisdom" mentioned' at Proverbs 8:22-31-and hence
he is seen as having a beginning, a start. Clement of Alexandria, therefore,
believed that Jesus' divinity came out of his being produced from God the
Father; he held that Jesus had a beginning and on that basis, at least as a
distinct "person", was not equal to the Father in time. Little is revealed about
the Holy Spirit in all of this.
The much quoted Tertullian (160 - 230 C.E.) is our next "Father". His
views will sound a somewhat familiar ring. Tertullian penned the following:
THE APOLOGY
Chapter 21: "We have been taught that he (the Word) proceeds forth from God, and
in that procession he is generated; so that he is the Son of God, and is called
God from unity of substance with God. For God, too, is a spirit. Even when the
ray is shot from the sun, it is still part of the parent mass; the sun will
still be in the ray, because it is a ray of the sun - there is no division of
substance, but merely an extension. Thus Christ is Spirit of Spirit, and God of
God, as light of light is kindled... So, too, that which has come forth out of
God is at once God and the Son of God, and the two are one.. In this way, also,
as he is Spirit of Spirit and God of God, he is made a second in manner of
existence - in position, not in nature; and he did not. withdraw from the
original source but went forth."
TERTULLIAN AGAINST MARCION, BOOK 2:
Chapter 27: "With regard, however, to the Father, the very gospel which is
common to us will testify that he was never visible, according to the word of
Christ, 'No man knoweth the Father, save the Son' for even in the Old Testament
he had declared, 'No man shall see me and live'. He means that the Father is
invisible, in whose authority and in whose name was he God who appeared as the
Son of God... (Christ) even in this manner is he our God... uniting in himself
man and God, God in mighty deeds, in weak ones man, in order that he may give to
man as much as he takes from God..."
Tertullian's Logos was generated out of the being of God and because of that he
is God for God is still "in" the Logos like 'the sun is still in a ray'. The
notion of two persons being one God seems inherent in Tertullian's theology. The
Holy Spirit has not arrived to this level in Tertullian.
It may be interesting to compare Tertullian's Logos to that of his predecessors
and contemporaries. Justin Martyr saw the Logos as "another God and Lord";
Tertullian saw them both as the very same God. Tatian saw the Logos as a being
originating out of the substance of God, one who seemed to be a being all to
himself, while Tertullian's Logos seems to be nothing more or less than an
extension of the very being of God. This is also true when we consider the views
of Theophilus of Antioch; his Logos comes from God but is seen as another being
helping God and going wherever he is sent, since he is a subordinate. Irenaeus
is less restrictive with his identification of "God". For him, this term applied
to the Father, to the Son and to adopted believers here on the earth. For
Irenaeus, the Logos is not "God" in the sense he is "God" with Tertullian.
One of the most esteemed "Fathers" now takes our attention; his name is Origen
(185 - 253 C.E.?). He has much to share with us as we shall see:*
PRAYER 15:1
"If we understand what prayer really is, we shall know that we may never pray to
anything generated - not even to Christ - but only to God and the Father of all,
to whom even our Savior himself prayed, as we have already said, and teaches us
to pray. For when he is asked, 'Teach us to pray', he does not teach how to pray
to himself, but to the Father, and to say: 'Our Father, who art in heaven', and
so on. For if the Son, as is shown elsewhere, is distinct from the Father in
nature and person., then we must pray either to the Son and not to the Father,
or to both, or to the Father only. Everyone will agree that to pray to the Son
and not the Father would be very strange, and maintained against the clearest
evidence; and if to both, then we must obviously pray and make our requests in
the plural saying, 'grant ye', 'favour ye','provide ye', 'save ye', and
everything similar in the same way.. But this is clearly incongruous, nor can
anyone point out where anyone has used it in Scripture. There remains, then, to
pray to God alone, the Father of all, but not apart from the High Priest who was
appointed with an oath by the Father..."
-------------------------------------------------
* All of the Origen quotes are from The Ancient Christian Writers - The Works of the Fathers in Translation, Series, Volume 19, "Origen" Translated by John J. O'Meara; Newman Press, 1954.
-------------------------------------------------
PRAYER 15:2
"...And as, if one is to pray correctly one does not pray to him who prays
himself, but rather to the Father whom our Lord Jesus taught us to call upon in
our prayer... He did not say simply,. ask me, or ask the Father: but rather, if
you ask the Father_ anything, he will give it to you in my name."
PRAYER 16:1
"...For the Father can rightly be regarded also as the Lord of his Son, and Lord
also of those who have through him become sons...
EXHORTATION TO MARTYRDOM 29 Part V
(Regarding Jesus' prayer to let this chalice pass from me)
"...But such was not the will of the Father,. which, as compared with the will
of the Son and with the judgment of the Saviour, orders and disposes all things
with superior wisdom."
Clearly Origen's* Logos is not equal to the Father in wisdom or authority and
the Holy Spirit does not enter his discussions on a level with the Logos, let
alone with the Father. Origen's Logos is not "God" in the sense that the Father
is "God".
In J. Nigel Rowe's Origen's Doctrine of Subordination, A Study in Oriqen's Christology, page 7, we note: "It ought to be pointed out that although in Origen's view the Son is the only being who shares the Father's divinity in its fulness, there are other beings - angels and men - who possess that divinity in part. Divinity is thus arranged in a fourfold hierarchy, in which the higher of the inferior types is surpassed by the Word of God, and the Word of God in turn is surpassed by the God of the Universe. In fact, certain beings (i.e., angels) are explicitly stated to have been honoured by God with the title of "God" in so far as they partake of his divinity. In one place Origen points out that "St. John inserts the definite article before the word θεος when that term refers to the αγενητος cause of all things, but omits it when the word is applied to the λογος."
Our next "Father" is Cyprian (200 - 257 C.E.?). We learn this
from him:
THE EPISTLES OF CYPRIAN
Epistle 7:1: "Our Lord did the will of his Father..."
Epistle 7:5: "...And to entreat the Lord himself and then through him, to make
satisfaction to God the Father, we have an advocate and an intecessor for our
sins, Jesus Christ the Lord and our God..."
Epistle 72:18: "How then, do some say that a Gentile baptized,
outside the Church, yea, and in opposition to the Church, so that it be only in
the name of Jesus Christ, everywhere, and in whatever manner, can obtain
remission of sin, when Christ himself commands the heathen to be baptized in the
full and united Trinity* ... and he who blasphemes against him whom
Christ called his Lord and God... The same Father whom he called 'greater' than
himself..."
Epistle 74:22: "...Impious voice blasphemes against the Father and God of Christ
and the Creator of the whole world."
Cyprian's Christ is a divinity but a divinity who has a divinity as his Father
and Superior, being "greater".
The last "Father" that we will consider is Lactantius (240 - 325 C.E.?). His
life bridges us into the Nicene period. What we learn from him is insightful
with respect to the thinking of many in his time:
THE DIVINE INSTITUTES, BOOK 4
Chapter 6: "God, therefore, the Contriver and Founder of all things... before he
commenced this excellent work of the world, begat a pure_ and incorruptible
spirit whom he called his Son. And although he had afterwards created by himself
innumerable other beings, whom we call angels, this first-begotten, however, was
the only one whom he considered worthy of being called by the divine name, as
being powerful in his Father's excellence and majesty... Assuredly, he is the
very Son of God, who by that most wise King Solomon, full of divine inspiration,
spake these things which we have added: 'God** founded me in the beginning of
his ways, in his work before the ages. He set me up in the beginning before he
made the earth'..."
-------------------------------------------------
* A literal translation of the text is: "_____________".
** Proverbs 8:22-31.
-------------------------------------------------
Chapter 13: "...For which reason it was befitting that the Son
also should be twice born, that he also might become fatherless and motherless.
For in his first nativity which was spiritual, he was motherless, because he was
begotten by God the Father alone, without the office of a mother. But in his
second, which was in the flesh, he was born of a virgin's womb without the
office of a father, that bearing a middle substance between God and man, he
might be able, as it were, to take by the hand this frail and weak nature of
ours, and raise it to immortality.."
Chapter 29: "...When we speak of God the Father and God the Son, we do not speak
of them as different; nor do we separate each because the Father cannot exist
without the Son, nor can the Son be separate from the Father, since the name of
Father cannot be given without the Son, nor can the Son be begotten without the
Father. Since, therefore, the Father makes the Son, and the Son the Father, they
both have one mind, one spirit, one substance; but the former, is as it were, an
overflowing fountain, the latter as a stream flowing forth from it; the former
as the sun, the latter, as it were, a ray extended from the sun."
Although Lactantius views the Son as "begotten" of God, a view repeated over and
over with many of the other "Fathers", for him there is a kind of mutual
dependence that exists between the Father and the Son, an equality not seen in
the earlier works that we have studied. A different kind of Son is presented in
Lactantius, one who shares a common essence with the Father. The spirit of a
duality - a partnership of two beings sharing the experience of being God, in
the ultimate sense - is plainly crafted in Lactantius' Christology. As in
earlier works, the Holy Spirit is not presented as an equal partner in the
heavenly abode.
We have attempted to keep commentary to a minimum in this paper in order for the
reader to get a feel for himself about the views of the "Fathers". On our part,
our conclusions are as follows: Following the death of the apostles, in concert
with the prediction of Christ, found at Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43, the Devil went
to work in the "field of wheat", the early Christian congregation. Distortions
to Christian doctrine and practice began early even as indicated by the Apostle
John's solemn warning at 1 John 2:18-24. The doctrine of Christ underwent an
evolution that eventually placed him on a par with the Father. The Jesus Christ,
the Logos, of the First Century congregation was not the one of the late Third
and Fourth Centuries, for sure. And, the notion that there were three equal
persons in one God is not mentioned at all, neither in the Christian Greek
Scriptures or in the "Early Fathers".
With the copies of the works of the "Fathers" before us and Jehovah's Holy Word, we are brought irretrievably to the conclusion that we need not look to the "Fathers" to determine the identity and nature of Christ nor to determine the place and purpose of God's Holy Spirit.
SIDE NOTES TO THE APOSTOLIC & ANTE-NICENE FATHERS
1. From Creeds,, Councils and Controversies - Documents Illustrative of the
History of the Church, A.D. 337-461, edited by J. Stevenson; William Clowes
& Sons Ltd., Publishers; London, 1966:
A. From the Council of Antioch, 341 A.D.:
"We believe, conformably to the evangelical and apostolical
tradition, in one God, the Father Almighty... In one Lord Jesus Christ, his Son,
Only Begotten God, by whom are all things... and in the Holy Ghost, who is given
to those who believe for comfort, and sanctification, and initiation, as also
our Lord Jesus Christ enjoined his disciples, go ye, make disciples of all the
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost
namely, of a Father who is truly Father, and a Son who is truly Son, and of the
Holy Ghost who is truly Holy Ghost, the names not being given without meaning
or, effect, but denoting accurately the peculiar subsistence (υποστασις), rank
and glory of each that is named, so that they are three in subsistence, and in
agreement one." (page 11)
B. The doctrinal statement of the Western Council of Sardica, 343 A.D.:
"...Lately two vipers have been born from the Arian asp, namely
Ursacius and Valens: they boastfully declare themselves to be most undoubted
Christians, and yet they affirm that the Word and the Holy Ghost were both
crucified and slain, and that they died and rose again; and they pertinaciously
maintain, like the heretics, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are of
diverse and distinct hypostases.. We have received and been taught, and we hold
the Catholic and apostolic tradition and faith and confession which teach, that
the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost have one hypostasis, which is termed
'essence' (ουςια) by the heretics.... If he (Jesus) had had a beginning, he
could not have always existed: for the ver existent Word does not have a
beginning.. God will never have an end. We do not say that the Father is the
Son, nor that the Son is the Father, but that the Father is the Father, and that
the Son is the Son of the Father... We affirm that he is truly Son, yet not in
the way in which men are said to be son: for they are said to be sons of God on
account of their regeneration, or of their merit, and not on account of their
being of one hypostasis with the Father, as is the Son. ...We confess that there
is but one God, and that the divinity of the Father and of the Son is one. No
one can deny that the Father is greater than the Son: this superiority does not
arise from any difference in hypostasis, nor indeed from any diversity existing
between them, but simply from the name of the Father being greater than that of
the Son." (pages 16,17)
C. From the Creed of the Long Lines, 345 A.D.:
"...Nor again, in confessing three realities and three persons,
of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Ghost according to the Scriptures, do we
therefore make three Gods: since we acknowledge the self-complete and unbegotten
and unbegun and invisible God to be one. only, the God and Father of the
only-begotten, who alone has being from himself and alone, as an act of grace
confers this on all others bountifully... believing then in the all-perfect
triad, that is, in the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, and calling the
Father God, and the Son God, yet we confess in them not two Gods but one dignity
of Godhead..."
D. The Second Creed (The Blasphemy) of Sirmium, 357 A.D.:
"...No one can doubt that the Father is greater than the Son in honour, dignity,
splendour, majesty, and in the very great name of Father, the Son himself
testifying, he that sent me is greater than I. And no one is ignorant that it is
Catholic doctrine that there are two persons of Father and Son; that the Father
is greater, and that the Son is subordinated..." (page 35)
2. An indication that Church "Father" Hermas believed that Jesus Christ and
Michael the Archangel are one and the same is found at Pastor of Hermas,
Book Third, Similitude 8th, Chapter 3. Hermas is a Second Century C.E. source.
3. Tatian's view of the human soul is found in his Address to the Greeks,
Chapter 13.
4. Irenaeus argues that the human soul is immortal in Irenaeus Against
Heresies, Book 2, Chapter 34.
5. Very important! Note Irenaeus' discussion on God's name in Irenaeus
Against Heresies, Book 2, Chapter 35. One of God's name is "Jaoth".
6. Irenaeus argues that the Father has given up his name for Jesus' name in
Irenaeus Against Heresies, Book 4, Chapter 17:6.
7. Irenaeus discusses the "New Earth" in Irenaeus Against Heresies, Book
5, Chapters 33-36.
8. Irenaeus argues that each creative day was 1,000 years long in Irenaeus
Against Heresies, Book 5, Chapter 28:3.
9. Clement of Alexandria presents a Mormonistic view of man in his
Exhortation to the Heathen, Chapter 1, "...And now the Word himself clearly
speaks to thee, shaming thy unbelief; yea, I say, the Word of God became man,
that thou mayest learn from man how man may become God."
10. Cyprian applied Jesus' words at Matthew 16:18 to groups of bishops not to
one bishop or pope. See the Epistles of Cyprian, Epistle 26.
11. In The Epistle of Barnabas, (c 100 C.E.), Chapter 15, we find,
"Therefore my children in six days that is in six thousand years, all things
will be finished, "and' he rested on the seventh day'". This meaneth when his
Son comes again shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the
ungodly... 'I shall make a ,beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of
another world. Wherefore also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day
also on which Jesus rose again from the dead." The writer evidently viewed each
creative day as one thousand years in length and also refers to the early
practice of having congregational meetings on Sunday, since Jesus was
resurrected on that day.
12. Justin Martyr suggests that Jesus died on a cross in the First Apology of
Justin Martyr, Chapter 55.
13. In Chapter 67 of the First Apology of Justin Martyr, Justin Martyr
notes the practice of meeting on the first day of the week, Sunday, "And on the
day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to
one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are
read, as long as time permits.... But Sunday is the day on which we all hold
common assembly..."
14. In Chapter 6 of the Second Apology of Justin Martyr, the question of
God's name is raised, "But to the Father of all, who is unbegotten, there is no
name given. For by whatever name he be called, he has as his elder the person
who gives him the name. But these words 'Father', and 'God' and 'Creator' and
'Lord' and 'Master' are not names, but appellations derived from his good deeds
and functions. And his Son, who alone is properly called Son, the Word, who also
was with him and was begotten before the works, when he first created and
arranged all things by him, is called Christ...."
15. Justin Martyr discussed 'new heavens and new earth' and speaks of two
resurrections in his Dialogues with Trypho, Chapter 81.
16. In Justin Martyr's Hortatory Address To The Greeks, Chapter 21, he
says this about God's name, "For God cannot be called by any proper name for
names are given to mark out and distinguish their subject-matters., because
these are many and diverse; but neither did any one exist before God who could
give him a name, nor did he himself think it right to name himself, seeing that
he is One and Unique..."
|
