5. Justin. Dial. cum Tryph. 56. p. 152. The next quotation requires us to bear in mind what I mentioned in my former work, (No. 23.) that whenever God is said in the Old Testament to have revealed himself, or to have been seen by any person, it was not the Father, but the Son. Justin, as I then stated, is very diffuse in establishing this position: and many of the passages which are thus explained compel us to conclude, that he applied the term God to the Son in the fullest and highest signification. He now shews that he did not understand this manifestation of the Father by the Son in a Sabellian sense: and though theology had not yet employed any Greek term equivalent to person, he sufficiently expresses the distinct personality of the Father and the Son. 66 66 Returning to the Scriptures, I will endeavour "to persuade you, that this God, who is said in the Scriptures to have been seen by Abraham and "Jacob and Moses, is a different Being from the "God who created the universe; I mean different "in number, (or numerically,) but not in counsel: "for I affirm, that he never did any thing, except "what the Creator himself, above whom there is "no other God, wished him to do or to say b." The word person, as I have observed, not having yet come into use in this sense, Justin could hardly have employed any other which would more plainly convey an idea of distinct individuality than aproμão, b Ἐπὶ τὰς γραφὰς ἐπανελθὼν, πειράσομαι πεῖσαι ὑμᾶς, ὅτι οὗτος ὅ τε τῷ ̓Αβραὰμ καὶ τῷ Ἰακὼβ καὶ τῷ Μωσεῖ ὦφθαι λεγόμενος καὶ γεγραμμένος Θεὸς ἕτερός ἐστι τοῦ τὰ πάντα ποιήσαντος Θεοῦ, ἀριθμῷ λέγω, ἀλλ ̓ οὐ γνώμῃ· οὐδὲν γάρ φημι αὐτὸν numerically. The following passages will also shew that something like Sabellianism had already been maintained, but that Justin was decidedly opposed to it. "The Jews, who think that it was always "the Father of the universe who talked with Moses, "whereas the person who spoke to him was the Son "of God, who is also called an angel and apostle, "are justly convicted of knowing neither the Fa"ther nor the Son: for they who say that the Son "is the Father, are convicted of neither understanding the Father, nor of knowing that the Father of 66 the universe has a Son, who also being the first"born Logos of God, is likewise God." He speaks still more plainly in the following passage: "I am 66 aware that there are some who wish to meet this 66 66 66 by saying, that the power which appeared from "the Father of the universe to Moses, or Abraham, or Jacob, is called an angel in his coming among men, since by this the will of the Father is made "known to men: he is also called Glory, since he " is sometimes seen in an unsubstantial appearance: "sometimes he is called a man, since he appears "under such forms as the Father pleases: and they "call him the Word, since he is also the bearer of messages from the Father to men. But they say, "that this power is unseparated and undivided from "the Father, in the same manner that the light of "the sun when on earth is unseparated and un"divided from the sun in heaven; and when it sets, "the light is removed with it: so the Father, they "say, when he wishes, makes his power go forth; "and when he wishes, he brings it back again to " himself. In this same manner, according to their 66 c Apol. I. 63. p. 81. "doctrine, he also made the angelsd." This is little else than Sabellianism: and Justin shews his own opinion of such an irrational hypothesis when he goes on to say, " But that there are angels, and that 66 they continue always to exist, and are not resolved "into that out of which they were produced, has "been proved above: and I have also proved at "some length, that this power, which the pro 66 phetical language speaks of as God, and as an "angel, has not a mere nominal enumeration like "the light of the sun, but also in number [i. e. in “numerical individuality] is something differente.” We have here the same term, apiμ, used, as I have explained it, for numerical individuality: and though the sun, and the light proceeding from the sun, are not in fact one and the same, yet Justin says, that the Father and the Son are still more numerically distinct: which demonstrably proves that he was entirely opposed to the Sabellian hypothesis: and his conclusion of this part of the argument is, that "that which is begotten is numerically dif"ferent from that which begets itf." He nevertheless made use of the analogy of the sun and its effulgence to illustrate the manner in which the Son proceeded from the Father: and the persons who anticipated Sabellius replied to his argument by saying, that the substance of the Father was thus divided into two. To which Justin answers, "have explained in a few words before, that this d Dial. cum Tryph. 128. p. 221. • Καὶ ὅτι δύναμις αὕτη, ἣν καὶ Θεὸν καλεῖ ὁ προφητικός Λόγος, διὰ πολλῶν ὡσαύτως ἀποδέδεικται, καὶ ἄγγελον, οὐχ ὡς τὸ τοῦ ἡλίου φῶς ὀνόματι μόνον ἀριθμεῖται, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀριθμῷ ἕτερόν τι ἐστί. The term ἀριθμῶ is thrice used in a similar sense in §. 129. p. 222. 4 Τὸ γεννώμενον τοῦ γεννῶντος ἀριθ μῶ ἕτερόν ἐστι. "Power was begotten by the Father, by his power "and will, and not by being severed from him, as 66 if the substance of the Father was divided in the same manner as all other things which are divided "and severed are not the same as they were before 66 66 66 66 they were severed: and I used as an example the "fires lighted from another fire, which we see to be "different, though that from which many may be "lighted is not diminished, but continues the same." The passage to which he alludes was probably this, As in the case of fire, we see another fire produced, though that from which it is lighted is not diminished, but continues the same; and that which is lighted from it appears to have its own existence, "without diminishing that from which it was lighted." Tatian, the disciple of Justin Martyr, made use of the same illustration to express the generation of the Soni: but I shall not dwell longer upon this part of the subject, which has been so profoundly investigated by bishop Bullk; and I have only noticed these expressions in the writings of the fathers, as shewing that they believed the Son to be of the same nature or substance with the Father, and yet to be personally distinct from him. 66 g -εἰπὼν τὴν δύναμιν ταύτην γεγεννῆσθαι ἀπὸ τοῦ Πατρὸς δυνάμει καὶ βουλῇ αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ ̓ οὐ κατ ̓ ἀποτομὴν, ὡς ἀπομεριζομένης τῆς τοῦ Πατρὸς οὐσίας, ὁποῖα τὰ ἄλλα πάντα μεριζόμενα καὶ τεμνόμενα, οὐ τὰ αὐτά ἐστιν ἃ καὶ πρὶν τμηθῆναι· καὶ παραδείγματος χάριν παρειλήφειν τὰ ὡς ἀπὸ πυρὸς ἀναπτόμενα πυρὰ ἕτερα ὁρῶμεν, οὐδὲν ἔλαττουμένου ἐκείνου ἐξ οὗ ἀναφθῆναι πολλὰ δύνανται, ἀλλὰ ταὐτοῦ μένοντος. Pag. 221, 222. h Καὶ ὁποῖον ἐπὶ πυρὸς ὁρῶμεν ἄλλο γινόμενον, οὐκ ἐλαττουμένου ἐκείνου ἐξ οὗ ἡ ἄναψις γέγονεν, ἀλλὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ μένοντος, καὶ τὸ ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἀναφθὲν καὶ αὐτὸ ὂν φαίνεται, οὐκ ἐλαττῶσαν ἐκεῖνο ἐξ οὗ ἀνήφθη. Dial. cum Tryph. 61. p. 158. i Orat. c. Græcos, 5. p. 247, 248. k Def. Fid. Nic. II. 4. ATHENAGORAS, A. D. 170. 6. Athenag. Legat. pro Christianis, c. 10. p. 286-7. The following passage, which was written towards the end of the second century, may surprise those persons who have allowed themselves to believe that the mystery of the Trinity is a recent invention. Athenagoras is explaining the belief of the Christians in the Father and the Son, and after stating the latter to be the Logos of the Father, which Logos is either in the mind, or displayed in the action, he adds, "For all things were made by “him and through him, the Father and the Son being one and since the Son is in the Father, "and the Father in the Son, by the unity and power of the Spirit, the Son of God is the Mind "and Word of God." This passage is followed shortly after by that which I have quoted at p. 22. where Athenagoras says, "We speak of the Father "as God, and the Son as God, and the Holy Ghost, shewing at the same time their power in unity, " and their distinction in order." 66 66 66 7. Athenag. Legat. pro Christianis, c. 12. p. 289. The following passage is still more remarkable, in which Athenagoras, after contrasting the expectations of a future life, which the heathen could have, with the sure and certain hope of a Christian, observes," But we who look upon this present life as "worth little or nothing, and are conducted through "it by the sole principle of knowing God and the "Word proceeding from him, of knowing what is 1 Πρὸς αὐτοῦ γὰρ καὶ δι ̓ αὐτοῦ πάντα ἐγένετο, ἑνὸς ὄντος τοῦ Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ· ὄντος δὲ τοῦ Υἱοῦ ἐν Πατρὶ, καὶ Πατρὸς ἐν Υἱῷ, ἑνότητι καὶ δυνάμει Πνεύματος, νοῦς καὶ Λόγος τοῦ Πατρὸς, ὁ Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ. For the explanations of this passage I would refer to Bull, Def. Fid. Nic. II. 4, 9. and Waterland, vol. III. p. 72. |