« PreviousContinue »
prebended in the man? In like manner, it is impossible not to infer from the uniform language of the early Christian writers that, according to their ideas, there was originally nothing in or belonging to the Son but what was necessarily contained in the Father.
Passages without end may also be selected from the most approved of the fathers to shew, in the clearest manner, that as the divinity which they then ascribed to Christ was the very same principle which had constituted the wisdom, and other operative powers, of God the Father, so what they called the generation of the Son, was the commencement of a state of actual personality in the logos ; whether in time, as was thought by some, or from all eternity, as was held by others; an opinion which was afterwards received as the established doctrine on the subject.
I shall not produce a tenth part of the authorities that might easily have been selected to prove these propositions ; nor one half of those which I have actually collected for the purpose ; but they will be abundantly sufficient to put an end to all the doubts that can have been entertained on the subject, especially as they will be extracted from writers of the most unquestioned orthodoxy, from Justin Martyr, to those of a very late period in the Christian history.
SECTION II. Authorities for this Opinion from Justin Martyr to Origen.
From a careful perusal of the writings of Justin, I cannot help thinking that he was the first, or one of the first, who advanced the doctrine of the permanent personality of the logos. He seems to write as if this was the case ; and it is also certain, that he was the oldest of the authorities for the pre-existence of Christ quoted by the anonymous author in Eusebius, as will be shewn hereafter. Justin says, " Jesus Christ is the only proper son of God, being his logos, firstborn, and powerful.”* Had he meant any other principle than the very logos which was an attribute of the Father, he would have said a logos, or the logos, and not his logos. But I quote this passage not as the most explicit, but as the first in the writings of Justin in which this sentiment appears. He likewise says,
“ Moses informs us that the spirit, and a
Και Ιησες Χριςομονο» ιδιως υιος τω Θεω γεγεννηθαι, λογο αυτο υπαρχων, και TOW7070kw.nai buvauic. Apol. I. p. 35. (P.)
power which was from God, is no other than the logos who was the first-begotten of God.” Some other characters which Justin imagined the logos to assume are mentioned in the following passage: “ The logos of God is also called his Son. He is likewise called an angel, and an apostle, or one sent by another," quoting the words of our Saviour, “ He that heareth me, heareth him that sent me.” +
But the following larger extract from Justin shews most distinctly that, in his idea, the logos of God bore the same relation to God, that the logos or reason of man bears to man, and that this principle was, in his opinion, the medium of all the divine communications from God to man from the beginning of the world : “ I will shew you from the Scriptures, that in the beginning, before all creatures, God produced from himself a rational power, which is called by the holy spirit, the glory of God, sometimes the Son, sometimes wisdom, sometimes an angel, sometimes god, sometimes lord, and logos. Sometimes he calls himself commander in chief, having appeared in the form of a man to Joshua. He has these names from his being subservient to his Father's will, and from being produced at his Father's pleasure, such as we experience in ourselves. For, on our uttering any word, (that is, logos,) we generate a logos; not that any thing is cut off from us so that we are diminished by that means, but as we see one fire lighted by another, that not being diminished from which it was lighted, but continuing the same. In proof of this, I can produce the word of wisdom, shewing that he is a God produced from the Father of all, being the logos, the wisdom, the power, and the glory of him that generated him; and Solomon says, if I tell you what happens to-day, I will recount things from the beginning. The Lord created me the αρχή, , the beginning, " the way to his works. Before the angels he established me, in the beginning, before he made the earth.” +
Το πνευμα αν και την δυναμιν την παρα τε Θεε εδεν αλλο νοησαι θεμις, η τον λογον, ος και πρωθολοκο. τω Θεω εςι, Μωύσης και προδεδηλωμενων προφητης εμηνυσε. Apol. i. p. 54. (P.)
+ Ο λογο δε το Θεε εςιν ο υιος αυλα, ως προεφημεν και αγελο δε καλείται, και απος ολο αυτος γαρ απαλγελλει όσα δει γνωσθηναι, και απος ελλείαι μηνυσων οσα αγελλείαι, ως και αντο ο κυριος ημων ειπεν, ο εμε ακρων ακ8ει τα αποςειλανίο με. 93. (P.)
1 Μαρτυριον δε και αλλο υμιν, ω φιλοι, εφην, απο των γραφων δωσω, ότι αρχην προ παντων των κτισμάτων και Θεος γεγεννηκε δυναμιν τινα εξ εαυτε λογικην, ήτις και δοξα κυρια υπο τα πνευματG», τα άγια καλειται, ποτε δε υιος, ποτε δε σοφια, ποτε δε αγελο, ποτε δε Θεος, ποτε δε κυριο», και λογο». Ποτε δε αρχιεραληγον εαυτον λεγει, εν ανθρωπά μορφη φανεντα τω το Ναυη Ιησε" εχειν γαρ σαντα προσονομαζεσθαι εκ τε τα υπηρετειν
Here is the whole system of Justin, and of the fathers before the Council of Nice, and also the chief foundation on which it was built. This, however, I shall not stop to examine, but proceed to state the opinions of other Christian writers who followed Justin. Irenæus expresses the same thought more concisely, when he says, “God is wholly mind, and existing logos; what he thinks, that he speaks. His thought is the logos, and logos is mind; and the mind comprehending every thing, is the Father himself.” *
In the following passage of Theophilus we see more clearly than in the preceding of Irenæus, that the logos was considered as being the same thing with the proper wisdom of the Father. “ When he said, let us make man, he spake to nothing but his own logos, and his own wisdom.”+ If the opinion of Theophilus had not been certainly known, it might even have been questioned whether, in writing the above passage, he really considered the logos as a person ; and indeed it is very possible, that, without attending to it, he might revert to the original meaning of the word logos, expressing himself as an Unitarian would have done. But the following passage puts it out of all doubt that this writer considered the logos as a real person, but originally nothing more than an attribute of the Father. Speaking of the voice which Adam heard in Paradise,
“ What is it but the logos of God, which is also his Son, but not as the poets and mythologists think of sons of God produced by copulation, but really considering the logos as being at all times in the heart of God; for before any thing was made he had him for his counsellor, being his own mind and understanding. Wherefore when God chose to make what he had devised, he generated his
το πατρικο βεληματι, και εκ τ8 απο τα πατρος θελησει γεγεννησθαι, [αλλ' ου.] τοιολον όποιον και εφ' ημων γενομενον δρωμεν. Λογον γαρ τινα τροβαλλοντες, λογον γεννωμεν, ου κατα αποτομης ως ελατίωθηναι τον εν ημιν λογον προβαλλομενοι. Και όποιον επι τυρος δρωμεν αλλο γινομενον, ουκ ελατίεμενε εκεινε εξ ου και αναψις γέγονεν, αλλα τα αυτε μενον7ο». Και το εξ αυτε αναφθεν και αυτο ον φαινεται, ουκ ελατίωσαν εκεινο εξ ου ανεφθη μαρτυρήσει
μοι ο λογος της σοφιας, αυτος ων ουτος ο Θεος απο τα πατρος των ολων γεννηθεις, και λογος, και σοφια, και δυναμις, και δοξα τα γεννησανθος υπαρχων, και δια Σολομωνος φησαν7%, ταυλα, εαν αναλγειλω υμιν τα καθ' ημέραν γινομενα, μνημονεύσω τα εξ αιωνΟ. αριθμησαι. Κυριος εκλισε με αρχην, οδον αυτα εις τα εργα αυτ8. Προ το αιωνα» εθεμελιωσε με. Εν αρχη προ τε την γην ποιησαι. Dial. p. 266.
N.B. Alx'ou, line 6, as Thirlby observes, must be a corruption, or interpolation. (P.)
* “ Deus autem totus existens mens, et totus existens logos, quod cogitat, hoc et loquitur; et quod loquitur, huc et cogitat. Cogitatio enim ejus logos, et logos mens, et omnia concludens mens, ipse est Pater. L. ii. C. xlviii. p. 176. (P.)
+ Ουκ αλλα δε τινι ειρηκε, ποιησωμεν, αλλ' η τω εαυτε λογω, και τη εαυτο σοφια. L. ii. p. 114. (P.)
logos, then put forth the first-begotten of all creation, not depriving himself of logos, but generating logos, and always conversing with his own logos."
Athenagoras is not less explicit than Theophilus. He says, “If I were asked what the Son of God is, Í should say that he is the first production of the Father, not as made, for God being an eternal mind, has logos always in himself, being from eternity a rational being, but as going forth, to be the idea and energy to material things of all kinds, which are naturally subject to controul; the heavy and the light being mixed together;" that is, being in a state of chaos. Here is the precise language of Platonism, in which, idea was synonymous to nous, which the Christians called logos. He adds, that " the prophetic spirit confirms this, when he said, The Lord created me the apxm (the principle) with respect to his works ;" + meaning, that the Son, when produced, was the source from which other things were made.
In this passage, as the writer explains what he meant by God having always had the logos in himself, by saying, that he was always aoyixa, that is, a rational, intelligent being, he certainly meant to intimate, that before the generation of the logos, it was the very same principle in God, that reason is in man, being his proper wisdom or intelligence, one of his attributes; and it was never imagined, that there were proper distinct persons in the mind of inan, merely because man is 207tx, rational. The very expression excludes the idea, and must have been intended to exclude it.
Clemens Alexandrinus has been thought by some to favour the Arian principle, of the logos being a creature, made out of nothing; but it will appear by the following passages, that nothing could be farther from his real ideas than that opinion, though the language in which he sometimes expresses the generation of the Son from the Father may be capable of that construction. Speaking of the logos, he says, “ He is the wisdom in which the Almighty delighted: for the Son is the power of God, as he is the most ancient logos of the Father, before all things that were made, and his wisdom, and especially the chosen teacher of those who were made by him.”_"God cannot be shewn, nor can he teach ; but the Son is wisdom, and knowledge, and truth, and every thing of this kind." +
Φωνη δε τι αλλο εςιν, αλλ' η ο λογο και το Θεό, ος εςι και υιος αυτ8' ουχ ως οι ποιηται και μυθογραφοι λεγουσι υιες θεων εκ συνεσιας γεννωμενες, αλλα ως αληθεια διηγειλαι τον λογον, τον οντα διαπαντος ενδιαθετον εν καρδια Θεου προ γαρ τι γινεσθαι τουλoν ειχε συμβουλον εαυτου νουν, και φρονησιν οντας οποτε δε ηθελησεν ο Θεος ποιησαι όσα εβουλευσαίο, τουλον τον λογον εγεννησε προφορικον, πρωτοτοκον πασης κλισεως, ου κενωθεις αυτος του λογου, αλλα λογον γεννησας, και τη λογω αυτου διαπαντος ομιλων. L. ii. p. 129. (Ρ.)
* “ό σαις τι βουλείαι, ερω δια βραχεων" πρωτον γεννημα ειναι το πατρι, ουχ ως γενομενον (εξ αρχης γαρ ο Θεος, νους αίδιος ων, ειχεν αυτος εν εαυτο τον λογον, αίδιως λογικος ων) αλλ' ώς των υλικων ξυμπανίων όποιου φυσεως και γης, οχειας υποκειμενων δικην, μεμιγμενων των παχυμερες ερων προς τα κουφοί ερα επ' αυτοις, ιδεα και ενεργεια ειναι προελθων συναδει δε τω λογω και το προφητικον πνευμα, Κυρια» γαρ, φησιν, εκτισε με, αρχην οδων αυτου you have in yourself, who are a rational creature, not * Αγνοια γαρ ουκ απτεται του Θεου, του προ καταβολης κοσμου συμβουλου γενομενου του σαΐρος αυλη γαρ ην σοφια ή προσεχαιρεν ο παντοκράτωρ Θεος δυναμις γαρ του Θεου ο υιος
Of all the Christian writers of antiquity, none exceeded Tertullian in the confidence which he had in his own principles. He seems to have imagined that there was no difficulty whatever in comprehending them ; and therefore he did not fear to enter into all the minutiæ of them, in order to answer every possible objection or cavil. By this means we are in full possession of his thoughts, as much as if we could now interrogate him on the subject; and as his orthodoxy with respect to the doctrine of the Trinity was never questioned in his own age, we see very clearly what that orthodoxy was. Among a number of passages that I might have selected from him for my present purpose, the following, I imagine, will be quite sufficient.
" Before all things, God was alone. He was a world and place, and all things to himself. He was alone, because there was nothing foreign to himself. But then he was not absolutely alone, for he had with him, and in him, his own reason; for God is a rational being. This the Greeks called logos, which word we translate sermo (speech), and therefore, we, through simplicity, are accustomed to say that sermo was from the beginning with God, when we ought to have preferred the word ratio (reason), because God was from the beginning rationalis (a being endued with reason), not sermonalis (endued with speech), and because speech, consisting with reason, has it as its substance. This, however, makes no difference. For though God had not yet emitted his word, he had it within himself, together with his reason, and in his reason, silently thinking and contriving within himself what he was about to pronounce by his speech. For thinking, and disposing with his reason, he made that speech which he treated with speech. That you may the more easily understand this from yourself, consider, as you are made in the image and after the likeness of God, the reason which
προ παντων των γενομενων αρχικώτατος λογος του πατρος, και σοφια αυτου" κυριως αν και διδασκαλος λεχθειη των δι' αυτου πλασθενίων. Strom. L. vii. p. 703. (Ρ.)
+ Ο μεν εν Θεος, αναποδεικτος ων, ουκ εςιν επιστημονικος, ο δε υιος, σοφια τε εςι και
2355nunantara ya åra, ada TAUTALOlom
Ihid L iv n