The webpage at https://carm.org/early-trinitarian-quotes has a few quotes where they are trying to show that the early Church Fathers believed in the Trinity Doctrine. They started off with Polycarp, and then Justin Martyr, but in this post we will look at the words of Ignatius of Antioch:
"In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever" (n. 7; PG 5.988).
"We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.' Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)
Firstly, simply mentioning the three (Father, Christ and spirit) together does not mean they share a substance, essence or ousia, nor does it imply an equality shared in one body. And, if simply mentioning the 3 together ensures triunity, then God, and the Son and the angels must be regarded as some mysterious triad, as they are mentioned together more often, (Matt 18:10,11; Matt 16:27; Matt 24:36; Mk 8:38; Mk 13:32; Luk 9:26; 12:8; Jn 1:51; 1Cor 4:9, 10; 1 Tim:21; Heb 1:6; Heb 2:9; 1 Pet 3:22; Rev 14: 21,22)...or even Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Gen 50:24; Ex 2:24; 3:6, 15,16; 4:5; 6:3, 8; 33:1; Lev 26:42; Num 32:11; Deut 1:8; 6:10; 9:5, 27; 29:13; 2 Kings 13:23; Jer 33:26; etc).
Secondly...do you know what is written before "We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word"? The words "But our Physician is the only true God, the unbegotten and unapproachable, the Lord of all, the Father and Begetter of the only-begotten Son." So here the Father is differentiated from the Son as being "the only true God" and "unbegotten." Remember also that the word "God" had a more ambiguous definition back then:
"The pre-Arian discussion of the Angel-Christology did not turn simply on the question whether Christ was an angel, but on another issue, namely, in what sense could he, as an angel, rank as God. The explanation which was offered by the supporters of the Angel-Christology was that Christ, according to his nature, was a high angel, but that he was named 'God'; for the designation 'God' was ambiguous. The word 'God' did mean, in the first place, the absolute divine omnipotence but it was also used for the beings who served this deus verus [Latin, 'god true'= (the) true God]. That these were designated 'gods' implies reverence and recognition of Him who sent them and whom they thus represented. Consequently in the Scriptures (Exod. xxii, 28), not only angels, but even men could be called 'gods' [cf. Ps. 8:5; Heb. 2:7, 9; Ps. 82:6, 7; John 10:34, 35] without according them the status in the strict sense. Even Latantius [260-330 C.E.] had thought in this way2 ... 2 Latantius, inst. Epitome [The Epitome Of The Divine Institutes], 37."-Martin Werner, The Formation Of Christian Dogma, p. 140.
Thirdly, the writings of Ignatius are largely forgeries. All scholars reject a large part of Ignatius' alleged writings as forgeries, and some scholars even reject them all as forgeries.
As Philip Shaff writes: "The whole story of Ignatius is more legendary than real, and his writings are subject to grave suspicion of fraudulent interpolation." (History of the Christian Church, Vol 2, ch 4)
https://tinyurl.com/yxpghy5p
No comments:
Post a Comment