Particulars
of Christianity:
401
First Eight Writers' Consensus
Addendum 2: Eternal Begetting - Justin
Martyr
Early
Church Confirmation Rubric
Early
Church Consensus: Introduction
1:
Nature of the Godhead
2:
Covenants & O.T. Saints Relationship to the Church
3:
Kingdom (Hell), Timing of 2nd Advent and Kingdom
4-5:
Age of the World (6000 Years); Communion Meal
6:
Baptisms
7-8:
Law of Christ; Repentance
9-12:
Excommunication; Divorce; Sabbath; Tithing
13:
Freewill (A) Against Original Sin and Total Depravity
13:
Freewill (B) Against Unconditional Election
13:
Freewill (C-D) Against Ltd. Atmt.; Ir. Grace, OSAS
14-15:
Church Authority; Roles of Men and Women
16-18:
Charismatic Gifts; Civil Gov't., War; Men & Angels
Addendum
1: Eternal Begetting - Irenaeus and Ignatius
Addendum
2: Eternal Begetting - Justin Martyr
Addendum
2: Eternal Begetting - Justin Martyr
Justin
Martyr also makes numerous statements on this topic, all of
which are best understood as equivalent in meaning to those
of Irenaeus. There are two reasons for this conclusion.
1.
First, Irenaeus himself accredits Justin Martyr as a reliable and
non-heretical teacher of the Christian faith, which itself
implies that Justin did not differ greatly from Irenaeus’
understanding on such central issues as the nature of the
Word. Moreover, Irenaeus quotes
from Justin 3 times, which means that Irenaeus
was familiar with Justin’s writings and, therefore, would
be in a position to know if Justin’s views differed from his
own.
2.
Second, all of the language used by Justin on the topic
of the Word’s begetting is perfectly congruent with the language
used by Irenaeus without anything
significantly different and without any incompatibilities
whatsoever. For these reasons, there is good reason to conclude
that Justin’s view is the same as that of Irenaeus,
even though Justin is less specific and elaborate in his commentaries.
Consequently, Justin also should be understood to believe
the Word was eternally begotten before the creation in a timeless
way, so that the Word was always present with the Father rather
than coming into being at some point as a separate entity.
Justin’s
comments on the “begetting” of the Word can be analyzed as
follows.
1.
First, it must be considered whether or not Justin’s references
to the pre-creation “begetting” of the Word actually indicate
an eternal, timeless begetting, rather than “begetting” in
the sense of the Word coming into existence just prior to
creating all other things. Here it must be noted that Justin
asserts time was created alongside the heavens.
Justin
Martyr –
HORTATORY
ADDRESS TO THE GREEKS
CHAP.
XXXIII. And from what
source did Plato draw the information that time was created
along with the heavens? For
he wrote thus: "Time, accordingly, was created along
with the heavens; in order that, coming into being together,
they might also be together dissolved, if ever their dissolution
should take place." Had
he not learned this from the divine history of Moses? For
he knew that the creation of time had received its original
constitution from days and months and years. Since,
then, the first day which was created along with the heavens
constituted the beginning of all time (for thus Moses wrote,
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,"
and then immediately subjoins, "And one day was made,"
as if he would designate the whole of time by one part of
it), Plato names the day "time," lest, if he
mentioned the "day," he should seem to lay himself
open to the accusation of the Athenians, that he was completely
adopting the expressions of Moses.
This
must be compared to Justin’s comments that the Word was begotten
before all creatures (i.e. all creation).
Justin
Martyr –
THE
SECOND APOLOGY OF JUSTIN
Chapter
VI. 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, ant 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 at first
He created and arranged all things by Him, is called Christ,
in reference to His being anointed and God's ordering all
things through Him…
Dialogue
of Justin –
PHILOSOPHER
AND MARTYR, WITH TRYPHO, A JEW
CHAP.
LXI. "I shall give you another testimony, my friends,"
said I, "from the Scriptures, that God begat
before all creatures a Beginning,(4)[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, then God, and then Lord and Logos;
and on another occasion He calls Himself Captain, when He
appeared in human form to Joshua the son of Nave(Nun).
CHAP.
LXII. But this Offspring, which was truly brought
forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the
creatures, and the Father communed with Him; 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 by God, who has also declared this same thing
in the revelation made by Joshua the son of Nave(Nun).
CHAP.
C. Accordingly He revealed to us all that we have perceived
by His grace out of the Scriptures, so that we know Him to be the first-begotten of God, and to be before all creatures;
likewise to be the Son of the patriarchs, since He assumed
flesh by the Virgin of their family, and submitted to
become a man without comeliness, dishonoured,
and subject to suffering…For [Christ] called one of His disciples--previously
known by the name of Simon--Peter; since he
recognised Him to be Christ the Son of God, by the revelation
of His Father: and since we find it recorded in the memoirs
of His apostles that He
is the Son of God, and since we call Him the Son, we have
understood that He proceeded before all creatures from the
Father by His power and will…
CHAP.
CXXV. …And
that Christ would act so when He became man was foretold by
the mystery of Jacob's wrestling with Him who appeared to
him, in that He ministered to the will of the Father,
yet nevertheless is
God, in that He is the first-begotten of all creatures.
Since
time is a created thing, and the Word was begotten before
all created things, then the begetting of the Word must be
timeless and eternal.
It
is also important to note that for Justin, the term “begotten”
does not necessarily mean “come into being” or “begin to exist.”
In his address to the Greeks, he quotes one of their own stories
about how the Hebrews “worship God Himself, the self-begotten King.” It is
clear that Justin does not mean that God created Himself or
caused Himself to come into existence. This quote demonstrates that
for Justin, the term “begotten” can mean “existing.” In this
case, God is the “self-existing King.” Consequently, for Justin
to describe the Word as “begotten” would not in any way automatically
imply that the Word came into being, just because the term
“begotten” is being used. For Justin, this term can just as
easily mean that the Word “eternally existed” from the Father.
Justin
Martyr –
JUSTIN'S
HORTATORY ADDRESS TO THE GREEKS
CHAP.
XI. For when one inquired at your oracle--it is your own story--what religious
men had at any time happened to live, you say that the oracle
answered thus: "Only the Chaldaeans
have obtained wisdom, and
the Hebrews, who worship God Himself, the self-begotten King."
2.
Second, Justin describes the begetting of the Word as
“peculiar,” thereby mirroring the kind of language used by
Irenaeus who rejected the Gnostics’
sequential generation of divine beings and instead referred
to the Word’s begetting as indescribable. This language is
also compatible, if not indicative, of the eternal-begetting
concept, given that an ordinary “begetting” or “coming into
being” would neither be peculiar or unique or indescribable.
Dialogue
of Justin –
PHILOSOPHER
AND MARTYR, WITH TRYPHO, A JEW
CHAP.
CV. For I have already proved that He was the
only-begotten of the Father of all things, being begotten
in a peculiar manner Word and Power by Him, and having afterwards
become man through the Virgin, as we have learned from
the memoirs.
3.
Third, it is quite arguably the case that for Justin the
“begetting” is not a reference to “how” the Word exists but
a reference to the first time the Word proceeded from the
Godhead into the realm of creation.
In
his earlier discussion of these same points with Trypho, Justin gives additional details explaining by analogy
his understanding of the pre-creation begetting of the Word
by the Father. Justin says that this Word which “God begat
before all creatures” “was a certain rational power from Himself.”
These words potentially imply that the Word existed as a rational
power within God before proceeding from God to create the
world. In this case, the begetting would not refer to the
Word coming into existence, but to the Word coming forth to
create, while the Word would exist prior to that as a rational
power that is part of God. The initial language at least allows
for this, but further statements from Justin seem to corroborate
it.
Justin
goes on to say that, he was “begotten of the Father by an
act of will; just as we see happening among ourselves: for
when we give out some word, we beget the word.” In Justin’s
metaphor, it would appear that the “us” is analogous to the
Father and “our words” are analogous to the Word of God. What
Justin says next is informative about his understanding of
the Word’s eternal existence with the Father. Justin says
that just as “when we give out some word, we beget a word;
yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word in us.” In
other words, before the word came out, manifesting and creating
physical sound, it was first present within us.
Moreover,
Justin points out that the coming forth of that word does
not diminish the existence of the word that was within us.
Just says that likewise the coming for of the Word of God
does not diminish the existence of the Word already within
God. Consequently, it would seem that a complete understanding
of Justin’s view would have the Word both being begotten to
create the world while at the same time remaining in the Father
undiminished by this proceeding forth. The Word then would
exist simultaneously within the Father without being diminished
and also outward from the Father forming the creation.
(It
is also important to note Justin’s use of the word “appears”
in the phrase “appears to exist by itself.” In particular,
it is interesting that Justin does not say that it “exists
by itself” but merely that it “appears” to do so. This implies
that for Justin, the Word does not truly exist apart from
God, but merely appears to do so. After all, in the analogy,
the Word’s substance remains that of God himself. Perhaps
Justin believes that it is the same substance, seemingly physical
separated, but in reality still a singular, shared essence
in unbroken communion with itself.)
If
this is the case, then all of Justin’s references to the “begetting”
of the Word “before all creatures” are merely references to
the Word proceeding from the Father to create and are not
reference to the Word coming into existence, since prior to
proceeding to create the Word already existed as a rational
power within the Father just as our words reside in us before
we speak (or beget) them. Thus, the “begetting” of the Word
might more accurately be viewed as the first time the Word
came into the realm of creation, in fact, even creating that
realm by this very proceeding forth from the Godhead. It was
when this Word, who was formerly within God, was spoken that
he became what Justin calls “a beginning” for creation, literally
bringing creation into being as he is spoken, or brought forth.
Dialogue
of Justin –
PHILOSOPHER
AND MARTYR, WITH TRYPHO, A JEW
(cited
above also) CHAP. LXI. "I shall give
you another testimony, my friends," said I, "from
the Scriptures, that God begat before all creatures a Beginning,(4)
[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, then God, and then Lord and Logos; and on another
occasion He calls Himself Captain, when He appeared in human
form to Joshua the son of Nave(Nun). For
He can be called by all those names, since He ministers to
the Father's will, and since He was begotten of the Father
by an act of will;(5) just as we see(6) happening among ourselves:
for when we give out some word, we beget the word; yet not
by abscission, so as to lessen the word(7) [which remains]
in us, when we give it out: and
just as we see also happening in the case of a fire, which
is not lessened when it has kindled [another], but remains
the same; and that which has been kindled by it likewise appears
to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was
kindled. The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten
of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power,
and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me,
when 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, and before He had made the
deeps, before the springs of the waters had issued forth,
before the mountains had been established. Before all the
hills He begets me. God made the country, and the desert,
and the highest inhabited places under the sky. When
He made ready the heavens, I was along with Him…' …CHAP.
LXII. "And the same sentiment was expressed,
my friends, by the word of God[written] by Moses, when it
indicated to us, with regard to Him whom it has pointed out,(3)
that God speaks in the creation of man with the very same
design, in the following words: 'Let Us make man after our
image and likeness. And let them have dominion over the
fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heaven, and over
the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creeping
things that creep on the earth. And God created man: after the image of God
did He create him; male and female created He them. And
God blessed them, and said, Increase and multiply, and fill
the earth, and have power over it.(4) And that you may not
change the[force of the] words just quoted, and repeat what
your teachers assert,--either that God said to Himself, 'Let
Us make, 'just as we, when about to do something, oftentimes
say to ourselves, 'Let us make;' or that God spoke to the
elements, to wit, the earth and other similar substances of
which we believe man was formed, 'Let Us make,' -- I shall quote again the words narrated by
Moses himself, from which we can indisputably learn that[God]
conversed with some one who was numerically distinct from
Himself, and also a rational Being. These are the words:
'And God said, Behold,
Adam has become as one of us, to know good and evil.'(5)
In saying, therefore, 'as one of us,' [Moses]
has declared that [there is a certain] number of persons associated
with one another, and that they are at least two. For
I would not say that the dogma of that heresy(6) which is
said to be among you(7) is true, or that the teachers of it
can prove that[God] spoke to angels, or that the human frame
was the workmanship of angels.
But this Offspring, which was truly brought forth from the
Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and
the Father communed with Him; 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 by
God, who has also declared this same thing in the revelation
made by Joshua the son of Nave(Nun).
It
is interesting to consider the last portion of the quote above
in light of this concept. The closing portion of the quote
states that before the Word who was “brought forth from the
Father” was first “with the Father before all creatures” and
“the Father communed with Him.” This imagery fits perfectly
with the concept that the Word existed in the Father, just
as our words do in us, before being brought forth (or begotten)
when we speak.
In
addition, it is also interesting that Irenaeus’
seems to have been familiar with Justin’s analogy comparing
the Word of God to the words of men. Irenaeus
also seems to note that the Gnostic heretics had heard of
this analogy also and were taking it too far to the point
where it became heretical. What was too far? What was heretical?
It was the idea, favored by the heretics,
that the analogy to human words indicated that the
Word of God himself had a beginning or came into existence
at a certain point in time, rather than being eternal and
uncreated. Irenaeus even seems to
comment indirectly on Justin himself, indicating that Irenaeus
believes Justin’s analogy to be adequate although insufficient,
yet still acceptable in contrast to the unacceptable views
of the Gnostics. And what about Justin’s analogy does Irenaeus
say is adequate and acceptable? It is the assertion that God
is, in Himself, “all word” and “in
that also He is Word.” Given the similarity, there can be
little doubt that this is a reference to Justin’s assertion
that the Word existed in God before being spoken or begotten.
Both Justin’s analogy and Irenaeus affirm that even before the speaking or begetting
or sending forth of the Word, the Word was already in God.
Irenaeus –
AGAINST
HERESIES, BOOK II
CHAP.
XIII. 3. …he who affirms that He is all
intelligence, and all word, and that, in whatever respect
He is intelligence, in that also He is Word, and that this
Nous is His Logos, will still indeed have only an inadequate
conception of the Father of all, but will entertain far more
becoming [thoughts regarding Him] than do those who transfer
the generation of the word to which men gave utterance to
the eternal Word of God, assigning a beginning and course
of production [to Him], even as they do to their own word.
And in what respect will the Word of God--yea, rather God
Himself, since He is the Word--differ from the word of men,
if He follows the same order and process of generation?
Moreover,
the following quotes from Justin on the topic of “begetting”
should be read in light of the specificity Justin lays out
in this metaphor comparing God’s Word to our words.
4.
Fourth, it is clear that Justin certainly believes that
the Word is God.
Justin
Martyr –
THE
FIRST APOLOGY OF JUSTIN
CHAP.
LXIII. 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 God.
Dialogue
of Justin –
PHILOSOPHER
AND MARTYR, WITH TRYPHO, A JEW
CHAP.
LXI. "I shall give you another testimony, my friends,"
said I, "from the Scriptures, that God begat
before all creatures a Beginning,(4)[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,
then God, and then Lord and Logos; and on another occasion
He calls Himself Captain, when He appeared in human form to
Joshua the son of Nave(Nun).
CHAP.
LXIII. And speaking
in other words, which also have been already quoted,[he
says]: 'Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre
of rectitude is the sceptre of Thy
kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hast hated iniquity:
therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed Thee with the
oil of gladness above Thy fellows. [He hath anointed Thee]
with myrrh, and oil, and cassia from Thy garments, from the
ivory palaces, whereby they made Thee glad. Kings' daughters
are in Thy honour. The queen stood at Thy right hand, clad in garments
embroidered with gold.(6) Hearken, O daughter, and behold,
and incline thine ear, and forget thy people and the house of thy father;
and the King shall desire thy beauty: because he is thy Lord,
and thou shalt worship Him.'(7) Therefore
these words testify explicitly that He is witnessed to by
Him who established these things,(8)
as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ.
CHAP.
CXXV. …And
that Christ would act so when He became man was foretold by
the mystery of Jacob's wrestling with Him who appeared to
him, in that He ministered to the will of the Father,
yet nevertheless is
God, in that He is the first-begotten of all creatures.
CHAP.
CXXVI. "But if you knew, Trypho,"
continued I, "who He
is that is called at one time the Angel of great counsel,(7)
and a Man by Ezekiel, and like the Son of man by Daniel,
and a Child by Isaiah,
and Christ and God to be worshipped by David, and Christ
and a Stone by many, and Wisdom by Solomon, and Joseph and
Judah and a Star by Moses, and the East by Zechariah, and
the Suffering One and Jacob and Israel by Isaiah again, and
a Rod, and Flower, and Corner-Stone, and Son of God, you would not have blasphemed Him who has now come, and been born, and suffered, and ascended to
heaven; who shall also come again, and then your twelve tribes
shall mourn. For if you had understood what has
been written by the prophets, you would not have denied that He was God,
Son of the only, unbegotten, unutterable
God.
CHAP.
CXXVII. …Therefore neither Abraham, nor Isaac, nor Jacob, nor any other man, saw
the Father and ineffable Lord of all, and also of Christ,
but [saw] Him who was according to His will His Son, being
God, and the Angel because He ministered to His will;
whom also it pleased
Him to be born man by the Virgin; who also was fire when He conversed with Moses from the bush.
CHAP.
CXXVI. And what follows in the writings of Moses I quoted and explained; "from
which I have demonstrated," I said, "that He who
is described as God appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to
Jacob, and the other patriarchs, was appointed under the
authority of the Father and Lord, and ministers to His will."
Then I went on to say what I had not said before: "And so, when the people desired to eat
flesh, and Moses had lost faith in Him, who also there is
called the Angel, and who promised that God would give
them to satiety, He who is both God and the Angel, sent by the Father, is described as
saying and doing these things.
5.
Fifth, in Justin’s discourse with the Jewish unbeliever
named Trypho, it is Trypho
who introduces the language “another God” with regard to the
Word. Justin responds using this same language.
However,
it must be noted that Justin’s clearly anticipates that Trypho
will defend himself with a Modalistic model in which the Word is not distinct from the
Father but merely a temporarily extended façade of the Father
that can be retracted like sunlight into the sun.
Consequently,
when Justin adopts Trypho’s phrase
“another God,” Justin simply intends that phrase as representing
the opposing view to Modalism. In
short, as can be seen plainly from Justin’s language, he is
merely arguing for the permanent distinctness between the
Word and the Father, in contrast to the temporary extension
view that Justin anticipates in response from Trypho.
Since
Justin is operating within Trypho’s
language, it should not be concluded that Justin necessarily
intends to convey that the Word and the Father are separate
Beings, merely that they are both Lord and God and that they
a permanently distinct from one another. Moreover, since the
focus of the debate is a Modalistic
model, the most we can conclude about Justin’s position is
that he is not a Modalist.
Dialogue
of Justin –
PHILOSOPHER
AND MARTYR, WITH TRYPHO, A JEW
CHAP.
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
sides the Maker of all things...CHAP.
LVI. "Moses, then,
the blessed and faithful servant of God, declares
that He who appeared to Abraham under the oak in Mamre
is God, sent with the two angels in His company to judge
Sodom by Another who remains ever in the supercelestial places, invisible to all men, holding personal
intercourse with none, whom we believe to be Maker and Father
of all things; for he speaks thus: 'God appeared to him
under the oak in Mature, as he sat at his tent-door at noontide.
And lifting up his eyes, he saw, and behold, three men stood
before him; and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from
the door of his tent; and
he bowed himself toward the ground, and said;' "(1)(and
so on;)(2) " 'Abraham gat up early in the morning to
the place where he stood before the Lord: and he looked toward
Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward the adjacent country, and beheld, and, lo, a flame went up
from the earth, like the smoke of a furnace.'" And when I had made an end of quoting these words, I asked them if they
had understood them. And they said they had understood them,
but that the passages adduced brought forward no proof that
there is any other God or Lord, or that the Holy Spirit says
so, besides the Maker of all things. Then I 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(3) the Maker of all things; who is also called an Angel,
because He announces to men whatsoever the Maker of all things--above
whom there is no other God--wishes to announce to them."
…Then I 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(8)
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."
And Trypho said, "Prove now
that this is the case, that we also
may agree with you. For we do not understand you to affirm
that He has done or said anything contrary to the will of
the Maker of all things." Then I said,
"The Scripture just quoted by me will make this plain
to you. It is thus: 'The sun was risen on the earth, and Lot
entered into Segor(Zoar);
and the Lord rained
on Sodom sulphur and
fire from the Lord out of heaven, and overthrew these
cities and all the neighbourhood.' "(1) Then the fourth of those who had
remained with Trypho said, "It(2)
must therefore necessarily be said that one of the two angels
who went to Sodom, and is named by Moses in the Scripture
Lord, is different from Him who also is God and appeared to
Abraham."(3) "It
is not on this ground solely," I said, "that it
must be admitted absolutely that some other one is called
Lord by the Holy Spirit besides Him who is considered Maker
of all things; not solely[for what is said] by Moses,
but also [for what
is said] by David. For there is written by him: 'The
Lord says to my Lord, Sit on My right hand, until I make
Thine enemies Thy footstool,'(4) as I have already quoted.
And again, in other words: 'Thy
throne, O God, is for ever and ever. A sceptre
of equity is the sceptre of Thy
kingdom: Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity:
therefore God, even
Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above
Thy fellows.'(5) If,
therefore, you assert that the Holy Spirit calls some other
one God and Lord, besides the Father of all things and His Christ, answer me; for I undertake to prove to you from Scriptures
themselves, that He whom the Scripture calls Lord is not
one of the two angels that went to Sodom, but
He who was with them, and is called God, that appeared
to Abraham."
In
fact, Trypho and his associates
were so entrenched in Modalistic
explanations that Justin has to revisit the same issue fifty
chapters later in the discourse.
CHAP.
CXXVIII. "And that Christ being Lord, and God the Son
of God, and appearing formerly in power as Man, and Angel,
and in the glory of fire as at the bush, so also was manifested
at the judgment executed on Sodom, has been demonstrated fully
by what has been said." Then I repeated once more
all that I had previously quoted from Exodus, about the vision
in the bush, and the naming of Joshua (Jesus), and continued:
"And do not suppose, sirs, that I am speaking superfluously
when I repeat these words frequently: but it is because
I know that some wish to anticipate these remarks, and to
say that the power sent from the Father of all which appeared
to Moses, or to Abraham, or to Jacob, is called an Angel because
He came to men (for by Him the commands of the Father have
been proclaimed to men); is called Glory, because He appears
in a vision sometimes that cannot be borne; is called a Man,
and a human being, because He appears strayed in such forms
as the Father pleases; and they call Him the Word, because
He carries tidings from the Father to men: but maintain that
this power is indivisible and inseparable from the Father,
just as they say that the light of the sun on earth is indivisible
and inseparable from the sun in the heavens; as when it
sinks, the light sinks along with it; so the Father, when He chooses, say they, causes His power to spring forth,
and when He chooses, He makes it return to Himself. In
this way, they teach, He made the angels. But
it is proved that there are angels who always exist, and are
never reduced to that form out of which they sprang. And
that this power which the prophetic word calls God, as has
been also amply demonstrated, and Angel, is not numbered [as
different] in name only like the light of the sun but is indeed
something numerically distinct, I have discussed briefly in what has gone
before; when I asserted that this power was begotten from
the Father, by His power and will, but not by abscission,
as if the essence of the Father were divided; as all other
things partitioned and divided are not the same after as before
they were divided: and, for the sake of example, I took the
case of fires kindled from a fire, which we see to be distinct
from it, and yet that from which many can be kindled is by
no means made less, but remains the same. CHAP. CXXIX.
"And now I shall again recite the words which I have
spoken in proof of this point. When
Scripture says,' The Lord rained fire from the Lord out of
heaven,' the prophetic word indicates that there were two
in number: One upon the earth, who, it says, descended to
behold the cry of Sodom; Another in heaven, who also is Lord
of the Lord on earth, as He is Father and God; the cause of
His power and of His being Lord and God. Again,
when the Scripture records that God said in the beginning,
'Behold, Adam has become like one of Us,'(1) this phrase,
'like one of Us,' is also indicative of number; and the words
do not admit of a figurative meaning, as the sophists
endeavour to affix on them, who are able neither to tell nor
to understand the truth. And
it is written in the book of Wisdom: 'If I should tell you
daily events, I would be mindful to enumerate them from the
beginning. The Lord created me the beginning of His ways for
His works. From everlasting He established me in the beginning,
before He formed the earth, and before He made the depths,
and before the springs of waters came forth, before the mountains
were settled; He begets me before all the hills.'"(2)
When I repeated these words, I added: "You perceive,
my hearers, if you bestow attention, that the
Scripture has declared that this Offspring was begotten by
the Father before all things created; and that which is begotten
is numerically distinct from that which begets,
any one will admit."
6.
Sixth, it is also interesting to note the difference between
how Justin describes the Godhead in defense of Trypho’s
potential Jewish Modalism and how he describes the Godhead in defense of Greek
polytheism. Comments from Justin’s discourse to the Greeks
are included under the next subsection immediately below.
For example, Justin’s address to the Greeks begins with the
following comments, focused exclusively on refuting their
polytheism.
Justin
Martyr –
JUSTIN'S
HORTATORY ADDRESS TO THE GREEKS
CHAP.
I. I
think it well first of all to examine the teachers of religion,
both our own and yours, who they were, and how great,
and in what times they lived; in order that those who have formerly received
from their fathers the false religion, may now, when they
perceive this, be extricated
from that inveterate error; and that we may clearly and
manifestly show that we ourselves follow the religion of our
forefathers according to God. …CHAP. II. Whom, then, ye men of Greece, do ye call your teachers of religion? The poets? It will do your cause no good to say so to men
who know the poets; for they know how
very ridiculous a theogony they
have composed,--as we can learn from Homer, your most distinguished and prince
of poets. For he says, first, that the gods were in the beginning
generated from water…So that if
you believe your most distinguished poets, who have given
the genealogies of your gods, you must of necessity either
suppose that the gods are such beings as these, or believe
that there are no gods at all.
It
is in Justin’s discourse with Trypho
that his language operates on Trypho’s
framework and adopts the description of the Word as “another
God.” In fact, during this discourse, Justin uses the “begetting”
to prove the permanent distinction between the Word and the
Father. But in Justin’s address to the Greek, he describes
the Word as the one declared to Moses to be “the ever-existent
God” who “eternally exists, and has no generation,” is “unbegotten
is eternal,” “has no birth,” and “always exists…not one time
only, but [in] the past, the present, and the future.” It
would seem that by necessity, a complete model of Justin’s
view would place him as neither Modalist,
nor Polytheist. His view of the Word rejects the Greek idea
that there were multiple gods and it rejects the potential
Jewish argument that the Word is merely a temporary mode or
façade of god. This contrast would place Justin’s view firmly
within the normal Trinitarian view, that the Word and the
Father are one God, not two, but they are permanently distinct from
one another rather than being mere modes or façades of one
another.
7.
Seventh, the eternal existence of the Word is further
demonstrated by Justin’s assertion that the God who appeared
and spoke to Moses was the Word.
Justin
Martyr –
THE
SECOND APOLOGY OF JUSTIN
CHAP.
CXXVII. Therefore neither
Abraham, nor Isaac, nor Jacob, nor any other man, saw the
Father and ineffable Lord of all, and also of Christ, but
[saw] Him who was according to His will His Son, being God,
and the Angel because He ministered to His will; whom
also it pleased Him to be born man by the Virgin; who
also was fire when He conversed with Moses from the bush.
Dialogue
of Justin –
PHILOSOPHER
AND MARTYR, WITH TRYPHO, A JEW
CHAP.
CXXVI. "But if you knew, Trypho,"
continued I, "who He
is that is called at one time the Angel of great counsel,(7)…For
Moses says somewhere in Exodus the following: 'The
Lord spoke to Moses, and said to him, I am the Lord, and I
appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, being their God;
and my name I revealed not to them, and I established my covenant
with them.'(1) … And what follows in the writings of Moses
I quoted and explained; "from which I have demonstrated,"
I said, "that He who is described as God appeared to
Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, and the other patriarchs,
was appointed under the authority of the Father and Lord,
and ministers to His will." Then I went on to say what
I had not said before: "And
so, when the people desired to eat flesh, and Moses had lost
faith in Him, who also there is called the Angel, and
who promised that God would give them to satiety, He
who is both God and the Angel, sent by the Father, is described
as saying and doing these things.
CHAP.
CXXVIII. "And
that Christ being Lord, and God the Son of God,
and appearing formerly in power as Man, and Angel, and in
the glory of fire as at the bush, so also was manifested at
the judgment executed on Sodom, has been demonstrated fully
by what has been said."
Justin
believes that the Word’s statements to Moses, particularly
the name or title he gives himself in front of Moses, expresses
his eternal existence, specifically including past, present,
and future. Notice that the three separate quotes below all
come from Justin’s address to the pagan Greeks, in contrast
to his discourse with Trypho, who
was a Jewish monotheist.
Justin
Martyr –
JUSTIN'S
HORTATORY ADDRESS TO THE GREEKS
CHAP.
XXI. 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, as He Himself also by His own prophets
testifies, when He says, "I God am the first," and
after this, "And beside me there is no other God."(3)
On this account, then,
as I before said, God did not, when He sent Moses to the Hebrews,
mention any name, but by a participle He mystically teaches
them that He is the one and only God. "For," says
He; "I am the Being;" manifestly contrasting Himself,
"the Being," with those who are not,(4) that
those who had hitherto been deceived might see that they were
attaching themselves, not to beings, but to those who had
no being.
CHAP.
XXII. …For Moses said,
"He who is," and Plato, "That which is."
But either of the expressions seems to apply
to the ever-existent God. For He is the
only one who eternally exists, and has no generation.
What, then, that other thing is which is contrasted with the ever-existent,
and of which he said, "And what that is which is always being generated, but never really is,"
we must attentively consider. For
we shall find him clearly and evidently saying that He who
is unbegotten is eternal, but that
those that are begotten and made are generated and perish(2)--as
he said of the same class, "gods of gods, of whom I am
maker"--for he speaks in the following words: "In
my opinion, then, we must first define what that
is which is always existent and has no birth, and what that
is which is always being generated but never really is.
CHAP.
XXV. …And whatever he thinks fit to tell of all that
he had learned from Moses and the prophets concerning one
God, he preferred delivering in a mystical style, so that
those who desired to be worshippers of God might have an inkling
of his own opinion. For being charmed with that saying of God to Moses, "I am the
really existing," and accepting with a great deal
of thought the brief participial expression, he
understood that God desired to signify to Moses His eternity,
and therefore said, "I am the really existing;"
for this word "existing" expresses not one time
only, but the three--the past, the present, and the future.
Conclusions
on Justin Martyr: Consequently, this further confirms
that although Justin believes the Word was begotten before
all creatures, Justin understood that begetting to be eternal
and timeless so that the Word always exists into past, present,
and future, rather than the Word coming into existence at
a certain point.
Addendum
Conclusions: In conclusion, a thorough analysis of Irenaeus,
Ignatius, and Justin Martyr indicates the following. While
all three men believed that the term “begotten” applied to
the Word’s divine nature, not just to his incarnation, they
did not believe that this “begetting” meant that the Word
was created or came into being at a certain point in time,
not have previously existed. Instead, they believed that this
“begetting” was timeless and eternal, so that the Word was
always generated by the Father, and, therefore, always existed
eternally with the Father. (However, it is more than likely
that Justin’s view of the “begetting” was merely a reference
to when the Word first came forth from the Godhead, having
previously existed within the Godhead, rather than as a reference
to “how” or “through what relationship” the Word exists with
the Father.)
Most
importantly, this eternal-begetting doctrine must be analyzed
in light of the scripture. And on this topic, the scripture
is remarkably clear and simple, in contrast to the complicated
and admittedly “indescribable” abstractness of the “eternal
begetting.”
First,
the authors offer remarkably scant scriptural evidence to
support these concepts. The total number of proofs includes
two scriptural titles for the Word (presented without their
surrounding scriptural context) and Proverbs 8. It is notable
that apart from Proverbs 8, within the writings of these men
there is no scriptural content or episode presented describing
or discussing or necessitating a pre-creation begetting of
the Word. Their concept rests entirely upon a presupposition
about the meaning of terms like “only-begotten” and “first-begotten.”
Second,
each author’s comments on this topic are self-contradicting.
These contradictions themselves occur in three important ways.
Number
one, in other places the authors each affirm the correct scriptural
meaning of the titles and concepts. For instance, roughly
half of the comments from each of the authors on this topic
actually ascribe the terms “begotten” and “Son of God” to
the incarnation and the appearance of the Word in His first
advent, rather than to some pre-creation generation or production
from the Father before the rest of creation. And sometimes
these identifications of the “Son-ship” or “begetting” as
the incarnation occur right in the very same passages where
the author uses the terms “only-begotten” or “first-begotten”
to speak of a pre-creation begetting. In addition, Irenaeus sometimes quotes John 1:18 as saying “the only-begotten
God” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book IV, Chap. XX. 11) but at other times he quotes
the exact same verse with the rendering “the only-begotten
Son” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies,
Book III, Chap. XI. 6., Irenaeus,
Against Heresies, Book IV, Chap. XX. 6).
Lastly, Justin specifically applies the term “begotten” to
God’s declaration to bring forth His Son from Mary’s womb.
Number
two, some of the arguments they offer in favor of this idea
in one place are contradicted by other arguments in another.
Again, Justin provides the pre-eminent example. In one chapter
he declares that there is only one Un-begotten Being, even
saying that it would not even be possible to conceptualize
or detect more than one Un-begotten Being. Justin also specifies
that all other beings, because they are begotten, are corruptible
and perishing. Yet in another chapter, he directly contrasts
the Word as begotten to the Father who alone is Un-begotten.
This dictates that the Word is corruptible and perishing,
not even having in Himself the attribute of eternal, self-existence.
In still another passage, Justin argues that the name YHWH
necessarily means its bearer is Un-begotten, ever-existent,
and without generation from any predecessor. But, as stated
earlier, Justin elsewhere plainly identifies that it was the
Word who identified Himself to Moses from the burning bush,
even though it was at this very encounter that the Word announced
Himself by the name YHWH.
In
addition, Irenaeus sometimes uses
the term “first-begotten” to speak of the Word being begotten
from God before creation but at other times he correctly apply
these phrases in reference to the Word’s elevation to a place
of pre-eminence in inheritance and rank over creation after
his resurrection. But in applying this term to the post-resurrection
elevation of the Word to pre-eminence, Irenaeus
contradicts Justin’s application of this term to the pre-creation
begetting of the Word chronologically before anything else
was created.
Similarly,
Justin appeals to Proverb’s 8, arguing that it was the Word
who said, “The Lord made me the beginning of His ways
for His works (Justin Martyr,
Dialogue Of Justin Philosopher And
Martyr, With Trypho, A Jew, Chap.
LXI.). From everlasting He established me in
the beginning, before He had made the earth.” However, Irenaeus
quotes the exact same statement but argues these are the words
of the Holy Spirit, not the Word, while at the same time distinguishing
the Word and the Spirit as separate from one another (Irenaeus, Against Heresies,
Book IV, Chap. XX. 3.) This
contradiction between Justin and Irenaeus
regarding Proverbs 8 is significant since Proverbs 8 is the
only scripture passage appealed to by either author as a description
of the pre-creation begetting of the Word.
Number
three, when the terms “only-begotten” and “first-begotten”
are both interpreted to refer to the begetting of the Word
before creation, they contradict one another. This is critical
since the mere terms themselves constitute the core of each
authors’ articulation of a pre-creation begetting of the Word.
To put it simply, if the Word is the only, then there are
none after Him. Yet if He is the first and others follow,
then He is not the only. This contradiction obviously results
from interpreting the word “begotten” in both phrases as a
reference to the generation of the Word by the Father before
creation. However, scripture clears up this problem quite
easily in two ways.
First,
in scripture, these phrases are not synonyms, but instead
each describes a separate concept. Second, in scripture, neither
term is used to describe the existence of the divine nature
of the Word. The term “only-begotten” is always used in reference
to the incarnation. The Word literally became a “Son” to God
when he took upon Himself a created human nature, flesh and
blood. Prior to this he was not a “Son” to God because He
Himself was Un-begotten and never experienced any part of
His nature coming into being or being brought into being.
In John 1:14-18, “only-begotten” is used to describe “the
Word made flesh” and dwelling among men.
Conversely,
the often-misunderstood phrase “bosom of the Father” does
not describe some primordial existential relationship between
the Father and the Word but instead an explanatory affirmation
of the Word’s present location. In other words, this phrase
is a counterpart to the similar term “Abraham’s bosom” and,
in John 1:18, it is used by John in acknowledgement that the
ascended Lord Jesus was now in heaven with the Father. And
in John 3:16-18 and 1 John 4:9, the term “only-begotten” is
associated with the Father sending the Son into the world,
and consequently, it undeniably speaks of the incarnation.
(Also see Irenaeus, Against Heresies,
Book III, Chap. XXII, which uses “bosom” to refer to the location
where Jesus while describing the resurrected saints coming
to reside near him and compare to John 1:18 and Matthew 27:51-52,
Ephesians 4:8, 2 Corinthians 5:8, and Revelation 6:9-11.)
But
perhaps the clearest demonstration of what the “Son-ship”
of the Word refers to can be found the first chapter of Luke’s
Gospel. Here the angel Gabriel explains to Mary in very simple
terms that the reason her child will be called “The Son of
the Highest” and “the Son of God” is because “The Holy Ghost
shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow
thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of
thee shall be called the Son of God.” Clearly, according to
the very earliest portions of the New Testament, the term
“Son of God” was applied to the Word, not because of some
pre-creation relationship or begetting from the Father, but
because the Word became man in the womb of Mary by the power
of God the Holy Spirit at the will of God the Father.
Similarly,
the term “first-born” is always used in reference to the elevation
of the Word to a place of pre-eminence as an heir and in rank
over creation after his resurrection. This is seen by the
fact that the term “firstborn” is often rendered in scripture
as part of the phrase “firstborn of the dead” (Romans 8:29,
Colossians 1:15, 18, Revelation 1:5). (The use of “firstborn”
as a title after the resurrection for the Word, such as Hebrews
11:28 and 12:23 must be understood in connection to these
more explicit, earlier usages in Romans and Colossians, not
in isolation from them with an alternate meaning.) Consequently,
the use of these titles by Ignatius, Justin, and Irenaeus
in reference to a pre-creation production of the Word by the
Father is shown to be not only self-contradicting, but plainly
unscriptural.
Having
surveyed and analyzed the totality of comments from Ignatius,
Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus on this
topic, the conclusion is simple. Their assertion that the
Word was eternally begotten by the Father before the rest
of creation cannot and should not be accepted.
