Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

the substance of the Father undergo change, though it hath the Son for the image of itself." (Athanas. de Decret. Syn. Nicen., sect. xxv., T. i., p. 230.)

METHODIUS. A. D. 290.

Bishop of Tyre, and author of a work entitled, The Banquet of the Ten Virgins, from which the following is an extract:

94. "Thou art my beloved Son, this day have I begotten thee. It is to be noted that he proclaims him as the Son, indefinitely and without specification of time. For he says to him, not Thou hast become, but Thou art making it manifest that he had neither lately obtained adoption, nor was one who, though pre-existent, would afterwards have an end; but having been begotten before, both would be and was the same." (Method. Sympos., p. 387.)

LACTANTIUS. A.D. 306.

This series of passages will be concluded, not inappropriately, with a few extracts from the writings of this eloquent and justly celebrated layman. That he is not distinguished for theological accuracy may readily be granted; but this circumstance does not detract from the value of his testimony, since it shows that the doctrine in question was well known and fully acknowledged even by some who were not well informed upon evangelical truth in general, and so far renders the evidence of more value than that of an accomplished and profound theologian.

95. "God begat a Spirit pure and incorruptible, whom he announced as his Son. And though, by him, he afterwards created innumerable others, whom we call angels, yet him alone, his first begotten, did he

dignify by the distinction of the divine name; and him the testimonies of the Prophets unite to declare the Son of the supreme God, abounding with the paternal power and majesty, and endowed with the loftiest prerogatives." He then proceeds to cite, among other authors, the Sibylline oracles, a forgery probably of the apostolic period, and therefore not inappropriate, as subsidiary evidence, on the doctrines then received. passages quoted by Lactantius is,

One of the

“ Αὐτὸν σὸν γίνωσκε Θεὸν, Θεοῦ υἱὸν ἐόντα.”
"Acknowledge him thy God, who is the Son of God."

To these he adds, Prov. viii. 22, &c. (Divin. Instit., lib. iv., c. vi., pp. 181, 182.)

96. "How then is he begotten? The divine operations can neither be known nor related by any one; yet do the sacred Scriptures [thus far] instruct us, in which we have the information that he, the Son of God, is the Word of God." (Ib., c. viii., p. 184.)

97. "Of the first nativity of the Word, I have spoken thus briefly as I was able. Of the second, as the controversy respecting it is greater, it will be needful to treat more at large. In the first place, such from the beginning was the divine arrangement, that it was necessary that the Son of God should descend to earth, that he might build a temple to God, and teach [man] righteousness." (lb., c. ix., x., p. 186.)

98. "In his first spiritual nativity, the Son was aμýrWP, without mother, because begotten of God the Father alone. But in his second and fleshly nativity, he was áráτwp, without father, because, without the intervention of a father, he was conceived in the womb of the Virgin. By the Spirit he was Son of God, by the flesh, son of man; that is, both God and man.” (Ib., c. xiii., p. 193.)

99. "When we speak of God the Father and God the

Son, we do not speak of a different God, nor do we divide either; for neither can the Father be without the Son, nor can the Son be separated from the Father; since neither can the Father be declared without the Son, nor the Son begotten without the Father. When, therefore, the Father is connected with the Son, and the Son with the Father, there is but one mind of either, one spirit, one substance. The one is as the exuberant fountain, the other as the river flowing from it; the one is as the sun, the other as a ray extended from the sun; who, inasmuch as he is faithful and dear to the supreme Father, is not separated, as neither is a river from the fountain, nor a ray from the sun; because the water of the fountain is in the river, and the light of the sun is in the ray." (Ib., c. xxix., p. 230.)

100. "Since the mind and will of either is in the other, or rather, since both are one, both are justly called the one God; because, whatever is in the Father, flows forth to the Son, and whatever is in the Son, descends from the Father.-He who receives the Son and bears his name, he worships the Father together with the Son; for the Son is the ambassador, and messenger, and High Priest of the sovereign Father. He is the gate of the most illustrious temple, he the way of light, he the leader of salvation, he the door of life.” (Ib., p. 231.)

From the evidence now adduced, we gather the following opinions of the ante-Nicene fathers :

1. That the title "Son of God" describes our Lord's pre-existent and eternal nature; and includes the sovereign attributes of Deity.

2. That the filiation of Christ is the proper evidence of his true Divinity.

3. That the titles "Word" and "Son" are kindred in sense, and identical in application.

4. That to Christ, as the Word, is to be attributed a divine geniture.

5. That the Sonship of our Redeemer is a relation, proper, natural, and divine; the result of his having been, truly and before all worlds, begotten of the substance of the Father.

SECTION V.

TESTIMONY FROM ANCIENT CREEDS, &c.

It was one of the paradoxical opinions of Dr. Priestley, that the sense of the primitive church upon Christian doctrine was essentially at variance with that of its Ministers and leading Theologians. Thus did he endeavour to elude the evidence on the Deity of Christ derived from the writings of antiquity. An opinion thus essentially absurd was not likely to command extensive credence; but, combined with other considerations, it shows the desirableness of ascertaining on disputed doctrines the judgment of the church, as well as that of its Doctors. For this purpose the appeal to ancient creeds is convenient and obvious.

The creeds of the early ages were professions of faith made by converts at baptism; and, from the very beginning, extemporary statements of this sort were probably required. When they had assumed an established form, they appear to have been employed by Christians as secret tokens for mutual recognition; and hence, it has been plausibly suggested, arose the name SYMBOLUM, by which among ancient writers they are commonly described. This latter use, however, could not have been of long continuance; since where the initiated were so numerous, the maintenance of the requisite secrecy was not to be expected.

*

Another important purpose of the ancient creeds, though of later date, was to provide a standard of doctrine, especially as available against rising heresies. And to this circumstance is to be traced the considerable diversity observable in these formulas. Originally, indeed,

See Rufinus Exposit, in Symbol, sect. ii., and King's History of the Creed, pp. 8, et seq.

« ForrigeFortsæt »