THE 2nd CENTURY "CHRISTOLOGY" OF THE APOLOGIST'S AND THE RISE OF 2nd-3rd CENTURY "MODALISM"
James
Leonard Papendrea, in his: “Novatian of Rome - The Culmination
of Pre-Nicene Orthodoxy,” (See http://www.jimpapandrea.com/), made some thought provoking comments
about the second century Apologists: “Logos Christology.”
He
brought up, the common concept they, (the Apologists), seem to have
shared about the Logos.
Some
of them, (Athenagoras of Athens, Justin the Samaritan Philosopher and
Martyr, Tatian of Syria, Theophilus of Antioch, Tertullian of
Carthage), taught that the Logos resided within the Father as an
undifferentiated part of the Father's mind, thought, or
intelligence. Meaning, originally, (among the Apologists at least),
the Logos was not considered as a real, and different, distinct, or
separate person to the Father, (thus un-differentiated). That the
Logos only existed potentially, (but not in the later sense
that Nicene so-called "Orthodoxy" understood it), but as
all creation did, (i.e. potentially), before they were actually
created, within the Father's mind as an IM-PERSONAL concept.
They
also taught that the Logos did not become: "the Son," (as a
real separate and different person to the Father), until his
instantaneous temporal: “generation,” (actually “creation” =
in my opinion), and subsequent, (in some cases simultaneous):
“procession” “from out of” the Father's intelligence, mind,
and power, by an act of, and as: “a work” of His, (i.e. the
Father's), singular will.
And
also, because the likes of Justin, Tatian, Theophilus, Tertullian
etc, sometimes blurred the identity of “the spirit” with:
“the Logos,” (= again undifferentiated as a separate
person or identity from “the holy spirit” in this case), thus,
they, in some cases, appeared to identify the “the holy
spirit,” and: “the Logos,” as one and the same person, (see
also the same earlier in Ignatius of Antioch and the Shepherd of
Hermas).
So,
in brief summary:
[1.]
The Son was not differentiated from the Father as a
separate person before his generation by some.
[2.]
The Son was not differentiated from the spirit as a
separate person post his generation by some.
He
remarked, that these ideas, found in their, (generally considered as
“Orthodox”), works and teaching, may
have, at least in part, contributed to the rise of 2nd-3rd century
“Modalism.” A prominent Post-Death-Of-The-Apostles
confusion heresy that took 2-IN-1 and 3-IN-1 forms.
I
found that an interesting thought. Perhaps, this gives you something
to think about.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
P.S. This does not necessarily mean I agree with the information, and/or religious views in J. L. Papandrea's book. He also gives some good information on the Mutability, (ability to change), of the Logos, vs the Im-mutability, (in-ability to change), of the Father as well. There were just isolated points in the book that got me thinking.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
P.S. This does not necessarily mean I agree with the information, and/or religious views in J. L. Papandrea's book. He also gives some good information on the Mutability, (ability to change), of the Logos, vs the Im-mutability, (in-ability to change), of the Father as well. There were just isolated points in the book that got me thinking.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Comments
Post a Comment