Christos Sp. Voulgaris
The
Biblical and Patristic Doctrine of the Trinity
From: The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, vol. 37 (Νov.) 3-4, Holy Cross Orthodox Press, Brookline, Mass., 1992.
4. God
the Father
It is true that God’s quality as
‘Father’ is also found in the religious literature outside the Bible.
Nevertheless, the fundamental aspect is that this quality is based upon
mythical conceptions and a primary act of birth, noting man’s natural descent
from God. Thus, the Ugaritic god ‘El’ is called Father of mankind, and
the Babylonian moon-god ‘Sin’ is called father and generator of gods and
men. This last idea is also found in Homer [vi]
and Plato, who calls him “maker and father of everything (Tim 28C, 41A
etc.).” In Egypt, Pharaoh was considered as God’s son in a special
sense of natural descent. However, in Plato and the Stoics, God’s
fatherhood takes on a philosophical connotation, according to which the
divine is the beginning and the depth of all beings, and the substance of
everything that exists (the divine, the world, and man) is the divine Logos
who sets the order and governs the universe as a cosmic logos. Man
comes to communion with this Logos by his own logos, who is the seed of the
universe. Thus, every man is considered to be God’s son because of the
communion of his logos with the logos of the universe, because of his natural
relationship with the divine.
Things are different in the Bible,
however, where God’s Fatherhood is of a personal character. In other
words, in contrast to naturalistic religions where God’s fatherhood is ascribed
to him by man, who made up the various gods in his own imagination and placed
them in his social and family structures, the Bible stresses the fact that
Fatherhood is an innate quality of God, because He reveals himself in the
Bible, particularly as a Father of his own Son by birth and secondarily as
the Father of men by adoption. Therefore, the naturalistic element is
replaced in the Bible by the divine revelation, which is the model of human
entities and relations. That is, men’s fatherhood and sonship are
expressions and types of the divine Fatherhood and sonship. With
respect to man, God’s Fatherhood is connected with man’s fidelity to Him and
not with His quality as Creator of the universe and himself. This is
why nowhere in the Bible is God said to be the Father of all men, but
only of those who are related to Him by faith, acknowledging Him as their own
God. Thus, Israel alone is said to be
God’s son in the Old Testament; God alone is said to be Israel’s Father
(Exodus 4:22, Deuteronomy 1:31, 8:5, 32:5-18, Psalm 26:9-10, Isaiah 43:6-7,
Jeremiah 31:9, Job 13:4, Malachi 1:6, etc.). This mutual relationship
between God and Israel is based upon God’s election of Israel as his
‘firstborn’ son (Exodus 4:22) and a whole series of God’s acts in history,
which Israel acknowledges by faith. However, this mutual relationship
is not the fundamental principle in God’s dealings with Israel, since God’s
non-incarnate revelation still underlines the distance between them.
The gap was bridged in the New Testament, where we have the actual presence
of Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son and Logos of God, who revealed God’s
innate quality as His own Father.
Indeed, according to the New Testament,
it was Word of God, “the only Son of God who is in the bosom of the Father
(John 1:18),”… “the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15, 2
Corinthians 4:4)” Who “reflects the glory and bears the very stamp of His
person (Hebrews 1:3),” who “became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14)” and
makes known the Father (Cf. Matthew 3:17 par. 17:5 par. 16:16, 27:43, Luke
1:32-35, John 1:34, 10:36, 11:4, 17:1, 19:7, etc.). The authority of
the revelation of the Son rests on His inner relationship and unity with the
Father to the extent that only the Son, Jesus Christ can say, “I and the
Father are one (John 10:30)” and that “the Father is in me and I am in the
Father (John 10:38, 14:10-11).” Thus,
if one knows the Son, he knows the Father, too; only by the Son does one come
to the Father (John 14:6-9, 8:19, etc.). These expressions indicate a
unity between the Son and the Father, which has nothing to do with the Gnostic conception where one person
was absorbed by the other. Rather, the unity between the Father and the
Son is a unity of substance that retains the identity of the persons.
According to the New Testament, God is
the Father of Jesus Christ, His eternal Son in a literary sense. Jesus underlined this by using the Aramaic
expression ‘Abba’ (Mark 14:36) and similar ones by which He stressed the fact
that He is the Son of God, who is His Father in an exclusive way (Matthew
7:21, 11:27, 26:63-64, Mark 12:6, Luke 10:21f, 22:42, 23:34-46, John 3:16-18,
etc.). It is interesting to note that He never used the expression ‘our
Father’ for both Himself and men together. Instead, He used the
expression ‘my Father’ for Himself and the expression ‘your Father’ for the
believers, who were also conscious that God is exclusively the Father of
Jesus Christ. Saying as though He was sent by the Father to whom He
addressed himself and prayed, whom He obeyed in His earthly life, and to whom
He returned at His exultation, exclude any notion of Monarchianism or Arianism,
and underline that He has always been distinguished as a Person from the
Father from the very beginning. It was
these verses upon which the Church Fathers built their theological reflection
in their fight to oppose the intention to identify the Son with the Father as
Persons or to distinguish them substantially and thus reduce the Son to the
state of a creature. The result of this theological controversy was the
invention of the term homoousios by St. Athanasius, which
was also adopted by the Synod of Nicaea (325 A.D.), which underlined the
identity of substance between the Father and the Son and their distinction as
persons.
On the other hand, man’s adoption as son
by God appears in the New Testament as the very purpose of the divine plan of
salvation fulfilled in the coming of Son to the world (Galatians 4:4-7,
Romans 8:14-22, Ephesians 1:3-5). As a creature man cannot be related
to God on account of nature, as in naturalistic religions. The highest
status he can obtain is his adoption as son by God on account of his faith in
Him. In the above passages this idea is presented as the result of the
cooperation between all three Persons of the Holy Trinity, according to which
the word of Jesus Christ in the world is activated within each individual by
the Holy Spirit, to the extent that each individual is able to call God his
own Father, exactly as Jesus Christ does; even to address him by the
expression which Jesus used in order to indicate their close unity, ‘Abba’
(Romans 8:15, Cf. Mark 14:36). Thus, only those “who are led by the
Spirit of God are sons of God” and therefore heirs of God and fellow heirs
with Christ (Rom 8:14-17). This makes it plain why Jesus Christ, as
reported in the Gospel of John, rejected the contention of the Jews saying,
“We have one Father, even God” and replied to them, “You are of your father
the devil (John 8:4ff);” this was because the Jews rejected Him as God’s
Son. Faith in the Son of Jesus Christ is the sine qua non
condition for the divine adoption. As St. Athanasius rightly pointed
out,[vii] “The Jews… rejecting the Son, do
not possess the Father either” because “adoption cannot be secured without
the real Son.”[viii] By adoption man becomes what
Jesus Christ is by birth, so that they are both of the same origin. Thus, Jesus calls the believers His own
brethren (Hebrews 2:10, 11:17). Let it be mentioned, however, that man
is adopted only by the Father and not by any of the other Persons.[ix]
Two points need to be stressed in His
respect:
1)
Man’s divine adoption is of
an ontological character (cf.
Romans 6:3-7, Galatians 3:26-28);
2)
God’s act and man’s condition adoption
refers to the person and not to the substance.
Conversely, it is
common to naturalistic religions and annihilates the value of Christ’s work
and man’s efforts to achieve it. If adoption applied to the substance,
then fatherhood should extend to all three Persons of the Trinity, not to the
Father alone, which is contrary to biblical revelation.
[vi] Iliad, A. 544.
[vii] Saint Athanasius,
Against the Arians, 2.42.
[viii] Ibid, 1.39.
[ix] Cf. Rom 8.14-15 Gal 4.6, Saint Basil,
Against Sabellians, 7. Clement of Alexandria, Paed 1,5.
|