Info

1 <>nsL"t|ucntly, unlikt: [us I ¿ti, irenaeu.H avnids distinguishing t be divine persons in ~lTctlî- that imply subordination but ilike Justin.l uses Lhc^Lj Maries In tm Striplure lu refill? I he Jews who "imagine thai Lhe) cjjuld know Iht: Ta11it: r :••: hinisel". without the Word, Ibal is, willioul 1 hi: Son.""1 At the same li:i:ch Irenaeus also combats Gnostics "■•■.ho vainly des larc that the purpose ut the text "No one knows the Father except the 5on'*(Ma[l I 1:27; I ukc 10:2 2) wn |u introduce a roi her unknown Gcut. Against this, Irenacus declares that the I ogos is the one who was manifest .niJ who, ir this way "chnoscs to reveaî C.od mi thai imi: mighl heco n k kiiiiw 11."- ' \Wïrking sim ultaneously against 1 ■ fFeren: oppi» ien I sn Irenaeu* denies that ' ¡od was humanly visible prior m the incarnat Lu n ol Jesus, which is his way of protecting lit', un.tv of God as well as affirming the divine economy that claimed that ( ■ :"-lI appeared uniquely in Christ for the sake of the world's sakationr This divine imiiai ve tow irI humans did not imply ( lod s mutability, however, sincc <Christ's l i ■ i .1 : ug as human ■.-■■.i,i pari li| Grid's pisti. .\:l.1111 .in;: Fve* fall was nui ,i miscalculation of tht -.Il.iIor an inherent cosmic flaw' rather, i1 was j ntMessary part []fa long and intentional process oil mal u rat inn, l ulTnin:iled ir lhe appearance of y I 35 the ln< arnale l>ne ( in appearand1 Itircvecn in the prnphels) and lo he completed in I he end tient: wilh (he salvific .. isi<>n of < ¡od i Iiill glory.

The way Irenaeus understands rbn.- Word to show forth God is through the agency of creation and in the incarnation—the works of ministry and redemption, as much as through the visions and words seen and \leard hy [ he I lebrew prnpbel h ail d pal ria rch h. \Vas hi ng l he di.h-ci ¡»les1 feet j ml feeding them jr the I Suppet were ways lh..i (iod "Yxerclsed providence"' toward those who earnestly ir^.-Li to behold God, hi-i in iliis way/'niccording i■- = their capacity," Finally, just as the theopkanies of the tiki testament a 11 ou the patt iarchs and prnphels to see and knowi hrist, Iranaeus claims that contemporary i hristianswho -.ri.M^ tke.Ht \Mi\i visiun.H .irl' themselves represented in those ancienl iciis. The t, hurt h appears in ihe i lid Tesiamcni, and ' ïod s redempiion i^ extended to all humanity from creation not to tkose who were horn aftei the time ir Tiberius ( !aesar.;''

Tqrtullian:The Dignity of the Incarnation and the Distinction of the Persons of theTririty

■ ■ ■ " ■ \/f % • f tr s v""■■ v v t -. -,s 7 ■¡"t v v v" ■ ■ ■-■' v » r i-" v .■ ■ ■ t'"v t" x ■ ™ v" -j ■b**"v" v " • .• ~m l-' v ■ ■ " ■■ ■■" ■■■ ■■■" .■ v" .■ v b ■ ■ v" . ■ / ■■ ■■■" ■

Tertullian, like his fellow North African Mi:iu./i.k Felix, rï-.I>uled Hih-l-who worshiped inanimate statues or images of the gods that were fash ioned our of everyday materials. In his Apology, he points out that they ,ir<- merely pieces of matter—'headless1' objects that ' have :i" --en.sc "i t!ll" injuries and disgraces nr their consecrating^ as llu-y are equally unc^iixii't> lit the honors p.iid lo thcm."Tertullian then defends Chris-[iartii against (hosewho pirSC^ute :\m:t. for refusing (O p.irl k

0 0

Post a comment