Yup, the unproblematic identification with the Sophia of the LXX in Proverbs 8 and the Logos is really, in my book, very strong evidence that the heteroousians were actually "traditional" when it came to chirstology/theology proper.
"There was then, a Word importing an unbeginning eternity; as also the Word itself, that is, the Son of God, who being, by equality of substance, one with the Father, is eternal and uncreated." (Fragments, Part I, section III)
"that so great a work was accomplished in so brief a space by the Lord, who, though despised as to appearance, was in reality adored, the expiator of sin, the Saviour, the clement, the Divine Word, He that is truly most manifest Deity, He that is made equal to the Lord of the universe; because He was His Son, and the Word was in God, not disbelieved in by all when He was first preached, nor altogether unknown when, assuming the character of man, and fashioning Himself in flesh, He enacted the drama of human salvation: for He was a true champion and a fellow-champion with [ie. God among creatures, not that Jesus is classed as a creature] the creature." (Exhortations, Chap 10)
"Despised as to appearance but in reality adored, [Jesus is] the Expiator, the Savior, the Soother, the Divine Word, he that is quite evidently true God, he that is put on a level with the Lord of the universe because he was his Son." (Exhortation to the Greeks, 10:110:1).
"Now the Stoics say that God, like the soul, is essentially body and spirit. You will find all this explicitly in their writings. Do not consider at present their allegories as the gnostic truth presents them; whether they show one thing and mean another, like the dexterous athletes, Well, they say that God pervades all being; while we call Him solely Maker, and Maker by the Word. They were misled by what is said in the book of Wisdom: 'He pervades and passes through all by reason of His purity;' since they did not understand that this was said of Wisdom, which was the first of the creation of God (SOFIAS THS PRWTOKTISTOU TWi QEWi)" (_Stromata_ 5.14).
Compare _Stromata_ 6.7, where Clement also uses the Greek term PRWTOKTISTOS for Wisdom or LOGOS.
I've onlny found in 6.7 "μηνύων τὸν πρωτόγονον υἱὸν" translates to "indicating/mentioning the firstborn son", and "πρώτης καταβολῆς" refers to "first foundation" or "original foundation," often translated as "from the foundation of the world" in many Christian texts. It's a phrase that suggests the beginning of time or the very start of the world's existence, often used to emphasize something's ancient or primordial nature.
observation: Ninc is obsessed with Jesus never being called a "creature" but no one here (Me, Edgar or the Witnesses) Hold that position - to say Christ is a mere creature would be putting him on a level where he is not.
However it cant be denied that "First-created" was applied (along with Firstborn of the dead) shows we should understand both meanings (as numerous scholars now concede, though refuse to adjust their beliefs)
A not "mere creature" is still a creature, but the Son is not a creature, but the only-begotten God.
"However it cant be denied that "First-created" was applied"
I'm still waiting for the clarification of the source, since in the Clementine text, not the Son, but Wisdom is called πρωτόκτιστος, but even if it's true: - the ambiguous word 'ktizo', calling Jesus 'ktisma' does not necessarily mean what you want to see in it - not every expression that sounds like a heretic proves an actualy heresy, one part of a sentence cannot be extracted from the work of the given church father, e.g. if Clement openly proclaims that Jesus is real God, then this is relevant - this does not prove a universal belief that a single witness is not a witness (unus testis nullus testis), a biblical rule - the concept of created Wisdom is known also for Augustine, but it is not identified with the person of the Son.
"shows we should understand both meanings"
The birth/generation of the Son from the Father is not synonymous with creation/being made, since these are not just different words, but the underlying meaning must be seen.
"A not "mere creature" is still a creature" - yet you use a different rhetoric in other places.. isreal is apparently not a nation (Num 23:9), despite me finding multiple commentaries saying it didn't class itself as idolotrous. i.e did not consider themselves among the nations.
"- the concept of created Wisdom is known also for Augustine, but it is not identified with the person of the Son." - loads of sources say otherwise.. and the important thing is what does Clement mean by "God" - you assume he means the only true God, but that might not be the case.
" the Son from the Father is not synonymous with creation/being made, since these are not just different words, but the underlying meaning must be seen." - yet we see they are all used basically synonomysly by early Christians
"the ambiguous word 'ktizo', calling Jesus 'ktisma' does not necessarily mean what you want to see in it" - Iv looked, and to my knowledge Ktizo is always used for divine creation after Gen 14 (Lxx) and is never used when placing someone in a position
"the concept of created Wisdom is known also for Augustine, but it is not identified with the person of the Son." - I have just discovered by my own research this is another misleading argument and is not entirely true.
John Patrick observed with respect to Clement of Alexandria’s use of such terms:
“Clement repeatedly identifies the Word with the Wisdom of God, and yet he refers to Wisdom as the first-created of God; while in one passage he attaches the epithet ‘First-created,’ and in another ‘First-begotten,’ to the Word. But this seems to be rather a question of language than a question of doctrine. At a later date a sharp distinction was drawn between ‘first-created’ and ‘first-born’ or ‘first-begotten,’ but no such distinction was drawn in the time of Clement.” (Clement of Alexandria), p. 103
It's a fair question, since I can't find πρωτόκτίσις in that writing, either.
I wonder if there are textual issues with Stromata 6.7 that could account for the fact that πρωτόκτίσις was purportedly found when the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae was searched, yet it's not in the copy of the writing found at the above link.
I will do more looking: that citation may just be mistaken, but the "first-created" language certainly appears in Stromata 5. See the image affixed to this blog post for the exact reference.
See John Patrick's book about Clement, page 103, which Duncan also quoted. He points out that Clement calls Christ (the Word/Wisdom of God), "First-begotten" in Stromata 6 and "First-created" in Stromata 5. Yet Patrick contends that Clement wasn't making a sharp distinction between the terms.
"See John Patrick's book about Clement, page 103, which Duncan also quoted. He points out that Clement calls Christ (the Word/Wisdom of God), 'First-begotten' in Stromata 6 and 'First-created' in Stromata 5. Yet Patrick contends that Clement wasn't making a sharp distinction between the terms."
Right, that's the quote that I'd like to validate myself. I'd like to quote Clement himself in discussions to illustrate the point Patrick makes. I guess I need to search Stromata 5 rather than Stromata 6.
If you can enlarge the image I posted to this blog entry, you will see the exact place in Stromata 5 where protokistos occurs. The word to look for in Stromata 6 is protogonos, I believe. That is, first-begotten. To be honest, I always found Migne a pain to search. New Greek texts make it much easier to find passages.
I see where the problem is here: 1. Clement in Stromata 5 calls Wisdom πρωτόκτιστος. 2. According to Clement, Christ is the Wisdom of God.
To draw the conclusion from this by means of a syllogism that, according to Clement, Christ is the first creation of God is rather hasty and even unfounded.
1. πρωτόκτιστος does not necessarily mean "the one who is the first to be created ever". It can also be translated as ancient, first (thus pre-eminent) compared (relative) to creatures. The verb 'ktizo' itself and the expressions formed from it also have a wide range of nuances. Rather, it emphasizes his unique role in the divine economy of creation and redemption.
2. We've known since Bill Clinton that a lot depends on "what the meaning of the word 'is' is." That "Christ is the wisdom of God", the "is" does not necessarily mean a literal identification, but also application, correspondence, and typological identification. So what can be said about the Wisdom cannot automatically be said about Christ at the same time, since this is parallelism.
Always remember, though, that theological concepts, especially ones developed in the early Christian church, can be complex and multifaceted. It's often beneficial to read Clement's works directly or delve into comprehensive studies about his theology to gain a more nuanced understanding of how he uses and conceptualizes terms like πρωτόκτιστος.
Not just according to Clement, but to many of the Church Fathers - Christ was the Wisdom of God, While not explicitly identified with "The son" (as you so boldly claimed) Wisdom is explicitly identified with "The logos". (something you omitted to mention) "is" is not the only word used when "identifying" Christ (Logos) as Wisdom but also a certain word translated "called" (haven't checked, but pretty sure this is a different word.)
"1." - your changing the goal posts here...
"first (thus pre-eminent) compared (relative) to creatures." - by claiming this you omit the second part of the compound word. Funny how when what you wanted you got.. you then change the goal posts again..
"So what can be said about the Wisdom cannot automatically be said about Christ at the same time, since this is parallelism." - funny, in most cases in parallelism the core meaning to the words (though poetically different) are synonymous and most of the time relay the same message. e.g "Before the mountains were born" (Psalms 90:2), is a poetic way of saying the the mountains were "established" (prov 8) or "created" - the terms are synonymous with each other.
"The verb 'ktizo' itself and the expressions formed from it also have a wide range of nuances." - your right it does, but like Johns strict usage ("rule"*) of arkhe and arkhon (which you fail to admit, tho is observed by most** Catholics I have spoken too) you'll notice a pattern writers fell into. Observe the usages of ktizo before and after Gen 14 in the LXX. Observe the common usage in the NT notice ktizo is exclusively used of divine creation in the NT, yet before Gen 14 in the LXX, we get a different word (Gen 14 is a very rough estimate, with a 2 chapter (12 - 14 - 16) margin of error) * Its not literally a rule, if you pay attention to how I use the word(s), you would realize I mean a "self inflicted principle" or in other words John doesn't have to do this, but chooses to. (There is more, but ill let you figure that out.) ** you being the only one
sorry Edgar I cant find it either (First-created in stromata) I think the reference is wrong. (I also don't understand the numbers e.g 5.89.4 - First number is the book, idk about the other 2)
Dear Anonymous, I know "first-created" is in Stromata 5, but I can understand your confusion since there is no uniformity when it comes to references for the Patristic literature. Another source just says Stromata 5.14 for the reference. See also https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2009/03/subordinationism-in-clement-of.html
I've cited plenty of Augustine in the past, and that's normally done by book, chapter, and section (i.e., Confessions 1.1.1). It's complicated and as I said earlier, I never liked searching for things in Migne anyway.
Forgot to add this into my last comment: a good way to find something that has the 3 numbers e.g 5.89.[etc] is to just search it in a document like that, basically took me straight to the word.
Good news! after a LOT of digging and transliterating I think I have located both instances in Clement. Edgar if you cut off the bit that dictates the form and case? search : πρωτόγο , there are 2 instances, one applied to uion and another to aggelon
or search "6.7.58.1" and look down about 3 lines at the bottom of the page and you will see "τὸν πρωτόγονον υἱὸν"
28 comments:
it shows a usage distinction not found in early Bible times - all these temporal terms were synonymous with one and other.
Yup, the unproblematic identification with the Sophia of the LXX in Proverbs 8 and the Logos is really, in my book, very strong evidence that the heteroousians were actually "traditional" when it came to chirstology/theology proper.
Clement NEVER called Jesus a creature
"There was then, a Word importing an unbeginning eternity; as also the Word itself, that is, the Son of God, who being, by equality of substance, one with the Father, is eternal and uncreated." (Fragments, Part I, section III)
"that so great a work was accomplished in so brief a space by the Lord, who, though despised as to appearance, was in reality adored, the expiator of sin, the Saviour, the clement, the Divine Word, He that is truly most manifest Deity, He that is made equal to the Lord of the universe; because He was His Son, and the Word was in God, not disbelieved in by all when He was first preached, nor altogether unknown when, assuming the character of man, and fashioning Himself in flesh, He enacted the drama of human salvation: for He was a true champion and a fellow-champion with [ie. God among creatures, not that Jesus is classed as a creature] the creature." (Exhortations, Chap 10)
"Despised as to appearance but in reality adored, [Jesus is] the Expiator, the Savior, the Soother, the Divine Word, he that is quite evidently true God, he that is put on a level with the Lord of the universe because he was his Son." (Exhortation to the Greeks, 10:110:1).
"Now the Stoics say that God, like the soul, is essentially body and spirit. You will find all this explicitly in their writings. Do not consider at present their allegories as the gnostic truth presents them; whether they show one thing and mean another, like the dexterous athletes, Well, they say that God pervades all being; while we call Him solely Maker, and Maker by the Word. They were misled by what is said in the book of Wisdom: 'He pervades and passes through all by reason of His purity;' since they did not understand that this was said of Wisdom, which was the first of the creation of God (SOFIAS THS PRWTOKTISTOU
TWi QEWi)" (_Stromata_ 5.14).
Compare _Stromata_ 6.7, where Clement also uses the Greek term PRWTOKTISTOS for Wisdom or LOGOS.
Where?
http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Clement%20of%20Alexandria_PG%2008-09/Stromata.pdf
I've onlny found in 6.7 "μηνύων τὸν πρωτόγονον υἱὸν" translates to "indicating/mentioning the firstborn son", and "πρώτης καταβολῆς" refers to "first foundation" or "original foundation," often translated as "from the foundation of the world" in many Christian texts. It's a phrase that suggests the beginning of time or the very start of the world's existence, often used to emphasize something's ancient or primordial nature.
observation: Ninc is obsessed with Jesus never being called a "creature" but no one here (Me, Edgar or the Witnesses) Hold that position - to say Christ is a mere creature would be putting him on a level where he is not.
However it cant be denied that "First-created" was applied (along with Firstborn of the dead) shows we should understand both meanings (as numerous scholars now concede, though refuse to adjust their beliefs)
A not "mere creature" is still a creature, but the Son is not a creature, but the only-begotten God.
"However it cant be denied that "First-created" was applied"
I'm still waiting for the clarification of the source, since in the Clementine text, not the Son, but Wisdom is called πρωτόκτιστος, but even if it's true:
- the ambiguous word 'ktizo', calling Jesus 'ktisma' does not necessarily mean what you want to see in it
- not every expression that sounds like a heretic proves an actualy heresy, one part of a sentence cannot be extracted from the work of the given church father, e.g. if Clement openly proclaims that Jesus is real God, then this is relevant
- this does not prove a universal belief that a single witness is not a witness (unus testis nullus testis), a biblical rule
- the concept of created Wisdom is known also for Augustine, but it is not identified with the person of the Son.
"shows we should understand both meanings"
The birth/generation of the Son from the Father is not synonymous with creation/being made, since these are not just different words, but the underlying meaning must be seen.
"A not "mere creature" is still a creature" - yet you use a different rhetoric in other places.. isreal is apparently not a nation (Num 23:9), despite me finding multiple commentaries saying it didn't class itself as idolotrous. i.e did not consider themselves among the nations.
"- the concept of created Wisdom is known also for Augustine, but it is not identified with the person of the Son." - loads of sources say otherwise.. and the important thing is what does Clement mean by "God" - you assume he means the only true God, but that might not be the case.
" the Son from the Father is not synonymous with creation/being made, since these are not just different words, but the underlying meaning must be seen." - yet we see they are all used basically synonomysly by early Christians
"the ambiguous word 'ktizo', calling Jesus 'ktisma' does not necessarily mean what you want to see in it" - Iv looked, and to my knowledge Ktizo is always used for divine creation after Gen 14 (Lxx) and is never used when placing someone in a position
https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iv.v.xiv.html
"the concept of created Wisdom is known also for Augustine, but it is not identified with the person of the Son." - I have just discovered by my own research this is another misleading argument and is not entirely true.
John Patrick observed with respect to Clement of Alexandria’s use of such terms:
“Clement repeatedly identifies the Word with the Wisdom of God, and yet he refers to Wisdom as the first-created of God; while in one passage he attaches the epithet ‘First-created,’ and in another ‘First-begotten,’ to the Word. But this seems to be rather a question of language than a question of doctrine. At a later date a sharp distinction was drawn between ‘first-created’ and ‘first-born’ or ‘first-begotten,’ but no such distinction was drawn in the time of Clement.” (Clement of Alexandria), p. 103
https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2009/03/subordinationism-in-clement-of.html
Nincsnevem asked:
"Where?
http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Clement%20of%20Alexandria_PG%2008-09/Stromata.pdf"
It's a fair question, since I can't find πρωτόκτίσις in that writing, either.
I wonder if there are textual issues with Stromata 6.7 that could account for the fact that πρωτόκτίσις was purportedly found when the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae was searched, yet it's not in the copy of the writing found at the above link.
Thoughts?
~Sean
Sean,
I will do more looking: that citation may just be mistaken, but the "first-created" language certainly appears in Stromata 5. See the image affixed to this blog post for the exact reference.
See John Patrick's book about Clement, page 103, which Duncan also quoted. He points out that Clement calls Christ (the Word/Wisdom of God), "First-begotten" in Stromata 6 and "First-created" in Stromata 5. Yet Patrick contends that Clement wasn't making a sharp distinction between the terms.
Hi Edgar,
You said:
"See John Patrick's book about Clement, page 103, which Duncan also quoted. He points out that Clement calls Christ (the Word/Wisdom of God), 'First-begotten' in Stromata 6 and 'First-created' in Stromata 5. Yet Patrick contends that Clement wasn't making a sharp distinction between the terms."
Right, that's the quote that I'd like to validate myself. I'd like to quote Clement himself in discussions to illustrate the point Patrick makes. I guess I need to search Stromata 5 rather than Stromata 6.
~Sean
Hi Sean,
If you can enlarge the image I posted to this blog entry, you will see the exact place in Stromata 5 where protokistos occurs. The word to look for in Stromata 6 is protogonos, I believe. That is, first-begotten. To be honest, I always found Migne a pain to search. New Greek texts make it much easier to find passages.
Hi Edgar,
Thank you for the clarification and additional resource. It looks like it's time find a searchable Greek text of Stromata 5:-)
~Sean
I see where the problem is here:
1. Clement in Stromata 5 calls Wisdom πρωτόκτιστος.
2. According to Clement, Christ is the Wisdom of God.
To draw the conclusion from this by means of a syllogism that, according to Clement, Christ is the first creation of God is rather hasty and even unfounded.
1. πρωτόκτιστος does not necessarily mean "the one who is the first to be created ever". It can also be translated as ancient, first (thus pre-eminent) compared (relative) to creatures. The verb 'ktizo' itself and the expressions formed from it also have a wide range of nuances. Rather, it emphasizes his unique role in the divine economy of creation and redemption.
2. We've known since Bill Clinton that a lot depends on "what the meaning of the word 'is' is." That "Christ is the wisdom of God", the "is" does not necessarily mean a literal identification, but also application, correspondence, and typological identification. So what can be said about the Wisdom cannot automatically be said about Christ at the same time, since this is parallelism.
Always remember, though, that theological concepts, especially ones developed in the early Christian church, can be complex and multifaceted. It's often beneficial to read Clement's works directly or delve into comprehensive studies about his theology to gain a more nuanced understanding of how he uses and conceptualizes terms like πρωτόκτιστος.
See also the Lampe lexicon image I posted the other day, and some of us have read Clement's works.
Not just according to Clement, but to many of the Church Fathers - Christ was the Wisdom of God, While not explicitly identified with "The son" (as you so boldly claimed) Wisdom is explicitly identified with "The logos". (something you omitted to mention)
"is" is not the only word used when "identifying" Christ (Logos) as Wisdom but also a certain word translated "called" (haven't checked, but pretty sure this is a different word.)
"1." - your changing the goal posts here...
"first (thus pre-eminent) compared (relative) to creatures." - by claiming this you omit the second part of the compound word. Funny how when what you wanted you got.. you then change the goal posts again..
"So what can be said about the Wisdom cannot automatically be said about Christ at the same time, since this is parallelism."
- funny, in most cases in parallelism the core meaning to the words (though poetically different) are synonymous and most of the time relay the same message.
e.g "Before the mountains were born" (Psalms 90:2), is a poetic way of saying the the mountains were "established" (prov 8) or "created" - the terms are synonymous with each other.
"The verb 'ktizo' itself and the expressions formed from it also have a wide range of nuances."
- your right it does, but like Johns strict usage ("rule"*) of arkhe and arkhon (which you fail to admit, tho is observed by most** Catholics I have spoken too) you'll notice a pattern writers fell into.
Observe the usages of ktizo before and after Gen 14 in the LXX.
Observe the common usage in the NT notice ktizo is exclusively used of divine creation in the NT, yet before Gen 14 in the LXX, we get a different word
(Gen 14 is a very rough estimate, with a 2 chapter (12 - 14 - 16) margin of error)
* Its not literally a rule, if you pay attention to how I use the word(s), you would realize I mean a "self inflicted principle" or in other words John doesn't have to do this, but chooses to. (There is more, but ill let you figure that out.)
** you being the only one
sorry Edgar I cant find it either (First-created in stromata) I think the reference is wrong. (I also don't understand the numbers e.g 5.89.4 - First number is the book, idk about the other 2)
Dear Anonymous, I know "first-created" is in Stromata 5, but I can understand your confusion since there is no uniformity when it comes to references for the Patristic literature. Another source just says Stromata 5.14 for the reference. See also https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2009/03/subordinationism-in-clement-of.html
I think the quote there uses Stromata 5.14.89.
https://libguides.dickinson.edu/classicalstudies/citing
I've cited plenty of Augustine in the past, and that's normally done by book, chapter, and section (i.e., Confessions 1.1.1). It's complicated and as I said earlier, I never liked searching for things in Migne anyway.
Augustine about the created Wisdom:
https://t.ly/KfA3t
Found it!
its the genitive form "πρωτοκτίστου"
page 178 - http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Clement%20of%20Alexandria_PG%2008-09/Stromata.pdf
Thanks Anonymous.
Forgot to add this into my last comment:
a good way to find something that has the 3 numbers e.g 5.89.[etc] is to just search it in a document like that, basically took me straight to the word.
Good news! after a LOT of digging and transliterating I think I have located both instances in Clement.
Edgar if you cut off the bit that dictates the form and case?
search : πρωτόγο , there are 2 instances, one applied to uion and another to aggelon
or search "6.7.58.1" and look down about 3 lines at the bottom of the page and you will see "τὸν πρωτόγονον υἱὸν"
Post a Comment