Tuesday Scholarly Notes
5/15/25
Kelly, J.N.D. (1978). "Chapter 5: Third-Century Trinitarianism." in Early Christian Doctrines, Revised Edition. (pp. 109-137). Harper San Francisco. (Personal Library)
While the earliest Christians were Trinitarian, Kelly points out that the main issue through the second century had been combatting paganism and gnostic thought, which postulated a multiplicity of gods. In the third century, it became more important to articulate the unity of God but his manifestation in three persons (Kelly 1978, p. 109). Previous attempts at explanation focused on the functions of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit rather than the interpersonal relationship within the Godhead.
Among the chief third century thinkers Kelly discusses Hippolytus and Tertullian, who stood in the tradition of the second century apologists (Kelly 1978, p. 110). Among modalists, both were considered polytheists. However, they were both strong advocates of the one and only God. The difficulty was to make an adequate description of one God eternally existing in three persons (Kelly 1978, p. 111).
While Hippolytus tended to use language which could be viewed as subordinationist in nature, Tertullian made arguments which directly attacked modalist views, so strongly defended the identical substance of each person of the Trinity, including the concept of eternity (Kelly 1978, p. 113). Both Hippolytus and Tertullian affirmed that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were one God but in three persons, manifest in different ways at the same time.
Kelly notes that at the end of the second century the teaching of "Dynamic Monarchianism" was circulating (Kelly 1978, p. 115). In this view, Christ was a mere man but was endued with God's spirit. The teaching may well be considered as adoptionist in nature. Kelly discusses several advocates of this point of view who lived well into the third century.
The more widespread and lasting form of Monarchianism is properly referred to as Modalism. Here God is one, and Christ is God. For this reason, there must only be one person of the Godhead (Kelly 1978, p. 119). Kelly, with Hippolytus, connects this view with the monism of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus (Kelly 1978, pp. 120-121), where the totality consisted of a number of mutually exclusive elements.
Kelly points out the fact that Hippolytus and Tertullian were not any sort of official spokesmen for the church at Rome, which was emerging as the theological center for the West (Kelly 1978, p. 123). Rather, those in Rome took on the teaching of Hippolytus and Tertullian, using it to defend against the modalist teaching which was spreading in the West. At the start of the third century, popes Zephyrinus and Callistus were sympathetic to modalism. This may well have been at the root of the hostility between Hippolytus and Callistus. Kelly describes Callistus' views in some detail (Kelly 1978, pp. 124-125).
At the same time, in Alexandria, Clement and Origen emerged as significant thinkers (Kelly 1978, pp. 126-127). Both attempted to discuss the Godhead using structures of Platonism. Clement, who was primarily a moralistic teacher, affirms one God in three persons, largely defined in functional terms, according to the activities of each person (Kelly 1978, p. 127). Origen made a more clearly analytical description of God, using Platonic terms. God the Father is the one God. The Son and Spirit may possibly be seen as "brought into existence" by the Father (Kelly 1978, p. 128). However, this is understood as an eternal act, so Origen rejects a time when the Son did not exist. However, he views the Son and Spirit somehow as secondary. Origen uses terminology of begetting for the Son, but is clear that He is eternally begotten and of the same substance as the Father (Kelly 1978, p. 130). The concept of some sort of hierarchical relationship among members of the Godhead opens Origen to charges of tritheism and subordinationism (Kelly 1978, p. 132).
Origen's views sparked substantial debate, especially in the Greek world through the remainder of the third century (Kelly 1978, pp. 132-133). Kelly notes a number of attempts to clarify his views, demonstrating either that he was genuinely Trinitarian or that he was a modalist or tritheist (Kelly 1978, pp. 134-136 passim).
5/15/25
Kelly, J.N.D. (1978). "Chapter 5: Third-Century Trinitarianism." in Early Christian Doctrines, Revised Edition. (pp. 109-137). Harper San Francisco. (Personal Library)
While the earliest Christians were Trinitarian, Kelly points out that the main issue through the second century had been combatting paganism and gnostic thought, which postulated a multiplicity of gods. In the third century, it became more important to articulate the unity of God but his manifestation in three persons (Kelly 1978, p. 109). Previous attempts at explanation focused on the functions of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit rather than the interpersonal relationship within the Godhead.
Among the chief third century thinkers Kelly discusses Hippolytus and Tertullian, who stood in the tradition of the second century apologists (Kelly 1978, p. 110). Among modalists, both were considered polytheists. However, they were both strong advocates of the one and only God. The difficulty was to make an adequate description of one God eternally existing in three persons (Kelly 1978, p. 111).
While Hippolytus tended to use language which could be viewed as subordinationist in nature, Tertullian made arguments which directly attacked modalist views, so strongly defended the identical substance of each person of the Trinity, including the concept of eternity (Kelly 1978, p. 113). Both Hippolytus and Tertullian affirmed that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were one God but in three persons, manifest in different ways at the same time.
Kelly notes that at the end of the second century the teaching of "Dynamic Monarchianism" was circulating (Kelly 1978, p. 115). In this view, Christ was a mere man but was endued with God's spirit. The teaching may well be considered as adoptionist in nature. Kelly discusses several advocates of this point of view who lived well into the third century.
The more widespread and lasting form of Monarchianism is properly referred to as Modalism. Here God is one, and Christ is God. For this reason, there must only be one person of the Godhead (Kelly 1978, p. 119). Kelly, with Hippolytus, connects this view with the monism of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus (Kelly 1978, pp. 120-121), where the totality consisted of a number of mutually exclusive elements.
Kelly points out the fact that Hippolytus and Tertullian were not any sort of official spokesmen for the church at Rome, which was emerging as the theological center for the West (Kelly 1978, p. 123). Rather, those in Rome took on the teaching of Hippolytus and Tertullian, using it to defend against the modalist teaching which was spreading in the West. At the start of the third century, popes Zephyrinus and Callistus were sympathetic to modalism. This may well have been at the root of the hostility between Hippolytus and Callistus. Kelly describes Callistus' views in some detail (Kelly 1978, pp. 124-125).
At the same time, in Alexandria, Clement and Origen emerged as significant thinkers (Kelly 1978, pp. 126-127). Both attempted to discuss the Godhead using structures of Platonism. Clement, who was primarily a moralistic teacher, affirms one God in three persons, largely defined in functional terms, according to the activities of each person (Kelly 1978, p. 127). Origen made a more clearly analytical description of God, using Platonic terms. God the Father is the one God. The Son and Spirit may possibly be seen as "brought into existence" by the Father (Kelly 1978, p. 128). However, this is understood as an eternal act, so Origen rejects a time when the Son did not exist. However, he views the Son and Spirit somehow as secondary. Origen uses terminology of begetting for the Son, but is clear that He is eternally begotten and of the same substance as the Father (Kelly 1978, p. 130). The concept of some sort of hierarchical relationship among members of the Godhead opens Origen to charges of tritheism and subordinationism (Kelly 1978, p. 132).
Origen's views sparked substantial debate, especially in the Greek world through the remainder of the third century (Kelly 1978, pp. 132-133). Kelly notes a number of attempts to clarify his views, demonstrating either that he was genuinely Trinitarian or that he was a modalist or tritheist (Kelly 1978, pp. 134-136 passim).
RSS Feed