Augustin - Trinity 124

124 24. According to the form of God, it is said “Before all the hills He begat me,”137 that is, before all the loftinesses of things created and, “Before the dawn I begat Thee,”138 that is, before all times and temporal things: but according to the form of a servant, it is said, “The Lord created me in the beginning of His ways.”139 Because, according to the form of God, He said, “I am the truth;” and according to the form of a servant, “I am the way.”140 For, because He Himself, being the first-begotten of the dead,141 made a passage to the kingdom of God to life eternal for His Church, to which He is so the Head as to make the body also immortal, therefore He was “created in the beginning of the ways” of God in His work. For, according to the form of God, He is the beginning,142 that also speaketh unto us, in which “beginning” God created the heaven and the earth;143 but according to the form of a servant, “He is a bridegroom coming out of His chamber.”144 According to the form of God, “He is the first-born of every creature, and He is before all things and by him all things consist;” according to the form of a servant, “He is the head of the body, the Church.”145 According to the form of God, “He is the Lord of glory.”146 From which it is evident that He Himself glorifies His saints: for, “Whom He did predestinate, them He also called; and whom He called, them He also justified; and whom He justified, them He also glorified.”147 Of Him accordingly it is said, that He justifieth the ungodly;148 of Him it is said, that He is just and a justifier.149 If, therefore, He has also glorified those whom He has justified, He who justifies, Himself also glorifies; who is, as I have said, the Lord of glory. Yet, according to the form of a servant, He replied to His disciples, when inquiring about their own glorification: “To sit on my right hand and on my left is not mine to give, but [it shall be given to them] for whom it is prepared by my Father.”150
125 25. But that which is prepared by His Father is prepared also by the Son Himself, because He and the Father are one.151 For we have already shown, by many modes of speech in the divine Scriptures, that, in this Trinity, what is said of each is also said of all, on account of the indivisible working of the one and same substance. As He also says of the Holy Spirit, “If I depart, I will send Him unto you.”152 He did not say, We will send; but in such way as if the Son only should send Him, and not the Father; while yet He says in another place, “These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you; but the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things.”153 Here again it is so said as if the Son also would not send Him, but the Father only. As therefore in these texts, so also where He says, “But for them for whom it is prepared by my Father,” He meant it to be understood that He Himself, with the Father, prepares seats of glory for those for whom He will. But some one may say: There, when He spoke of the Holy Spirit, He so says that He Himself will send Him, as not to deny that the Father will send Him; and in the other place, He so says that the Father will send Him, as not to deny that He will do so Himself; but here He expressly says, “It is not mine to give,” and so goes on to say that these things are prepared by the Father. But this is the very thing which we have already laid down to be said according to the form of a servant: viz., that we are so to understand “It is not mine to give,” as if it were said, This is not in the power of man to give; that so He may be understood to give it through that wherein He is God equal to the Father. “It is not mine,” He says, “to give;” that is, I do not give these things by human power, but “to those for whom it is prepared by my Father;” but then take care you understand also, that if “all things which the Father hath are mine,”154 then this certainly is mine also, and I with the Father have prepared these things.
126 26. For I ask again, in what manner this is said, “If any man hear not my words, I will not judge him?”155 For perhaps He has said here, “I will not judge him,” in the same sense as there, “It is not mine to give.” But what follows here? “I came not,” He says, “to judge the world, but to save the world;” and then He adds,” He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him.” Now here we should understand the Father, unless He had added, “The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.” Well, then, will neither the Son judge, because He says, “I will not judge him,” nor the Father, but the word which the Son hath spoken? Nay, but hear what yet follows: “For I,” He says, “have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, He gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak; and I know that His commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.” If therefore the Son judges not, but “the word which the Son hath spoken;” and the word which the Son hath spoken therefore judges, because the Son “hath not spoken of Himself, but the Father who sent Him gave Him a commandment what He should say, and what He should speak:” then the Father assuredly judges, whose word it is which the Son hath spoken; and the same Son Himself is the very Word of the Father. For the commandment of the Father is not one thing, and the word of the Father another; for He hath called it both a word and a commandment. Let us see, therefore, whether perchance, when He says, “I have not spoken of myself,” He meant to be understood thus,—I am not born of myself. For if He speaks the word of the Father, then He speaks Himself,156 because He is Himself the Word of the Father. For ordinarily He says, “The Father gave to me;” by which He means it to be understood that the Father begat Him: not that He gave anything to Him, already existing and not possessing it; but that the very meaning of, To have given that He might have, is, To have begotten that He might be. For it is not, as with the creature so with the Son of God before the incarnation and before He took upon Him our flesh, the Only-begotten by whom all things were made; that He is one thing, and has another: but He is in such way as to be what He has.And this is said more plainly, if any one is fit to receive it, in that place where He says: “For as the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself.”157 For He did not give to Him, already existing and not having life, that He should have life in Himself; inasmuch as, in that He is, He is life. Therefore “He gave to the Son to have life in Himself” means, He begat the Son to be unchangeable life, which is life eternal. Since, therefore, the Word of God is the Son of God, and the Son of God is “the true God and eternal life,”158 as Jn says in his Epistle; so here, what else are we to acknowledge when the Lord says, “The word which I have spoken, the same shall judge him at the last day,”159 and calls that very word the word of the Father and the commandment of the Father, and that very commandment everlasting life?” “And I know,” He says, “that His commandment is life everlasting.”

127 27. I ask, therefore, how we are to understand, “I will not judge him; but the Word which I have spoken shall judge him:” which appears from what follows to be so said, as if He would say, I will not judge; but the Word of the Father will judge. But the Word of the Father is the Son of God Himself. Is it to be so understood: I will not judge, but I will judge? How can this be true, unless in this way: viz., I will not judge by human power, because I am the Son of man; but I will judge by the power of the Word, because I am the Son of God? Or if it still seems contradictory and inconsistent to say, I will not judge, but I will judge; what shall we say of that place where He says, “My doctrine is not mine?” How “mine,” when “not mine?” For He did not say, This doctrine is not mine, but “My doctrine is not mine:” that which He called His own, the same He called not His own. How can this be true, unless He has called it His own in one relation; not His own, in another? According to the form of God, His own; according to the form of a servant, not His own. For when He says, “It is not mine, but His that sent me,”160 He makes us recur to the Word itself. For the doctrine of the Father is the Word of the Father, which is the Only Son. And what, too, does that mean, “He that believeth on me, believeth not on me?”161 How believe on Him, yet not believe on Him? How canso opposite and inconsistent a thing be understood—“Whoso believeth on me,” He says, “believeth not on me, but on Him that sent me;”—unless you so understand it, Whoso believeth on me believeth not on that which he sees, lest our hope should be in the creature; but on Him who took the creature, whereby He might appear to human eyes, and so might cleanse our hearts by faith, to contemplate Himself as equal to the Father? So that in turning the attention of believers to the Father, and saying, “Believeth not on me, but on Him that sent me,” He certainly did not mean Himself to be separated from the Father, that is, from Him that sent Him; but that men might so believe on Himself, as they believe on the Father, to whom He is equal. And this He says in express terms in another place, “Ye believe in God, believe also in me:”162 that is, in the same way as you believe in God, so also believe in me; because I and the Father are One God. As therefore, here, He has as it were withdrawn the faith of men from Himself, and transferred it to the Father, by saying, “Believeth not on me, but on Him that sent me,” from whom nevertheless He certainly did not separate Himself; so also, when He says, “It is not mine to give, but lit shall be given to them] for whom it is prepared by my Father,” it is I think plain in what relation both are to be taken. For that other also is of the same kind, “I will not judge;” whereas He Himself shall judge the quick and dead.163 But because He will not do so by human power, therefore, reverting to the Godhead, He raises the hearts of men upwards; which to lift up, He Himself came down.

Chapter 13.—Diverse Things are Spoken Concerning the Same Christ, on Account of the Diverse Natures of the One Hypostasis

[Theanthropic Person]. Why It is Said that the Father Will Not Judge, But Has Given Judgment to the Son.
128 28. Yet unless the very same were the Son of man on account of the form of a servant which He took, who is the Son of God on account of the form of God in which He is; Paul the apostle would not say of the princes of this world, “For had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.”164 For He was crucified after the form of a servant, and yet “the Lord of glory” was crucified. For that “taking” was such as to make God man, and man God. Yet what is said on account of what, and what according to what, the thoughtful, diligent, and pious reader discerns for himself, the Lord being his helper. For instance, we have said that He glorifies His own, as being God, and certainly then as being the Lord of glory; and yet the Lord of glory was crucified, because even God is rightly said to have been crucified, not after the power of the divinity, but after the weakness of the flesh:165 just as we say, that He judges as God, that is, by divine power, not by human; and yet the man Himself will judge, just as the Lord of glory was crucified: for soHe expressly says, “When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, and before Him shall be gathered all nations;”166 and the rest that is foretold of the future judgment in that place even to the last sentence. And the Jews, inasmuch as they will be punished in that judgment for persisting in their wickedness, as it is elsewhere written, “shall look upon Him whom they have pierced.”167 For whereas both good and bad shall see the Judge of the quick and dead, without doubt the bad will not be able to see Him, except after the form in which He is the Son of man; but yet in the glory wherein He will judge, not in the lowliness wherein He was judged. But the ungodly without doubt will not see that form of God in which He is equal to the Father. For they are not pure in heart; and “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.”168 And that sight is face to face,169 the very sight that is promised as the highest reward to the just, and which will then take place when He “shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father;” and in this “kingdom” He means the sight of His own form also to be understood, the whole creature being made subject to God, including that wherein the Son of God was made the Son of man. Because, according to this creature, “The Son also Himself shall be subject unto Him, that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.”170 Otherwise if the Son of God, judging in the form in which He is equal to the Father, shall appear when He judges to the ungodly also; what becomes of that which He promises, as some great thing, to him who loves Him, saying, “And I will love him, and will manifest myself to him?”171 Wherefore He will judge as the Son of man, yet not by human power, but by that whereby He is the Son of God; and on the other hand, He will judge as the Son of God, yet not appearing in that [unincarnate] form in which He is God equal to the Father, but in that [incarnate form] in which He is the Son of man.172

129 29. Therefore both ways of speaking may be used; the Son of man will judge, and, the Son of man will not judge: since the Son of man will judge, that the text may be true which says, “When the Son of man shall come, then before Him shall be gathered all nations;” and the Son of man will not judge, that the text may be true which says, “I will not judge him;””173 and, “I seek not mine own glory: there is One that seeketh and judgeth.”174 For in respect to this, that in the judgment, not the form of God, but the form of the Son of man will appear, the Father Himself will not judge; for according to this it is said, “For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son.” Whether this is said after that mode of speech which we have mentioned above, where it is said, “So hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself,”175 that it should signify that so He begat the Son; or, whether after that of which the apostle speaks, saying, “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name:”—(For this is said of the Son of man, in respect to whom the Son of God was raised from the dead; since He, being in the form of God equal to the Father, wherefrom He “emptied” Himself by taking the form of a servant, both acts and suffers, and receives, in that same form of a servant, what the apostle goes on to mention: “He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross; wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, in the Glory of God the Father:”176 —whether then the words, “He hath committed all judgment unto the Son,” are said according to this or that mode of speech; it sufficiently appears from this place, that if they were said according to that sense in which it is said, “He hath given to the Son to have life in Himself,” it certainly would not be said, “The Father judgeth no man.” For in respect to this, that the Father hath begotten the Son equal to Himself, He judges with Him. Therefore it is in respect to this that it is said, that in the judgment, not the form of God, but the form of the Son of man will appear. Not that He will not judge, who hath committed all judgment unto the Son, since the Son saith of Him, “There is One that seeketh and judgeth:” but it is so said, “The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son;” as if it were said, No one will see the Father in the judgment of the quick and the dead, but all will see the Son: because He is also the Son of man, so that seen even by the ungodly, since they too shall see Him whom they have pierced.

130 30. Lest, however, we may seem to conjecture this rather than to prove it clearly, let us produce a certain and plain sentence of the Lord Himself, by which we may show that this was the cause why He said, “The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son,” viz.because He will appear as Judge in the form of the Son of man, which is not the form of the Father, hut of the Son; nor yet that form of the Son in which He is equal to the Father, but that in which He is less than the Father; in order that, in the judgment, He may be visible both to the good and to the bad. For a little while after He says, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but shall pass177 from death unto life.” Now this life eternal is that sight which does not belong to the bad. Then follows, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live.”178 And this is proper to the godly, who so hear of His incarnation, as to believe that He is the Son of God, that is, who so receive Him, as made for their sakes less than the Father, in the form of a servant, that they believe Him equal to the Father, in the form of God. And thereupon He continues, enforcing this very point, “For as the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given to the Son to have life in Himself.” And then He comes to the sight of His own glory, in which He shall come to judgment; which sight will be common to the ungodly and to the just. For He goes on to say, “And hath given Him authority to execute judgment also, because He is the Son of man.”179 I think nothing can be more clear. For inasmuch as the Son of God is equal to the Father, He does not receive this power of executing judgment, but He has it with the Father in secret; but He receives it, so that the good and the bad may see Him judging, inasmuch as He is the Son of man. Since the sight of the Son of man will be shown to the bad also: for the sight of the form of God will not be shown except to the pure in heart, for they shall see God; that is, to the godly only, to whose love He promises this very thing, that He will show Himself to them. And see, accordingly, what follows: “Marvel not at this,” He says. Why does He forbid us to marvel, unless it be that, in truth, every one marvels who does not understand, that therefore He said the Father gave Him power also to execute judgment, because He is the Son of man; whereas, it might rather have been anticipated that He would say, since He is the Son of God? But because the wicked are not able to see the Son of God as He is in the form of God equal to the Father, but yet it is necessary that both the just and the wicked should see the Judge of the quick and dead, when they will be judged in His presence; “Marvel not at this,” He says, “for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”180 For this purpose, then, it was necessary that He should therefore receive that power, because He is the Son of man, in order that all in rising again might see Him in the form in which He can be seen by all, but by some to damnation, by others to life eternal. And what is life eternal, unless that sight which is not granted to the ungodly? “That they might know Thee,” He says, “the One true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent.”181 And how are they to know Jesus Christ Himself also, unless as the One true God, who will show Himself to them; not as He will show Himself, in the form of the Son of man, to those also that shall be punished?182
131 31. He is “good,” according to that sight, according to which God appears to the pure in heart; for “truly God is good unto Israel even to such as are of a clean heart.”183 But when the wicked shall see the Judge, He will not seem good to them; because they will not rejoice in their heart to see Him, but all “kindreds of the earth shall then wail because of Him,”184 namely, as being reckoned in the number of all the wicked and unbelievers. On this account also He replied to him, who had called Him Good Master, when seeking advice of Him how he might attain eternal life, “Why askest thou me about good?185 there is none good but One, that is, God.”186 And yet the Lord Himself, in another place, calls man good: “A good man,” He says, “out of the good treasure of his heart, bringeth forth good things: and an evil man, out of the evil treasure of his heart, bringeth forth evil things.”187 But because that man was seeking eternal life, and eternal life consists in that contemplation in which God is seen, not for punishment, but for everlasting joy; and because he did not understand with whom he was speaking, and thought Him to be only the Son of man:188 Why, He says, askest thou me about good? that is, with respect to that form which thou seest, why askest thou about good, and callest me, according to what thou seest, Good Master? This is the form of the Son of man, the form which has been taken, the form that will appear in judgment, not only to the righteous, but also to the ungodly; and the sight of this form will not be for good to those who are wicked. But there is a sight of that form of mine, in which when I was, I thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but in order to take this form I emptied myself.189 That one God, therefore, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, who will not appear, except for joy which cannot be taken away from the just; for which future joy he sighs, who says, “One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord:”190 that one God, therefore, Himself, I say, is alone good, for this reason, that no one sees Him for sorrow and wailing, but only for salvation and true joy. If you understand me after this latter form, then I am good; but if according to that former only, then why askest thou me about good? If thou art amongthose who “shall look upon Him whom they have pierced,”191 that very sight itself will be evil to them, because it will be penal. That after this meaning, then, the Lord said, “Why askest thou me about good? there is none good but One, that is, God,” is probable upon those proofs which I have alleged, because that sight of God, whereby we shall contemplate the substance of God unchangeable and invisible to human eyes (which is promised to the saints alone; which the Apostle Paul speaks of, as “face to face;”192 and of which the Apostle Jn says, “We shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is;”193 and of which it is said, “One thing have I desired of the Lord, that I may behold the beauty of the Lord,” and of which the Lord Himself says, “I will both love him, and will manifest myself to him;”194 and on account of which alone we cleanse our hearts by faith, that we may be those “pure in heart who are blessed for they shall see God:”195 and whatever else is spoken of that sight: which whosoever turns the eye of love to seek it, may find most copiously scattered through all the Scriptures),—that sight alone, I say, is our chief good, for the attaining of which we are directed to do whatever we do aright. But that sight of the Son of man which is foretold, when all nations shall be gathered before Him, and shall say to Him, “Lord, when saw we Thee an hungered, or thirsty, etc.?” will neither be a good to the ungodly, who shall be sent into everlasting fire, nor the chief good to the righteous. For He still goes on to call these to the kingdom which has been prepared for them from the foundation of the world. For, as He will say to those, “Depart into everlasting fire;” so to these,” Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you.” And as those will go into everlasting burning; so the righteous will go into life eternal. But what is life eternal, except “that they may know Thee,” He says, “the One true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent?”196 but know Him now in that glory of which He says to the Father, “Which I had with Thee before the world was.”197 For then He will deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father,198 that the good servant may enter into the joy of his Lord,199 and that He may hide those whom God keeps in the hiding of His countenance from the confusion of men, namely, of those men who shall then be confounded by hearing this sentence; of which evil hearing “the righteous man shall not be afraid”200 if only he be kept in “the tabernacle,” that is, in the true faith of the Catholic Church, from “the strife of tongues,”201 that is, from the sophistries of heretics. But if there is any other explanation of the words of the Lord, where He says, “Why asketh thou me about good? there is none good, but One, that is, God;” provided only that the substance of the Father be not therefore believed to be of greater goodness than that of the Son, according to which He is the Word by whom all things were made; and if there is nothing in it abhorrent from sound doctrine; let us securely use it, and not one explanation only, but as many as we are able to find. For so much the more powerfully are the heretics proved wrong, the more outlets are open for avoiding their snares. But let us now start afresh, and address ourselves to the consideration of that which still remains).

1 1 On the ascetic tendencies of the second and third centuries, and the gradual introduction of clerical celibacy (which began with a decree of Bishop Siricius of Rome, 385), see Schaff, Church Hist., vol. ii. 367-414, and vol. 3,242-250).
1 Westminster Confession, II. iii.
2 That Augustin had considerable acquaintance with Greek is proved by his many references and citations throughout his writings. In this work, see XII. 7,11; XII. 14,22; XIII. 10,14; XIV. 1,1; XV. 9,15. His statement in III. 1,1, is, that he was “not so familiar with the Greek tongue (Graecae linguae non sit nobis tantus habitus), as to be able to read and understand the books that treat of such [metaphysical] topics.” In V. viii. 10, he remarks that he does not comprehend the distinction which the Greek Trinitarians make between oujsia and uJpovstasi"; which shows that he had not read the work of Gregory of Nyssa, in which it is defined with great clearness. One may have a good knowledge of a language for general purposes, and yet be unfamiliar with its philosophical nomenclature).
3 For an analysis of Augustin’s Trinitarianism, see Bauv: Dreieinigkeitslehre I. 828-885; Gangauf: Des Augustinus speculative Lehre von Gott dem Dreieinigen; Schaff: History, 3,684 sq).
4 The Mohammedan conception of the Divine Unity, also, is deistic. In energetically rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity, the Mohammedan is the Oriental Unitarian).
5 “That view of the divine nature which makes it inconsistent with the Incarnation and Trinity is philosophically imperfect, as well as scripturally incorrect.” H. B. Smith: Faith and Philosophy, p. 191).
6 Upon the necessary conditions of self consciousness in God, see Müller: On Sin, II. 136 sq. (Urwick’s Trans ); Dorner: Christian Doctrine, I. 412-465; Christlieb: Modern Doubt, Lecture III.; Kurtz: Sacred History,§ 2; Billroth: Religions Philosophie, § 89, 90; Wilberforce: Incarnation, Chapter III; Kidd: On the Trinity, with Candlish’s Introduction; Shedd: History of Doctrine, I. 365-368).
1 [Augustin here puts generare for creare—which is rarely the case with him, since the distinction between generation and creation is of the highest importance in discussing the doctrine of the Trinity. His thought here is, that God does not bring himself into being, because he always is. Some have defined God as the Self-caused: causa sut. But the category of cause and effect is inapplicable to the Infinite Being.—W. G. T. S.]
2 (
Ps 17,8,
3 (Ex 20,5,
4 (Gn 6,7,
5 (Ex 3,14,
6 (1Tm 6,16).
7 [God’s being is necessary; that of the creature is contingent. Hence the name I Am, or Jehovah,—which denotes this difference. God alone has immortality a parte ante, as well as a parte post.—W. G. T. S.]).
8 (Jc 1,17,
9 (Ps 102,26-27.
10 (Col 2,3,
11 (1Co 2,2-3.
12 [St.Paul,, in this place, denominates imperfect but true believers “carnal,” in a relative sense, only. They are comparatively carnal, when contrasted with the law of God, which is absolutely and perfectly spiritual. (Rm 7,14). They do not, however, belong to the class of carnal or natural men, in distinction from spiritual. The persons whom the Apostle here denominates “carnal,” are “babes in Christ.”—W. G. T. S.]
13 (1Co 3,1-2).
14 (Ps cv. 4.
15 [This request of Augustin to his reader, involves an admirable rule for authorship generally—the desire, namely, that truth be attained, be it through himself or through others. MiIton teaches the same, when he says that the author must “study and love learning for itself, not for lucre, or any other end, but the service of God and of truth, and perhaps that lasting fame and perpetuity of praise, which God and good men have consented shall be the reward of those whose published labors advance the good of mankind.”—W. G. T. S.]).
149 16 (Ps 1,2,
17 (Ph 3,15,
18 [Augustin teaches the Nicene doctrine of a numerical unity of essence in distinction from a specific unity. The latter is that of mankind. In this case there is division of substance—part after part of the specific nature being separated and formed, by propagation, into individuals. No human individual contains the whole specific nature. But in the case of the numerical unity of the Trinity, there is no division of essence. The whole divine nature is in each divine person. The three divine persons do not constitute a species—that is, three divine individuals made by the division and distribution of one common divine nature—but are three modes or “forms” (Ph 2,6) of one undivided substance, numerically and identically the same in each.—W. G. T. S.]).
19 (Mt 3,16).
20 Acts. 2,2,Ac 2,4).
21 (Mc 1,11,
22 (Mt 17,5,
23 (Jn 12,28,
24 [The term Trinity denotes the Divine essence in all three modes. The term Father (or Son, or Spirit) denotes the essence in only one mode. Consequently, there is something in the Trinity that cannot be attributed to any one of the Persons, as such; and something in a Person that cannot be attributed to the Trinity, as such. Trinality cannot be ascribed to the first Person; paternity cannot be ascribed to the Trinity.—W. G. T. S.]
25 (Sg 6,23).
26 (Ph 3,12-14).
150 27 (Jn 1,1 Jn 14,2-3).
28 [Augustin here postulates the theistic doctrines of two substances—infinite and finite; in contradiction to the postulate of pantheism, that there is only one substance—the infinite.—W. G. T. S.]
29 (1Jn 5,20).
30 (1Co 1,24,
31 (Si 24,5).
32 (1Tm 6,14-16.
33 (Ps 72,18).
34 (Jn 5,19 Jn 5,21.
35 [Nothing is more important, in order to a correct interpretation of the New Testament, than a correct explanation of the term God. Sometimes it denotes the Trinity, and sometimes a person of the Trinity. The context always shows which it is. The examples given here by Augustin are only a few out of many.—W. G. T. S.].
36 (1Co 8,6).
37 (Rm 11,36).
38 Ipsi).
151 39 (Rm 11,33-36).
40 (1Co 8,6).
41 (Ph 2,6).
42 [It is not generally safe to differ from Augustin in trinitarian exegesis. But in Ph 2,6 “God” must surely denote the Divine Essence, not the first Person of the Essence. St. Paul describes “Christ Jesus” as “subsisting” (uJpavrcwn) originally, that is prior to incarnation, “in a form of God”(ejn morfh` u`eou`), and because he so subsisted, as being “equal with God.” The word morfh` is anarthrous in the text: a form, not the form, as the A.V and R.V. render. St. Paul refers to one of three “forms” of God—namely, that particular form of Sonship, which is peculiar to the second person of the Godhead. Had the apostle employed the article with morfhv, the implication would be that there is only one “form of God”—that is, only one person in the Divine Essence).
If then u`eou`, in this place, denotes the Father, as Augustin says, St. Paul would teach that the Logos subsisted “in a form of the Father,” which would imply that the Father had more than one “form,” or else (if morfhv be rendered with the article) that the Logos subsisted in the “form” of the Father, neither of which is true. But if “God,” in this place, denotes the Divine Essence, then St. Paul teaches that the unincarnate Logos subsisted in a particular “form” of the Essence—the Father and Spirit subsisting in other “forms” of it).
The student will observe that Augustin is careful to teach that the Logos when he took on him “a form of a servant,” did not lay aside “a form of God.” He understands the kenosis (ejkevnwse) to be, the humbling of the divinity by its union with the humanity, not the exinanition of it in the extremest sense of entirely divesting himself of the divinity, nor the less extreme sense of a total non-use of it during the humiliation.—W.G.T.S.]).
43 (1Co 11,3).
44 (Ps 82,6).
45 (Rm 1,25,
46 (Ga 5,13).
47 (Dt 6,13,
152 48 (Ph 3,3).
49 (1Co 6,19 1Co 15,20).
50 (1Tm 2,5,
51 (Jn 14,28).
52 Eximanivit.
53 Habitu.
54 (Ph 2,6-7.
55 Habitu.
56 (Jn 1,3,
57 (Ga 4,4-5.
58 (Gn 1,26,
153 59 Habitum).
60 (
1Co 15,28 1Co 24,27.
61 Subjicere.
62 (Ph 3,20-21.
63 Evacuaverit.
64 (1Co 15,24-25.
65 (Ps 112,8,
66 (1Co 13,12,
67 (Mt 11,27,
68 Similitudines.).
69 In recubitu(Ct 1,11 see LXX.
70 Vestra).
71 (Col 3,3-4.
154 72 (1Co 13,12,
73 (1Jn 3,2,
74 (Ex 3,14.
75 (Jn 17,3,
76 (1Co 4,5,
77 (Ps 5,5,
78 10 [The common explanation is better, which regards the “kingdom’” that is to be delivered up, to be the mediatorial commission. When Christ shall have finished his work of redeeming men, he no longer discharges the office of a mediator. It seems incongruous to denominate the beatific vision of God by the redeemed a surrender of A kingdom. In I. 10,21, Augustin says that when the Redeemer brings the redeemed from faith to sight, “He is said to ‘deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father.0’ ”—W.G.T.S.]
79 (Rm 8,24-25.
80 (Ct 1,12,
81 (Ps 16,11,
82  Jn 14,8 Jn 14,10.
83 (2Co 5,6-7.
155 84 (Ac 15,9,
85 (Mt 5,8,
86 (Ps 91,16,
87 (Jn 10,30,
88 (Jn 14,17).
89 (Jn 14,15-17).
90 (1Co 2,14,
91 (Jn 16,13,
92 (1Co 2,11,
93 (Jn 16,6-7.
94 (Ph 2,7,
95 (Jn 14,28.
96 (Jn 20,17,
97 (Jn 14,21,
98 (Jn 14,22-23).
99 (Jn 14,16-23).
100 [An act belonging eminently and officially to a particular trinitarian person is not performed to the total exclusion of the other persons, because of the numerical unity of essence. The whole undivided essence is in each person; consequently, what the essence in one of its personal modes, or forms, does officially and eminently, is participated in by the essence in its other modes or forms. Hence the interchange of persons in Scripture. Though creation is officially the Father’s work, yet the Son creates (Col 1,16 He 1,3). The name Saviour is given to the Father (1Tm 1,1). Judgment belongs officially to the Son (Jn 5,22 Mt 25,31); yet the Father judgeth (1P 1,17). The Father raises Christ (Ac 13,30); yet Christ raises himself (Jn 10,18 Ac 10,41 Rm 14,9).—W. G. T. S.].
101 (Jn 16,22,
102 (Lc 10,30-42.
103 (Rm 8,26,
104 (Ps 27,4,
105 [The redeemed must forever stand in the relation of redeemed sinners to their Redeemer. Thus standing, they will forever need Christ’s sacrifice and intercession in respect to their, past sins in this earthly state. But as in the heavenly state they are sinless, and are incurring no new guilt, it is true that they do not require the fresh application of atoning blood for new sins, nor Christ’s intercession for such. This is probably what Augustin means by saying that Christ “no longer makes intercession for us,” when he has delivered up the kingdom to God. When the Mediator has surrendered his commission, he ceases to redeem sinners from death, while yet he continues forever to be the Head of those whom he has redeemed, and their High Priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek (He vii. 19).—W. G. T. S.]
106 (1Co 15,24-28).
157 107 [The animal soul is different in kind from the rational soul though both constitute one person; while the rational soul of a man is the same in kind with that of another man. Similarly, says Augustin, there is a difference in kind between the human nature and the divine nature of Christ, though constituting one theanthropic person, while the divine nature of the Son is the same in substance with that of the Father, though constituting two different persons, the Father and Son.—W. G. T. S.]).
108 Proverbs—A. V).
109 Proverbs—A. V).
110 Show—A.V).
111 (
Jn 16,25-28.
112 (Rm 8,32).
113 (Jn 14,28).
114 (Ph 2,7,
115 (Mt 12,32,
116 (Mt 12,28,
117 Is 61,1 Lc 4,18-19).
158 118 (Jn 1,3,
119 (Ga 4,4,
120 Jn 10,30.
121 (Jn 6,38,
122 (Jn 5,26). [In communicating the Divine Essence to the Son, in eternal generation, the essence is communicated with all its attributes. Self existence is one of these attributes. In this way, the Father “gives to the Son to have life in himself,” when he makes common (koinwnei`n), between Himself and the Son, the one Divine Essence.—W. G. T. S.]
123  Mt 26,38-39.
124 (1Jn 5,20,
125 (Ph 2,8,
126 (Jn 17,15,
127 (Jn 17,10,
128 (Jn 7,16,
159 129 (Mc 13,32,
130 [The more common explanation of this text in modern exegesis makes the ignorance to be literal, and referable solely to the human nature of our Lord, not to his person as a whole. Augustin’s explanation, which Bengel, on Mc 13,32, is inclined to favor, escapes the difficulty that arises from a seeming division of the one theanthopic person into two portions. one of which knows, and the other does not. Yet this same difficulty besets the fact of a growth in knowledge, which is plainly taught in Lc 1,80. In this case, the increase in wisdom must relate to the humanity alone.—W. G. T. S.]
131 (Gn 22,12,
132 (Jn 15,15,
133 (Jn 16,12,
134 (1Co 2,2,
135 (1Co 3,1,
136 (1Co 2,6).
137 Pr 8,25).
138 (Ps 110,3). Vulgate.
139 Pr 8,22.
140 (Jn 14,6,
141 Ap 1,5.
142 (Jn 8,25,
143 (Gn 1,1).
144 (Ps 19,5,
145 (Col 1,15 Col 1,17-18).
146 (1Co 2,8,
147 (Rm 8,30,
148 (Rm 4,5,
149 (Rm 3,26,
150 (Mt 20,23,
161 151 (Jn 10,30,
152 (Jn 16,7,
153 (Jn 14,25-26.
154 (Jn 16,15,
155 (Jn 12,47-50).
156 Seipsum loquitur.
157 (Jn 5,26,
158 (1Jn 5,20,
159 (Jn 12,48,
160 (Jn 7,16,
161 (Jn 12,44,
162 162 (Jn 14,1).
163 (2Tm 4,1,
164 (1Co 2,8,
165 (2Co 13,4,
166 (Mt 25,31-32.
167 (Za 12,10,
168 (Mt 5,8,
169 (1Co 13,12,
170 1Co 15,24-28.
171 (Jn 14,21 Jn 14,
172 [Augustin in this discussion, sometimes employs the phrase “Son of man” to denote the human nature of Christ, in distinction from the divine. But in Scripture and in trinitarian theology generally, this phrase properly denotes the whole theanthropic, person under a human title—just as “man”, (1Tm 2,5), “last Adam” (1Co 15,45), and “second man” (1Co 15,47), denote not the human nature, but the whole divine-human person under a human title. Strictly used, the phrase “Son of man” does not designate the difference between the divine and human natures in the thenothropos, but between the person of the un-incarnate and that of the incarnate Logos. Augustin’s meaning is, that the Son of God will judge men at the last day, not in his original “form of God,” but as this is united with human nature—as the Son of man.—W. G. T. S.]
163 173 (Jn 12,47,
174 (Jn 8,50).
175 (Jn 5,22 Jn 5,26.
176 (Ph 2,8-11.
177 Transit in Vulg.; and so in Greek.
178 (Jn 5,24-25.
179 (Jn 5,25-26).
180 (Jn 5,22-29).
181 (Jn 17,3.
182 [Augustin here seems to teach that the phenomenal appearance of Christ to the redeemed in heaven will be different from that to all men in the day of judgment. He says that he will show himself to the former “in the form of God;” to the latter, “in the form of the Son of man.” But, surely, it is one and the same God-man who sits on the judgment throne, and the heavenly throne His appearance must be the same in both instances: namely, that of God incarnate. The effect of his phenomenal appearance upon the believer will, indeed, be very different from that upon the unbeliever. For the wicked, this vision of God incarnate will be one of terror; for the redeemed one of joy.—W. G. T. S.]
183 (Ps 73,1,
184 Ap 1,7.
164 185 [Augustin’s reading of this text is that of the uncials; and in that form which omits the article with ajgau`ou`.—W. G. T. S.]
186 (
Mt 19,17,
187 (Mt 12,35,
188 [That is, a mere man. Augustin here, as in some other places, employs the phrase “Son of man” to denote the human nature by itself—not the divine and human natures united in one person, and designated by this human title. The latter is the Scripture usage. As “Immanuel” does not properly denote the divine nature, but the union of divinity and humanity, so “Son of man” does not properly denote the human nature, but the union of divinity and humanity.—W. G. T. S.]
189 (Ph 2,6-7.
190 (Ps 27,4,
191 (Za 12,10,
192  .
193 (1Jn 3,2,
194 (Jn 14,21,
195 (Mt 5,8).
165 196 (Mt 25,37 Mt 25,41 Mt 25,34.
197 (Jn 17,3-5.
198 (1Co 15,24,
199 (Mt 25,21 Mt 25,23.
200 (Ps 112,7,
201 (Ps 31,21).

Augustin - Trinity 124