Page 26

economy of creation was consistent with other second century thinkers.

*Summary: In Theophilus we see a presentation of the relationships between Father, Son, and Spirit in terms
consistent with his second century predecessors. The Word is distinct, but not separate, from the Father, and
is thus regarded as "divine" (Autolycus 2.22.6), though he consistently functions in accordance with the
Father's will (2.22.6). Similarly, the Holy Spirit operates in submission to the Father (1.7.3; 2.9.1; 2.10.2;
2.18.2). Theophilus also has the distinction of being the first to explicitly point out the "threeness" of God
with a term often translated "Trinity," triavdo" (2.15.4).

Power in Unity, Diversity in Rank: Athenagoras (c. 177180)

183

Near the beginning of his Embassy for the Christians Athenagoras described an absolute distinction

between Creator and creature. He wrote in Embassy 4.1:

Now when we make a distinction between matter and God (diairou'sin ajpoV th'" u{lh" toVn qeoVn) and
show that matter is one being while God is quite other (e{teron mevn ti ei\nai thVn u{lhn, a[llo deV toVn
qeovn), completely separated from the former (kaiV toV diaV mevsou poluv)--for the divine is unbegotten and
invisible (qei'on ajgevnhton ei\nai kaiV aji?dioon), beheld only by mind and thought (nw'/ novnw/ kaiV lovgw/
qewrouvmenon), while matter is subject to generation and corruption (genhthVn kaiV fqarthvn)--surely it is
unreasonable of them to charge us with atheism.

In light of this stark contrast between God on the one hand and all created things on the other, it is

significant that Athenagoras included lovgo" and pneu'ma on the side of the Creator by virtue of their
unity with him. He wrote in Embassy 6.5:

The Stoic school even though they amass a multitude of names for the divine being, according as it has to be
named to suit the changes of matter through which they say that the "Breath" of God (toV pneu'ma . . . tou'
qeou') passes, do in reality reckon God to be one (e{na nomivzousi toVn qeovn). For if God is that artisan fire
which, making its way towards the production of the universe, embraces all the "seminal reasons" (touV"
spermatikouV" lovgou") after the pattern of which each group of things comes to be in its appointed order,
and if the Spirit of God pervades the whole universe (toV deV penu'ma aujtou' dihvkei di* o{lou tou' kovsmou),
then God is one in their philosophy (oJ qeoV" ei\" kat* aujtouv").

Athenagoras demonstrated that the Stoics conceived of God as one (e{na nomivzousi toVn qeovn) and

suggested that the they may not consent to this reading of their doctrine (they agree "even against their
will"--cf. 7.1). It is apparent that Athenagoras was reading the philosophers in conformity with his own
Christian doctrine and toward whatever end would strengthen his apology. Because he did this, though,
his interpretation of the Stoic beliefs reflected his own, though we must always correct the language and
concepts with Athenagoras's more explicit positive statements of Christian doctrine. Here Athenagoras
intentionally used the terms lovgo" and pneu'ma from Stoic philosophy to point out parallels with
Christian concepts of the unity of God, who also works in creation with lovgo" and pneu'ma. This
strongly suggests that Athenagoras regarded all three persons of the Trinity as being on the side of the
uncreated order rather than the created realm.

In this vein, Athenagoras expressly declared that "the Father and Son are one" (Embassy 10.2).

184

183

English translation was adopted from Crehan, ed., Athenagoras, while the Greek text is taken from Miroslav Marcovich, ed.,

Athenagoras: Legatio Pro Christianis, ed. Miroslav Marcovich, Patristische Texte und Studien, vol. 31 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1990).
Athenagoras wrote his Embassy sometime between 177 and 180 (Crehan, ed., Athenagoras, 6). The Resurrection of the Dead
attributed to Athenagoras was written c. 176-180, and although Athenagoras's authorship of the work has often been challenged,
either conclusion could only be held with a delicate grip (see the discussion and summary of recent scholarship on the authorship of
Resurrectio in Miroslav Marcovich, ed., Athenagorae Qui Fertur De Resurrectione Mortuorum, Supplements to Vigiliae
Christianae [Leiden: Brill, 2000], 1-3). However, Resurrection of the Dead has no explicit Trinitarian or intratrinitarian references,
though one cannot rule out the possibility that he had the Son and Spirit in mind when he occasionally mentioned the "power and
wisdom" of God (duvnami" kaiV sofiva) related in some sense to creation (3.3; 5.1; 8.4; 12.6; but cf. 18.2, "wisdom and justice").