Thomas Aquinas on Arianism and the Son of God

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reformed Covenanter

Cancelled Commissioner
Arius, although he would say that Christ was before the blessed Virgin and that the person of the Father is other than the person of the Son, nevertheless made a three-fold attribution to Christ: first, that the Son of God was a creature; second, that he is not from eternity, but was formed the noblest of all creatures in time by God; third, that God the Son is not of one nature with God the Father, and therefore that he was not true God.

But this too is erroneous and contrary to the teaching of the Holy Scriptures. For it is written: I and the Father are one (John 10:30), that is, in nature; and therefore, just as the Father always existed, so also the Son; and just as the Father is true God, so also is the Son. That Christ is a creature, as said by Arius, is contradicted by the fathers in the Creed: true God of true God; and the assertion that Christ is not from eternity but in time is also contrary to the Creed: begotten not made; and finally, that Christ is not of the same substance as the Father is denied in the Creed: consubstantial with the Father.

For the reference, see:


N.B. Apologies for the lack of posts in recent times; the chronic fatigue has been bad of late.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top