Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 7
In the quotations, Irenaeus says the Son “has been eternally coexisting with the Father” and “not one of the created…things shall ever be compared to the Word…by whom all things were made”; what view of God’s uniqueness and the Son’s identity is being protected here, and why might early Christians have felt it was “monstrous and unlawful” (Origen) to compare the Son’s origin to created beings?
Another way to ask: Why were early Christians so strongly against treating the Son like a created thing? What were they trying to protect about who God is and who the Son is?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
They are protecting the idea that the Son is not part of creation but the divine Word through whom creation was made, eternally with the Father. Comparing the Son to created beings would, in their view, wrongly place Him inside the category of “created and subject things,” undermining God’s uniqueness and the Son’s true identity.
- Irenaeus: “The Son has been eternally coexisting with the Father,” explicitly denying a beginning in time.
- Irenaeus: “Not one of the created and subject things shall ever be compared to the Word of God by whom all things were made.”
- The speaker’s conclusion from Irenaeus: “Jesus was not part of creation.”
- Origen calls it “monstrous and unlawful” to compare the Father’s begetting of the Son to “any man or other living thing.”
- Origen rejects the idea “there was a time when he did not exist,” labeling that a “heretics” view.