Skip to content
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Expository Teaching Using Early Christian Insights  /  Practical Example One: Genesis 18  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 7
The early Christian writers (Irenaeus, Clement, Novatian) resolve the tension by saying the “theophanies” were appearances of the pre-incarnate Son/Word, not the Father; what assumptions about God, Scripture, and Christ are built into that early Christian reading, and how does it challenge or refine how you were taught to read Old Testament “God appeared” passages?
Another way to ask: Early Christian writers said these “theophanies” were the Son/Word appearing, not the Father. What beliefs about God, Scripture, and Jesus are behind that idea, and how does it change how you read Old Testament stories where “God appeared”?

Direct Answer Their reading assumes Scripture is consistent, the Father is invisible/infinite in a unique way, and the Son (the Word) can truly appear and speak before the incarnation—so “God appeared” can refer to the Son without contradicting texts about the Father being unseen.

Support from Transcript:

  • Irenaeus: “The Son of God is implanted everywhere throughout Moses’ writings,” and “he spoke with Abraham when he was about to eat with him.”
  • Clement: “The face of God is the word by whom God is manifested and made known… the Word, the logos.”
  • Novatian distinguishes Father and Son: the Father is “infinite… not enclosed in any place,” so “with reason, he can neither descend nor ascend.”
  • Novatian argues the “descending” God fits the Son: “he who descended is the same who ascended… That is the Son of God, the Word of God.”
  • Pike summarizes their conclusion: “for them, there’s no conflict whatsoever… It must be… the Word of God, the Son of God.”
Discussion Follow-ups If “God appeared” can mean the Son, how might that change the way you read Old Testament narratives—less as strange exceptions and more as Christ-centered revelation? What safeguards would keep this from becoming a careless default explanation?

Jumpstarter 7 of 10
Back Questions Next