Opening the library…

Search the Bible

Against Hermogenes

Tertullian

Chapter 3

About this work

Author: Tertullian

Chapter III.—An Argument of Hermogenes. The Answer: While God is a Title Eternally Applicable to the Divine Being, Lord and Father are Only Relative Appellations, Not Eternally Applicable. An Inconsistency in the Argument of Hermogenes Pointed Out.

He adds also another point: that as God was always

‹ Chapter 2 Chapter 4 ›

God

,

there

was

never

a

time

when

God

was

not

also

Lord

.

But

it

was

in

no

way

possible

for

Him

to

be

regarded

as

always

Lord

,

in

the

same

manner

as

He

had

been

always

God

,

if

there

had

not

been

always

,

in

the

,

a

something

of

which

He

could

be

regarded

as

evermore

the

Lord

.

So

he

concludes

that

God

always

had

Matter

co

-

existent

with

Himself

as

the

Lord

thereof

.

Now

,

this

tissue

of

his

I

shall

at

once

hasten

to

pull

abroad

.

I

have

been

willing

to

set

it

out

in

form

to

this

length

,

for

the

information

of

those

who

are

unacquainted

with

the

subject

,

that

they

may

know

that

his

other

arguments

likewise

need

only

be

understood

to

be

refuted

.

We

affirm

,

then

,

that

the

name

of

God

always

existed

with

Himself

and

in

Himself

—

but

not

eternally

so

the

Lord

.

Because

the

condition

of

the

one

is

not

the

same

as

that

of

the

other

.

God

is

the

designation

of

the

substance

itself

,

that

is

,

of

the

Divinity

;

but

Lord

is

(

the

name

)

not

of

substance

,

but

of

power

.

I

maintain

that

the

substance

existed

always

with

its

own

name

,

which

is

God

;

the

title

Lord

was

afterwards

added

,

as

the

indication

indeed

of

something

accruing

.

For

from

the

moment

when

those

things

began

to

exist

,

over

which

the

power

of

a

Lord

was

to

act

,

God

,

by

the

accession

of

that

power

,

both

became

Lord

and

received

the

name

thereof

.

Because

God

is

in

like

manner

a

Father

,

and

He

is

also

a

Judge

;

but

He

has

not

always

been

Father

and

Judge

,

merely

on

the

ground

of

His

having

always

been

God

.

For

He

could

not

have

been

the

Father

the

Son

,

nor

a

Judge

sin

.

There

was

,

however

,

a

time

when

neither

sin

existed

with

Him

,

nor

the

Son

;

the

former

of

which

was

to

constitute

the

Lord

a

Judge

,

and

the

latter

a

Father

.

In

this

way

He

was

not

Lord

those

things

of

which

He

was

to

be

the

Lord

.

But

He

was

only

to

become

Lord

at

some

future

time

:

just

as

He

became

the

Father

by

the

Son

,

and

a

Judge

by

sin

,

so

also

did

He

become

Lord

by

means

of

those

things

which

He

had

made

,

in

order

that

they

might

serve

Him

.

Do

I

seem

to

you

to

be

weaving

arguments

,

Hermogenes

?

How

neatly

does

Scripture

lend

us

its

aid

,

when

it

applies

the

two

titles

to

Him

with

a

distinction

,

and

reveals

them

each

at

its

proper

time

!

For

(

the

title

)

God

,

indeed

,

which

always

belonged

to

Him

,

it

names

at

the

very

first

:

“

In

the

beginning

God

created

the

heaven

and

the

earth

;

”

and

as

long

as

He

continued

making

,

one

after

the

other

,

those

things

of

which

He

was

to

be

the

Lord

,

it

merely

mentions

God

.

“

And

God

said

,

”

“

and

God

made

,

”

“

and

God

saw

;

”

but

nowhere

do

we

yet

find

the

Lord

.

But

when

He

completed

the

whole

creation

,

and

especially

man

himself

,

who

was

destined

to

understand

His

sovereignty

in

a

way

of

special

propriety

,

He

then

is

designated

Lord

.

Then

also

the

Scripture

added

the

name

Lord

:

“

And

the

Lord

God

,

Deus

Dominus

,

took

the

man

,

whom

He

had

formed

;

”

“

And

the

Lord

God

commanded

Adam

.

”

Thenceforth

He

,

who

was

previously

God

only

,

is

the

Lord

,

from

the

time

of

His

having

something

of

which

He

might

be

the

Lord

.

For

to

Himself

He

was

always

God

,

but

to

all

things

was

He

only

then

God

,

when

He

became

also

Lord

.

Therefore

,

in

as

far

as

(

Hermogenes

)

shall

suppose

that

Matter

was

eternal

,

on

the

ground

that

the

Lord

was

eternal

,

in

so

far

will

it

be

evident

that

nothing

existed

,

because

it

is

plain

that

the

Lord

as

such

did

not

always

exist

.

Now

I

mean

also

,

on

my

own

part

,

to

add

a

remark

for

the

sake

of

ignorant

persons

,

of

whom

Hermogenes

is

an

extreme

instance

,

and

actually

to

retort

against

him

his

own

arguments

.

For

when

he

denies

that

Matter

was

born

or

made

,

I

find

that

,

even

on

these

terms

,

the

title

Lord

is

unsuitable

to

God

in

respect

of

Matter

,

because

it

must

have

been

free

,

when

by

not

having

a

beginning

it

had

not

an

author

.

The

fact

of

its

past

existence

it

owed

to

no

one

,

so

that

it

could

be

a

subject

to

no

one

.

Therefore

ever

since

God

exercised

His

power

over

it

,

by

creating

(

all

things

)

out

of

Matter

,

although

it

had

all

along

experienced

God

as

its

Lord

,

yet

Matter

does

,

after

all

,

demonstrate

that

God

did

not

exist

in

the

relation

of

Lord

to

it

,

although

all

the

while

He

was

really

so

.

Notes

1
Porro.
2
Retro.
3
Itaque.
4
Conjecturam.
5
Tam…quam.
6
Scilicet.
7
Argumentari: in the sense of argutari.
8
Naviter nobis patrocinatur.
9
Gen. i. 1.
10
Gen. i. 3, etc.
11
Cognominatur: as if by way of surname, Deus Dominus.
12
Gen. ii. 15.
13
Gen. ii. 16.
14
Et ego.
15
Extrema linea. Rhenanus sees in this phrase a slur against Hermogenes, who was an artist. Tertullian, I suppose, meant that Hermogenes was extremely ignorant.
16
Experimenta.
17
Libera: and so not a possible subject for the Lordship of God.
18
Matter having, by the hypothesis, been independent of God, and so incapable of giving Him any title to Lordship.
19
Fuit hoc utique. In Hermogenes’ own opinion, which is thus shown to have been contradictory to itself, and so absurd.