Opening the library…

Search the Bible

Against Praxeas

Tertullian

Chapter 17

About this work

A polemical Latin treatise opposing a modalist account of God and articulating distinctions among Father, Son, and Spirit while insisting on divine unity and the reality of Christ’s incarnation.

Author: Tertullian
Date: Early 3rd century
Origin: Carthage, North Africa
Genre: Theological Treatise

Chapter XVII.—Sundry August Titles, Descriptive of Deity, Applied to the Son, Not, as Praxeas Would Have It, Only to the Father.

They more readily supposed that the Father acted in

‹ Chapter 16 Chapter 18 ›

the

Son’s

name

,

than

that

the

Son

acted

in

the

Father’s

;

although

the

Lord

says

Himself

,

“

I

am

come

in

my

Father’s

name

;

”

and

even

to

the

Father

He

declares

,

“

I

have

manifested

Thy

name

unto

these

men

;

”

whilst

the

Scripture

likewise

says

,

“

Blessed

is

He

that

cometh

in

the

name

of

the

Lord

,

”

that

is

to

say

,

the

Son

in

the

Father’s

name

.

And

as

for

the

Father’s

names

,

God

Almighty

,

the

Most

High

,

the

Lord

of

hosts

,

the

King

of

Israel

,

the

“

One

that

is

,

”

we

say

(

for

so

much

do

the

Scriptures

teach

us

)

that

they

belonged

suitably

to

the

Son

also

,

and

that

the

Son

came

under

these

designations

,

and

has

always

acted

in

them

,

and

has

thus

manifested

them

in

Himself

to

men

.

“

All

things

,

”

says

He

,

“

which

the

Father

hath

are

mine

.

”

Then

why

not

His

names

also

?

When

,

therefore

,

you

read

of

Almighty

God

,

and

the

Most

High

,

and

the

God

of

hosts

,

and

the

King

of

Israel

,

the

“

One

that

is

,

”

consider

whether

the

Son

also

be

not

indicated

by

these

designations

,

who

in

His

own

right

is

God

Almighty

,

in

that

He

is

the

Word

of

Almighty

God

,

and

has

received

power

over

all

;

is

the

Most

High

,

in

that

He

is

“

exalted

at

the

right

hand

of

God

,

”

as

Peter

declares

in

the

Acts

;

is

the

Lord

of

hosts

,

because

all

things

are

by

the

Father

made

subject

to

Him

;

is

the

King

of

Israel

because

to

Him

has

especially

been

committed

the

destiny

of

that

nation

;

and

is

likewise

“

the

One

that

is

,

”

because

there

are

many

who

are

called

Sons

,

but

are

not

.

As

to

the

point

maintained

by

them

,

that

the

name

of

Christ

belongs

also

to

the

Father

,

they

shall

hear

(

what

I

have

to

say

)

in

the

proper

place

.

Meanwhile

,

let

this

be

my

immediate

answer

to

the

argument

which

they

adduce

from

the

Revelation

of

John

:

“

I

am

the

Lord

which

is

,

and

which

was

,

and

which

is

to

come

,

the

Almighty

;

”

and

from

all

other

passages

which

in

their

opinion

make

the

designation

of

Almighty

God

unsuitable

to

the

Son

.

As

if

,

indeed

,

He

which

is

to

come

were

not

almighty

;

whereas

even

the

Son

of

the

Almighty

is

as

much

almighty

as

the

Son

of

God

is

God

.

Notes

1
John v. 43.
2
John xvii. 6.
3
Ps. cxviii. 26.
4
John xvi. 15.
5
Acts ii. 22.
6
Rev. i. 8.