By Water & Blood

Chapter 19: How Marcellus, citing Old Testament texts about one God, denied the Son of God like the Jews

Listen, at any rate, to the sort of expressions he uses, writing word for word as follows (Nr. 57):

“Whom, then, does Asterius suppose to be the one who says, ‘I am he that is’—the Son or the Father? For looking to the human flesh which the Word of God assumed, and imagining things in this way because of it, he said that there are two hypostases, of Father and of Son, thus separating the Son of God from the Father as one might separate a son of man from his natural father.”

And he goes on next (Nr. 58):

“If, then, he says that the Father, separating himself from the Son, spoke these things to Moses, he will confess that the Son is not God. For how can it be that the one who says, ‘I am he that is,’ does not also agree that he says he is ‘he that is’ by contrast with what is not? But if he should say that the Son, divided in hypostasis, says this—‘I am he that is’—he will again be thought to say the same about the Father; and each of these is impious.”

And again, trying to show that the Father and the Son are one, he writes thus (Nr. 66):

“For he himself confesses, saying, ‘The Father is in me, and I in the Father.’ And that he did not say this simply or without aim is plain also from another apostolic saying; for the one who said, ‘One Lord, one faith, one baptism,’ said, ‘One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.’ You see that not even here does he depart from the concord, but here too he has experienced the same thing. For having said ‘one Lord,’ he again said ‘one God,’ in order that, whenever he mentions the one Lord, he may include the Father also, and whenever he speaks about the Father, he may bear witness that the Word of God is not outside him.”

Having said these things, Marcellus next gathers together more passages from the Old Covenant to prove that God has no Son. Saying, at any rate, that God is an indivisible Monad, he presents the same one as Father and the same one as Son, writing in this manner (Nr. 68):

“What then? If, not attending to the Spirit, we should not suppose that the Monad is indivisible in power, shall we not err, when the Word clearly teaches us, ‘Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve’?

And he proclaims the same through the Gospel according to Mark. For when a certain scribe came to him and asked which was the first of the commandments, he answered him, saying thus: ‘The first of all is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy soul, and with all thy strength. This is the first. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

There is none other commandment greater than these. And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he.’

But the scribe, who seemed to have learned piety through the law, is seen praising the Saviour’s saying, ‘Hear, O Israel,’ when he said, ‘The Lord thy God is one,’ and confirming with an oath that it was well said; for he says, ‘Of a truth thou hast said that there is one God, and there is none other but he.’ Yet those who boast that they know the mysteries of the New Covenant wish to fashion even a second God, separated from the Father in hypostasis and power.”

To these he adds, establishing through the following that God is one and that there is no Son (Nr. 68):

“And that the divine Scripture knows how to call the Monad Lord and God has already become plain from what was said before, where God said to his servant Moses: ‘And God said again unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you.’ You see how, showing us here one person (πρόσωπον), he addresses the same one as Lord and God.

And again the Scripture likewise says, ‘And the Lord spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods beside me.’ You hear how through the pronoun he declares that there is one God only.

And again a little later he says, ‘I am the Lord thy God,’ saying that he himself is Lord and God. And what do we learn also through another Scripture? ‘And thou shalt know this day,’ he says, ‘and shalt not be turned aside in thy mind, that the Lord thy God, he is God in heaven above and upon the earth beneath, and there is none beside him.’ And again in the same Deuteronomy he says, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.’

And again in the same book: ‘See, see that I am, and there is no god beside me: I will kill, and I will make alive; I will wound, and I will heal.’ How, then, did Asterius, who pretends to follow the holy Scriptures simply and with fear, not recognize this part, which says, ‘The Lord thy God, he is God in heaven above and upon the earth beneath, and there is none else beside him,’ and that ‘he is one,’ and beside him there ‘is none other’?”

And after other things he adds to these again, saying (Nr. 68):

“How, then, will not the holy prophet Jeremiah plainly convict him of teaching otherwise? For prophesying to us the things concerning the Saviour, he spoke thus: ‘This is our God, and there shall none other be accounted of in comparison of him. He hath found out all the way of knowledge, and hath given it unto Jacob his servant, and to Israel his beloved. Afterward did he shew himself upon earth, and conversed with men.’”

And again he adds, saying (Nr. 50):

“But it seems that the Father is in the Word, even if this does not seem so to Asterius and to those who think the same as he. For it seems so to the inspired prophet Isaiah, who says through the Holy Spirit, ‘And they shall worship thee, and in thee shall they make supplication; for God is in thee, and there is none other beside thee. For thou art God.’ You see how he overturns root and all the artful villainy of those who teach otherwise?”

And again he goes on (Nr. 67):

“And if you wish to hear yet another prophecy of the same prophet confirming one God for us, ‘I God am the first,’ he says, ‘and unto the things to come I am.’ For the ‘I’ is indicative of one person. For the two expressions signify to us one person. For having said ‘I,’ he adds also ‘am,’ so that through the two parts of speech, pronoun and verb, the Monad of the Godhead is attested.

And if he should need yet another testimony, I will again furnish him with the same prophet, saying, ‘I am the first, and I am hereafter; and beside me there is no God.’ If Asterius supposes that the Son is divided in hypostasis from the Father, as a son of man is, being scandalized at the human flesh which he assumed for our sakes, let him show us who it is that says these things;

for here too the saying that is spoken belongs to one person. Who, then, is it that says, ‘There is no God beside me’? And let him hear also another prophecy, which says, ‘There is none righteous and a Saviour beside me.’ If he should think that there are two gods, he must confess that the other is neither righteous nor Saviour. But if he is neither righteous nor Saviour, how can he still be God? For he declares that one is righteous and Saviour. And again he says, ‘Before me there was no other, and after me there shall be none; I am God, and beside me there shall be none that saveth.’

And if he wishes to hear yet another prophetic saying—spoken, perhaps, to him and to those who are disposed toward the Godhead as he is—let him hear Isaiah himself, saying, ‘Repent, ye that go astray; turn in your heart, and remember the former things of old: for I am the God, and there is none beside me.’ He did not say, ‘I am God,’ in order that through the addition of the article also he might clearly show that God is one. And what of Hosea the prophet? Does not he too bear witness to the same things, saying, ‘I brought thee up out of Egypt; and thou shalt know no god but me, and there is no saviour beside me’? And again Malachi says, ‘Hath not one God

created you? Have we not all one father?’ But Asterius will perhaps say that David, though he is the most ancient of the other prophets after Moses, said nothing about this, and that for this reason he is in doubt whether one ought to think that there are two gods divided in hypostasis or not. So, that he may not say this, I think it consistent to show him that David too says the same things as the saints already mentioned: ‘Hear,’ he says, ‘O my people, and I will speak unto thee; O Israel, and I will testify unto thee: if thou wilt hearken unto me, there shall no new god be in thee; neither shalt thou worship any strange god.

For I am the Lord thy God.’ He who points to himself and says, ‘I am’—is he not plainly saying that there is one God only, that is, himself?”