One God, Almighty and Invisible

Now we said that the Eastern churches, in delivering the creed, say “in one God the Father Almighty” and “in one Lord.” Here “one” is to be understood not as a number but absolutely. For example, if someone says “one man” or “one horse,” “one” is used as a number, since there may be a second man and a third, or a second horse and a third. But where a second or a third cannot be added, if we say “one,” we mean one not as a number but absolutely. For example, if we say “one sun,” the meaning is that a second or a third cannot be added, for there is only one sun. Much more, then, is God, when he is said to be “one,” called “one” not as a number but absolutely; that is, he is said to be one because there is no other. In the same way it is to be understood of the Lord that he is one Lord, Jesus Christ, by or through whom God the Father holds dominion over all. That is why, in the next clause, God is called “Almighty.” [a]

God is called Almighty because he holds rule and dominion over all things. But the Father holds all things through his Son, as the apostle says: “By him were created all things, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers.” And again, writing to the Hebrews, he says, “Through him also he made the worlds,” and “He appointed him heir of all things.” By “appointed” we are to understand “begot.” Now if the Father made the worlds through him, and all things were created by him, and he is heir of all things, then through him the Father also holds rule over all things. For as light is born of light, and truth of truth, so Almighty is born of Almighty. As it is written of the seraphim in the Revelation of John: “And they have no rest day and night, crying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Sabaoth, who was and who is and who is to come, the Almighty.” He, then, who “is to come” is called “Almighty.” And who else is there who “is to come” but Christ, the Son of God?

To this is added “invisible and incapable of suffering.” I should mention that these two words are not in the creed of the Roman church. They were added in our church, as is well known, because of the Sabellian heresy, which we call “the Patripassian”: the teaching which says that the Father himself was born of the Virgin and became visible, or claims that he suffered in the flesh. To shut out such impiety about the Father, then, our forefathers seem to have added these words, calling the Father “invisible and incapable of suffering.” For it is plain that the Son, not the Father, took flesh and was born in the flesh, and that from that birth in the flesh the Son became “visible and capable of suffering.” Yet as regards the immortal substance of the Godhead which he has, one and the same with that of the Father, we must believe that neither the Father nor the Son nor the Holy Spirit is “visible or capable of suffering.” But the Son, in that he stooped to take on flesh, was both seen and suffered in the flesh. This too the prophet foretold when he said, “This is our God; no other will be counted beside him. He has found out the whole way of knowledge and has given it to Jacob his servant and to Israel his beloved. Afterward he showed himself on earth and lived among people.”