This collection of essays contains the papers given at the Sixth International East-West Symposium of New Testament Scho...
dokumen.pub
The Holy Spirit and the Church according to the New Testament: Sixth International East-West Symposium of New Testament Scholars, Belgrade, August 25 to 31, 2013
10 Parallelism is a semantic or structural repetition of sentences or certain parts of sentences. Repetition of the sentences according to their meaning (Parallelismus membrorum) is the fundamental feature of poetic biblical language.
Semantic parallelism in biblical poetry is enhanced by syntactic parallelism – the word order in one verse corresponds to the word order and word meaning in the next verse. The purpose of parallelism is to transform the common perception of an object by a unique semantic expression. The equivalent elements strengthen the mutual relationship of the verses and intensify the meaning. The most common types of parallelisms are the following: 1) synonymous – when both members of the couplet express the same thought through different words (Ps 2:10–11; Prov 26:27; Wis 1:2.4); 2) antithetic – when both members of the couplet express the same message through opposite statements (Ps 1:6; Prov 10:1; 13:3; Wis 2:11); 3) synthetic – when the second member of the couplet further develops and expands on the concept from the first one (Ps 96:1; Prov 18:10–11; Wis 2:1b–d, 8–9b). Thus, structured parallelisms make the boundaries between sentences less certain and more open to multiple meanings. Parallelisms can be found in prose texts, as well. 11 Cf. W. HARRINGTON, Uvod u Stari Zavjet: Spomen obećanja (Record of the Promise: The Old Testament) (2nd ed.; KS; Zagreb, 1987), 298.
249
those who “combat the Spirit” (Or. 31,3), Gregory explains his belief in the divinity of the Spirit (Or. 31,3).90 Reasoning that the Spirit is consubstantial with the Father and the Son (ὁµοούσιος, Or. 31,10),91 he concludes that by virtue of their divinity the three are one (ἕν τὰ τρία θεότητι),92 of one nature and of one dignity (ἐν τῇ µιᾷ φύσει τε καὶ ἀξίᾳ τῆς θεότητος, Or. 31,9). Gregory’s opponents, however, tenaciously want to know the difference between the Son and the Spirit.93 They want to grasp the inner-trinitarian distinction in regard to the Holy Spirit – precisely the question Augustine dealt with in the passages quoted in the Decretum Aquisgranense. Gregory responds by demonstrating the distinction in the three persons’ relationship with each other.94 God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit differ in their relation of origin, the specific character (ἰδιότης) of the Father being the unbegotten (τὸ µὴ γεγεννῆσθαι), that of the Son being the begotten (τὸ γεγεννῆσθαι, analogous to the Augustinian natus est), and that of the Spirit being the proceeding one (τὸ ἐκπορεύεσθαι, in Augustine Procedere; Gregory of Nazianzus Or. 31,9). Gregory had developed this notion shortly before by means of quotation and exegesis of John 15:26 (τὸ Πνεῦµα τὸ ἅγιον95 ὅ παρά τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐκπορευέται), thereby anticipating the Augustinian argument.96 He 90 He substantiates his doctrine with a “swarm of testimonies” from the Bible (ὁ τῶν µαρτυρίων ἐσµός; Or. 31,29). After Tertullian, Prax. 13,6 (cf. DÜNZL, Pneuma, 26 [n. 54]) Gregory of Nazianzus and Basil of Caesarea are the first to state the divinity of the Spirit explicitely. Cf. Basil of Caesarea, De spiritu sancto (written 375/ 376), spir. 23,54 (τὸ θεῖον τῇ φύσει, “he who is divine by nature”), who, however, avoids calling the Spirit “consubstantial” (ὁµοούσιος) with Father and Son, or even “God” (θεός); cf. H.-J. SIEBEN, “Einleitung,” in Basilius von Caesarea, De spirito sancto: Über den heiligen Geist. Übersetzt und eingeleitet von Hermann Josef Sieben (FC 12; Freiburg, 1993), 7–63, 42. Gregory of Nazianzus expresses the divinity of the Holy Spirit from the very beginning of his public appearance, that is, already at the time when Basil wrote his Contra Eunomium (sc. 364 C.E.), cf. BEELEY, Holy Spirit, 99 (n. 89); A. MEREDITH, “The Pneumatology of the Cappadocian Fathers and the Creed of Constantinople,” IThQ 48 (1981), 196–211, 197 (dealing just shortly with Gregory of Nazianzus). 91 Cf. BEELEY, Holy Spirit, 101 (n. 89). In his monograph Gregory of Nazianzus on the Trinity and the Knowledge of God: In Your Light We Shall See Light (OSHT; Oxford, 2008), Beeley points out that Gregory in these passages wants “to show that it is not logically impossible for the Spirit to be God and consubstantial with the Father, even though the Bible does not explicitly say that it is” (168; italics K.B.). 92 Cf. Tertullian, Prax. 25,1: Qui tres unum sunt … (“these three are one”), referring to 1 John 5:8 and John 10:30. 93 Gregory of Nazianzus, Or. 31,9: Τί οὖν ἐστί, φησίν, ὃ λείπει τῷ Πνεύµατι, πρὸς τὸ εἶναι Υἱόν; Εἰ γὰρ µὴ λεῖπόν τι ἦν, Υἱὸς ἂν ἦν. 94 διάφορον τῆς ἄλληλα σχέσεως, Or. 31,9. 95 Cf. however NA28: τὸ Πνεῦµα τῆς ἀληθείας. 96 Because of the limitations of human mind, Gregory would not approve of further reflection on these divine mysteries, cf. Gregory of Nazianzus, Or. 31,8 with allusion to John 20:11.
)”
