Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

Proverbs 8:22-31 in the Christology of the Early

Fathers
Maurice Dowling

The Ante-Nicene Fathers

In Patristic Christology, the concept of Wisdom became very

prominent, and the portrayal of Wisdom in Proverbs 8 - especially
vv.22-31 - was one of the most popular OT passages applied to
Christ. Even though some early writers occasionally identify
Wisdom with the Holy Spine, this is not typical of the Fathers in
generaL Most Fathers assume without question that the OT Wisdom
passages speak of the Son (or Word) of God.Z

Justin Martyr quotes Proverbs 8:22ff as part of his argument that

the Word (who is divine Wisdom) is distinct yet also inseparable
from God:

God begat before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a

certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is
called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now
the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then
Lord and Logos ...

He was begotten of the Father by an act of will; just as we

see happening among ourselves: for when we give out some
word we beget the word; yet not by abscission, so as to

1
Eg. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 4.20.3 (A.Roberts & J.Donaldson, Ante-Nicene
Fathers, Vol. 1, p.488). Theophilus in Ad Auto/. 2.15 appears to think of
the Spirit as Wisdom when he describes the divine trias as 'God, his Word,
and his Wisdom' (ibid. Vol. 2, p.101), but in 2.10 he applies Prov. 8:22ff
to the Son/Logos (ibid. p.98).
2
Some non-canonical Wisdom passages also fmd their way into the
Patristic repertoire, eg. Baruch 3:29-37 and Wisdom 7:22ff.

99
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

lessen the word [which remains] in us, when we give it out:

and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire,
which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], but
remains the same; and that which has been kindled by it like
wise appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from
which it was kindled. The Word of Wisdom, who is
Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and
Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the glory of the
begetter, will bear evidence to me, when he speaks by
Solomon the following: 'If I shall declare to you what
happens daily, I shall call to mind events from everlasting,
and review them. The Lord made me the beginning of His
ways for His works ... '[quoting in full Proverbs 8:21-36;
v.21 in the LXX is very different from the MT]. 3

Athenagoras and Tertullian use the Proverbs passage in the context

of their 'two-stage' history of the Word: there is the Word
immanent in the mind of God from all eternity, and there is the
Word expressed or sent forth for the purposes of creation.
Athenagoras and Tertullian make Proverbs 8:22ff refer to the latter
'stage', namely, the extrapolation of the Word for the purpose of
creating the world4 Athenagoras says:

That we are not atheists, therefore, seeing that we

acknowledge one God, uncreated eternal, invisible,
impassible, incomprehensible, illimitable, who is
apprehended by the understanding only and the reason, who
is encompassed by light, and beauty, and spirit, and power
ineffable, by whom the universe has been created through
His Logos, and set in order, and kept in being - I have
sufficiently demonstrated. [I say 'His Logos'], for we
acknowledge also a Son of God. Nor let anyone think it
ridiculous that God should have a Son. For though the

3
Justin, Dial. 61 - Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p.227f
4
The two stages correspond to the distinction between A.6yoc; EVOL<t8ETo<;
and A.6yoc; npo<j>opLKo<; in Theophilus, Ad Auto!. 2.22

100
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

poets, in their fictions, represent the gods as no better than

men, our mode of thinking is not the same as theirs,
concerning either God the Father or the Son. But the Son of
God is the Logos of the Father, in idea and in operation; for
after the pattern of Him and by Him were all things made,
the Father and the Son being one. And, the Son being in the
Father and the Father in the Son, in oneness and power of
spirit, the understanding and reason [vofls KIXt A.6yos] of the
Father is the Son of God. But if, in your surpassing
intelligence, it occurs to you to enquire what is meant by the
Son, I will state briefly that He is the first product of the
Father, not as having been brought into existence (for from
the beginning, God, who is the eternal mind [vous], had the
Logos in Himself, being from eternity instinct with Logos
[logikos]); but inasmuch as he came forth to be the idea and
energizing power of all material things, which lay like a
nature without attributes, and an inactive earth, the grosser
particles being mixed up with the lighter. The prophetic
Spirit also agrees with our statements. 'The Lord', it says,
'made me, the beginning of His ways to His works.' 5

The identification of Wisdom and Logos is even clearer in

Tertullian

Now, as soon as it pleased God to put forth into their

respective substances and forms the things which He had
planned and ordered within Himself, in conjunction with
His Wisdom's Reason and Word, He first put forth the
Word Himself, having within Him His own inseparable
Reason and Wisdom, in order that all things might be made
through Him through whom they had been planned and
disposed, yea, and already made, so far forth as [they were]
in the mind of God. This, however, was still wanting to

5
Athenagoras, Leg. 10 - Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2, p.133
101
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, JBS 24, June 2002

them, that they should also be properly known, and kept

permanently in their proper forms and substances.

Then, therefore, does the Word also Himself assume His

own form and glorious garb, His own sound and vocal
utterance, when God says, 'Let there be light'. This is the
perfect nativity of the Word, when he proceeds forth from
God - formed by Him first to devise and think out all
things under the name of Wisdom - 'The Lord created, or
formed, me as the beginning of His ways' ... The Son
likewise acknowledges the Father, speaking in His own
person under the name of Wisdom: 'The Lord formed me as
the beginning of His ways, with a view to His own works;
before all the hills did He beget me'. For if indeed Wisdom
in this passage seems to say that she was created by the
Lord with a view to His works, and to accomplish His
ways, yet proof is given in another Scripture that 'all things
were made by the Word, and without Him was there
nothing made' .6

In Justin, the Proverbs passage is used to demonstrate the distinction

between the Logos and the Father, and the priority of the Logos
over creation; in Athenagoras and Tertullian it is used to present a
picture of the Logos passing from an 'immanent' to an 'expressed'
state. The passage is also of some importance for Origen. In his
commentary on John 1, Origen expounds his concept of the
EtrLVOLCn or different aspects of the person and work of Christ.
Among the various EtrLVoLCn, Wisdom occupies a special place, and
Origen makes a connection between the words of Proverbs 8:22 in
the LXX, KUpto<; EK"t"LOEV I.I.E &px~v oowv ainov El<; Epya auwu trpo
wu ai.wvo<; E0E1.1.E.ALwoEv I.I.E E:v &pxfl, and those of John 1: 1, 'Ev
&pxiJ Jiv 6 A.6yo<;. In Origen's understanding, Wisdom is the
beginning of all the ways of God 'inasmuch as she contained within

6
Tertullian, Adv. Prax. 6-7 - Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3, 9.601f

102
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

herself either the beginnings or forms or species of all creation' 7 .

This Wisdom, Origen emphasizes, is not an impersonal attribute of
God but is in fact the first-born Son of God. 8 Origen makes use of
two meanings of &px~ the idea of an actual 'beginning' in the
chronological sense, and the idea of a 'principle' according to which
the world was made.

Wherefore we have always held that God is the Father of

his only-begotten Son, who was born indeed of him, and
derives from him what he is, but without any beginning, not
only such as may be measured by any divisions of time, but
even that which the mind alone can contemplate within
itself, or behold, so to speak, with the naked powers of the
understanding. And therefore we must believe that Wisdom
was generated before any beginning that can either be
comprehended or expressed. And since all the creative
power of the coming creation was included in this very
existence of Wisdom (whether of those things which have
an original or of those which have a derived existence),
having been performed beforehand and arranged by the
power of foreknowledge; on account of these very creatures
which had been described, as it were, and prefigured in
Wisdom herself, does Wisdom say, in the words of
Solomon, that she was created at the beginning of the ways
of God, inasmuch as she contained within herself either the
beginnings, or forms or species of all creation. 9

For Christ is, in a manner, the demiurge, to whom the

Father says, 'Let there be light', and, 'Let there be a
firmament'. But Christ is demiurge as a beginning [&px~]
inasmuch as he is Wisdom. It is in virtue of his being
Wisdom that he is called &px~. For Wisdom says in

7
De Princ. 1:2:2 - Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p.246
8
ibid. 1:2: 1
9
ibid. 1:2:2

103
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

Solomon: 'God created me, the beginning of his ways, for

his works' ... Consider, however, if we are at liberty to take
this meaning of &pxfJ for our text, 'In the beginning was the
Word', so as to obtain the meaning that all things came into
being according to Wisdom and according to the models of
the system which are present in his thoughts. For I consider
that as a house or a ship is built and fashioned in accordance
with the sketches of the builder or designer, the house or the
ship having their beginning [&pxfJ] in the sketches and
reckonings in his mind, so all things came into in
accordance with the designs of what was to be, clearly laid
down by God in Wisdom. 10

The first hint that Proverbs 8:22ff might be the occasion of

controversy comes with 'the affair of the two Dionysii' in the third
century, an affair which may be said to have anticipated the Arian
controversy of the fourth. In the fragments which remain from
Dionysius of Alexandria, there is no direct allusion to Proverbs 8,
but from the letter of Dionysius of Rome to his Alexandrian
namesake, it would appear that the latter had used Proverbs 8 as part
of his argument against the Sabellians. 11 Dionysius of Alexandria
apparently interpreted the word EKnaEv of Prov.8:22 too literally
for the liking of the Roman bishop. In his zeal to refute the
Sabellians, the Alexandrian Dionysius so stressed the distinction
between the Father and the Son, with the help of Proverbs 8 and
other texts, that he gave the impression that they belonged to
distinct orders of being - the Father being the Creator and the Son
being created - and he used two illustrations which seemed to
confirm this impression: the relationship between the farmer and the
vine and that between the ship and the shipbuilder. Athanasius, in
De sententia Dionysii, works hard to present Dionysius of
Alexandria in the best possible light, arguing that the Arians have

Comm. in !oh. 1:22

1
- Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 10, p.307f
11
The Roman Dionysius' letter is preserved in Athanasius, De Decretis 26
- Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Second Series (P.Schaff & H.Wace),
Vol. 4, p.l67f

104
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

no right to claim him as their 'partisan' 12 , whereas Basil ofCaesarea

felt that Dionysius had fallen into 'the opposite error' to Sabellius 13
Whatever may have been the precise beliefs of Dionysius of
Alexandria, that particular 'affair' ended peaceably. The same
cannot be said of the Arian controversy.

The fourth century

Arius and his kin appealed to a number of Biblical texts in order to

support their subordinationist Christology. They made use of any
passage which described the Father as the one and true God, or
which represented the Son as in any way inferior or subordinate to
the Father, or which portrayed Christ as being subject to limitations
and emotions incompatible with being divine, or which suggested
that the Son did in fact have a beginning. Inevitably, Prov.8:22ff
proved to be an important weapon in the Arian arsenal. The three
main verbs of vv.22-25 were treated as synonyms: 'The Lord
created (EK-naEv) me ... established (E8Ef!EALWaEv) me ... begets
(yEvv~) me.'
14

As far as the Arians were concerned, the meaning of this passage

was clear. The Son (i.e. the Word or Wisdom of God) was a
creature. The key verbs of Prov.8:22ff occur in Arius' letter to
Eusebius ofNicomedia, where he writes of the Son: 'Before he was
begotten or created or ordained or established he was not, for he
was not unbegotten.' 15 There is also a clear echo of the Proverbs
passage in Arius' letter to Alexander:

12
De sent. Dion. 19 - ibid. p.l83.
13
Basil, Ep. 9 - Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Second Series, Vol. 8,
p.123
14 A.Rahlfs, Septuaginta, Vol.II, p.l96

15
H-G.Opitz, Urkunden zur Geschichte des Arianischen Streites, 318-328
(Athanasius Werke Ill: I, Leipzig, 1934), p.3

105
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

God, being the cause of all things, is unbegun and

altogether unique, but the Son, being begotten apart from
time by the Father, and being created and established before
ages, was not before being begotten. 16

Similarly, Eusebius of Nicomedia wrote to Paulinus of Tyre in the

following terms:

We have learned that [the Son] was created and established

and begotten in substance and in an unchangeable and
inexpressible nature and in likeness to him who made him,
as the Lord himself says: 'God created me the beginning of
his ways, and he established me before time began; he
begets me before all the hills'. 17

Proverbs 8:22ff was a passage which, in the opinion of the Arians,

spoke plainly of the creaturely nature of the Son and his inferiority
to the Father. In their eyes, the text obviously referred to the pre-
incarnate Son; it could not be made to refer to the humanity of
Christ. The Arians found a powerful weapon in Proverbs 8. They
were following the standard line of interpretation in applying these
verses to the pre-incarnate Son, and Marcellus of Ancyra's attempt
to counter the Arians by applying the passage to the Incarnation
suffered from all the disadvantages of apparent novelty. Marcellus'
interpretation could be regarded as not only novel, but also forced.
Certain other 'subordinationist' texts, particularly those referring to
the person of Jesus Christ (e.g. 'The Father is greater than I'), could
with some justification be interpreted as references to the oLKoVOf!LO:
Ko:-r&. o&.pK&. rather than to the being of the Son himself. This device
was not so convincing when applied to Proverbs 8.

We shall consider in more detail Marcellus' interpretation of the

Proverbs passage, because he was one of the principal opponents of
Arianism in the period 320-345, although he is much less well

16
ibid. p.13
17
ibid. p.16

106
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

known than Athanasius 18 Before doing so, we should note that,

with the exception of people mentioned, but not named, by Gregory
of Nazianzus 19 , the Arians' opponents did not attempt to outflank
them on the interpretation of Proverbs 8 by the strategy of arguing
that this passage speaks figuratively and poetically of a divine
attribute, rather than concretely of a divine person. Fourth-century
readers generally accepted without question that the personal
language of the Proverbs passage indicated a divine person, and
that, since Christ was the Wisdom of God (as explicitly stated in I
Cor.l :24 ), it was obviously Christ that the passage was describing.
One way of countering the Arian interpretation was foreshadowed
by Origen, whose Christology makes important use of the concepts
of 'generation' and 'eternal generation'. Origen saw the phrase
'begets me' ofProv.8:25 as the key to the whole passage. It is clear
from several parts of Origen's work that for him the relationship
between the Father and the Son was most fitly described using the
verb yEvvaw, rather than KTL~w or 8Ef.LEA.t6w. Origen points out that
Prov.8:25 makes a significant use of the present tense, 'begets'
indicating a continual generation?0 There is a hint of a similar
approach to Proverbs 8 in a letter of Dionysius of Rome which
Athanasius has preserved. Referring to Prov. 8:22, the Roman
bishop insists that the verb 'to create' may have different meanings
and that in this passage it cannot possibly mean 'to make' in the
sense of'to bring into being'. In support ofhis argument, Dionysius
cites Ps.llO (LXX Ps.l09):3, Prov.8:25 and Col.l:l5. He
comments: 'In many passages of the divine oracles the Son is said to

18
References will be made to the fragments of Marcellus preserved by
Eusebius of Caesarea and found in E.Klostermann (ed. ), Die griechischen
christlichen Schrifisteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte. Eusebius Werke IV
(Leipzig, 1906).
19
Catachetical Orations 4:2
20
Horn. in Jerem 9:4 (GCS Origen 3, p.70). In contrast to his use of
yEvvciw, Origen betrays a certain diffidence about using K-r((w when
speaking of the Son: 'God having created the Son, as it were ... (Comm. in
!oh. 1:19; GCS0rigen4, p.24)

107
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

have been begotten (YEYEvvfjo9at) but nowhere to have come into

being (yqovEva l). '21

During the course of the Arian controversy, a number of writers had

occasion to comment on Proverbs 8:22ff, and some followed a line
similar to what we find in Origen and Dionysius. Eusebius of
Caesarea in effect argued that the verb 'created', of v.22, did not
mean what the Arians claimed. The context of Eusebius' principal
discussion of the Proverbs passage is his polemic against Marcellus
in De Ecclesiastica Theologia 3. Although he does not mention
Arius by name here, Eusebius is clearly arguing that the Church is
not faced with a stark choice between Marcellus' exegesis (ie.
applying Proverbs 8 to the Incarnation) and that of the Arians. In
fact, some time before the controversy over Marcellus' views, and
possibly before Arius had become notorious, Eusebius had had
occasion to comment on Prov.8:22 in his Demonstratio Evangelica.
Here he comments that, although v.22 indicates that Wisdom is a
yEvT)r6v, this term is to be understood in a qualified sense, making it
closer in meaning to yEVVT)fla. 22 When dealing with the proverbs
passage in more detail in De Ecclesiastica Theologia 3;2, Eusebius
argues that the passage proves that God and the Wisdom which
figures in Proverbs 8 are not one and the same: the Wisdom of this
text is not merely an accident or a predicate ( a quf..L~af..La - a word
rarely found in early Christian writers/ 3 This Wisdom is, in fact,
the Word or Son of God, of whom Paul said, ' ... Christ, the power
of God and the Wisdom of God' 24 Eusebius has no doubt that the
words ofProv.8:22ff are spoken by the Son, and he argues:

21
Dionysius is quoted in Athanasius, De Decretis (Migne, Patrologia
Graeca 25, 464D-465A).
22
Dem.ev. 5:1 (GCS Eusebius 6, p.210ft).
23
GCS Eusebius 4, p.139
24
I Cor.1 :24

108
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

Even if he says that he was created, he does not mean this in

the sense of passing from non-existence into existence, not
that he too, like all the other creatures, was made out of
nothing, as some have supposed in error; but rather that he
subsists and lives, being before and existing before the
creation of the whole world, having been ordained to rule
over all things by the Lord, his Father, and the passage says
'created' rather than 'ordained' or appointed' .zs

Eusebius cites other passages from Scripture to show that 'to create'
is not always used in the absolute sense of 'to bring into being out
of nothing'; it is sometimes used j.LHat1JopLK0(;. 26 However, Eusebius'
main point of originality lies not so much in these arguments as in
his appeal to the Hebrew text, no doubt through the medium of
Origen's Hexapla. Eusebius points out that in the Greek versions
produced by Aquila, Theodotion and Symmachus, we find that
Prov.8:22 has kr~oa-ro - 'possessed' or 'acquired' -rather than
the EKTLOEV of the LXX. Eusebius agrees that EKT~aw (from
KTUOj.L!XL) is a more accurate rendering of the original Hebrew (i.e.
the verb qanah, which Eusebius does not mention as such), and he
argues that, whereas KTLoLC.; is popularly understood as implying the
transition from non-existence to existence, KTfiOL(; on the other hand
indicates a relationship between that which is already in existence
and the one who does the 'possessing':

Therefore, when the Son of God says: 'The Lord possessed

(EKT~oa-ro) me as the beginning of his ways for his works',
he was declaring both his pre-existence and his unique
relationship to the Father, and at the same time the value

25
GCS Eusebius 4, p.l40. In answer to these comments, the Arians might
well have asked why, if the Son was in fact 'ordained' to rule over all
things, the text in question does not actually say 'ordained' but rather
'created'!
26
GCS Eusebius 4, p.l41. Eusebius quotes Amos 4:13, Ps.51:10,
Eph.2:15; 4:24,11 Cor.5:17.

109
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

and necessity of his own personal care and control of his

Father's works. 27

Eusebius points out at some length Marcellus' insistence that the

whole passage refers to the flesh which the Saviour assumed. 28 The
amount of space which Eusebius devotes to Marcellus'
interpretation is an indication of the strong feelings which he held
on the matter. What annoyed Eusebius was not that Marcellus took
issue with the Arians over Proverbs, but rather the way in which he
did so.

The factor which shapes Marcellus' interpretation of Prov.8:22-31

is the conviction that the passage refers to the Incarnation of the
Word. He appears to accept without question the reading EKnoEv
j.!E, of v.22, but he insists that this refers to the OEtrrEpa. ol.KoVOj.lLO:.
When we refer to the origin of Christ's humanity 'it is fitting to
speak of "creation'" 29 The Lord created the Saviour through the
Virgin Mary30 , and in this connection Marcellus has no difficulty
accepting that the EKnoEv of Prov.8:22 means 'brought into
existence':

God our master, when he made what had not existed, truly
created. For what 'he created as the beginning of his ways'

27
GCS Eusebius 4, p.l43. Gregory ofNyssa, writing against the latter-day
Arian Eunomius, also draws attention to the original Hebrew behind
Prov.8:22. However, Gregory is prepared to accept the rendering which
Eunomius is using and his main thrust is that the verse does in fact refer to
the Incarnation: 'He was created when he became man'; 'The words
"created me" do not proceed from the divine and immortal nature but from
that which was commingled with it in the Incarnation from our created
nature ... The sense of "created me" has reference to the humanity'. (Cont.
Eunom. 2:10; 3:2)
28
GCS Eusebius 4, p.l44
29
Marcellus, fragment 9. Klostermann, p.l87
30
Marcellus, fragment 10. Klostermann, p.187

110
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

was not flesh which already existed and which the Word
then assumed, but rather that which did not exist. 31

According to Marcellus, when Scripture speaks of Christ

prophetically in the words: 'The Lord created me the beginning of
his ways', we are to see this as relating to the 'ways' established by
the incarnate Lord:

It was therefore right, since old things had passed away and
all things were about to become new through the new life of
our Saviour, that our master Christ should declare through
the prophet, 'The Lord created me the beginning of his
ways' .32

For to us who intend to live righteously he is the way to the

fear of God, the beginning of all ways that lead from here. 33

He rightly calls our master and Saviour 'the beginning of

ways', because he is the beginning also of all the other ways
that we have had that come after the first way. This signifies
the traditions of the holy apostles who have, in accordance
with the prophecy, proclaimed to us this new mystery 'in the
most exalted of proclamations'. 34

Similarly, when Proverbs 8:22 says: 'The Lord created me the

beginning of his ways for his works', we are to understand these
'works' as meaning those of the incarnate Word, the works to which
Christ referred when he said: 'My Father works until now, and so
do I', and: 'I have completed the work which you gave me' .35

31
Marcellus, fragment 11. Klostermann, p.187
32
Marcellus, fragment 12. Klostermann, p.187
33
Marcellus, fragment 13. Klostermann, p.187
34
Marcellus, fragment 14. Klostermann, p.187
35
Marcellus, fragment 15. Klostermann, p.l87

Ill
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

Moving on to Proverbs 8:23 - npo wu al.wvoc E9Ef.LE.HwoEv f.LE E:v

&pxfl - Marcellus says that the use the singular al.wvoc is
significant. In his opinion, it refers to the 'age' which follows the
ministry of the incarnate Word. The text does not say npo Twv
al.wvwv (plural) and so Proverbs 8 cannot be referring to the
foundation of the Son 'before the ages' 36 Asterius, the 'Arian'
against whom Marcellus was writing, had obviously interpreted the
verbs 'created', 'established' and 'begets' in terms of the creation of
the Son 'before the ages', just as Arius himself had said of the Son:
'Begotten outside time by the Father, created and established before
the ages, before being begotten he was not' 37 As well as insisting
that there is a fundamental difference between 'age' and 'ages',
Marcellus argues that the verb 'established', like 'created', refers to
the incarnation, the KO:L!X oapKo: OLKOVOf.LLO:. The Apostle Paul had
said: 'No man can lay any other foundation than the one laid, which
is Christ Jesus', and so it is obvious that Proverbs 8:23 speaks of the
laying of a 'foundation' in Christ. 38 Marcellus anticipates his
opponents' argument that the phrase 'before the age' (npo wu
o:lwvoc) implies a divine activity at some time before the
incarnation; in other words they would interpret the text as meaning:
'Before the age [of the incarnation] he established me'. Marcellus
responds by saying that, because both the purpose of God and also
the prophesying of the new dispensation existed before the age of
the incarnation, the phrase 'before the age' is quite appropriate.

Just as the Almighty God long ago foreordained the

Church, so in his thought he first laid the foundations of the
dispensation of Christ in the flesh, through whom he
purposed to call the race of godly men 'unto adoption'. 39

36
Marcellus, fragment 17. Klostermann, p.187f
37
Arius to Alexander. Opitz, Urkunde 6 (p.13)
38
Marcellus, fragments 17-18. Klostermann, p.187f
39
Marcellus, fragment 19. Klostermann, p.188

112
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

Though this new mystery has been revealed in what are

indeed the last times, yet because this was foreordained
before this age it was appropriate that the prophecy should
say, 'Before this age he laid my foundations' .40

Eusebius preserves for us Marcellus' allegorical interpretations of

the various phrases used in Proverbs 8:24-25. According to
Marcellus, 'before the earth was made' refers to human flesh, which
Scripture describes as 'earth' ('dust'). 41 Marcellus rather tortuously
applies this phrase to the healing of human nature through the work
of Christ, rather than simply to the flesh which Christ assumed. 42
'Before the oceans were made' (v.24) refers to 'the hearts of the
saints, which in their depths have the gift of the Spirit' .43

As for what is said next - 'Before the springs of water came forth'
- Marcellus takes this as a reference to the Apostles. Why he should
do so is not immediately obvious, but it becomes clearer when we
bear in mind a traditional interpretation of the twelve springs of
Elim mentioned in Exodus 15:27. Tertullian44 and Origen45 saw the
twelve springs as a type of the Apostles, who were commissioned to
evangelize and to baptize all nations, and, going a step further than
them, Marcellus links together Exodus 15:27, Matthew 28:19 and
Proverbs 8:24b: 'And so the Saviour said to the holy springs, 'Go
and make disciples of all nations' ."'6 The next verse, v.25, is also
interpreted as referring to the Apostles:

40
Marcellus, fragment 20. Klostennann, p.l88
41
An allusion to Genesis 2:7 and 3:19.
42
Marcellus, fragment 21. Klostermann, p.188
4'
'Marcellus, fragment 22. Klostermann, p.l88.
44
Adv. Marcionem IV:l3:4 (Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina,
Tertullian Vol.l, p.572f)
45
Horn in Ex .. 7:3 (GCS Origen Vol.6, p.207f)
46
Marcellus, fragment 25. Klostermann, p.l89
113
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, !BS 24, June 2002

He says, 'Before the mountains were set in place, and

before all the hills, he begets me'. By 'mountains' and
'hills' he means the Apostles and the Apostles' successors,
indicating by a figure of speech how righteously they lived
compared with other men. 47

Again, Marcellus was following a line of interpretation which was

not altogether novel. In Hippolytus48 and in Origen49 , we find
examples where the mountains and hills mentioned in the Old
Testament are seen as prophetic references to the Apostles.

As for the latter part of Proverbs 8:22-31, Marcellus has to make a

rigid division between vv.22-25 and the rest of the passage. Verses
22-25 are made to refer to the Incarnation, with the help of a good
deal of typological exegesis. However, Marcellus would have found
himself in real difficulties if he had tried to force this line of
interpretation consistently in the following six verses. He is content,
it seems, to accept that vv.26-31 refer to the creation of the world
through the Word:

Since it was not possible that God should consider the

creation of the heavens apart from his Word and the
wisdom the belongs to the Word, Scripture has rightly said,
'When he set out the heavens I was with him' .50

For before the world existed the Word was in the Father.
When Almighty God decided to make all things in heaven
and on earth, the origin of the universe required an active,
efficient force. For this reason, since there was no one apart
from God (for, as everyone agrees, all things were made by
him), the Word came forth and became the maker of the

47
Marcellus, fragment 27. Klosterrnann, p.189
48
De Benedic. Jacobi 27, C.Diobouniotis & N.Beis ed., p.12
49
Comm. in Cant. 3 (GCS Origen Vol.8, pp.201, 205)
50
Marcellus, fragment 59. Klostermann, p.195

114
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

universe, he who first of all prepared it in thought within his

own being, as Solomon the prophet teaches us when he
says ... [Prov.8:27 -30]. 51

Eusebius of Caesarea points out the obvious fact that '[h]e who said,
'When he set out the heavens I was with him', was the same as he
that said, 'The Lord created me the beginning of his ways for his
works'. 52 He points out the basic weakness in Marcellus'
interpretation: 'If it was the flesh which said, 'Before the oceans
were made, before the springs of water ... ', it follows that, 'When he
set out the heavens I was with him', must also be said on behalf of
the flesh! ' 53 How Marcellus would have replied to this charge of
inconsistency we can only guess.

Marcellus' interpretation of Proverbs 8 is an excellent example of

his opposition to Arianism and of his desire to maintain the unity of
the Godhead at all costs. However, he is rather vague as to who
exactly is speaking in this passage. If the Word is the subject of the
whole passage then he appears to speak as someone who has a
distinct existence something which does not fit easily into
Marcellus' theology. If the incarnate Word (ie., in Marcellus, the
Son) is the subject, then v.27ff would mean that the incarnate
Word, and not simply the Word, co-operated with the Father in the
work of creation. If the whole of the passage is essentially poetic
language, where divine wisdom is personalized and the role of
divine wisdom in creation and providence is dramatized, then many
of the problems created by the Arian interpretation are solved.
Marcellus tackles the passage with the assumption that it speaks
specifically of the divine Word (as distinct from the Father) rather
than of wisdom as a divine attribute. Consequently, he rather ties
himself in knots by arguing that vv.22-25 speak of the incarnate
Word, whereas vv.26-30 speak of the Word or Wisdom through
which the world was made.

51
Marcellus, fragment 60. Klostennann, p.196
52
De Eccles. Theol. 3:3. (GCS Eusebius Vol.4, p.l53)
53
ibid. (p.154) .

115
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

Athanasius attempted a similar line of interpretation of Proverbs 8,

although he made a strict distinction between EKHOEV (v.22) and
yEvvq (v.25). Anxious to counter the Arian argument that,
according to v.22, the Son is a creature, Athanasius claimed that
4
EK-noEv f.LE referred to the humanity of Christ. 5 Similarly, the clause
npo wu o:Lwvo<;; E8EflE.A.lwoEv f!E referred, Athanasius says, to the
propose which the which God had of building his church upon
Christ; 55 yEVvq f.t.E, on the other hand, refers to the unique
relationship between the Father and the Son, a relationship which
distinguishes the Son altogether from the category of created
beings 56 . Athanasius' interpretation of these verses is in some ways
more satisfying because it avoids the strained exegesis which we
find in Marcellus, but Athanasius too is open to the charge of
inconsistency in his handling of Proverbs 8:22-31.

Another interpretation - also involving a sharp distinction between

EKnoEv and yEvvq - is that of Gregory ofNazianzus. In the Fourth
Theological Oration, he argues that in studying what Scripture says
about the Son we should adopt the principle of 'attributing to the
deity the higher and diviner expressions, and the lower and more
human to him who for us men was the Second Adam.' 57 Gregory is
prepared to accept the view of'the sacrilegious robbers ofthe Bible
and the thieves of the sense of its contents' that Proverbs 8:22 refers
to 'our Saviour himself, the true Wisdom' .58 But whereas 'created
me' refers to the humanity of Christ' (because 'created' implies a
cause and therefore cannot refer to his deity), the phrase 'begets me'
(v.25) does not admit the idea of a cause. Therefore: 'Wisdom is
called a creature in connection with the lower generation, but

54
Contra Ar. 2:46 - Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Second Series,
Vol.4, p.373
55
ibid. 2:73-77 (p.388fi)
56
ibid. 2:57-61 (p.379fi)
57
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Second Series, Vol.7, p.309
58
ibid. p.309f
116
 Dowling, Proverbs 8:22-31, IBS 24, June 2002

begotten in respect of the first and more incomprehensible.'59

Gregory is aware of people who interpret the words of Proverbs 8
'as those of Wisdom herself. .. For Scripture personifies many even
lifeless objects'. 60 But he does not specify which writers he has in
mind and he makes it clear that he does not agree with them.

Conclusion

A major feature of the controversies of the fourth century was the

tendency to make certain passages of Scripture into battlefields, or
strategic points which must be captured if the campaign as a whole
is to be successful. Certainly, the exegesis of Scripture is not a task
which Christian theology can afford to neglect. If Scripture means
anything at all, then it is worth taking the trouble to find out what
that meaning is. However, it has perhaps been overlooked that what
is important is the totality of the Biblical witness. In doctrinal
controversies there is always the danger that certain passages
become isolated as all-important, while the rest of Scripture is
treated as almost superfluous. The exegesis of Scripture obviously
entails the exegesis of specific passages and, indeed, of individual
words, but too often this exercise can become a scouring of
Scripture for proof-texts to be used in defence of established
positions. This article has concentrated on one passage which was
used as a weapon by different sides during the Arian controversy.
One wonders if the energy expended in pressing such a text into
service really contributed to a better understanding of the passage in
its Biblical context.

Maurice Dowling

59
ibid. p.309
60
ibid.

117