NPNF2-08. Basil: Letters and Select Works - Holy Bible Institute

To the same Amphilochius.and of the mighty qualities attributed to the essence of God, image of power, image of wisdom,as Christ is called “the power of God and the wisdom of God”? 2981 Now of wisdomknowledge is plainly a part; and if in any part He falls short, He is not an image of the whole;and how can we understand the Father not to have shewn that day and that hour—thesmallest portion of the ages—to Him through Whom He made the ages? How can theCreator of the universe fall short of the knowledge of the smallest portion of the thingscreated by Him? How can He who says, when the end is near, that such and such signs shallappear in heaven and in earth, be ignorant of the end itself? When He says, “The end is notyet.” 2982 He makes a definite statement, as though with knowledge and not in doubt. Thenfurther, it is plain to the fair enquirer that our Lord says many things to men, in the characterof man; as for instance, “give me to drink” 2983 is a saying of our Lord, expressive of Hisbodily necessity; and yet the asker was not soulless flesh, but Godhead using flesh enduedwith soul. 2984 So in the present instance no one will be carried beyond the bounds of theinterpretation of true religion, who understands the ignorance of him who had received allthings according to the œconomy, 2985 and was advancing with God and man in favour andwisdom. 29862. It would be worthy of your diligence to set the phrases of the Gospel side by side,and compare together those of Matthew and those of Mark, for these two alone are foundin concurrence in this passage. The wording of Matthew is “of that day and hour knowethno man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.” 2987 That of Mark runs, “But ofthat day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither theSon, but the Father.” 2988 What is noticeable in these passages is this; that Matthew saysnothing about the ignorance of the Son, and seems to agree with Mark as to sense in saying“but my Father only.” Now I understand the word “only” to have been used in contradistinctionto the angels, but that the Son is not included with His own servants in ignorance.2772981 1 Cor. i. 24.2982 Matt. xxiv. 6.2983 John iv. 7.2984 cf. Ep. cclxi. 2. The reference is to the system of Apollinarius, which denied to the Son a ψυχὴ λογικήor reasonable soul.2985 οἰκονομικῶς, i.e. according to the œconomy of the incarnation. cf. note on p. 7.2986 cf. Luke ii. 52.2987 Matt. xxiv. 36. R.V. in this passage inserts “Neither the Son,” on the authority of , B. D. Plainly St. Basilknew no such difference of reading. On the general view taken by the Fathers on the self-limitation of the Saviour,cf. C. Gore’s Bampton Lectures (vi. p. 163, and notes 48 and 49, p. 267).2988 Mark xiii. 32.768