Patripassianism - Trinitarian Perspective

Trinitarian Perspective

From the standpoint of the doctrine of the Trinity—one Divine Being existing in three Persons—patripassianism is considered heretical because it denies the distinct personhood of the Members of the Trinity. In this vein patripassianism asserts that God the Father—rather than God the Son—became incarnate and suffered on the Cross for humanity's redemption. This not only denies the personhood of God-the-Son (Jesus Christ), but also distorts the spiritual transaction that was taking place at the Cross, which the Apostle Paul described as follows: "God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. . . . God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God ." (2 Corinthians 5:19, 21)

It is possible, however, to modify patripassianism so as to acknowledge the Divine Being as having feelings toward, and sharing in the experiences of, both God-Incarnate (Jesus) and other human beings. Full-orbed patripassianism denies Trinitarian distinctions, yet it is not heretical to say that God "feels" or "experiences" things, including nonphysical forms of suffering. With regard to the crucifixion of Jesus, it is consistent with Scriptural teaching to say that God the Father "suffered"—that is, felt emotional/spiritual pain—along with His Son. This was due to the temporary breach of their relationship when the Son took upon himself the wrath of the Father toward sin. Jesus expressed this temporal divine rift when he cried out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46)

(NOTE: This is not to suggest that God-the-Son Himself bears no wrath toward sin; we see from the book of Revelation, for instance, Christ himself executing divine wrath on the enemies of God. But in the economy of salvation, as taught in the Bible, a spiritual transaction was required, between a Judge and a Redeemer—so that sinners need not be punished. Since the Father has functional authority over the Son (though They are equal in Being), it is logical in the transaction of salvation that the "greater" should take the role of Judge, and the "lesser" take the role of Redeemer. Hence, at the Cross it was the Father who condemned and punished sin, and the Son who bore that punishment in our stead.)