32段。奥尔森在《基督教神学思想史》（The Story of Christian Theology）183页中将pneumatomachountes翻译为“敌圣灵主义者”，Spirit Fighter
或Patrologiae Cursus Completus，Series Graeca。由巴黎大主教Migne 于1857-1866年间编撰的教父文集，共166卷。
Nicene an Post-Nicene Fathers（NPNF）-208，p.102
比较两本书间的神学论点并不在本文的范畴之内。但是，我们可以由此勾勒出正统神学从亚他那修经安波罗修，再传至奥古斯丁的路线。
自从天主教于明朝末年来华，将Trinity 翻成三位一体之后，华人基督徒中间，就一直采用这个名词，其中的“体”乃是指当时通用的“实体（Ousia，即Substance或Nature）”，并非今日人所知道的“身体”。但Trinity这个字其实与尼西亚会议所决定的Three Persons One Substance 有别，应该照着字面翻成“三一神”，而尼西亚大会的决议，希腊文和英文的Substance 都是指着“实质”，“本质或本体”，应该翻成“三位一质”。本文为了顾及传统，故仍使用“三位一体”这个名词。
因为只有一位神，所以我们不可能将父、子和圣灵分割成为“三位同有一性质的神”。而且，因为神是“纯一的（simple）”，神性不可能容许任何非神性的属性，例如当属于被造之物的被造的属性。若圣灵如同特以皮西所宣称， 是被造的（就是与神“不同质（Heteroousion）”），那么圣灵必然被排斥在神格之外，这就意味着神格中的“不可分割性（indivisibility）”和“纯一性（simplicity）”完全被破坏了。所以，三位一体中的“不可分割性（indivisibility）”，“同质（homoousion）”，和“纯一性（simplicity）”是三个环环相扣的整体。破坏了这三者中任何的一个，必然会造成其他两者的崩溃，结果就是三位一体教义的瓦解。
父、子和圣灵有同样的神性，是纯一的，故此不可被分割。请参考对于“不可分割性”和“纯一性”的相关讨论。
“Therefore, he does not beget the Son by way of partition ……But the Son is said to be Son of the Father, and the Spirit of the Son is said to be Spirit of the Father. Thus, there is one Godhead of the Holy Trinity, unto which there is also one faith.”16段
“For no alien thing is intermixed with the Triad, but it is indivisible and homogenous with itself（homoia heaute）……They should have acknowledged what is written and joined the Son to the Father and not divided the Spirit from the Son, so as to preserve truly the indivisibility and homogeneity of the nature（homophyes）of the Holy Trinity.”17段
“For the Spirit is inseparable from the Son, as the Son is inseparable from the Spirit.”33段
“But the Son is said to be Son of the Father, and the Spirit of the Son is said to be Spirit of the Father. Thus, there is one Godhead of the Holy Trinity, unto which there is also one faith.”16段
“因为在三位中不可能混入任何与之不同的事物（For no alien thing is intermixed with the Triad）”，17段。这实际上就是28段中再度被提及的， 神的“纯一性（simplicity）”的观念。请参考“不可分割性”和“同质”的相关讨论。
“……祂不但与自己不可分割，也与自己是同质的。（……but it is indivisible and homogenous with itself（homoia heaute)）”，17段
“……They should have acknowledged what is written and joined the Son to the Father and not divided the Spirit from the Son, so as to preserve truly the indivisibility and homogeneity of the nature（homophyes）of the Holy Trinity.”17段
“The Holy Spirit demonstrate[s] that it has nothing in common with or proper（idiom）to the nature or essence of creature.”27段
“祂的里面没有任何不属于祂的或外来的（性质）被调和（mingled）到祂里面，也不是由造物主和被造之物组成的，而是完全的造物主和宇宙塑造者。祂是独一的，在本质上不可分割，而祂的活动（energeia ）也是独一的。故此，父在圣灵里，借由道，行了一切的工。有鉴于此，神圣三位一体的一（oneness）能够被保守，教会传扬只有一位“超乎众人之上，贯乎众人之中，也住在众人之内”（弗四6）的神──作为父，祂“超乎众人之上”，是始，和泉源；借由子，祂“贯乎众人之中”；在圣灵里，祂“住在众人之内”。这就是三位一体……”28段
Indivisible 和inseparable基本上是同义词，可以互换。
http：//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Chalcedon#Confession_of_Chalcedon
“……Those who say that the Spirit is a creature should say also that the Son, through whom all things were created, is a creature as well.”24段
奥古斯丁秉承了这个思想，他在《三位一体论》1.12.25中说：“因为我们根据圣经中的许多说法已经证明，凡论三位一体中的一位所说的，也是论三位所说的，因为同一本体的动作是分不开的。”在4.21中说：“但我敢说，同一本质的父，子，圣灵，创造主上帝，全能的三位一体，在工作上是不可分的。”
“But when we are enlightened by the Spirit, it is Christ who is in the Spirit enlightens us.”19段
“But when we are given to drink of the Spirit, we drink Christ.”19段
“But, the Son being wisdom when we receive the Spirit of wisdom, we attain Christ and become wise in him.”19段
“And when the Spirit is given to us, it is God who is in us.”19段
“But when we are made alive in the Spirit, Christ himself is said to live in us.”19段
在31段中，亚他那修还提到：“若子在我们里面，父也就在我们里面，就像子说的：‘我在父里面，父在我里面。’（约十四10）所以当道临到先知们时，他们就在圣灵自己里面说预言。（But if the Son is in us, so is the Father, as the Son says:‘I am in the Father and the Father in me’（Jn 14: 10). So when the Word comes to the prophets, they prophesy in the Holy Spirit itself.）故此，当圣经说到圣灵在某人里面的时候， 我们就应该领会为是道在那个人里面，赐给他圣灵。（Therefore, when the Spirit is said to be in someone, it is understood that the Word is in that person, giving the Sprit.）”奥古斯丁在《三位一体论》中有一段完全一致的表述：“但我敢说，同一本质的父，子，圣灵，创造主上帝，全能的三位一体，在工作上是不可分的。……因为父，子，圣灵，三者在同一本质中，乃是一体，不是由于今世的活动，乃超过一切受造之上，没有时间和空间的间隔，从永恒至永恒，是一，并像永恒一样充满了真理和仁爱。但在我的词语中，父，子，圣灵是分开的，不能同时称呼，并且各有其可见的字汇。正如我一称呼我的记忆，智力，和意志，每一称呼就个别的指每一项，但各项都由三者所说出； 因为这三个称呼中没有一个不是被我的记忆，智力，和意志共同说出的；照样三位一体共同发出父的声音，子的肉身，圣灵的鸽子，而我们却把每一事物个别的归于一位。我们凭着比方多少可以知道，那本身不可分离的三位一体，是由有形受造物的出现分离的彰显出来； 而且三位一体的运行，在那些个别彰显父，或子，或圣灵的事上，也是不可分离的。”
奥古斯丁在《三位一体论》1.9.19中说：“但当父和子与爱祂们的人同住时，难道圣灵被排除在外么？ ……经上既论到圣灵说‘祂与你们同在，也要在你们里面’，圣灵就当然不能被排除于那居所之外。……所以圣灵在父和子来到的时候并不会离开， 反要与祂们永远同在一居所里；因为祂既不会不同着祂们来，而祂们也不会不同着祂来。为求指三位一体，经上将有些事个别的归于三位中个别的一位； 然而称呼一位时，并不将其他二位排除在外，因为三位一体是合一的，是一本体，一上帝，父，子，圣灵。”
“The activity（energeia）of the Trinity is one. For the apostle does not mean that what is given by each [of the Trinity] is different and separate but rather that what is given is given in Trinity, and it is all from the one God.”31段
“For the gift and the grace that is given are given in the Trinity: from the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit.”30段
“But if it was Christ who was speaking in him, then clearly the Sprit that was speaking in him was Christ's Spirit.”31段
“......in the Holy Spirit; and, speaking in the Holy Spirit, they speak these things in Christ......”31段
“When the Spirit gave testimony to Paul（cf. Acts 20:23), Christ himself was speaking in Paul, insofar as the testimony issued from the Spirit of theWord. Thus it was that when the Word came to the holy Virgin Mary, the Spirit also entered with him（cf. Lk 1:35), and the Word in the Spirit, fashioned and jointed a body to himself.”31段
奥古斯丁在《三位一体论》中也有完全一致的描述：“但当父和子与爱祂们的人同住时，难道圣灵被排除在外么？那么上面论圣灵为何说‘祂……乃世人不能接受的；因为不见祂，也不认识祂；你们却认识祂；因祂常与你们同在，也要在你们里面’（约十四16~17）呢？经上既论到圣灵说‘祂常与你们同在，也要在你们里面’，圣灵就当然不能被排除于那居所之外。也许有人空想道， 当父和子一同来到爱祂们的人那里去，与他同住的时候，圣灵就要离开那里，好像是让位给那些比祂大的。但圣经本身驳斥这种属血气的观念，因为稍前曾说：‘我要求父，父就另外赐给你们一位保惠师，叫祂永远与你们同在。’（十四16）所以圣灵在父和子来到的时候并不会离开， 反要与祂们永远同在一居所里； 因为祂既不会不同着祂们来，而祂们也不会不同着祂来。为求指三位一体，经上将有些事个别的归于三位中个别的一位； 然而称呼一位时，并不将其他二位排除在外，因为三位一体是合一的，是一本体，一上帝，父，子，圣灵。”《三位一体论》1.9.19
“But when God is in us, the Son also is in us.”18段
“But if the Son is in us, so is the Father.”31段
“But if it was Christ who was speaking in him, then clearly the Sprit that was speaking in him was Christ's Spirit.”31段
“Such being the correlation（sustoichia）and the unity of the Holy Trinity, who would dare to separate the Son from the Father, or the Spirit from the Son of from the Father himself? ......or that the son is of a different being（allotrioousion）than the Father, or that the Spirit is foreign to the Son? But how can this be? If one were to enquire and ask again. How can it be that when the Spirit is in us, the Son is said to be in us, and when the Son is in us, the Father is said to be in us? Or, how is it really a Trinity if the three are depicted（semainetai）as one? Or how is it that when one is in us, the Trinity is said to be in us?”20段
“When we are sealed in this way, we properly become sharers in the divine nature, as Peter says（2 Pet 1:4), and so the whole creation participates of the Word, in the Spirit.”23段。参考彼后一4
“But if the Holy Spirit were a creature, there would not be for us any participation of God in the Spirit. Indeed, if we were merely united to a creature, we would still be foreigners to the divine nature, having no participation in it......But if we become sharers in the divine nature through participation in the Spirit, one would have to be crazy to say that the Spirit is of a created nature and not of the nature of God, for that is how those in whom the Spirit is become divinized. But if the Spirit divinizes, it is not to be doubted that it is of the nature of God himself. “24段
“Therefore, the Spirit is not among the things that have come into being but belongs（idiom）to the divinity of the Father, and is the one in whom the Word divinizes the things that have come into being. But the one in whom creation is divinized cannot be extrinsic to the divinity of the Father.”
“The Holy Spirit is participated and does not participate.（For we must not hesitate to repeat ourselves.)”27段
“For that is how those in whom the Spirit is become divinized. But if the Spirit divinizes, it is not to be doubted that it is of the nature of God himself.”24段
“Therefore it is in the Spirit that the Word glorifies creation and presents it to the Father by divinizing it and granting it adoption......[He] is the one in whom the Word divinizes the things that have come into being. But the one in whom creation is divinized cannot be extrinsic to the divinity of the Father.”25段
同样的逻辑也被亚他那修用来证明基督是神。参考《反亚流四论文》（Four Orations Against Arians）2.21：“因为若人与一个被造之物联合， 是不能被神化的，除非子就是神；除非那位具有祂（父）的本质和祂的真道披上身体， 没有人能够被带到父的面前。（For man had not been deified if joined to a creature, or unless the Son were very God; nor had man been brought into the Father's presence, unless He had been His natural and true Word who had put on the body......so also the man had not been deified, unless the Word who became flesh had been by nature from the Father and true and proper to Him. For therefore the union was of this kind, that He might unite what is man by nature to Him who is in the nature of the Godhead, and his salvation and deification might be sure.）”
Oikonomia 实际上是个双关语，它同时带有（1）神永远救赎的计划，以及（2)这个计划在历史中不同时代付诸实行的方式，两个含义。所以，在英文和中文，它分别被翻译为Economy── 经纶（或经世）以及Dispensation──分赐。前者强调计划，后者强调分赐。事实上，“时代论（Dispensationalism）”的英文字根：dispense， 就是oikonomia 的英文翻译之一。所以，Dispensationalism 更合式的翻译，应当是“分赐论”，甚至“经纶论”。李常受在《新约总论──神》第十四篇中对于oikonomia有如下的定义：“在已过的永远里，神立了神圣的经纶，祂永远的计划。（弗一9~11，三9~11，提前一4下）。在以弗所一章十节，三章九节，和提前一章四节，译为‘经纶’的希腊文是oikonomia，奥依克诺米亚，英语化形式是economy。希腊文的意思是家庭律法或家庭行政，指神的家庭行政，要在基督里将自己分赐到祂所拣选的人里面， 使祂能得着召会，作祂团体的彰显；所以等于经纶，安排，计划。我们可以用简单的话说，在已过的永远里，神立了一个计划，神圣、永远的计划。”页165
即“经纶的三一（Economic Trinity）”
即“素质的三一（Essential Trinity）”
Basil Studer, Trinity and Incarnation: The Faith of the Early Church, English Translated by Matthias Westerhoff, p.1, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993
故此， 也是在圣灵里， 道荣耀（glorifies）、神化（divinized）并认养（grant it adoption）被造之物后，再将它献给神。而那把被造之物联于道的，必定不在被造之物中，而那将儿子名分赐给被造之物的，不能在子之外。
事实上，“道成肉身”──“肉身成道”乃是教父神学的一大特色。
下是亚他那修直接使用oikonomia──economy 的范例：《尼西亚信经护文》（Defence of Necene Definitiaon）#25──“对于丢尼修，亚历山大的主教，他在写（书）反驳撒伯流的时候，根据（基督的）肉身解释了救赎的经纶，除了驳斥了撒伯流外，还清楚的表明了，不是父成为肉身，而是祂的道（成为肉身），如同约翰所说的（约一14）。（As for Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, he was writing against Sabellius and explaining in detail the economy of Salvation according to the flesh, thereby refuting the Sabellians and showing that it is not the Father who became flesh but his Word, as John said（Jn 1:14).）”《关于亚里米嫩和西流加两个大会》（On the Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia）#8──“我们知道， 祂就是神的独生子， 被父吩咐从诸天（heavens）降世，为了除罪由童女马利亚而生。祂教导门徒，并根据父的旨意，完成了神的经纶，被钉在十字架上，为我们而死，并降到地里面的部分，规范了那里面的事物，阴间的看门者看见祂（伯三八17）就恐惧战抖。（We know that He, the Only-begotten Son of God, at the Father's bidding came from the heavens for the abolishment of sin, and was born of the Virgin Mary, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled the Economy according to the Father's will, and was crucified, and died and descended into the parts beneath the earth, and regulated the things there, Whom the gatekeepers of hell saw（Job xxxviii. 17, LXX.）and shuddered）”
“认养”这个字的希腊文──υιοθεσια ，其原意是“放在儿子的地位（the placing as the son）”，强调的是儿子“地位”而不是认养的“手续”。与今日所理解的“认养”不同。
Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1（ANF01），p.471
这段话可被视为后世“信经”的始祖，将基督教的信仰简洁的涵盖于其中。
“The Church, though dispersed through out the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord...... but may, in the exercise of His grace, confer immortality on the righteous, and holy, and those who have kept His commandments, and have persevered in His love, some from the beginning [of their Christian course], and others from [the date of] their repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory.......But the fact referred to simply implies this, that one may [more accurately than another] bring out the meaning of those things which have been spoken in parables, and accommodate them to the general scheme of the faith; and explain [with special clearness] the operation and dispensation of God connected with human salvation.”
Against Praxeas，ANF03，pp.874-875
The Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity and Unity, Sometimes Called the Divine Economy, or Dispensation of the Personal Relations of the Godhead.
根据希腊文Alethea 的原意，这里的“真理”也带有“真实”或“实际”的意思。
“We, however, as we indeed always have done（and more especially since we have been better instructed by the Paraclete, who leads men indeed into all truth), believe that there is one only God, but under the following dispensation, or , as it is called, that this one only God has also a Son, HisWord, who proceeded from Himself, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. Him we believe to have been sent by the Father into the Virgin, and to have been born of her──being bothMan and God, the Son of Man and the Son of God, and to have been called by the name of Jesus Christ; ...... who sent also from heaven from the Father, according to His own promise, the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost......that one cannot believe in One Only God in any other way than by saying that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are the very selfsame Person. As if in this way also one were not All, in that All are of One, by unity（that is）of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons──the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. How they are susceptible of number without division, will be shown as our treatise proceeds.”
水流职事站，神学与神的经纶，《肯定与否定》， 第一卷第二期
特土良，Against Praxeas 7.2，ANF03，pp.874-875
天主教当时在其功德论上面建立了庞大的赎罪卷系统，把人的称义和得救变成金钱的交易，而遭到了路德马丁和约翰卡尔文的激烈反对。路德会因此推出了“因信称义”的教义。改革宗的教义则被总结为“郁金香（TULIP）”。
“And he then shews the excellency of the promises, that they make us partakers of the divine nature, than which nothing can be conceived better. For we must consider from whence it is that God raises us up to such a height of honor. We know how abject is the condition of our nature; that God, then, should make himself ours, so that all his things should in a manner become our things, the greatness of his grace cannot be sufficiently conceived by our minds. Therefore this consideration alone ought to be abundantly sufficient to make us to renounce the world and to carry us aloft to heaven. Let us then mark, that the end of the gospel is, to render us eventually conformable to God, and, if we may so speak, to deify us.”《Calvin's Commentary Vol. 45》，http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/calvin/cc45/cc45026.htm#vii.ii.i，2 Peter 1:1-4
注85. 实际上， 倪柝声于一九四八年的鼓岭训练中就曾经说过：“所以我们只许顺服，不许背叛，因为神再无其他的工作了。神差摩西、大，以及众先知，至终基督来了。在神的经纶中，教会乃是神最后的工作。”《鼓岭训练记录（卷一）》第十六篇，话语与顺服权柄的关系。这是地方召会在其信息中第一次正式使用“经纶”一词。在《中心的信息》，“一个求启示的祷告”中，倪柝声已经将以弗所一章十节中“要照所安排的，在日期满足的时候”，重新翻译为“为着时期满足时的经纶”。可惜倪柝声对它并没有进一步的解释。但是可以肯定的，李常受乃是继承了倪柝声，而使用了“经纶”一词。至于李常受为什么选用“经纶”，请参考《历史与启示》，台湾福音书房。 “按神性说，祂与父同体（consubstantial [co-essential]）；按人性说， 祂与我们同体（consubstantial [coessential]），在凡事上与我们一样，只是没有罪。……是同一基督，是子、是主、是独生的，具有二性，不相混乱（inconfusedly），不相交换（unchangeably），不能分开（indivisibly），不能离散（inseparably）。二性的区别不因联合而消失，各性的特点反得以保存，会合于一个位格、一个实质之内，而并非分离成为两个位格，却是同一位子、独生的、道上帝、主耶稣基督。”中文：http：http://baike.baidu.com/view/157338.htm，英文：http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Chalcedon。由此可见，《迦克顿信经》基本上就是把从使徒所遗传下来的基督论正统观念，以一种比较简明、浓缩的方式，再陈述一遍。
例如Daniel L. Migliore 的《信仰寻求认识──基督教神学简介》（Faith Seeking Understanding – An Introduction to Christian Theology）（Eerdmans）的编辑次序是：神学的目标（The Task of Theology）→启示的意义（The Meaning of Revelation）→圣经的权威（The Authority of Scripture）→三一神（The Triune God）等等。Alister E McGrath 的《基督教神学── 简介》（Christian Theology──An Introduction）的编辑顺序乃是：神学的源头（The Sources of Theology）→对神的认识：自然和启示（The Knowledge of God: Natural and Revealed）→神论（Doctrine of God)→三位一体（The Doctrine of Trinity）。这已经成为系统神学的标准架构。它是一种“人本”的模式：从人的角度，期望获得特殊的启示，来认识神，以及神学诸论。而神的经纶（Oikonomia）为轴心的模式，则是从神救赎的计划和执行的角度，来探讨神学诸论。
这是李常受所提出著名的， 也是在华人基督教界饱受争议的公式。这个公式乃是基于教父神化（theosis）神学的标准表述方式：“神成为人，使得人成为神。”但是在这两句话间加上了两条更为明确， 细化了的定义：（1)“在神的生命和性情上”──意思是，得到神的生命是神化的基础，得到神的性情是神化的结果；（2)“不在神格上”──代表不能与神同等，避免了西方基督教最为忌惮的，人进化成为神的任何可能性。不但在亚他那修的著作， 在所有古教父的著作中都可以寻到这两个定义。
《新约总论》是地方召会中，唯一一套以系统神学的诸论方式，将其教导整理，归纳的著作。第一册的目录为：第一篇新约与神新约的经纶（一）[br/]第二篇新约与神新约的经纶（二）[br/]第三篇神──祂的身位（一）[br/]第四篇神──祂的身位（二）[br/]第五篇神──祂的身位（三）[br/]第六篇神──祂的身位（四）[br/]第七篇神──祂的性质[br/]读者们可以从此看见， 地方召会乃是以神的经纶（Oikonomia）为基础，来发展其神论的教义。
亚他那修批判亚流派以人类的物质观念来刺探神的奥秘。
亚他那修的意思是，人不可能永远是父或子。他的身分会随着时间转变， 而称呼以及称呼后面的意义也会随之转变。这与神的“不可改变性”相对。所以，在神格里面，父，永远是父；子，永远是子。亚他那修这句话背后，就是反对亚流的“曾有一时子不存在”的谬论。
子的出生并不像人类的出生一样， 在出生就成为与父亲完全不同的独立个体。反而，子的位格虽然与父的位格不同，但是祂们仍然是一位神。
某些人认为子只是三分之一的神， 亚他那修在此驳斥这个危险的想法。
“子也不是父（Father）的一部分”这句话指的是“素质的三一（Essential Trinity）”，“也就是，父永远是父，子永远是子。就如同，父永远不可能成为子，子也永远不可能成为父”这句话指的是“经纶的三一（Economic Trinity）”。两者合在一起就是神的三一性。
亚他那修在此用神的“合一性（unity）”来捍卫圣灵就是神的真理。他的逻辑非常简单：只有一位神而圣灵就在这位神里面，所以圣灵必然是与神同质的，不可能是被造的。
三位一体的“不可分割性”和“同构型”（indivisibility and homogeneity of the nature（homophyes）of the Holy Trinity）是整个三位一体教义的核心思想之一。不可分割性保证了不会出现三神论的异端；同构型则在一个神格中维持了三个位格的不同（若只有一个位格，就不必谈同质了）。故此，亚他那修在此呼吁的就是：只要同时守住这两条底线，三位一体的正统性也就得以被确认。换句话说，减损了这两点的任何一点，就会危及三位一体教训的平衡。
“在圣灵里的基督（Christ who is in the Spirit）”这个说法，乃是直接取自于约翰十七章二十一节：“使他们都合而为一；正如你父在我里面，我在你里面，使他们也在我们里面；叫世人可以信你差了我来。”这处经文完美的体现了三位一体的“彼此并存（co-exist）”和“互相内住（co-inhere）”的关系。因为基督在圣灵里，所以基督和圣灵是“彼此并存（co-exist）”，所以他们必然也是“同质（homoousios）”的；也是因为基督在圣灵里面，所以基督和圣灵是“互相内住（co-inhere）”， 所以祂们也是“不可分割的（indivisible）”。地方召会对于这个观念，称之为“是灵的基督（Pneumatic Christ）”。亚他那修的这段话架构在“在圣灵里的基督”观念之上，不但完美的体现了他在三位一体教义上的平衡性，也让我们看见后世三位一体教义上的平衡性源自于何处！（20段中，“从父而来，经过子，并在圣灵里（from the Father， through the Son, in the Holy Spirit）”这句话对于这个观念表达得更为淋漓尽致）。另外我们当注意的是，亚他那修在这篇文章中的对手，乃是一班承认子与父同质，但否认圣灵是神的人士。所以，亚他那修的策略非常简单：只要将圣灵和子是一，这些异端人士的错误就是显而易见，不攻自破的。
亚他那修在此表明，“不可分割性”和“同构型”是捍神的“合一性（unity）”之两块基石。
亚他那修在此承认，从神的合一性（unity）而言，父、子、圣灵都在信徒里面。
请读者注意“从父而来，经过子，并在圣灵里（from the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit）”这句话的含义。
“从虚无而来（from non-being）”是被造之物的一大特征。“从神来的（from God）”的另一个同意语是“流出（offspring）”，指的是“与神同质”，就是神。故此，亚他那修能够肯定，圣灵与被造之物是完全无法相比的！
这段话可以说是亚他那修在这封书信中最精采，也是最无法为今日教会所接受的论述。他在此用来捍卫圣灵是神的论点乃是：“若圣灵是一个被造之物，我们就无法在圣灵里有分于神。反而，若我们只是与一个被造之物联合，我们仍然无分于神性。……若我们借由分享圣灵，而成为神性的分享者，谁还能够疯狂的教导圣灵是一个被造之物， 没有神的性情？因为这就是那些圣灵内住的人，如何被神化的。若圣灵神化我们，祂必然就有神的性质。（But if the Holy Spirit were a creature，there would not be for us any participation of God in the Spirit. Indeed, if we were merely united to a creature, we would still be foreigners to the divine nature, having no participation in it......But if we become sharers in the divine nature through participation in the Spirit, one would have to be crazy to say that the Spirit is of a created nature and not of the nature of God, for that is how those in whom the Spirit is become divinized. But if the Spirit divinizes, it is not to be doubted that it is of the nature of God himself.）”亚他那修认为，彼后一章四节下半中段的“有分于神性”乃是那些“圣灵内住的人”在圣灵里才能够得到的。若圣灵不是神，那么圣灵就是一个被造之物，信徒所分享的，不过也是一个被造之物罢了，不可能得到神的性情，也就不可能被神化（Theosis）。所以，“若圣灵神化我们，祂必然就有神的性质”，祂就必然是神。以“有分（Participation）-神化（Theosis）”作为捍卫圣灵是神的作法，也被亚他那修用来捍子是神。亚他那修在《反亚流四论文》（Four Orations Against Arians）3.70 中也是说到：“但是，人若与一个被造之物联合，就无法被神化，除非子就是真神。……同样的，除非那位道成肉身的，其性质就是从父而来，并真的与祂同性质， 人类就无法被神化。（But humanity would not have been deified if joined to a creature, or unless the Son was true God…… so also humanity would not have been deified unless the Word who became flesh was by nature from the Father and true and proper（idios）to him. Athanasius,Khaled Anatollios,Routledge,p.163)”在其他的地方，亚他那修甚至论到，若基督不是神，只是一个被造之物，就意味着祂不但不能拯救-神化我们，连祂自己都需要被拯救了。亚他那修常常使用“以子之矛攻子之盾”的战术，用对方所承认的教导来攻击对方的错误。亚他那修不断使用“神化（deification 或theosis）”作为捍卫基督-圣灵是神的利器， 除了代表当时的亚流派也承认这个教义外， 也证明这个教义在当时的正统性。很遗憾的，今日的更正教普遍抵制“神化”的教义，直到最近十年才开始进行大规模、严肃的反思。甚至连新教阵营中向来反对“神化”教义的改革宗，CarlMosser 也于2002年在苏格兰神学杂志（Scottish Journal of Theology）中发表了一篇名为《我们可能获得最大的祝福──卡尔文与神化》（The Greatest Possible Blessing: Calvin and Deification）的论文，呼吁改革宗正视卡尔文对于神化教义的教导， 在其之后，Gannon Murphy 于2008年6月1日的今日神学（Theology Today）， 以《改革宗的神化教义？》（Reformed Theosis? ）为题，发表了一篇呼吁改革宗建立一个“改革宗的神化教义”后，在改革宗内部引发了针对神化教义的大讨论，至今尚未结束。
亚他那修在此诉诸神学中“神的纯一性（simplicity）”的概念。就是神的性质是单纯的，也是独一的。一方面不可能混入任何被造的成分，另一方面也是独一，不可分割的。以此保守三位一体的一（oneness）。
希腊文energeia 正确的翻译应当是“能力”。但是英文版将此字翻译为activity， 故根据英文翻译为活动。下同
亚他那修暗讽，根据特以皮西（Tropici）的逻辑，所有的被造之物都应该是神了。
亚他那修在《尼西亚信经护文》14段末尾有一段极其类似，却又描述得更为清楚的叙述：“‘道成肉身’（约一14）的目的乃是要叫祂为所有的人献上肉身（为祭），好叫我们这些领受祂（圣）灵（Spirit）的人能够被神化（divinized）。除非借由祂穿上我们受造的身体，我们无法得到这个恩典。所以，我们得以被称为‘（属）神的子民’和‘在基督里的人’。正如我们接受（圣）灵（Spirit）的人，并没有失去我们本身的性质（idian ousian，指人性），所以主为了我们的缘故成为一个人，披上了一个身体时，也并不比神（God，大写，独一的真神）小。祂（He, 大写，指神的儿子）并不因为被身体遮藏而降卑，反而使它神化（divinized）并使它不朽。”（”For the Word became flesh”（Jn 1:14）in order that he may offer it for the sake of all and so that we receiving from his Spirit may be enabled to be divinized. In no other way would we attain to this, if it were not that he himself put on our created body. For thus have we begun to be called”people of God”and “people who are in Christ”.But just as when we receive the Spirit we do not destroy our proper being（idian ousian), so also, when the Lord becomes a human being for our sakes and puts on a body, he is none the less God. He was not lessened by the covering of the body, but rather divinized it and made it immoral.）