Patripassianism
In one sentence
A form of modalism implying that the Father himself suffered in the incarnation and crucifixion.
In simple terms
If Father and Son are not eternally distinct Persons, Jesus’ suffering can be described as the Father himself suffering; this is the Patripassian implication.
Biblical truth
Scripture teaches that the Son truly suffered and died in the flesh while distinguishing the Son from the Father.
Key Scriptures
Matt. 27:46 · Luke 23:46 · John 3:16–17 · John 17:1–5 · 1 Pet. 3:18
Example
The phrase “the Father was crucified” becomes possible if “Father” and “Son” are treated merely as names of one Person in different modes.
Who holds it
Historically the term was applied to certain modalistic teachings.
Opposing view
Trinitarianism
Not to be confused with
Not to be confused with the claim that God in the Son truly entered human suffering; the issue here is confusion of the Persons.
History
The polemical term arose in early controversies over modalistic Monarchianism.
Main point of debate
The dispute concerns who suffers on the cross: the incarnate Son as personally distinct from the Father, or God understood without personal distinction between Father and Son.