meaning of ev elva, whenever it occurs in the writings of John, as John, x. 30; xvii. 11, &c. Cf. on these verses: Semler, Historische und kritische Sammlungen über die sogenannten Beweisstellen der Dogmatik, Erstes Stück; Halle, 1764, 8vo; also his Vertheidigung und Zusätze, 2n St. 1768. Michaelis, Einleit. ins N. T., th. ii.; and especially Griesbach, Diatribe in loc. 1 John, v. Appendix, N. T. Ed. ii.

SECTION XXXVI.

OF THOSE TEXTS IN WHICH THE FATHER, SON,

AND HOLY GHOST ARE SEPARATELY MENTIONED,
AND IN WHICH THEIR NATURE AND MUTUAL

RELATION ARE TAUGHT.

dren of God sometimes denotes his favourites, those beloved by him; sometimes those who endeavour to resemble him, especially in purity, love, and beneficence; sometimes both those who love and follow him as children a father, and those whom he loves as a father does dutiful children. In this respect, too, God is often called the Father of men-i. e., their example, pattern, the being whom they imitate. When the name Father is applied to God in either of these respects, as creator or as benefactor, the whole godhead is intended.

tament, ὁ Θεὸς καὶ Πατὴρ τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χρισ 3. God is frequently called in the New TesTov, Romans, xv. 6; 2 Cor. xi. 31; Ephes. i. 3, &c. This expression in many texts indicates,

THESE texts form the second class above men- (a) The relation in which Christ, as the Sationed, s. 35; and they shew how the texts of viour of men, stands to God; in which relation the first class are to be understood. They prove he is frequently called the Son of God, s. 37. (a) that the Son and Holy Spirit, according to God is represented in the Bible as properly the the doctrine of the New Testament, are divine, author and institutor (Harp) of Christianity; or belong to the one divine nature; and (b) that and also as the father of Christ, in that he sent the three subjects are personal and equal. In him into the world, and commissioned him as a popular instruction it will be found best to ex- man to instruct and to redeem our race. It is hibit this class of texts before the other. In clear from John that Christ himself often calls examining these texts we shall exhibit (1) those God his father, in reference to this charge and which teach the divinity of the Father; (2) of commission which God had given him. John, the Son; (3) of the Holy Ghost. xvii. 1-3, Πάτερ,δόξασόν σου τὸν Υἱὸν ἔδωκας αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν πάσης σαρκὸς ἵνα γινώσκωσι σε, τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεὸν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας, Ἰησοῦν Xploróv. This is quite accordant with that scriptural usage before specified, by which the author of a thing is called its father. And besides, teachers were called by the Jews fathers, and those taught by them, children. 2 Kings, ii. 12; vi. 21. Christ says to his disciples, Matt. xxiii. 9, Let none call you FATHER (as teachers are called), for one is your Father, (teacher, instructor,) who is in heaven.

The Deity of the Father.

When the term Father is applied to God it often designates the whole godhead, or the whole divine nature; as ɛòs & Пaτýρ, 1 Cor. viii. 4—6; John, xvii. 1-3. He is often called Osòs καὶ Πατήρ—1. 8., Θεὸς ὁ Πατήρ, οι Θεὸς ὅς ἐστι Harp, as Gal. i. 4, (a Hebraism, like the use of for the relative .) All the arguments, therefore, which prove the existence of God (vide s. 15-17), prove also the deity of the Father. In the scriptures God is called Father,

1. Inasmuch as he is the creator and preserver. Deut. xxxii. 6, Is he not thy Father, who hath made thee and established thee? 1 Cor. viii. 6, εòs & Пarηp i§ où zà návra, Ephes. iv. 6, Пarn návrov. The Hebrews call the author, inventor, teacher of anything, the father of it; as Gen. iv. 20-22, Jubal, the father of all who play on the harp, &c.; Job, xxxviii. 28, God, the Father of rain.

2. Inasmuch as he is the benefactor, guardian, and guide of men. Psalm lxviii. 5, The father of the fatherless. Job says of himself, (xxix. 16,) I was the father of the poor. Isaiah, lxiii. 16, "Thou (God) art our father and redeemer." Psalm ciii. 13, “As a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him." It was a great object with Christ to diffuse just apprehensions respecting the universal paternal love of God to men. Cf. Romans, viii. 15, 16, also s. 28, 30, 31. Hence he frequently calls God, Father, heavenly Father, &c. The name chil

(b) This phrase, the Father of Jesus Christ, in many passages, undoubtedly indicates a certain internal relation existing in the godhead of the deity of Christ to the deity of the Father, the peculiar nature of which relation is nowhere disclosed in the Bible, and probably cannot be clearly understood by men. We know, however, that while Christ always acknowledged that he derived everything from the Father, he made himself equal to him. Vide Morus, p. 63, s. 8. In this sense, Christ uses the phrase in many passages, and among others, in his discourse, John, v. This even the Jews noticed, and accused him of blasphemy, because he called God Пarépa idov, and so made himself equal to God, (ver. 18.) Nor does Christ blame them, in his answer, for understanding him in this way; but, on the contrary, goes on to say, ver. 23, that all should honour the Son even as they honour the Father. Cf. John, x. 30, seq.; Luke, ii. 49. Theologians therefore say: Pater dicitur dupliciter ; (a) izostatixŵs, personaliter,

incommunicabiliter, (de prima persona ;) (b) | race under infinite obligations, by the special ovouwdws, essentialiter; sic tribus personis esse commune. Morus, p. 60, note ad. s. 4.

SECTION XXXVII.

OF THE TEXTS IN WHICH DIVINE NAMES ARE
GIVEN TO CHRIST.

THE deity of Christ is proved from three classes of texts. Morus, p. 60, seq. s. 5-9. (a) Texts in which divine names are ascribed to him, s. 37. But from most of these texts, in themselves considered, we can derive no very strong argument for the supreme or essential deity of Christ. They rather prove his divineness than his deity. In order to prove the deity of Christ, we depend upon (b) texts in which divine attributes and works, and (e) divine honour or worship (cultus divinus) are ascribed to him. Both of these classes will be considered in s. 38, coll. s. 100. From all these texts in conjunction the result is, that Christ is called God on account of his divine attributes and works. Morus, p. 63.

blessings relating to our salvation, which be has bestowed upon us. But these benefits derive an additional value from the exalted character of the person to whom we owe them. And the gratitude which we shall feel towards him, and our willingness to obey his precepts and to believe his doctrine, will therefore probably be in proportion to the idea we form of his character. It is not then, as many would have us suppose, a matter of no consequence to undervalue the character of Christ, or degrade him to the level of a man. The truth of this observation is abundantly confirmed both by scripture and experience; and it should be seriously pondered by every teacher of religion.

The following are the principal texts in which the names of deity are given to Christ;—

1. John, i. 1, 2. Christ is here called aóyos Morus, p. 71, note. John is the only one of the New-Testament writers who applies this name to Christ. He wrote among the Grecian Jews, and for the Hellenistic Christians, among whom probably this appellation of Christ must at that time have been very common; which is the reason why he does not more fully explain it. It signifies among the Jews and other ancient people, when applied to God, everything by which God reveals himself to men, and makes known to them his will. Hence those who made known the divine will to men were called by the Hellenists aóyou, otherwise ayyɛhot, Sovho

ov· as, ✪ɛòs xρηται λóyos, Philo, Migrat.

Abrah. Vide Book of Wisdom, xviii. 15, on which ef. Grotius. Now this word was probably applied to the Messiah, by way of eminence, because he was considered as the greatest divine messenger; Rev. xix. 13.

The Hellenists, however, frequently associated very erroneous ideas with this word; and

Note 1. Works in defence of the deity of Christ. Among the more ancient writers, Calixtus, Whitby, Spener, Venema, defended this doctrine. Among the more modern, G. F. Seiler has written, and with reference to the present controversies, Ueber die Gottheit Christi; Leipzig, 1775, 8vo. Semler, Ueber die Beweisstellen u. s. w. 1772, 4to; particularly his historical notes. "Gottheit Christi, Ist sie wohl aus seinen eignen Reden zu erweisen?" (printed without name of the place, 1790, 8vo.) In the year 1786, the King of England gave, as the subject of a premium-essay, the proof of the divinity of Christ (in the sense of the Lutheran church), and appointed the theological faculty at Göttingen to award the prize, (a medal, worth 50 ducats.) This gave occasion to the follow-on this account John undertakes here to correct ing work of Semler, Vorbereitung auf die their mistakes respecting it, and gives it a very Königl. Grossbrit. Preisfrage von der Gottheit elevated meaning. He says: & Aóyos (the deChristi; Halle, 1787, 8vo. From twenty-seven clarer, revealer of God) existed Ev àpxy-viz., zov essays that were offered, none were judged wor- xóμov (na, Gen. i. 1-i. e., ab æterno.) thy of the prize. The faculty, however, pub- Did he exist before the creation of the world, he lished the following essay as the best: Jo. Frid. must be God; for before the creation nothing Flatt, Commentatio, in qua symbolica ecclesiæ but God himself existed. This pre-existence nostræ dei deitate Christi sententia probatur et❘ of Christ is also taught in his discourses, John, vindicatur; Gottinge, 1788, 8vo. The follow-viii. 58; xvii. 5, 24. And the Aóyos was with ing able and intelligent letters, written under fictitious names, owed their origin to this prize: Io. Aspontani ad Rud. Plimmelium, de deitate Jesu Christi, epistolæ quatuor; Lips. 1789, 8vo. Martini, Versuch einer pragmatischen Geschichte des Dogma von der Gottheit Christi, in den vier ersten Jahrhunderten; Rostock und Leipzig, 1800.

God-viz., before he revealed himself to men. Kai sòs žv ¿ Aóyos, propositio inversa, as in John, iv. 24. O Aóyos is the subject; the Logos was God. Crell's conjectural reading, ɛoù v & 2óyos, must be rejected at once, since all the MSS. agree in the common reading, which is undoubtedly correct. Vide s. 100. In this passage the principal proof does not lie in the Note 2. Morus, p. 65, s. 9, makes the follow-word aóyos, nor even in the word Sɛós, which in ing just observation Christ has laid the human a larger sense is often applied to kings and

4. Rom. ix. 5. Paul is speaking of the privileges of the Jewish nation, and mentions among others the circumstance, that Christ was derived from them, as to his bodily nature, § ův ô Xpio-xpiorós, Messiah, or king. In the oriental lanτὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα· and then adds, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάν- guages, kings are commonly called the sons TWV OEÒS, EÛROYNTòs eis toùs aiŭvas! If this re- of God, by way of eminence, (so in Greek fers to Christ, it is a very strong proof of his duoyevels and diorpe peis;) and the most distindivinity. For the phrase òs λorós is ap-guished among them his first-born, Ps. lxxxix. plied only to the supreme God, Romans, i. 25; Mark, xiv. 61. Besides & is used for ös tort, which usually relates to the immediate antecedent.

SECTION XXXVIII.

denote his Messiahship-Jesus also sometimes appropriates this name to himself. He says, Mark, xiii. 32, that he himself, as Tiòs, knew not OF THE TEXTS IN WHICH DIVINE ATTRIBUTES the time of the judgment of Jerusalem. To contend, therefore, that this appellation always denotes the divine nature of Christ, would involve us in unnecessary difficulty. But the meaning which we have now given will by no means apply in all the cases in which this appellation occurs. It sometimes denotes,

(b) The higher nature of Christ-e. g., Rom. i. 3, 4. Christ is here spoken of in two respects: first, xarà oápxa, in his inferior nature, his humanity, and in this he is called Tiòs Δαυίδ: secondly, κατὰ πνεῦμα ἀγιωσύνης, as to his higher, more perfect nature, rò Slov, and in this he is called rios ɛov, and solemnly declared to be such by God in his resurrection from the dead. Jesus, moreover, uses this title of himself in this sense, John, v. 17, seq.; and the Jews well understood that by thus using it he made himself equal to God; cf. x. 30, 33. Nor did Christ charge them with misunderstanding him, but, on the contrary, admitted the sense they had put upon his words; cf. ver. 18, 23; and x. 34. Again, the predicates connected with this appellation, John, i. and Heb. i. ii., are such as are never used in respect to any man, or any created spirit. Thus Christ is called μovoyevs. Moreover, Xplorós is often distinguished from riòs ɛou. Thus, Matt. xvi. 16, where Peter answers a question of Jesus, by saying, thou art the Christ, the Son of God: cf. John, xx. 31.

(c) He is also called Son of God, Luke, i. 35, to designate the immediate power of God in the miraculous production of his human nature. In the same sense, Adam, who was immediately created by God, is called the Son of God, Luke, iii. 38.

7. Tit. ii. 13, We expect the glorious appearance, the ἐπιφάνειαν τῆς δόξης του μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Here | it is objected, that if eòs uέyas related to Christ, the xai would be omitted. But since rou is omitted before σωτῆρος, both μεγάλου Θεοῦ and owenpos must be construed as in apposition with 'Inooù Xpiorov, according to a known usage of the Greek language; and so they are construed by many of the ancient writers. Besides, inipávɛca is the word by which the solemn coming of Christ is appropriately designated. The passage therefore, is regarded, even by Henke, as referring to Christ.

These are the most important texts of this class. Other texts are sometimes placed in connexion with these, which are less capable of defence, either on critical or philological grounds. Such are 1 John, v. 20; 1 Tim. iii. 16; Acts, xx. 28.

AND WORKS ARE ASCRIBED TO CHRIST; AND IN WHICH DIVINE HONOUR IS REQUIRED FOR HIM. I. Texts in which Divine Attributes and Works are ascribed to Christ.

THIS is the second class of the division mentioned in the first part of s. 37. Many doubtful texts are often placed in this class, in order to make out the proof, that all the divine attributes are ascribed to Christ in the Bible. But the proof of this is not at all important. For if it be allowed that one single divine attribute is ascribed to Christ in the Bible, the conclusion is inevitable, that he must possess all the rest. The divine attributes cannot be separated or disjoined; where one of them exists, all of them must be found. And the truth of this cannot be disputed. Vide s. 18. The following divine attributes and works are distinctly ascribed to Christ in the scriptures—viz.,

1. Eternity. Cf. Morus, p. 60, 61, s. 6. This attribute is ascribed to him in those texts in which he is said to have existed before the foundation of the world; for this is the way in which eternity à parte ante is always described. Vide s. 20. Here belongs the text, John, i. 1 (s. 37); and also John, xvii. 5, Glorify me with that glory which I had with thee ро τоν tòv xóopov elva. The glory here spoken of could not be that derived from the government of the kingdom of God, or of the church; because neither of them existed before the creation of the world; it can therefore be nothing else than divine glory. Here, two, belongs the passage, John, viii. 58, where Christ describes his higher nature, by saying, Before Abraham was, I AM (ɛiui); for by this same verb, in the present tense, does God describe his own unchangeable being. Accordingly the Jews understood him to assert for himself a divine attribute, and therefore charged him with blasphemy, and sought to stone him, (ver. 59.) And so frequently, according to the testimony of John and the other evangelists, Christ spoke of himself, in a manner in which it would have been presumption and blasphemy for a prophet or any created being to speak.

2. The creation and preservation of the world. This is ascribed to him, John, i. 1-3, Пávra δι' αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν, ὁ γέγονεν. Ver. 10, Ο κόσμος δι' αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο. Col. i. 15-17, Пpwrótoxos náons xrioews, not, primus inter res creatas, which would be inconsistent with the context, ver. 16, where the reason is given why he was яpwróτoxos but, rex, the ruler or governor (xpwtevwv iv nàow, principatum tenens, Col. i. 18); in which sense

Christ is also called яparóτoxos in Heb. i. 6, and
ápxn (i. e., àpxwv) TYS XTiσews Oεov, Rev. iii. 14.
By him were all things in the universe created,
(ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα τὰ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ
ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς,) the material and spiritual world,
(τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ αόρατα ;) everything which is ele-
valed, great, and powerful, (θρόνοι κυριότητες,
ἀρχαί, κ. τ. λ. ;) all things were created by him
(di avrov) and on his account, or for his service
(εἰς αὐτόν). He exists from eternity (πρὸ πάν-
zwr), and from him everything derives its exist-
ence (rà xávra iv avtý ovvéotyxɛ). Philo and
Josephus often speak of God, the Creator, in
the same way. Heb. i. 2, 3. Christ is here
described as pépwr, (i. e., conservans; cf. N, Is.
xlvi. 3; and the phrase apoy applied to God)
τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ· i. e., by
his almighty will or command. That in the
clause, di où xai rovs aiŵvas éxoínoɛv, the word
Sá may denote not merely the instrumental, but
also the efficient cause, is evident from many
texts-e. g., John, iii. 17; Romans, i. 5; 1 Cor.
i. 9; and especially from Heb. ii. 10, where
the same word is used in reference to the Fa-
ther, de où và návra. And that the meaning of
Paul was, that the Son himself was the creator
of the universe, is placed beyond a doubt from
the text, Heb. i. 10, where Ps. cii. 26 (Thou,
Lord, hast founded the earth; the heavens are the
work of thy hands,) is quoted and applied to
Christ. Therefore inasmuch as the eternal
power and majesty of the Father are declared
by the creation, so far as it is his work (Rom,
i. 20); the eternal power and majesty of the
Son are declared by this same creation, so far
as it is his work. For further remarks respect-
ing the creation of the world by the Son, vide
s. 47.

3. Omnipotence is ascribed to Christ, Phil. iii. 21; omniscience, Matt. xi. 27. John, vi. 46, He only, Ewpaxe Tòv яatépa. John, ii. 24, 25. He is also described as the searcher of hearts, who knows and will bring to light the most hidden things, 1 Cor. iv. 5. Indeed, it follows of course, that if Christ has created, governs, and preserves all things, he must possess omnipotence and omniscience. Here it is objected, that from other texts it is clear that Christ received both his doctrine and his power from the Father-e. g., Matt. xi. 27, яávra po raрedón vñò Tov natpós. John, viii. 26; xii. 49; Matt. xxviii. 18, all power in heaven and in earth is GIVEN me. John, iii. 35; v. 26; the Father hath given power to the Son to raise the dead, &c. But in these passages Christ is spoken of as MESSIAH, or as an ambassador appointed by God. And here it is evident, that he is considered in the New Testament both as God, and as God united with man. Vide s. 100, seq. Note. The passage Col. ii. 9, iv avt xaTaxi πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς, is quoted

to prove that Christ possesses all divine perfec-
tions. But the text must be explained by the
parallel texts, Col. i. 19, èv avrò̟ evdóxŋoɛ nāv
τὸ πλήρωμα κατοικήσαι, and Ephes. iii. 19, where
the phrase πλήρωμα Θεοῦ occurs instead of
πλήρωμα θεότητος, so that θεότης is abstract for
concrete, like κυρίοτης instead of Κύριος. Πλήρ
ρωμα means multitude, collection; as πλήρωνα
Tv Svwv, Rom. xi. 25. By the phrase, then,
πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος, the whole multi-
tude of men living under the divine government
are intended, and when of these it is said, that
they iv avr (Xplory) xaroixɛi, it is the same as
to say, All men without distinction, whether
Jews or Greeks, have citizenship in the Chris-
tian church,-all are the people of God. Ewua-
τικῶς is equivalent to ὡς σῶμα, and must be ex-
plained by the parallel texts, Col. i. 18; Ephes.
i. 22; iv. 15; according to which the meaning
of the phrase is, they compose the BODY, or church,
of which Christ is the head (xepan.) Næsselt,
in his Weihnachts programm. of 1785, gives
another explanation. He supposes the allu-
sion is to the perfect divine instruction which
is given by Christ, and that in a real and dis-
tinct manner (owμatixis); and not in symbols
and images, as in the Mosaic religion.

II. Texts in which Divine Honour is required for
Christ.

This is the third class of texts in proof of the divinity of Christ. Christ and his apostles expressly teach that divine honour and worship must be paid to God only. Vide Matt. iv. 10, coll. Deut. vi. 13; Rev. xix. 10. And in this they agree entirely with the prophets of the Old Testament. Vide Isa. xlii. 8; xlviii. 11. Hence it is just to conclude, that when Christ himself and his apostles require that divine worship should be paid to him, they acknowledge that he is God; otherwise they would require what, according to their own principles, would be blasphemy. The following are the principal texts of this class :

1. John, v. 23, All should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father; whoso honours not the Son, honours not the Father who hath sent him. We reason thus:-If the worship due to the Father should be paid to the Son, and if he who withholds from the Son such worship as is due to the Father, is regarded as if he honoured not the Father, it follows that equal honour is due to the Son with the Father. But Christ, according to his own maxims, could have laid no claim to this honour if he were less than the Father, or, which is the same thing, were not God. Now the Son is honoured as the Father, his instructions and precepts are embraced and obeyed as those of the Father; when the same unlimited confidence is placed in him as is placed in the Father; when all our salvation is