CAPUT III. Deum esse omnium conditorem, dominum et parentem, e sacris Scripturis probatur.
CAPUT XII. Deum enim Veteris Testamenti Scripturarum auctoritate probari.
CAPUT XIII. Eamdem veritatem evinci e sacris Novi Foederis Litteris.
CAPUT XIV. Idem argumentum persequitur auctor.
CAPUT XV. al. XXIII. Rursum ex Evangelio Christum Deum comprobat.
CAPUT XVI. al. XXIV. Iterum ex Evangelio Christum Deum comprobat.
CAPUT XVII. al. XXV. Item ex Moyse in principio sacrarum Litterarum.
CAPUT XIX. al. XXVII. Quod etiam Jacob apparuerit Deus Angelus, nempe Dei Filius.
CAPUT XXI, al. XVI. Eamdem divinam majestatem in Christo aliis iterum Scripturis confirmari.
CAPUT XXII, al. XVII. Eamdem divinam majestatem in Christo aliis iterum Scripturis confirmat.
CAPUT XXVI, al. XXI. Adversus autem Sabellianos Scripturis probat alium esse Filium, alium Patrem.
CAPUT XXVII. al. XXII. Pulchre respondet ad illud: sumus, quod illi pro se intendebant.
CAPUT XXVIII. Pro Sabellianis etiam nihil facere illud: Qui videt me, videt et Patrem, probat.
Chapter XV.102 According to Pamelius, ch. xxiii.Argument.—Again He Proves from the Gospel that Christ is God.
If Christ is only man, how is it that He says, “Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: because I know whence I came, and whither I go; ye know not whence I came, and whither I go. Ye judge after the flesh?”103 John viii. 14, 15. Behold, also He says, that He shall return thither whence He bears witness that He came before, as being sent,—to wit, from heaven. He came down therefore from whence He came, in the same manner as He goes thither from whence He descended. Whence if Christ were only man, He would not have come thence, and therefore would not depart thither, because He would not have come thence. Moreover, by coming thence, whence as man He could not have come, He shows Himself to have come as God. For the Jews, ignorant and untaught in the matter of this very descent of His, made these heretics their successors, seeing that to them it is said, “Ye know not whence I come, and whither I go: ye judge after the flesh.” As much they as the Jews, holding that the carnal birth of Christ was the only one, believed that Christ was nothing else than man; not considering this point, that as man could not come from heaven, so as that he might return thither, He who descended thence must be God, seeing that man could not come thence. If Christ is only man, how does He say, “Ye are from below, I am from above; ye are of this world, I am not of this world?”104 John viii. 23. But therefore if every man is of this world, and Christ is for that reason in this world, is He only man? God forbid! But consider what He says: “I am not of this world.” Does He then speak falsely when He says “of this world,” if He is only man? Or if He does not speak falsely, He is not of this world; He is therefore not man only, because He is not of this world. But that it should not be a secret who He was, He declared whence He was: “I,” said He, “am from above,” that is, from heaven, whence man cannot come, for he was not made in heaven. He is God, therefore, who is from above, and therefore He is not of this world; although, moreover, in a certain manner He is of this world: wherefore Christ is not God only, but man also. As reasonably in the way in which He is not of this world according to the divinity of the Word, so He is of this world according to the frailty of the body that He has taken upon Him. For man is joined with God, and God is linked with man. But on that account this Christ here laid more stress on the one aspect of His sole divinity, because the Jewish blindness contemplated in Christ the aspect alone of the flesh; and thence in the present passage He passed over in silence the frailty of the body, which is of the world, and spoke of His divinity alone, which is not of the world: so that in proportion as they had inclined to believe Him to be only man, in that proportion Christ might draw them to consider His divinity, so as to believe Him to be God, desirous to overcome their incredulity concerning His divinity by omitting in the meantime any mention of His human condition, and by setting before them His divinity alone. If Christ is man only, how does He say, “I proceeded forth and came from God,”105 John viii. 42. when it is evident that man was made by God, and did not proceed forth from Him? But in the way in which as man He proceeded not from God, thus the Word of God proceeded, of whom it is said, “My heart hath uttered forth a good Word;”106 Ps. xlv. 1. which, because it is from God, is with reason also with God. And this, too, since it was not uttered without effect, reasonably makes all things: “For all things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made.”107 John i. 3. But this Word whereby all things were made (is God). “And God,” says he, “was the Word.”108 John i. 1. Therefore God proceeded from God, in that the Word which proceeded is God, who proceeded forth from God. If Christ is only man, how does He say, “If any man shall keep my word, he shall not see death for ever?”109 John viii. 51. Not to see death for ever! what is this but immortality? But immortality is the associate of divinity, because both the divinity is immortal, and immortality is the fruit of divinity. For every man is mortal; and immortality cannot be from that which is mortal. Therefore from Christ, as a mortal man, immortality cannot arise. “But,” says He, “whosoever keepeth my word, shall not see death for ever;” therefore the word of Christ affords immortality, and by immortality affords divinity. But although it is not possible to maintain that one who is himself mortal can make another immortal, yet this word of Christ not only sets forth, but affords immortality: certainly He is not man only who gives immortality, which if He were only man He could not give; but by giving divinity by immortality, He proves Himself to be God by offering divinity, which if He were not God He could not give. If Christ was only man, how did He say, “Before Abraham was, I Am?”110 John viii. 58. For no man can be before Him from whom he himself is; nor can it be that any one should have been prior to him of whom he himself has taken his origin. And yet Christ, although He is born of Abraham, says that He is before Abraham. Either, therefore, He says what is not true, and deceives, if He was not before Abraham, seeing that He was of Abraham; or He does not deceive, if He is also God, and was before Abraham. And if this were not so, it follows that, being of Abraham, He could not be before Abraham. If Christ was only man, how does He say, “And I know them, and my sheep follow me; and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish?”111 John x. 27, 28. And yet, since every man is bound by the laws of mortality, and therefore is unable to keep himself for ever, much more will he be unable to keep another for ever. But Christ promises to give salvation for ever, which if He does not give, He is a deceiver; if He gives, He is God. But He does not deceive, for He gives what He promises. Therefore He is God who proffers eternal salvation, which man, being unable to keep himself for ever, cannot be able to give to another. If Christ is only man, what is that which He says, “I and the Father are one?”112 John x. 30. For how can it be that “I and the Father are one,” if He is not both God and the Son?—who may therefore be called one, seeing that He is of Himself, being both His Son, and being born of Him, being declared to have proceeded from Him, by which He is also God; which when the Jews thought to be hateful, and believed to be blasphemous, for that He had shown Himself in these discourses to be God, and therefore rushed at once to stoning, and set to work passionately to hurl stones, He strongly refuted His adversaries by the example and witness of the Scriptures. “If,” said He, “He called them gods to whom the words of God were given, and the Scriptures cannot be broken, ye say of Him whom the Father sanctified, and sent into this world, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God.”113 John x. 35, 36. By which words He did not deny Himself to be God, but rather He confirmed the assertion that He was God. For because, undoubtedly, they are said to be gods unto whom the words of God were given, much more is He God who is found to be superior to all these. And nevertheless He refuted the calumny of blasphemy in a fitting manner with lawful tact.114 “Dispositione,” scil. οἰκονομίᾳ .—Jackson. For He wishes that He should be thus understood to be God, as the Son of God, and He would not wish to be understood to be the Father Himself. Thus He said that He was sent, and showed them that He had manifested many good works from the Father; whence He desired that He should not be understood to be the Father, but the Son. And in the latter portion of His defence He made mention of the Son, not the Father, when He said, “Ye say, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God.” Thus, as far as pertains to the guilt of blasphemy, He calls Himself the Son, not the Father; but as pertaining to His divinity, by saying, “I and the Father are one,” He proved that He was the Son of God. He is God, therefore, but God in such a manner as to be the Son, not the Father.
CAPUT XV. al. XXIII. Rursum ex Evangelio Christum Deum comprobat.
Si homo tantummodo Christus, quomodo ait (Joan., VIII, 14, 15): Etsi ego de me testificor, verum est testimonium meum; quia scio unde venerim, et quo eam : vos ignoratis unde venerim, aut quo eam: vos secundum carnem judicatis. Ecce et heic illuc se dicit rediturum, unde se testificatur ante venisse, missum scilicet de coelo. Descendit ergo unde venit, quomodo illuc vadit unde descendit. Ex quo, si homo tantummodo Christus esset, non inde venisset; 0911B atque ideo nec illuc abiret, quoniam non inde venisset. Veniendo autem inde, unde homo venire non potest, Deum se ostendit venisse. Sed enim hujus ipsius descensionis ignari et imperiti Judaei, heredes sibi haereticos istos reddiderunt, quibus dicitur: Vos ignoratis unde veniam, et quo eam: vos secundum carnem judicatis (Ib.). Tam isti quam Judaei carnalem solam esse Christi nativitatem tenentes, nihil aliud Christum esse quam hominem crediderunt; non considerantes illud, quoniam cum de coelo homo non potuerit venire, ut merito illuc posset redire, Deum esse qui inde descenderit, unde homo venire non potuerit. Si homo tantummodo Christus, quomodo dicit: Vos ex inferioribus estis, ego de sursum sum; vos 0911C de hoc mundo estis, ego non sum de hoc mundo? (Joan., VIII, 23.) Ideo autem si omnis homo ex hoc mundo est, et ideo in hoc mundo est Christus, an homo tantummodo est? Absit. Sed considera quod ait: Ego non sum de hoc mundo. Numquid ergo mentitur, quum ex hoc mundo sit, si homo tantummodo sit? Aut si non mentitur; non est ex hoc mundo. Non ergo homo tantummodo est, quia ex hoc mundo non est. Sed ne lateret quis esset, expressit unde esset: Ego, inquit, de sursum sum; hoc est, de coelo, unde homo venire non potest; non enim in coelo factus est. Deus est ergo qui de sursum est, et idcirco de hoc mundo non est: quamquam etiam quodammodo ex 0911D hoc mundo est; unde non Deus tantum est Christus, 0912A sed et homo. Ut merito, quomodo non est ex hoc mundo secundum Verbi divinitatem; ita ex hoc mundo sit secundum suscepti corporis fragilitatem: Homo est enim cum Deo junctus, et Deus cum homine copulatus. Sed idcirco nunc heic Christus in unam partem solius divinitatis incubuit, quoniam caecitas Judaica solam in Christo partem carnis aspexit, et inde in praesenti loco, silentio praeterita corporis fragilitate quae de mundo est, de sua sola divinitate locutus est quae de mundo non est: ut in quantum illi inclinaverant, ut hominem illum tantummodo crederent, in tantum illos Christus posset ad divinitatem suam considerandam trahere, ut se Deum crederent; volens illorum incredulitatem circa divinitatem suam, omissa interim commemoratione 0912B sortis humanae, solius divinitatis oppositione superare. Si homo tantummodo Christus, quomodo dicit: Ego ex Deo prodii et veni (Joan. VIII, 42; XVI, 28), cum constet hominem a Deo factum esse, non ex Deo processisse: ex Deo autem homo quomodo non processit, sic Dei Verbum processit; de quo dictum est: Eructavit cor meum Verbum bonum (Ps. XLIV, 2). Quod quoniam ex Deo est, merito et apud Deum est. Quodque, quia non otiose prolatum est, merito omnia facit. Omnia enim per ipsum facta sunt, et sine ipso factum est nihil (Joan. I, 3). Sed enim hoc Verbum per quod facta sunt omnia (Deus est). Et Deus, inquit, erat Verbum. Deus ergo processit ex Deo, dum qui, processit Sermo, Deus est qui processit ex Deo. Si homo tantummodo Christus; quomodo 0912C ait: Si quis verbum meum servaverit, mortem non videbit in aeternum? (Joan. VIII, 51.) Mortem in aeternum non videre, quid aliud quam immortalitas est? Immortalitas autem divinitati socia est, quia et Divinitas immortalis est, et immortalitas divinitatis fructus est. Sed enim omnis homo mortalis est; immortalitas autem ex mortali non potest esse. Ergo ex Christo homine mortali, immortalitas non potest nasci. Sed qui verbum custodierit, inquit, meum, mortem non videbit in aeternum. Ergo verbum Christi praestat immortalitatem , et per immortalitatem praestat divinitatem. Quod si non potest exhibere, ut immortalem alterum faciat ipse mortalis; hoc autem 0912D Christi verbum exhibet, pariter et praestat immortalitatem: 0913A non utique homo tantum est, qui praestat immortalitatem; quam, si tantummodo homo esset, praestare non posset: praestando autem divinitatem per immortalitatem, Deum se probat divinitatem porrigendo, quam nisi Deus esset, praestare non posset. Si homo tantummodo Christus, quomodo inquit Ante Abraham ego sum? (Joan. VIII, 58.) Nemo enim hominum ante eum potest esse ex quo ipse est; nec potest fieri ut quisquam prius fuerit ante illum ex quo ipse originem sumpsit. Sed enim Christus, cum ex Abraham sit, ante Abraham esse se dicit. Aut mentitur igitur et fallit si ante Abraham non fuit, qui ex Abraham fuit: aut non fallit si etiam Deus est, dum ante Abraham fuit. Quod nisi fuisset, consequenter cum ex Abraham fuisset, ante Abraham 0913B esse non posset. Si homo tantummodo Christus; quomodo ait: Et ego agnosco eas et sequuntur me meae; et ego vitam aeternam do illis, et numquam peribunt in perpetuum? (Joan. X, 27, 28.) Sed enim cum omnis homo mortalitatis sit legibus alligatus, et idcirco in perpetuum se ipse servare non possit, multo magis in perpetuum alterum servare non poterit. At in perpetuum se Christus repromittit salutem daturum; quam si non dat, mendax est: si dat, Deus est. Sed non fallit; dat enim quod repromittit: Deus est ergo, qui salutem perpetuam porrigit; quam homo, qui se ipsum servare non potest, alteri praestare non poterit. Si homo tantummodo Christus, quid est, quod ait: Ego et Pater unum sumus? (Ib. v. 30.) Quomodo enim Ego et Pater unum sumus, si non et Deus 0913C est et Filius? qui idcirco unum potest dici dum ex ipso est, et dum Filius ejus est, et dum ex ipso nascitur , dum ex ipso processisse reperitur, per quod et Deus est. Quod cum invidiosum Judaei putassent, et blasphemum credidissent, eo quod se ostenderat his sermonibus Christum esse Deum, ac propterea ad lapides concurrissent, et saxorum ictus injicere gestiissent; exemplo et testimonio Scripturarum adversarios suos fortiter refutavit. Si illos, inquit, dixit deos ad quos Dei verba facta sunt, et non potest solvi Scriptura; quem Pater sanctificavit et misit in 0914A hunc mundum, vos dicitis, quia blasphemas, quia dixi, Filius Dei sum ego (Joan. X, 35, 36). Quibus vocibus neque se negavit Deum, quin immo Deum se esse firmavit. Nam quia sine dubitatione dii esse dicuntur, ad quos verba Dei facta sunt; multo magis hic Deus, qui melior illis omnibus invenitur. Et nihilominus calumniosam blasphemiam dispositione legitima congruenter refutavit: Deum enim se sic intelligi vult, ut Filium Dei, et non ipsum Patrem vellet intelligi. Missum enim se esse dixit (Ib. v. 32), et multa operase ex Patre ostendisse monstravit; ex quo non Patrem se, sed Filium esse intelligi voluit; et in ultima parte defensionis, Filii, non Patris, fecit mentionem dicendo: Vos dicitis quia blasphemas, quia dixi: Filius Dei sum. Ita quod ad crimen blasphemiae 0914B pertinet, Filium se, non Patrem dicit: quod autem ad divinitatem spectet ipsius, Ego et Pater unum sumus dicendo, Filium se esse et Deum probavit: Deus est ergo: Deus autem sic, ut Filius sit, non Pater.