Chapter XIV.—Of the Words or the Voice that Came from Heaven Upon Him When He Had Been Baptized.

31. Thereafter Matthew proceeds thus: “And Jesus, when He was baptized, went up straightway out of the water; and, lo, the heavens were opened unto Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon Him; and, lo, a voice from heaven saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” This incident is also recorded in a similar manner by two of the others, namely Mark and Luke. But at the same time, while preserving the sense intact, they use different modes of expression in reproducing the terms of the voice which came from heaven. For although Matthew tells us that the words were, “This is my beloved Son,” while the other two put them in this form, “Thou art my beloved Son,” these different methods of speech serve but to convey the same sense, according to the principle which has been discussed above. For the heavenly voice gave utterance only to one of these sentences; but by the form of words thus adopted, namely, “This is my beloved Son,” it was the evangelist’s intention to show that the saying was meant to intimate specially to the hearers there [and not to Jesus] the fact that He was the Son of God. With this view, he chose to give the sentence, “Thou art my beloved Son,” this turn, “This is my beloved Son,” as if it were addressed directly to the people. For it was not meant to intimate to Christ a fact which He knew already; but the object was to let the people who were present hear it, for whose sakes indeed the voice itself was given. But furthermore now, with regard to the circumstance that the first of them puts the saying thus, “In whom I am well pleased,”307    In quo mihi complacui—well pleased with myself. the second thus, “In Thee I am well pleased;”308    In te complacui. and the third thus, “In Thee it has pleased me;”309    In te complacuit mihi. Matt. iii. 16, 17; Mark i. 10, 11; Luke iii. 22. [The Greek mss., of most weight, show no variation between Mark and Luke in the last clause.—R.]—if you ask which of these different modes represents what was actually expressed by the voice, you may fix on whichever you will, provided only that you understand that those of the writers who have not reproduced the self-same form of speech have still reproduced the identical sense intended to be conveyed. And these variations in the modes of expression are also useful in this way, that they make it possible for us to reach a more adequate conception of the saying than might have been the case with only one form, and that they also secure it against being interpreted in a sense not consonant with the real state of the case. For as to the sentence, “In whom I am well pleased,”310    In quo mihi complacui—as if = "in" whom I am well pleased with myself. if any one thinks of taking it as if it meant that God is pleased with Himself in the Son, he is taught a lesson of prudence by the other turn which is given to the saying, “In Thee I am well pleased.”311    In te complacui. And on the other hand, if, looking at this last by itself, any one supposes the meaning to be, that in the Son the Father had favour with men, he learns something from the third form of the utterance, “In Thee it has pleased me.”312    In te complacuit mihi. From this it becomes sufficiently apparent, that whichever of the evangelists may have preserved for us the words as they were literally uttered by the heavenly voice, the others have varied the terms only with the object of setting forth the same sense more familiarly; so that what is thus given by all of them might be understood as if the expression were: In Thee I have set my good pleasure; that is to say, by Thee to do what is my pleasure.313    In te placitum meum constitui, hoc est, per te gerere quod mihi placet. [Greek aorist points to a past act; hence “set my good pleasure” is a better rendering of the verb, in all three accounts, than “am well pleased.”—R.] But once more, with respect to that rendering which is contained in some codices of the Gospel according to Luke, and which bears that the words heard in the heavenly voice were those that are written in the Psalm, “Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten Thee;”314    Ps. ii. 7. although it is said not to be found in the more ancient Greek codices, yet if it can be established by any copies worthy of credit, what results but that we suppose both voices to have been heard from heaven, in one or other verbal order?

CAPUT XIV. De verbis vocis factae de coelo super baptizatum.

31. Deinde sequitur Matthaeus: Baptizatus autem confestim ascendit de aqua. Et ecce aperti sunt ei coeli, et vidit Spiritum Dei descendentem sicut columbam, et venientem super se. Et ecce vox de coelis dicens: Hic est Filius meus dilectus, in quo mihi complacui. Hoc et alii duo, Marcus et Lucas, similiter narrant: sed de verbis vocis quae de coelo facta est, variant locutionem, salva tamen sententia. Quod enim Matthaeus ait dictum, Hic est Filius meus dilectus, et alii duo dicunt, Tu es Filius meus dilectus, ad eamdem sententiam explicandam valet, sicut superius tractatum est. Vox enim coelestis unum horum dixit, sed Evangelista ostendere voluit ad id valere quod dictum est, Hic est Filius meus, ut illis potius qui audiebant indicaretur quod ipse esset Filius Dei, atque ita dictum referre voluit, Tu es Filius meus, ac si diceretur illis, Hic est Filius meus. Non enim Christo indicabatur quod sciebat: sed audiebant qui aderant, propter quos etiam ipsa vox facta est. Jam vero quod alius dicit, in quo mihi complacui; alius, in te complacui, alius, in te complacuit mihi (Matth. III, 16, 17; Marc. I, 10, 11, et Luc. III, 22): si quaeris quid horum in illa voce sonuerit, quodlibet accipe, dummodo intelligas eos qui non eamdem locutionem retulerunt, eamdem retulisse sententiam. Quae diversitas locutionum ad hoc etiam utilis est, ne uno modo dictum minus intelligatur, et aliter quam res se habet, interpretetur. Quod enim dictum est, in quo mihi complacui, 1093 si velit quis ita intelligere, ut Deus in Filio sibi placuisse videatur; admonetur ex eo quod dictum est, in te complacui. Si rursus ex hoc uno intelligat quisque, in Filio Patrem placuisse hominibus; admonetur ex eo quod dictum est, in te complacuit mihi. Ex quo satis apparet, quilibet Evangelistarum coelestis vocis etiam verba tenuerit, alios ad eamdem sententiam familiarius explicandam verba variasse: ut intelligatur hoc dictum esse ab omnibus, tanquam diceretur, In te placitum meum constitui, hoc est, per te gerere quod mihi placet. Illud vero quod nonnulli codices habent secundum Lucam, hoc illa voce sonuisse quod in Psalmo scriptum est, Filius meus es tu, ego hodie genui te (Psal. II, 7); quanquam in antiquioribus codicibus graecis non inveniri perhibeatur, tamen si aliquibus fide dignis exemplaribus confirmari possit, quid aliud quam utrumque intelligendum est quolibet verborum ordine de coelo sonuisse?