Chapter IV.-The
God of the
Law and the
Prophets, and the
Father of Our
Lord Jesus Christ, is the Same
God.
1.
Having now
briefly arranged these
points in
order as we
best could, it
follows that,
agreeably to our
intention from the first, we
refute those who
think that the
Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ is a
different God from Him who
gave the
answers of the
law to
Moses, or
commissioned the
prophets, who is the
God of our
fathers,
Abraham,
Isaac, and
Jacob. For in this
article of
faith, first of all, we must be
firmly grounded. We have to
consider, then, the
expression of
frequent recurrence in the
Gospels, and
subjoined to all the
acts of our
Lord and
Saviour, "that it might be
fulfilled which was
spoken by this or that
prophet," it
being manifest that the
prophets are the
prophets of that
God who made the
world. From this therefore we
draw the
conclusion, that He who
sent the
prophets, Himself
predicted what was to be
foretold of
Christ. And there is no
doubt that the
Father Himself, and not another
different from Him,
uttered these
predictions. The
practice, moreover, of the
Saviour or His
apostles,
frequently quoting illustrations from the
Old Testament,
shows that they
attribute authority to the
ancients. The
injunction also of the
Saviour, when
exhorting His
disciples to the
exercise of
kindness, "Be ye
perfect, even as your
Father who is in
heaven is
perfect; for He
commands His
sun to
rise upon the
evil and the
good, and
sendeth rain on the
just and on the
unjust," most
evidently suggests even to a
person of
feeble understanding, that He is
proposing to the
imitation of His
disciples no other
God than the
maker of
heaven and the
bestower of the
rain. Again, what else does the
expression, which
ought to be used by those who
pray, "Our
Father who
art in
heaven,"
appear to
indicate,
save that
God is to be
sought in the
better parts of the
world,
i.e., of His
creation? Further, do not those
admirable principles which He
lays down
respecting oaths,
saying that we
ought not to "
swear either by
heaven, because it is the
throne of
God; nor by the
earth, because it is His
footstool,"
harmonize most
clearly with the
words of the
prophet, "
Heaven is My
throne, and the
earth is My
footstool? " And also when
casting out of the
temple those who
sold sheep, and
oxen, and
doves, and
pouring out the
tables of the
money-changers, and
saying, "
Take these
things, hence, and do not make My
Father's
house a
house of
merchandise," He
undoubtedly called Him His
Father, to whose
name Solomon had
raised a
magnificent temple. The
words, moreover, "Have you not
read what was
spoken by
God to
Moses: I am the
God of
Abraham, and the
God of
Isaac, and the
God of
Jacob; He is not a
God of the
dead, but of the
living," most
clearly teach us, that He
called the
God of the
patriarchs (because they were
holy, and were
alive) the
God of the
living, the same,
viz., who had
said in the
prophets, "I am
God, and besides Me there is no
God." For if the
Saviour,
knowing that He who is
written in the
law is the
God of
Abraham, and that it is the same who
says, "I am
God, and besides Me there is no
God,
acknowledges that very one to be His
Father who is
ignorant of the
existence of any other
God above Himself, as the
heretics suppose, He
absurdly declares Him to be His
Father who does not
know of a
greater God. But if it is not from
ignorance, but from
deceit, that He
says there is no other
God than Himself, then it is a much
greater absurdity to
confess that His
Father is
guilty of
falsehood. From all which this
conclusion is
arrived at, that He
knows of no other
Father than
God, the
Founder and
Creator of all
things.
2. It would be
tedious to
collect out of all the
passages in the
Gospels the
proofs by which the
God of the
law and of the
Gospels is
shown to be one and the same. Let us
touch briefly upon the
Acts of the
Apostles, where
Stephen and the other
apostles address their
prayers to that
God who made
heaven and
earth, and who
spoke by the
mouth of His
holy prophets,
calling Him the "
God of
Abraham, of
Isaac, and of
Jacob; "the
God who "
brought forth His
people out of the
land of
Egypt." Which
expressions undoubtedly clearly direct our
understandings to
faith in the
Creator, and
implant an
affection for Him in those who have
learned piously and
faithfully thus to
think of Him; according to the
words of the
Saviour Himself, who, when He was
asked which was the
greatest commandment in the
law,
replied, "Thou shalt
love the
Lord thy
God with all thy
heart, and with all thy
soul, and with all thy
mind. And the
second is like unto it, Thou shalt
love thy
neighbour as
thyself." And to these He
added: "On these
two commandments hang all the
law and the
prophets." How is it, then, that He
commends to him whom He was
instructing, and was
leading to
enter on the
office of a
disciple, this
commandment above all others, by which
undoubtedly love was to be
kindled in him towards the
God of that
law,
inasmuch as such had been
declared by the
law in these very
words? But let it be
granted,
notwithstanding all these most
evident proofs, that it is of some other
unknown God that the
Saviour says, "Thou shalt
love the
Lord thy
God with all thy
heart," etc., etc. How, in that
case, if the
law and the
prophets are, as they
say, from the
Creator,
i.e., from another
God than He whom He
calls good, shall that
appear to be
logically said which He
subjoins,
viz., that "on these
two commandments hang the
law and the
prophets? "For how shall that which is
strange and
foreign to
God depend upon Him? And when
Paul says, "I
thank my
God, whom I
serve my
spirit from my
forefathers with
pure conscience," he
clearly shows that he
came not to some
new God, but to
Christ. For what other
forefathers of
Paul can be
intended, except those of whom he
says, "Are they
Hebrews? so am I: are they
Israelites? so am I."
Nay, will not the very
preface of his
Epistle to the
Romans clearly show the same
thing to those who
know how to
understand the
letters of
Paul,
viz., what
God he
preaches? For his
words are: "
Paul, the
servant of
Jesus Christ,
called to be an
apostle,
set apart to the
Gospel of
God, which He had
promised afore by His
prophets in the
holy Scriptures concerning His
Son, who was made of the
seed of
David according to the
flesh, and who was
declared to be the
Son of
God with
power, according to the
spirit of
holiness, by the
resurrection from the
dead of
Christ Jesus our
Lord," etc. Moreover, also the
following, "Thou shalt not
muzzle the
mouth of the
ox that
treadeth out the
corn.
Doth God take care for
oxen? or
saith he it
altogether for our
sakes? For our
sakes, no
doubt, this is
written, that he that
plougheth should
plough in
hope, and he that
thresheth in
hope of
partaking of the
fruits." By which he
manifestly shows that
God, who
gave the
law on our
account,
i.e., on
account of the
apostles,
says, "Thou shalt not
muzzle the
mouth of the
ox that
treadeth out the
corn; "whose
care was not for
oxen, but for the
apostles, who were
preaching the
Gospel of
Christ. In other
passages also,
Paul,
embracing the
promises of the
law,
says, "
Honour thy
father and thy
mother, which is the first
commandment with
promise; that it
may be well with thee, and that thy
days may be
long upon the
land, the
good land, which the
Lord thy
God will
give thee." By which he
undoubtedly makes
known that the
law, and the
God of the
law, and His
promises, are
pleasing to him.
3. But as those who
uphold this
heresy are sometimes
accustomed to
mislead the
hearts of the
simple by
certain deceptive sophisms, I do not
consider it
improper to
bring forward the
assertions which they are in the
habit of
making, and to
refute their
deceit and
falsehood. The
following, then, are their
declarations. It is
written, that "no
man hath
seen God at any
time." But that
God whom
Moses preaches was both
seen by
Moses himself, and by his
fathers before him; whereas He who is
announced by the
Saviour has never been
seen at all by any one. Let us therefore
ask them and ourselves whether they
maintain that He whom they
acknowledge to be
God, and
allege to be a
different God from the
Creator, is
visible or
invisible. And if they shall
say that He is
visible, besides
being proved to
go against the
declaration of
Scripture, which
says of the
Saviour, "He is the
image of the
invisible God, the
first-born of every
creature," they will
fall also into the
absurdity of
asserting that
God is
corporeal. For nothing can be
seen except by
help of
form, and
size, and
colour, which are
special properties of
bodies. And if
God is
declared to be a
body, then He will also be found to be
material, since every
body is
composed of
matter. But if He be
composed of
matter, and
matter is
undoubtedly corruptible, then, according to them,
God is
liable to
corruption! We shall
put to them a
second question. Is
matter made, or is it
uncreated,
i.e., not made? And if they shall
answer that it is not made,
i.e.,
uncreated, we shall
ask them if one
portion of
matter is
God, and the other
part the
world? But if they shall
say of
matter that it is made, it will
undoubtedly follow that they
confess Him whom they
declare to be
God to have been made!-a
result which
certainly neither their
reason nor ours can
admit. But they will
say,
God is
invisible. And what will you do? If you
say that He is
invisible by
nature, then neither
ought He to be
visible to the
Saviour. Whereas, on the
contrary,
God, the
Father of
Christ, is
said to be
seen, because "he who
sees the
Son," he
says, "
sees also the
Father." This
certainly would
press us very
hard, were the
expression not
understood by us more
correctly of
understanding, and not of
seeing. For he who has
understood the
Son will
understand the
Father also. In this
way, then,
Moses too must be
supposed to have
seen God, not
beholding Him with the
bodily eye, but
understanding Him with the
vision of the
heart and the
perception of the
mind, and that only in some
degree. For it is
manifest that He,
viz., who
gave answers to
Moses,
said, "You shall not
see My
face, but My
hinder parts." These
words are, of
course, to be
understood in that
mystical sense which is
befitting divine words, those
old wives'
fables being rejected and
despised which are
invented by
ignorant persons respecting the
anterior and
posterior parts of
God. Let no one indeed
suppose that we have
indulged any
feeling of
impiety in
saying that even to the
Saviour the
Father is not
visible. Let him
consider the
distinction which we
employ in
dealing with
heretics. For we have
explained that it is one
thing to
see and to be
seen, and another to
know and to be
known, or to
understand and to be
understood. To
see, then, and to be
seen, is a
property of
bodies, which
certainly will not be
appropriately applied either to the
Father, or to the
Son, or to the
Holy Spirit, in their
mutual relations with one another. For the
nature of the
Trinity surpasses the
measure of
vision,
granting to those who are in the
body,
i.e., to all other
creatures, the
property of
vision in
reference to one another. But to a
nature that is
incorporeal and for the most
part intellectual, no other
attribute is
appropriate save that of
knowing or
being known, as the
Saviour Himself
declares when He
says, "No
man knoweth the
Son,
save the
Father; nor does any one
know the
Father,
save the
Son, and he to whom the
Son will
reveal Him." It is
clear, then, that He has not
said, "No one has
seen the
Father,
save the
Son; "but, "No one
knoweth the
Father,
save the
Son."
4. And now, if, on
account of those
expressions which
occur in the
Old Testament, as when
God is
said to be
angry or to
repent, or when any other
human affection or
passion is
described, (our
opponents)
think that they are
furnished with
grounds for
refuting us, who
maintain that
God is
altogether impassible, and is to be
regarded as
wholly free from all
affections of that
kind, we have to
show them that
similar statements are found even in the
parables of the
Gospel; as when it is
said, that he who
planted a
vineyard, and let it out to
husbandmen, who
slew the
servants that were
sent to them, and at last
put to
death even the
son, is
said in
anger to have
taken away the
vineyard from them, and to have
delivered over the
wicked husbandmen to
destruction, and to have
handed over the
vineyard to others, who would
yield him the
fruit in its
season. And so also with
regard to those
citizens who, when the
head of the
household had
set out to
receive for himself a
kingdom,
sent messengers after him,
saying, "We will not have this
man to
reign over us; " for the
head of the
household having obtained the
kingdom,
returned, and in
anger commanded them to be
put to
death before him, and
burned their
city with
fire. But when we
read either in the
Old Testament or in the
New of the
anger of
God, we do not
take such
expressions literally, but
seek in them a
spiritual meaning, that we
may think of
God as He
deserves to be
thought of. And on these
points, when
expounding the
verse in the
Psalms 2, "Then shall He
speak to them in His
anger, and
trouble them in His
fury," we
showed, to the
best of our
poor ability, how such an
expression ought to be
understood.