no means proves a generation from eternity: for mention is made here of A BEGINNING and OF DAYS, which cannot apply to what is eternal: and the words which are rendered in the Vulgate "a principio, a diebus æternitatis"-" from the beginning, from the days of eternity,"-stand in the Hebrew" from of old, or from former time-from the days of age" ["0"] ], but the "days of age" are the same as "days of old,"—as may be seen from the following passages: Isaiah lxiii. 9, "In his love and in his pity he redeemed them, and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old" [b]; Malachi iii. 4, “Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the Lord, as in the days of old, and as in former years" [y]. But that any thing should have been from of old, sometimes implies in the Scriptures that it had for a long period of time been noted and illustrious; as appears from Jeremiah xxv. 5, "dwell in the land which the Lord hath given unto you and to your fathers for ever and ever." And this holds particularly, when families are spoken of. The meaning of the passage then is, that Christ should deduce the illustrious origin of his birth from a very remote antiquity-that is, from the time when God, after rejecting Saul, established a king and a regal family over his people-which was done in David; who was of Bethlehem, and was also the author of the stock and family of Christ: or, indeed, from Abraham himself, who was the first father and progenitor of the race of Israel 12. What 12 12 Calvin's observations on this passage are worthy perusal. But What reply do you make to the second testimony, from Psalm ii. 7? That it asserts nothing concerning the generation of Christ out of the essence of the Father, or of any eternal generation whatever : for since the words THIS DAY denote a fixed period of time, they cannot imply eternity. And that God has begotten him, does not prove that he begat him out of his own essence. This is evident from hence, that these very words, "this day have I begotten thee," were in their primary application spoken of David, who, certainly, was begotten neither from eternity, nor out of the essence of God: also because the apostle Paul quotes this passage to prove the resurrection of Christ: Acts xiii. 32, 33, "We declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us his children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second Psalm-Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee:" further, because the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews cites them in proof of the glorification of the Lord Jesus: Heb. i. 5, and v. 5, “ For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son" &c. "Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest, but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son,""&c. and lastly, because it appears that God begets Sons otherwise than out of his own esBut above all, the words which follow (Micah v. 4) ought to be noticed-namely, that "he shall feed in the strength of the Lord, in the majesty of the name of the Lord his God,"—which could with no propriety be spoken of the Eternal God. B. WISSOWATIUS. sence, sence, since the Scriptures state that believers are begotten of God. Thus, John i. 12, 13, " To them gave he power to become the Sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." 1 John iii. 9, "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin, for his seed remaineth in him : and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." James i. 18, " Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth"," What answer do you make to the third testimony, adduced from Psalm cx. 3 ? It is to be remarked that this passage is incorrectly translated both in the Vulgate and the Greek versions: for the sense of the original Hebrew is, "from the womb of the morning thou hast the dew of thy birth," in which words David predicts of christians that they should multiply as the drops of the morning dew. What reply do you make to the fourth testimony, quoted from Proverbs viii. 23 ? In order the more clearly to understand this subject, you must know that those who from this testimony would prove the generation of Christ from eter 13 That these words of the Psalmist refer to the resurrection of Christ from the dead, as they are interpreted by the apostle, (Acts xiii. 32, 33,) is admitted by Hilary, Ambrose, Calvin, and Paræus. ANDREW WISSOWATIUS. But it ought to be remarked that the Chaldee Paraphrast instead of BEGETTING uses the word CREATING: for he thus renders the passage under consideration, (Psalm ii. 7,) “ I will declare the promise which God hath spoken-My beloved, as a son is to his father, so art thou fair to me, as if this day I had created thee." B. WISSOWATIUS. nity, argue in the following manner :-The wisdom of God is begotten from everlasting (Prov. viii. 23) : Christ is the wisdom of God (1 Cor. i. 24) :-therefore he is begotten from everlasting. But that this argument is not valid will appear from hence, that Solomon speaks of the wisdom which existed in the mind of God before all ages, which was afterwards displayed in the Law, and through the Law communicated to mankind. On this account he does not add to it the word GOD. But Paul calls Christ expressly the Wisdom of God, and also the Power of God; because Christ crucified was a signal and illustrious effect and demonstration of the divine wisdom and power and in like manner, on the contrary, Christ crucified is styled, in respect to human wisdom and power, the foolishness of God wiser than men, and the weakness of God stronger than men. And thus also, by a similar figure, the apostle a little before (ver. 21) calls the workmanship of God in the creation of the world, the wisdom of God. Hence it Hence it appears that Solomon writes of a wisdom which neither is nor could be a person: but only by a common figure (prosopopoeia) introduces it as speaking; which figure is so apparent in the words of Solomon, that no one can fail to observe it who only reads what is declared respecting wisdom in the seventh, eighth, and ninth chapters of this book. But Paul, by another wellknown figure (metonymy), speaks of a wisdom which is a person. Besides, the words which are translated "from everlasting" are in the Hebrew "from the age," or "from of old," [b] à seculo. But it is one thing to have been from of old, and another to have been from eternity. See Isaiah Ixiv. 4; Jerem. ii. 20; Luke i. 70; and many other places 14. Which 14 That Solomon in this chapter (Prov. viii.) by no means speaks of the Son of God, but of the wisdom of God, by which he has created all things wisely (Prov. iii. 19, 20; Jer. x. 12; Psalm civ. 24), is admitted by many of the Fathers: as Athanasius, Basil, Gregory, Epiphanius, and Cyril. These things may also be understood of the wisdom which was afterwards displayed in the Law of God.-See the Apocryphal Books Ecclesiasticus xxiv. 8, 10, 25, &c.; Baruch iii. 37; iv. 1; and Wisdom of Solomon x., &c. AN. WISSOWATIUS. That things which are not persons, may by prosopopœia be spoken of personally, is evinced by the admirable discourse of the apostle (1 Cor. xiii.) concerning charity. Moreover, Christ is justly called, 1 Cor. i. 24, Zopia 8 (the Wisdom of God), on account of the treasures of wisdom and knowledge dwelling in himCol. ii. 3. What Paul states, 1 Cor. i. 30, is also entitled to consideration, that "Christ is made unto us of God Wisdom," &c. B. WISSOWATIUS. [The following clause is added to the original in the English translation of the first edition of this Catechism. It will serve to show the opinion of the old English Socinians respecting the Holy Spirit, which will be found more explicitly stated in the quarto Unitarian Tracts published about the close of the 17th century. They held that it was a created being, and the first in rank and dignity in the angclic hierarchy." Though we should admit, that by wisdome is understood a person, yet what hinders but that we may with far greater probability understand it of the Holy Spirit, who is called the Spirit of Wisdom, and hath the same things attributed to him that are ascribed to wisdome ?-See Isaiah xi. 1-5; Isaiah iv. 4; Exod. xxxi. 1-6, compared with Prov. viii. 12, 14, 15, 16, 20; and Gen. i. 2, compared with Prov. viii. 22, 29, 30. Where it is observable, that Moses, describing the creation of the world, maketh mention of the Holy Spirit, but not of the Son of God; who was as worthy to have been mentioned, and would accordingly have been expressed, had he been then present with God, as well as the Spirit. Neither will it be amisse to cite the concurrent suffrages of holy men under the old covenant, whose writings, though put out of the Canon, as not found in the Hebrew, are E 2 yet |