Directory_and_Chronicle_1850 — Page 682

640

Defense of an Essay, &c.

DEC.

"it was in consequence of the act of creation that He whom we call God, began to sustain the relation which is signfied by that term."

With respect to the meaning of εν αρχη, Knapp says, " 'Ο λογος existed sv apxn, viz. xodμov (Bereshith, Gen. i. 1. i. e. ab eterno). Did he exist before the creation of the world he must be God; for before the creation nothing but God himself existed." Art. 4. § 37.

Pearson. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.' Where 'in the beginning' must not be denied unto the third proposition, because it can not be denied unto the second. Therefore in the beginning, or ever the earth was, the Word was God,' (Prov. viii. 23.) the same God with whom he was. For we can not conceive that the Apostle should speak of one kind of God in the second, and of another in the third pro- position; in the second of a God eternal and independent; in the third of a made and depending God."

Waterland. "The Word is here (John i. 1.) said to have been God in the beginning, that is before the creation; from whence it is further probable that he is God in the strict and proper sense. This circumstance may at least be sufficient to convince you that the relative sense which you contend for is not applicable. He could have no relation to the creatures before they were made; no dominion over them when they were not; and therefore could not be God in the sense of dominion or office." Vol. I. p. 316.

Kuinoel.

"Initio rerum, ante mundum conditum extitit Logos. Ev apxn scl. lou xodμou......respondit Heb. Bereshith, Gen. i. 1. quem locum Johan- nes respexit;" &c.

Tholuck. Ev apx", the same as bereshith, in the beginning, and means when the world commenced, and time with it—then, already the Word was.'

n

I will pause longer on this point, as there will probably be no difference of opinion among those who take an interest in this controversy with respect to the meaning of ev apxn, but will proceed to cite some authorities to show that the word God, in the sentence "the Word was God," predicates that the Word was possessed of the Divine nature; and this because Dr. L. expresses the belief" that not a single writer of eminence can be brought forward to con- trovert his position that God is a relative term." I will commence my quota- tions with Calvin, as Dr. L. has quoted him to sustain his views. Commenting on this sentence in the 1st verse of John's Gospel, he says, "That there may be no remaining doubt as to Christ's Divine essence, the Evangelist dis- tinctly asserts that he is God. Arius showed prodigious wickedness when, to avoid being compelled to acknowledge the eternal Divinity of Christ, he prattled about I know not what imaginary Deity; but for our part, when we are informed that the Speech was God, what right have we any longer to call in question his eternal essence ?”—Calvin in loc,

"For as the names of God, which have respect to external work began to be ascribed to him from the existence of the work (as when he is called the Creator of heaven and carth), so piety does not, recognize or adinit any name which might indicate that a change had taken place in God himself. Nothing