Book 1

Chapter 1.

John. Since you intend in this work to treat the questions put forward by the Armenians from the literal sense of sacred Scripture, show me first what sense of sacred Scripture ought to be called literal. For if that sense ought to be called literal which is signified by the words of the letter in the common usage of speech, many things in sacred Scripture seem to me to be false according to the letter, which does not seem right to say. This is clear:¹⁸ for in Isaiah 5 it is said, "Therefore hath hell enlarged her soul, and opened her mouth without any bounds,"¹⁹ which, according to the common usage of speech, is evidently false, since hell lacks a mouth and a soul. And Isaiah 24: "The moon shall blush, and the sun shall be ashamed, when the Lord of hosts shall reign"; which is evidently not true according to the common usage of speech, since to blush is an act or passion through a rational soul in a body. And Habakkuk 2 says, "The stone that is in the wall shall cry out,"²⁰ which according to the common and vulgar manner and usage of speech has no truth. Countless such things are affirmed in the sacred writings which are false according to common and vulgar usage. Hence it does not seem to me that the sense which is vulgar should always be called the literal sense.

But if I say that the literal sense is the one that the writer of the letter understands, I am met by this: the signification of the letter comes from the sense of the words, and the signification of words comes from the usage of men, not of a few men and those who compose scriptures, but of peoples or of the common crowd; and it follows that the literal sense ought properly to be called the one that the words of the scriptures and of the letters, or the letters themselves, signify among the common people, a sense which is not always the one that the affirmer of the scripture understands.

Richard. It does not matter which sense ought properly to be called the literal sense of any scripture, provided you know the mind of the author. For in this work I always take as the literal sense the one that the maker or author of the scripture understands (I do not say the writer), since perhaps the author himself did not write, but another instructed by him, who perhaps did not understand everything as the author or editor did; as you have in Jeremiah 36,²¹ that Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord. Hence the literal sense is not always the vulgar one, as is clear in the things you objected above and in many similar ones; but the literal sense of such sayings, as we take it at present, is the sense of the author, which is sometimes signified only figuratively or transumptively²² by the words in which it is expressed.

Chapter 2.

John. I am content to call the literal sense so, but I do not always see whom I am to call the writer, the editor or the author. For example, if I affirm Moses to be the author of every part of the book of Genesis, because we hold that he was the editor of that book and of the four books following, I shall find Moses the author of falsehood and fraud. See there,¹ in chapter 3, a falsehood expressly spoken by the serpent, namely: "No, you shall not die."² And in Genesis 27, when Isaac asked Jacob his son, "Art thou my son Esau?", he answered, "I am": see, another falsehood. Indeed there are many similar things there. But if I say that someone other than Moses, or others, such as the serpent and Jacob, are the authors of these sayings and writings, I consequently have to say the same of the portions of the individual books where different persons are reported to have said or done different things: that there are different authors, which does not seem fittingly said. And if in the passages mentioned and those like them neither the editor of the book is the author nor those who are reported to have said such things, we shall find all such sayings to be without an author, which does not seem right to say of any part of sacred Scripture.

Richard. You open up the difficulty about this word "author," since, according to the frequent usage of speech, someone can be understood to be the author of a scripture in three ways: either because he is its asserter, or because he is its editor or compiler, or in both ways at once; and so it is taken properly. Now in the things you call falsehoods Moses is not the asserter but the editor or compiler. For those³ who speak the things that Moses reports to have been said are in this way called asserters, that is, the authors of those falsehoods (if indeed the words are to be called falsehoods, since some labour to excuse the saying of Jacob). In the other things that are asserted by Moses, Moses is also editor and asserter, and so he is author in both ways. And in this way only that scripture has an author whose editor and asserter are the same; and this way is the proper one. The other two ways are less proper, yet they often come into the usage of speech; and therefore the things that are said to have been spoken by one person and are written down by another, as deeds done by the first, are not said in this way to have an author.

So, then, you concluded truly in each member: namely, that Moses is the author of the falsehoods, that is, as writer, but this way is improper; likewise, that in like sayings and deeds that are said to have been spoken or done by others in different parts of Scripture there are different authors, that is, asserters; and so, moreover, in the third member you truly conclude that the falsehoods which the editors of sacred Scripture report others to have spoken have no author properly so called, that is, one who is both their writer and their asserter. Understand it thus: in every part of sacred Scripture what is asserted by the editor of Scripture must be truth. Hence that passage of Genesis is true: "The serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die." Likewise it is true that Jacob answered, "I am," since Moses asserted that this was said by Jacob, "I am," and that this was said by the serpent, "No, you shall not die." Hence gather briefly that the author or editor of Scripture cannot be convicted of falsity or error except as regards the things he asserts, not concerning the things he reports another to have said. For it is nothing to him whether such sayings are true or false, provided it is true that those said them whom he affirms to have said them.

Chapter 3.

John. If we call the author of Scripture so, Isaiah will not be the author of the prophecies he composed, since at the beginning of his book he said, "Hear, O ye heavens, and give ear, O earth, for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken."⁴ Since, then, he reports that the Lord said the things he uttered and wrote, he will not be their author, nor could he be convicted if they were false, a statement I accept. And as I concluded about Isaiah, so it seems to follow about Jeremiah, who at the beginning of his book puts first, "And the word of the Lord came to me, saying." In the same way the prophet [Hosea]⁵ puts first, "The word of the Lord that came to Hosea, saying"; and so do many others of the prophets. Hence it seems to follow that even if they pronounce false things they are not to be convicted of falsehood, nor are they the authors of their sayings.

Richard. You conclude truly that no prophet ought to be called, in the third way mentioned, that is, properly, the author of his prophetic scripture which he does not himself assert but only affirms that God says it. Rather, God is the author of that scripture, since God asserts and composes it, while the prophet is only God's notary in writing it down, as I said above that Baruch was the scribe or notary of Jeremiah. Hence what you infer, namely that if the things uttered are false the prophets are not to be convicted of falsehood, is true, if indeed it appears from the circumstances of the scripture that the prophet asserts and affirms those sayings to be God's. Hence it seems to me that Isaiah cannot be convicted of falsehood in his saying to King Hezekiah (4 Kings 20 and Isaiah 38⁶), "Take order with thy house, for thou shalt die, and not live," although it seems false, since he puts immediately before it, "Thus saith the Lord." Likewise neither can Jonah be convicted of falsehood in that word, "Yet forty days and Ninive shall be destroyed,"⁷ although it seems[?] false, since there is put before it, "Arise, and go to Ninive, the great city: and preach in it the preaching that I bid thee" (Jonah 3). Nor, so far as it seems to me, can any prophet in such a case (that is, when he says that the Lord says something), if he foretells or proclaims or writes it as he is commanded, be charged with falsehood on that head, or even with rashness, since he says or writes this by divine command. Yet every believer will none the less labour to consider how that saying of the prophet, as of God's notary, contains truth; which we shall do, God willing, for the passages mentioned and others in their places.

Chapter 4.

John. I now see what is to be called the literal sense of sacred Scripture: namely, the sense that the author, that is, its asserter, had concerning the scripture itself. From this it seems to follow that the same scripture often has two or more literal senses, since the author often asserts and affirms the same part of Scripture in a different sense. And this seems to follow especially of the prophetic scriptures, since all prophetic sacred scripture seems to be asserted by God; hence 2 Peter 1: "For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost." For what is inspired by the Holy Spirit is doubtless asserted by him. And many prophetic things are asserted by the prophets themselves: hence Moses at the very beginning of sacred Scripture asserts in prophesying that "In the beginning God created heaven, and earth," and the other things that follow. And the patriarch Jacob in Genesis 49⁸ prophesies and asserts many things about each of his sons, as the other prophets frequently assert their prophecies. Again, it is evident that a saying of sacred Scripture is frequently taken in a different sense by God and by the prophet himself, like that saying in John 11 which was affirmed by Caiaphas, the chief of the priests: "You know nothing. Neither do you consider that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people and that the whole nation perish not." Now it follows in the same place: "And this he spoke not of himself: but being the high priest of that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation. And not only for the nation, but to gather together in one the children of God that were dispersed." See, John expounds God's sense, namely the redemption of the human race; but the sense that Caiaphas had in mind does not seem to have been the one stated, for then he would have known by prophecy that the Lord was the redeemer, and would have been converted to him and would not have given consent to his death. Hence it seems that the sense of Caiaphas was that Jesus should be killed lest the whole nation, by following his teaching, should withdraw from obedience to the Romans, and consequently that nation should perish through the Romans coming there, as those understood it to whom he replied in giving counsel. For immediately before it there precedes: "The chief priests⁹ therefore and the Pharisees gathered a council and said: What do we, for this man doth many miracles? If we let him alone so, all will believe in him; and the Romans will come, and take away our place and nation. But one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that year, said to them: You know nothing," etc. From which [it is clear] whom Caiaphas answered and in what sense.¹⁰

Again, that saying in the second book of Kings, chapter 7, said to David: "And when thy days shall be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish thy¹¹ kingdom. He shall build a house to my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son": according to the sense of the scripture this is firmly[?]¹² said of Solomon the son of David, as Solomon himself is read to have said in 3 Kings, chapter 5, thus: "But now the Lord God hath given me rest round about; and there is no adversary nor evil occurrence. Wherefore I purpose to build a temple to the name of the Lord my God, as the Lord spoke to David my father, saying: Thy son, whom I will set upon the throne, in thy place, he shall build a house to my name." Again, there follows here immediately: "And if he commit any iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men"; a saying that cannot befit Christ, but Solomon. Therefore the preceding one too, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son," is likewise to be said of Solomon according to the letter, that is, according to the sense of the author. But that saying, "I will be," etc., the apostle Paul in Hebrews 1 says God [said]¹³ of Christ, in the person of God the Father, in this way: "He sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high: being made so much better than the angels as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they. For to which of the angels hath he said at any time: Thou art my Son, to-day have I begotten thee? And again: I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?" The literal sense of this scripture, therefore, is double.

Again, that saying in Deuteronomy 18: "The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet of thy nation and of thy brethren like unto me: him thou shalt hear: as thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb, when the assembly was gathered together, and saidst: Let me not hear any more the voice of the Lord our God, neither let me see this exceeding great fire, lest I die. And the Lord said to me: They have spoken all things well. I will raise them up a prophet out of the midst of their brethren like to thee: and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And he that will not hear my words, or the words of him who shall speak in my name, I will be the revenger";¹⁴ this seems plainly to be said, in the sense of Moses, of Joshua, Samuel and the other prophets [?] who were to succeed him in governing the people,¹⁵ since the people asked for this, as is said here: "and saidst: Let me not hear any more the voice of the Lord." The Lord granted this petition, as is clear here when [he said], "They have spoken all things well." And yet the apostle Peter, in Acts 3, said that this saying was said of Christ. Hence it follows that this saying has a double literal sense.

Again, that saying in Exodus 12,¹⁶ "Neither shall you break a bone thereof," and in Numbers 9, "Nor break a bone thereof," was doubtless said, in the sense of the author, namely Moses, of the paschal lamb and of that lamb as it was to be kept by the people: namely, that in eating the paschal lamb they were not to break any bone of it. And yet the evangelist John, in chapter 19 of his gospel, says: "But after they were come to Jesus, when they saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs"; and below: "For these things were done that the scripture might be fulfilled: You shall not break a bone of him"; where he says that this was said of Christ according to the letter, or according to God's sense. And so, as it seems, this saying can have a double literal sense.

Again, Deuteronomy 25: "Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn."¹⁷ It is doubtless taken literally of the ox that treads out the corn; and yet the apostle, in 1 Corinthians 9, proves by that saying that he and Barnabas had the power of receiving necessaries from those to whom they preached: "Doth God take care for oxen? Or doth he say this for our sakes? For these things are written indeed for our sakes." This saying, therefore, has a double literal sense.

Again, in Galatians 4 the apostle speaks thus: "Tell me, you that desire to be under the law, have you not read the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman and the other by a free woman. He who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh: but he of the free woman was by promise. Which things are said by an allegory. For these are the two testaments." Here he seems to say that those writings about the sons of Abraham are said by an allegory, and so the allegorical sense is the literal sense of those sayings. For that sense is said to be literal in which something stands said; and there is no doubt that those sayings, in the literal sense, are about the carnal sons of Abraham. Therefore those writings and sayings have a double literal sense.

Again, in 1 Corinthians 10 the apostle, persuading the Corinthians, says: "Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them tempted and perished by the serpent. Neither do you murmur, as some of them murmured and were destroyed by the destroyer. For these things happened to them in figure: and they are written for our correction, upon whom the ends of the world are come." Now the literal sense of a figurative saying or deed seems to be the thing figuratively designated.¹⁸ And it is evident that those deeds of which he speaks befell the ancients in one literal sense and were written in another sense, namely the historical;¹⁹ hence he seems to mean that the same saying and deed has several literal senses. Hence he himself says: "And they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ." And it is evident that Moses brought forth water for the people from a material rock according to the divine command, as is read in Numbers 20 and Exodus 17. Hence "rock" seems literally to signify two things.

Again, in Ephesians 5, of that saying of Genesis 2, "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother: and shall cleave to his wife. And they shall be two in one flesh," the apostle says that it is a great sacrament concerning Christ and the church.

See: from what you laid down above, namely that the literal sense of sacred Scripture is the sense that its author or asserter had concerning the scripture itself, it seems to follow that the same scripture has a double author and a double literal sense. And if we grant this, an absurdity seems to follow, namely that the literal sense of some scripture sometimes does not appear from the scripture itself at all. For from these words, "Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn," the sense that the apostle affirms would never appear; nor, moreover, do the senses that he and the other apostles had in the other passages set out above appear from those sayings. Hence I do not see how [that] sense could be said to be the literal sense of the scripture itself, etc.

Chapter 5.

Richard. You conclude truly about the double author of prophetic sacred Scripture; for we hold that all prophetic scripture is asserted by the prophet and inspired by the Holy Spirit, and so asserted by God. Nevertheless you should attend to this: we do not call literal or historical every sense that its author or asserter understood by it, but we call the literal or historical sense of sacred Scripture only that which its immediate author had concerning it.²⁰ For just as the apostle Paul, in Romans 7, distinguishes the literal sense from the spiritual sense when he says, "So that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter," and in 2 Corinthians 3, "For the letter killeth: but the spirit quickeneth," so, when a prophet, or an asserter or editor of sacred Scripture, understands something by that scripture, and the Holy Spirit, who is the primary author, intimates by the same scripture that same thing and with it something else, we call the sense of the prophet or editor literal, since the prophet is its immediate author, and the other sense we call spiritual or allegorical.

But when the prophet himself or the editor of the scripture, perhaps informed by the Holy Spirit, bears two senses in mind concerning the scripture itself (as perhaps was the case in the passages of [2] Kings, Deuteronomy and Exodus that you expounded above, and in many like them, for of this we have nothing certain), since it is manifest that the two senses of his saying could not be proved from the circumstances of that saying, but only one of them (for from the fact that one sense is proved from the letter it follows that the other cannot be proved from it, although the other may be proved to be a sense of it by the authority of another inspired writer and from another place of sacred Scripture), that sense is to be called literal which can appear more clearly from the very form of the scripture and from its circumstances, and the other is allegorical, according to that saying of the apostle in Galatians brought forward by you above. In the same way, when some saying of Scripture is not asserted by the writer but only by God (as I said above is the case with the things the prophets foretell, not asserting them but [?] them),²¹ provided it can then be proved to have a double sense, that sense is to be taken as literal which stands more in conformity with the circumstances of the scripture, or can be shown from them, and the other is to be called allegorical. And this sense I call primary, since it appears first from sacred Scripture; but the other does not appear from it, but from another place of Scripture.

Hence the literal sense of this saying, "Nor break a bone thereof," is about the paschal lamb, according to the circumstances of the letter; but that it can be understood of Christ cannot be proved from the saying itself or its circumstances. Rather, that this is a sense of this scripture is proved by the authority of John the Evangelist, and for this reason, as I said, it is to be called spiritual or allegorical. So the literal sense of the saying in 2 Kings 7 is about Solomon, and the allegorical or spiritual sense is about Christ, which is proved to be a sense of that scripture by the authority of the apostle Paul, but cannot be proved from the circumstances of the place itself. And that it was said of Solomon according to the sense of the letter you have reasonably shown; it is clear none the less, expressly, in 1 Paralipomenon, chapters [17]²² and 22, where that sentence is repeated thus: "And David said to Solomon: My son, it was my desire to have built a house to the name of the Lord my God. But the word of the Lord came to me, saying: Thou hast shed much blood, and fought many battles; thou canst not build a house to my name, after shedding so much blood before me. The son that shall be born to thee shall be most quiet; and I will make him rest from all his enemies round about: and therefore he shall be called Peaceable: and I will give peace and quietness to Israel all his days. He shall build a house to my name, and he shall be a son to me, and I will be a father to him: and I will establish his throne over Israel for ever. Now then, my son, the Lord be with thee, and do thou prosper, and build the house to the Lord my²³ God, as he hath spoken of thee." Here it is most clearly evident that David affirms that saying of God, "He shall be a son to me, and I will be a father to him," to have been said to him about Solomon, whom for this reason David commanded to build a house to the Lord his God, as God had told him concerning him. And in chapter 28 the same is most clearly evident, where it is written thus: "And among my sons (for the Lord hath given me many sons) he hath chosen Solomon his son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of the Lord over Israel. And he said to me: Solomon thy son shall build my house, and my altars;²⁴ for I have chosen him to be my son, and I will be a father to him; and I will establish his kingdom for ever, if he continue to keep my commandments and my judgments, as at this day," etc. What can be said more clearly than that God says this of Solomon, one of the sons of David whom the Lord gave him?

So the literal sense of that saying in Deuteronomy [18]²⁵ is about the other prophets without distinction who were to preach to the people of the Jews, and the allegorical sense is about Christ, which is proved to be a sense of that scripture by the authority of the apostle Peter. You ought to say the same of that passage of Deuteronomy 25. So, it seems, one should say, according to the mind of the apostle, of many other things both done and written by the fathers and the prophets, as you alleged above from 1 Corinthians 10, Galatians 4 and Ephesians 5: namely, that they have an allegorical sense about the church or about Christ; although the Jews do not accept at all any sense of the scripture of the Old Testament beside the primary one, which I call literal, since no other besides the literal could be proved from the old scripture, although at times another sense of it can be proved from the New Testament.

John. If only the literal sense can be proved from the letter, so that only from that sense can there be[?] proof,²⁶ then Peter and Paul did not prove sufficiently, one of whom took of Christ the saying "A prophet of thy nation," etc., and the other took of him the saying "I will be to him a father," etc.; and neither of those sayings, as you say, can be understood of him literally. Therefore it follows of John, and of whoever use the other authorities mentioned above of Christ, namely²⁷ that none of them will prove or has proved his point.

Richard. You do not infer that providently enough, since their assertion that those things were to be understood spiritually of Christ was a principle sufficiently proved to all Christians, since they read that Christ said, "The Paraclete, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things" (John 14), and in chapter 16, "But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth"; although among outsiders, who did not suppose them to have been inspired, such a proof would not have been valid. Hence, generally and among all, no proof from Scripture is valid except from its literal sense, although from another sense, because of the authority of the one who alleges the scripture in a spiritual sense, the proof may be efficacious enough among those who have faith in his inspiration. But if anyone wishes to speak of a double literal sense of our Scripture because of such a double manner of proving, let him affirm it as it seems good to him, provided he does not call the second sense historical. I do not resist him, although I do not see that it can fittingly be said; nor, from the fact that its spiritual sense is called literal, could or can a proof from it be affirmed to be valid any more than if it were not called literal but mystical, since that sense cannot be proved from the letter but only proves something on account of the authority of him who alleges it.

Chapter 6.

John. I now see that the literal or historical sense of sacred Scripture is understood to be the primary sense, which the immediate author of the scripture asserts or intends to affirm by that scripture. Go on, then, to the first article, and show in plain speech from our new scripture, according to its literal sense, that the Christ whom we worship was and is God. But I do not want you to use anyone's exposition, since in this work I will not receive testimony outside the canonical scripture of the New and Old Testament, because the eastern nations do not receive any other testimony either, except about things done. And I do not do this without cause. For see, many things are contained in our canon which, according to the sense of a number of our Latins, claim that our Christ whom we worship is also true God, and which nevertheless, in my judgment, do not of themselves show it altogether sufficiently according to the literal sense.

Richard. At least list those that occur to you, so that, if need be, we may more cautiously avoid them.

John. See, we read in Matthew 3 that Jesus baptized in water [and] in the Holy Spirit,¹ which does not seem to prove the point, although some of our people, great enough men, think this saying has the force of a proof; for all the priests of the church baptize in the Holy Spirit. Again, that he is called the Son of God does not seem to prove it, since it is said in John 1 that "he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name." Again, that he forgave men their sins, as he says of himself in Matthew 9 and Mark 2; for he says not only to Peter but to all his apostles, in Matthew 1[8],² "Whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven"; it is said in John 20, "Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them." Again, that it is said in Matthew 6, "Our Father who art in heaven," and Isaiah 63, "Thou, O Lord, art our father." Or that he commanded the winds and the sea, and also the unclean spirits, and they obeyed him, as is read in Matthew 8, [Mark] 4³ and Luke 8; and in Luke 10 it is read that the disciples returned with joy, saying, "Lord, the devils also are subject to us"; and he says generally to his disciples, in John 14, "Amen, amen, I say to you, he that believeth in me, the works that I do, he also shall do: and greater than these shall he do." Again, that the world, or even heaven, is called his kingdom, as is read in Matthew 13 and Mark 13; for in the Apocalypse it is written in his person, "To him that shall overcome, I will give to sit with me in my throne: as I also have overcome and am set down with my Father in his throne"; and in chapter [20]⁴ it is said of those beheaded for the testimony of Jesus that they reigned with Christ a thousand years. And Daniel 7 says, "The saints of the most high God shall take the kingdom: and they shall possess the kingdom for ever and ever." And 2 Timothy 2: "If we suffer, we shall also reign."⁵

Again, it is conceivable enough⁶ that almighty God could [set] another of finite power under himself, and the whole world under him; as some philosophers say that the mover of the highest heaven is of finite power, under whom nevertheless the whole world is governed and ruled, and they say God is of infinite power;⁷ as Joseph too was lord in the whole land of Egypt (Genesis 45), who nevertheless, it is evident, had another lord above him in the land of Egypt, namely Pharaoh king of Egypt. Hence by a like manner of speaking all the foregoing seem capable of being understood in such a way that they do not prove Christ to have been true and almighty God.

Again, that he came in to the disciples when the doors were shut, as is read in John 20, or that he walked upon the sea, as follows there;⁸ for angels, both good and bad, can enter thus through solid walls even with bodies. Again, that he is to come to judge the living and the dead in the glory of his Father and in majesty, as is read in Matthew 1[6], [Matthew] 25,⁹ Mark 8 and Luke 21; for he says that his apostles will sit upon twelve seats judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19). And this glory or majesty is to be understood as bodily, since he says they will see him coming in glory and majesty. And it is read in Luke 9 also, when he had been transfigured on the mountain, that "waking, they saw his glory." Hence it is evident that such glory or majesty, which they could see with the eyes of flesh, does not prove him to be God. Again, that he is the light of the world, as he says of himself in John 8; for he says to the disciples in Matthew 5, "You are the light of the world." Again, that he is in the Father and the Father in him, as he says in John 10, 14 and 17; for he says to his disciples in John 15, "Abide in me: and I in you," and in John 14, "In that day you shall know that I am in my Father: and you in me, and I in you." Again, that the Father and he are one, as he says in John 10 and 17; for there he prays the Father for his own, that they may be one in them as he and the Father are one. Again, that he gave his apostles wisdom which their adversaries could not resist, as he had also promised he would do (Luke 21); for angels give wisdom to men by instructing them, and some angels instruct them, as appears in Zechariah 2, where it is said of the prophet that he heard an angel saying to another angel, "Run, speak to this young man, saying: Jerusalem shall be inhabited without walls." Again, that he says in John 8, "I am not of this world"; for he says to his disciples in John 15, "You are not of the world." Again, that the prophets call him Lord, as David: "The Lord said to my Lord" (Psalm 109¹⁰); and Elizabeth in Luke [1]¹¹ says, "Whence is this to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" I do not see that this sufficiently proves him to be God, since he can be understood as a lord midway between God and men, less than God and greater than men, as we rightly call Mary our Lady. Again, that he was the saviour of the world, as appears in John 3, "that the world may be saved by him," where there is no doubt that by "world" the human race is meant; or that he is called saviour in Luke [2]¹² and in many other places; since it can be understood, it seems, that the salvation of the human race could be brought about through a creature as through a means, God accepting it. Again, that he says in John 8, "You are from beneath, [I] am from above";¹³ or what he says there afterwards, "From God I proceeded and came. For I came not of myself: but he sent me." Again, that he is called lord of the sabbath[?] in Luke 6¹⁴ could reasonably be said of the highest angel, who moves the highest heaven. Again, what he says in the last chapter of Matthew, "Behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world," could be understood of his existence in the sacrament of the altar; this could also be verified of the angel who is set over the Christian people; and so such a saying does not prove him to be God. Again, what the apostle said at the end of 2 Corinthians, "Do you seek a proof of Christ that speaketh in me," does not prove him to be God, since Zechariah says in the second chapter of his book and in the first that an angel spoke in him.

These foregoing passages, or at least most of them, and many like them that I have not set down here, our saints expound of Christ, affirming from them that he is God; which seems to me altogether impossible by force of the literal exposition. Therefore I ask that you set down only clear and plain testimonies; or, if you set down any of the foregoing, that you so confirm them from the circumstances of the scripture that they obtain the force of a solid proof; since the bare words themselves, according to their literal sense, do not seem any more sufficient to prove what I have said, etc.

Chapter 7.

Richard. According to your wish I will not set down the foregoing; or if I bring in any of them, I will do as far as my strength allows what you have asked last of all here. Let us begin, then, from the testimonies of John, who searched into the divinity of Christ, as we believe, more deeply than the other apostles. See, in John 1 it is written: "In the beginning was the Word: and the Word was with God: and [the Word] was God";¹⁵ and below: "And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth. John beareth witness of him and crieth out, saying: This is he of whom I spoke: He that shall come after me is preferred before me: because he was before me. And of his fulness we all have received: and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses: grace and truth came by Christ." See, here you have expressly, if you attend to the sequence of the letter, that the Word was in the beginning with God and was made flesh, that is, was incarnate; of whom, since you have it that of his fulness we have all received grace from grace, since grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. Therefore it is evident from this that Christ was in the beginning the Word with God, and God.

This the same John, in the beginning of his first epistle, as here, says more expressly, thus: "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and our hands have handled, of the word of life. For the life was manifested: and we have seen and do bear witness and declare unto you the life eternal, which was with the Father and hath appeared to us. That which we have seen and have heard, we declare unto you: that you also may have fellowship with us and our fellowship may be with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ." See, John himself and the other disciples of Christ heard the word of life, which was from the beginning, and saw it with their eyes, looked upon it and handled it with their hands; and the eternal life, which was with the Father, appeared to them. Now it is evident that the word of life, which is from the beginning, is God, and also that the eternal life, which was with the Father, is God; which Word and which Life they saw and handled, namely Jesus Christ, Son of God the Father, as he consequently adds: "and our fellowship may be with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ."

And so that you may not doubt that he is speaking of the natural Son, he says in chapter 2: "Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is not the Christ?¹⁶ This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son hath the Father also." See, from the fact that someone denies Jesus it is inferred that he denies the Father, since whoever denies the Son must consequently deny the Father; which follows not of an adopted son but only of the natural and only-begotten Son. For even if an adopted son by grace is denied, or a natural son who is not the only-begotten, the father is not on that account denied, since there can none the less be some son by nature. John repeats this also in chapter 4: "By this," he says, "hath the grace of God appeared in you,¹⁷ because God hath sent his only begotten Son into this world, that we may live by him." Again he speaks thus in his gospel, chapter 3: "For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son: that whosoever believeth in him may not perish, but may have life everlasting." And Christ in the parable of Mark 12 says of himself that a certain man who had a vineyard sent one most dear son to the husbandmen, whom they seized and killed. Again, he says in Luke[?]:¹⁸ for he who is an adopted son of God only has many brothers, and is not only-begotten, nor the one Son of God; but he calls Christ the true and only-begotten Son of God.

Chapter 8.

Again, [John,] chapter 3, says: "In this we have known the charity of God, because he hath laid down his life for us." Behold: he who laid down his life for us was God. And [in] chapter 5:¹ "And it is the Spirit which testifieth that Jesus is the truth";² and there is no doubt that he who is the truth is God. And next, at the end of chapter 5, he says most plainly: "We know that the Son of God is come. And he hath given us understanding that we may know the true God and may be in his true Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and life eternal."³ What could be said more plainly than that Jesus is the true Son of God, and true God, and life eternal? Again, John 5 says: "My Father worketh until now; and I work. Hereupon therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he did not only break the sabbath but also said God was his Father, making himself equal to God." Here you have it expressly that Jesus says God is his Father, and that he implied he was equal to God. Either, then, what he implied was not true, which it is wicked to say, or he himself was God; or [else] the Jews told a lie in saying that he had made himself equal to God, since he had not said this. But that he did imply it, what follows shows well enough;⁴ for there follows: "Jesus answered and said to them: Amen, amen, I say unto you, the Son cannot do any thing of himself, but what he seeth the Father doing: for what things soever he doth, these the Son also doth in like manner. For the Father loveth the Son and sheweth him all things which himself doth." Behold: the Son does all things whatsoever the Father does; therefore he is God, as the Father is. Now, to show this by a kind of induction, he sets forth the greater works of the Father which the Son likewise does himself, so that from them, a fortiori, it may be believed of all; for there follows: "For as the Father raiseth up the dead and giveth life: so the Son also giveth life to whom he will." Behold one kind of work among the greater ones, which work he ascribes to the Son; he confirms it when he says: "Amen, amen, I say unto you, that the hour cometh, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live." Another follows: "For neither doth the Father judge any man: but hath given all judgment to the Son, that all men may honour the Son, as they honour the Father." And shortly after: "And he hath given him power to do judgment, because he is the Son of man." This I think he added lest anyone should erroneously suppose the Son before the incarnation to be less than the Father, and able, lacking it, to receive this judicial power from the Father. So, to show that he did not receive this power anew except according to his humanity, he says "because he is the Son of man," so that it may be understood that the Father gave the Son the power of exercising judgment in human nature, as we believe will come to pass at the end of the world, and of pronouncing the words of judgment that are expressed in Matthew 25: "Come, ye blessed of my Father," etc. In this way the Father will not judge any man, but has thus given all judgment to the Son, "that all men may honour the Son, as they honour the Father." For the Son would not be honoured as the Father on account of the power of doing judgment which the Father gave the Son, unless the Father had judicial power as the Son has; and besides this, the Father gave him no other power than that which he himself had.⁵ Now these two works of the Father, namely to do judgment and to give life to the dead, are among the Father's greater works, and above all to give life to the dead spiritually; for this I think a greater work than to create heaven and earth, because, although each requires omnipotence and each is done gratuitously, yet the justification of the ungodly man who is dead is against his merit, whereas creation is not against it but comes about beyond the merit of the thing created.⁶ Rightly, therefore, since these works of the Father are attributed to the Son, it follows that the other, lesser ones are attributed to him, so that from them he may show himself to be God. Note, however, that I have not here asserted Christ to be God from judgment alone, that is, from a judicial sentence alone, for that cannot be done, as you objected at the beginning, but from such a power of doing judgment that on account of that judgment the Son is to be honoured as the Father, as he says, namely as of equal power, or rather of one power, with the Father. For no one can judge thus except God, namely by his own authority and his own judicial power; but the apostles are to be understood as judges [only] as assistants to him; hence they do not receive the power of judging for which they ought to be honoured as the Father, etc.

Chapter 9.

Again, in John 8 we read: "They said therefore to him: Who art thou? Jesus therefore saith to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you." And what sort of beginning he is, Paul, writing to the Hebrews, says thus at the very first: "God, who, at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all, in these days, hath spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world." Behold: he is the beginning through which God the Father made the world. Therefore [he is] God. Again, in John 10 he says of himself: "I will lay down my life, and I will take it again. No man shall take it away from me: but I will lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down: and I have power to take it up again."⁷ Now it is evident that no one but God has of himself power to lay down his life, and indeed no one below God has power to lay down his life;⁸ for no one, unless he be God, can raise himself from the dead, because then he would in some way presuppose to his own resurrection, and consequently to his own personal existence, the very personal existence by which he was to raise himself; and this is impossible to find except in God, and [there only] with respect to different natures. Hence he next affirms that he is God, saying thus: "My sheep hear my voice. And I know them: and they follow me. And I give them life everlasting: and they shall not perish for ever. And no man shall pluck them out of my hand. That which my Father hath given me is greater than all: and no one can snatch them out of the hand of my Father. I and the Father are one." Who can give life everlasting but God? For no one can give anything but what is his, and no creature has or can have the eternal life of another as its own, in its own power or authority, since eternal life, that is, the true beatitude of the soul, is the effect of the beatifying object, namely God, and consequently can be created or given by no creature. Note therefore that he proves that no one can take his sheep out of his hand by this, that what his Father gave him is greater than all; and what that is he next shows when he said: "I and the Father are one." Therefore to be one with the Father was given him, and this is greater than all; and so, because no one can snatch out of the Father's hand, it follows consequently that no one can snatch his sheep out of his hand either. From which it is evident that he is God as his Father is; and the Jews too affirm that he said this, as is added next;⁹ for there follows: "Jesus answered them: Many good works I have shewed you from my Father. For which of those works do you stone me? The Jews answered him, saying: For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy: and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God."

Chapter 10.

Again, in John 14 Christ says of himself: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life." [?]¹⁰ Because he is the life, he next, in the same chapter, promises as the final reward to the one who loves him that he will love him and will manifest himself to him, meaning to imply that beatitude truly consists in this manifestation of himself; which he says more expressly in chapter 17: "Now this is eternal life," he says, "That they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." Although this can be understood in two ways, either so that the sense is "Now this is eternal life: that they may know thee alone, who art the true God, and also know Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent" (and then too it follows that Jesus Christ is God, because knowledge of him deifies essentially), or so that the sense is "Now this is eternal life: that they may know thee and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent, [to be] the only true God," that is, thee and him to be the true God, yet from either sense it follows well that Jesus Christ is true God, since to know him is eternal life, as is to know the Father. Again, the same [chapter] continues: "And now glorify thou me, O Father, with thyself, with the glory which I had, before the world was, with thee." Now it is evident that God alone had glory with the Father before the world was, because no creature existed before the world was. Therefore Christ was God before the world was. Again, in chapter 16 Christ says: "But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth. For he shall not speak of himself: but what things soever he shall hear, he shall speak. And the things that are to come, he shall shew you. He shall glorify me: because he shall receive of mine and shall shew it to you. All things whatsoever the Father hath are mine. Therefore I said that he shall receive of mine and shew it to you." Now it is evident that the Holy Ghost receives nothing from any creature, but from God alone; therefore Christ is God, if the Spirit receives from Christ that which he afterwards announced to the apostles, according to the other reading, "he shall receive of mine and shew it to you."¹¹ Hence it follows that the Holy Ghost did not receive from anyone created knowledge which he announced to the apostles, since he is immutable, receptive of no accident; therefore he received no doctrine or wisdom but the eternal, which is nothing other than the divine essence. For all eternal knowledge is God and the divine essence. Therefore, according to this reading, the Holy Ghost received eternal knowledge, namely the divine essence, which is the divine knowledge, which was Christ's; whence it follows that Christ was God. Since the divine essence belongs to none but God, not even an angelic creature could truly and rightly say, "All things whatsoever the Father hath are mine." For it befits no creature whatever to affirm, "Mine is omnipotence," or "Mine is infinite wisdom," or "Mine is infinite goodness," and so of the other attributes, although holy creatures have these in their own mode of having.¹² Again, John 20: "But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Son of God: and that believing, you may have life in his name."¹³ He speaks of the natural son; it is evident, for John would have laboured for very little if he had written all these things so that men should believe that Jesus was the adopted son of God; for this they believed without Scripture. Again, in Apocalypse 1 and 2 it is said: "I am the First and the Last, and alive, and was dead, and I am living for ever and ever, and having the keys of death and of hell."¹⁴ No one is the first and the last but God; and neither God the Father died nor the Holy Ghost; therefore God the Son died. Hence next, in chapter 2, he says expressly: "These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like to a flame of fire." This same one says there: "Be thou faithful unto death: and I will give thee the crown of life." Of this same one he says in chapter 3: "These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, who is the beginning of the creation of God." Who can give the crown of life but God? It is evident, therefore, that the Son of man whom John describes in the first chapter as seen by him in the spirit is true God. Again, chapter 5: "Thou art worthy, O Lord God,¹⁵ to take the book and to open the seals thereof: because thou wast slain and hast redeemed us, O God, in thy blood."¹⁶ Behold, expressly: God was slain. Hence it is evident that the slain Christ of whom he speaks there was God.

Chapter 11.

Again, in Matthew 1 it is said: "When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child, of the Holy Ghost. Whereupon Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing publicly to expose her, was minded to put her away privately. But while he thought on these things, behold the Angel of the Lord appeared in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name Jesus. For he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which God spoke by the prophet,¹ saying: Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel,² which being interpreted is, God with us." Behold, here you have it that the virgin's son Jesus not only saved the people from their sins but also that his name is Emmanuel, that is, God with us; and therefore he is God. For he whose name is God is himself God, since neither "God" nor "God with us" is the name of any creature. Again, in Matthew 11 and Luke 10 it is said in similar words: "All things are delivered to me by my Father. And no one knoweth the Son but the Father: neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him." Behold, here he names himself the Son of God the Father, who is unknown to anyone except himself and him to whom he will reveal him;³ which yet he could not truly say if he were a son of adoption, or adopted son, only, because then the angels would have had knowledge of the Father before him. Again, in Matthew 23 he says most clearly to the Jews in his own person: "Behold I send to you prophets and wise men and scribes: and some of them you will put to death and crucify: and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city. That upon you may come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just, even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar." Here you have it that Christ sent prophets from the beginning of the world, and wise men and scribes. The same sentence he explains more fully in Luke 11, calling himself the wisdom of God: "For this cause," he says, "the wisdom of God said: I will send to them prophets and apostles: and some of them they will kill," etc. Therefore he was the wisdom of God before he was conceived of Mary, which could not have been unless he had been God.⁴

Chapter 12.

Again, in the last [chapter] of Luke: "I will send the promised Spirit of my Father upon you."⁵ Now it is evident that no one sends the Holy Ghost, who is God, except God alone. For the apostles and the saints in the church pray that the Holy Ghost may come and be sent upon men, yet they could never send him; for the sender always has authority of power in respect of the one sent, [?]⁶ nor does it ever belong to the lesser to send the greater. Therefore to send the Holy Ghost, who is God, belongs to God alone. Again, Matthew 26⁷ and Mark 14: "And the high priest said to him: I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us if thou be the Christ the Son of God. Jesus saith to him: Thou hast said it. Nevertheless I say to you, hereafter you shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his garments, saying: He hath blasphemed: What further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now you have heard the blasphemy." Here he affirms himself to be the Son of God and that he will sit at the right hand of God, meaning the natural son, as the high priest also understood it, who was asking him whether he was the Son of God. For unless both the questioner and the answerer had understood it so, it would not have been to the point to say that he blasphemed;⁸ for he does not blaspheme who calls himself an adopted son of God, nor would he have answered truly to the questioner's mind unless he had understood it of the natural son. But the natural Son of God is equal to the Father and God, without doubt. Again, the last [chapter] of Matthew says: "All power is given to me in heaven and in earth"; like which it is said in Psalm 8: "Thou hast subjected all things under his feet." From this the Apostle, in 1 Corinthians 15 and Hebrews 2, confidently affirms him to have been God; how much more can I.

Chapter 13.

Again, let us consider what Paul affirms on this matter. Behold, in Romans 9, when he says of the Jews, his brethren: "Whose are the fathers and of whom is Christ, according to the flesh, who is over all things, God blessed for ever. Amen." There is no need to expound this, because it could not be said more plainly that Christ is God, who is over all things, blessed for ever. Again, chapter 14: "For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written: As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me and every tongue shall confess to God." Behold, here he expounds the standing before the judgment seat of Christ by that prophetic saying in the person of God,⁹ from which he affirms Christ to be God. Again, 1 Corinthians 1: "We preach Christ crucified: unto the Jews indeed a stumblingblock, [unto the Gentiles] foolishness: but unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ, the power of God and the wisdom of God." Now it is evident that the power of God and the wisdom of God is God. And if you say that there is added next: "You are in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom and justice and sanctification and redemption: as it is written: He that glorieth may glory in the Lord," where he says that Jesus Christ has been made unto us by God wisdom and justice; whence it seems it could be said that the preceding text too can be taken in this way, and so it does not seem to follow from this that he is God, even if he is the power of God and the wisdom of God: this does not empty the argument of its force. For in the Apostle's earlier words he says absolutely and simply, with nothing added, that Christ is¹⁰ the power and wisdom of God; but in the later words he is not asserted simply and absolutely to be wisdom, but with the qualification "unto us" or "for us"; and from this he seems to be called justice to us because he makes us wise and just, from which it does not follow, as it seems, that he is God. Again, note what he adds at the end, "that, as it is written: He that glorieth may glory in the Lord," wishing to show that one must glory in Christ Jesus, and as in the Lord, because he is made unto us wisdom and justice and redemption and sanctification. Again, how would Jesus Christ be sanctification and redemption to us unless he were God? For neither an angel nor any creature could sanctify or redeem from mortal sin; but he alone who can enter into the mind can sanctify, and he alone can redeem from infinite, that is mortal, sin, to which an infinite, that is eternal, penalty is justly due, who has of himself an infinite principle,¹¹ which no one has or can have except God almighty alone. Again, from these chapters therefore it necessarily follows that Jesus Christ is God. Again, what the Apostle next adds about this wisdom of God in chapter 2: "Howbeit," he says, "we speak wisdom among the perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, neither of the princes of this world that come to nought. But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, a wisdom which is hidden, which God ordained before the world, unto our glory: which none of the princes of this world knew. For if they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory." Behold, now you have it expressly that this wisdom, which is Jesus Christ, is the Lord of glory, although it is evident that no one is the Lord of glory but God. Again, next, in the third chapter he says: "According to the grace that is given to me, as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation: and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid: which is Jesus Christ." Behold: in the building of our faith he lays Jesus Christ as the foundation. Now it is evident that the whole structure of our faith is founded on God and that God alone is the foundation of faith; hence in Hebrews 11 the same Apostle, showing the principles of the Christian faith, says: "He that cometh to God must believe that he is: and is a rewarder to them that seek him." Therefore, if Christ Jesus is the foundation besides which no other can be laid, it follows that he is God. Again, he says expressly in chapter 8: "For although there be many gods that are called gods, either in heaven or on earth (for there be gods many and lords many): yet to us there is but one Father, of whom are all things, and we in him: and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."¹² Behold: to us there is only one Lord, namely Jesus, by whom are all things, and we are by him, even if others are called lords; hence it is evident that he is the highest of all, and so he is God. Again, at the end of 2 Corinthians he says: "Do you seek a proof of Christ that speaketh in me, who towards us is not weak, but is mighty in us?¹³ For although he was crucified through weakness, yet he liveth by the power of God." Behold: Christ, who was crucified, lives by the power of God; hence he says that he is not weak, meaning [not weak] by reason of the crucifixion, which after a true crucifixion would not be so unless he had been God;¹⁴ for any creature whatever would have been weakened by crucifixion, since it would have been killed by it, nor would it have remained mighty as it is here: "but is mighty in us."

Chapter 14.

Again, Galatians 4: "When the fulness of the time was come, God sent his Son, made under the law: that he might redeem them who were under the law: that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because you are sons of God, God hath sent the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying: Abba, Father."¹⁵ Here you have it that God sent his Son made of a woman, and sent him for this, that he might redeem those who were under the law. Now God alone can redeem from mortal sin, as I proved above; and you have it here also that he sent him in the fulness of time. And what is the fulness of time but the completion of time according to the number of years, namely in the sixth age of the world, or in the sixth millennium? This age is therefore called the fulness of time because such an age in a man is his fulness in perfection, and afterwards he declines more in limbs and in knowledge than he advances. But how did God send his Son if the one sent was not the Son before the sending? For when someone sends his son, the one sent is a son before he is sent; just as, if someone were to send his servant, the one sent is a servant before he is sent. Christ therefore was the Son of God before he was sent, and consequently he was the natural son, and also was God. Again, in Philippians 2 the Apostle says: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." And shortly after: "For which cause, God also hath exalted him and hath given him a name which is above all names: that in his name every knee should bow, of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth: and that every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father." Behold an express testimony that Christ is God: that he is in the form of God; that he thought it not robbery to be equal with God; that he is in the glory of God the Father; that he has a name above every name; and that in his name every knee ought to bow, of those in heaven, on earth and under the earth. And this, no one doubts, befits God alone. Again, in Colossians 1 he says, speaking of God the Father: "Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness and hath translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love, in whom we have redemption and the remission of sins: who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: for in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers. All things were created by him and in him. And he is before all: and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the whole church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that he may hold the primacy: because in him it hath well pleased [the Father] that the fulness of the Godhead should dwell corporeally."¹⁶ Behold, he says expressly that he is the firstborn of every creature, that is, the Son of God before every creature, because in him all things were created in heaven and on earth, angels as well as the rest; and that he is before all things and that all things consist in him. And these things can befit God alone.

Chapter 15.

Again, Titus chapter 3:¹ "For the grace of our Saviour God hath appeared to all men: instructing us, that, denying ungodliness and worldly desires, we should live soberly and justly and godly in this world, looking for the blessed hope and coming of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ."² Behold, here he not only says that Christ is God, but the great God. But if anyone contends that "God" is said of the Father, like that in the next chapter: "But when the goodness and kindness of God our Saviour appeared: not by the works of justice which we have done, but according to his mercy, he saved us, by the laver of regeneration and renovation of the Holy Ghost, whom he hath poured forth upon us abundantly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour" (for this appears to be said of the Father, who poured forth the Holy Ghost upon us through our Lord Jesus Christ), let him note that the Apostle here says "looking for the blessed hope and coming of the glory of the great God"; for he is not accustomed to say that the Father will come to judgment, but Christ. Hence this is said of Christ, although the following saying, in the following chapter, is said of the Father; and in both he not without cause speaks of the Saviour God,³ so that we may understand that both are one God and one Saviour, because neither can save except through the divinity, which is one in both.

Chapter 16.

Again, that I may conclude [?] the sayings of this same Apostle:⁴ behold, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, at the beginning, he proves by many arguments that Christ is true God, setting first, as I touched on above in chapter [?],⁵ "Last of all, in these days, God hath spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world. Who being the brightness of his glory and the figure of his substance and upholding all things by the word of his power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high: being made so much better than the angels as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they." Behold the assertion of this Apostle; and it is, as it were, the conclusion which he strives to confirm in the whole epistle. Nor is there need to expound the words, since he says in plain speech that God made the world through him who is the brightness of the Father, so calling him that he may not be believed to be of less brightness than he whose brightness he is and the figure of whose substance; who upholds all things by the word of his power, that is, by himself, who is the Word and the power of the Father. For he often speaks in this manner,⁶ as in Colossians 1: "Yet now he hath reconciled in the body of his flesh through his death": "in the body of flesh," that is, in the body which is flesh, or fleshly. Again, [he says] that he is better than the angels and that he has inherited the name of the Father, and possessed it by hereditary right as the Son of God the Father; all of which clearly show him to be God. Hence he next shows all these things through the holy Scripture of the Old Testament: first, that he is the Son, through that verse of the psalm, "This day have I begotten thee," and through that of 2 Kings 7, "I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son"; although this was said of Solomon according to the letter, nevertheless it is understood of him who says, "Behold a greater than Solomon here." Second, that he is the brightness of the Father's glory and the figure of his substance, that is, his natural son and of one substance; moreover⁷ through this, that it is said of him in Psalm 96, "And all the angels of God shall adore him,"⁸ he shows that he sits at the right hand of God the Father, that is, has the better goods which the Father has (for this is to sit at his right hand); [and] through this, that it is said of him, "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever," and through that, "The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thy enemies," etc. And that same point, together with this, that through him God made the world and that he upholds all things by his power, he proves through that verse, "The sceptre of equity is the sceptre of thy kingdom," and through that, "In the beginning, O Lord, thou foundedst the earth: and the heavens are the works of thy hands."⁹ And next, in chapter 2, moreover, through this: "Thou hast subjected all things under his feet"; whence he left nothing not subject to him, but appointed him heir of all things. And next, through the whole epistle, he treats of his priesthood, how he, as priest, made purgation of sins. Hence in chapter 3 he proves him greater than Moses by this, that he is the son and Moses the servant, speaking of the natural son, since otherwise Moses would have been a son as he was. Again, from this, that he built his own house as God, who created all things, which house we are, as he says next there; but Moses was a servant in it, not its creator. And in chapter 5 he says that "whereas he was the Son of God, he learned obedience by the things which he suffered," and before that he says there that God said to him, "Thou art my Son: this day have I begotten thee." Behold, you have it that this Apostle not only says that he is God, but proves it.

Chapter 17.

Again, in Acts 3 Peter calls Jesus the author of life: "You asked," he says, "that a murderer be given to you; for you killed the author of life."¹⁰ And in chapter 4: "Be it known to you and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him, this man standeth here before you, whole. This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved." Now it is evident that no one is the author of life but God; nor is it less evident that salvation is in the name of God, and also in God. Therefore Jesus is God, since salvation is in no other, nor is there any name of salvation other than his name. Again, in Acts 20 Paul says: "Take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock, wherein God hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood."¹¹ Behold, here he says that God purchased the church with his own blood, speaking of Christ; without doubt, therefore, he who purchased the church with his own blood was God. Again, James in his epistle, chapter 2, says: "My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ of glory, with respect of persons." Behold, he calls Jesus Christ the Lord of glory, as in the psalm the prophet calls him the Lord of glory, saying: "Who is this King of Glory? the Lord who is strong and mighty: the Lord mighty in battle." Now God alone is the Lord of glory, without doubt. Again, Peter in his epistle, chapter 1: "You were not redeemed with corruptible things, as gold or silver, from your vain conversation of the tradition of your fathers: but with the precious blood, as of a lamb unspotted and undefiled, of Christ, manifested in the last times for us." And shortly after: "From a sincere heart love one another earnestly: being born again, not of corruptible seed, but incorruptible, by the word of God who liveth and remaineth. For all flesh is grass and all the glory thereof as the flower of grass. The grass is withered and the flower thereof is fallen away. But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel hath been preached unto you." Behold, here he describes them as redeemed by the price of the blood of the Lamb, that is, Christ; and next, in other words, he says that they were redeemed by the word of the living God, which word endures for ever and is that which they preached to them. Now it is evident that Christ is the divine Word, which endures for ever, which Peter himself and the other apostles preached to men. Again, in chapter 4 he says: "That in all things God may be honoured through Jesus Christ our Lord: to whom is honour and glory and empire for ever and ever." And in the second epistle, at the beginning: "For so an entrance shall be ministered to us with one accord into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."¹² Like which John says of Christ in Apocalypse 1: "To him be glory and empire for ever and ever." But to none save God alone [belongs] eternal empire; hence Paul says in Hebrews 2: "For God hath not subjected unto angels the world to come." For although others who are to be saved will reign with Christ, as you showed at the beginning, yet no one besides God is to be called [lord] as God is;¹³ and therefore you denied, not prudently enough, that he could be argued to be God from the fact that the world and heaven are his kingdom. Again, in 2 Peter 1 Peter says: "They have followed the faith in the justice of our God [and] Saviour Jesus Christ."¹⁴ Again, Jude, in chapter 1 of his epistle, says: "For certain men are secretly entered in, ungodly men, who were written of long ago unto this judgment, turning the grace of our God into riotousness and denying the only sovereign Ruler, our Lord Jesus Christ." Here he says that certain ungodly men were written beforehand unto judgment because they deny Jesus Christ, the only sovereign Ruler and Lord; whence it is evident that he is God, if he alone is sovereign Ruler and Lord.

Here ends the first book.