Calvin's Institutes

Section: 1.13.9-12

9. The deity of Christ in the Old Testament

Further, I do not yet touch upon the person of the Mediator, but postpone it until we reach the treatment of redemption. Despite this, because it ought to be agreed among all that Christ is that Word endued with flesh, the testimonies affirming Christ’s deity are suitably included here. Though it is said in Ps. 45, “O God, thy throne is everlasting and forever and ever” [Ps. 45:6; 44:7, Vg.], the Jews turned their backs and made the name Elohim fit also the angels and the highest powers. Yet nowhere in Scripture do we find a like passage, which raises up an eternal throne for a creature; nor, indeed, is he called simply “God,” but also the eternal ruler. Furthermore, this title is bestowed on no one without an addition, as when Moses is said to become “as God to Pharaoh” [Ex. 7:1]. Others read “of Pharaoh” in the genitive case, which is exceedingly silly. Indeed, I confess that what is remarkable for its singular excellence is often called “divine,” but from the context it is clear enough that such an interpretation here is hard and forced, and really does not make sense.

But if their stubbornness does not yield, quite evidently Christ is brought forward by Isaiah both as God and as adorned with the highest power, which is the characteristic mark of the one God. “This is,” he says, “the name by which they will call him, Mighty God, Father of the coining age,” etc. [Isa. 9:6 p.] The Jews also rail here, and thus invert the reading, “This is the name by which the Mighty God, Father of the coming age, shall call him,” etc., leaving to the Son only the title “Prince of Peace.” But to what purpose would so many titles be heaped up in this place to God the Father, since the intention of the prophet is to adorn Christ with clear marks to build up our faith in him? Therefore there is no doubt that for the same reason he is now called “Mighty God” as a little before he was called “Immanuel.” Yet nothing clearer can be found than the passage of Jeremiah, that “this will be the name by which the branch of David will be called, ‘Jehovah our Righteousness’” [Jer. 23:5-6 p.; cf. ch. 33:15-16]. For, since the Jews further teach that other names of God are nothing but titles, but that this one alone [Jehovah], which they speak of as ineffable, is a substantive to express his essence, we infer that the only Son is the eternal God who elsewhere declares that he will not give his glory to another [Isa. 42:8]

The Jews, indeed, take refuge here, pointing out that Moses imposed this name upon the altar erected by him, and Ezekiel did so upon the new city of Jerusalem. But who does not see that the altar was built as a reminder that God was “the exaltation of Moses,” and that Jerusalem was not marked with God’s name simply to testify to God’s presence? For so does the prophet speak: “The name of the city from that day shall be ‘Jehovah is there’ ” [Ezek. 48:35]. Indeed, Moses expresses himself in this way: “He built an altar and called its name ‘Jehovah my exaltation’ ” [Ex. 17:15, cf. Vg.]. But more debate remains over another passage of Jeremiah, where this very formula is referred to Jerusalem in these words: “This is the name by which they will call it, ‘Jehovah our righteousness’ ” [Jer. 33:16, cf. Vg. and Comm.]. However, this testimony is so very far from obscuring the truth that we are defending as rather to lend support to it. For whereas before he had witnessed that Christ was the true Jehovah, from whom righteousness comes, now he declares that the church of God will be so clearly aware of this that it is able to glory in the very name. Therefore in the former passage the source and cause of righteousness is set forth; in the latter, the effect is added.

10. The “Angel of the Eternal God”

But if this evidence does not satisfy the Jews, I do not see by what subtleties they can elude the fact that Jehovah is so frequently set forth in the person of an angel. To the holy patriarchs an angel is said to have appeared, claiming for himself the name of the Eternal God Judg. 6:11, 12, 20, 21, 22; 7:5, 9]. If someone takes exception that this is said in regard to the role that he plays, the difficulty is by no means thus resolved. For as a servant he would not permit a sacrifice to be offered to himself and thus deprive God of His honor. Yet the angel, refusing to eat bread, commands that a sacrifice be offered to Jehovah [Judg. 13:16]. Indeed, the fact itself proves that he is Jehovah himself [ch. 13: 20]. Therefore Manoah and his wife infer from this sign that they have seen not only an angel but God himself. Hence that exclamation: “We shall … die because we have seen God” [ch. 13:22]. And when the wife answers, “If Jehovah had willed us to die, he would not have received the offering from our hand” [ch. 13: 23], she confesses that he who was previously called an angel is truly God. Besides, the angel’s reply removes all doubt: “Why do you ask concerning my name, which is wonderful?” [ch. 13:18].

The impiety of Servetus was even more detestable, when he asserted that God was never revealed to Abraham and the other patriarchs, but that in his place an angel was worshiped. But the orthodox doctors of the church have rightly and prudently interpreted that chief angel to be God’s Word, who already at that time, as a sort of foretaste, began to fulfill the office of Mediator. For even though he was not yet clothed with flesh, he came down, so to speak, as an intermediary, in order to approach believers more intimately. Therefore this closer intercourse gave him the name of angel. Meanwhile, what was his he retained, that as God he might be of ineffable glory. The same thing is meant by Hosea, who, after recounting Jacob’s struggle with the angel, says, “Jehovah, the God of Hosts, Jehovah, his name is a remembrance” [Hos. 12:5, Vg.]. Again, Servetus yelps that God took on the person of an angel. As if the prophet does not indeed confirm what had been said by Moses, “Why do you ask my name?” [Gen.32:29 p.]! And the confession of the holy patriarch sufficiently declares that he was not a created angel, but one in whom full deity dwelt, when Jacob says, “I have seen God face to face” [v. 30]. Hence, also, that saying of Paul’s that Christ was the leader of the people in the wilderness [I Cor. io:4]; because even though the time of humbling had not yet arrived, that eternal Word nevertheless set forth a figure of the office to which he had been destined. Now if we review objectively the second chapter of Zechariah, the angel who sends the other angel [Zech. 2:3] is immediately declared to be the God of Hosts, and to him is ascribed the highest power [v. 9]. I pass over innumerable testimonies on which our faith safely agrees, even though they move the Jews not a whit. For when it is said in Isaiah, “Behold, this is our God; … he is Jehovah; we shall wait upon him, and he will preserve us” [Isa. 25:9, cf. Vg.], anyone with eyes can see that this refers to God, who rises up anew to save his people. And the emphatic demonstrations twice repeated permit a reference here to no one else but Christ. Even clearer and fuller is a passage in Malachi, where he promises that the ruler then awaited will come to his temple [Mai. 3:1]. Certainly that temple was sacred to no other than to the one supreme God, yet the prophet claims it for Christ. From this it follows that he is the same God who had always been worshiped among the Jews.

11. The divinity of Christ in the New Testament: witness of the apostles

Moreover, the New Testament abounds with innumerable testimonies. We must therefore take the trouble to make a brief selection rather than to heap up all. But although the apostles spoke of him after he had already appeared in the flesh as the Mediator, still all I bring forward will be a suitable proof of his eternal deity.

First of all, a point worth especial attention is the apostles’ teaching that what had been foretold concerning the eternal God had already been revealed in Christ or was someday to be manifested in him. For when Isaiah prophesies that the Lord of Hosts is to be “a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense for the Judeans and Israelites” [Isa. 8:14 p.], Paul declares this prophecy fulfilled in Christ [Rom. 9:32-33]. Therefore he proclaims Christ to be Lord of Hosts. Similarly, elsewhere he says, “We must all stand once before the judgment seat of Christ” [Rom. 14:10 p.]. “For it is written, … To me every knee shall bow [Rom. 14:11, Vg.], to me … every tongue shall swear” [Isa. 45:23, order changed]. Since in Isaiah, God foretells this concerning himself, and Christ, indeed, shows it forth in himself, it follows that he is that very God whose glory cannot be transferred to another. It is evident that what Paul cites to the Ephesians from The Psalms applies to God alone: “Ascending on high, he led the captivity” [Eph. 4:8; Ps. 68:18; 67:19, Vg.]. Understanding that an ascension of this sort had been prefigured when in a notable victory God put forth his power against the foreign nations, Paul indicates that it was manifested more fully in Christ. Thus John testifies that it was the glory of the Son which had been revealed through Isaiah’s vision [John 12:41; Isa. 6:1], even though the prophet himself writes that he saw the majesty of God. Obviously the titles of God that the apostle in The Letter to the Hebrews confers upon the Son are the most glorious of all: “In the beginning, thou, O Lord, didst found heaven and earth” [Heb. 1:10 p.; Ps.101:26 p., Vg.; 102:25, EV], etc. Likewise, “Adore him, all ye his angels” [Ps. 96:7, Vg.; 97:7, EV; cf. Heb. 1:6]. And still he does not misuse them when he applies them to Christ. Indeed, whatever they sing in The Psalms, He alone fulfills. For he it was who, rising up, was merciful to Zion [Ps. 101:14, Vg.; 102:13, EV]; he who asserted for himself the rule over all nations and islands [Ps. 96:1, Vg.; 97:1, EV]. And why should John have hesitated to refer the majesty of God to Christ, when he had declared that the Word was ever God [John 1:1, 14]? Why should Paul have feared to place Christ on God’s judgment seat [II Cor. 5:10], when he had previously proclaimed his divinity so openly, saying that he was “God … blessed forever” [Rom. 9:5]? And to make clear how consistent he is in this respect, in another passage he writes that “God has been manifested in the flesh” [I Tim. 3: 16 p.]. If God is to be praised forever, he, then, it is to whom alone all glory and honor are due, as Paul affirms in another place [I Tim. 1:17]. And he does not conceal this, but openly proclaims: “Though he was in the form of God, he would not have counted it robbery if he had shown himself equal with God, yet he voluntarily emptied himself” [Phil. 2:6-7 p.]. And lest the impious carp about some feigned god, John went farther, saying: “He is the true God, and eternal life” [I John 5:20 p.]. However, it ought to be more than enough for us that he is called God, especially by that witness who aptly declares to us that there are not many gods, but one [Deut. 6:4]. Moreover, it is that Paul who said, “Though many are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, … yet for us there is one God, from whom are all things.” [I Cor. 8:5-6 p.] When we hear from the same mouth that “God was manifested in the flesh” [I Tim. 3:16 p.], that “God has purchased the church by his blood” [Acts 20:28 p.], why do we imagine a second god, whom Paul acknowledges not at all? And no doubt the same was the opinion of all godly men. In like manner Thomas openly proclaims him his Lord and God [John 20:28], and thus professes him to be that sole God whom he had always worshiped.

12. The divinity of Christ is demonstrated in his works

Now if we weigh his divinity by the works that are ascribed to him in the Scriptures, it will thereby shine forth more clearly. Indeed, when he said that he had been working hitherto from the beginning with the Father [John 5:17], the Jews, utterly stupid to all his other sayings, still sensed that he made use of divine power. And therefore, as John states, “the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath, but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God” [John 5:18]. How great will our stupidity then be if we do not feel that his divinity is here plainly affirmed? And verily, to govern the universe with providence and power, and to regulate all things by the command of his own power [Heb. 1:3], deeds chat the apostle ascribes to Christ, is the function of the Creator alone. And he not only participates in the task of governing the world with the Father; but he carries out also other individual offices, which cannot be communicated to the creatures. The Lord proclaims through the prophet, “I, even I, am the one who blots out your transgressions for my own sake” [Isa. 43:25 p.]. According to this saying, when the Jews thought that wrong was done to God in that Christ was remitting sins, Christ not only asserted in words, but also proved by miracle, that this power belonged to him [Matt. 9:6]. We therefore perceive that he possesses not the administration merely but the actual power of remission of sins, which the Lord says will never pass from him to another. What? Does not the searching and penetrating of the silent thoughts of hearts belong to God alone? Yet Christ also had this power [Matt. 9:4; cf. John 2:25]. From this we infer his divinity.