Psalmist describes how Jehovah appeared on earth for the purpose of founding a kingdom; how He reappears as the terrible Judge; how the heavens declare His justice and all the people behold His glory, and how those are confounded who adore graven things and glory in their idols. Then there follows the exhortation (verse 7): "Adore him (i. c., m), all you angels." Consequently Christ is the Jehovah of whom David speaks in this Psalm. " 109 We read in the Messianic Psalm XLIV, which is ascribed to the sons of Core: "Sedes tua, Deus (D) in saeculum saeculi - Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.' The Rationalist exegetes, who take the word Deus in this text for a nominative instead of a vocative, disregard both the dignity of God and Scriptural usage. If their interpretation were correct, the meaning of the text would be: Thy seat, or throne (i. e., according to the Rationalist conception, the throne of an earthly king), is God Himself for ever and ever. Though Holy Scripture sometimes refers to creatures (e. g., heaven and hell, angels and men) as the seat or throne of God, it nowhere designates God as the seat or throne of man, e. g., of an earthly prince. This interpretation is positively untenable in the light of Heb. I, 8: “Ad Filium [scil. Christum] autem dicit: Thronus tuus, Deus, in saeculum saeculi (ò Opóvos σov, Θεός, εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τοῦ αἰῶνος), where the text Ps. XLIV, 7 is used to show Christ's superiority over the angels. That St. Paul intends eós for a vocative is plain from New Testament Greek usage, as the student may see from a comparison of such texts as Matth. XI, 26; 109 Ps. XLIV, 7. On this passage, and the whole Psalm of which it forms a part, cfr. A. J. Maas, S. J., Christ in Type and Prophecy, Vol. II, pp. 36 sqq., New York 1895. 66 Mark V, 41; Luke VIII, 54; John XIX, 3; Eph. VI, I; Col. III, 18; Heb. X, 7; Apoc. VI, 10. Consequently Ps. XLIV, 7, can only mean: Thy throne, O God D', stands for ever." Since the sons of Core never employ the term "Elohim" except when they wish to designate the true God, it follows that Christ bears the Divine Name D, i. e., Oeós = God. 99 111 The hardness of heart which the Jews manifested in spite of the many wonderful miracles wrought by our Saviour, St. John attributes to the prophecy of Isaias 110 and adds: "Haec dixit Isaias, quando vidit gloriam eius et locutus est de eo- These things said Isaias, when he saw his glory and spoke of him [Christ].” Turning to the sixth chapter of Isaias, we read: “Vidi Dominum (i) sedentem super solium excelsum. . . Seraphim clamabant alter ad alterum et dicebant: Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus Dominus exercituum (nigay nin?), plena est omnis terra gloria eius-I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and elevated. . . . The seraphims cried to one another: Holy, holy, holy, the Lord God of hosts, all the earth is full of his glory.' Hence, according to St. John, Christ is “God” (Dominus, ) and “Lord of hosts" (Dominus exercituum, ... . . . .(יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת 99 112 It should also be noted that St. Mark, in the beginning of his Gospel,118 refers the well-known exhortation of Isaias: 114 "Parate viam Domini - Prepare ye the way of the Lord," to John the Baptist, as the precursor of the "Lord," thereby acknowledging the latter to be "Jehovah." In Mark I, 2, we have a citation from Malachias (attributed to Isaias), in which Jehovah 110 Is. VI, 9 sqq. 111 John XII, 41. 112 Is. VI, I sqq. 113 Mark I, 3. 115 66 Himself is quoted as prophesying: "Ecce ego mitto angelum meum et praeparabit viam ante faciem meamBehold I send my angel, and he shall prepare the way before my face." Now this angel is none other than John the Baptist, who, as a precursor, is to prepare the way before the face of Jehovah," i. e., Christ. As Christ 110 also applies this text to the Baptist, resp. to Himself, we have a double warrant for the assertion that the Jehovah of Malachias is identical with Jesus. b) Christ is expressly called "God" in at least four New Testament texts. A fifth occurs in the prologue of St. John's Gospel, but we defer the discussion of it to the next Section, where we shall treat explicitly of the Logos. a) The first of the four passages just alluded to is John XX, 28. The Evangelist describes how Christ reproached the incredulous Thomas for his unbelief, whereupon "Thomas answered and said to Him: My Lord and my God-(¿ Κύριος μου καὶ ὁ Θεός μου) Dominus meus et Deus meus." Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius represented this reply as a mere exclamation of surprise; but the text plainly says: "dixit ei (ElTev auT)-[Thomas] said to him." These (εἶπεν αὐτῷ)—[Thomas] words also exclude the Rationalist theory which asserts that the Apostle, in exclaiming "My Lord and my God!" did not address Jesus, who 115 Mal. III, 1. On this prophecy cfr. Maas, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 10. 116 Luke VII, 27 and Matth. XI, 435 sqq. stood before him, but Almighty God in Heaven. It is obvious from the context that Thomas desired to make a profession of faith not simply in the Resurrection of Christ, but also in His Divinity, for which the Resurrection furnishes such a triumphant argument. It is in this sense that Christ replies to him: "Quia vidisti me, Thoma, credidisti; beati, qui non viderunt et crediderunt - Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed; blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed." 117 B) Christ is again expressly called God in Tit. II, 13: "Exspectantes beatam spem et adventum gloriae magni Dei et Salvatoris nostri Iesu Christi (τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστού) Looking for the blessed hope and coming of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ." 66 St. Paul does not mean to distinguish two separate persons the "great God," or Father, and "Our Saviour Jesus Christ." He is speaking solely of Christ, who is both "the great God" and our Saviour;" else he would repeat the definite article and express himself like this: Τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν 'Inσou Xplorо. Whenever St. Paul wishes to distinguish between the different Persons of the Most Holy Trinity, he always repeats the article. On the other hand, he never repeats the article when heaping several predicates on one and the same Person. Cfr. 2 Cor. I, 3: “ Εὐλογητὸς ὁ Θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ Κυρίου - Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." 118 The 117 John XX, 29. 118 Cfr. also Eph. I, 3. Ethiopian translation has dropped the kaì without in the least changing the signification of the text. But there is also a strong objective reason for applying the phrase "the great God" to Jesus Christ. For in speaking of the "coming of the glory of the great God," the Apostle can only mean Christ, because Holy Scripture tells us nothing of an epiphany of the Father, and we know that the second coming (parousia) of Christ will coincide with the Last Judgment. 7) An equally cogent argument can be construed from I John V, 20: "Scimus quoniam Filius Dei venit et dedit nobis sensum, ut cognoscamus verum Deum et simus in vero Filio eius: hic est verus Deus et vita aeterna - And 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. This is the true God and life eternal." Here the Divinity of Christ, which is logically deducible from the fact that He is a true Son of the true God, is expressly reaffirmed in the concluding phrase: This is the true God—åλŋlivòs @eòs. It is contrary to the rules of logic and grammar alike to refer the phrase "This is the true God and life eternal," not to the immediately preceding word “ Filio,” but to the more remote verum Deum" (i. e., Patrem). In that case ille Keivos should be the pronoun used, not hic OUTOS. To refer the demonstrative pronoun hic OUTOS to the determinative pronoun eius would offend against the idiom of the Latin language. If |