Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadMcClintock Biblical Encyclopedia: God
Subjects in this Topic:
from the same Saxon root as good, thus beautifully expressing the divine benignity as the leading attribute of the most general term for the Deity, and corresponding almost invariably to two Hebrew words, both from a common root ( àåּì , au, to be strong). Hengstenberg, however, regards the simpler of these words ( àֵì , El) as a primitive (Auth. of Pent. 1:251), while some consider the extended form ( àֵֵìåֹäּ , Elo'dh) as derived from a different root (the obsolete àָìָäּ , found in Arabic = to worship). The corresponding Shemitic terms are: Arabic, Al or Allah (q.v.); Syriac, Ilo or Eloho; Samar. El or Chilah (= powerful; Castell, in Walton's Polyglot Bible, 6, s.v.); Phoenician El ( ἠë or ἰë ), as in En-el ( ῎Åíõëïò , òéðàì ), Gag-el (Gagilus, ââàì ), Å᾿ëïåßì (Sanchon.). SEE ALMIGHTY.
The only other Hebrew word generally employed in naming the Supreme Being is Jehovah, éְäåָֹä , which some (so Havernick, Historische-critsche Einleitung ins alte Testament, Berlin, 1839) propose to point éִäְåֶä , Jahveh, meaning "the Existing One," holding that Elohim is used merely to indicate the abundance and super-richness contained in the Divine Being. With such, therefore, Jehovah is not of the same origin as the heathen Jove, but of a strictly peculiar and Hebrew origin. Both names are used by Moses discriminately, in strict conformity with the theological idea he wished to express in the immediate context; and, pursuing the Pentateuch nearly line by line, it is astonisling to see that Moses never uses any of the names at mere random or arbitrarily, but is throughout consistent in the application of the respective terms. Elohim is the abstract expression for absolute Deity apart from the special notions of unity, holiness, substance, etc. It is more a philosophical than devotional term, and corresponds with our term Deity, in the same way as state or government is abstractly expressive of a king or monarch. Jehovah, however, seems to be the revealed Elohim, the Manifest, Only, Personal, and Holy Elohim: Elohim is the Creator, Jehovah the Redeemer, etc. SEE JEHOVAH.
The translators of the Eng. A.V. have invariably translated this last Hebrew word by " Lord," which is printed in those passages in small capitals in our common Bibles, but whenever the two words which they thus render occur together, Adonai-Jehovah, the latter is rendered "God," in order to prevent the repetition of " Lord." The Greek has èåüò (either with or without the art.). Jerome and the Rabbins enumerate ten Heb. words as meaning God; but they relate rather to his attributes. SEE LORD.
I. Usage of the Hebrew terms properly rendered "God."
1. àֵì , El. This term is used in the most general way as a designation of Deity, whether of the true God or of the false gods, even the idols, of the heathen. In the latter reference it occurs Isa_44:10; Isa_44:15; Isa_45:20; Isa_46:6; and in the plur. àֵìַéí , Elim', Exo_15:11; Dan_11:36; though in both these last instances it may be questioned whether the word is not used in the sense of mighty ones. To render the application of the term in this reference more specific, such epithets as àִçֵø , other, foreign (Exo_34:14), æָø , strange, hostile (Psa_81:10), ðֵëָø , strange (Deu_32:12), are used. When used of the true God, àֵì is usually preceded by the article ( äָàִì , Gen_31:13; Deu_7:9), or followed by such distinctive epithets as ùִׁãִּé , Almighty (Exo_6:3); òåֹìָí , eternal (Gen_21:33; Isa_40:28); òִìְéåֹï , Supreme (Gen_14:18); çִé , living (Jos_3:10); âַּáּøֹ , mighty (Isa_9:5); or such qualifying adjuncts as ëָּáåֹã , of glory (Psa_29:3); àֵֶîú , of truth (Psa_31:6); âְּîֻìåֹú , of retributions (Jer_51:56); áֵּéúàּàֵì , of Bethel (Gen_31:13). éַùְׂøָàֵì , of Israel (Gen_33:20); éְùֻׁøåּï (Deu_33:26). In poetry àֵì sometimes occurs as a sign of the superlative; as äִøִøֵéàּàֵì , hills of God, very high hills (Psa_36:7); àִøְæֵéàּàֵì , cedars of God (Psa_80:11). The phrase áְּðֵéàּàֵìַéí . occurs Psa_29:1; Psa_89:7; and is supposed by some to refer to angels; but others take àìéí here for àéìéí , and translate Sons of the mighty (see Rosenmuller, ad loc.). There is no instance of àֵì in the singular being used in the sense of mighty one or hero; for even if we retain that reading in Eze_31:11 (though thirty of Kennicott's codices have the reading àéì , and the probability is that in those which present àì the é is implied), the rendering "God of the nations" may be accepted as conveying a strong but just description of the power of Nebuchadnezzar, and the submission rendered to him; compare 2Co_4:4. In proper names àì is often found sometimes in the first member of the compound word, e.g. àìéä , Elijah; àìãã , Eldad, etc., and sometimes as the last member, e.g. ùׁîåàì Samuel; ìîåàì , Lemuel; èáàì , Tabeel, etc. SEE EL.
2. àìֵåֹäִּ , Elo'ah, plur. àìֵäַéí , Elohim'. The singular form occurs only in poetry, especially in Job, and in the later books, such as Daniel, Nehemiah, and Chronicles. It is used as well of idol deities as of the true God (Dan_11:37-38; Hab_1:11; Deu_32:15; Psalms 1:22; Hab_3:3, etc.); once in the former case with the addition of ðֵëָø (Dan_11:39), and in the latter with that of éִòֲ÷ֹá (Psa_114:7). The more common usage is that of the plural. This pervades all the books of the Old Test., from the earliest to the latest. Thus it is used principally of the true God, and in this case frequently with the article prefixed (Gen_5:22; Gen_6:9; Gen_6:11; Gen_17:18), as well as with such adjuncts as äִùָּׁîִéַí (Neh_1:4), or with the addition of åְäָàָøֶå ֹ (Gen_24:3); àָîֵï (Isa_65:16); öִãַּ÷ (Psa_4:2); äִöִּáָּàåֹú (Amo_3:13), etc. When the relation of Israel to God is to be indicated, the phrases God of Israel, Jacob, Abraham are used (Eze_5:1; Psalm 20:2; 47:10, etc.); and in this case, as the term Elohim is equivalent in effect to Jehovah, it is often used interchangeably with that term; thus Moses, who is designated òֵáֶã éְäֹåָä , Ebed-Jehovah (Deu_34:5), is called in the same sense ò àìֵäַéí , Ebed-Elohim (Dan_9:11); and the same object is designated indifferently øåּçִ éְäֹåָä , Ruach-Jehovah, and ø àìֵäַéí , Ruach-Elohim (comp. Jdg_3:10, and Exo_31:3, etc.). Not unfrequently the two terms are combined (Lev_18:2; Lev_18:4, etc.; Lev_19:2, etc.; 2Sa_5:10; 1Ki_1:36; 1Ki_14:13; Psa_18:29, etc.). Most commonly, however, they are used distinctively, with respect, probably, to the difference between their primary meanings (see Hengstenberg, Auth. d. Pent. 1:181 sq.). In the Pentateuch this discriminative usage has given ground for certain hypotheses as to the composition of that work. SEE PENTATEUCH.
In the earlier historical books, Jehovah is more frequently used than Elohim; in Job, Jehovah is more frequently used in the poetical, Eloah or Elohim in the prosaic portions; in the Psalms, sometimes the one, sometimes the other predominates, and this has been thought to afford some criterion by which to judge of the age of the psalm, the older psalms being those in which Elohim is used; in Proverbs we have chiefly Jehovah; in Ecclesiastes, Daniel, and Jonah almost exclusively Elohim, and in the other prophets chiefly Jehovah. Elohim is also used of idol deities or false gods, because these are worshipped as if they were God (Exo_19:20; Exo_32:31; Jos_24:20; Jer_2:11; Jon_1:5, etc.); and, like El, it is used as a superlative (Psa_68:16; Psa_65:10, etc.). Kings and judges, as the vicegerents of Deity, or as possessing a sort of repreasentative majesty, are sometimes called Elohim (Psa_82:1; Psa_82:6; Exo_21:6; Exo_22:8). Whether the term is used of angels may be made matter of question. This is the rendering given to àֵֹìäַéí by the Sept.,Vulg., Targ., Syr., etc., in Gen_3:5; Psa_8:6; Psa_82:1; Psa_82:6; Psa_97:7; Psa_138:1; but in the majority of these instances there can be little doubt that the translators were swayed by were dogmatical considerations in adopting. that rendering; they preferred it because they avoided thus the strongly by anthropomorphic representation which a literal rendering would have preserved. In all these passages the proper signification of àìֹäַéí may be retained, and in some of them, such as Gen_3:5; Psa_82:1; Psa_82:6, this seems imperatively required. In Psa_8:6 also the rendering "angels" seems excluded by the consideration that the subject of the writer is the grace of God to man in giving him dominion over the works of his hands, in which respect there can be no comparison between man and the angels, of whom nothng of this sort is affirmed. In Psa_97:7, the connection of the last clause with what precedes affords sufficient reason for our giving Elohim its proper rendering, as in the A.V. That the author of the epistle to the Hebrews should have adopted the Sept. rendering in citing these two passages (Heb_2:7; Heb_1:6), cannot be held as establishing that rendering, for, as his argument is not affected by it, he was under no call to depart from the rendering given in the version from which he quotes. But, though there be no clear evidence that Elohim is ever used in the sense of angels, it is sometimes used vaguely to describe unseen powers or superhemman beings that are not properly thought of as divine. Thus the witch of Endor saw "Elohim ascending out of the earth" (1Sa_28:13), meaning thereby some beings of. an unearthly, superhuman character. So also in Zec_12:8 it is said, "The house of David shall be as Elohim, as the angel of the Lord," where, as the transition from Elohim to the angel of the Lord is a minori ad majus, we must regard the former as a vague designation of supernatural powers. Hengstenberg would explain Psa_8:6 in accordance with this; but the legitimmicy of this may be doubted. SEE ELOHIM.
On the use or absence of the article with àֵֹìäַéí see Quarry (Genesis, page 270 sq.), who, after an elaborate examination of the subject, sums up the results as the following: "The dispelling of the supposition that any essential difference existed, at least in the earlier books, between Elohim with and without the article — any difference at all, but such as the exigencies of each occasion with respect to sense or grammar would have made in the case of any common appellative; the illustration of the use of the article with particles and prepositions, elucidating many passages of Scripture, and explaining many seeming causes of perplexity; and the establishment of an important characteristic difference as regards the usage in the case of Elohim with or without the article, between the earlier and later books of the sacred canon." SEE ARTICLE (IN GRAMMAR).
II. The attributes ascribed to God by Moses are systematically enumerated in Exo_34:6-7, though we find is isolated passages in the Pentateuch and elsewhere additional properties specified, which bear more directly upon the dogmas and principles of religion, such as, e.g. that he is not the author of sin (Gen_1:31), although since the fall man is prone to sin (Gen_6:5; Gen_8:21, etc.). But, as it was the avowed design of Moses to teach the Jews the unity of God in opposition to the polytheism of the other nations with whom they were to come in contact, he dwelt particularly and most prominently on that point, which he hardly ever omitted when he had an opportunity of bringing forward the attributes of God (Deu_6:4; Deu_10:17; Deu_4:39; Deu_9:16, etc.; Num_16:22; Num_33:19, etc.; Exo_15:11; Exo_34:6-7, etc.).
In the prophets and other sacred writers of the Old Testament these attributes are still more fully developed and explained by the declarations that God is the first and the last (Isa_44:6); that he changes not (Hab_3:6); that the earth and heaven shall perish, but he shall endure (Psa_102:26) — a distinct allusion to the last doomsday — and that he is omnipresent (Pro_15:3; Job_34:22, etc.).
In the New Testament also we find the attributes of God systematically classified (Rev_5:12; Rev_7:12), while the peculiar tenets of Christianity embrace, if not a further, still a more developed idea, as presented by the apostles and the primitive teachers of the Church (compare Semisch's Justin Martyr, 2:151 sq., translated by J.E. Ryland, 1843).
The expression "to see God" (Job_19:26; Job_13:5; Isa_38:11) sometimes signifies merely to experience his help; but in the Old Testament Scriptures it more usually denotes the approach of death (Gen_32:30; Jdg_6:23; Jdg_13:22; Isa_6:5). SEE DEATH.
The term áֶּïàּàֵֹìäַéí “son of God," applies to kings (Psalm 2:7; 82:6, 27). The usual notion of the ancients that the royal dignity was derived from God may here be traced to its source: hence the Homeric äéïãÝíçò âáóéëåýò . This notion, entertained by the Oriental nations with regard to kings, made the latter style themselves gods (Psa_82:6). Add. áְּðֵé àֵֹìäַéí "sons of God," in the plural, implies inferior gods, angels (Gen_6:2; Job_1:6);also faithful adherents, worshippers of God (Deu_14:1; Psa_73:15; Pro_14:26). àַéùׁ àֵֹìäַéí "man of God," is sometimes applied to an angel (Jdg_13:6; Jdg_13:8), as also to a prophet (1Sa_2:27; 1Sa_9:6; 1Ki_13:1).
When, in the Middle Ages, scholastic theology began to speculate on the divines attributes as the basis of systematic and dogmatic Christianity, the Jews, it appears, did not wish to remain behind on that head, and, collecting a few passages from the Old Testament, and more especially from Isa_11:2, and 1Ch_29:11, where the divine attributes are more amply developed and enumerated, they strung them together in a sort of cabbalistic tree, but in reality representing a human figure. SEE CABBALA.
III. The Scriptures contain frequent notices of false gods as objects of idolatrous worship:
1. By the Hebrews. These were of two kinds:
a. Adoration of other beings than Jehovah, held as divine (Ehrlen, De diis et deab. Gentil. in S.S. memoratis, Argent. 1750; Leusden, De idolis V.T. in his Philolog. Hebr. mixt. page 291 sq.; Kalkar, Udsigt over den idolatr. Cultus som omtales i bibeln, Odense, 1838 sq.). Such false deities (which are generally identified with their images, Deu_4:28 sq.; Psa_115:4 sq.; Psa_135:15 sq.; 2Ma_2:2; comp. also òֲöָáַéí , idols, in passages like 1Sa_31:9; Hos_4:17) are called àֵַìéìַéí nothings (perhaps a play upon àֵֹìäַéí ), in the Jewish Church phraseology (Lev_19:4; Lev_26:1; comp. Hab_2:18), or çֲáָìַéí , breaths, i.e., vanities (Jer_2:5; Jer_8:19; Jer_14:22), äִáְìֵé ùׁ åְà utter vanities (Jon_2:9; comp. ôὰ ìÜôáéá , Act_14:15), ùַׁ÷ּåּöַéí , abominations (1Ki_11:5; Kings 23:13); derisively âַּìּåּìַéí , logs (Eze_6:4; Eze_14:3); their sacred rites àָéֶï , frivolity (1Sa_15:23; Isa_66:3), and their whole worship harlotry (Ezekiel 23; compare æָðָä , and derivatives, in Winer, Simonis Lex. p. 286 sq.), in contrast with which Jehovah is called the true God ( àֵֹìäַéí çִéַּéí , Jer_10:10 sq.; Dan_6:20; Dan_6:26 [compare îֵúַéí , Psalm 116:28]; Act_14:15; 2Co_6:16), the God of Heaven (Jdt_5:7; compare Jer_10:11, etc.). Indeed idolatry was reprobated as a capital offense in the Mosaic law, under penalty of extirpation and destruction in the case of the whole people (Lev_19:4; Deu_6:15; Deu_8:19; Deu_11:16 sq.; Deu_28:15 sq.; Deu_30:17 sq.; Deu_31:16 sq.; comp. Jos_23:16; 1Ki_9:6 sq.), and stoning for individuals (Exo_22:20; Deu_17:2 sq.; comp. Deu_6:14 sq.; Deu_7:16; Deu_8:19; Deu_13:2 sq.; Exo_20:3; Exo_20:23); and the Israelites were admonished in their campaigns utterly to demolish idolatrous images (Exo_23:24; Exo_34:13; Deu_7:5; Deu_7:25; Deu_12:2 sq.; comp. 1Ch_14:12; 1Ma_10:84), and not to tolerate any heathen whatever in their land (Exo_23:33; Deu_20:17), and, furthermore, to shun all connection (even civil and political) with idolatrous nations (Exo_23:32; Exo_34:15 sq.; Deu_7:1 sq.). Even instigation to idolatry was liable to punishment by death (Deu_13:6 sq.). In spite, however, of these severe statutes, we find the Israelites, not only during the passage through the wilderness and the unsettled period of their polity (Num_25:2; Deu_13:13; Jos_24:23; comp. Amo_5:25 sq.), but also under the monarchy, sadly departing from the worship of Jehovah, and addicting themselves to the adoration of Phoenico-Philistine-Syrian and Arabico-Saboean (in the time of the Maccabees also to Graeco-Syrian) deities (see Gramberg, Religionsideen, 1:436), such as Baal, Ashtaroth, Moloch, Chemosh, Thammuz, etc., and connecting therewith soothsaying and sorcery (Deu_18:10 sq.; comp. Dale, De divinationib. idolol. V.T. in his work De origine et progr. idolol. page 363 sq.). See each of these names in its place.
The service rendered to foreign deities was very multiform (Mishna, Sanhedrinm, 7:6), but consisted principally of vows (Hos_9:10), incense (1Ki_11:8; 2Ki_22:17; 2Ki_23:5; Jer_1:16; Jer_7:9; Jer_11:12; Jer_13:15; Jer_32:29), bloodless (Jer_7:18) and bloody offerings (2Ki_5:17), including even human beings. SEE MOLOCH. The incense and offerings were presented on high places and hills (Isa_57:7; Jer_2:20; Jer_3:6; Jer_13:27; Hos_4:13; 1Ki_11:7; 2Ki_23:5; comp. Philostr. Apoll. 2:4; Spanheim, ad Callim. Del. 70; SEE HIGH PLACE ), on roofs. (Jer_19:13; Jer_32:29; Isa_65:3), under shady trees (1Ki_14:23; 2Ki_16:4; 2Ki_17:10; Hos_4:13; Isa_1:29; Jer_2:20; Jer_3:13; Jer_17:2; 2Ch_28:4; Eze_6:13; Eze_20:28; see Movers, Phönic. page 577 sq.), also in valleys (Jer_2:23; 2Ch_28:3) and gardens (Isa_1:29; Isa_65:3). SEE GROVE. The votaries of many of these deities made an offering of their own chastity to them, and illicit commingling of the sexes was a chief element of such cultus. SEE BAAL; SEE ASTARTE. Sitting upon graves formed also a part of idolatry, either as a propitiation to the manes or in necromancy (Isa_65:4). Lustration even was not wanting (Isa_66:17). The priestly castes of these idolatrous systems were numerous (1Ki_18:22; 2Ki_10:21) and in good station (Hos_10:5). One kind of them was called Kemarim ( ëַּîָøַéí , Zep_1:4; 2Ki_23:5; a Syriac word, Gesen. Thes. page 693; Mishna, Megil. 4:9). SEE IDOLATRY.
b. The worship of Jehovah, under the form of any image whatever, was strictly forbidden (Exo_20:4; Deu_4:16; Deu_5:8; Deu_27:15; comp. Tacit. Hist. 5:5). Such symbols as the Golden Calf (q.v.) were borrowed from Egypt (Jos_24:14; Eze_20:7 sq.). See Ewald, Isr. Gesch. 2:109 sq.; Gerritsen, Cur Hebraei ante exil. Babyl. se ad idolorum et plurium deor. cultum valde promos ostenderint, in the Annal. Acad. Rheno-Traject. 1822-3, page 120 sq.; Michaelis, Mos. Recht, 5:98 sq.; Otho, Lex. Rabb. page 286 sq. SEE IMAGE.
2. Idolatry of non-Israelitish Nations. — See each in its place. This was frequently portrayed by the prophets in all its grossness (1Ki_18:27; comp. Deyling's Observ. 1:136 sq.), especially by exhibitions of the (mechanical) construction of these gods (images, Isa_2:8; Isa_2:20; Isa_44:10 sq.; Jer_10:3 sq.; Hos_13:2; Psa_115:4; Bar_6:3 sq.; Wis_13:11 sq.; Wis_15:7 sq.; compare Philo, 2:472; Horace, Sat. 1:81 sq. Arnob. 3:12; 6:13 sq.; Augustine, Civ. Dei. 6:10), and their powerlessness (Isa_41:29; Isa_42:17; Isa_46:1-2; Jer_2:28; compare Deu_4:28; Deu_28:36 Psa_115:5 sq.; Hab_2:18). The images of the gods ( îִöֵּáåֹú ) were sometimes cast (metallic, Jdg_17:4; Isa_2:20; Isa_40:19; Hos_13:2), ðֶñֶêְ , îִñֵּëָä ; sometimes carved (of wood, Isa_44:13; Jer_10:3; comp. Pliny, 12:2; 13:17; Pausan. 2:19, 3), ôֶּñֶì , ôְּñַéì SEE DIANA, or even moulded of clay (Wis_15:8; Pliny distinguishes "lignea et fictilia simulacra," 34:16). They were fastened with chains, so as not to fall down or be carried away (Isa_41:7; Jer_10:4; comp. Pausan. 3:15, 5; 8:41, 4; Arnob. 6:13), and were usually overlaid with gold or silver, and were, besides, richly decked with apparel (Isa_2:20; Isa_30:22; Isa_31:7; Isa_40:19; Jer_10:4; Hos_8:4; Baruch 12:16; compare Dougtaei Analect. 2:179 sq.; Bahr, Symbol. 1:277 sq.). They were also painted with red (vermilion) color (Wis_13:14; compare Pliny, 33:7, 36; 35:12, 45; Virgil, Eclog. 6:22; 10:26 sq.; Plutarch, Quaest. Romans 98; Arnob. 6:10; Bahr, Symbol. 1:334). They were taken by armies with them into battle (2Sa_5:21; comp. Curtius, 8:14, 11; Polyamn. 7:4). Victors were accustomed to carry them about in triumph, in order to despoil the subject nations of their divinities (Isa_10:10; Isa_36:19; Isa_37:12), or to bind them to greater fidelity (Isa_46:1 sq.; Jer_48:7; Jer_49:3; Hos_10:5; Dan_11:8; compare Pausan. 8:46, 1; see Bochart, Hieroz. 1:372; Withof, Opusc. page 143 sq.). The weapons of slain enemies were hung as trophies in the temples of the gods (1Sa_31:10; Pausan. 1:13, 3; Xenoph. Anab. 5:3, 4; Euseb. Chron. Arm. 1:67). Soothsaying and sorcery ever stand in, connection with this cultus (Isa_19:3). SEE MARK IN THE FLESH.
IV. The Christian Doctrine of God. —
1. Source. — The Christian idea of God is derived from the Scriptures. The statement GOD IS GOD suffices for the wants of theology in itself, and is given as a complete proposition in the Scriptures (Exo_3:14; Isa_43:12). But the Scriptures afford many indications, not merely as to the character of God, but also as to his nature. The substance of these teachings may be summed up in the statements. God is a Spirit, God is Love, God is Lord. These statements include the idea of an immaterial, intelligent, and free personal Being, of perfect goodness, wisdom, and power, who made the universe and continues to support it, as well as to govern and direct it, by his providence. Dr. Adam Clarke gives the following general statement of the doctrine of the Great First Cause: "The eternal, independent, and self-existent Being; the Being whose purposes and actions spring from himself, without foreign motive or influence; he who is absolute in dominion; the most pure, the most simple, the most spiritual of all essences; infinitely benevolent, beneficent, true, and holy; the cause of all being, the upholder of all things; infinitely happy, because infinitely perfect; and eternally self-sufficient, needing nothing that he has made; illimitable in his immensity, inconceivable in his mode of existence, and indescribable in his essence; known fully only to himself, because an infinite mind can only be fully comprehended by itself. In a word, a Being who, from his infinite wisdom, can not err or be deceived, and, from his infinite goodness, can do nothing but what is eternally just, and right, and kind." The Christian doctrine of God, in its development, involves the idea of the Trinity: God the Fathar, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. SEE TRINITY.
2. Connotation of the term God. — The word Èåüò , God, taken to signify "an object of religious venersation," was formerly applied to the pretended deities of the heathen, and accordingly Äåõò and Deus were employed by the promulgators of the Gospel when calling on the heathen to transfer their worship from their idols to Jehovah. But the word "God" has come to signify in Christian sense the Maker and Ruler of the world, and is absolutely and exclusively applied to him. There is "one God" in the Christian sense, and there can be but one. "It is not meant merely that we believe this as a fact, but that it is moreover implied in the very meaning we attach to the word. And this is a distinction which should always be carefully attended to. The word 'Mohamedan' means nothing more or less than a believer in Mohammed, though the Christian regards Mohammed as having been in fact an impostor, and the Mohammedans regard him as a true prophet; but neither of these is implied (or connoted) by the word 'Mohammedan' when used by a Christian. On the contrary, thee word 'God' does imply what has been above stated, as is evident from this: that any one who should deny that there exists any such being as a Maker and Governor of the world, would be considered by Christians not only as in error, but as an Atheist — as holding that there is no God (while whoever should affirm the existence of more than one God would be held to be an idolater); and this not the less though he should admit the existence of some being superior to man, such as the fairies, demons, nixes, etc., which are still feared lay the vulgar in almost all parts of Christendom; the genii of the Eastern nations, and the gods and goddesses of the ancient heathens, which were all of this description. None of them was accounted the 'Creator,' and the births of most of them are recorded in their mythology; and altogether the notions entertained of time seem to have been very nears the same as the vulgar superstitions still prevailing in most parts of Europe relative to the fairies, etc., these being doubtless no other than the ancient heathen deities of those parts, the belief in their existence and dread of their power having survived the introduction of Christianity, though the title of 'gods' has been dropped, as well as the words 'sacrifice' and 'worship' in reference to the offerings, invocations, and other tokens of reverence with which they are still in several places honored. It appears, therefore, that as the ancient heathens denounced the early Christians as Atheists for contemning the heathen deities, so they may be considered as being, in the Christian sense of the word, themselves Atheists (as indeed they are called in Eph_2:12), and that consequently the word 'God,' in the Christian sense sand in the heathen must be regarded as having two meanings. Wide, therefore, of the truth is the notion conveyed in Pope's 'Universal Prayer,' the Pantheism, as it is called, of the ancient heathen philosophers and the Brahmins of the present day, who applied the word God to a supposed soul of the universe:
3. Can God be known? — The Scriptures declare that God is invisible (Exo_33:20; Joh_1:18; 1Jn_4:12; 1Ti_6:16, etc.) and unsearchable (Job_11:7; Job_37:23). But the very existence of the idea of God, and even the use of the name God, with its connotation as given above, imply, not indeed that it is possible for man to comprehend God, but that it is not impossible to know God. And so the Scriptures make it man's duty to become "acquainted with God" (1Ch_28:9; Jer_9:24; 2Pe_1:2; Joh_17:3, etc.). Even Atheists are bound to explain the res in intellectu manifested in the thought and language of men. To deny absolutely that God can be known is to deny that he exists; and, on the other hand, the proof, or even the admission that God exists, implies that it can not be absolutely unknown what or how he is: the knowledge of his existence implies as a necessary condition some knowledge of the mode of his existence, i.e. his power, wisdom, justice, etc. The passages cited above, declaring that God is invisible, etc., are not to be tortured to favor the idea that the human mind is absolutely incapable of knowing God. On the contrary, their purpose is to vindicate the claims of revelation as the source of knowledge of God. The Scriptures teach that God is made known him Christ (1) by his works (Rom_1:20; Psa_19:1-2); (2) through his Son, which is, in part, his essence. True, God revealed his "glory" to Moses (Exo_33:18-23), but the manifestation was given through a medium, or, rather, reflection, making "the goodness" of God to "pasbefore" Moses. Not sight, but faith, is the condition and means of our knowledge of God in this life (2Co_5:7). God, then, can be known, but only so far as he gives the knowledge of himself, and so far as the capacity of man can reach. Johannes Damascenus said truly, "It is not possible to know God altogether; neither is it altogether impossible to know God." To see him with the bodily eyes would be fatal to a sinful creature (see citations above). But there is a dead "knowledge of God" (Rom_1:21; Jam_2:19); and, in contrast with it, there is a living knowledge of God, which includes a spiritual seeing of the invisible, the privilege of all who are in vital union with God through faith is his Son (Heb_11:27).
Science trusts to the functions and laws of the human mind as its instruments for the discovery of truth. But to know the truth, and to recognize the ground and object of phenomena in their connection and unity, is a process which leads invariably to the knowledge of the original and perfect Being; for every science which recognizes truth and goodness in the world, in nature and in reason, recognises therewith a power of wisdom and goodness. But as we cannot recognize such a power abstractly, in recognizing it at all we recognize the eternal God (Suabedissen, Metaphysik, 1836, page 143). Yet as man, by science, can know the works of God only very imperfectly and incompletely, criticism and skepticism are alwvays the companions of science , and she can be, at best, only the pioneer of true religious knowledge, or its servant. For the true religious knowledge of God is not founded upon science, but upon life — the life of communion with God. In the religious life the consciousness of God is before and apart from all reflection, all speculation; the souls, in its rapid dialectics, under the pressure of religious needs, has no need of syllogism to prove the existence of God. So Tertullian declares (in his Testimonium Animae) that even the common heathen mind, a part from philosophy, reached a truer knowledge of God and of divine things than the heathen mythology and philosophy could teach. Even the Platonic philosophy taught that the longing of the soul for the truth and beauty of goodness leads to a renunciation of the outward and visible in behalf of an apprehension of the spiritual and real. Spiritual Christianity transforms this teaching into a higher one, viz. that the longing of the soul for God, the search for God in Christ, is always rewarded, and that the "pure in heart" see God with the spiritual eyes of faith. Luther's doctrine that God may be taught, named, and apprehended in Christ, and in Christ alone, is quite in harmony with the early theology of the Church (e.g. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 2).
Not that a mere intellectual faith in Christ brings this knowledge of God. With the conversion of the soul begins its new, spiritual capacity to receive and apprehend God; and as the soul is emptied of self and purged from sin by the Holy Spirit, it grows in knowledge of God, in light and love, until the "life of God" becomes the "life of the soul." Dr. Nevin (Reply to Dorner, 1869) has the following striking passage as to the specifically Christian conception of God: "There is a sense in which the absolute being of God, as related immediately and directly to our created being, must be considered the necessary ground of our knowing him and coming into union with him in the way of religion. The whole possibility of religion for us starts in the God-consciousness, or direct sense of Deity, which is as much a part of our original nature as the sense we have of the world around us or of our own existence. It is not put into us by any outward evidence or argument. It authenticates and necessitates itself as a fundamental fact in our life; and in doing this it certifies, to the same extent, the truth of the object on which it is exercised. Or, rather, we must say, the truth of the object on which it is exercised, which is the Divine Being, or the existence of the Absolute, certifies itself, makes itself sure in and through the consciousness into which it enters. In this sense, the idea of God comes before Christianity, as it comes before religion in every other form. But who will say that this general idea of God can be for us, therefore, the actual root of Christianity, so that any among us, starting with that alone, could ever by means of it come to a full construction of what God is for true Christian faith? It lies at the ground of pantheism, dualism, polytheism, deism, and all false religions, no less than at the ground of Christianity. For the distinctive knowledge of Christianity, then, we need some other specific principle or root. which, however it may be comprehended in the general principle of all religion, must be regarded at the same time nevertheless as the ground and beginning, exclusively and entirely, of religion under this its highest and only absolutely complete form. Where, now, is that principle to be found? Where does the whole world of Christianity, the new creation of the Gospel (life, power, doctrine, and all), take its rise and start? Where do we come to the source of its perennial revelation, the ground of its indestructible life? Where, save in the presence of the Word Incarnate, the glorious Person of him who is the Root and the Offspring of David, the bright and morning Star — the faithful and true Witness, the BEGINNING of the creation of God!"
But Religion has had her errors and excesses as well as Science. As the latter seeks in its pride, by purely intellectual effort, to apprehend the absolute, so the former has at certain periods allowed mysticism to take the place of the simple revealed truth as to the life of God in the soul, and, in the spirit of the Oriental theosophy, has called the "redeemed soul but a drop in the ocean of God", SEE MYSTICISM. The orthodox Christian doctrine keeps the golden mean between these extremes. It asserts, and has asserted from the beginning, that a real and objective knowledge of God comes only from God's revelation, and that only êáôὰ ôὸἐöéêôüí , pro virili (Arist. De Mund.), according to the best capacity of man. It teaches not only that God is "incomprehensible," but also that every step taken in the true knowledge of God by the soul makes his "incomprehensibility" more obvious. It does not pretend that the scriptural doctrine of one God in three persons is perfectly within the scope of the human intellect to comprehend as well as to apprehend; but all Church history shows that a genuine and even scientific knowledge of God has been better maintained with the doctrine of the Trinity than without it. When the Arians attacked the Nicene doctrine of the Trinity on the ground that it transcended human reason, the orthodox replied that it was easier to know God by receiving the doctrine of the Trinity than by rejecting it. Naked monotheism, whether in Judaism, Islamism, or elsewhere, has always ended in bald pantheism (q.v.), while on the other hand the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, though stigmatized by infidel and rationalistic opponents as Tritheism, has, from the beginning, preserved in the Church the idea of God as the eternal, spiritual, and personal Being, and has kept up, also, a pure and spiritual worship of the Great Supreme. See Ritter, Ueber die Erkenntniss Gottes in der Welt, 1836; Nitzsch, Syst. d. Christlichen Lehre, § 7, 60-80; Nitzsch, in Herzog's Real-Encyklop. s.v. Gott.
V. Substance and Mode of the Scripture Teaching. — In the Scriptures no attempt is made to prove the existence of a God. The error of men consisted not in denying a God, but in admitting too many; and one great object of the Bible is to demonstrate that there is but one. No metaphysical arguments, however, are employed in it for this purpose. The proof rests on facts recorded in the history of the Jews, from which it appears that they were always victorious and prosperous so long as they served the only living and true God, Jehovah (the name by which the Almighty made himself known to them), and uniformly unsuccessful when they revolted from him to serve other gods. What argument could be so effectual to convince them that there was no god in all the earth but the God of Israel? The sovereignty and universal providence of the Lord Jehovah are proved by predictions delivered by the Jewish prophets, pointing out the fate of nations and of empires, specifying distinctly their rise, the duration of their power, and the causes of their decline; thus demonstrating that one God ruled among the nations, and made them the unconscious instruments of promoting the purposes of his will. In the same manner, none of the attributes of God are demonstrated in Scripture by reasoning: they are simply affirmed and illustrated by facts; and instead of a regular deduction of doctrines and conclusions from a few admitted principles, we are left to gather them from the recorded feelings and devotional expressions of persons whose hearts were influenced by the fear of God. These circumstances point out a marked singularity in the Scriptures, considered as a repository of religious doctrines. The writers, generally speaking, do not reason, but exhort and remonstrate; they do not attempt to fetter the judgment by the subtleties of argument, but to rouse the feelings by an appeal to palpable facts. This is exactly what might have been expected from teachers acting under a divine commission, and armed with undeniable facts to enforce their admonitions. The sacred writers furnish u with information on the existence and the character of God
(1) from the names by which he is designated; (2) from the actions ascribed to him; and (3) from the attributes with which he is invested.
"1. The names of God as recorded in Scripture convey at once ideas of overwhelming greatness and glory, mingled with that awful mysteriousness with which, to all finite minds, and especially to the minds of mortals, the divine essence and mode of existence must ever be invested. Though ONE, he is àֵֹìäַéí , ELOHIM, GODS, persons adorable. He is éְäåָֹä , JEHOVAH, self-existing; àֵì , EL, the Mighty, Almighty; ùׁãּé , SHADDAI, omnipotent, all-sufficient; àֲãֹðָé , ADONAI, Lord, Ruler, Judge. These are among the adorable appellatives of God which are scattered throughout the, revelation that he has been pleased to make of himself. But on one occasion he was pleased more particularly to declare his name, that is, such of the qualities and attributes of the divine nature as mortals are the most interested in knowing, and to unfold not only his natural, but also those of his moral attributes by which his conduct towards his creatures is regulated: 'And the Lord passed by and proclaimed, The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and upon the children's children unto the third and fourth generation' (Exodus 34). This is the most ample and particular description of the character of God, as given by himself in the Old Testament" (Watson). The name "which is above every name" (Php_2:9), is the name JESUS (Col_3:17). The name in Exo_3:14 is peculiar in denoting God as the "God who reveals himself." The declaration "I am that I am," or "I will be that I will be," does not so much include a predicate of God as a declaration of the eternal being of God, as revealing himself and his kingdom in time; it involves not merely the sense of existence (to which it is limited by the Septuaguint version ὁ ὤí ), but also the idea of the continual self-revealing of God, and thus unifies, so to speak, all the successive steps and epochs of revelation. HE is "the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, which is, and which was, and which is to come — the Almighty" (Rev_1:8). The name Jehovah was too holy to be uttered, and others were substituted for it by the Jews; the fearful penalty for blaspheming it was death (Lev_24:16; see Clarke's note ad loc.). In the names Father and Redeemer (Isa_63:16), new elements of the character of the self- revealing Jehovah are set forth; he shows himself as the God of grace and love to his people who turn unto him. — Watson, Institutes, part 2, 100:1; Nitzsch, in Herzog's Real-Encyklop. s.v. Gott; Hengstensberg, Die Gottesnamen des Pentateuch; Knapp, Theology (Wood's ed. page 84) Lange, On Genesis, Introd. § 7.
2. Actions. — "The second means by which the Scriptures convey to us the knowledge of God is by the actions which they ascribe to him. They contain, indeed, the important record of his dealings with men in every age which is comprehended within the limit of the sacred history, and by prophetic declaration they also exhibit the principles on which he will govern the world to the end of the so that the whole course of the divine administration may be considered as exhibiting a singularly illustrative comment upon those attributes of his nature which, in their abstract form, are contained in such declarations as those which have been just quoted.
(1.) The first act ascribed to God is that of creation. By this were manifested: his eternity and self-existence, as he who creates must be before all creatures, and he who gives being to others can himself derive it from none; his almighty power, shown both in the act of creation and in the number and vastness of the objects so produced; his wisdom, in their arrangement and in their fitness to their respective ends; and his goodness, as the whole tended to the happiness of sentient beings. The foundations of his natural and moral government are also made manifest by his creative acts. In what he made out of nothing he had an absolute right and prerogative; it awaited his ordering, and was completely at his disposal; so that to alter or destroy his own work, and to prescribe the laws by which the intelligent and rational part of his creatures should be governed, are rights which none can question. Thus, on the one hand, his character of Lord or Governor is established, and, on the other, our duty of lowly homage and absolute obedience.
(2.) Providence. — Agreeably to this, as soon as man was created he was placed under a rule of conduct. Obedience was to be followed with the continuance of the divine favor; transgression, with death. The event called forth new manifestations of the character of God. His tender mercy, in the compassion showed to the fallen pair; his justice, in forgiving them only in the view of a satisfaction to be hereafter offered to his justice by an innocent representative of the sinning race; his love to that race, in giving his own Son to become this Redeemer, and in the fullness of time to die for the sins of the whole world; and his holiness, in connecting with this provision for the pardon of man the means of restoring him to a sinless state, and to the obliterated image of God in which he had been created. Exemplifications of the divine mercy are traced from age to age in his establishing his own worship among men, and remitting the punishment of individual and national offenses in answer to prayer offered from penitent hearts, and in dependence upon the typified or actually offered universal sacrifice; of his condescension, in stooping to the cases of individuals, in his dispensations both of providence and grace, by showing respect to the poor and humble, and principally by thee incarnation of God in the form of a servant, admitting even into familiar and friendly intercourse with himself, and then entering into heaven to be their patron and advocate until they should be received into the sauce glory, 'and so be forever with the Lord;' of his strictly righteous government, in the destruction of the old world, the cities of the plain, the nations of Canaan, and all ancient states, upon their 'filling up the measure of their iniquities,' and, to show that 'he will by no means clear the guilty,' in the numerous and severe punishments inflicted even upon the chosen seed of Abraham because of their transgressions; of his long-suffering, in frequent warnings, delays, and corrective judgments inflicted upon individuals and nations before sentence of utter excision and destruction; of faithfulness and truth, in the fulfillment of promises, often many ages after they were given, as in the promises to Abraham respecting the possession of the land of Canaan by his seed, and in all the 'promises made to the fathers' respecting the advent, vicarious death, and illustrious offices of the 'Christ,' the Savior of the world; of his immutability, in the constant and unchanging laws and principles of his government, which remain to this day precisely the same in every thing universal as when first promulgated, and have been the rule of his conduct in all places as well as through all time; of his prescience of future events, manifested by the predictions of Scripture; and of the depth and stability of his counsel, as illustrated in that plan and purpose of bringing back a revolted world to obedience and felicity which we find steadily kept in view in the scriptural history of the acts of God in former ages — which is still the end towards which all his dispensations bend, however wide and mysterious their sweep, and which they will finally accomplish, as we learn from the prophetic history of the future contained in the Old and New Testaments. Thus the course of divine operation in the world has from age to age been a manifestation on the divine character, continually receiving new and stronger illustrations until the completion of the Christian revelation by the ministry of Christ and his inspired followers, and still placing itself in brighter light and more impressive aspects as the scheme of human redemption runs on to its consummation. From all the acts of God as recorded in the Scriptures we are taught that he alone is God; that he is present every where to sustain and govern all things; that his wisdom is infinite, his counsel settled, and his power irresistible; that he is holy, just, and good — the Lord and the Judge, but the Father and the Friend, of Man_1:3.
Nature and Attributes. — "More at large do we learn what God is from the declarations of the inspired writings. As to his substance, that 'God is a Spirit.' As to his duration, that 'from everlasting to everlasting he is God;' 'the King, eternal, immortal, invisible.' That, after all the manifestations he has made of himself, he is, from the infinite perfection and glory of his nature, incomprehensible: 'Lo, these are but parts of his ways, and how little a portion is heard of him!' 'Touching the Almighty, we cannot find him out.' That he is unchangeable: 'The Father of Lights, with whom there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.' That 'he is the fountain of life,' and the only independent Being in the universe: 'Who only hath immortality.' That every other being, however exalted, has its existence from him: 'For by him were all things created which are in heaven and in earth, whether they are visible or invisible.' That the existence of every thing is upheld by him, no creature being for a moment independent of his support: 'By him all things consist;' 'upholding all things by the word of his power.' That he is omnipresent: 'Do not I fill heaven and earth with my presence? saith the Lord.' That he is omniscient: 'All things are naked and open before the eyes of him with whom we have to do.' That he is the absolute Lord and Owner of all things: 'The heavens, even the heaven of heavens, are thine, and all the parts of then;' 'The earth is thine, and the fullness thereof, the world and them that dwell therein;' 'He doeth according to his will in the armies of heaven and among the inhabitants 'of the earth.' That his providence extends to the minutest objects: 'The hairs of your head are all numbered;' 'Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.' That he is a Being of unspotted purity and perfect rectitude: 'Holy, holy, holy Lord God of hosts!' 'A God of truth, and in whom there is no iniquity;' 'Of purer eyes than to behold iniquity.' That he is just in the administration of his government: 'Shall not the Judge of the whole earth do right?' 'Clouds and darkness are round about him; judgment and justice are the habitation of his throne.' That his wisdom is unsearchable: 'O the depth of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!' And, finally, that he is good and merciful: 'Thou art good, and thy mercy endureth forever;' 'His tender mercy is over all his works;' 'God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ;' 'God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them;' 'God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.' SEE ATTRIBUTES; also VI below. "Under these deeply awful but consolatory views do the Scriptures present to us the supreme object of our worship and trust; and they dwell upon each of the above particulars with inimitable sublimity and beauty of language, and with an inexhaustible variety of illustration. Nor can we compare these views of the divine nature with the conceptions of the most enlightened of pagans without feeling how much reason we have for everlasting gratitude that a revelation so explicit and so comprehensive should have been made to us on a subject which only a revelation from God himself could have made known. It is thus that Christian philosophers, even when they do not use the language of the Scriptures, are able to speak on this great and mysterious doctrine in language so clear and with conceptions so noble; in a manner, too, so equable, so different from the sages of antiquity, who, if at any time they approach the truth when speaking of the divine nature, never fail to mingle with it some essentially erroneous or groveling conception. 'By the word GOD,' says Dr. Barrow, 'we mean a Being of infinite wisdom, goodness, and power, the Creator and the Governor of all things, to whom the great attributes of eternity and independency, omniscience and immensity, perfect holiness and purity, perfect justice and veracity, complete happiness, glorious majesty, and supreme right of dominion belong, and to whom the highest veneration and most profound submission and obedience are due' (Barrow, On the Creed). ‘Our notion of Deity,' says Bishop Pearson, 'doth expressly signify a Being or Nature of infinite perfection; and the infinite perfection of a being or nature consists in this, that it be absolutely and essentially necessary, an actual being of itself, and potential or causative of all beings beside itself; independent from any other, upon which all things else depend, and by which all things else are governed' (Pearson, On the Creed). 'God is a Being,' says Lawson, 'and not any kind of being, but a substance which is the foundation of other beings; and not only a substance, but perfect. Yet many beings are perfect in their kind, yet limited and finite; but God is absolutely, fully, and every way infin