Manual of Christian theology

Preface

In this revised edition of his Manual of Christian Theology the writer seeks to express as clearly as possible the views of Christian truth which fifty years of study have fixed in his mind. The work, however, is strictly a manual, not attempting to elaborate all the reasons for the views expressed, but leaving much to be supplied by the student or teacher. In the present state of theological inquiry a moderately full discussion of the subjects epitomized in this volume would have quadrupled its size, and it has been the writer’s hardest task to bring into a narrow compass, by processes of omission and compression, what he had written in extenso for his own satisfaction.

In all parts of the Manual abundant references are made to the Holy Scriptures; often in the old way of appealing to single texts or expressions, but never without due regard to the whole context in ascertaining their meaning. It is far better for students to examine every proof-text in its original setting, than to have it brought before them in a quotation: hence numerous references and few citations. It is hoped that every reader of the volume will go through it with Bible in hand, and multiply its value a hundred fold by “ searching the Scriptures daily whether these things are so ” (Acts 17:11).

iii

IV

PREFACE

This edition of the Manual differs from the former edition in that it makes Christian Service a distinct Part of the work, on a par with Mankind, the Person and Work of Christ, the Christian Life, and Issues Hereafter; and it is hoped that this novelty of analysis will not be condemned without a generous attempt to appreciate the advantages which it offers in the study of theology as related to life.

It may also be remarked that the study of Angels has been relegated to an Appendix following Part Second, on Mankind, and that an attempt has been made to employ ordinary instead of technical language in speaking of theological questions. The old doctrines are not overlooked or depreciated, but discussed under new names.

The writer desires to make his grateful acknowledgments to the Rev. William Harston Goodall for help and encouragement in preparing this volume, to the Rev. John Russell Gow, for the careful Index of Subjects, costing much labor, and, above all, to one whose radiant courage, hopefulness, and devotion have been the light of his home and the joy of his heart for almost half a century. To her the reader is indebted for the Index of Bible References, and the writer, for counsel and suggestion in every part of the work.

May the Great Teacher accept this humble attempt to honor his Name!

Alvah Hovey.

Newton Theological Institution, Newton Centre.

September i, 1900.

I. Definitions: i. Of Christian Theology, 3; 2. Of Christian

Religion, 3; 3. Of the Christian Religion, 3.

II. Relations of Christian Theology: 1. To Natural and Biblical Theology, 4; 2. To Apologetic, Polemic, and Comparative Theology, 4.

III. Postulates of Christian Theology: 1. Normal action of the mind trustworthy, 4; 2. Value of Evidence estimated by this, 5 ; 3. Value of probable Evidence variable, 5 ; 4. Knowledge of God possible, 6.

IV. Cautions to Students of Theology against: 1. Bold Inferences from the Infinite, 6; 2. Over-Confidence in Speculation, 7; 3. Pride of Opinion, 7; 4. Self-Interest, 7.

V. Qualifications for this Study: 1. Mental, 8; 2. Moral, 8; 3. Religious, 8; 4. Educational, 9.

VI. Benefits of this Study: 1. Mental, 9; 2. Moral, 9; 3. Religious, 10; 4. Practical, 10.

VII. Divisions of this Study: 1. According to this Manual, 10; — Part I. God in Nature and in Scripture, 10; Part II. Mankind: their Nature, Character, and Condition, 10; Part III. Jesus Christ: His Person and His Work, 11; Part IV. Christian Life: its Beginning and its Growth, 11 ; Part V. Christian Service, especially among men, 11 ; Part VI. Issues Hereafter, 11. 2. According to other works whose point of view is either (1) Trinitarian, 11; (2) Christocentric, 11; (3) Governmental, 12; or (4) Redemptive, 12.

VI

THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE

Chapter I. God Revealed In Nature

1. Trustworthiness of Nature’s Teaching: i. Definition of Na-

ture, 1 7; 2. Nature known but in part, 17; 3. This knowledge real and valuable, 17.

II. Content of this Revelation: 1. Materialism indefensible : (1) If matter is lifeless, 18; (2) If it is a two-sided entity, 19; (3) Objections to the latter hypothesis, 19.

2. Monism unsatisfactory: (1) Arguments for it criticised, 20;

a. That it satisfies the logical appeal for unity, 20; b. That it dispenses with creation, 21 ; c. That it accounts for reciprocal action, 21 ; d. That it is sustained by biology, 22 ; e. And by certain texts of Scripture, 22. (2) Objections

to Monism: a. Will force and physical force inconvertible, 23; b. Monism endangers human freedom, 24; c. And rejects the testimony of consciousness, 24.

3. Theism is rational and credible: (1) The Order of Nature

favors it, 25 ; (2) The Marks of Design in Nature favor it, 26; (3) Objections answered, namely: a. That parts of living beings are useless, 27 ; b. That certain forces in nature are harmful, 28.

4. The Genetic history of Nature Theistic: Stages and transi-

tions of evolution, 28: (1) From uniform substance to differing atoms, 29; (2) From atoms to vegetables, 29; (3) From vegetables to animals, 31. Objections to Theism from animal phenomena : a. Animals perish prematurely, 32; but (a) Abbreviated life is better than no life, 32; and (b) A perfect habitat for different species may be impossible, 32. b. Carnivora abound, 32; but (a) More living beings are thus possible, 33; (b) Death of animals well-nigh painless, 33. c. Useless parts of animals, 33 ; but these may be due (a) to God’s love of symmetry, 33; (b) To his method of evolution, 33; or (c) To educational uses of the parts condemned, 33. (4) From animals to

mankind — who are rational, moral, and religious beings, 33. a. Mankind are Rational beings, 34; animals are not. Notice, e. g., (a) Size of the human brain, 34; (b) Human speech, 34; (c) The human hand, 34; (d) Constructive art

Vll of Mankind, 34; (e) Man’s appreciation of the sublime and beautiful, 34; (f) His power of imagination, 35; (g) His ability to form general concepts, 35; (h) His introspection, 35 5 (i) His aspiration and endless progress, 35. b. Mankind are Moral beings, 36; hence not the offspring of animals, (a) Their consciousness of duty and of law, 36; (b) Of a law-giver, 36; and (c) Of accountability to him, 36. c. Mankind are Religious beings: for (a) They put their dependence on a Higher Power, 37; (b) They recognize accountability to that Power, 37; (c) They are inwardly moved to worship, 37; (d) They crave a personal object of worship, 38; (e) Only a perfect being can satisfy them forever, 38; (f) The perfection of God is therefore credible, 38.

5. A priori arguments in favor of this conclusion: (1) The syllogism of Anselm criticised, 40; (2) The syllogism of Samuel Clarke criticised, 40; (3) The syllogism of Cousin criticised, 40; (4) Bearing of the a priori arguments on the question at issue, 40.

III. The Revelation of God in Nature insufficient for mankind in their present moral condition: 1. Because God’s mercy to sinners is not clearly revealed in Nature, 41 ; 2. Neither is his treatment of them hereafter thus revealed, 41 ; 3. Nor what the Divine Being has done for them in the person of Christ, 41 ; 4. Nor what is the inner fulness of his life as the triune God, 41.

Chapter II. God Revealed In Scripture

As revelation in Scripture is supernatural, two objections are made to it: 1. It gives more light to some than to others, 42. Answer: (1) So does Providence, 42; (2) Both Scripture and Providence honor man’s responsibility for what he has — much or little, 42. 2. It affirms supernatural aid

which is incredible, 44. Answer: (1) God’s action resembles that of the human spirit more than that of physical energy, 44; (2) Supernatural action tends to restore, not to disturb, the order of nature, 44; (3) Such action is neither impossible, incredible, or even improbable, 45.

First Proposition: The New Testament writings trustworthy as historical records. The trustworthiness of historical records depends on their date and their writers: Notice then, 1. That Christianity appeared about a. d. 30,

Vlll

4 6; 2. That the New Testament Scriptures antedate a. d. ioo, 47; 3. And were written by Apostles or their Associates, 47. Consider, especially, (1) Paul’s conversion and character, 48; (2) His thirteen Epistles, especially the Undisputed Four, 48; (3) The historical contents of the Four, 48; (4) The Epistles of James, Jude, 1st of Peter, and 1st of John, 49; (5) Trustworthiness of the Gospels, as specially important, 49 ; a. Early Christian writers .make them antedate a. d. ioo, 50 ; b. All the early versions contain them, 50; c. The fourth Gospel, though written by John in his old age, trustworthy, 51 ; d. Relation of the Gospels to one another: Critical views, 52; e. The Evangelists men of good judgment, 54; f. And manifestly upright — no motive for misrepresentation, 54. Conclusion, 55.

Second Proposition : The New Testament writings prove Jesus Christ to have been an infallible Teacher. Meaning of the word “ infallible,” 55 ; Method of proof, 56. 1. What Jesus claimed to know, 56; 2. His manner of teaching, 56; 3. Accord between the two, 57. Hence (1) His disciples believed his claim to be just, 58; (2) Readers of the Gospels have believed the same thing, 58; (3) His doctrines ratify his claim, 58; (4) His fulfilled predictions do the same : — the only apparent exception noted, 58; (5) His claim confirmed by miracles, 59. Definition and purpose of miracles, 59. Objections to them answered, 60. a. Human testimony for miracles said to be nullified : (a) By man’s predisposition to believe in them, 60; (b) By the observed uniformity of nature, 60; (c) By the perfection of God’s works in nature, 60; (d) By the fact that God is nothing but a blind force, 60. Answers: a. Every normal bias of the mind is towards truth, 60; b. The order of nature is changed by man, 61 ; c. A finite world complete in itself no better than one improvable, 61 ; d. The last objection owes all its force to atheism, 61 ; e. A single miracle refutes all these objections, 62; f. The testimony for Christ’s miracles excellent, and his claim to infallibility ratified, 62.

Third Proposition: The New Testament writings prove that Jesus Christ promised the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit to His Apostles, by whom, with some of

THEIR ASSOCIATES, THE New TESTAMENT WAS WRITTEN.

I. Meaning of inspiration as here used, 63; 2. Texts containing this great promise, 63; 3. What they naturally sig-

IX mfy: (i) That the Holy Spirit would be Christ’s Advocate with the Apostles, 64; (2) That he would bring to their remembrance Christ’s teaching, 64; (3) That he would lead them into the whole truth, 64; (4) And thus qualify them to teach his gospel without error, 64. In their completeness these promises were fulfilled to the apostles only: a. They were addressed to them alone, 64; b. They assured them of specially needed help, 64; c. History forbids us to make the promises universal, 65; d. Yet some of them may be applied to all believers, 65; e. Paul was added to the primitive Apostles, 65 ; f. And so had with them a plenitude of gifts, 65 ; g. All Christians may have the benefit of them through the Scriptures, but the Apostles’ teaching will never be superseded, 66.

Objections to the inerrancy of the Apostles as religious teachers: 1. They were not always true to their convictions: answer, 66 ; 2. They taught contradictory views of truth : answer, 67; 3. They misinterpreted the Old Testament: answer, 67; 4. They expected the visible return of Christ in their own day: answer, 67; 5. They admitted their forgetfulness and ignorance : answer, 67.

But some New Testament writers were not Apostles. (1) John Mark, an associate of Peter, Paul, and Barnabas, was one of these, 67 ; (2) Luke, the physician and companion of Paul, was another, 67; (3) James and Jude, brothers of Jesus, were others, 68; (4) The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews belongs to the same class, 68. All these were probably associates of the Apostles and perhaps inspired, 68.

Fourth Proposition : Jesus Christ, together with the Apostles and their associates, indorsed the Old Testament Scriptures as from God. i. These Scriptures existed in the time of Christ, 69; 2. As is suggested by the Son of Sirach, 69; 3. And affirmed by Josephus contra Apionem, 69 ; yet 4. There was controversy about the canonicity of Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, 70. Notice then: (1) How Jesus used the Old Testament writings, 70; (2) How they were used by Paul, 71; (3) How they differ from the New Testament, 71 ; (4) How this is justified by their character: They are distinguished a. For historic fairness, 72 ; b. For accuracy in local allusions, 73 ;

c. For accuracy in their references to Oriental life, 73 ;

d. For the fulfilment of some of their predictions, 73.

X

Why not of all? 73. (a) Many of them were conditional,

73; (b) Many were figurative and obscure, 73; yet (c) Their authors claimed to speak God’s word, 74; (d) Their religious teaching was timely and progressive, 74; and (e) The spirit of essential Truth was in it. Our result thus far provisional, 75.

Mode of Inspiration. Theories named and discriminated. 1. Theory of verbal plenary inspiration: said to be required,

(1) By the object of inspiration, 77; (2) By the use of language not understood by the speaker or writer, 77; (3) By the language, “ Thus saith the Lord,” 77 ; (4) By the adjective, theopneustic, in 2 Tim. 2:16, 77. Objections to this theory scrutinized : a. It fails to account for varieties of style in the sacred scriptures, 77; b. It disagrees with the free play of feeling indicated by their style, 78; c. It belittles the work of inspired men, 78.

2. Theory of dynamical “ plenary ” inspiration: which (1) de-

fines inspiration as a direct influence of spirit on spirit, 79; (2) Agrees with the purpose of revelation, 79; (3) Allows of appropriation from others by inspired writers, 79; (4) Agrees with a useful distinction between inspiration and revelation, 80; (5) Accounts every thing in Scripture equally inspired, 80.

3. Theory of dynamical “religious” inspiration: which main-

tains, (1) That the purpose of Scripture is to make known religious truth, 80; (2) That the passages affirming inspiration limit it to religious truth. This theory modifies one’s view of the inerrancy of Scripture in all non-religious teaching, 81.

4. Theory of universal Christian inspiration, 83. (1) The same

Spirit is said to dwell and work in all renewed men, 83;

(2) The prediction of Joel and the promise of Christ are applicable to all, 83; (3) Views of Dorner and Cave and author of this manual, 84.

Objections to this view of the Bible stated and answered : 1. That it tends to Bibliolatry, 86; 2. That it retards the progress of science, 86; 3. That it requires all copies, versions, and interpretations to be inerrant as well, 87 ; 4. That Scripture is often obscure, 88 ; 5. That it uses unsound arguments, 91 ; 6. That it interprets falsely, 92 ; 7. That it teaches scientific errors, 94; 8. That it contains historical errors, 97; 9. That it abounds in contradictions, 100; 10. That it

XI makes false predictions, 102; 11. That it teaches bad morality, 103; 12. That it teaches bad theology, 104. Hence the Bible is a trustworthy source of religious truth, that is, of truth concerning God and the way of life, 105.

Chapter III. Resultant Doctrine Of God

I. That God is a living and morally perfect Being. 1. As such

he has perfect knowledge: (1) According to the testimony of Scripture, 107 ; (2) According to the demands of reason. 2. As such he is perfectly righteous: (1) According to the language of Scripture, 108 ; (2) According to human reason, 108. 3. As such he has perfect feeling or love: (1) According to Scripture, 109; and (2) According to our moral judgment, 109. 4. As such he has perfect will or power:

(1) According to Scripture, no; and (2) According to reason, no. 5. As such he is also triune, no; (1) According to the New ’Testament, no; (2) And in order to fulness of life, in. Difficulties of this doctrine briefly considered, in.

II. That God is an Infinite Being or Spirit. 1. As such he is

independent in respect to (1) his existence, (2) his knowledge, (3) his action, (4) his happiness, 113. 2. As such

he is immutable in respect to (1) his essence, (2) his knowledge, (3) his character, (4) his purpose, (5) his blessedness, 113. 3. As such he is eternal, perhaps, timeless; though the latter point is mooted, 114. 4. As such he is omnipresent,

III. That God has an Eternal Purpose, 116. This is both scriptural and reasonable. Let us consider the end sought by the divine purpose. This is said to be (1) The glory of God himself, 117; (2) The well-being of mankind, 117; (3) Two ends which may be resolved into one, 118. Objections criticised, viz., a. The presence of suffering in the world, 1 18; and b. The presence of sin, 118.

IV. That God has created all things through the Word. 1. What is meant by the act of creation, 120; 2. Objections to creation answered, 121 ; 3. The vastness of creation ; 4. Men not the only rational beings created, 121.

V. That God upholds all things through the Word, 122. 1. This

proposition opposed to deism, dualism, and pantheism, 122; 2. God’s power a factor in everything that exists, 123 ; 3. Views of Harris (S.), Lotze (H.), Edwards (J.), 123;

xii

4. What divine upholding really signifies, 124.; 5. Answer to an objection, 124.

VI. That God provides for the fulfillment of his Eternal purpose, 124. 1. God’s providence defined, 124; 2. It is uni-

versal, 125 ; 3. It is rational, 126 ; 4. It is particular and instructive, 126; 5. It satisfies the Christian heart, 127.

Chapter I. Nature Of Mankind

I. Men are by nature bipartite: 1. This is the common rep-

resentation of Scripture, 132; 2. And is supported by consciousness, 132; 3. Texts supposed to favor a tripartite nature examined, 133; 4. Use of the words ‘soul’ and ‘spirit’ in Scripture, 134; 5. The two elements of man’s nature interdependent here, 135.

II. Men are by nature racial, or homogeneous: as may be inferred, 1. From the language of Scripture, though Professor Winchell dissents, 136; 2. From their natural similarity the world over, 138; 3. Yet Genesis does not disprove an evolutionary origin of the body, 139.

III. As racial men are reproductive: This is undeniable as to

the body, but as to the soul three hypotheses are defended, namely, I. That of pre-creation, 139; 2. That of co-creation, 140, and 3. That of pro-creation, 141. 4. Bearing of these

hypotheses on the nature of death and after-life, 142.

IV. Men are by nature social beings: 1. Evidence of this; 2. Importance of it, quotation from Saisset, 143.

V. Men are by nature moral beings, i. e., subjects of moral law:

1. Source and content of the moral law, 144; (1) Its source must be the moral nature of God, 145 ; (2) Its content must therefore be what his moral nature approves, in other words, likeness to himself; what He seeks men are bound to seek, the summum bonum for him is the summum bonum for them, 147; (3) This has been said to be either holiness or happiness, 148; (4) But neither of these comprises in itself all good; Both are intrinsically desirable, 148. (5) Objection to this view and further reasons for

it, 148. 2. Human faculties which condition moral action: These are (1) knowing, (2) feeling, (3) desiring, and (4) willing, 149. 3. In what part of action its moral quality

Xlll resides: Answer; In the soul’s choice of its ultimate end of action: in its deepest preference, 150. 4. Is this inward and ultimate choice of the soul free or constrained? (1) The teaching of the Scriptures is, a. That the actual sinfulness of men is certain, 151 ; b. That the first sin was man’s free act, 151 ; c. That men are now morally weak, 152; d. That their duty to repent is unquestionable, 153; e. That they need God’s help in doing this, 153. (2) The

teaching of consciousness is, a. Conclusive for the fact of freedom (Hamilton, Lotze, Schurman), although, b. This has been often questioned (Alexander, A.), 154. (3) The

teaching of logic, resting on the law of causation, is still doubtful: a. Reasoning of Jonathan Edwards, 155; b. Conclusion of Lotze, Schurman, and others, 156. 5. Moral

action necessarily free in all beings, good or bad: (1) This fact must be steadfastly affirmed, 157; although (2) It must be difficult to reverse a settled choice, 158; (3) Propositions to be always maintained, 158.

Chapter II. Their Character

1. As a race Mankind are sinful. 1. Definitions of sin: (1)

Want of conformity to the law of God, 160, criticism; (2) Inordinate desire, criticism, 161 ; (3) Deficiency of love to God, criticism, 161 ; (4) Preference of self to God, 162.

2. All mankind are sinful, that is, inclined to wrong-doing:

(1) Alleged direct testimony of Scripture, 163; (2) Bodily death a fruit of sin, 163; (3) Christ’s death for all, 163; (4) Man’s nature vitiated at birth, 163; (5) Language of Ovid, Seneca, and others, 163.

3. All mankind not equally sinful: (1) As the Scriptures teach,

164; (2) Yet in a sense “totally depraved,” 164; (3) Conscience with reason teaches the same : for, a. Man is accountable for every wrong voluntary act, 165 ; b. For any inclination to sin which he freely appropriates, 165 ; c. For any increase of this inclination due to his sinful action, 165;

d. For the evil which he may expect to follow his sin, 166;

e. For lack of improvement in moral capacity due to his sins, 166; f. For deterioration of moral capacity due to his sinning, 167; g. For failing to do all the good he might have done if he had been always faithful. Hence all men cannot be equally guilty, 167.

Is a man responsible for sin which he countenances in another? I. He is responsible for countenancing the sin, 168; 2. And

XIV countenancing sin encourages sinners, 168; 3. Yet there is a difference between inwardly approving and resolvedly doing, 169; 4. A man is guilty for any wrong act in proportion to his sympathy with it, 169; 5. Sinners are an alliance of evil-doers, 170; 6. So, too, the good need not work alone, 170; 7. But benefit from fellowship with the good is counterbalanced by disadvantages from fellowship with the bad, 170; 8. As sympathy grows responsibility grows, 170.

Chapter III. Their Condition

I. As sinful mankind are condemned — Notice six hypotheses

concerning their responsibility for sin, especially in connection with their first parents : 1. The Pelagian hypothesis stated and criticised, 171 ; 2. The Arminian hypothesis stated and criticised, 172; 3. The Edwardean hypothesis stated and criticised, 173 ; 4. The Placean hypothesis stated and criticised, 173 ; 5. The Augustinian hypothesis stated and criticised, 173 ; 6. The Calvinistic hypothesis stated and criticised, 174.

II. All men while unrenewed are exposed to punishment , with-

out prospect of relief: 1. Purpose of punishment, 176; 2. Elements of punishment, 177; 3. Media and agents of punishment, 178.

Other views: — 1. That extinction of conscious being is the final punishment of unbelievers: a. Because endless loss and pain would be too great a retribution for temporal sin, 179; b. Because a permanently miserable being is of no use to God or man, 180; c. Because eternal life is the fruit of union with Christ, 180; d. Because death always means extinction of conscious being, 180; e. Because the Scriptures deny conscious existence to wicked men after death, 181 ; f. Because they use other terms for punishment which point to extinction of consciousness, 181. 2. That all the wicked will be restored through repentance, either here or hereafter: (1) Because the presence of endless sin and suffering in the universe is incredible, 182; (2) Because the utter extinction of evil is predicted by some of the sacred writers, especially by Paul, 183; (3) Reply to these arguments. Natural evil is not purely retributive, 183.

Appendix. Biblical Doctrine of Angels

I. Their essence or substance: (1) They are spiritual beings with no bodily organs. Texts a. b. c. d. make this probable

XV against other texts (a), (b), (c), (d) which suggest

material bodies, 186. 2. Their power in the universe is,

(1) Great, as compared with that of men, 189; (2) Yet limited in every direction, 190. Their knowledge is, (1) Very great, measured by our standards, 190; (2) But strictly finite, and, in some respects, inferior to man’s, 190.

II. Their character as moral beings. 1. Many of them are sin-

less, 191 ; this appears from scripture passages (1), (2), (3)> (4)> 191 ; But how they have been established in

righteousness we do not know, 192; Queries (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), 192. Many of them are sinful. This appears

from texts (1), (2), (3). Queries suggested by Scripture,

III. Their employment. 1. That of good angels may be inferred, (1) From names given to them in Scripture, 195;

(2) From actions ascribed to them in Scripture, 195; (3) Their guardianship of particular nations or men is doubtful, 195; (4) They appear to be an organized host (a), (b), (c), (d), 197; (5) They appear to be very numerous, 197; (6) They should not be worshipped by men, nor asked to mediate between them and God, 197.

2. That of evil angels. This may be inferred, as in the case of good angels: (1) From their names, 198; (2) From their actions, 198; (3) Especially, from their taking possession of men, 198 : a. By getting control of their bodily organs, 198 ;

b. By producing physical disease, 198 ; c. Their presence revealed by signs unknown to us, 199; d. Their usurped control sometimes began early, 199; e. Their removal called “a casting out,” 199; f. Some of the Jews practiced exorcism, 199; g. Evil angels a kingdom, and Satan their head; Queries, (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), 200.

Part Third. Jesus Christ: His Person And Work

The world prepared for his coming in at least eight particulars.

Chapter I. Person Of Jesus Christ

I. Person of Jesus Christ Divine. Conspectus of evidence, 1. In the language of the Old Testament: (1) Historical — concerning the Angel of Jehovah, 206; a. Dr. Goodspeed’s analysis of this evidence, 206; b. The sign-presence of the

XVI angel variable, 207 ; c. As “ sent ” not God in the absolute sense, but a revealer of God; d. Identified in the New Testament with the higher nature of Christ, 207. (2)

Prophetic — concerning the Messiah to come. Objection to predictive messages answered : Typical prophecy as natural as direct prophecy, a. Psalms ii., xlv., lxxii., cx., and Isa. ix., 5, 6, all either directly or typically Messianic, b. The same is also true of Micah 5 : 2-5 ; Mai. 3 : 1, and Dan. 7:13, 14, 208.

2. In the language of Jesus Christ himself: (1) In the syn-

optical Gospels, a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. ; (2) In the fourth Gospel, a. b. c. d. e. as compared with (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) ; (3) In the book of Revelation, a. b. c. d. e., 212.

3. In the words of New Testament-writers: (1) In the Syn-

optical Gospels and James, Jude, and Peter, a. b. c., 216; (2) In the writings of Paul, with the Epistle to the Hebrews, a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i., 217; (a) Meyer’s interpretation of Rom. 9:5. 218; (b) Better interpretation of Sanday and Headlam; (c) Notes on 1 Tim. 3:16; Eph. 5:5; and Titus 2:13, 217. (3) In the writings of John.

John’s object in writing his Gospel, 220; he teaches clearly the divine nature of Christ, a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h., 221 ; (a) Meyer’s interpretation of Jo. 1:1. 221 ; (b) Green on the omission of the article before 6 e 6 s, 222; (c) de Pressense’s view of John’s relation to Philo, 222; (d) Notes on Jo. 20: 28, Leathes and Luthardt, 223; (e) On 1 Jo. 5 : 20, a. b. c. d. e., 224; (f) On Jo. 1: 18; not a proof passage, 225; (4) Use of Kipios by New Testament writers in speaking of Christ, 225.

II. Person of Jesus Christ Human. Study limited to the New Testament: why? 226. The humanity of Jesus Christ is taught by texts: 1. Which denominate him man, 227; 2. Which call him the Son of man; 3. Which ascribe to him human properties and susceptibilities, 227; 4. Which speak of his flesh, etc. ; 5. Which describe his official work, a. b. c. d., 227.

III. Jesus Christ Unipersonal, i. Controversy in the early church, 228; 2. Decision of the Trullan Council, 229; 3. This decision formally correct, 229; 4. Post- Reformation creeds assert the personal unity of Christ : Reasons for affirming this: (1) His conception and birth, 230; (2) His use of the personal pronouns ‘ I ’ and ‘ me-’ and * my,’ 230; (3) His resurrection and ascension as one person, 230;