Daniel Featley on Christ as “God of God”

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reformed Covenanter

Puritanboard Commissioner
That Christ is Deus de Deo, God of God, is thus clearly proved out of Scripture; whosoever is God and the Son of God, must needs be God of God; but Christ is God and the Son of God, ergo &c. But it hath been objected, if he be God of God, then he must have his essence communicated to him from the Father, and so be essentiatus a patre, essentiated, or natured from the Father: this will not follow, no more then that Socrates is essentiatus a Sophronisco, but only that he is genitus a patre, begotten of his Father, and so is recipiens essentiam, or habens essentiam communicatam a patre; which manner of speech is approved of by Beza, filius est a patre per ineffabilem totius essentiae communicationem ab aeterno: the Son is from the Father by an unspeakable communication of his whole essence from eternity: and Symlerus, non negamus silium haberea essentiam a Deo patre, sed essentiam genitam negamus: we do not deny that the Son hath his essence from God the Father, but we deny that the essence is begotten, and why should we boggle at this phrase, when our Lord himself acknowledgeth, Ioh. 5.26. omnia mihi data sunt a patre meo, & pater dedit filio habere vitam in se, all things are given me of my Father? ...

For more, see Daniel Featley on Christ as “God of God”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top