The Institution of Christian Religion

It is easy by many places to prove that it is false which they hold, that so oft as there is in scripture mention made absolutely of God, none is meant thereby but the Father. And in those places that they them selves do allege, they foully bewray their own want of consideration, because there is also set the name of the Sonne. Whereby appeareth, that the name of God is there relatively taken, and therefore restrained to the Person of the Father. And their objection where they say, If the Father were not only the true God, he should himself be his own Father, is answered with one word. It is not inconvenient for degree and orders sake, that he be peculiarly called GOD, which hath not only of him self begotten his wisdom, but also is the God of the Mediator, as in place fit for it, I will more largely declare. For sith Christ was openly showed in the flesh, he is called the Son of God, not only in respect that he was the eternal Word before all worlds begotten of the Father: but also because he took upon him the Person and office of the Mediator to join us unto God. And because they do so boldly exclude the Son from the honour of God, I would fain know whether the Son when he pronounceth, that none is good but God,¹ do take goodness from himself? I do not speak of his human nature, least perhaps they should take exception, and say, that what soever goodness was in it, it came of free gift. I ask whether the eternal Word of God be good or no? If they say nay, then we hold their ungodliness sufficiently convinced: in saying yea, they confound themselves. But where as at the first sight, Christ seemeth to put from himself the name of Good, that doth the more confirm our meaning. For sith it is the singular title of God alone, forasmuch as he was after the common manner saluted by the name of Good, in refusing false honour, he did admonish them that the goodness wherein he excelled, was the goodness that God hath. I ask also, where Paul affirmeth that only God is immortal,² wise, and true, whether by these words Christ be brought into the number of men mortal, foolish, and false? Shall not he then be immortal, that from the beginning was life to give immortality to angels? Shall not he be wise that is the eternal wisdom of God? Shall not the trueth it self be true?

It is easy by many places to proue that it is false whiche they holde, that so ofte as there is in scripture mencion made absolutely of God, none is ment therby but the Father. And in those places that they them selues doo alledge, they fowly bewray their owne want of consideration, because there is also sette the name of the Sonne. Wherby appeareth, that the name of God is there relatiuely takē, and therfore restrained to the Person of the Father. And their obiection where they say, If the Father were not only the true God, he should himselfe be his owne Father, is answered with one worde. It is not inconuenient for degree and orders sake, that he be peculiarly called GOD, whiche hath not only of hym selfe begotten his wisedome, but also is the God of the Mediatour, as in place fitte for it, I will more largely declare. For sythe Christ was openly shewed in the fleshe, he is called the Sonne of God, not onely in respect that he was the eternall Worde before all worldes begotten of the Father: but also because he tooke vpon hym the Person and office of the Mediatour to ioyne vs vnto God. And because they do so boldly exclude the Sonne from the honour of God, I would fayne knowe whether the Sonne when he pronounceth, that none is good but God,