But God is present not only with those beinjjs who are capable of communion with Him : He is present also in Nature. He arrays the lily in beauty (Mt 6=9), He cares for the birds (v.™), notes the fall of a sparrow (10^), and is unceasingly active in works of mercy and kindness (Jn 5"). How Jesus pictured to His mind this presence of C!od in the material world we cannot learn from the <I(isiip1s. His belief in this particular, as also ill rc^^ard to God's presence with men, was probably Hkc that of the Ps.almists and Prophets (see, e.(f., i's •23-' 139'-'-, Is 40" 66"), though a more constant and marked element of His teaching. It was, doubtless, a consequence of His religious conscious- ness of God rather than a product of philosophic thought.
LiTERATtTiE.— See under art. Father.
George Holley Gilbert.
GODS The single passage in the Gospels where
the word Beol occurs (Jn lO"'"-) affords an excellent example both of the style of Jesus' arguments with His Jewish adversaries and of His attitude to the OT. The phrase, ' I said, Ye are gods,' is a literal
652
GODS
GOLD
quotation of Ps 82 (LXX 81)'^, and is introduced as such by the word invariably employed for that purpose {((TTtp -yiypafiixivov, cf. yi-YpairTai. of Mt 43. 6. 7. lu) \^ jg plain that in quoting these words Jesus is arguing after the manner of the well- known argnmentum, ad hominem, from His use of the personal pronoun 'your,' as well as from His application ot the title ' law ' to the Psalms (if ti? vd/MV ii/iui/, cf. Tu v/j-eripifi in 8" ; and for a similar use of the term 'law,' cf. Jn 12** 15==). It is an appeal to authority, the validity of which His hearers would be the first to recognize. It was impossible for them to escape a conclusion so im- mediately the outcome of premisses universally accepted as true. At the same time it is an argu- ment a fortiori. If their beloved Law, to which they Avere constantly appealing, hesitated not to designate as 'gods' (D'n'jg) the judges whose par- tiality and injustice provoked their arraignment by God, and the solemn warning to 'judge the weak and fatherless, do justice to the afflicted and destitute ' (Ps 82^), surely the charge of blasphemy came badly from those men who recognized in this Law their final court of appeal. His claim to be 'the Son of God,' whom the Father, in a unique sense, both 'sanctified and sent,' could be judged by His works, and it was sufficient to contrast those works which they could daily witness with the works of men whom God designated ' sons of the Most High ' (fv^j; -13, Ps 826).
Jesus in this place seems to adopt the interpretation of this Psalm which is given by the Targum, and which applies the title 'gods' to the earthly judges acting in their capacity as representatives of God. He, moreover, countenances the ex- tension of the term ' Law ' to other portions of the OT besides the Pentateuch. This was a common practice in the writ- ings of the Jewish Rabbins, who spoke of 'the threefold Law'— Pentateuch, Prophets, and Hagiographa (S/tabbath, SSa). Com- pare also the Talmudic tractate Sanhedrin, fol. 91, 92, for the question of R. Joshua, ' In what manner is the Resurrection of the dead proved from the Law ? ' with the answer that it is said in Ps 84-' "^They shall praise thee ' ; not ' they have praised thee.' To the same question propounded by R. Chaia the answer is that the Resurrection is proved from Is 628 (gee Wiinsche, Xeue Beitrdge zur Erldnterung der Evangelien atts Talmud und Midmsh).
There is another explanation current among the Jews which applied the term 'cliihim in this place to the Israelites who stood before Mt. Sinai and received the law (t^oj oU a i^oyK tow tjiou iyiviro, Jn KJ^^). If, said they, their fathers had not sinned in the matter of the golden caif, tlit.-y wouhl tia\ e heen as the angels; they would neither Ikim' k. ^^.iti m . li:l.li.ti ni.r lieeii subject to death. For this 1- - 1 _ 1 itiis interpretation, that the Psalm - [imti"
(mtJS V.7), in spite of the f.irl III ,i li - llnusly
' ■' " see the Tal ■■
Lightfoot's Hor. Ileh. et Talm., vol. iii. p. 359),
The evidential value of the whole passage with respect to Jesu.s' attitude to the OT Scriptures will, to some extent at least, be measured by the nature of the clause, ' the Scripture * cannot be broken.' If it is parenthetical, we have a direct assertion by Jesus that He regarded the OT as containing elements of abiding significance, and, moreover, that its meaning found its final and true explanation in His person and life (of. Jn 13'* and Mt 5'* etc.). On the other hand, it is by no means certain that the clause is of the nature of a paren- thesis, and not dependent upon the preceding con- ditional particle (ei). In this case the sense would be ' if tne Scripture cannot be broken,' which would have the effect of i>resenting the arijumentum ad hominem in a still stronger and more merciless form. This is again made more forcible by His use of the emphatic pronoun {viieU), as if He in- tended to say, ' How is it possible for you, of all people, in face of the fact that you assert the in- violability of this passage, to find fault with the claims which I have jiut forward, and to say that I am a blasphemer?' (see Plummer in Camliridgc