§ 111. Calvin's coMMEXTAiiiES. 533
ble fountain of all wisdom, but I deny that its fertility consists in the various meanings which any man at his pleasure may put into it. Let us know, then, that the true meaning of Scripture is the natural and obvious meaning; and let us embrace and abide by it resolutely. Let us not onl}^ neglect as doubtful, but boldly set aside as deadly corruptions, those pretended expositions which lead us away from the natural meaning." He approvingly quotes Clirysostom, wlio says that the word " allegory " in this passage is used in an improper sense. ^ He was averse to all forced attempts to harmonize difficulties. He constructed his Harmony of the Gospels from the three Synoptists alone, and explained John separately. 4. Calvin emancipated exegesis from the bondage of dogmatism. He was remarkably free from traditional orthodox prepossessions and prejudices, being convinced that the truths of Christianity do not depend upon the number of dicta prohantia. He could see no proof of the doctrine of the Trinity in the plural Elohim^^ nor in the three angel visitors of Abraham, 18 : 2, nor in the Trisagion, Ps. 6 : 3,^ nor of the divinity of the Holy Spirit in Ps. 33 : 6.4
1 " Et certe Chrysosfomiis in vocahulo AUegorice fatetur esse catechresin (^Kara- XPlfTis) ." quod verissimum est."
2 Ad. Gen. 1:1 (Opera, XXIII. 15): " Habetur apud Moses D'H^S, nomen pluralis numeri. Unde colligere solent, hie in Deo notari tres personas ; sed quia parum solida mihi videtur tanUe rei probatio, ego in voce non insistam. Quin potius manendi sunt lectores ut sibi a violentis ejusmodi g/ossis caveant. Putant iili se testimonium habere adversus Arianos ad probandam Filii et Spiritus divinitatem, interea se involvunt in errorein Sabellii." But in the words, " Let us make man," Gen. 1:26, he admits, after rejecting the Rabbinical fancies, the intimation of a plurality in God: " Christiani apposite plures subesse in Deo personas ex hoc testimonio contendunt. Neminem exfraneum adiwcat Dens .■ hinc colligimus, intus eum aliquid distinctum invenire : ut certe a-terna eius sapientia et virtus in ipso resident." (lb. 25.)
3 On this passage he remarks : " Veteres hoc testimonio usi sunt, quum vellent adi'ersus Arianos tres personas in una Dei essentia probare. Quorum ego sententiam non improbo; sed si mihi res cum hiereticis esset, mnllem firmioribus testimomis uti."
* Older Lutheran divines (even Walch, Biblioth. theol. IV. 413) charged him with Judaizing and Socinian misinterpretation of the O. T. proof texts for the Trinity and the divinity of tlie Messiah. Aegidius Hunnius, in his Calvinus Judaizans (Wittenberg. 1598), thought that Calvin ought to have
534 THE REFORMATION IN FRENCH SWITZERLAND.
5. He prepared the way for a proper historical understanding of prophecy. He fully believed in the Messianic prophecies, which are the very soul of the faith and hope of Israel ; but he first perceived that they had a primary bearing and practical application to their own times, and an ulterior fulfilment in Christ, thus serving a present as well as a future use. He thus explained Psalms 2, 8, 16, 22, 40, 45, 68, 110, as typically and indirectly Messianic. On the other hand, he made excessive use of typology, especially in his Sermons, and saw not only in David but in every king of Jerusalem a "• figure of Christ." In his explanation of the protevangelium, Gen. 3 : 15, he correctly understands the " seed of the woman,'' collectively of the human race, in its perpetual-conflict with Satan, which will culminate ultimatel}' in the victory of Christ, the head of the race.^ He widens the sense of the formula ''that it might be fulfilled" {7va irX'qpwOri), so as to express sometimes simply an analogy or correspondence between an Old Testament and a New Testament event. The prophecy, Hos. 11 : 1, quoted by Matthew as referring to the return of the Christ-child from Egypt, must, accordingly, "not be restricted to Christ," but is "skilfull}'- adapted to the present occasion." ^ In like manner, Paul, in Rom. 10 : 6, gives only an embellishment and adaptation of a word of Moses to the case in hand.^
been burnt for his abominable perversion of tlie Scriptures. D. Parens of Heidelberg defended him against this charge in his Orthodoxus Calvinus, Modern Lutheran exegesis fully sustains him.
^ Ad Gen. 3: 15 (^Opera, XXIII. 71) : " GeneraUter semen interpi-etor de posteris. Sed quum experientia doceat, multum abesse quin supra diabolum victores emergant o nines Jilii Ada, ad caput unuin venire jiecesse est, lit reperiamus ad quevi pertineat victoria. Sic Paulus a semine Ahrah(V ad Christum nos deducit. . . . Quare sensus est (meo judicio'), humanuiii genus, quod opprimere conalus erat Satan, fore tandem superius."
2 Harm. I. 80. Tholuck's ed. On ver. 23 in the same chapter, Calvin says (p. 83) : " Non deducit Matthceus Nazarceum a Nazareth : quasi sit hcec propria et certa etijmologia, sed tantum est allusio," etc.
3 Comp. his notes on Gen. 3:15; Isa. 4:2; 6:3; Ps. 33 : 6 ; Matt. 2:15; 8:17; 11:11; John 1:51- 2:17; 5:31 sq.; 2 Cor. 12:7; 1 Pet. 3:19; Heb. 2:6-8; 4:3; 11:21,