1Iren.adv. hær. i. 10. Tertull. de præscr. hær. xiii. adv. Prax. ii. de veland. virg. i. Orig. de principp.proem. iv.↑2Iren. adv. hær. iii. xviii. 7.↑3Athanas. contra Arianos, orat. 2, 33.↑4Gregor. Naz. Or. 51, p. 740, B.:τὸ γὰρἀπρόσληπτονἀθεράπευμον. ὃ δὲ ἥνωται τῷ θεῷ, τοῦτο καὶ σώζεται.↑5—ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χ. συμφώνως ἄπαντες ἐκδιδάσκομεν, τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν θεότητι, καὶ τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι, θεὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθῶς τὸν αὐτὸν ἐκ ψυχῆς λογικῆς καὶ σώματος, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, καὶ ὁμοούσιον τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον ἡμῖν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας· πρὸ αἰώνων μὲν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, ἐπ’ ἐσχάτων δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν τὸν αὐτὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου τῆς θεοτόκου κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν, υἱὸν, κύριον, μονογενῆ, ἐκ δύο φύσεων ασυνχύτως, ἀτρέπτως, ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως γνωριζόμενον· οὐδαμοῦ τῆς τῶν φύσεων διαφορᾶς ἀνῃρημένης διὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, σωζομένης δὲ μᾶλλον τῆς ἰδιότητος ἑκατέρας φύσεως, καὶ εἰς ἓν πρόσωπον καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν συντρεχούσης· οὐκ εἰς δύο πρόσωπα μεριζόμενον ἣ διαιρούμενον, ἀλλ’ ἔνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν υἱὸν καὶ μονογενῆ, θεὸν λόγον, κύριον Ἰ. Χ.↑6The 6th Œcumenical Synod of Constantinople declared:δύο φυσικὰ θελήματα οὐχ ὑπεναντία,—ἀλλ’ ἑπόμενον τὸ ἀνθρώπινον αὐτοῦ θέλημα—καὶ ὑποτασσόμενοντῷθείῷ αὐτοῦ καὶ πανσθενεῖ θελήματι.↑7Athanas. de incarn. 54:αὐτὸς ἐνηνθρώπησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς θεοποιηθῶμεν. Greg. Nyt. Orat. cass. 35:τότε τε κατεμίχθη πρὸςτὸθεῖον, ἵνα τὸ ἡμέτερον τῇ πρὸς τὸ θεῖον ἐπιμιξίᾳ γένηται θεῖον. Joann. Damasc. de f. orth. iii. 20:πάνταἀνέλαβεν(τὰ αδιάβλη τὰ πάθη τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὁ Χ.) ἵνα πάντα ἁγιάση. Greg. Naz. or. ii. 23 f. Hilar. Pictav. de trin. ii. 24:humani generis causa Dei filius natus ex virgine est—ut homo factus ex virgine naturam in se carnis acciperet perque hujus admixtionis societatem sanctificatum in eo universi generis humani corpus existeret. For other expressions of the kind, see Münscher, Dogmengesch., herausg. von Cölln, 1, § 97, Anm. 10.↑8Münscher, § 96, Anm. 5, s. 423 f.↑9Augustin, de Catechiz. rudib. 7.↑10Vid. Münscher, § 96.↑11Ibid. § 97.↑12Comp.Form. Concord., Epit. und Sol. decl. VIII. p. 605 ff. and 761 ff. ed. Hase. Chemniz,de duabus naturis in Christo libellus, andloci theol., loc. 2, de filio; Gerhard. II. th. 1, p. 640 ff. (ed. 1615); Quenstedt,theol. didact. polem. P. 3, c. 3. Comp. De Wette, bibl. Dogm. § 64 ff.↑13See the Oratio appended to the locus de pers. et offic. Chr. Gerhard, ut sup. p. 719 ff.↑14Vid. Gerhard, II. th. 1, p. 685 ff.; Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 71 f.↑15Reinhard, Vorles. über die Dogm. s. 354, conformably to the proposition urged by the Reformed against the Lutherans:Nulla natura in se ipsam recipit contradictoria, Planck, Gesch. des protest. Lehrbegriffs, Bd. 6, s. 782.↑16Fausti Socini de Christi natura disputatio. Opp. Bibl. Fr. Pol. 1, p. 784; Catech. Racov. Q. 96 ff. Comp. Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 96. Spinoza, also, ep. 21, ad Oldenburg, Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556, says:Quod quædam ecclesiæ his adduut, quod Deus naturam humanam assumpserit, monui expresse, me, quid dicant, nescire; imo, ut verum fatear, non minus absurde mihi loqui videntur, quam si quis mihi diceret, quod circulus naturam quadrati induerit.↑17(Röhr) Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 378 ff.; Wegscheider Inst. theol. § 128; Bretschneider, Handb. der Dogm. 2, § 137 ff.; also Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. 2tes St. 2ter Absch. b.↑18Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 96–98.↑19Spinoza, tract. theol. polit. c. vi. p. 133. ed. Gfrörer, and ep. 23, ad Oldenburg, p. 558 f. Briefe über den Rat., 4ter, 5ter, 6ter, 12ter. Wegscheider, §§ 11, 12. Schleiermacher, §§ 14, 47.↑20Prælect. theol. c. xv.↑21In the work:defensio fidei cath. de satisfactione Chr. adv. F. Socinum.↑22Summa, P. 3, Q. 48, A. 2.↑23Comm. in Sentt. L. 3, Dist. 19.↑24See, besides Socinus,Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn., c.↑25Töllner, Der thätige Gehorsam Christi untersucht. 1768.↑26Wegscheider, § 199.↑27Compare with what follows especially the Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 372 ff.; Wegscheider, §§ 128, 133, 140.↑28For the different views, see Bretschneider, Dogm. 2, s. 353, systematische Entwicklung, § 107.↑29Röhr, Briefe, s. 36, 405 ff.↑30Schleiermacher, on his Glaubenslehre, to Dr. Lücke, 2tes Sendschreiben, Studien, 2, 3, s. 481 ff.↑31Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 92–105.↑32This opinion has been already put forth in the most noted reviews of Schleiermacher’s system; comp. Braniss, über Schleiermacher’s Glaubenslehre; H. Schmid, über Schl. Glaubensl. s. 263 ff.; Baur, die christl. Gnosis, s. 626 ff., and the Review of Rosenkranz, Jahrb. fur wiss. Kritik, 1831.↑332ter Sendschreiben.↑34Schmid, ut sup.↑35Comp. Rosenkranz, ut sup. s. 935 ff.↑36Baur, ut sup. s. 653.↑37Thus Schmid, ut sup. s. 267.↑38Ep. 21, ad Oldenburg. Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556:—dico, ad salutem non esse omnino necesse, Christum secundum carnem noscere; sed ed æterno illo filio Dei, h. e. Dei æterna sapientia, quæ sese in omnibus rebus, et maxime in mente humana, et omnium maxime in Christo Jesu manifestavit, longe aliter sentiendum. Nam nemo absque hac ad statum beatitudinis potest pervenire, utpote quæ sola docet, quid verum et falsum, bonum et malum sit.↑39Religion innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. drittes Stück, 1te Abthl. vii.↑40Ut sup. 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn. 3tes Stück, 1te Abthlg.↑41This is shown by Baur, christl. Gnosis, s. 660 ff.↑42Censur des christl. protestantischen Lehrbegriffs, 3, s. 180.↑43Religion und Theologie, 2ter Abschnitt, Kap. 3; comp. bibl. Dogmatik, § 255; kirchliche, § 64 ff.↑44Ideen über Mythologie u. s. w. in Henke’s neuer Magazin, b. s. 454 ff. Comp. Henke’s Museum, 3, s. 455.↑45Vorlesungen über die Methode des akademischen Studiums, s. 192.↑46Hegel’sPhänomenologie des Geistes, s. 561 ff.; Vorlesungen über die Philos. der Relig. 2, s. 234 ff. Marheineke, Grundlehren der christl. Dogmatik. s. 174 ff. Rosenkranz, Encyklopädie der theol. Wissenschaften, s.38 ff., 148 ff.; comp. myStreitschriften, 3tes Heft, s. 76 ff.↑47Dogmatik, § 326.↑48Encyklopädie, s. 160.↑49Selbstbewusstsein und Offenbarung, s. 295 f. Comp. Bauer, Recens. des L. J., Jahrbücher f. wiss. Kritik, 1836, Mai, s. 699 ff.↑50Compare with this my Streitschriften, 3 Heft, s. 68 ff. 125.↑51With this should be compared the explanation in the Streitschriften, ut sup. s. 119.↑52Of this also there is an explanation in the Streitschriften, 3, s. 166 f.↑53Herein lies the answer to the objection which Schaller (der historische Christus und die Philosophie, s. 64 ff.) has made to the above view; namely, that it teaches only a substantial, not a personal unity of man with God. That unity which exists in the determination of the race has already been present in individuals separately, according to the different measure of their religious development, and thus the substantial unity has become, in different degrees, a personal unity.↑54Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, 2, s. 263 ff.Compare the collection of the several propositions of Hegel on the person of Christ and the evangelical history, in myStreitschriften, 3.Heft, s. 76.↑55Glaubenslehre, 1, s. 47.↑56In the 2ten Sendschreiben on his Glaubenslehre.↑
1Iren.adv. hær. i. 10. Tertull. de præscr. hær. xiii. adv. Prax. ii. de veland. virg. i. Orig. de principp.proem. iv.↑2Iren. adv. hær. iii. xviii. 7.↑3Athanas. contra Arianos, orat. 2, 33.↑4Gregor. Naz. Or. 51, p. 740, B.:τὸ γὰρἀπρόσληπτονἀθεράπευμον. ὃ δὲ ἥνωται τῷ θεῷ, τοῦτο καὶ σώζεται.↑5—ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χ. συμφώνως ἄπαντες ἐκδιδάσκομεν, τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν θεότητι, καὶ τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι, θεὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθῶς τὸν αὐτὸν ἐκ ψυχῆς λογικῆς καὶ σώματος, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, καὶ ὁμοούσιον τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον ἡμῖν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας· πρὸ αἰώνων μὲν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, ἐπ’ ἐσχάτων δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν τὸν αὐτὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου τῆς θεοτόκου κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν, υἱὸν, κύριον, μονογενῆ, ἐκ δύο φύσεων ασυνχύτως, ἀτρέπτως, ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως γνωριζόμενον· οὐδαμοῦ τῆς τῶν φύσεων διαφορᾶς ἀνῃρημένης διὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, σωζομένης δὲ μᾶλλον τῆς ἰδιότητος ἑκατέρας φύσεως, καὶ εἰς ἓν πρόσωπον καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν συντρεχούσης· οὐκ εἰς δύο πρόσωπα μεριζόμενον ἣ διαιρούμενον, ἀλλ’ ἔνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν υἱὸν καὶ μονογενῆ, θεὸν λόγον, κύριον Ἰ. Χ.↑6The 6th Œcumenical Synod of Constantinople declared:δύο φυσικὰ θελήματα οὐχ ὑπεναντία,—ἀλλ’ ἑπόμενον τὸ ἀνθρώπινον αὐτοῦ θέλημα—καὶ ὑποτασσόμενοντῷθείῷ αὐτοῦ καὶ πανσθενεῖ θελήματι.↑7Athanas. de incarn. 54:αὐτὸς ἐνηνθρώπησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς θεοποιηθῶμεν. Greg. Nyt. Orat. cass. 35:τότε τε κατεμίχθη πρὸςτὸθεῖον, ἵνα τὸ ἡμέτερον τῇ πρὸς τὸ θεῖον ἐπιμιξίᾳ γένηται θεῖον. Joann. Damasc. de f. orth. iii. 20:πάνταἀνέλαβεν(τὰ αδιάβλη τὰ πάθη τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὁ Χ.) ἵνα πάντα ἁγιάση. Greg. Naz. or. ii. 23 f. Hilar. Pictav. de trin. ii. 24:humani generis causa Dei filius natus ex virgine est—ut homo factus ex virgine naturam in se carnis acciperet perque hujus admixtionis societatem sanctificatum in eo universi generis humani corpus existeret. For other expressions of the kind, see Münscher, Dogmengesch., herausg. von Cölln, 1, § 97, Anm. 10.↑8Münscher, § 96, Anm. 5, s. 423 f.↑9Augustin, de Catechiz. rudib. 7.↑10Vid. Münscher, § 96.↑11Ibid. § 97.↑12Comp.Form. Concord., Epit. und Sol. decl. VIII. p. 605 ff. and 761 ff. ed. Hase. Chemniz,de duabus naturis in Christo libellus, andloci theol., loc. 2, de filio; Gerhard. II. th. 1, p. 640 ff. (ed. 1615); Quenstedt,theol. didact. polem. P. 3, c. 3. Comp. De Wette, bibl. Dogm. § 64 ff.↑13See the Oratio appended to the locus de pers. et offic. Chr. Gerhard, ut sup. p. 719 ff.↑14Vid. Gerhard, II. th. 1, p. 685 ff.; Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 71 f.↑15Reinhard, Vorles. über die Dogm. s. 354, conformably to the proposition urged by the Reformed against the Lutherans:Nulla natura in se ipsam recipit contradictoria, Planck, Gesch. des protest. Lehrbegriffs, Bd. 6, s. 782.↑16Fausti Socini de Christi natura disputatio. Opp. Bibl. Fr. Pol. 1, p. 784; Catech. Racov. Q. 96 ff. Comp. Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 96. Spinoza, also, ep. 21, ad Oldenburg, Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556, says:Quod quædam ecclesiæ his adduut, quod Deus naturam humanam assumpserit, monui expresse, me, quid dicant, nescire; imo, ut verum fatear, non minus absurde mihi loqui videntur, quam si quis mihi diceret, quod circulus naturam quadrati induerit.↑17(Röhr) Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 378 ff.; Wegscheider Inst. theol. § 128; Bretschneider, Handb. der Dogm. 2, § 137 ff.; also Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. 2tes St. 2ter Absch. b.↑18Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 96–98.↑19Spinoza, tract. theol. polit. c. vi. p. 133. ed. Gfrörer, and ep. 23, ad Oldenburg, p. 558 f. Briefe über den Rat., 4ter, 5ter, 6ter, 12ter. Wegscheider, §§ 11, 12. Schleiermacher, §§ 14, 47.↑20Prælect. theol. c. xv.↑21In the work:defensio fidei cath. de satisfactione Chr. adv. F. Socinum.↑22Summa, P. 3, Q. 48, A. 2.↑23Comm. in Sentt. L. 3, Dist. 19.↑24See, besides Socinus,Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn., c.↑25Töllner, Der thätige Gehorsam Christi untersucht. 1768.↑26Wegscheider, § 199.↑27Compare with what follows especially the Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 372 ff.; Wegscheider, §§ 128, 133, 140.↑28For the different views, see Bretschneider, Dogm. 2, s. 353, systematische Entwicklung, § 107.↑29Röhr, Briefe, s. 36, 405 ff.↑30Schleiermacher, on his Glaubenslehre, to Dr. Lücke, 2tes Sendschreiben, Studien, 2, 3, s. 481 ff.↑31Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 92–105.↑32This opinion has been already put forth in the most noted reviews of Schleiermacher’s system; comp. Braniss, über Schleiermacher’s Glaubenslehre; H. Schmid, über Schl. Glaubensl. s. 263 ff.; Baur, die christl. Gnosis, s. 626 ff., and the Review of Rosenkranz, Jahrb. fur wiss. Kritik, 1831.↑332ter Sendschreiben.↑34Schmid, ut sup.↑35Comp. Rosenkranz, ut sup. s. 935 ff.↑36Baur, ut sup. s. 653.↑37Thus Schmid, ut sup. s. 267.↑38Ep. 21, ad Oldenburg. Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556:—dico, ad salutem non esse omnino necesse, Christum secundum carnem noscere; sed ed æterno illo filio Dei, h. e. Dei æterna sapientia, quæ sese in omnibus rebus, et maxime in mente humana, et omnium maxime in Christo Jesu manifestavit, longe aliter sentiendum. Nam nemo absque hac ad statum beatitudinis potest pervenire, utpote quæ sola docet, quid verum et falsum, bonum et malum sit.↑39Religion innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. drittes Stück, 1te Abthl. vii.↑40Ut sup. 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn. 3tes Stück, 1te Abthlg.↑41This is shown by Baur, christl. Gnosis, s. 660 ff.↑42Censur des christl. protestantischen Lehrbegriffs, 3, s. 180.↑43Religion und Theologie, 2ter Abschnitt, Kap. 3; comp. bibl. Dogmatik, § 255; kirchliche, § 64 ff.↑44Ideen über Mythologie u. s. w. in Henke’s neuer Magazin, b. s. 454 ff. Comp. Henke’s Museum, 3, s. 455.↑45Vorlesungen über die Methode des akademischen Studiums, s. 192.↑46Hegel’sPhänomenologie des Geistes, s. 561 ff.; Vorlesungen über die Philos. der Relig. 2, s. 234 ff. Marheineke, Grundlehren der christl. Dogmatik. s. 174 ff. Rosenkranz, Encyklopädie der theol. Wissenschaften, s.38 ff., 148 ff.; comp. myStreitschriften, 3tes Heft, s. 76 ff.↑47Dogmatik, § 326.↑48Encyklopädie, s. 160.↑49Selbstbewusstsein und Offenbarung, s. 295 f. Comp. Bauer, Recens. des L. J., Jahrbücher f. wiss. Kritik, 1836, Mai, s. 699 ff.↑50Compare with this my Streitschriften, 3 Heft, s. 68 ff. 125.↑51With this should be compared the explanation in the Streitschriften, ut sup. s. 119.↑52Of this also there is an explanation in the Streitschriften, 3, s. 166 f.↑53Herein lies the answer to the objection which Schaller (der historische Christus und die Philosophie, s. 64 ff.) has made to the above view; namely, that it teaches only a substantial, not a personal unity of man with God. That unity which exists in the determination of the race has already been present in individuals separately, according to the different measure of their religious development, and thus the substantial unity has become, in different degrees, a personal unity.↑54Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, 2, s. 263 ff.Compare the collection of the several propositions of Hegel on the person of Christ and the evangelical history, in myStreitschriften, 3.Heft, s. 76.↑55Glaubenslehre, 1, s. 47.↑56In the 2ten Sendschreiben on his Glaubenslehre.↑
1Iren.adv. hær. i. 10. Tertull. de præscr. hær. xiii. adv. Prax. ii. de veland. virg. i. Orig. de principp.proem. iv.↑2Iren. adv. hær. iii. xviii. 7.↑3Athanas. contra Arianos, orat. 2, 33.↑4Gregor. Naz. Or. 51, p. 740, B.:τὸ γὰρἀπρόσληπτονἀθεράπευμον. ὃ δὲ ἥνωται τῷ θεῷ, τοῦτο καὶ σώζεται.↑5—ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χ. συμφώνως ἄπαντες ἐκδιδάσκομεν, τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν θεότητι, καὶ τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι, θεὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθῶς τὸν αὐτὸν ἐκ ψυχῆς λογικῆς καὶ σώματος, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, καὶ ὁμοούσιον τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον ἡμῖν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας· πρὸ αἰώνων μὲν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, ἐπ’ ἐσχάτων δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν τὸν αὐτὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου τῆς θεοτόκου κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν, υἱὸν, κύριον, μονογενῆ, ἐκ δύο φύσεων ασυνχύτως, ἀτρέπτως, ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως γνωριζόμενον· οὐδαμοῦ τῆς τῶν φύσεων διαφορᾶς ἀνῃρημένης διὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, σωζομένης δὲ μᾶλλον τῆς ἰδιότητος ἑκατέρας φύσεως, καὶ εἰς ἓν πρόσωπον καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν συντρεχούσης· οὐκ εἰς δύο πρόσωπα μεριζόμενον ἣ διαιρούμενον, ἀλλ’ ἔνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν υἱὸν καὶ μονογενῆ, θεὸν λόγον, κύριον Ἰ. Χ.↑6The 6th Œcumenical Synod of Constantinople declared:δύο φυσικὰ θελήματα οὐχ ὑπεναντία,—ἀλλ’ ἑπόμενον τὸ ἀνθρώπινον αὐτοῦ θέλημα—καὶ ὑποτασσόμενοντῷθείῷ αὐτοῦ καὶ πανσθενεῖ θελήματι.↑7Athanas. de incarn. 54:αὐτὸς ἐνηνθρώπησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς θεοποιηθῶμεν. Greg. Nyt. Orat. cass. 35:τότε τε κατεμίχθη πρὸςτὸθεῖον, ἵνα τὸ ἡμέτερον τῇ πρὸς τὸ θεῖον ἐπιμιξίᾳ γένηται θεῖον. Joann. Damasc. de f. orth. iii. 20:πάνταἀνέλαβεν(τὰ αδιάβλη τὰ πάθη τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὁ Χ.) ἵνα πάντα ἁγιάση. Greg. Naz. or. ii. 23 f. Hilar. Pictav. de trin. ii. 24:humani generis causa Dei filius natus ex virgine est—ut homo factus ex virgine naturam in se carnis acciperet perque hujus admixtionis societatem sanctificatum in eo universi generis humani corpus existeret. For other expressions of the kind, see Münscher, Dogmengesch., herausg. von Cölln, 1, § 97, Anm. 10.↑8Münscher, § 96, Anm. 5, s. 423 f.↑9Augustin, de Catechiz. rudib. 7.↑10Vid. Münscher, § 96.↑11Ibid. § 97.↑12Comp.Form. Concord., Epit. und Sol. decl. VIII. p. 605 ff. and 761 ff. ed. Hase. Chemniz,de duabus naturis in Christo libellus, andloci theol., loc. 2, de filio; Gerhard. II. th. 1, p. 640 ff. (ed. 1615); Quenstedt,theol. didact. polem. P. 3, c. 3. Comp. De Wette, bibl. Dogm. § 64 ff.↑13See the Oratio appended to the locus de pers. et offic. Chr. Gerhard, ut sup. p. 719 ff.↑14Vid. Gerhard, II. th. 1, p. 685 ff.; Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 71 f.↑15Reinhard, Vorles. über die Dogm. s. 354, conformably to the proposition urged by the Reformed against the Lutherans:Nulla natura in se ipsam recipit contradictoria, Planck, Gesch. des protest. Lehrbegriffs, Bd. 6, s. 782.↑16Fausti Socini de Christi natura disputatio. Opp. Bibl. Fr. Pol. 1, p. 784; Catech. Racov. Q. 96 ff. Comp. Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 96. Spinoza, also, ep. 21, ad Oldenburg, Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556, says:Quod quædam ecclesiæ his adduut, quod Deus naturam humanam assumpserit, monui expresse, me, quid dicant, nescire; imo, ut verum fatear, non minus absurde mihi loqui videntur, quam si quis mihi diceret, quod circulus naturam quadrati induerit.↑17(Röhr) Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 378 ff.; Wegscheider Inst. theol. § 128; Bretschneider, Handb. der Dogm. 2, § 137 ff.; also Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. 2tes St. 2ter Absch. b.↑18Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 96–98.↑19Spinoza, tract. theol. polit. c. vi. p. 133. ed. Gfrörer, and ep. 23, ad Oldenburg, p. 558 f. Briefe über den Rat., 4ter, 5ter, 6ter, 12ter. Wegscheider, §§ 11, 12. Schleiermacher, §§ 14, 47.↑20Prælect. theol. c. xv.↑21In the work:defensio fidei cath. de satisfactione Chr. adv. F. Socinum.↑22Summa, P. 3, Q. 48, A. 2.↑23Comm. in Sentt. L. 3, Dist. 19.↑24See, besides Socinus,Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn., c.↑25Töllner, Der thätige Gehorsam Christi untersucht. 1768.↑26Wegscheider, § 199.↑27Compare with what follows especially the Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 372 ff.; Wegscheider, §§ 128, 133, 140.↑28For the different views, see Bretschneider, Dogm. 2, s. 353, systematische Entwicklung, § 107.↑29Röhr, Briefe, s. 36, 405 ff.↑30Schleiermacher, on his Glaubenslehre, to Dr. Lücke, 2tes Sendschreiben, Studien, 2, 3, s. 481 ff.↑31Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 92–105.↑32This opinion has been already put forth in the most noted reviews of Schleiermacher’s system; comp. Braniss, über Schleiermacher’s Glaubenslehre; H. Schmid, über Schl. Glaubensl. s. 263 ff.; Baur, die christl. Gnosis, s. 626 ff., and the Review of Rosenkranz, Jahrb. fur wiss. Kritik, 1831.↑332ter Sendschreiben.↑34Schmid, ut sup.↑35Comp. Rosenkranz, ut sup. s. 935 ff.↑36Baur, ut sup. s. 653.↑37Thus Schmid, ut sup. s. 267.↑38Ep. 21, ad Oldenburg. Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556:—dico, ad salutem non esse omnino necesse, Christum secundum carnem noscere; sed ed æterno illo filio Dei, h. e. Dei æterna sapientia, quæ sese in omnibus rebus, et maxime in mente humana, et omnium maxime in Christo Jesu manifestavit, longe aliter sentiendum. Nam nemo absque hac ad statum beatitudinis potest pervenire, utpote quæ sola docet, quid verum et falsum, bonum et malum sit.↑39Religion innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. drittes Stück, 1te Abthl. vii.↑40Ut sup. 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn. 3tes Stück, 1te Abthlg.↑41This is shown by Baur, christl. Gnosis, s. 660 ff.↑42Censur des christl. protestantischen Lehrbegriffs, 3, s. 180.↑43Religion und Theologie, 2ter Abschnitt, Kap. 3; comp. bibl. Dogmatik, § 255; kirchliche, § 64 ff.↑44Ideen über Mythologie u. s. w. in Henke’s neuer Magazin, b. s. 454 ff. Comp. Henke’s Museum, 3, s. 455.↑45Vorlesungen über die Methode des akademischen Studiums, s. 192.↑46Hegel’sPhänomenologie des Geistes, s. 561 ff.; Vorlesungen über die Philos. der Relig. 2, s. 234 ff. Marheineke, Grundlehren der christl. Dogmatik. s. 174 ff. Rosenkranz, Encyklopädie der theol. Wissenschaften, s.38 ff., 148 ff.; comp. myStreitschriften, 3tes Heft, s. 76 ff.↑47Dogmatik, § 326.↑48Encyklopädie, s. 160.↑49Selbstbewusstsein und Offenbarung, s. 295 f. Comp. Bauer, Recens. des L. J., Jahrbücher f. wiss. Kritik, 1836, Mai, s. 699 ff.↑50Compare with this my Streitschriften, 3 Heft, s. 68 ff. 125.↑51With this should be compared the explanation in the Streitschriften, ut sup. s. 119.↑52Of this also there is an explanation in the Streitschriften, 3, s. 166 f.↑53Herein lies the answer to the objection which Schaller (der historische Christus und die Philosophie, s. 64 ff.) has made to the above view; namely, that it teaches only a substantial, not a personal unity of man with God. That unity which exists in the determination of the race has already been present in individuals separately, according to the different measure of their religious development, and thus the substantial unity has become, in different degrees, a personal unity.↑54Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, 2, s. 263 ff.Compare the collection of the several propositions of Hegel on the person of Christ and the evangelical history, in myStreitschriften, 3.Heft, s. 76.↑55Glaubenslehre, 1, s. 47.↑56In the 2ten Sendschreiben on his Glaubenslehre.↑
1Iren.adv. hær. i. 10. Tertull. de præscr. hær. xiii. adv. Prax. ii. de veland. virg. i. Orig. de principp.proem. iv.↑2Iren. adv. hær. iii. xviii. 7.↑3Athanas. contra Arianos, orat. 2, 33.↑4Gregor. Naz. Or. 51, p. 740, B.:τὸ γὰρἀπρόσληπτονἀθεράπευμον. ὃ δὲ ἥνωται τῷ θεῷ, τοῦτο καὶ σώζεται.↑5—ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χ. συμφώνως ἄπαντες ἐκδιδάσκομεν, τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν θεότητι, καὶ τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι, θεὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθῶς τὸν αὐτὸν ἐκ ψυχῆς λογικῆς καὶ σώματος, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, καὶ ὁμοούσιον τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον ἡμῖν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας· πρὸ αἰώνων μὲν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, ἐπ’ ἐσχάτων δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν τὸν αὐτὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου τῆς θεοτόκου κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν, υἱὸν, κύριον, μονογενῆ, ἐκ δύο φύσεων ασυνχύτως, ἀτρέπτως, ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως γνωριζόμενον· οὐδαμοῦ τῆς τῶν φύσεων διαφορᾶς ἀνῃρημένης διὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, σωζομένης δὲ μᾶλλον τῆς ἰδιότητος ἑκατέρας φύσεως, καὶ εἰς ἓν πρόσωπον καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν συντρεχούσης· οὐκ εἰς δύο πρόσωπα μεριζόμενον ἣ διαιρούμενον, ἀλλ’ ἔνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν υἱὸν καὶ μονογενῆ, θεὸν λόγον, κύριον Ἰ. Χ.↑6The 6th Œcumenical Synod of Constantinople declared:δύο φυσικὰ θελήματα οὐχ ὑπεναντία,—ἀλλ’ ἑπόμενον τὸ ἀνθρώπινον αὐτοῦ θέλημα—καὶ ὑποτασσόμενοντῷθείῷ αὐτοῦ καὶ πανσθενεῖ θελήματι.↑7Athanas. de incarn. 54:αὐτὸς ἐνηνθρώπησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς θεοποιηθῶμεν. Greg. Nyt. Orat. cass. 35:τότε τε κατεμίχθη πρὸςτὸθεῖον, ἵνα τὸ ἡμέτερον τῇ πρὸς τὸ θεῖον ἐπιμιξίᾳ γένηται θεῖον. Joann. Damasc. de f. orth. iii. 20:πάνταἀνέλαβεν(τὰ αδιάβλη τὰ πάθη τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὁ Χ.) ἵνα πάντα ἁγιάση. Greg. Naz. or. ii. 23 f. Hilar. Pictav. de trin. ii. 24:humani generis causa Dei filius natus ex virgine est—ut homo factus ex virgine naturam in se carnis acciperet perque hujus admixtionis societatem sanctificatum in eo universi generis humani corpus existeret. For other expressions of the kind, see Münscher, Dogmengesch., herausg. von Cölln, 1, § 97, Anm. 10.↑8Münscher, § 96, Anm. 5, s. 423 f.↑9Augustin, de Catechiz. rudib. 7.↑10Vid. Münscher, § 96.↑11Ibid. § 97.↑12Comp.Form. Concord., Epit. und Sol. decl. VIII. p. 605 ff. and 761 ff. ed. Hase. Chemniz,de duabus naturis in Christo libellus, andloci theol., loc. 2, de filio; Gerhard. II. th. 1, p. 640 ff. (ed. 1615); Quenstedt,theol. didact. polem. P. 3, c. 3. Comp. De Wette, bibl. Dogm. § 64 ff.↑13See the Oratio appended to the locus de pers. et offic. Chr. Gerhard, ut sup. p. 719 ff.↑14Vid. Gerhard, II. th. 1, p. 685 ff.; Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 71 f.↑15Reinhard, Vorles. über die Dogm. s. 354, conformably to the proposition urged by the Reformed against the Lutherans:Nulla natura in se ipsam recipit contradictoria, Planck, Gesch. des protest. Lehrbegriffs, Bd. 6, s. 782.↑16Fausti Socini de Christi natura disputatio. Opp. Bibl. Fr. Pol. 1, p. 784; Catech. Racov. Q. 96 ff. Comp. Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 96. Spinoza, also, ep. 21, ad Oldenburg, Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556, says:Quod quædam ecclesiæ his adduut, quod Deus naturam humanam assumpserit, monui expresse, me, quid dicant, nescire; imo, ut verum fatear, non minus absurde mihi loqui videntur, quam si quis mihi diceret, quod circulus naturam quadrati induerit.↑17(Röhr) Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 378 ff.; Wegscheider Inst. theol. § 128; Bretschneider, Handb. der Dogm. 2, § 137 ff.; also Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. 2tes St. 2ter Absch. b.↑18Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 96–98.↑19Spinoza, tract. theol. polit. c. vi. p. 133. ed. Gfrörer, and ep. 23, ad Oldenburg, p. 558 f. Briefe über den Rat., 4ter, 5ter, 6ter, 12ter. Wegscheider, §§ 11, 12. Schleiermacher, §§ 14, 47.↑20Prælect. theol. c. xv.↑21In the work:defensio fidei cath. de satisfactione Chr. adv. F. Socinum.↑22Summa, P. 3, Q. 48, A. 2.↑23Comm. in Sentt. L. 3, Dist. 19.↑24See, besides Socinus,Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn., c.↑25Töllner, Der thätige Gehorsam Christi untersucht. 1768.↑26Wegscheider, § 199.↑27Compare with what follows especially the Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 372 ff.; Wegscheider, §§ 128, 133, 140.↑28For the different views, see Bretschneider, Dogm. 2, s. 353, systematische Entwicklung, § 107.↑29Röhr, Briefe, s. 36, 405 ff.↑30Schleiermacher, on his Glaubenslehre, to Dr. Lücke, 2tes Sendschreiben, Studien, 2, 3, s. 481 ff.↑31Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 92–105.↑32This opinion has been already put forth in the most noted reviews of Schleiermacher’s system; comp. Braniss, über Schleiermacher’s Glaubenslehre; H. Schmid, über Schl. Glaubensl. s. 263 ff.; Baur, die christl. Gnosis, s. 626 ff., and the Review of Rosenkranz, Jahrb. fur wiss. Kritik, 1831.↑332ter Sendschreiben.↑34Schmid, ut sup.↑35Comp. Rosenkranz, ut sup. s. 935 ff.↑36Baur, ut sup. s. 653.↑37Thus Schmid, ut sup. s. 267.↑38Ep. 21, ad Oldenburg. Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556:—dico, ad salutem non esse omnino necesse, Christum secundum carnem noscere; sed ed æterno illo filio Dei, h. e. Dei æterna sapientia, quæ sese in omnibus rebus, et maxime in mente humana, et omnium maxime in Christo Jesu manifestavit, longe aliter sentiendum. Nam nemo absque hac ad statum beatitudinis potest pervenire, utpote quæ sola docet, quid verum et falsum, bonum et malum sit.↑39Religion innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. drittes Stück, 1te Abthl. vii.↑40Ut sup. 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn. 3tes Stück, 1te Abthlg.↑41This is shown by Baur, christl. Gnosis, s. 660 ff.↑42Censur des christl. protestantischen Lehrbegriffs, 3, s. 180.↑43Religion und Theologie, 2ter Abschnitt, Kap. 3; comp. bibl. Dogmatik, § 255; kirchliche, § 64 ff.↑44Ideen über Mythologie u. s. w. in Henke’s neuer Magazin, b. s. 454 ff. Comp. Henke’s Museum, 3, s. 455.↑45Vorlesungen über die Methode des akademischen Studiums, s. 192.↑46Hegel’sPhänomenologie des Geistes, s. 561 ff.; Vorlesungen über die Philos. der Relig. 2, s. 234 ff. Marheineke, Grundlehren der christl. Dogmatik. s. 174 ff. Rosenkranz, Encyklopädie der theol. Wissenschaften, s.38 ff., 148 ff.; comp. myStreitschriften, 3tes Heft, s. 76 ff.↑47Dogmatik, § 326.↑48Encyklopädie, s. 160.↑49Selbstbewusstsein und Offenbarung, s. 295 f. Comp. Bauer, Recens. des L. J., Jahrbücher f. wiss. Kritik, 1836, Mai, s. 699 ff.↑50Compare with this my Streitschriften, 3 Heft, s. 68 ff. 125.↑51With this should be compared the explanation in the Streitschriften, ut sup. s. 119.↑52Of this also there is an explanation in the Streitschriften, 3, s. 166 f.↑53Herein lies the answer to the objection which Schaller (der historische Christus und die Philosophie, s. 64 ff.) has made to the above view; namely, that it teaches only a substantial, not a personal unity of man with God. That unity which exists in the determination of the race has already been present in individuals separately, according to the different measure of their religious development, and thus the substantial unity has become, in different degrees, a personal unity.↑54Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, 2, s. 263 ff.Compare the collection of the several propositions of Hegel on the person of Christ and the evangelical history, in myStreitschriften, 3.Heft, s. 76.↑55Glaubenslehre, 1, s. 47.↑56In the 2ten Sendschreiben on his Glaubenslehre.↑
1Iren.adv. hær. i. 10. Tertull. de præscr. hær. xiii. adv. Prax. ii. de veland. virg. i. Orig. de principp.proem. iv.↑2Iren. adv. hær. iii. xviii. 7.↑3Athanas. contra Arianos, orat. 2, 33.↑4Gregor. Naz. Or. 51, p. 740, B.:τὸ γὰρἀπρόσληπτονἀθεράπευμον. ὃ δὲ ἥνωται τῷ θεῷ, τοῦτο καὶ σώζεται.↑5—ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χ. συμφώνως ἄπαντες ἐκδιδάσκομεν, τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν θεότητι, καὶ τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι, θεὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθῶς τὸν αὐτὸν ἐκ ψυχῆς λογικῆς καὶ σώματος, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, καὶ ὁμοούσιον τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον ἡμῖν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας· πρὸ αἰώνων μὲν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, ἐπ’ ἐσχάτων δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν τὸν αὐτὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου τῆς θεοτόκου κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν, υἱὸν, κύριον, μονογενῆ, ἐκ δύο φύσεων ασυνχύτως, ἀτρέπτως, ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως γνωριζόμενον· οὐδαμοῦ τῆς τῶν φύσεων διαφορᾶς ἀνῃρημένης διὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, σωζομένης δὲ μᾶλλον τῆς ἰδιότητος ἑκατέρας φύσεως, καὶ εἰς ἓν πρόσωπον καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν συντρεχούσης· οὐκ εἰς δύο πρόσωπα μεριζόμενον ἣ διαιρούμενον, ἀλλ’ ἔνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν υἱὸν καὶ μονογενῆ, θεὸν λόγον, κύριον Ἰ. Χ.↑6The 6th Œcumenical Synod of Constantinople declared:δύο φυσικὰ θελήματα οὐχ ὑπεναντία,—ἀλλ’ ἑπόμενον τὸ ἀνθρώπινον αὐτοῦ θέλημα—καὶ ὑποτασσόμενοντῷθείῷ αὐτοῦ καὶ πανσθενεῖ θελήματι.↑7Athanas. de incarn. 54:αὐτὸς ἐνηνθρώπησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς θεοποιηθῶμεν. Greg. Nyt. Orat. cass. 35:τότε τε κατεμίχθη πρὸςτὸθεῖον, ἵνα τὸ ἡμέτερον τῇ πρὸς τὸ θεῖον ἐπιμιξίᾳ γένηται θεῖον. Joann. Damasc. de f. orth. iii. 20:πάνταἀνέλαβεν(τὰ αδιάβλη τὰ πάθη τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὁ Χ.) ἵνα πάντα ἁγιάση. Greg. Naz. or. ii. 23 f. Hilar. Pictav. de trin. ii. 24:humani generis causa Dei filius natus ex virgine est—ut homo factus ex virgine naturam in se carnis acciperet perque hujus admixtionis societatem sanctificatum in eo universi generis humani corpus existeret. For other expressions of the kind, see Münscher, Dogmengesch., herausg. von Cölln, 1, § 97, Anm. 10.↑8Münscher, § 96, Anm. 5, s. 423 f.↑9Augustin, de Catechiz. rudib. 7.↑10Vid. Münscher, § 96.↑11Ibid. § 97.↑12Comp.Form. Concord., Epit. und Sol. decl. VIII. p. 605 ff. and 761 ff. ed. Hase. Chemniz,de duabus naturis in Christo libellus, andloci theol., loc. 2, de filio; Gerhard. II. th. 1, p. 640 ff. (ed. 1615); Quenstedt,theol. didact. polem. P. 3, c. 3. Comp. De Wette, bibl. Dogm. § 64 ff.↑13See the Oratio appended to the locus de pers. et offic. Chr. Gerhard, ut sup. p. 719 ff.↑14Vid. Gerhard, II. th. 1, p. 685 ff.; Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 71 f.↑15Reinhard, Vorles. über die Dogm. s. 354, conformably to the proposition urged by the Reformed against the Lutherans:Nulla natura in se ipsam recipit contradictoria, Planck, Gesch. des protest. Lehrbegriffs, Bd. 6, s. 782.↑16Fausti Socini de Christi natura disputatio. Opp. Bibl. Fr. Pol. 1, p. 784; Catech. Racov. Q. 96 ff. Comp. Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 96. Spinoza, also, ep. 21, ad Oldenburg, Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556, says:Quod quædam ecclesiæ his adduut, quod Deus naturam humanam assumpserit, monui expresse, me, quid dicant, nescire; imo, ut verum fatear, non minus absurde mihi loqui videntur, quam si quis mihi diceret, quod circulus naturam quadrati induerit.↑17(Röhr) Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 378 ff.; Wegscheider Inst. theol. § 128; Bretschneider, Handb. der Dogm. 2, § 137 ff.; also Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. 2tes St. 2ter Absch. b.↑18Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 96–98.↑19Spinoza, tract. theol. polit. c. vi. p. 133. ed. Gfrörer, and ep. 23, ad Oldenburg, p. 558 f. Briefe über den Rat., 4ter, 5ter, 6ter, 12ter. Wegscheider, §§ 11, 12. Schleiermacher, §§ 14, 47.↑20Prælect. theol. c. xv.↑21In the work:defensio fidei cath. de satisfactione Chr. adv. F. Socinum.↑22Summa, P. 3, Q. 48, A. 2.↑23Comm. in Sentt. L. 3, Dist. 19.↑24See, besides Socinus,Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn., c.↑25Töllner, Der thätige Gehorsam Christi untersucht. 1768.↑26Wegscheider, § 199.↑27Compare with what follows especially the Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 372 ff.; Wegscheider, §§ 128, 133, 140.↑28For the different views, see Bretschneider, Dogm. 2, s. 353, systematische Entwicklung, § 107.↑29Röhr, Briefe, s. 36, 405 ff.↑30Schleiermacher, on his Glaubenslehre, to Dr. Lücke, 2tes Sendschreiben, Studien, 2, 3, s. 481 ff.↑31Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 92–105.↑32This opinion has been already put forth in the most noted reviews of Schleiermacher’s system; comp. Braniss, über Schleiermacher’s Glaubenslehre; H. Schmid, über Schl. Glaubensl. s. 263 ff.; Baur, die christl. Gnosis, s. 626 ff., and the Review of Rosenkranz, Jahrb. fur wiss. Kritik, 1831.↑332ter Sendschreiben.↑34Schmid, ut sup.↑35Comp. Rosenkranz, ut sup. s. 935 ff.↑36Baur, ut sup. s. 653.↑37Thus Schmid, ut sup. s. 267.↑38Ep. 21, ad Oldenburg. Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556:—dico, ad salutem non esse omnino necesse, Christum secundum carnem noscere; sed ed æterno illo filio Dei, h. e. Dei æterna sapientia, quæ sese in omnibus rebus, et maxime in mente humana, et omnium maxime in Christo Jesu manifestavit, longe aliter sentiendum. Nam nemo absque hac ad statum beatitudinis potest pervenire, utpote quæ sola docet, quid verum et falsum, bonum et malum sit.↑39Religion innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. drittes Stück, 1te Abthl. vii.↑40Ut sup. 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn. 3tes Stück, 1te Abthlg.↑41This is shown by Baur, christl. Gnosis, s. 660 ff.↑42Censur des christl. protestantischen Lehrbegriffs, 3, s. 180.↑43Religion und Theologie, 2ter Abschnitt, Kap. 3; comp. bibl. Dogmatik, § 255; kirchliche, § 64 ff.↑44Ideen über Mythologie u. s. w. in Henke’s neuer Magazin, b. s. 454 ff. Comp. Henke’s Museum, 3, s. 455.↑45Vorlesungen über die Methode des akademischen Studiums, s. 192.↑46Hegel’sPhänomenologie des Geistes, s. 561 ff.; Vorlesungen über die Philos. der Relig. 2, s. 234 ff. Marheineke, Grundlehren der christl. Dogmatik. s. 174 ff. Rosenkranz, Encyklopädie der theol. Wissenschaften, s.38 ff., 148 ff.; comp. myStreitschriften, 3tes Heft, s. 76 ff.↑47Dogmatik, § 326.↑48Encyklopädie, s. 160.↑49Selbstbewusstsein und Offenbarung, s. 295 f. Comp. Bauer, Recens. des L. J., Jahrbücher f. wiss. Kritik, 1836, Mai, s. 699 ff.↑50Compare with this my Streitschriften, 3 Heft, s. 68 ff. 125.↑51With this should be compared the explanation in the Streitschriften, ut sup. s. 119.↑52Of this also there is an explanation in the Streitschriften, 3, s. 166 f.↑53Herein lies the answer to the objection which Schaller (der historische Christus und die Philosophie, s. 64 ff.) has made to the above view; namely, that it teaches only a substantial, not a personal unity of man with God. That unity which exists in the determination of the race has already been present in individuals separately, according to the different measure of their religious development, and thus the substantial unity has become, in different degrees, a personal unity.↑54Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, 2, s. 263 ff.Compare the collection of the several propositions of Hegel on the person of Christ and the evangelical history, in myStreitschriften, 3.Heft, s. 76.↑55Glaubenslehre, 1, s. 47.↑56In the 2ten Sendschreiben on his Glaubenslehre.↑
1Iren.adv. hær. i. 10. Tertull. de præscr. hær. xiii. adv. Prax. ii. de veland. virg. i. Orig. de principp.proem. iv.↑
1Iren.adv. hær. i. 10. Tertull. de præscr. hær. xiii. adv. Prax. ii. de veland. virg. i. Orig. de principp.proem. iv.↑
2Iren. adv. hær. iii. xviii. 7.↑
2Iren. adv. hær. iii. xviii. 7.↑
3Athanas. contra Arianos, orat. 2, 33.↑
3Athanas. contra Arianos, orat. 2, 33.↑
4Gregor. Naz. Or. 51, p. 740, B.:τὸ γὰρἀπρόσληπτονἀθεράπευμον. ὃ δὲ ἥνωται τῷ θεῷ, τοῦτο καὶ σώζεται.↑
4Gregor. Naz. Or. 51, p. 740, B.:τὸ γὰρἀπρόσληπτονἀθεράπευμον. ὃ δὲ ἥνωται τῷ θεῷ, τοῦτο καὶ σώζεται.↑
5—ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χ. συμφώνως ἄπαντες ἐκδιδάσκομεν, τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν θεότητι, καὶ τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι, θεὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθῶς τὸν αὐτὸν ἐκ ψυχῆς λογικῆς καὶ σώματος, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, καὶ ὁμοούσιον τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον ἡμῖν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας· πρὸ αἰώνων μὲν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, ἐπ’ ἐσχάτων δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν τὸν αὐτὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου τῆς θεοτόκου κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν, υἱὸν, κύριον, μονογενῆ, ἐκ δύο φύσεων ασυνχύτως, ἀτρέπτως, ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως γνωριζόμενον· οὐδαμοῦ τῆς τῶν φύσεων διαφορᾶς ἀνῃρημένης διὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, σωζομένης δὲ μᾶλλον τῆς ἰδιότητος ἑκατέρας φύσεως, καὶ εἰς ἓν πρόσωπον καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν συντρεχούσης· οὐκ εἰς δύο πρόσωπα μεριζόμενον ἣ διαιρούμενον, ἀλλ’ ἔνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν υἱὸν καὶ μονογενῆ, θεὸν λόγον, κύριον Ἰ. Χ.↑
5—ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χ. συμφώνως ἄπαντες ἐκδιδάσκομεν, τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν θεότητι, καὶ τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι, θεὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθῶς τὸν αὐτὸν ἐκ ψυχῆς λογικῆς καὶ σώματος, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, καὶ ὁμοούσιον τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον ἡμῖν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας· πρὸ αἰώνων μὲν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, ἐπ’ ἐσχάτων δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν τὸν αὐτὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου τῆς θεοτόκου κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Χριστὸν, υἱὸν, κύριον, μονογενῆ, ἐκ δύο φύσεων ασυνχύτως, ἀτρέπτως, ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως γνωριζόμενον· οὐδαμοῦ τῆς τῶν φύσεων διαφορᾶς ἀνῃρημένης διὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, σωζομένης δὲ μᾶλλον τῆς ἰδιότητος ἑκατέρας φύσεως, καὶ εἰς ἓν πρόσωπον καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν συντρεχούσης· οὐκ εἰς δύο πρόσωπα μεριζόμενον ἣ διαιρούμενον, ἀλλ’ ἔνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν υἱὸν καὶ μονογενῆ, θεὸν λόγον, κύριον Ἰ. Χ.↑
6The 6th Œcumenical Synod of Constantinople declared:δύο φυσικὰ θελήματα οὐχ ὑπεναντία,—ἀλλ’ ἑπόμενον τὸ ἀνθρώπινον αὐτοῦ θέλημα—καὶ ὑποτασσόμενοντῷθείῷ αὐτοῦ καὶ πανσθενεῖ θελήματι.↑
6The 6th Œcumenical Synod of Constantinople declared:δύο φυσικὰ θελήματα οὐχ ὑπεναντία,—ἀλλ’ ἑπόμενον τὸ ἀνθρώπινον αὐτοῦ θέλημα—καὶ ὑποτασσόμενοντῷθείῷ αὐτοῦ καὶ πανσθενεῖ θελήματι.↑
7Athanas. de incarn. 54:αὐτὸς ἐνηνθρώπησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς θεοποιηθῶμεν. Greg. Nyt. Orat. cass. 35:τότε τε κατεμίχθη πρὸςτὸθεῖον, ἵνα τὸ ἡμέτερον τῇ πρὸς τὸ θεῖον ἐπιμιξίᾳ γένηται θεῖον. Joann. Damasc. de f. orth. iii. 20:πάνταἀνέλαβεν(τὰ αδιάβλη τὰ πάθη τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὁ Χ.) ἵνα πάντα ἁγιάση. Greg. Naz. or. ii. 23 f. Hilar. Pictav. de trin. ii. 24:humani generis causa Dei filius natus ex virgine est—ut homo factus ex virgine naturam in se carnis acciperet perque hujus admixtionis societatem sanctificatum in eo universi generis humani corpus existeret. For other expressions of the kind, see Münscher, Dogmengesch., herausg. von Cölln, 1, § 97, Anm. 10.↑
7Athanas. de incarn. 54:αὐτὸς ἐνηνθρώπησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς θεοποιηθῶμεν. Greg. Nyt. Orat. cass. 35:τότε τε κατεμίχθη πρὸςτὸθεῖον, ἵνα τὸ ἡμέτερον τῇ πρὸς τὸ θεῖον ἐπιμιξίᾳ γένηται θεῖον. Joann. Damasc. de f. orth. iii. 20:πάνταἀνέλαβεν(τὰ αδιάβλη τὰ πάθη τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὁ Χ.) ἵνα πάντα ἁγιάση. Greg. Naz. or. ii. 23 f. Hilar. Pictav. de trin. ii. 24:humani generis causa Dei filius natus ex virgine est—ut homo factus ex virgine naturam in se carnis acciperet perque hujus admixtionis societatem sanctificatum in eo universi generis humani corpus existeret. For other expressions of the kind, see Münscher, Dogmengesch., herausg. von Cölln, 1, § 97, Anm. 10.↑
8Münscher, § 96, Anm. 5, s. 423 f.↑
8Münscher, § 96, Anm. 5, s. 423 f.↑
9Augustin, de Catechiz. rudib. 7.↑
9Augustin, de Catechiz. rudib. 7.↑
10Vid. Münscher, § 96.↑
10Vid. Münscher, § 96.↑
11Ibid. § 97.↑
11Ibid. § 97.↑
12Comp.Form. Concord., Epit. und Sol. decl. VIII. p. 605 ff. and 761 ff. ed. Hase. Chemniz,de duabus naturis in Christo libellus, andloci theol., loc. 2, de filio; Gerhard. II. th. 1, p. 640 ff. (ed. 1615); Quenstedt,theol. didact. polem. P. 3, c. 3. Comp. De Wette, bibl. Dogm. § 64 ff.↑
12Comp.Form. Concord., Epit. und Sol. decl. VIII. p. 605 ff. and 761 ff. ed. Hase. Chemniz,de duabus naturis in Christo libellus, andloci theol., loc. 2, de filio; Gerhard. II. th. 1, p. 640 ff. (ed. 1615); Quenstedt,theol. didact. polem. P. 3, c. 3. Comp. De Wette, bibl. Dogm. § 64 ff.↑
13See the Oratio appended to the locus de pers. et offic. Chr. Gerhard, ut sup. p. 719 ff.↑
13See the Oratio appended to the locus de pers. et offic. Chr. Gerhard, ut sup. p. 719 ff.↑
14Vid. Gerhard, II. th. 1, p. 685 ff.; Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 71 f.↑
14Vid. Gerhard, II. th. 1, p. 685 ff.; Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 71 f.↑
15Reinhard, Vorles. über die Dogm. s. 354, conformably to the proposition urged by the Reformed against the Lutherans:Nulla natura in se ipsam recipit contradictoria, Planck, Gesch. des protest. Lehrbegriffs, Bd. 6, s. 782.↑
15Reinhard, Vorles. über die Dogm. s. 354, conformably to the proposition urged by the Reformed against the Lutherans:Nulla natura in se ipsam recipit contradictoria, Planck, Gesch. des protest. Lehrbegriffs, Bd. 6, s. 782.↑
16Fausti Socini de Christi natura disputatio. Opp. Bibl. Fr. Pol. 1, p. 784; Catech. Racov. Q. 96 ff. Comp. Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 96. Spinoza, also, ep. 21, ad Oldenburg, Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556, says:Quod quædam ecclesiæ his adduut, quod Deus naturam humanam assumpserit, monui expresse, me, quid dicant, nescire; imo, ut verum fatear, non minus absurde mihi loqui videntur, quam si quis mihi diceret, quod circulus naturam quadrati induerit.↑
16Fausti Socini de Christi natura disputatio. Opp. Bibl. Fr. Pol. 1, p. 784; Catech. Racov. Q. 96 ff. Comp. Marheineke, Instit. symb. § 96. Spinoza, also, ep. 21, ad Oldenburg, Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556, says:Quod quædam ecclesiæ his adduut, quod Deus naturam humanam assumpserit, monui expresse, me, quid dicant, nescire; imo, ut verum fatear, non minus absurde mihi loqui videntur, quam si quis mihi diceret, quod circulus naturam quadrati induerit.↑
17(Röhr) Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 378 ff.; Wegscheider Inst. theol. § 128; Bretschneider, Handb. der Dogm. 2, § 137 ff.; also Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. 2tes St. 2ter Absch. b.↑
17(Röhr) Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 378 ff.; Wegscheider Inst. theol. § 128; Bretschneider, Handb. der Dogm. 2, § 137 ff.; also Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. 2tes St. 2ter Absch. b.↑
18Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 96–98.↑
18Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 96–98.↑
19Spinoza, tract. theol. polit. c. vi. p. 133. ed. Gfrörer, and ep. 23, ad Oldenburg, p. 558 f. Briefe über den Rat., 4ter, 5ter, 6ter, 12ter. Wegscheider, §§ 11, 12. Schleiermacher, §§ 14, 47.↑
19Spinoza, tract. theol. polit. c. vi. p. 133. ed. Gfrörer, and ep. 23, ad Oldenburg, p. 558 f. Briefe über den Rat., 4ter, 5ter, 6ter, 12ter. Wegscheider, §§ 11, 12. Schleiermacher, §§ 14, 47.↑
20Prælect. theol. c. xv.↑
20Prælect. theol. c. xv.↑
21In the work:defensio fidei cath. de satisfactione Chr. adv. F. Socinum.↑
21In the work:defensio fidei cath. de satisfactione Chr. adv. F. Socinum.↑
22Summa, P. 3, Q. 48, A. 2.↑
22Summa, P. 3, Q. 48, A. 2.↑
23Comm. in Sentt. L. 3, Dist. 19.↑
23Comm. in Sentt. L. 3, Dist. 19.↑
24See, besides Socinus,Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn., c.↑
24See, besides Socinus,Kant, Relig. innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn., c.↑
25Töllner, Der thätige Gehorsam Christi untersucht. 1768.↑
25Töllner, Der thätige Gehorsam Christi untersucht. 1768.↑
26Wegscheider, § 199.↑
26Wegscheider, § 199.↑
27Compare with what follows especially the Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 372 ff.; Wegscheider, §§ 128, 133, 140.↑
27Compare with what follows especially the Briefe über den Rationalismus, s. 372 ff.; Wegscheider, §§ 128, 133, 140.↑
28For the different views, see Bretschneider, Dogm. 2, s. 353, systematische Entwicklung, § 107.↑
28For the different views, see Bretschneider, Dogm. 2, s. 353, systematische Entwicklung, § 107.↑
29Röhr, Briefe, s. 36, 405 ff.↑
29Röhr, Briefe, s. 36, 405 ff.↑
30Schleiermacher, on his Glaubenslehre, to Dr. Lücke, 2tes Sendschreiben, Studien, 2, 3, s. 481 ff.↑
30Schleiermacher, on his Glaubenslehre, to Dr. Lücke, 2tes Sendschreiben, Studien, 2, 3, s. 481 ff.↑
31Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 92–105.↑
31Glaubenslehre, 2, §§ 92–105.↑
32This opinion has been already put forth in the most noted reviews of Schleiermacher’s system; comp. Braniss, über Schleiermacher’s Glaubenslehre; H. Schmid, über Schl. Glaubensl. s. 263 ff.; Baur, die christl. Gnosis, s. 626 ff., and the Review of Rosenkranz, Jahrb. fur wiss. Kritik, 1831.↑
32This opinion has been already put forth in the most noted reviews of Schleiermacher’s system; comp. Braniss, über Schleiermacher’s Glaubenslehre; H. Schmid, über Schl. Glaubensl. s. 263 ff.; Baur, die christl. Gnosis, s. 626 ff., and the Review of Rosenkranz, Jahrb. fur wiss. Kritik, 1831.↑
332ter Sendschreiben.↑
332ter Sendschreiben.↑
34Schmid, ut sup.↑
34Schmid, ut sup.↑
35Comp. Rosenkranz, ut sup. s. 935 ff.↑
35Comp. Rosenkranz, ut sup. s. 935 ff.↑
36Baur, ut sup. s. 653.↑
36Baur, ut sup. s. 653.↑
37Thus Schmid, ut sup. s. 267.↑
37Thus Schmid, ut sup. s. 267.↑
38Ep. 21, ad Oldenburg. Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556:—dico, ad salutem non esse omnino necesse, Christum secundum carnem noscere; sed ed æterno illo filio Dei, h. e. Dei æterna sapientia, quæ sese in omnibus rebus, et maxime in mente humana, et omnium maxime in Christo Jesu manifestavit, longe aliter sentiendum. Nam nemo absque hac ad statum beatitudinis potest pervenire, utpote quæ sola docet, quid verum et falsum, bonum et malum sit.↑
38Ep. 21, ad Oldenburg. Opp. ed. Gfrörer, p. 556:—dico, ad salutem non esse omnino necesse, Christum secundum carnem noscere; sed ed æterno illo filio Dei, h. e. Dei æterna sapientia, quæ sese in omnibus rebus, et maxime in mente humana, et omnium maxime in Christo Jesu manifestavit, longe aliter sentiendum. Nam nemo absque hac ad statum beatitudinis potest pervenire, utpote quæ sola docet, quid verum et falsum, bonum et malum sit.↑
39Religion innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. drittes Stück, 1te Abthl. vii.↑
39Religion innerhalb der Gränzen der blossen Vernunft. drittes Stück, 1te Abthl. vii.↑
40Ut sup. 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn. 3tes Stück, 1te Abthlg.↑
40Ut sup. 2tes Stück, 1ter Abschn. 3tes Stück, 1te Abthlg.↑
41This is shown by Baur, christl. Gnosis, s. 660 ff.↑
41This is shown by Baur, christl. Gnosis, s. 660 ff.↑
42Censur des christl. protestantischen Lehrbegriffs, 3, s. 180.↑
42Censur des christl. protestantischen Lehrbegriffs, 3, s. 180.↑
43Religion und Theologie, 2ter Abschnitt, Kap. 3; comp. bibl. Dogmatik, § 255; kirchliche, § 64 ff.↑
43Religion und Theologie, 2ter Abschnitt, Kap. 3; comp. bibl. Dogmatik, § 255; kirchliche, § 64 ff.↑
44Ideen über Mythologie u. s. w. in Henke’s neuer Magazin, b. s. 454 ff. Comp. Henke’s Museum, 3, s. 455.↑
44Ideen über Mythologie u. s. w. in Henke’s neuer Magazin, b. s. 454 ff. Comp. Henke’s Museum, 3, s. 455.↑
45Vorlesungen über die Methode des akademischen Studiums, s. 192.↑
45Vorlesungen über die Methode des akademischen Studiums, s. 192.↑
46Hegel’sPhänomenologie des Geistes, s. 561 ff.; Vorlesungen über die Philos. der Relig. 2, s. 234 ff. Marheineke, Grundlehren der christl. Dogmatik. s. 174 ff. Rosenkranz, Encyklopädie der theol. Wissenschaften, s.38 ff., 148 ff.; comp. myStreitschriften, 3tes Heft, s. 76 ff.↑
46Hegel’sPhänomenologie des Geistes, s. 561 ff.; Vorlesungen über die Philos. der Relig. 2, s. 234 ff. Marheineke, Grundlehren der christl. Dogmatik. s. 174 ff. Rosenkranz, Encyklopädie der theol. Wissenschaften, s.38 ff., 148 ff.; comp. myStreitschriften, 3tes Heft, s. 76 ff.↑
47Dogmatik, § 326.↑
47Dogmatik, § 326.↑
48Encyklopädie, s. 160.↑
48Encyklopädie, s. 160.↑
49Selbstbewusstsein und Offenbarung, s. 295 f. Comp. Bauer, Recens. des L. J., Jahrbücher f. wiss. Kritik, 1836, Mai, s. 699 ff.↑
49Selbstbewusstsein und Offenbarung, s. 295 f. Comp. Bauer, Recens. des L. J., Jahrbücher f. wiss. Kritik, 1836, Mai, s. 699 ff.↑
50Compare with this my Streitschriften, 3 Heft, s. 68 ff. 125.↑
50Compare with this my Streitschriften, 3 Heft, s. 68 ff. 125.↑
51With this should be compared the explanation in the Streitschriften, ut sup. s. 119.↑
51With this should be compared the explanation in the Streitschriften, ut sup. s. 119.↑
52Of this also there is an explanation in the Streitschriften, 3, s. 166 f.↑
52Of this also there is an explanation in the Streitschriften, 3, s. 166 f.↑
53Herein lies the answer to the objection which Schaller (der historische Christus und die Philosophie, s. 64 ff.) has made to the above view; namely, that it teaches only a substantial, not a personal unity of man with God. That unity which exists in the determination of the race has already been present in individuals separately, according to the different measure of their religious development, and thus the substantial unity has become, in different degrees, a personal unity.↑
53Herein lies the answer to the objection which Schaller (der historische Christus und die Philosophie, s. 64 ff.) has made to the above view; namely, that it teaches only a substantial, not a personal unity of man with God. That unity which exists in the determination of the race has already been present in individuals separately, according to the different measure of their religious development, and thus the substantial unity has become, in different degrees, a personal unity.↑
54Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, 2, s. 263 ff.Compare the collection of the several propositions of Hegel on the person of Christ and the evangelical history, in myStreitschriften, 3.Heft, s. 76.↑
54Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, 2, s. 263 ff.Compare the collection of the several propositions of Hegel on the person of Christ and the evangelical history, in myStreitschriften, 3.Heft, s. 76.↑
55Glaubenslehre, 1, s. 47.↑
55Glaubenslehre, 1, s. 47.↑
56In the 2ten Sendschreiben on his Glaubenslehre.↑
56In the 2ten Sendschreiben on his Glaubenslehre.↑