John Calvin on One God, One Faith, and One Baptism

"As God has manifested himself more clearly by the advent of Christ, so he has made himself more familiarly known in the three persons.  Of many proofs let this one suffice.  Paul connects together these three, God, faith, and baptism, and reasons from the one to the other, i.e., because there is one faith he infers that there is one God; and because there is one baptism he infers that there is one faith. Therefore, if by baptism we are initiated into the faith and worship of one God, we must of necessity believe that he into whose name we are baptized is the true God.  And there cannot be a doubt that our Savior wished to testify, by a solemn rehearsal, that the perfect light of faith is now exhibited, when he said, 'Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit' (Matt 28:19), since this is the same thing as to be baptized into the name of the one God, who has been fully manifested in the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.  Hence it plainly appears, that the three persons, in whom alone God is known, subsist in the divine essence.  And since faith certainly ought not to look hither and thither, or run up and down after various objets, but to like, refer, and cleave to God alone, it is obvious that were there various kinds of faith, there behooved also to be various gods.  Then, as the baptism of faith is a sacrament, its unity assures us of the unity of God.  Hence also it is proved that it is lawful only to be baptized into one God, because we make a profession of faith in him in whose name we are baptized.  What, then, is our Savior's meaning in commanding baptism to be administered in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, if it be not that we are to believe with one faith in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Hoy Spirit?  But is this anything else than to declare that the Father, Son, and Spirit, are one God?  Wherefore, since it must be held certain that there is one God, not more than one, we conclude the the Word and Spirit are of the very essence of God" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.16).

John Calvin on Christ as Eternal God

"If [outside] of God there is no salvation, no righteousness, no life, Christ, having all these in himself, is certainly God.  Let no one object that life or salvation is transfused into him by God.  For it is said not that he received, but that he himself is salvation.  And if there is none good but God, how could a mere man be pure, how could he be, I say not good and just, but goodness and justice?  Then what shall we say to the testimony of the evangelist, that from the very beginning of creation 'in him was life, and this life was the light of men'?  Trusting to such proofs, we can boldly put our hope and faith in him, though we know it is blasphemous [irreverence] to confide in any creature.  'Ye believe in God,' says he, ' believe also in me' (John 14:1).  And so Paul (Rom 10:11 and 15:12) interprets two passages of Isaiah, 'Whoso believeth in him shall not be confounded' (Isa 28:16); and, 'In that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for [a banner] of the people; to it shall the gentiles seek' (Isa 11:10).  But why adduce more passages of Scripture on this head, when we so often meet with the expression, 'He that believeth in me has eternal life'?" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.13).

John Calvin on Christ's Eternal Godhead (Part 2 of 2)

"It was [Jesus Christ] who arose and pitied Zion - he who claimed for himself dominion over all nations and islands.  And why should John have hesitated to ascribe the majesty of God to Christ, after saying in his preface that the Word was God? (John 1:14).  Why should Paul have feared to place Christ on the judgment-seat of God (2 Cor 5:10), after he had so openly proclaimed his divinity, when he said that he was God over all, blessed for ever? And to show how consistent he is in this respect, he elsewhere says that 'God was manifest in the flesh' (1 Tim 3:16).  If he is God blessed forever, he therefore it is to whom alone, as Paul affirms in another place, all glory and honor is due.  Paul does not disguise this, but openly exclaims, that 'being in the form of God (he) thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation' (Phil 2:6).  And lest the wicked should clamor and say that he was a kind of spurious God, John goes farther, and affirms, 'This is the true God, and eternal life.'  Though it ought to be enough for us that he is called God, especially by a witness who distinctly testifies that we have no more gods than one, Paul says, 'Though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth (as there be gods many, and lord many), but to us there is but one God' (1 Cor 8:5,6).  When we hear from the same lips that God was manifest in the flesh, that God purchased the church with his own blood, why do we dream of any second God, to whom he makes not the least allusion?  And there is no room to doubt that all the godly entertained the same view.  Thomas, by addressing him as his Lord and God, certainly professes that he was the only God whom he had ever adored (John 20:28)" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.11).

John Calvin on the Deity of Jesus in the Old Testament (Part 2 of 2)

"The same thing is intimated by Hosea, who, after mentioning the wrestling of Jacob with the angel, says, 'Even the Lord God of hosts; the Lord is his memorial' (Hos 12:5).  Servetus again insinuates that God personated an angel; as if the prophet did not confirm what had been said by Moses, 'Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name?' (Gen 32:29, 30).  And the confession of the holy patriarch sufficiently declares that he was not a created angel, but one in whom the fullness of the Godhead dwelled, when he says, 'I have seen God face to face.'  Hence also Paul's statement, that Christ led the people in the wilderness (1 Cor 10:4. See also Calvin on Acts 7:30, and infra, c. 14 s. 9).  Although the time of humiliation had not yet arrived, the eternal Word exhibited a type of the office which he was to fulfill.  Again, if Zech 1:9, etc., and Zech 2:3, etc., be candidly considered, it will be seen that the angel is immediately after declared to be the Lord of Hosts, and that supreme power is ascribed to him.  I omit numberless passages in which our faith rests secure, though they may not have much weight with the Jews.  For when it is said in Isaiah, 'Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him and he will save us; this is the Lord: we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation; (Isa 25:9), even the blind may see the the God referred to is he who again rises up for the deliverance of his people.  And the emphatic description, twice repeated, precludes the idea that reference is made to any other than to Christ.  Still clearer and stronger is the passage of Malachi, in which a promise is made that the messenger who was then expected would come to his own temple (Mal 3:1).  The temple certainly was dedicated to almighty God only, and yet the prophet claims it for Christ.  Hence it follows, that he is the God who was always worshiped by the Jews" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion).

John Calvin on the Deity of Jesus in the Old Testament (Part 1 of 2)

"But if this does not satisfy the Jews, I know not what [irritating and trivial objections] will enable them to evade the numerous passages in which Jehovah is said to have appeared in the form of an angel (Judg 6,7,13,16-23, etc.).  This angel claims for himself the name of the eternal God.  Should it be alleged that this is done in respect of the office which he bears, the difficulty is by no means solved.  No servant would rob God of his honor, by allowing sacrifice to be offered to himself.  But the angel, by refusing to eat bread, orders the sacrifice due to Jehovah to be offered to him.  Thus the fact itself proves that he was truly Jehovah.  Accordingly, Manoah and his wife infer from the sign, that they had seen not an angel, but God.  Hence Manoah's exclamation, 'We shall die; for we have seen the Lord.'  When the woman replies, 'If Jehovah had wished to slay us, he would not have received the sacrifice at our hand,' she acknowledges that he who is previously called an angel was certainly God.  We may add, that the angel's own reply removes all doubt, 'Why do ye ask my name, which is wonderful?'  Hence the [the lack of reverence to God] of Servetus was the more detestable, when he maintained that God was never manifested to Abraham and the patriarchs, but that an angel was worshiped in his stead.  The orthodox doctors of the church have correctly and wisely expounded, the the Word of God was the supreme angel, who then began, as it were by anticipation, to perform the office of Mediator.  For though he were not clothed with flesh, yet he descended as in an intermediate form, that he might have more familiar access to the faithful.  This closer intercourse procured for him the name of the angel; still, however, he retained the character which justly belonged to him, that of the God of ineffable glory" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion).

John Calvin on Asserting the Divinity of Christ

"When it is said in Ps 45, 'Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever,' the Jews quibble that the name Elohim is applied to angels and sovereign powers.  But no passage is to be found in Scripture, where an eternal throne is set up for a creature.  For he is not called God simply, but also the eternal Ruler.  Besides, the title is not conferred on any man, without some addition, as when it is said that Moses would be a God to Pharaoh (Exod 7:1).  Some read as if it were in the genitive case, but this is too [anemic].  I admit, that anything possessed of singular excellence is often called divine, but it is clear from the context, that this meaning here is harsh and forced, and totally inapplicable.   But if their perverseness still refuses to yield, surely there is no obscurity in Isaiah, where Christ is introduced both as God, and as possessed of supreme power, one of the peculiar attributes of God, 'His name shall be called the might God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace' (Isa 9:6).  Here, too, the Jews object, and invert the passage thus: This is the name by which the mighty God, the everlasting Father, will call him; so that all which they leave to the Son is, 'Prince of Peace.'  But why should so many epithets be here accumulated on God the Father, seeing the prophet's design is to present the Messiah with certain distinguished properties which may induce us to put our faith in him?  There can be no doubt, therefore, that he who a little before was called Immanuel, is here called the mighty God.  Moreover, there can be nothing clearer than the words of Jeremiah,

     'This is the name whereby he shall be called,
     "The lord our righteousness"' (Jer 23:6)" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.9).

John Calvin on Proving the Divinity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit

"When the word of God is set before us in the Scriptures, it were certainly most absurd to imagine that it is only a fleeting and [imperceptible] voice, which is sent out into the air, and comes forth beyond God himself, as was the case with the communications made to the patriarchs, and all the prophecies.  The reference is rather to the wisdom ever dwelling with God, and by which all oracles and prophecies were inspired.  For, as Peter testifies (1 Pet 1:11), the ancient prophets spoke by the Spirit of Christ just as did the apostles, and all who after them were ministers of the heavenly doctrine.  But as Christ was not yet manifested we necessarily understand that the Word was begotten of the Father before all ages.  But if that Spirit, whose [agent] the prophets were, belonged to the Word, the inference is irresistible, that the Word was truly God.  And this is clearly enough shown by Moses in his account of the creation, where he places the Word as intermediate.  For why does he distinctly narrated that God, in creating each of his works, said, let there by this - let there be that, unless that the unsearchable glory of God might shine forth in his image?  I know prattlers would easily evade this, by saying that 'Word' is used for order or command; but the apostles are better expositors, when they tell us that the worlds were created by the Son, and that he sustains all things by his mighty word (Heb 1:2).  For we here see that 'word' is used for the nod or command of the Son, who is himself the eternal and essential Word of the Father.  And no man of sane mind can have any doubt as to Solomon's meaning, when he introduces wisdom as begotten by God, and presiding at the creation of the world, and all other divine operations (Prov 8:22).  For it were trifling and foolish to imagine any temporary command at a time when God was pleased to execute his fixed and eternal counsel, and something more still mysterious.  To this our Savior's words refer, 'My Father worketh hitherto, and I work' (John 5:17).  In thus affirming, that from the foundation of the world he constantly worked with the Father, he gives a clearer explanation of the what Moses simply touched.  The meaning therefore is, that God spoke in such a manner as left the Word his peculiar part in the work, and thus made the operation common to both.  But the clearest explanation is given by John, when he states that the Word - which was from the beginning, God and with God, was, together with God the Father, the maker of all things.  For he both attributes a substantial and permanent essence to the Word, assigning to it a certain peculiarity, and distinctly showing how God spoke the world into being.  Therefore, as all revelations from heaven are duly designated by the title of the word of God, so the highest place must be assigned to that substantial Word, the source of all inspiration, which, as being liable to no variation, remains forever one and the same with God, and is God" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.7)