28 It was the doctrine of Aristotle that excellence of character is the proper object of love, and in proportion as we recognise such excellence in others are we attracted to become like them (see Sidgwick's Methods of Ethics, book iv. c. 5, sec. 4). If this be true of the creature, how much more should it be so of the Creator, who is the perfection of all that we can conceive of goodness and truth. Compare De Trin. viii. 3-6, De Vera Relig. 57, and an extract from Athanese Coquerel in Archbishop Thomson's Bampton Lectures, note 73.

29 See x. sec 40, note 6, and sec. 53, above.

30 That is, the artificer makes, God creates. The creation of matter is distinctively a doctrine of revelation. The ancient philosophers believed in the eternity of matter. As Lucretius puts it (i. 51): "Nullam rem e nihilo gigni divinitus unquam." See Burton, Bampton Lectures, lect. iii. and notes 18-21, and Mansel, Bampton Lectures, lect. iii. note 12. See also p. 76, note 8, above, for the Manichaean doctrine as to the u>\lh; and The Unseen Universe, arts. 85, 86, 151, and 160, for the modern doctrine of "continuity." See also Kalisch, Commentary on Gen. i. 1.

31 Ps. xxxiii. 9.

32 Ibid. ver. 6.

33 Matt. xvii. 5.

34 John i. 1.

35 John viii. 25, Old Ver. Though some would read, Qui et loquitur, making it correspond to the Vulgate, instead of Quia et loquitur, as above, the latter is doubtless the correct reading, since we find the text similarly quoted in Ev. Joh. Tract. xxxviii. 11, where he enlarges on "The Beginning," comparing principium with a_rxh. It will assist to the understanding of this section to refer to the early part of the note on p. 107, above, where the Platonic view of the Logos, as e0ndia/fetoj and proforiko/j, or in the "bosom of the Father" and "made flesh," is given; which terminology, as Dr. Newman tells us (Arians, pt. i. c. 2, sec. 4), was accepted by the Church. Augustin, consistently with this idea, says (on John viii. 25, as above): "For if the Beginning, as it is in itself, had remained so with the Father as not to receive the form of a servant and speak as man with men, how could they have believed in Him, since their weak hearts could not have heard the word intelligently without some voice that would appeal to their senses? Therefore, said He, believe me to be the Beginning; for that you may believe, I not only am, but also speak to you." Newman, as quoted above, may be referred to for the significance of a_rxh as applied to the Son, and ibid. sec. 3, also, on the "Word." For the difference between a mere "voice" and the "Word," compare Aug. Serm. ccxciii. sec. 3, and Origen, In Joann. ii. 36.

36 John iii. 29.

37 Ps. xxxi. 10.

38 Ps. ciii. 3-5.

39 Rom. viii. 24, 25.

40 Ps. civ. 24.

41 See note 12, p. 174, below.

42 Ps. cii. 27.

43 Ps. ii. 7, and Heb. v. 5.

44 Ps. cxxxix. 6.

45 Matt. vii. 11.

46 Ps. lxxiii. 16.

47 Ps. cxvi. 10.

48 Ps. xxvii. 4.

49 Ps. xxxix. 5.

50 Compare Gillies (Analysis of Aristotle, c. 2, p. 138): "As our conception of space originates in that of body, and our conception of motion in that of space, so our conception of time originates in that of motion; and particularly in those regular and equable motions carried on in the heavens, the parts of which, from their perfect similarity to each other, are correct measures of the continuous and successive quantity called Time, with which they are conceived to co-exist. Time, therefore, may be defined the perceived number of successive movements; for, as number ascertains the greater or lesser quantity of things numbered, so time ascertains the greater or lesser quantity of motion performed." And with this accords Monboddo's definition of time (Ancient Metaphysics, vol. i. book 4, chap. i.), as "the measure of the duration of things that exist in succession by the motion of the heavenly bodies." See xii. sec. 40, and note, below.

51 Gen. i, 14.

52 Josh. x. 12-14.

53 Ps. viii.28.