Anf-03 v.iv.v.vii Pg 26
Luke iv. 32.
—not because He taught in opposition to the law and the prophets. No doubt, His divine discourse3658 3658 Eloquium.
gave forth both power and grace, building up rather than pulling down the substance of the law and the prophets. Otherwise, instead of “astonishment, they would feel horror. It would not be admiration, but aversion, prompt and sure, which they would bestow on one who was the destroyer of law and prophets, and the especial propounder as a natural consequence of a rival god; for he would have been unable to teach anything to the disparagement of the law and the prophets, and so far of the Creator also, without premising the doctrine of a different and rival divinity. Inasmuch, then, as the Scripture makes no other statement on the matter than that the simple force and power of His word produced astonishment, it more naturally3659 3659 Facilius.
shows that His teaching was in accordance with the Creator by not denying (that it was so), than that it was in opposition to the Creator, by not asserting (such a fact). And thus He will either have to be acknowledged as belonging to Him,3660 3660 That is, the Creator.
in accordance with whom He taught; or else will have to be adjudged a deceiver since He taught in accordance with One whom He had come to oppose. In the same passage, “the spirit of an unclean devil” exclaims: “What have we to do with Thee, Thou Jesus? Art Thou come to destroy us? I know Thee who Thou art, the Holy One of God.”3661 3661
Anf-03 v.iv.v.xiii Pg 7
Luke iv. 32.
And again: “Therefore, my people shall know my name in that day.” What name does the prophet mean, but Christ’s? “That I am He that doth speak—even I.”3909 3909
Edersheim Bible History
Lifetimes viii.ix Pg 15.3, Lifetimes viii.xi Pg 1.3
Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, Chapter 4
VERSE (32) - :36 Jer 23:28,29 Mt 7:28,29 Mr 1:22 Joh 6:63 1Co 2:4,5; 14:24,25
