Note 1 — Quest. LXV., LXVI.

The first that seems to use this unsavoury mode of speaking, is Gregory Nazianzen; who did not consider how inconsistent some of those rhetorical ways of speaking, he seems fond of, are with that doctrine, which, in other parts of his writings, he maintained. Those words Χριστοποιειν, and θεοποιειν, which he sometimes uses to express the nature, or consequence of this union between Christ and believers, are very disgustful. In one place of his writings, (Vid. ejusd. Orat. 41.) exhorting Christians to be like Christ, he says, That because he became like unto us, γενωμεθα Θεοι δι αυτον, efficiamur Dii propter ipsum; and elsewhere, (in Orat. 35. de Folio.) he says, Hic homo Deus effectus postea quam cum Deo coaluit ἱνα γενωμαι τοσουτον θεος ὁσον εκ εινοc ανθρωπος εγενηθη, ut ipse quoque tantum Deus efficiar quantum ipse homo. And some modern writers have been fond of the same mode of speaking, especially among those who, from their mysterious and unintelligible mode of expressing themselves, have rather exposed than defended the doctrines of the gospel. We find expressions of the like nature in a book put forth by Luther, which is supposed to be written by Taulerus, before the Reformation, called Theologia Germanica, and some others, since that time, such as Parcelsus, Swenckfelt, Weigelius, and those enthusiasts, that have adhered to their unintelligible and blasphemous modes of speaking.