Commentary on Genesis and Exodus, Chapter 33 · Questions · Question 48
QUEST. XLVIII. Whether Moses here had a sight of the divine essence.
Vers. 20. THou canst not see my face. 1. Some are of opinion that Moses saw the divine essence of God in the mount. Thomas Aquinas seemeth to incline to this opinion, upon the authoritie of Augustine: Deus supernaturaliter & super communem ordinem, mentes aliquorum in hac carne viventium, usque ad visionem essentiae suae elevavit, &c. God supernaturally and above the common order, hath lifted the mindes of some in the flesh to the vision of his divine essence, as Augustine saith of Moses, and Paul, lib. 12. super Genes. and libr. de videndo Deo, 1. p. qu. 12. art. 11. in Cor.Thomas.
Tostatus also affirmeth the same, that Moses saw the divine essence, though not at this instant; for otherwise God had not satisfied Moses request, neither had shewed him all his good, which he said hee would cause to passe by him.
Contra. 1. But Augustine affirmeth otherwise, that Moses here had not his full desire; Non videbat Deum in tanta familiaritate, ut desiderabat videre; He saw not God in this great familiaritie, as he desired to see him: nec desideranti fuit hoc concessum, neither was this granted unto his desire, to see the essence of God. 2. God caused all his good to passe by him, that is, as Vatablus expoundeth it, vestigia omnium bonorum, certaine footsteps of all his goodnesse: or as Oleaster, God himselfe passed by, in quo sunt omnia bona, in whom are all good things. The Lord both shewed unto Moses a spirituall vision, in the proclaiming of his epithetes and names, and a sensuall, in exhibiting a glorious representation; yet it followeth not that he saw his divine essence.
1. Wherefore it is the sounder opinion, that Moses did not here see the divine essence it selfe, but onelyonly some demonstration of his glorie, as his humane capacitie was able to receive.
Ibid. ubi supra.1. Irenaus giveth instance of Moses, Helia…, Ezechiel, Daniel, that none of them saw God in his divine nature and essence: concerning Moses he sheweth it out of this place, where Moses desired, manifest… videre Deum, to see God manifestly: but the Lord answered him in effect, that, impossibile est homini videre Deum, it is impossible for man to see God. And Helias, after the mightie winde, earthquake, and fire, heard a soft and still voice, which signified the comming of Christ in the flesh, which should be, post illam legem, qua data est per Mosem mitis & tranquillus, &c. which should be mild and peaceable after that (rough) law, which was given by Moses, wherein hee should not breake a brused reed, nor quench the smoking flax: these were but similitudines claritatis Domini, & prophetiae futurorum, similitudes of the brightnesse of the Lord, and prophecies of things to come. So Ezechiel, in that heavenly vision, saw onelyonly the similitude of a throne, and the similitude of the Son of man upon it: and he saith, Hac visio similitudo gloria Domini; This is the vision of the similitude of the glorie of the Lord, Ezech. 1.28. So in the fierie oven wherein Shadrach, Mesach, and Abed…go were put, the fourth that was seene to walke with them, is said to be similis filio Dei, like to the Son of God, Dan. 4.24. And Dan. 7.23. it is said, As I beheld in visions by night, behold one like the Son of man came in the clouds of heaven; Out of these places Irenaus inferreth, that none of all these did see the divine nature and essence of God.
2. So also Chrysostom, Nec principatus, nec potestates in coelestibus noverunt Dei substantiam; non item Paulus, aut Ezechiel, atque Esaias; Neither the principalities,De incomprehensib. Dei natur. hom. 4. nor the powers in heaven have knowne the substance of God; no not Paul, Ezechiel, or Esaias, &c. and this he groundeth upon these words in the Gospell; No man hath seene God at any time: he addeth further, Tum ex his, quae Mosi denegat, &c. liquidum hoc habetur; and this further is evident by that which was denied unto Moses: Cum ille sensu oculorum Deum videre concupisceret, &c. when he desired to see God with the sense of his eyes.
3. Cyrillus doth gather as much upon the Lords answer to Moses; Ille ad Mosem clare dixit, Super Joan. lib. 1. cap. 12.quia nemo videbit faciem, &c. He said evidently to Moses, because no man shall see my face, and live.
4. Ambrose also saith: Irritus quidem erat postulationis affectus, sed affectus probabilis servi;In Psal. 119. His affectionate desire was frustrate, but yet it was a reasonable desire.
5. Hierom. also is in the same minde: Faciem Dei juxta naturae sua proprietatem nulla videt creatura;In Isaiam cap. 1. No creature can see the face of God in the propertie of his owne nature.
6. But whereas Iacob saith, I have seene God face to face, Gen. 32.30. which is here denied unto Moses; Thomas Aquinas well interpreteth that place, that whereas it is said, that Iacob saw God face to face,1 part. qu. 2. ar. 11. in Cor. Referendum est, non ad ipsam essentiam, sed ad figuram, in quo representabatur Deus; It must be referred not unto the essence of God, but unto that figure, wherein God was represented, &c. Otherwise it is not to be doubted, but that Moses saw more than Iacob did: and there is no question, but that this was the most cleere sensible vision of Gods glorie that is to be found in all the old Testament: for none of the Fathers saw the Lords back-parts, but only Moses; Oleast. yet neither Iacob there, nor Moses here saw the divine essence: Nunc majus aliquid & prastantius obtinet, non tamen ut Deum perfecte videat, &c. Moses obtained a more excellent thing than Iacob, yet not to see God perfectly, as he is in himselfe, but as the capacitie of humane nature was able to beare, Calvin.
7. Alcuinus giveth this reason, why Moses, when it is said the Lord spake with Moses face to face, saw not the divine essence: for then hee would not have said afterward, Ostende mihi teipsum;Lib. 2 de Trinitat. cap. 16. Shew me thy selfe, or thy glorie: Apparuit ergo ei Deus in ea specie qua voluerat, non ipse autem apparuit illi natura propria; God therefore appeared unto him in that manner, hee would not in his owne nature, &c.
8. Simlerus addeth further: hee saw onelyonly the back-parts of God, Non vidit igitur naturam & substantiam; Therefore he saw not his nature and substance. And whereas notwithstanding the Lord is said to have talked with Moses face to face, that is only to shew a difference betweene that cleere vision which Moses had, and other visions shewed to other Prophets, not so cleere, Simler.
9. Lyranus then here is deceived, who affirmeth, that though the vision or sight of the divine essence was not now granted to Moses; Tamen alias fuit concessa in vita praesenti; Yet it was granted at another time in this life present. But the reason here used by the Lord, that no man can see God and live, is generall excluding all men, while they live here, from the vision of Gods nature and essence. And as Tostatus reasoneth, Non videtur esse aliud tempus inconvenientius, &c. There seemeth no time to be more convenient for Moses to see Gods essence in, than this, when Moses made that request unto God, qu. 17. yet Tostatus likewise is deceived, who thinketh, that Moses at this time did see the divine essence.