8.  I am, however, at a loss to understand how our opponents with all their ingenuity can adduce the title of Godhead in proof of nature, as though they had never heard from Scripture that nature does not result from institution and appointment. χειροτονητή.  Moses was made ἐχειροτονήθη. a god of the Egyptians when the divine voice said, “See I have made thee a god to Pharaoh. Ex. vii. 1.  The title therefore does give proof of a certain authority of oversight or of action.  The divine nature, on the other hand, in all the words which are contrived, remains always inexplicable, as I always teach.  We have learnt that it is beneficent, judicial, righteous, good, and so on; and so have been taught differences of operations.  But we are, nevertheless, unable to understand the nature of the operator through our idea of the operations.  Let any one give an account of each one of these names, and of the actual nature to which they are applied, and it will be found that the definition will not in both cases be the same.  And where the definition is not identical the nature is different.  There is, then, a distinction to be observed between the essence, of which no explanatory term has yet been discovered, and the meaning of the names applied to it in reference to some operation or dignity.  That there should be no difference in the operations we infer from the community of terms.  But, we derive no clear proof of variation in nature, because, as has been said, identity of operations indicates community of nature.  If then Godhead be the name of an operation, we say that the Godhead is one, as there is one operation of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; if, however, as is popularly supposed, the name of Godhead indicates nature, then, since we find no variation in the nature, we reasonably define the Holy Trinity to be of one Godhead.