The
Trinity
Contents
1.
Introduction
In
this chapter we shall attempt to set forth in as clear language as
possible the
basic truths which the Church holds concerning the doctrine of the
Trinity. We
shall first present the Scripture evidence on which the doctrine rests
and then
we shall present the credal statemerits and formulations that have been
set
forth by church councils and by individual thinkers as they have
applied
themselves to the interpretation of that evidence through the two
thousand
years of the Christian era.
The
doctrine of the Trinity is perhaps the most mysterious and difficult
doctrine
that is presented to us in the entire range of Scripture. Consequently
we do
not presume to give a full explanation of it. In the nature of the case
we can
know only as much concerning the inner nature of the Godhead as has
been
revealed to us in the Scriptures. The tri-personality of God is
exclusively a
truth of revelation, and one which lies outside the realm of natural
reason. Its
height and depth and length and breadth are immeasurable by reason of
the fact
that the finite is dealing with the Infinite. As well might we expect
to
confine the ocean within a tea-cup as to place a full explanation of
the nature
of God within the limits of our feeble human minds. It is not our
purpose to
engage in metaphysical subtleties, nor to speculate on the implications
which
may be drawn from this doctrine. We do hope, however, that under the
guidance
of the Holy Spirit we shall be enabled to set forth in a plain simple
way, yet
as fully as the limitations of our finite minds and language will
permit, the
truth concerning it, and to guard it against the errors and heresies
which have
prevailed at one time or another in the history of the Church. While we
are not
able fully to comprehend the Divine mind, we nevertheless have been
created in
the image of God and therefore have the right, within limits, to
conceive of
God according to the analogy of our own nature, and we should be able
to grasp
enough of this sublime revelation which God has been pleased to give
concerning, Himself to make a considerable advance in our spiritual
growth. Since
in the study of this doctrine we are absolutely dependent on revelation
(there
being nothing else quite similar to or analogous with it in our own
consciousness or in the material world), and since the subject of our
study is
transcendently sacred, that subject being the innermost nature of the
infinitely
righteous and transcendent God, our attitude should be that of
disciples who,
with true humility and reverence, are ready to receive implicitly
whatever God
has seen fit to reveal.
Since
God is the Creator Preserver and final Disposer of all things, the One
in whom
we live and move and have our being, our knowledge of Him must be basic
and
fundamental to all our knowledge. In answer to the question, "What is
God?", the Scriptures reveal Him to us, in the first place, as a
rational
and righteous Spirit, infinite in His attributes of wisdom, being,
power,
holiness, justice, goodness, and truth; and in the second place they
reveal Him
to us as One who exists eternally as three "Persons", these three
Persons, however, being one in substance and existing in the most
perfect unity
of thought and purpose. It is evident, moreover, that if God does thus
exist in
three Persons, each of whom has His distinctive part in the works of
creation,
providence, redemption and grace, that fact governs His activity in all
spheres
of His work and, consequently, the doctrine which treats of the nature
of His
Person must seriously affect all true theology and philosophy.
Doctrines vital
to the Christian system, such as those of the Deity and Person of
Christ, the
Incarnation, the Atonement, etc., are so inextricably interwoven with
that of
the Tri-unity of God that they cannot be properly understood apart from
it.
We
should notice that the doctrine of the Trinity is the distinctive mark
of the
Christian religion, setting it apart from all the other religions of
the world.
Working without the benefit of the revelations made in Scripture, men
have, it
is true, arrived at some limited truths concerning the nature and
Person of
God. The pagan religions, as well as all philosophical speculations,
are based
on natural religion and can, therefore, rise to no higher conception
than that
of the unity of God. In some systems we find monotheism with its belief
in only
one God. In others we find polytheism with its belief in many separate
gods. But
none of the pagan religions, nor any of the systems of speculative
philosophy
have ever arrived at a trinitarian conception of God. The fact of the
matter is
that apart from supernatural revelation there is nothing in human
consciousness
or experience which can give man the slightest clue to the distinctive
God of
the Christian faith, the triune, incarnate, redeeming, sanctifying God.
Some of
the pagan religions have set forth triads of divinities, such as, for
instance,
the Egyptian triad of Osiris, Isis and Horus, which is somewhat
analogous to
the human family with father, mother and child; or the Hindu triad of
Brahma,
Vishnu and Schiva, which in the cycle of pantheistic evolution
personifies the
creative, preservative and destructive powers of nature; or the triad
set forth
by Plato, of goodness, intellect and will,-which are not examples of
true and
proper tri-personality, not real persons who can be addressed and
worshipped,
but only personifications of the faculties or attributes of God. None
of these
systems have anything in common with the Christian doctrine of the
Trinity
except the notion of "threeness".
Before
undertaking the more detailed study of the doctrine of the Trinity it
may be
well to remind ourselves that man's knowledge of God has been
progressive. The
most general revelation of the existence of God has been given through
nature
and is therefore common to all men. The existence of God is an
intuitive truth
universally accepted by the unprejudiced mind. Man knows himself to be
dependent and responsible, and therefore posits the One on whom he is
dependent
and to whom he is responsible. He attributes to this One in an eminent
degree
all of the good qualities which he finds in himself, and thus comes to
know God
as a personal Spirit, infinite, eternal, and perfect in His attributes.
The
Second stage in the revelation concerning the nature and attributes of
God was
that given through the Old Testament period. There a great advance is
made over
the revelation given through man's intuition and through nature, and
God is
disclosed as particularly the God of grace and the redeemer of sinners.
The
third stage, the one in which at present we are particularly
interested, is
that given in the New Testament in which God is represented as existing
in a
trinity of Persons, each of whom performs a distinctive part in the
works of
creation, providence, and redemption. As Dr. Warfield has pointed
out:
"The
elements of the plan of salvation are rooted in the mysterious nature
of the
Godhead, in which there coexists a trinal distinction of persons with
absolute
unity of essence; and the revelation of the Trinity was accordingly
incidental
to the execution of this plan of salvation, in which the Father sent
the Son to
be the propitiation for sin, and the Son, when He returned to the glory
which
He had with the Father before the world was, sent the Spirit to apply
His
redemption to men. The disclosure of this fundamental fact of the
divine
nature, therefore, lagged until the time had arrived for the actual
working out
of the long-promised redemption; and it was accomplished, first of all
in fact
rather than in word, by the actual appearance of God the Son on earth
and the
subsequent manifestations of the Spirit, who was sent forth to act as
His representative
in His absence."
(Studies in Theology, p. 113)
We
believe that the cosmological. teleological, ontological, and moral
arguments
for the existence of God are valid for any one with an open and
unprejudiced
mind. Perhaps they will not convince a rationalist or an atheist, but
at
present we are not particularly concerned with that class of persons.
That
theism alone is capable of solving the riddle of the universe is the
firm
conviction of present day scientific and philosophical thought as we
have it
set forth in the writings of the most outstanding leaders in these
fields, such
as Eddington, jeans, Millikan, Whitehead, Hocking, Brightman, etc. The
materialistic concept which held almost undisputed sway a few decades
ago has
been replaced with the idea that behind all that we see there is a
personal God
who is the Creator and Sustainer of the universe.
The
present writer assumes that his readers are convinced theists. Others
could
hardly be expected to have an interest in theology, much less to be
concerned
about the doctrine of the Trinity. The psalmist gave the divine
appraisal of
Atheism in the words, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no
God" (xiv. 1). As a recent writer has pointed out, Atheism is "the
very quintessence of absurdity, folly raised to the nth degree.
In view
of the manifold proofs of His power and wisdom on every hand, it is
hard to see
how any open mind can deny the existence of a Supreme Being who rules
over all.
To maintain that this far-flung universe is the result of an accidental
juxtaposition of atoms, a fortuitous confluence of cosmic forces, is a
hypothesis too nonsensical for refutation. As has been pointed out more
than
once, as well expect a million monkeys banging away on typewriters
accidentally
to produce a Paradise Lost. An atheistic explanation of the
origin of
the world (the sum total of all that is) calls for an immeasurably
greater
credulity than the tenets of Theism. If there be no God the
cosmos is a
hopeless riddle" (Dr. C. Norman Bartlett, The Triune God,
p. 36).
But
while it is so widely recognized that Theism alone offers an adequate
explanation of the universe, the fact remains that many theists who
firmly
believe in the existence of a personal God deny just as strongly that
there is
a plurality of persons in the Godhead as is set forth in the
trinitarian faith.
In the Christian doctrine of the Trinity they see only tritheism, or
some one
of the myriad varieties of polytheism which have been so common in both
ancient
and modern times. They look upon it as an absurdity or as a
contradiction of
terms, and are never tired of asserting that if God is one He cannot be
three. But
when we give more careful thought to the theistic problem we find that
the
absurdity and irrationality lie on their side of the fence, and that
the
conception of God as an eternally lonely, solitary person is utterly
out of the
question. And while we do not go so far as to say that the personality
of God
necessarily implies the doctrine of the Trinity, we do believe that the
personal traits of love, honour, fellowship, trust, sympathy. etc.,
cannot
flower forth in their full beauty and fragrance unless there are
objective
personal relationships, and that this is true of Deity as well as of
humanity.
The
theory that God is superpersonal is, of course, an absurdity. In the
nature of
the case Divine personality is an infinitely greater thing than human
personality ; but the only alternative to a personal God is an
impersonal God. And
when we assert that God is impersonal we assert the primary tenet of
atheism. If
God exists, lie must be personal. We cannot worship the Principle of
the
Absolute, nor hold communion with a Cosmic Power: and to assert that
God is
superpersonal is but to deceive ourselves with a high-sounding
phrase.
2.
Statement of the Doctrine
Assuming
that Theism is the accepted form of belief. and that God is personal,
we would
state the doctrine of the Trinity under the following heads:
1. THERE IS BUT ONE
LIVING
AND TRUE GOD
One
of the most common objections alleged against the doctrine of the
Trinity is
that it involves tritheism, or a belief in three Gods. The fact of the
matter,
however. is that it stand-, unalterably opposed to tritheism as well as
to
every other form of polytheism. Scripture, reason and conscience are in
perfect
agreement that there is but one self-existent, eternal, supreme Being
in whom
all of the divine attributes or perfections inhere and from whom they
cannot be
separated. That both the Old and the New Testament do teach the unity
of God is
clearly set forth in the following verses:
"
Hear, 0 Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah" (Deut. 6:4). "Thus
saith Jehovah, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, Jehovah of hosts:
I am the
first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God" (Isa. 44:6).
The
Decalogue, which is the foundation of the moral and religious code of
Christianity, as well as of Judaism, has as its first and greatest
commandment,
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Exod. 20:3). "I and
the Father are one," said Jesus (John 10:30). "Thou believest that
God is one; thou doest well" (Jas. 2:19). "We know that no idol is
anything in the world, and that there is no God but one" (I Cor. 8:4).
There
is but "one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all,
who
is over all, and through all, and in all" (Eph. 4:5, 6). "I am the
Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end"
(Rev. 22: 13). From Genesis to Revelation God is declared to be one.
That
the universe is a unit is the settled conclusion of modern science and
philosophy; and with this, of course, goes the corollary that the God
who
created it and who rules it is One. Astronomers tell us, for instance,
that the
same principles which govern in our solar system are also found in the
millions
of stars which are trillions of miles away. Physicists analyze the
light that
comes from the sun and from the distant stars and tell us that not only
are the
same elements, such as iron, carbon, oxygen, etc., which are found on
the earth
also found on them, Nit that these elements are found in practically
the same
proportion as here. From the law of gravitation we learn that every
material
object in the universe attracts every other material object with a
force which
is directly proportional to their masses and inversely, proportional to
the
square of the distance between their centers. Hence every grain of sand
in the
desert and on the sea-shore is linked up with every sun in the
universe. The
sluggish earth mounts upward to meet the falling snowflake. The
microscope
reveals marvels just as wonderful as those revealed by the telescope,
and
everywhere it is the same unified system.
Certainly
the Unitarians have no monopoly on the doctrine of the unity of God.
Trinitarians
hold this just as definitely. The unity of God is one of the basic
postulates
of theism, and no system can possibly be
true which teaches otherwise.
II. WHILE GOD IN HIS
INNERMOST NATURE IS ONE, HE, NEVERTHELESS, EXISTS AS THREE PERSONS
The
best concise definition of the doctrine of the Trinity, so far as we
are aware,
is that found in the Westminster Shorter Catechism: "There are three
persons within the Godhead; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost; and
these
three are one God, the same in substance. equal in power and glory." We
would prefer, however, to use the term "Spirit" rather than
"Ghost," since a ghost is commonly understood to be a spirit that
once had a body but lost it, and the Holy Spirit has never possessed a
body of
any kind.
We
have seen that the Scriptures teach that there is but one true and
living God. They
teach with equal clearness that this one God exists as three distinct
Persons,
as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit:
(a)
The Father is God: "To us there is one God, the Father, of whom are
all
things" (I Cor. 8:6). "Paul, an apostle . . . through Jesus Christ,
and God the Father" (Gal. 1: 1). "There is . . . one God and Father
of all" (Eph. 4:6). "At that season Jesus answered and said, I thank
thee, 0 Father, Lord of heaven and earth ... " (Matt. 11 :25). "For
him (the Son) the Father, even God. hath sealed" (John 6:27).
"According
to the foreknowledge of God the Father" (I Pet. 1:2). "That every
tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God
the
Father" (Phil. 2:11 ). "I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and
my God and your God" (John 20:17). "But the hour cometh, and now is,
when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth"
(John 4:23). Jesus prayed to God the Father (Mark 14:36; John 11:41;
17:11,
etc.).
(b)
The Son is God: "Christ ... who is over all, God blessed for ever"
(Rom. 9:5). "For in Him (Christ) dwelleth all the fulness of the
Godhead
bodily" (Col. 2:9). "Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and
my God" (John 20:28). "1 and the Father are one" (John 10:30).
"Looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of the great
God
and our Saviour Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13). "Thou art the Christ, the
Son of the living God" (Matt. 16:16). Christ assumed power over the
Sabbath, and "called God His own Father, making Himself equal with
God" (John 5:18). He assumed the prerogatives of God in forgiving sins
(Mark 2:5). "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,
and
the Word was God" (John 1:1).
The
attributes which can be ascribed only to God are ascribed to Christ:
Holiness-"Thou art the Holy One of God" (John 6:69) ; "Him who
knew no sin," (II Cor. 5:21) ; "Which of you convicteth me of sin?"
(John 8:46) ; "Holy, guileless, undefiled, separate from sinners"
(Heb. 7:26). Eternity-"In the beginning was the Word" (John 1:1) ;
"Before Abraham was born, I am" (John 8:58) ; "But of the Son he
saith, Thy throne 0 God, is forever and ever" (Heb. I : 8) ; "The
glory which I had with thee before the world was" (John 17:5). Life -
"In Him was life" (John 1:4) ; "I am the way, and the truth, and
the life: no one cometh unto the Father but by me" (John 14:6) ; "I
am the resurrection and the life" (John 11:25). Immutability-"Jesus
Christ is the same yesterday and to-day, yea and for ever" (Heb. 13:8),
"They (the heavens) shall perish; but thou continuest.... They shall be
changed: but thou art the same" (Heb. I : 11, 12). Omnipotence-"All
authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth" (Matt. 28:18)
;
"The Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come. the Almighty"
(Rev, 1:8). Omniscience-"Thou knowest all things" (John 16:30) ;
"Jesus knowing their thoughts" (Matt. 9:4) ; "Jesus knew from
the beginning who they were that believed not, and who it was that
should
betray Him"(John 6:64) ; "In whom are all the treasures of wisdom and
knowledge hidden" (Col. 2:3). Omnipresence-" I am with you
always" (Matt. 28:20) ; "The fulness of him that filleth all in
all" (Eph. 1:23). Creation-"All things were made through him; and
without him was not anything made that hath been made" (John 1 :3) ;
"The world was made through him" (John 1:10) ; "For in him were
all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible
and
things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or
powers; all
things have been created through him, and unto him; and he is before
all
things, and in him all things consist" (Col. 1 :16, 17) ; "Upholding
all
things by the word of his power" (Heb. 1:3). Raising the dead-"And he
(God the Father) gave him (Christ the Son) authority to execute
judgment ...
for the hour cometh in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his
voice,
and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection
of life;
and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment" (John
5:27-29). judgment of all men--"But when the Son of man shall come in
his
glory, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit on the throne of
his
glory: and before him shall be gathered all the nations: and he shall
separate
them one from another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the
goats; and
he shall set the sheep on his right hand, and the goats on the left.
Then shall
the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my
Father,
inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
. . . And
he shall say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye
cursed, into
the eternal fire, which is prepared for the devil and his angels....
And these
shall go away into eternal punishment: but the righteous into eternal
life" (Matt. 25:31-46). Prayer and worship are to be directed to
Christ-"If ye shall ask anything in my name, that will I do" (John
14:14) ; "He was parted from them, and was carried up into heaven. And
they worshipped him" (Luke 24:51, 52) ; "Stephen, calling upon the
Lord, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" (Acts 7:59) ; all are
to
"honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the
Son honoreth not the Father that sent him" (John 5:23) ; Believe on the
Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved" (Acts 16:31) ; "Let all the
angels of God worship him" (Heb. 1 :6) ; "That in the name of Jesus
every knee should bow ... and that every tongue should confess that
Jesus
Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Phil. 2:10, 11) ;
"Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" (II Pet. 3:18) ; "Jesus
Christ, to whom be the glory for ever and ever" (Heb. 13:21; and when
we
compare these verses with statements such as we have in Isaiah, "Look
unto
me and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there
is none
else" (45:22), and Jeremiah, "Thus saith Jehovah, Cursed is the man
that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arm" (17:5), we are faced
with
this dilemma: either the Christian doctrine of the Trinity must be
true, or the
Scriptures are self-contradictory; either the Scriptures recognize more
Gods
than one, or Christ, together with the Father and the Holy Spirit is
that one God.
All
of these ascriptions of holiness, eternity, life, immutability,
omnipotence,
omniscience, omnipresence, creation, providence, raising the dead,
judgment of
all men, prayer and worship due to Christ, most clearly teach His
Deity. Such
attitudes of mind if directed toward a creature would be idolatrous.
(c)
The Holy Spirit is God: "Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled
thy
heart to lie to the Holy Spirit? . . . Thou has not lied unto men, but
unto
God" (Acts 5:3,4) ; "For who among men knoweth the things of a man,
save the spirit of the man, which is in him? even so the things of God
none
knoweth, save the Spirit of God" (I Cor. 2:11) ; "But when the
Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the
Spirit of
truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall bear witness of me"
(John 15:26). In the Baptismal Formula, "Go ye therefore, and make
disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of
the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19), and in the Apostolic
Benediction, "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God,
and
the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all" (11 Cor. 13:14), the
Holy Spirit is placed on a plane of absolute equality with the Father
and the Son
as Deity and is regarded equally with them as the source of all power
and
blessing.
There
are many, even among professedly Christian people. who have no higher
conception of the Holy Spirit than that of an impersonal, mysterious,
supernatural power or influence of God. It is true that in the Old
Testament,
where the emphasis was upon the unity of God, the references to the
Spirit,
while not incapable of being applied to a distinct person, were more
generally
understood to designate simply God's power or influence. But in the
more
advanced revelation of the New Testament the distinct personality of
the Holy
Spirit is clearly seen. No longer can He be looked upon as merely a
divine
power or influence, but as a divine Person. Some people, even among
those in
the Christian Churches, because they are very thoughtless, speak of the
Holy
Spirit as it, when a little reflection would show them that the proper
term is He
or Him.
That
the Holy Spirit is a Person is clearly taught in the following verses:
"The Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this
chariot" (Acts 8:29). "The Spirit said unto him (Peter), Behold,
three men seek thee. But arise, and get thee down. go with them.
nothing
doubting: for I have sent them" (Acts 10:19, 20). "The Holy Spirit
said, separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have
called
them" (Acts 13:2). "The Holy Spirit shall teach you in that very hour
what ye ought to say" (Luke 12:12). "When lie, the Spirit of truth,
is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak
from himself ; but what things
soever he shall hear, these shall he speak: and he shall declare unto
you the
things that are to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall take of
mine, and
shall declare it unto you" (John 16:13, 14). "And I will pray the
Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may be with
you for
ever, even the Spirit of truth: whom the world cannot receive; for it
beholdeth
him not. neither knoweth him: ye know him; for he abideth with you, and
shall
be in you" (John 14:16, 17),-here the Holy Spirit is called a
"Comforter" (marginal reference Advocate), that is, one called to
stand by our side as our Guide, Teacher, Instructor, Sponsor; and in
the nature
of the case, therefore, He must be a Person. In a parallel passage
Christ is
similarly spoken of,-"We have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ
the righteous" (I John 2:1 ) "The spirit I Himself maketh
intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered" (Rom.
8:26). "Grieve
not the Holy Spirit of God" (Eph. 4:30). "He that hath an ear, let
him bear what the Spirit saith to the churches" (Rev. 2:17). "Every
sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against
the
Spirit shall not be forgiven. And whosoever shall speak a word against
the Son
of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever shall speak against the
Holy
Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in
that which
is to come (Matt. 12:31, 32)-the language here used implies that it is
impossible to commit a sin against a more divine personage than the
Holy
Spirit, that of all possible sins the sin against the Holy Spirit is
the worst,
both in its nature and consequences, and thus implies His eternal
dignity and
Deity.
Words
which in the Old Testament are ascribed to God are in the New Testament
more
specifically said to have been spoken by the Holy Spirit,-compare Jer.
31 :33,
34 with Heb. 10: 15-17, Ps. 9 -,:7-11 with Heb. 3:711 ; Isa. 6:9, 10
with Acts
28:25-28. In the Old Testament we read that the Holy Spirit brought
order out
of the primeval chaos (Gen. 1 :2) ; and He strove to lead the
ante-diluvians in
the ways of righteousness (Gen. 6:3) ; He equipped certain men to
become
prophets (Num. 11 :26, 29) ; He instructed the Israelites as a people
(Neh.
9:20) ; He came upon Isaiah and equipped him to be a prophet (61 : 1 ),
and
caused Ezekiel to go and preach to those of the captivity (3 :12, 15 ).
In the
New Testament the miracle of the virgin birth of Christ was wrought
through His
power (Luke 1 ;35) ; He descended on Jesus at the baptism and equipped
Him for
the public ministry (Matt. 3:16) ; He was promised as a Comforter and
Teacher
to the disciples (John 16:7-13) ; He came upon the disciples on the day
of
Pentecost and equipped them to be world missionaries (Acts 2:1-42) ; He
kept
Paul from going in one direction and sent him in another (Acts 16:6-10)
; He
equips different individuals with different gifts and talents (I Cor.
12:4-31)
; He performs the supernatural work of regenerating the souls of men
(Titus
3:5, John 3:5) ; He inspired the prophets and apostles so that what
they spoke
or wrote in God's name was truly His word to the people (II Pet. 1 :20,
21) ;
in the works of regeneration and sanctification He applies to the heart
of each
of the Lord's people the objective redemption which was wrought out by
Christ,
and in general He directs the affairs of the advancing Church. He is
thus set
forth as the Author of order and beauty in the physical world, and of
faith and
holiness in the spiritual world.
Throughout
the Scriptures the Holy Spirit is thus set forth as a distinct Person,
with a
mind, will and power of His own. Baptism is administered in His name.
He is
constantly associated with two other Persons, the Father and the Son,
whose
distinct personalities are recognized,-a phenomenon which could lead
only to
confusion if He too were not a distinct Person. The personal pronouns,
"He," "Him," "I," and "Me," are applied
to Him, pronouns which can be used intelligently only when applied to a
person.
They occur so repeatedly through the prose narratives and cannot be set
aside
as a tendency to personify an impersonal force. That two and two make
four does
not appear more clear and conclusive than that the Holy Spirit is a
living
Agent, working with consciousness, will and power.
After
the personality of the Holy Spirit is established there are but few who
will
deny His Deity. It is certain that He is not a creature, and
consequently those
who admit His personality accept His Deity readily enough. Most of the
heretical sects that have maintained that Christ was a mere man have,
in
accordance with that, maintained that the Spirit was only a power or
influence.
This was the opinion held by the Gnostics and Socinians, as well as
that held
by present-day Unitarians and rationalists.
That
there should be any doubt at all concerning the personality of the
Spirit may
seem strange; and yet, as Dr. A. H. Strong has pointed out:
"It is noticeable that
in Scripture there is no
obtrusion of the Holy Spirit's personality, as if He (the One who
inspired the
prophets as they wrote) desired to draw attention- to Himself. The Holy
Spirit
shows not Himself, but Christ Like John the Baptist, He is a mere
voice, and so
an example to Christian preachers, who are themselves 'made . . .
sufficient as
ministers . . . of the spirit' (11 Cor.3:6). His leading is therefore
often
unperceived; He so joins Himself to us that we infer His presence only
from the
new and holy exercises of our own minds; He continues to work in us
even when
His presence is ignored and His purity is outraged by our sins"
(Systematic Theology, p. 324).
III THE TERMS "FATHER
"SON" AND "HOLY SPIRIT" DESIGNATE DISTINCT PERSONS WHO ARE OBJECTIVE
TO EACH OTHER
The
terms Father, Son and Spirit do not merely designate the different
relations
which God assumes toward His creatures. They are not analogous to the
terms
Creator, Preserver and Benefactor, which do express such relations, but
are the
proper names of different subjects who are distinct from one another as
one
person is distinct from another. That this is true is clear from the
following
personal relations which they bear toward each other:
(a)
They mutually use the pronouns I, thou, he and him when speaking to or
of each
other. "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye
him" (Matt. 17:5). "Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that
the Son may glorify thee" (John 17:1). "1 came out from the Father,
and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go unto the
Father" (John 16:28). "When he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he
shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from
himself: but
what things soever he shall hear, these shall he speak: and he shall
declare
unto you the things that are to come" (John 16:13).
(b)
The Father loves the Son, and the Son loves the Father. The Spirit
glorifies
the Son. "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his
hand" (John 3:35). "I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide
in his love" (John 15:10). "He (the Holy Spirit) shall glorify me;
for he shall take of mine, and shall declare it unto you" (John 16:14).
(c)
The Son prays to the Father. "And now, Father, glorify thou me with
thine
own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was"
(John
17:5). "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another
Comforter, that he may be with you for ever" (John 14:16).
(d)
The Father sends the Son, and the Father and the Son send the Holy
Spirit who
acts as their Agent. "He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that
receiveth me receiveth him that sent me" (Matt. 10:40). "As thou
didst send me into the world" (John 17:18). "And this is life
eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom
thou didst
send, even Jesus Christ (John 17:3). "But the Comforter, even the Holy
Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all
things,
and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you" (John 14:26).
"It
is expedient for you that I go away ; for if I go not away, the
Comforter will
not come unto you; but if I go, I will send him unto you" (John 16:7).
Thus
we see that the Persons within the Godhead are so distinct that each
can
address the others, each can love the others, the Father sends the Son,
the
Father and the Son send the Spirit, the Son prays to the Father, and we
can
pray to each of them. They act and are acted upon as subject and
object, and
each has a particular work to perform. We say they are distinct
persons, for a
person is one who can say I, who can be addressed as thou, and who can
act and
be the object of action.
The
doctrine of the Trinity, then, is but the synthesis of these facts.
When we
have said these three things,-that there is but one God, that the
Father and
the Son and the Spirit is each God, and that the Father and the Son and
the
Spirit is each a distinct Person,-we have enunciated the doctrine of
the
Trinity in its fulness. This is the form in which it is found in the
Scriptures, and it is also the form in which it has entered into the
faith of
the Church.
3.
Further Scripture Proof
While
there is no single passage in Scripture which sets forth the doctrine
of the
Trinity in formal, credal statement, there are numerous passages in
which the
three Persons are mentioned in such a manner as to exhibit at once
their unity
and their distinctness. Most important of these is the Great Commission
given
in Matthew 28:19, in which baptism is commanded "in the name of the
Father
and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." In this, the initiatory rite of
the Christian religion, the doctrine of the Trinity is purposely set
forth in
such a manner as to keel) it before the minds of the people as a
cardinal
doctrine of the faith. "What we witness here," says Dr. Warfield,
"is the authoritative announcement of the Trinity as the God of
Christianity by its Founder, in one of the most solemn of His recorded
declarations. Israel had worshipped the one only true God under the
Name of
Jehovah ; Christians are to worship the same one only and true God
under the
Name of 'the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.' This is the
distinguishing characteristic of Christians ; and that is as much as to
say
that the doctrine of the Trinity is, according to our Lord's own
apprehension
of it, the distinctive mark of the religion which He founded." (Biblical
Doctrines, p. 155).
The Apostolic
Benediction -
"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ,and the love of God, and the
communion
of the Holy Spirit, be with you all" (II Cor. 13:14), which is a prayer
addressed to Christ for His grace, to the Father for His love, and to
the Holy
Spirit for His fellowship-is designed to serve the same purpose. In
this
formula, as in that of baptism, the divinity, and consequently the
equality, of
each of the persons in the Godhead is taken for granted; and no other
interpretation is rationally possible except that which the Church has
held down
through the ages, namely, that God exists in three Persons and that
these three
are one in substance, equal in power and glory.
In
the account of our Lord's baptism we find as clear teaching concerning
the
reality of the Trinity as any one can reasonably ask for, -Christ the
Son stood
there in human form and was visible to all the people, the voice of God
the
Father spoke from heaven, saying, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am
well pleased," and the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Christ was seen
as
that of a dove (Matt. 3:16, 17).
In
the announcement of the birth of Jesus three divine Persons came into
view:
"And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come
upon
thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee: wherefore
also the
holy thing which is begotten shall be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35).
Here we read of the coming of the Holy Spirit, of the power of the
Most
High, and are told that the Child is to be known as the Son of God.
Also, in
the parallel account of Matthew 1 :18-23 the three persons of
the
Trinity are named.
The
distinction between the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is
announced by
Jesus when He says: "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send
unto
you from the Father, He shall bear witness of me" (John 15:26).
In
the final discourse and prayer (John, chs. 14-17), Christ spoke to and
of the
Father and promised to send another Comforter, the Holy Spirit, who
would
guide, teach, and inspire the-disciples. Here again the personality and
Deity
of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are recognized with special
clearness.
The
teaching of Jesus is, of course, trinitarian throughout. In
accordance with
the Hebrew idea of sonship,-that whatever the father is, that the son
is
also,-He claimed to be the Son of God Matt. 9:27; 24:36; Mark 8:31;
Luke 10:22;
John 9:35-37; 11:4) ; and the Jews, with exact appreciation of His
meaning,
understood Him to claim that He was "equal with God" (John 5:18), or,
to put it more briefly, they understood Him to claim that He was
"God" (John 10:33). He claims that He knows the Father and that the
Father knows Him with perfect mutual knowledge: "All things have been
delivered unto me of my Father: and no one knoweth who the Son is, save
the
Father; and who the Father is, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the
Son
willeth to reveal him" (Luke 10:22; also Matt. 11:27). The title,
"Son of God," in such a sense that it involves absolute community
with God the Father in knowledge and power, is attributed to Him and
accepted
by Him ( ' Matt. 8:29; 14:33; 27:40, 43, 54; Mark 3:11; Luke 4:41;
22:70; John
1:34, 49; 11:27). But while He thus asserts that His eternal home is in
the
depths of the Divine Being, He sets forth in equally clear language His
distinctness from the Father: "Jesus said unto them, If God were your
Father, ye would love me: for I came forth and am come from God; for
neither
have I come of myself, but he sent me" (John 8:42). And to His
disciples
He said: "In that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you,
that I will pray the Father for you; for the Father himself loveth you,
because
ye have loved me, and have believed that I came forth from the Father.
I came
out from the Father, and am come into the world; again, I leave the
world, and
go unto the Father" (John 16:26-28).
Hence
our primary reason for believing the doctrine of the Trinity is, as we
have
stated elsewhere, not because of any general tendency of human thinking
to go
in that direction, nor because of any analogies in nature, but only
because it
is a clearly revealed doctrine of the Bible. For those who accept the
authority
of the Scriptures the evidence is conclusive. We do not here attempt to
argue
with those who deny that authority, but refer them to the Christian
doctrine of
the Inspiration of the Scriptures. Unless we are agreed that the
Scriptures are
an authoritative revelation from God, it is useless to argue over the
doctrine
of the Trinity. The Christian finds the proofs for the trustworthiness
of the
Bible so convincing that he is compelled to accept its teaching
concerning the
Trinity even though his finite mind is not able to comprehend its full
meaning.
Yet
while it is true that the evidence for the doctrine of the Trinity is
found in
the Bible, it is also true that, as in the case of the other doctrines
in the
Christian system, there is no place where this doctrine is set forth in
a
complete and systematic form. The different elements of the doctrine,
such as
the unity of God, the true and equal Deity of the Father, Son and Holy
Spirit,
their distinct personality, the relationship which they bear to each
other, to
the Church, and to the world, etc., while expressed most clearly in the
New
Testament are found scattered through all parts of the Bible from the
first
chapter of Genesis to the last of Revelation. It is only by proving
these
elements separately, as we have attempted to do, that the truth of the
whole
doctrine is most satisfactorily brought out. The doctrine is given in
Scripture, not in formulated definition, but in fragmentary allusions;
and it
is only as we assemble the disjecta membra into their organic
unity that
we are able to grasp its true meaning. It lies in Scripture as it were
in
solution, and comes into clear view only when it is crystallized out
from its
solvent. The Bible is not a work on Systematic Theology, but only the
quarry
out of which the stone for such a temple can be obtained. Instead of
giving us
a formal statement of a theological system it gives us a mass of raw
materials
which are to be organized and systematized and worked up into their
organic
relations. Nowhere, for instance, do we find a formal statement of the
doctrine
of the Inspiration of the Scriptures, or of the sovereignty of God, or
of the
Person of Christ. The Bible gives us an account of the creation of the
world
and of man, of the entrance of sin, and of God's purpose to redeeem man
from
sin. It tells particularly of God's merciful dealings with one group of
people,
the Israelites, and of the founding of Christianity ; and the doctrinal
facts
are given with but little regard to their logical relations. These
doctrinal
facts therefore need to be classified and arranged into a logical
system and
thus transformed into theology. That the material in the Bible is not
arranged
in a theological system is in accordance with God's procedure in other
realms. He
has not given us a fully developed system of biology, astronomy,
economics, or
politics. We simply find the unorganized facts in nature and
experience, and
are left to develop them into a system as best we may, And since the
doctrines
are not thus presented in a systematic and formal way it is, of course,
much
easier for varied and false interpretations to arise.
That
even in the New Testament the doctrine of the Trinity is not set forth
with
anything even approaching systematic treatment, but rather in the form
of
incidental allusions, may occasion some surprise. But while not
presenting the
doctrine with argumentative reasoning, nor in creedal statements, the
New
Testament everywhere assumes it, and the unstudied naturalness and
simplicity
with which it is given makes it all the more impressive and
illuminating. We
find not merely a text here and there, but such a wealth of trinitarian
implications that. as Dr. Bartlett says: "They blossom forth everywhere
in
such profusion that the reverent and unprejudiced reader seeking light
upon
this subject is troubled, not by a paucity of proof texts, but by an
embarrassment of riches." (The Triune God, p. 22).
Dr.
Warfield points out that the whole book is saturated with
Trinitarianism:
"Jesus
Christ and the Holy Spirit are the fundamental proof of the doctrine of
the
Trinity. This is as much as to say that all the evidence of whatever
kind, and
from whatever source derived, that Jesus Christ is God manifested in
the flesh,
and that the Holy Spirit is a Divine Person, is just so much evidence
for the
doctrine of the Trinity; and when we go to the New Testament for
evidence of the
Trinity we are to seek it, not merely in the scattered allusions to the
Trinity
as such, numerous and instructive as they are, but primarily in the
whole mass
of evidence which the New Testament provides of the Deity of Christ and
the
Divine personality of the Holy Spirit. When we have said this, we have
said in
effect that the whole mass of the New Testament is evidence for the
Trinity. For
the New Testament is saturated with evidence of the Deity of Christ and
the
Divine personality of the Holy Spirit" (Biblical Doctrines, p. 146).
That
a doctrine which to us is so difficult should, even in the hands of a
people
who had become fiercely monotheistic, take its place silently and
imperceptibly
among accepted Christian truths without struggle and without
controversy, is
certainly one of the most remarkable phenomena in the history of human
thought.
We have not far to seek, however, for the explanation. Marvellous
developments
had taken place between the closing of the Old Testament and the
opening of the
New. To quote Dr. Warfield again:
"It
may carry us a little way to remark, as it has been customary to remark
since
the time of Gregory of Nazianzus, that it was the task of the Old
Testament
revelation to fix firmly in the minds and hearts of the people of God
the great
fundamental truth of the unity of the Godhead; and it would have been
dangerous
to speak to them of the plurality within this unity until this task had
been
fully accomplished. The real reason for the delay in the revelation of
the
Trinity, however, is grounded in the secular development of the
redemptive
purpose of God; the times were not ripe for the revelation of the
Trinity in
the unity of the Godhead until the fulness of the time had come for God
to send
forth His Son unto redemption, and His Spirit unto sanctification. The
revelation in word must needs wait upon the revelation in fact, to
which it
brings its necessary explanation, no doubt, but from which it derives
its own
entire significance and value. The revelation of a Trinity in the
Divine unity
as a mere abstract truth without relation to manifested fact, and
without
significance to the development of the kingdom of God, would have been
foreign
to the whole method of the Divine procedure as it lies exposed to us in
the
pages of Scripture" (Biblical
Doctrines, p. 145).
The
revelation that God exists in three Persons, as Father, Son and Holy
Spirit,
is, in fact, the only basis on which the Christian doctrine of
redemption can
be intelligently set forth. Hence the revelation concerning the
plurality of
Persons in the Godhead is not given for the mere purpose of presenting
something which shall be puzzling and inscrutable to human minds, but
as a
necessary step in the much fuller revelation concerning the plan of
salvation. The
incarnation of God the Son and the outpouring of God the Holy Spirit at
Pentecost marked two tremendous advances in the divine plan. The
revelation of
the Trinity was incidental to the fuller development of the plan of
salvation,
and at the time of the writing of the New Testament books the doctrine
was
already the common property of Christian believers. Hence in speaking
and
writing to one another they assumed this common trinitarian
consciousness
rather than instructed one another about something concerning which
there was
no disagreement, and the result is that we find the doctrine everywhere
pre-supposed, presented in the form of allusion rather than in express
teaching.
4. The
Trinity in the Old Testament
In
regard to all of the great doctrines of the Bible we find that
revelation has
been progressive. What is only intimated at first is set forth clearly
and
fully as time goes on. The obscure hint in the Old Testament is found
to
coincide perfectly with the fuller revelations in the New. As with our
physical
eyesight God does not cause the sun to rise with a sudden flash, lest
such
strong and glorious light should blind us, so He has also borne with
our
immature spiritual eyesight; He did not at first manifest Himself in
the
wonderful personality of the Messiah, the sun of Righteousness, and in
the
personality of the Holy Spirit, but revealed Himself gradually, precept
upon
precept, line upon line, here a little, there a little, until our
understanding
was prepared to receive the whole truth. Since the doctrine of the
Trinity is
one which arises out of the completed redemption as it is presented to
us in
the New Testament and cannot be intelligently comprehended apart from
that
redemption, we should not expect to find it set forth with any
clearness in the
Old Testament. And yet, if the doctrine is a vital and necessary part
of the
Christian system we would expect that at least some foregleams or
intimations
of it might be given. And this we find actually to be the case.
"The
Old Testament," says Dr. Warfield, "may be likened to a chamber
richly furnished but dimly lighted; the introduction of light brings
into it
nothing which was not in it before; but it brings out into clearer view
much of
what is in it but only dimly or even not at all perceived before. The
mystery
of the Trinity is not revealed in the Old Testament; but the mystery of
the
Trinity underlies the Old Testament revelation, and here and there
almost comes
into view. Thus the Old Testament revelation of God is not corrected by
the
fuller revelation which follows it, but only perfected, extended and
enlarged" (Biblical Doctrines, p.
142).
The
orderly, progressive way in which these doctrines are revealed, through
the
successive writings in the sixty-six books and over a period of
approximately
fifteen hundred years, is one of the strongest arguments for the Divine
origin
of the Bible. As all that is in the full grown tree was potentially in
the
seed, so we find that the clearly revealed doctrines of the New
Testament were
given in rudimentary form in the earliest chapters of Genesis. This is
true of
doctrines such as those of redemption, the Person and work of the
Messiah, the
nature of the Holy Spirit, and the future life. But in regard to no
other
doctrine is this more true than in regard to that of the Trinity.
Indirect
allusions to the Trinity were permitted by the Holy Spirit who presided
over
the writing of the books, but there is no reason to believe that the
truth was
apprehended in any adequate way even by the prophets themselves. The
doctrine
itself was veiled and held in reserve until the accompanying work of
Christ in
redemption made it intelligible to the human mind.
Hence
the Old Testament emphasizes the unity of God and special care is taken
not to
aggravate the constant tendency of Israel toward polytheism. A
premature
revelation of the Trinity might have been a hindrance to religious
progress;
for the race then, like the child now, needed to learn the unity of God
before
it could profitably be taught the Trinity. Otherwise it might have
fallen into
tritheism. Abraham in Chaldea, and the Israelites in Egypt and later in
Palestine, needed to be guarded against the almost universal urge
toward
polytheism. The first and greatest commandment of the Decalogue was
directed
against polytheism, and the second and next most important was directed
against
idolatry with its strong tendency toward polytheism. For centuries this
was
drilled into the consciousness of Israel and established as a primal
truth; then
at long last a new day dawned, the Messiah came personally to live
among and
instruct His people, and the Holy Spirit was manifested in power in the
early
Church. The Church was then ready for the further truth that while God
is One,
He, nevertheless, exists as three Persons. Even after the New Testament
revelation men have found it extremely difficult to state the doctrine
of the
Trinity without verging on Tritheism on the one hand, or Modalism or
Unitarianism on the other.
PLURAL NAMES AND
PRONOUNS
In
the very first chapter of Genesis, as well as in many other places, we
find
that the names of God are in the plural, Elohim, also Adonai;
and
with these plural forms of the divine name singular verbs and
adjectives are
usually joined,-a remarkable phenomenon in view of the fact that the
Hebrew
language also contained the singular term El, meaning God.
Along with
the plural name, God sometimes uses plural pronouns in referring to
Himself:
"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen. 1:26, 27) ;
"And Jehovah God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know
good and evil" (spoken of Adam after the fall) (Gen. 3:22) ; "Come,
let us go down, and there confound their language" (at the tower of
Babel)
(Gen. 11:7) ; "And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I
send, and who will go for us?" (Isa. 6:8). In these verses we have
counsel
within the Trinity, God speaking with Himself. He is not taking counsel
with,
nor asking advice of, the angels, as some have suggested; for the
angels are
not His counsellors, but His servants, and, like man, infinitely below
Him in
knowledge. In the Divine nature itself, the Bible teaches us, is to be
found
that plurality of personal powers which polytheism separated and sought
to
worship in isolation.
The
words of Moses which are so often quoted by the Jews today, "Hear, 0
Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah" (Deut. 6:4), are in the English
translation an unmeaning repetition of words, but in the original
Hebrew they
contain much sound instruction. "Jehovah our Elohim is one Jehovah"
the word Elohim being plural shows that God the Lord, in covenant
engagement
and manner of existence, is more than one, yet is "one Jehovah" as
regards essence of being.
THE ANGEL OF JEHOVAH
Very
important is the fact that, beginning with the book of Genesis and
continuing
with ever-increasing clearness throughout the remainder of the Old
Testament,
we find a distinction made between Jehovah and the Angel of Jehovah who
presents Himself as one in essence with Jehovah yet distinct from Him.
Such an
event, in which God assumes the form of an angel or of a man in order
to speak
visibly and audibly to man, is commonly known as a "theophany." As
the revelation is unfolded by the procession of the prophets we find
that
divine titles and divine worship are given to this Angel and accepted
by Him,
that He is revealed as an eternal Being, the Mighty God, the Prince of
peace,
the Adonai, the Lord of David, that He is to be born of a virgin, that
He will
be despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with
grief,
that He will bear the sin of many, and that he will, above all, set up
the
kingdom of righteousness which is to increase until it fills the whole
earth. These
prophecies, as the New Testament makes clear, were fulfilled in Christ,
the
second Person of the Trinity, who in His Divine-human capacity wrought
redemption for His people and who is to rule until all enemies have
been placed
under His feet.
In
Genesis 16:7-13 we have an account of a theophany in which the Angel of
Jehovah
appeared to Hagar out in the wilderness, commanded her to return to her
mistress, and promised that He would multiply her seed exceedingly. Now
it is
clear that no created angel, speaking in his own name, could have
claimed such
authority. Here we are face to face with God Himself under a different
manifestation; and Hagar, realizing this great truth, "called the name
of
Jehovah that spake unto tier, Thou art a God that seeth: for she said,
Have I
even here looked after him that seeth me?"
In
Genesis 18:1-19:29 we have a remarkable revelation of God to Abraham
with the
idea of the Trinity in the background. There we read: "And Jehovah
appeared unto him by the oaks of Mamre . . . and he looked, and, to,
three men
stood over against him ... and when he saw them . . . he bowed himself
to the
earth, and said, My Lord (not lords), If now I have found favour in thy
sight
... And they said unto him, Where is Sarah thy wife? And he said,
Behold, in
the tent. And he (Jehovah) said, I will certainly return unto thee when
the
season cometh round; and, to, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And
Sarah heard
in the tent door, which was behind him. Now Abraham and Sarah were old,
and
well stricken in age.... And Sarah laughed within herself . . . . And
Jehovah
said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh? . . . Is anything too
hard for
Jehovah?" Although the visitors appear as three men, that is, three
persons, Abraham addresses them in the singular, and throughout this
passage
the singular references to Jehovah and the plural references to the
three men
are used interchangeably. And after the two "men" had gone on toward
Sodom, Jehovah still stands before Abraham who pleads with Him to spare
the
city. Yet when the two men appear before Lot in Sodom it is Jehovah who
speaks
to him. "And he (Jehovah) said, Escape for thy life . . . And Lot said
unto them (plural) . . . Let me escape thither (to Zoar) . . . . And he
(Jehovah) said, See, I have accepted thee concerning this thing also,
that I
will not overthrow the city of which thou hast spoken." In other words,
Jehovah who appeared to Abraham and the three men that Abraham saw
apparently
were the same, and Jehovah who appeared to Lot and the two men that Lot
saw
apparently were the same.
In
Genesis 22:1-19 we have references to God and also to one who is "the
angel of Jehovah." In verse 2 God commands Abraham: "Take now thy son
. . . and offer him there for a burnt offering," while in verse 12 the
Angel of Jehovah retracts and nulllifies the command of God, with the
words:
"Lay not thy hand upon the lad." In verses 15-18 this angel of
Jehovah swears by Himself as Jehovah, saying that He is Jehovah, and
gives
Abraham the promise of threefold blessing.
In
Genesis 32:22-32 Jehovah appeared to Jacob under the guise of a
mysterious
person who wrestled with him all the night. In the morning Jacob
realized that
he had been face to face with God, and asked for His blessing. He
called the
name of the place "Peniel," "for," said he, "I have
seen God face to face."
The
Angel of Jehovah appeared to Moses in the burning bush and commissioned
him to
go back to Egypt and deliver the Israelites. He gave Moses the promise
that He
would be with them and that He would lead them out (Exod. 3:1-22). In
this
passage the terms "God" and "Angel of Jehovah" are used
interchangeably. A little later God talked with Moses on Mount Sinai
and gave
him the Ten Commandments. In the New Testament Stephen tells us that it
was the
Angel who spoke to Moses on the Mount (Acts 7:38), and Paul tells us
specifically that Christ was the spiritual "rock" which followed the
Israelites throughout their wilderness journey (I Cor. 10:4).
In
Ex. 23:20-23 God, speaking through Moses, promises to send His Angel
before the
children of Israel to keep them and to bring them into the promised
land. In
regard to this Angel they were especially warned: "Take ye heed before
him, and hearken unto his voice; provoke him not; for he will not
pardon your
transgression: for my name is in him." Here we find that the Angel of
Jehovah has power to forgive sins; and this in itself identifies Him
with
Jehovah, for we are taught that only God can forgive sins. In the New
Testament
we find that this power and authority belongs to the Lord Jesus Christ.
In
Deuteronomy 18:18, 19 we find a most wonderful prophecy given through
Moses. "I
will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee;
and I
will put my words in his mouth. and he shall speak unto them all that I
shall
command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken
unto my
words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him."
Concerning
this prophecy ex-Rabbi Leopold Cohn says:
"Every
Jewish scholar will admit that there has not been any other prophet
like unto
Moses outside of the Lord Jesus, who was even greater than Moses. That
this
promised future prophet is identical with the Angel of Exodus 23:21 is
proven
by God's command to obey Him. In addition to all these previous names
and
characteristics God calls Him here prophet and tells us that He will be
born of
a woman and be like one of our brethren. (And) notice, please, the
particular
punishment for disobeying this wonderful Person. 'I will require it of
him.'
That means that in case of Israel's disobedience to the Messiah, God is
going
to punish continually until they will repent and obey" (Pamphlet, The
Trinity in the Old Testament, p. 8).
In
Joshua 5:13--6:3 another strange appearance is recorded.
"And
it came to
pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and
looked, and
behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his
hand -.
and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for
our
adversaries? But he said, Nay; but as prince of the host of Jehovah am
I now
come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and
said unto
him What saith my lord unto his servant? And the prince of Jehovah's
host said
unto Joshua, Put off thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon
thou
standest is holy. . . . And Jehovah said unto Joshua, See, I have given
into
thy hand Jericho, and the king thereof, and the mighty men of valour. .
.
." This "man," this "prince of Jehovah's host," whom
Joshua discovered to be Jehovah Himself, is quite plainly the promised
Angel
who was to go before the children of Israel and lead them into the
land.
In
the light of the New Testament this Angel of Jehovah who appeared in
Old
Testament times, who spoke as Jehovah, exercised His power, received
worship
and had the authority to forgive sins, can be none other than the Lord
Jesus
Christ, who comes from the Father (John 16:28), speaks for Him (John
3:34;
14:24), exercises His power (Matt. 28:18), forgives sin (Matt. 9:2),
and
receives worship (Matt. 14:33; John 9:38). God the Father has not been
seen by
any man (John 1 :18), neither could He be sent by any other-, but God
the Son
has been seen (I John 1:1,2), and has been sent (John 5:36). Apart from
Christ
the puzzling question would be, Who can this mysterious personality be?
Indirect
allusions to a complexity of persons within the Godhead are found in
numerous
other places. Examples are: "Jehovah saith unto my Lord, Sit thou at my
right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool" (Ps. 110:1), a
passage which in the New Testament Christ applies to Himself (Mark
12:35-37). "Jehovah
said unto me, Thou art my son; This day have I begotten thee" (Ps.
2:7),
which Paul tells us was fulfilled in Christ (Acts 13:33). "Thy throne,
0
God, is for ever and ever" (Ps. 45:6) ; and the writer of the book of
Hebrews tells us that this relates to Christ and His kingdom (1 :8).
The
fact of the matter is that the Old Testament predictions of the coming
Messiah,-such as that He should be born of a virgin (Isa. 7:14), born
in
Bethlehem of Judea (Mic. 5:2), the son of David and heir to his throne
(11 Sam.
7:12-16; Isa. 9:7), that the government should be upon His shoulder,
and His
name should be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the
Everlasting
Father, the Prince of Peace (Isa. 9:6), that He should work miracles in
opening
the eyes of the blind, unstopping the ears of the deaf, healing the
lame, and
causing the dumb to speak (Isa. 35:5, 6), that He should be a man of
sorrows,
acquainted with grief, having no special beauty, that He should be a
suffering
Messiah, wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities,
our
substitute as a sacrifice to God (Isa. 53:1-12), that He should
suddenly come
to His temple (Mal. 3:1), that in His official entry into Jerusalem He
should
come in meekness, riding upon an ass (Zech. 9:9), etc.,taken in
connection with
the descriptions of the One known as the Angel of Jehovah, were
designed to
make it possible for the people to recognize the Lord Jesus Christ at
once by
comparing these descriptions with His works, and, accepting Him, to
receive
forgiveness for sins.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE
OLD
TESTAMENT
Ordinarily
the Old Testament references to the Spirit were so indistinct that they
were
understood to refer only to an energy or influence which proceeded from
God. Nowhere
is the Spirit specifically called a person; yet when He is spoken of it
is in
terms that may properly be applied to a person. As read in the light of
the New
Testament, however, there are a number of places in which He is seen to
be a
distinct Person. Examples are: "Who hath directed the Spirit of
Jehovah,
or being his counsellor hath taught him?" (Isa. 40:13) ; "Thou gavest
also thy good Spirit to instruct them" (Neh. 9:20) ; "My Spirit shall
not strive with man for ever" (Gen. 6:3) ; "Take not thy holy Spirit
from me" (Ps. 51 :11) ;"Whither shall Igo from thy Spirit?" (Ps.
139:7) ; and in Isaiah 63:7-11 we may say that the Trinity actually
comes into
view, for here we have a reference to "Jehovah" who is the God of
Israel and who bestows great blessings upon His people, to the "angel
of
his presence" who "was their Saviour," and to the "holy
Spirit" who was in their midst and who was "grieved" at their
rebellion. Three times He is called the "holy Spirit" (Ps. 51 :11 ;
Isa. 63:10, 11). Some theologians have understood the threefold
ascription of
praise in the seraphim's song, "Holy, holy, holy, is Jehovah of hosts;
the
whole earth is full of his glory" (Isa. 6:3), with its close parallel
in
the angelic chorus of Revelation 4:8, "Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord
God,
the Almighty, who was and who is and who is to come," as having
reference
to the Trinity. Certainly the divinely given formula which the priests
were to
use in blessing the people, "Jehovah bless thee, and keep thee: Jehovah
make his face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: Jehovah
lift up
his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace" (Num. 6:2426), finds
its
counterpart with explicit reference to the Trinity in the Apostolic
Benediction
of the New Testament Church: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and
the
love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all" (II
Cor. 13:14).
Yet
it is beyond question that, apart from the New Testament revelation,
these
intimations of the distinct personalities of the Son and of the Spirit
were
obscure,-and purposely so, we may say, since the people were not then
ready to
grasp the meaning of such a revelation. No scholars using the Old
Testament
alone have ever arrived at a trinitarian conception of God. In fact
Jews unite
with Mohammedans in accusing Trinitarians of polytheism. At New
Testament times
those who had been trained under the law, the Pharisees, for instance,
appear
to have thought of the Spirit of God and the power of God as equivalent
terms.
But
while not fully revealed and not recognized until Pentecost, the Holy
Spirit as
the executive of the Trinity was from the beginning the sustainer and
moulder
of the laws of nature, the One who inspired the prophets and who could
be
sinned against and grieved. In the second verse of the very first
chapter in
Genesis we read that "The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the
waters,"-the marginal reading says, "was brooding upon."
"Amid
the darkness that surrounded the primeval chaos," says Dr. J. Ritchie
Smith, "the Spirit of God is discovered, brooding upon the face of the
waters, like a bird upon its nest" (The Holy Spirit in the Gospels,
p.
34).
just as
electricity was present in nature and played a vitally important part
in the
lives of men long before they discovered it and learned to make it
serve so
many wonderful purposes, so the
Holy Spirit was living and active as a distinct Person in the Godhead
from
eternity and moulded the affairs of men without His distinct
personality being
known to them.
"Even
in the first chapter of Genesis," says Dr. Charles Hodge, "the Spirit
of God is represented as the source of all intelligence, order, and
life in the
created universe; and in the following books of the Old Testament He is
represented as inspiring the prophets, giving wisdom. strength, and
goodness to
statesmen and warriors, and to the people of God. This Spirit is not an
agency,
but an agent, who teaches and selects; who can be sinned against and
grieved;
and who, in the New Testament, is unmistakably revealed as a distinct
person. When
John the Baptist appeared, we find him speaking of the Holy Spirit as
of a
person with whom his countrymen were familiar, as an object of divine
worship
and the giver of saving blessings. Our Divine Lord also takes this
truth for
granted, and promises to send the Spirit, as a Paraclete, to take His
place; to
instruct, comfort, and strengthen them, whom they were to receive and
obey. Thus,
without any violent transition, the earliest revelations of this
mystery were
gradually unfolded, until the Triune God, Father, Son, and Spirit,
appear in
the New Testament as the universally recognized God of all believers" (Systematic
Theology, I, p. 447).
JEWISH
MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE DOCTRINE
'The
Christian doctrine of the Trinity has been generally misunderstood
among the
Jewish people, with the result that they believe we worship three Gods.
To set
forth this idea and the reason for its strong hold on the Jewish people
to-day
we propose to quote rather extensively from the writings of one who is
in a
position to under the problem,-from the writings of Ex-Rabbi Leopold
Cohn.
Says
he:
"The
reason that the Jews have become estranged from the doctrine of the
Triune God
is found in the teachings of Moses Maimonides. He compiled thirteen
articles of
faith which the Jews accepted and incorporated into their liturgy. One
of them
is 'I believe with a perfect faith that the Creator, blessed be His
name, is an absolute one' (Hebrew, 'Yachid'). This has been
repeated
daily
by Jews
in their prayers, ever since the twelfth century, when Moses Maimonides
lived. This
expression of an 'absolute one' is diametrically opposed to
the word of
God which teaches with great emphasis that God is not a 'Yachid,' which
means
an only one, or an 'absolute one,' but 'achid,' which means a united
one.
In Deuteronomy 6:4 God laid down for His people a principle of faith,
which is
certainly superior to that of Moses Maimonides, inasmuch as it comes
from God
Himself. We read, 'Hear 0 Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE,'
stressing
the sense of the phrase 'one' by using not 'yachid,' which Moses
Maimonides
does, but 'achid,' which means a united one.
"We
want now to trace where these two words, 'yachid' and 'achid,' occur in
the Old
Testament and in what connection and sense they are used, and thus
ascertain
their true meaning.
In
Genesis I we read, 'And there was evening and there was morning, one
day.'
Here the word 'achid' is used, which implies that the evening and the
morning-two separate objects-are called one, thus showing
plainly that
the word 'achid' does not mean an 'absolute one,' but a united
one.
Then in Genesis 2:24 we read, 'Therefore shall a man leave his father
and his
mother and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh.'
Here
too the word 'achid' is used, furnishing another proof that it means a united
one, referring, as it does in this case, to two separate persons.
"Now
let us see in the Word of God where that expression 'yachid,' an 'absolute
one,'
is found. In Genesis 22:2 God says to Abraham, 'Take now thy son, thine
only
son.' Here we read the word 'yachid.' The same identical word,
'yachid,' is
repeated in the 12th verse of the same chapter. In Psalm 25:16 it is
again
applied to a single person as also in Jeremiah 6:26, where we read,
'Make thee
mourning as for an only son.' The same word, conveying the sense of one
only,
occurs in Zechariah 12:10, 'And they shall look upon me whom they have
pierced,
and they shall mourn for Him as one mourneth for his only son.'
"Thus
we see that Moses Maimonides, with all his great wisdom and much
learning, made
a serious mistake in prescribing for the Jews that confession of faith
in which
it is stated that God is a 'Yachid,' a statement which is absolutely
opposed to
the Word of God. And the Jews, in blindly following the so-called
'second
Moses' have once more given evidence of their old proclivities of
perverting
the Word of the living God. The Holy Spirit made that serious complaint
against
them through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, 'For ye have perverted the
words of
the living God, of the Lord of hosts our God' (Jer. 23:36).
"This
is therefore the belief of the true Christian. He does not have three
gods, but
'one,' a Scriptural one, which is in Hebrew 'achid,' and which consists
of
three personal revelations of God as we shall see in the following
Scriptures.
"In
the very first verse of the Bible we find two manifestations of the
Godhead. 'In
the beginning God created ... and the Spirit of God moved.'
Here
we see plainly that God taught us to believe that He is the creator of
all
things and that His Spirit is moving upon this world of ours to lead,
guide and
instruct us in the way He wants us to walk. So here in the
first chapter
of the Bible are two manifestations of God.
"It will interest the reader to know that the most sacred Jewish book,
the
Zohar, comments on Deuteronomy 6:4-'Hear 0 Israel, Jehovah our God,
Jehovah is
one,' saying, 'Why is there need of mentioning the name of God three
times in
this verse?' Then follows the answer. 'The first Jehovah is the Father
above. The
second is the stem of Jesse, the Messiah who is to come from the family
of
Jesse through David. And the third is the way which is below (meaning
the Holy
Spirit who shows us the way) and these three are one.'
According to the Zohar the Messiah is not only called Jehovah but is a
very
part of the Triune Jehovah." (The Trinity in the Old Testament,pp.
3, 4).
5. One
Substance, Three Persons
Much
of the opposition to the doctrine of the Trinity has arisen because of
a
misunderstanding of what it really is. We do not assert that one God is
three
Gods, nor that one person is three persons, nor that three Gods are one
God. God
is not three in the same sense in which He is one. To assert that He is
would,
indeed, make the doctrine what the Unitarians are ever fond of
declaring it to be,
mathematical absurdity. We assert rather that within the one Divine
"substance" or "essence" there are three mutually related
yet distinct centers of knowledge, consciousness, love and will.
"Substance"
or "essence" is that which the different members of the Godhead have
in common, that in which the attributes and powers of Deity inhere;
"person" is that in which they differ.
Yet
while there are three centers of knowledge, consciousness, love and
will, each
of the Persons possesses in toto the one indivisible,
incorporeal
substance of Deity in which the attributes and powers inhere, and
therefore
possesses the same infinite knowledge, wisdom, power, holiness,
justice,
goodness and truth. They work together or cooperate with such perfect
harmony
and unity that we are justified in saying that the Triune God works
with one
mind and one will. What the one knows, the others know; what the one
desires,
the others desire: and what the one wills, the others will.
Independence and
self-existence are not attributes of the individual persons, but of the
Triune
God; hence there are not three independent wills, but three dependent
wills, if
we may so speak, each of which is exercised for the honour and glory
and
happiness of the other two.
We
can illustrate the nature of the Trinity partially as follows: a bank
or
railroad, for instance, is owned and operated not by an individual but
by many
officials, stock-bolders, and workers, who have a community of
interests; yet
we have no hesitation in speaking of the corporation in the singular
and saying
that the First National Bank desires to make this investment, or that
the
Pennsylvania Railroad is opposed to the passage of a certain piece of
legislation by Congress.
The
decisions reached by the board of directors express the desires and
purposes of
the corporation as a whole. Similarly, although we believe there are
three
distinct Persons in the Godhead, we speak of God in the singular and
apply to
Him the pronouns He, Him and His.
In
thinking of this mystery we are to remember that the processes of our
own
thinking, feeling and willing in our purely human personalities remain
a
complete mystery to us. It is also to be pointed out that since the
incarnation
Christ has also thought and felt and willed in a human manner, although
the
union of the Divine and the human psychological activity within the
Divine-human Person, like the unity of the Persons within the Godhead,
is
incomprehensible to us.
The
error of the Unitarians is that while they construct a doctrine of the
Divine
unity they do so at the expense of the Divine personality. They look
upon the
Father, Son and Holy Spirit as but three successive aspects or modes in
which
God reveals Himself, comparable to that of a man who is known in his
own family
as father, in the business world as a banker, and in the Church as an
elder. Such
a view gives us only a modal Trinity. Any statement of the doctrine
which fails
to set forth both the unity and the tri-personality of the Godhead
falls short
of the Scripture teaching.
Since
the three Persons of the Trinity possess the same identical,numerical
substance
or essence, and since the attributes are inherent in and inseparable
from the
substance or essence, it follows that all of the Divine attributes must
be
possessed alike by each of the three Persons and that the three Persons
must be
consubstantial, co-equal and co-eternal. Each is truly God, exercising
the same
power, partaking equally of the Divine glory, and entitled to the same
worship.
When the word "Father" is used in our prayers, as for example in the
Lord's prayer, it does not refer exclusively to the first person of the
Trinity, but to the three Persons as one God. The Triune God is our
Father.
The
doctrine of the Trinity cannot lead to Tritheism; for while there are
three
Persons in the Godhead, there is but one substance or essence, and
therefore
but one God. It is rather a case of the one life substance, Deity,
existing
consciously as three Persons. The three Persons are related to the
divine
substance not as three individuals to their species, as Abraham, Isaac
and
Jacob to human nature; they are only one God,-not a triad, but a
Trinity. In
the inmost depths of their being they are inherently and inescapably
one.
That
each of the Persons of the Trinity does possess in toto the numerically
same
substance is proved by such Scripture verses as the following: "For in
him
dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9). "1 and
the Father are one" (John 10:30). "Believe me that I am in the
Father, and the Father in me" (John 14:11). "God was in Christ
reconciling the world unto Himself'' (II Cor. 5:19).
It
need not surprise us that in the Godhead we find a form of personality
entirely
unique and different from that found in man. In the ascending scale of
life as
we know it in this world there are numerous modes of existence as we
pass from
the simpler to the more complex forms. In the plants we find what is
truly
called life, although it is so elementary that it does not even come to
consciousness.
In the insects we find sensitiveness and instinct, two particulars in
which
they far surpass the plant life. In the birds and animals we find
affection
between parent and offspring, which in some cases is very strong,
together with
a much higher type of instinct than is found among the insects. Man in
his turn
makes a tremendous advance over the animals in that he possesses
reasoning
power, a deep moral consciousness, and an immortal soul. These higher
stages in
man's nature are of course absolutely incomprehensible to the animals,
birds
and insects, which can, at best, have only a very vague understanding
of his
nature, although they fear him and recognize him as their master.
Consequently
we need not be surprised that the nature of God surpasses our
comprehension,-that the one divine substance is conscious in three
Persons, in
Father, Son and Holy Spirit,-and that no attempt is made to explain
that
mystery to us, probably for the very reason that our little minds are
utterly
incapable of grasping such truth. Doubtless we are as incapable of
understanding God's nature as the animals and birds are of
understanding ours.
Hence
it is admitted that our knowledge of the relationships which subsist
between
the three Persons of the Trinity extends only to the surface. There
must be
infinite depths in the conscious being of God to which human thought
can never
penetrate. We are told clearly, however, that God has existed from
eternity as three
self-conscious persons. Certainly we are not prepared to say that this
tri-personality which has been revealed to us exhausts the mystery of
the
Godhead. As Dr. A. A. Hodge has well said:
"For
aught we can know, in the depths of the Infinite Being there may be a
common
consciousness which includes the whole Godhead, and a common
personality. This
may all be true; but what belongs to us to deal with is the sure and
obvious
fact of revelation, that God exists from eternity as three
selfconscious Persons,
the Father, Son and Holy Spirit."
How
shall we define the term "person"? As it is used in modern Psychology
it means an intelligent, free, moral agent. But in setting forth the
doctrine
of the Trinity the Church has used the term in a sense different from
that in
which it is used anywhere else. The word "Person" as it is applied to
the three subsistences within the Godhead, like the more important word
"Trinity," is not found in Scripture itself ; yet the idea which it
expresses is Scriptural, and we do not know any other word that
expresses so
well the idea we have in mind. In the science of Theology, as in all
other
sciences, some technical terms are an absolute necessity. When we say
there are
three distinct persons in the Godhead we do not mean that each one is
as
separate from the others as one human being is from every other. While
they are
said to love, to hear, to pray to, to send, and to testify of each
other, they
are, nevertheless, not independent of each other; for as we have
already said,
self-existence and independence are properties, not of the individual
persons,
but of the Triune God. The singular pronouns I, Thou, He and Him are
applied to
each of the three Persons; yet these same singular pronoun's are
applied to the
Triune God who is composed of these three Persons. Hence too much
stress must
not be laid on the mere term. The Father,Son and Holy Spirit can be
distinguished,but they cannot be separated; for they each possess the
same
identical numerical substance or essence. They do not merely exist
alongside of
each other, as did Washington, Jefferson and Franklin, but they
permeate and
interpenetrate each other, are in and through each other.
Consequently,
in theological language we would define a person as a mode of
subsistence which
is marked by intelligence, will, and individual existence. The Church
fathers
realized, of course, that they were dealing with a doctrine which was
far above
the comprehension of the human mind, and, in developing the creeds,
they did
not attempt to explain the mystery of the Trinity, but only to state it
as well
as they were able with the language at their disposal. We can hope to
do no
more.
A PLURALITY OF PERSONS
WITHIN THE GODHEAD IS IN HARMONY WITH REASON
Instead
of the doctrine of the Trinity being contrary to reason as charged by
Unitarians, a little considered thought should convince us that a
plurality of
Persons within the Godhead is eminently agreeable to reason. That there
should
be specifically three Persons does not necessarily follow, but that God
might
be more than One seems very probable. We shrink from the thought of an
eternally lonely God, and take refuge in the Christian doctrine of the
Trinity.
This doctrine, we find, is of such a nature that, on the one hand, it
avoids
the hard monotheism of the Jews and Mohammedans, and on the other, the
crass
polytheism of the Greeks and Romans. Through the truth which it
presents we are
enabled to see that God has always been independent of the entire
creation,
that within His own nature there is to be found that absolute
perfection and
self-sufficiency which we instinctively ascribe to Him. Unless there is
to be
found that plurality of Persons within His own nature, time as well as
eternity
would seem to be unbearably monotonous to Him. For where among the
creatures
are there to be found personalities capable of responding fully to His
own
personality? Men and angels, while created in His image, are infinitely
below
Him; even the nations, Isaiah tells us, are as a drop in the bucket,
and as the
small dust of the balance (40:15). Only within the fellowship of the
Father,
Son and Holy Spirit is there to be found that full interplay of
personality
which the nature of God demands. And when once we have conceived of God
as
Trinity we can never again be satisfied with a modalistic or Unitarian
conception of Him.
It
has long been customary to say that the attribute of love in God proves
a
plurality of Persons within the Godhead,-that love is necessarily self
-
communicative, and that with a unitary God it could have existed only
as a
craving, unsatisfied, under the category of the possible rather than of
the
actual. This reasoning further asserts that since God is infinite His
love must
be infinite, and that it therefore demands an infinite object. It is
usually
further asserted that these two infinite Persons demand a third through
whom
their love is communicated and to whom it is also given. This line of
reasoning, however, does not seem fully conclusive. It at least seems
possible
that God's own all-perfect Being could have supplied a satisfying
object for
His love. To say that love, in its very nature, is self -communicative,
and
that it therefore demands an object other than itself, seems to be
merely a
play on words. If we may imagine a lonely Robinson Crusoe, for
instance,
shipwrecked on an island for the remainder of his life, and imagine
further
that the storm which shipwrecked him also killed all the other persons
with
whom he was acquainted, would that, even as regards a limited human
being, mean
that the remainder of his life would be abnormal in the sense that be
would be
destitute of the attribute of love? Might there not be, even within his
own
limited nature, a kind of love based on good conscience and moral
uprightness? The
attribute of love need not disappear just because a person is alone.
But while
love in itself does not prove that there must be a plurality of Persons
in the
Godhead, yet what added richness, fulness and force is given to this
love in
either God or man when there is fellowship with others! Only thus is
personality seen at its best. Hence while reason does not give us the
doctrine
of the Trinity in the first place, i.e., apart from revelation, it does
render
the negative service of showing that the doctrine is not inconsistent
with
other known truth, and also the positive service of showing that only
on the
basis of the Trinity do we have a fully adequate conception of God as
selfconscious Spirit and living love.
There
are, of course, elements of truth even in polytheism, distorted and
perverted
though they may be, and present-day men of letters, as well as
philosophers in
all ages and the pagan people in all nations, have found relief in
speaking of
"the gods."
"The
most widely diffused of all religious systems," says Dr. J. Ritchie
Smith,
"polytheism is the perversion of a great truth, the truth of the
variety
and fulness of the divine nature. Lacking the conception of a God
everywhere
present and active, men were forced to assume a host of divinities,
between
whom the attributes and energies of the Deity may be distributed, and
who in
virtue of their numbers may accomplish the works of creation and
providence. .
. . It is the distinctive mark of polytheism that it sacrifices the
unity to
the variety of the divine nature. Against this error the Old Testament
everywhere contends. Not until it was extirpated from the minds of the
chosen
people, and the taint of idolatry purged away in the furnace of
affliction, was
the truth revealed in its fulness that polytheism strove so vainly to
express. The
Old Testament overthrows the error, the New Testament brings to light
the
truth, of polytheism. . . . The fulness and variety that men seek in
many gods
are found in one. The doctrine of the Trinity at once preserves the
unity and
discloses the fulness of the divine nature. God is one, is the message
of the
Old Testament; God is one in three Persons, is the message of the New;
and the
revelation is complete" (The Holy Spirit in the Gospels, p.19).
6.
Meaning of the Terms "Father",
"Son", and "Spirit"
To
our occidental type of Mind the terms "Father" and "Son"
carry with them, on the one hand, the ideas of source of being and
superiority,
and on the other, subordination and dependence. In theological
language,
however, they are used in the Semitic or Oriental sense of sameness
of
nature. It is, of course, the Semitic consciousness which
underlies the
phraseology of Scripture, and wherever the Scriptures call Christ the
"Son" of God they assert His true and proper Deity. The term
"Son" is applied to Christ, not merely as an official title in
connection with the work of redemption, nor because of His incarnation
or
supernatural birth, nor because of His resurrection.although in these
regards
He is preeminently the Son of God.-but primarily to designate an
inherent
trinitarian relationship. In the economy of redemption, and for the
accomplishment of a specific purpose, He temporarily accepted a
position
subordinate to that of the Father. In its deepest sense it is a unique
sonship
which cannot be predicated of, nor shared with, any creature. Father
and Son
are co-eternal and co-equal in power and glory, partaking of the same
nature
and substance, and have always existed as distinct Persons. The Father
is, and
always has been, as much dependent on the Son as the Son is on the
Father, for,
as we need to keep in mind, self-existence ind independence are
properties not
of the Persons within the Godhead, but of the Triune God.
In
Hebrews 1 :5-8, for instance, the writer sets forth the superiority of
Christ
as a Divine Person. Being Divine, or Deity, the express image of the
invisible
God, He is called the "Son" of God, which means precisely the same
thing. He came into the world as the Son. and had existed from eternity
as
such. Being the Son, the One through whom the worlds were created and
the heir
of all things, He is declared by the writer to be God and to reign upon
an
everlasting throne. During the public ministry the Jews, in accordance
with the
Hebrew usage of the term, correctly understood Jesus' claim to be the
"Son" of God as equivalent to asserting that He was "equal with
God," or, simply "God" (John 5:18; 10:33) ; and it was for
claiming to be "the Christ, the Son of God," that He was accused of
blasphemy by the high priest and sentenced by the Sanhedrin to be
crucified
(Matt. 26:63-66).
This
idea has perhaps been more clearly expressed by Dr. Warfield than by
any other.
Says he:
"What
underlies the conception of sonship in Scriptural speech is just
'likeness';
whatever the father is that the Son is also. The emphatic application
of the
term 'Son' to one of the Trinitarian Persons, accordingly, asserts
rather His
equality with the Father than His subordination to the Father; and if
there is
any implication of derivation in it, it would appear to be very
distant. The
adjunction of the adjective 'only begotten' (John 1:14; 3:1618; 1 John
4:9)
need add only the idea of uniqueness, not of derivation (Ps. 22:20; 25
;16;
35;17) ; and even such a phrase as 'God only begotten' (John 1:18) may
contain
no implication of derivation, but only of absolutely unique
consubstantiality;
as also such a phrase as 'the first-begotten of all creation' (Col.
1:15) may
convey no intimation of coming into being, but merely assert priority
of
existence. In like manner, the designation 'Spirit of God' or 'Spirit
of
Jehovah,' which meets us frequently in the Old Testament, certainly
does not
convey the idea there either of derivation or of subordination, but is
just the
executive name of Godthe designation of God from the point of view of
His
activity-and imports accordingly identity with God; and there is no
reason to
suppose that, in passing from the Old Testament to the New Testament,
the term
has taken on an essentially different meaning. It happens, oddly
enough,
moreover, that we have in the New Testament itself what amounts almost
to
formal definitions of the two terms 'Son' and 'Spirit,' and in both
cases the
stress is laid on the notion of equality or sameness. In John 5:18 we
read: 'On
this account, therefore, the Jews sought the more to kill him, because.
not
only did be break the Sabbath, but also called God his own Father,
making
himself equal with God.' The point lies, of course, in the adjective
'own.'
Jesus was, rightly, understood to call God 'his own Father,' that is,
to use
the terms 'Father' and 'Son' not in a merely figurative sense, as when
Israel
was called God's son, but in the real sense. And this was understood to
be
claiming to be all that God is. To be the Son of God in any sense was
to be
like God in that sense; and to be God's own Son was to be exactly like
God, to
be 'equal with God.' Similarly, we read in I Corinthians 2:10, 11: 'For
the
Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For who of
men
knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him?
Even so
the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God.' Here the
Spirit
appears as the substrate of the Divine self-consciousness, the
principle of
God's knowledge of Himself: He is, in a word, just God Himself in the
innermost
essence of His Being. As the spirit of man is the seat of human life,
the very
life of man itself, so the Spirit of God is His very life-element. How
can He
be supposed, then, to be subordinate to God, or to derive His being
from God?"
(Biblical Doctrines, p. 163).
Thus
we find that the divine and original idea of fatherhood and sonship in sameness
of nature. In the Godhead this is, of course, a purely
spiritual
relationship, and is in accordance with the transcendence of Deity. In
the
finite human sphere, where man is but a faint and imperfect pattern of
God, the
ideas of fatherhood and sonship, besides implying sameness of nature,
imply
also the ideas of origination and subordination, as well as a material
nature
which is mediated by sex. In the divine sphere sonship is absolute,
while in
the human it is relative, very much as the attributes of wisdom, power,
holiness, justice and love are absolute in God but relative in man.
Hence while
the limitations of human language are such that we are not able to
express
these ideas fully, the relationship which subsists between the first
and second
Persons of the Trinity finds its closest analogy in the relationship
which an
earthly father bears to his son.
And
in like manner the third Person of the Trinity, partaking of the same
life
substance and equal with the Father and the Son in power and glory, is
called
the Spirit. As the everywhere-present executive of the Trinity,
immaterial and
invisible, He is Spirit in the truest sense of the word. He is called
the
"Holy" Spirit because He is absolutely holy in His own nature, and is
the source and cause of holiness in the creatures.
We
have seen that the terms "Father" and "Son" are not at all
adequate to express the full relationship which exists between the
first and
second Persons of the Godhead. They are, however, the best that we
have. They
are the terms used in Scripture, and besides expressing the idea of
sameness of
nature, they are found to be reciprocal, expressing the ideas of love,
affection, trust, honour, unity and harmony, ideas of endearment and
preciousness. When we are told that God "gave" His Son for the
redemption of the world we are led to understand that the situation was
in some
ways analogous to that of a human father who gives his son for
missionary
service or for the defense of his country. It is something which
involves
sacrifice on the part of the father as well as privation and suffering
on the
part of the son. And, similarly, when the term "Spirit" is applied to
the third Person of the Trinity it is not implied that His nature is in
any way
different from theirs, for they each partake of the numerically same
substance,
and are all equally spirit. He is so called, however, because He is the
very
life element of Deity, and because so far as our relation to God is
concerned
God comes to us in a spiritual way preeminently through this Person,
His Spirit
communes with our spirits, speaks to our consciences, cleanses our
hearts, and leads
us in right paths.
That
the terms "Father" and "Son" are used in a peculiar sense
as applied to the first and second Persons of the Trinity might easily
be
inferred from their varied usage in other parts of Scripture and in
everyday
speech. We read, for instance, that Jubal was the father of such as
dwell in
tents and have cattle, and that Jubal was the father of all such as
handle the
harp and the pipe (Gen. 4:20, 21). Abraham was given the promise that
he should
be the father of a multitude of nations (Gen. 17:4) ; and today every
Jew
regards himself as a son of Abraham. Jehovah said of the nation,
"Israel
is my son. my first-born" (Exod. 4:22). Of a king whose position before
God is one of special honour and authority, as was that of Solomon, the
Lord
could say, "I will be his father, and he shall be my son" (11 Sam.
7:14). Judas was a "son of perdition" (John 17:12). We are familiar
with the early Church "fathers," and we speak of one who has shown us
the way of righteousness as our father in the faith. George Washington
is said
to have been the father of his country. The Germans speak of the
fatherland,
and the English of the mother country. We say that Mr. So-and-so is a
loyal son
of Calvin, or Luther or Wesley, and we have groups of people who call
themselves Daughters of the American Revolution, or Sons of the
American
Legion. Hence it is quite clear that in religious as well as in secular
affairs
the terms father and son are used in a variety of senses.
And
beyond this, although in perfect harmony with it, we find that much
Scripture
teaching is given in figurative language. Christ is called the Lamb of
God
(John 1:29; Rev. 7:14) ; the good shepherd (John 10:11) ; the door
(John 10:7).
He is the true vine, and His disciples are the branches (John 15:1-5) ;
He is
the true light (John 1:9) ; His disciples are the light of the world
(Matt.
5:14), and the salt of the earth (Matt. 5:13). Similarly, God is
declared to be
love (I John 4:8) ; light (I John 1:5) ; a consuming fire (Heb. 12:29).
The psalmist
declares that Jehovah is his rock, his fortress, his shield and high
tower
(18:2), and that the righteous take refuge under His wings (91:4). When
we are
told that God is angry, or that He repents, or forgets, or laughs, the
writer
is, of course, using figurative language. Such expressions are known as
anthropomorphisms, instances in which the divine action as seen from
the human
viewpoint is likened to that of a man who is actuated by these states
of mind. These
are instances in which God adjusts Himself to human language, "talking
down" to us, in much the same way that human parents find it necessary
to
talk down to their children. We know that as a matter of fact God is
altogether
free from the passions and failings of human nature.
Hence
in accordance with this general method of procedure it was only most
fitting
that the terms "Father," "Son" and "Spirit"
should have been chosen to express the relationship which the first and
second
Persons of the Trinity bear to each other, which the third bears to the
first
and second, and which the first bears to us. Our language contains no
terms
better fitted to convey the desired meaning.
Similarly,
the term "person," as we have indicated before, is but an imperfect
and inadequate expression of a truth that transcends our experience and
comprehension. When applied to the different members of the Godhead it
only
approximates the truth. It is, if you please, a make-shift, and is
employed in
Scripture in this sense. Yet it expresses more clearly than any other
word we
know the conception which the Scriptures give of the Father, Son and
Holy
Spirit. It is used to express an idea of personality within the Godhead
which
lies, we may say, approximately half-way. between that of a mere form
of
manifestation, or personification, which would lead to Unitarianism,
and the
idea of fully separate, independent personalities such as is found in
human
beings, which would lead to Tritheism. It expresses a distinction not
identical
with, but in some respects analogous to, that subsisting between three
different men. If there were three Gods, they would, of course, limit
each
other and deprive each other of Deity, since it would be impossible for
each to
be infinite. There is room for many finite beings, but room for only
one infinite
Being. The merit of the statement of this doctrine in the Athanasian
Creed was
that it preserved the distinct personalities and also the unity of the
Godhead:
"The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Ghost is God; and yet
there
are not three Gods but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son
is
Lord, the Holy Ghost is Lord; yet there are not three Lords but one
Lord. For
as we are compelled by Christian truth to acknowledge each person by
Himself to
be God and Lord, so we are forbidden by the same truth to say that
there are
three Gods or three Lords." Hence in view of the defects of human
language,the very limited revelation which God has seen fit to give us
concerning this subject, and the fact that the nature of this
distinction must
be incomprehensible to us, we are ready not only to admit, but to point
out
precisely, the imperfection of the language which we are obliged to
employ in
setting forth this doctrine.
7.
Subordination of the Son and Spirit to
the Father
In
discussing the doctrine of the Trinity we must distinguish between what
is
technically known as the "immanent" and the "economic"
Trinity. By the "immanent" Trinity we mean the Trinity as it has
subsisted in the Godhead from all eternity. In their essential, innate
life we
say that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the same in substance,
possessing
identical attributes and powers, and therefore equal in glory. This
relates to
God's essential existence apart from the creation. By the "economic"
Trinity we mean the Trinity as manifested in the world, particularly in
the
redemption of sinful men. There are three opera ad extra, additional
works, if we may so describe them, which are ascribed to the Trinity,
namely,
Creation, Redemption and Sanctification. These are works which are
outside of
the necessary activities of the Trinity, works which God was under no
obligation or compulsion to perform.
In
the Scriptures we find that the plan of redemption takes the form of a
covenant, not merely between God and His people but between the
different
Persons within the Trinity, so that there is, as it were, a division of
labour,
each Person voluntarily assuming a particular part of the work. lst,-To
the
Father is ascribed primarily the work of Creation, together with the
election
of a certain number of individuals whom He has given to the Son. The
Father is
in general the Author of the plan of redemption. 2nd,-To the Son is
ascribed
the work of redemption, to accomplish which He became incarnate,
assuming human
nature in order that, as the federal head and representative of His
people, He
might, as their substitute, assume the guilt of their sin and suffer a
full
equivalent for the penalty of eternal death which rested upon them. He
thus
made full satisfaction to the demands of justice, which demands are
expressed
in the words, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die," and, "The
wages of sin is death." Also, in His capacity as the federal head and
representative of His people, He covenanted to keep the law of perfect
obedience which was originally given to their forefather Adam in his
representative capacity, which law Adam had broken and had thereby
plunged the
race into a state of guilt and ruin. Identifying Himself thus with His
people,
He paid the penalty which rested on them and earned their salvation.
Acting as
their King and Saviour, and also as Head of the Church which He thus
forms, He
directs the advancing kingdom and is ever present with His people.
3rd,-To the
Holy Spirit is ascribed the works of Regeneration and Sanctification,
or the
application to the hearts of individuals of the objective atonement
which has
been wrought out by Christ. This He does by spiritually renewing their
hearts,
working in them faith and repentance, cleansing them of every taint of
sin, and
eventually glorifying them in heaven. Redemption, in the broad sense,
is thus a
matter of pure grace, being planned by the Father, purchased
by the Son,
and applied by the Holy Spirit.
If
we may be so bold as to draw an analogy with our federal government
where, when
it functions normally, we have three equal and coordinated branches, we
may say
that the Father, in planning and creating the world, in ordaining its
laws, and
in giving to the Son a people to be redeemed by Him, corresponds to the
Legislative branch; the Holy Spirit, through His regenerating and
cleansing
power and through His control of the minds of men and of the forces of
nature,
corresponds to the Executive branch; and the Son, giving Himself in the
satisfaction of divine justice, and then acting as judge of the entire
world,
corresponds to the judicial branch.
Yet
while particular works are ascribed pre-eminently to each of the
Persons, so
intimate is the unity which exists within the Trinity, there being but
one
substance and "one God," that each of the Persons participates to
some extent in the work of the others. "I am in the Father, and the
Father
in me," said Jesus (John 14:11). "He that hath seen me hath seen the
Father" (John 14:9). "God was in Christ reconciling the world to
himself" (II Cor. 5:19). "1 will not leave you desolate: I come unto
you" (through the Holy Spirit) (John 14:18). As Dr. Charles Hodge says:
"According
to the Scriptures, the Father created the world, the Son created the
world, and
the Spirit created the world. The Father preserves all things: the Son
upholds
all things; and the Spirit is the source of all life. These facts are
expressed
by saying that the persons of the Trinity concur in all acts ad
extra. Nevertheless
there are some acts which are predominantly referred to the Father,
others to
the Son, and others to the Spirit. The Father creates, elects, and
calls; the
Son redeems; and the Spirit sanctifies." (Systematic Theology, 1,
p. 445).
Hence
we say that while the spheres and functions of the three persons of the
Trinity
are different, they are not exclusive. That which is done by one is
participated in by the others with varying degrees of prominence. The
fact of
the matter is that there have been three great epochs or dispensations
is the
history of redemption, corresponding to and successively manifesting
the three
Persons of the Godhead. That of the Father began at the creation and
continued
until the beginning of the public ministry of Jesus; that of the Son,
embracing
a comparatively short period of time, but the important period in which
redemption was worked out objectively, began with the public ministry
of Jesus
and continued until the day of Pentecost; and that of the Holy Spirit
began
with the descent of the Holy Spirit on the disciples on the day of
Pentecost
and continues until the end of the age.
In
regard to the work of the economic Trinity we find there is a definite
procedure in the work of redemption and also in the government of the
world in
general, the work of the Father in creation and in the general plan for
the
world being primary, that of the Son in redeeming the world being
subordinate
to and dependent on that of the Father, and that of the Holy Spirit in
applying
redemption coming later in time and being subordinate to and dependent
on that
of the Father and of the Son. Hence in regard to the work of redemption
particularly, which is the great and all-important work that God does
for man
in this world, there is a logical order, that of the Father being
first, that
of the Son second, and that of the Spirit third. And when the Persons
of the
Trinity are mentioned in our theological statements it is always in
this order.
The
Father sends the Son and works through Him (John 17:8; Rom. 8:3; 1
Thess. 5:9;
Rom. 5:1), and the Father and Son work through the Holy Spirit (Rom.
5:5; Gal.
5:22, 23; Titus 3:5; Acts 15:8, 9). In Christ's own words He that is
sent is
not greater than he that hath sent him (John 13:16) ; and in His state
of humiliation,
speaking from the standpoint of His human nature, He could say, "The
Father is greater than I" (John 14:28). Paul tells us that we are
Christ's, and that Christ is God's (I Cor. 3:23) ; also, that as Christ
is the
head of every man, so God is the head of Christ (I Cor. 11:3). Numerous
things
are predicated of the incarnate Son which cannot be predicated of the
second
Person of the Trinity as such,Jesus, in His human nature, advanced in
wisdom
(Luke 2:52), and even late in His public ministry did not know when the
end of
the world was to come (Matt. 24:36). In the work of redemption, which
we may
term a work of supererogation since it is undertaken through pure grace
and
love and not through obligation, the Son who is equal with the Father
becomes
as it were officially subject to Him. And in turn the Spirit is sent
by, acts
for, and reveals both the Father and the Son, glorifies not Himself but
Christ,
and works in the hearts of His people faith, love, holiness and
spiritual
enlightenment. This subordination of the Son to the Father, and of the
Spirit
to the Father and the Son, relates not to their essential life within
the
Godhead, but only to their modes of operation or their division of
labour in
creation and redemption.
This
subordination of the Son to the Father, and of the Spirit to the Father
and the
Son, is not in any way inconsistent with true equality. We have an
analogy of
such priority and subordination, for instance, in the relationship
which exists
between husband and wife in the human family. Paul tells us that that
relationship is one of equality in Christ Jesus. in whom "there can be
no
male and female" (Gal. 3:28),-woman's soul being of as much value as
man's,-yet one of personal priority and subordination in which in the
home and
the State the husband is the acknowledged spokesman and leader. As Dr.
W.
Brenton Greene says: "In the sight of God husband and wife are, and in
the
eye of the law ought to be, halves of one whole and neither better than
the
other. But while this is so and cannot be emphasized too strongly, the
relationship of husband and wife, nevertheless, is such that the
position of
the wife is distinct from and dependent on that of the husband. This
does not
imply that the wife as a person is of inferior worth to her husband: in
this
respect there is neither male nor female; for they are both 'one in
Christ
Jesus.' Neither does it mean that the mission of the wife is of less
importance
than that of the husband. There are certain functions, moral and
intellectual
as well as physical, which she fulfills far better than her husband;
and there
are certain other functions of supreme necessity which only she can
fulfill at
all. What is meant, however, is that as there are some things of
primary
importance that only the wife can do; so there are other indispensable
functions that only the husband ought to discharge, and chief among
these is
the direction of their common life. He, therefore, should be the 'head'
of the
'one body' that husband and wife together form. Whether we can
understand it or
not, such a relationship is not inconsistent with perfect equality. It
is not
in the case of the Trinity. Father, Son and Spirit are equal in power
and
glory. Yet the Son is second to the Father, and the Spirit is second to
both
the Father and the Son, as to their 'mode of subsistence and
operation.' Whatever,
therefore, the secondary position of the wife as regards her husband
may imply,
it need not imply even the least inferiority" (Notes on Christian
Sociology).
In
the political realm we may say that the president of the United States
is
officially first, the governor of a state officially second, and the
private
citizen officially third. Yet they are each equally possessed of human
nature,
and in fact the private citizen may be a better man morally and
spiritually
than either the governor or the president. Also, two men of equal rank
in
private life may join the army, one to become a captain, the other to
become a
private soldier in the ranks of this captain. Officially, and for a
limited
time, one becomes subordinate to the other, yet during that time they
may be
equals in the sight of God. In the work of redemption the situation is
somewhat
analogous to this,-through a covenant voluntarily entered into, the
Father, Son
and holy Spirit each undertake a specific work in such a manner that,
during
the time this work is in progress, the Father becomes officially first,
the Son
officially second, and the Spirit officially third. Yet within the
essential
and inherent life of the Trinity the full equality of the persons is
preserved.
8. The
Generation of the Son and the
Procession of the Holy Spirit
The
kindred doctrines of the Eternal Generation of the Son and of the
Eternal
Procession of the Holy Spirit are admittedly doctrines which are but
very
obscurely understood by the best of theologians. Certainly the present
writer,
with his limited study and experience, is not under the delusion that
he shall
be able to give a fully satisfactory explanation of them. He proposes
only to
define the doctrines and to offer a few brief comments.
The
Eternal Generation of the Son, as stated by a representative
theologian, is
defined as: "an eternal personal act of the Father, wherein, by
necessity
of nature, not by choice of will, He generates the person (not the
essence) of
the Son, by communicating to Him the whole indivisible substance of the
Godhead, without division, alienation, or change, so that the Son is
the express
image of His Father's person, and eternally continues, not from the
Father, but
in the Father, and the Father in the Son" (Dr. A. A. Hodge, Outlines
of
Theology, p. 182).
The
following Scripture verses are commonly given as the principal support
of this
doctrine: "For as the Father hath life in Himself, even so gave He to
the
Son also to have life in Himself" (John 5:26) ; "Believe me that I am
in the Father, and the Father in me" (John 14:11) ; "Even as thou,
Father, art in me, and I in thee" (John 17:21) ; "That ye may know
and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father" (John
10:38)
; Christ is declared to be "the effulgence of his glory, and the very
image of his substance" (Heb. 1 :3) ; "For God so loved the world,
that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him
should not
perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:16).
The
present writer feels constrained to say, however, that in his opinion
the
verses quoted do not teach the doctrine in question. He feels that the
primary
purpose of these and similar verses is to teach that Christ is
intimately
associated with the Father, that He is equal with the Father in power
and
glory, that He is, in fact, full Deity, rather than to teach that His
Person is
generated by or originates in an eternal process which is going on
within the
Godhead. Even though the attempt is made to safeguard the essential
equality of
the Son by saying that the process by which the Son is generated is
eternal and
necessary, he does not feel that the attempt is successful. If, as even
Augustine, for instance, asserts, the Father is the Fons Trinitatis-the
fountain or source of the Trinity-from whom both the Son and the Spirit
are
derived, it seems that in spite of all else we may say we have made the
Son and
the Spirit dependent upon another as their principal cause, and have
destroyed
the true and essential equality between the Persons of the Trinity. As
we have
stated before, when the Scriptures tell us that one Person within the
Trinity
is known as the "Father," and another as the "Son," they
intend to teach not that the Son is originated by the Father, nor that
the
Father existed prior to the Son, but that they are the same in nature.
This,
apparently, was also the position held by Calvin, for at the conclusion
of his
chapter on the Trinity he says:
"But,
studying the edification of the Church, I have thought it better not to
touch
upon many things, which would be unnecessarily burdensome to the
reader,
without yielding him any profit. For to what purpose is it to dispute,
whether
the Father is always begetting? For it is foolish to imagine a
continual act of
generation, since it is evident that three Persons have subsisted in
God from
all eternity" (Institutes, Book I, Chap. 13).
PROCESSION OF THE HOLY
SPIRIT
The
Procession of the Holy Spirit has commonly been understood to designate
"the relation which the third person sustains to the first and second,
wherein by an eternal and necessary, i.e., not voluntary, act of the
Father and
the Son, their whole identical divine essence, without alienation,
division, or
change, is communicated to the Holy Ghost" (Dr. A. A. Hodge, Outlines
in Theology, p. 189).
"Procession"
is a more general term than "Generation," although in each case the
process is admittedly inscrutable. Procession is said to differ from
Generation
in that the Son is generated by the Father only, while the Spirit
proceeds from
both the Father and the Son at the same time,--or as some have put it,
proceeds
from the Father, through the Son.
What
we have said concerning the alleged Scripture proof for the doctrine of
the
generation of the Son is even more applicable to that which is advanced
to
prove the procession of the Spirit. There is, in fact, only one verse
in
Scripture which is commonly put forward to prove this doctrine, and it
is found
in John 15:26: "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto
you
from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the
Father, he
shall bear witness of me." Again, the best Bible scholars are divided
as
to whether or not this verse teaches the "procession" of the Spirit
in the sense that His Person originates as the result of an inscrutable
although eternal and necessary process within the Godhead, or whether
the verse
merely has reference to His mission in this world as He comes to apply
the
redemption which Christ purchased. Jesus uses a similar form of
expression when
of His own redemptive mission He says, "I came out from the Father, and
am
come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go unto the Father"
(John 16:28). In the original Greek the phrase, "came out from,"
which is here used of Jesus, is stronger than the "Proceedeth from,"
which is used of the Spirit; yet the context of John 16:28 makes it
perfectly
clear that what Jesus said of Himself had reference to His mission and
not to
what is commonly termed His eternal generation; for His coming forth
from the
Father into the world is contrasted with His leaving the world and
going back
to the Father. We are, of course, told that the Holy Spirit is sent by
the
Father and by the Son; but the mission as He comes to apply redemption
is an
entirely different thing from the procession. It seems much more
natural to
assume that the words of John 15:26, which were a part of the Farewell
Discourse, and which were, therefore, spoken within the very shadow of
the
cross, were not philosophical but practical, designed to meet a present
and
urgent need, namely, to comfort and strengthen the disciples for the
ordeal
through which they too were soon to pass. This was His method of
teaching on
other occasions, and it is at least difficult to see why He would have
departed
from it on this occasion. He was soon to leave the disciples, and He
simply
gave them the promise that another Helper, who likewise comes from the
Father,
shall take His place and be to them what He has been and do for them
what He
has done. It would seem that, since they hardly knew of the Spirit as
yet, this
would not at all have been an appropriate occasion to instruct them
concerning
the metaphysical relation which subsists between the Father and the
Spirit. They
are taught rather that the Spirit comes with divine authority, and that
He is
continually going forth from the Father to fulfill His purposes of
Grace.
Hence
John 15:26, at best, carries no decisive weight concerning the doctrine
of the
procession of the Spirit, if, indeed, it is not quite clearly designed
to serve
an entirely different purpose. We prefer to say, as previously stated,
that
within the essential life of the Trinity no one Person is prior to, nor
generated by, nor proceeds from, another, and that such priority and
subordination as we find revealed in the works of creation, redemption
and
sanctification, relate not to the immanent but to the economic Trinity.
Historically,
the doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit, which supposedly is
of
lesser consequence than that of the Generation of the Son, has been
perverted
and exaggerated out of all proportion too its real importance, and has
been
made the object of bitter and prolonged controversy between the Eastern
and
Western churches. It
was, in fact, the immediate occasion of the split in Christendom in the
eleventh century, and to this day it constitutes the main difference in
doctrine between the Greek Orthodox and the Roman Catholic churches.
The Greek
church has maintained that the Spirit proceeds from the Father only,
while the
Latin church, and also the Protestant churches generally, have
maintained that
He proceeds from both the Father and the Son. But certainly the
evidence for
the doctrine is too scanty, and its meaning too obscure, to justify the
hard
feeling and the ecclesiastical division which has resulted from it.
9.
The Trinity Presents a Mystery but not a Contradiction
To expect that we
who do not
understand ourselves nor the forces of nature about us should
understand the
deep mysteries of the Godhead would certainly be to the last degree
unreasonable. Of all the Christian doctrines this is perhaps the most
difficult
to understand or to explain. That God exists as a Trinity has been
clearly
revealed in Scripture; but the particular mode in which the three
Persons exist
has not been revealed. When we behold the Triune God we feel like one
who gazes
upon the midday sun. The finite is not able to comprehend the infinite;
and the
marvelous personality of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit remains and
must ever
remain a profound mystery regardless of all the study that the greatest
theologians of the Church have expended upon it. When we try to grasp
its
meaning the words in job come to mind, "Canst thou by searching find
out
God? Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?" The question
answers itself.
In every sphere we
are called
upon to believe many truths which we cannot explain. What, for
instance, is
light? What gives the force of gravity its pull, and through what
medium does
it act? How does the mind make contact with the physical brain ?
"There are many
things in
the world which are true but which cannot be understood," says Dr.
Floyd
E. Hamilton. "What is the real nature of electricity? What is life?
What
enable., a human body to turn the same food into bone, teeth, flesh,
and hair?
These are but a few of the questions which man has never been able to
answer,
and probably never will, but that fact does not affect their truth.
They exist,
and their existence does not depend upon our understanding them. In the
same
way, the Triune God exists and His existence does not depend upon our
understanding the mysteries of His nature" (The Basis of Christian
Faith, p. 278).
And Dr. David S.
Clark remarks:
"We must distinguish between apprehension and comprehension. We can
know
what God is, without knowing all He is. We can touch the earth while
not able
to embrace it in our arms. The child can know God while the philosopher
cannot
find out the Almighty unto perfection." (A Syllabus of Systematic
Theology, p. 59).
"It is a mystery
indeed," says Professor Flint, "yet one which explains many other
mysteries, and which sheds a marvelous light on God, on nature, and on
man" (Anti-Theistic Theories, p. 439).
Most people will
admit, for
instance, that they do not understand Einstein's theory of relativity;
yet few
will be so bold as to declare it irrational. We do not understand how
such a
vast amount of energy can be locked up within the atom; but the
recently
developed atomic bomb proves beyond doubt that it is there. Unless God
were too
great for our full intellectual comprehension, He would surely be too
small to
satisfy our spiritual needs.
But while the
doctrine of the
Trinity presents a mystery, it does not present a contradiction. It
asserts
that God is one in one respectin substance or essenceand that He is
three in an
entirely different respect-in personal distinctions ; and the charge of
anti-trinitarians, that there is no middle ground between the Unitarian
position (which asserts the unity of God but denies the Deity of Christ
and the
personality of the Holy Spirit) and Tritheism (which asserts that there
are
three Gods) is easily refuted by this fact. The doctrine of the Trinity
is
above reason, and could never have been discovered by man apart from
divine
revelation; yet it cannot be proved contrary to reason, nor
inconsistent with
any other truth which we know concerning God.
Furthermore, we
hardly see bow
any one can insist that the doctrine of the Trinity strikes the average
person
as unreasonable when as a matter of fact Pantheism (which holds that
every
person and every thing which exists is but one of the innumerable forms
in
which God exists) is the form of philosophy which has been the most
widely
diffused and the most persistently held by the various peoples down
through the
ages. If the human mind has been able to conceive of God as existing in
such an
infinite number of forms, surely the statement that He exists in three
Persons
should not be hard to believe. The fact is that the doctrine as
presented in
Scripture is found to be eminently agreeable to reason. The historic
Christian
Church in all its branches has held tenaciously to this doctrine; and
on the
part of individuals the deepest and truest and most fruitful Christian
faith
has been found in those who have had an experimental knowledge and
fellowship
not only with God the Father, but also with Christ the Son and with the
Holy
Spirit,-that is, in Evangelicals as distinguished from Unitarians and
Modernists.
Let it be remembered
that we are
under no obligation to explain all the mysteries connected with this
doctrine.
We are only under obligation to set forth what the Scriptures teach
concerning
it, and to vindicate the teaching as far as possible from the
objections that
are alleged against it. It is a doctrine which should never be
presented to an
unbeliever as a subject for argumentative proof, for it can be accepted
only by
faith, and that only after the person is convinced that God has spoken
and that
He has revealed this as a truth concerning Himself. With the Psalmist
we are
compelled to say, "Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high,
I
cannot attain unto it" (139:6) ; and with Athanasius, "Man can
perceive only the hem of the garment of God; the cherubim cover the
rest with
their wings." But though we are not able to give a full explanation of
our
faith we may know, and should know, what we believe and what we do not
believe,
and should be acquainted with the facts and truth on which our faith
rests.
Many
analogies have
been given
down through the ages to illustrate this doctrine, but we had as well
admit
that none of them have been of any special value and that some of them
have
been positively misleading. Some of the more common are: body, soul and
spirit;
intellect, emotion and will in man; stem, flower and seed in the plant;
egg,
larva and butterfly in the insect; solid, liquid and gas in matter;
light, heat
and radiance in the sun, etc. None of these, however, are true
analogies. All
of them fail to do justice to the personal element, particularly to the
tri-personal element, in the Godhead. The best of them, that of
intellect,
emotion and will in man, presents three functions in one person, but
not three
persons in one substance. Those of the solid, liquid and gas, or of the
egg,
larva and butterfly, are not Christian, but Unitarian; for they
represent the
same substance as going through three successive stages.
Since there is none
like God,-for
"to whom will ye liken God, or what likeness will ye compare unto
Him,"-we shall look in vain for any explanation of the Trinity either
in
the structure of our own minds or in nature about us. As the Trinity is
not
discoverable by reason in the first place, so it is not capable of
proof by
reason in the second place. We receive it only because it is taught in
Scripture, and just as it is taught there. As Luther said concerning
this
doctrine: "We should, like the little children, stammer out what the
Scriptures teach: that the Father is truly God, that Christ is truly
God, that
the Holy Ghost is truly God, and yet that here are not three Gods, or
three
Beings, as there are three men, three angels, or three windows."
10.
Historical Aspects of the Doctrine
During the first
three centuries
of the Christian era, theological discussion was centered almost
entirely on
the relationship subsisting between the Father and the Son, to the
almost
complete neglect of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. In the nature of
the case
the development of a formal statement of the doctrine of the Trinity
was a slow
process. During the second and third centuries the influence of Stoic
and
Platonic thought caused some to deny the full Deity of Christ and to
attempt to
reduce Him to such dimensions as were considered commensurate with a
world of
time and space. Then against this tendency there arose a reaction,
known as
Monarchianism, which identified the Father, Son and Holy Spirit so
completely
that they were held to be only one Person who manifested Himself in
different
capacities.
We are not to infer
that the
doctrine of the Deity of Christ was a deduction from that of the
Trinity, but
rather the reverse. Because of the claims which Christ made, the
authority
which He assumed, the miracles which He worked, and the glory which He
displayed, particularly in His resurrection, the early Christians were
practically unanimous in their recognition of Him as truly God. This
conviction, together with the inferential statement of the doctrine of
the
Trinity in the Baptismal Formula and in the Apostolic Benediction,
served as
their basis in the formulation of the doctrine. But since they were
equally
convinced that there was but one true God, the difficulty arose as to
how to
reconcile these two fundamental articles of the faith. There were some
who
attempted to solve the difficulty by denying the Deity of Christ, but
their
numbers were so few during the first two centuries that they had little
influence.
This controversy was
settled for
the early Church by the Council of Nicaea, in Asia Minor, which met in
the year
325. Under the influence of Athanasius, who later became Bishop of
Alexandria,
the Council declared for the full and eternal Deity of Christ, who was
declared
to be "God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, being of one
substance with the Father."
But so absorbed had
the Council
been in working out the doctrine concerning the Person of Christ that
it
omitted to make any definite statement concerning the Holy Spirit.
Athanasius
had taught the true Deity of the Holy Spirit, but many of the writers
of the
period identified Him with the Logos or Son, while others regarded Him
as but
the impersonal power or efficacy of God. It was but natural that until
the
question concerning the Person and nature of the Son was settled not
much
progress could be made in the development of the doctrine of the Holy
Spirit.
The defect of the Nicene Creed was remedied, however, by the Second
Ecumenical
Council, which met at Constantinople in 381, and included in its creed
the
statement: "We believe in the Holy Ghost, who is the Lord and Giver of
life, who proceedeth from the Father, who, with the Father and Son,
together is
worshipped and glorified, who spake by the prophets."
Another heresy which
arose was
that of Sabellianism. This view held that there was but one Person in
the
Godhead, and that the terms Father, Son and Holy Spirit simply denoted
this one
Person in different capacities. As Creator of the world He was known as
Father;
as Redeemer of the race He was known as the Son; and when working in
the hearts
of men He was known as the Holy Spirit. Some chose to say that it was
the same
God who in Old Testament times was known as Father, who afterward
became
incarnate as the Son, and who reveals Himself in the Church as the Holy
Spirit.
These different manifestations of the same Person were considered
analogous to
that of a man who is known in his home as father, in the Church as an
elder,
and in the community as a doctor.
But this view
satisfied the
religious consciousness of Christians in only one regard, namely, in
recognizing the true Deity of Christ. Its defects were glaring; for if
the
phases were successive, then God ceased to be the Father when He became
the
Son, and ceased to be the Son when He became the Holy Spirit. The
incarnation
was reduced to a temporary union of the Divine and the human nature in
the man
Jesus Christ. This view was so out of harmony with the Scriptures that
it was
soon rejected, and the Church doctrine, which is neither Tritheism nor
Sabellianism but the true mean between these errors, was maintained.
One other
trinitarian heresy that
we should notice was that of the Socinians. They held that Christ was
only a
man, a very good man to be sure, in fact the best of men because more
fully
animated and controlled by the power of God than any other had ever
been, but
who had no existence until he was born by ordinary generation of Joseph
and
Mary. They acknowledged that he possessed a more advanced revelation
from God
than had been given to any of the earlier prophets or teachers. They
perceived
the impropriety of worshipping a creature as the Arians had done,
regardless of
how high he might be exalted; and while less orthodox than the Arians,
they
were at this point more consistent. This view was, of course, condemned
by the
Church, but it has continued as a heresy on the outskirts of true
religion down
through the ages. Present-day Modernism, which is essentially a denial
of the
supernatural in religion, also carries on the Socinian tradition with
more or
less consistency.
To Augustine belongs
the credit for
having made a considerable advance in the development of the doctrine,
and for
centuries his book, On The Trinity, remained the standard work
on the
subject. While Athanasius had secured the acceptance by the Church of
the true
personality and Deity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, he did allow
that the
Son and the Holy Spirit were subordinate to the Father in order and
dignity.
Augustine did away with the idea of subordination by stressing the
numerical
unity of their essence, and through his powerful influence the doctrine
was
accepted by the Church in fact as well as in theory. Although the
Reformation
was a time of great advances in the development of doctrine, that of
the
Trinity has been wrought out so clearly at the earlier period that
there was no
tendency to enter into speculation concerning it. Both Luther and
Calvin
refused to go beyond the simple statements of Scripture, although it
did fall
to Calvin to reassert the self-existence and the full equality of the
Son and
the Holy Spirit with the Father against those who taught that the
generation of
the Son and the procession of the Holy Spirit denoted perpetual
communication
of essence from the Father and therefore dependence. In Calvin's
statement the
idea of the equalization of the persons took the place of the ideas of
generation and procession.
The Church of the
Scriptures and
of the creeds is, of course, Trinitarian, not Unitarian. Up until a
century ago
every denomination and practically every local church taught the
doctrine of
the Trinity as a matter of course. But with the passing of the years a
change
has taken place, and even in many of the so-called evangelical churches
this
doctrine, which, sets forth eternal and unchanging truth, is scarcely
mentioned, while in others it, like many other essential truths, is
challenged,
doubted or denied. The truth has not changed, but the attitude of many
in our
generation toward that truth has changed; and today the controversy
rages with
new vigour, not only against the foe without, but also against the
fleece-clad
foe within.
In an excellent
article on The
Doctrine of the Trinity, Dr. Clarence E. Macartney has the
following to say
about the present-day controversy. "What Athanasius contended against
in
his day was the effort to give the world a damaged Christ. He knew that
a
damaged Christ was no Christ. He knew that a redemption wrought out by
any
other save the God of redemption, God the Father, God the Son, and God
the Holy
Spirit, was no redemption at all. Under different names and forms there
appears
from time to time that same subtle effort of unbelief to persuade the
world to
accept a damaged Christ instead of the Christ who is the eternal Son of
God.
Not since the days of Arius has there been so widespread and warmly
propagated
a movement to substitute for the New Testament Christ, the Christ of
redemption, a lesser Christ, a damaged Christ. The leaders of this
movement
either openly deny the New Testament accounts of the miraculous entry
of Christ
into the world, or hold the acceptance or the rejection of those
accounts of
how Christ came has nothing to do with Christianity. This new Christ
probably
did not work miracles. He did not die on the cross as a substitute for
man,
taking his place, and bearing his sins before the law of God. He did
not rise
from the dead with the same body in which He was entombed in Joseph's
sepulchre, nor in that body did He ascend into the heavens to intercede
at the
right hand of God the Father Almighty; and the repeated statements of
the New
Testament about His glorious and triumphant return to the earth mean
only that
truth and right are at length to prevail upon the earth. Yet the men
who hold
these views still talk, and some of them still preach, about Christ.
What
Christ? 'Who is this?' the people exclaimed when Jesus rode into
Jerusalem amid
the plaudits of the multitude. Today the Christian Church may well
exclaim
concerning this new, this damaged Christ, 'Who is this?"'
It may be of
interest to give a
brief summary of the creedal statements of the Church concerning this
doctrine.
We have said that during the first three centuries there were no
important
councils and that the formulation of a creedal statement was a slow
process.
The early Christians held the doctrine, as it were, in solution; time
and
controversy were destined to precipitate it out. Because of the
bitterness of
the Jews, the mockery of the pagans, and the inevitable confusion and
contradiction in the mode of statement even by those within the Church
who
honestly intended to hold what the Scriptures taught concerning it, the
Church
was compelled to analyse the doctrine and to set it forth in clear-cut,
formal
statements.
The best summary of
the teaching
of the various creeds, so far as we know, is found in the
above-mentioned
article by Dr. Macartney, and is prefaced by the following remarks:
"As we read these
statements
let us remember that they represent no idle and airy speculations, but
a noble
effort of trained minds to define and explain the truth of the Trinity
as they
had found it in the pages of the Bible and in the traditions of
believing
Christians. Let us remember, too, that these statements, especially the
earlier
ones, were formulated in times when Christianity was being fiercely
assailed by
unbelief. At Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, and other cities
of the
United States, the visitor is taken to see an old fort, or the site of
an old
fort, where the first settlers established themselves and defended
themselves.
These log forts, with loophole and outlook, standing now in the midst
of great
cities, mark the growth and progress of the nation, for without the
enterprise,
heroism and sacrifice which are associated with these forts, there
would not
have been a nation. These ancient confessions are like venerable
fortresses.
They mark the crises in the history of Christianity and recall the
heroism and
daring of men who refused to have their Christian heritage taken from
them, and
in the face of a world of unbelief cried out, 'Credo! I believe!' There
is no
cant so ignorant, so wretched, so worthy of immeasurable scorn, as that
so
popular today, which belittles creeds and the men who gave them to us,
and the
men who defend them, and say that they have nothing to do with
practical
Christianity. Without these creeds, and the courage and love and faith
which
they represent, Christianity would long ago have perished from off the
face of
the earth."
1. The Nicene
Creed (325):
"We believe in one
God-And
in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, light
of
light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance
with
the Father-And in the Holy Ghost."
2. The Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed (381).
In this creed the
clauses concerning
the Father and the Son are practically the same as in the Nicene Creed.
But the
article concerning the Holy Ghost is changed to the following: "And in
the
Holy Ghost, who is the Lord and giver of life, who proceedeth from the
Father,
who, with the Father and Son, is worshipped and glorified, who spake by
the
prophets."
3. The Athanasian
Creed (origin
and time uncertain, but the most logical and elaborate of the creeds) :
"And the Catholic
Faith is
this: that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither
confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance; for there is one
Person of
the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the
Godhead
of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one; the glory
equal,
the majesty co-eternal. For like as we are compelled by the Christian
verity to
acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so we are
forbidden by
the Catholic Religion to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords."
4. The Augsburg
Confession
(1530),-the oldest Protestant creed and the accepted standard of
Lutheranism:
"There is one Divine
essence
which is called and is God, eternal, without body, indivisible, of
infinite
power, wisdom, goodness, the Creator and Preserver of all things,
visible and
invisible. And yet there are three Persons of the same essence and
power, who
also are coeternal, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost."
5. The
Thirty-Nine
Articles
(1571),-the creed of the Church of England and of the Protestant
Episcopal
Church in the United States:
"There is but one
living and
true God. And in the unity of this Godhead there are three Persons, of
one
substance, power and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost."
6. The
Westminster
Confession
(1647),-the creed of the Presbyterian Church, with which the Canon of
the Synod
of Dort, the symbol of the Reformed Church, agrees quite closely:
"There is but one
living and
true God. In the unity of the Godhead there are three Persons, of one
substance, power, and eternity-God the Father, God the Son, and God the
Holy
Ghost. The Father is one, neither begotten not proceeding; the Son is
eternally
begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the
Father and
the Son."
11.
Practical Importance of the Doctrine
The doctrine of the
Trinity is
not to be looked upon as an abstract metaphysical speculation, nor as
an
unnatural theory which has no bearing on the practical affairs of life.
It is
rather a most important revelation concerning the nature of the only
living and
true God, and of His works in the salvation of men. The very purpose of
the
Gospel is, of course, to bring us to the knowledge of God precisely in
the way
in which He has revealed Himself. And as Calvin tells us in the
introductory
sentence in his Institutes:
"True and
substantial wisdom
principally consists of two parts, the knowledge of God, and the
knowledge of
ourselves."
And then he adds
that "no
man can take a survey of himself but he must immediately turn to the
contemplation of God in whom he lives and moves: since it is evident
that our
very existence is nothing but a subsistence in God alone."
The knowledge of God
the Father
who is the source of redemption, of God the Son who achieves
redemption, and of
God the Holy Spirit who applies redemption, is declared in Scripture to
be
eternal life. Every other conception of God presents a false god to the
mind
and conscience. So different is the system of theology developed, and
the
manner of life which flows from it, that for all practical purposes we
may say
that Unitarians and Trinitarians worship different Gods.
This is an advanced
doctrine
which was not made known in Old Testament times, and that for the very
reason
that it could not be understood until the objective work of redemption
had been
completed. But in the New Testament it is interwoven with the whole
Christian
economy, not in terms of speculative philosophy but in those of
practical
religion.
"The doctrine of the
Trinity," says Dr. Bartlett, "lies in the very heart of Christian
truth. It is the centre from which all other tenets of our faith
radiate. If we
entertain wrong views of the nature of the Supreme Being our entire
theology is
imperiled" (The Triune God, p. 13).
Inscrutable, yet not
self-contradictory, this doctrine furnishes the key to all of the other
doctrines which have to do with the redemption of man. Apart from it
doctrines
such as the Deity of Christ, the incarnation, the personality of the
Holy
Spirit, regeneration, justification, sanctification, the meaning of the
crucifixion and the resurrection, etc., cannot be understood. It thus
underlies
the whole plan of salvation. As Dr. Henry B. Smith tells us:
"For
the Trinity
there is a
strong, preliminary argument in the fact that in some form it has
always been
confessed by the Christian Church, and that all that has opposed it has
been
thrown off. When it has been abandoned, other chief articles, as the
atonement,
regeneration, etc., have almost always followed it, by logical
necessity; as
when one draws the wire from a necklace of gems, the gems all fall
asunder" (System of Christian Theology, p. 49.)
"The idea of the
Trinity," says Dr. Warfield, "illuminates, enriches and elevates all
our thoughts of God. It has become a commonplace to say that Christian
theism
is the only stable theism. That is as much as to say that theism
requires the
enriching conception of the Trinity to give it permanent hold upon the
human
mind-the mind finds it difficult to rest in the idea of an abstract
unity for
its God: and that the human heart cries out for the living God in whose
Being
there is that fulness of life for which the conception of the Trinity
alone
provides."
And again:
"If he (the
believer) could
not construct the doctrine of the Trinity out of his consciousness of
salvation, yet the elements of his consciousness of salvation are
interpreted
to him and reduced to order only by the doctrine of the Trinity which
he finds
underlying and giving their significance and consistency to the
teaching of the
Scriptures as to the processes of salvation. By means of this doctrine
he is
able to think clearly and consequently of his threefold relation to the
saving
God, experienced by him as fatherly love sending a Redeemer, as
redeeming love
executing redemption, as saving love applying redemption. . . . Without
the
doctrine of the Trinity, his conscious Christian life would be thrown
into
confusion and left in disorganization if not, indeed, given an air of
unreality; with the doctrine of the Trinity, order, significance and
reality
are brought to every element of it. Accordingly, the doctrine of the
Trinity
and the doctrine of redemption, historically, stand or fall together. A
unitarian theology is commonly associated with a Pelagian anthropology
and a
Socinian soteriology. It is a striking testimony which is borne by F.
E.
Koenig: 'I have learned that many cast off the whole history of
redemption for
no other reason than because they have not attained to a conception of
the
Triune God'. (Biblical Doctrines, pp. 139, 167).
The doctrine of the
Trinity gives
us a theocentric system of theology, and thus places in true
proportion
the work of God the Father. God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. This
system
alone gives us the proper approach to the study of theology, showing
that it
must be from the standpoint of the triune God rather than from that of
the
second or third Person of the Trinity, or from man,-that is,
theocentric rather
than Christocentric or anthropocentric. It should be unnecessary for us
to have
to say that theocentric theology (by which we mean that which is
generally
known as the Reformed or Calvinistic faith) gives Christ a very high
place in
the system. He is the Godman, the center and course of salvation; but
while
soteriology has a prominent place, it is not made the organizing
principle, but
rather one of the subdivisions in the theological system. The history
of
doctrine shows quite clearly that those who have attempted to organize
the
system of theology around the person of Christ, regardless of their
good
intentions, have tended to slight other vital truths and to drift into
a
superficial system. Their system is unstable and tends to gravitate
downward,
relinquishing one doctrine after another until it becomes
anthropocentric.
The third system,
quite common in
our day and generally known as Modernism or Humanism, is
anthropocentric,-that
is, it attempts to understand the nature of God by reconstructing Him
from what
we know of man. This system allows man to cast his own shadow over God,
limiting His Lordship. It means that Christ is to be looked upon
primarily as a
man, and that, as expressed by an outstanding Modernist of our day,
nobody
should go to Jesus "to his manger and his cross to find the omnipotence
that swings Orion and the Pleiades." All such errors are to be avoided
by
placing God in His triune nature at the center of our theological
system. Only
thus shall we arrive at a true knowledge of Him. This is the Biblical
order:
first, the Father, who is the Creator and the Author of salvation; then
the
Son, who provides redemption objectively; and then the Holy Spirit, who
applies
redemption.
One cause of the
strength of the
Trinitarian theology has been the appeal which it makes to the inward
sense of
sin,-that sad weight which rests so heavily upon every serious
soul---while the
great weakness of Unitarianism has been its insensibility to the
reality and
consequences of sin. Trinitarians have seen sin not merely as
misfortune or
incomplete development, but as awful and heinous crime, repulsive to
God, and
deserving His just wrath and punishment. They have held that it could
not
merely be pardoned without an atonement (that is, without any one
suffering the
consequences), but that God is under as much obligation to punish sin
as He is
to reward righteousness. On the other hand Pelagians, Socinians, and
present-day Modernists and Unitarians have taken a superficial and
minimizing
view of sin, with the inevitable result that their faith has been
superficial,
their religious feelings have been deadened, and the sinews of all
evangelistic
and missionary effort have been cut. Having given up the doctrine of
the
Trinity, they naturally take a low view of the person of Christ. Even
according
to their own admission the great literature to which a Christian would
turn for
faith, hope, love and inspiration has been almost exclusively the
product of
trinitarian writers. Hence the best method to use in dealing with
Modernists
and Unitarians is to arouse in them the sense of sin; for once a person
realizes the hideous and ghastly nature of his sin he also realizes
that none
other than a Divine Redeemer can save him from it.
And that brings us
to another
point: If there were no trinity, there could be no incarnation, no
objective
redemption, and therefore no salvation; for there would then be no one
capable
of acting as Mediator between God and man. In his fallen condition man
has
neither the inclination nor the ability to redeem himself. All merely
human
works are defective and incapable of redeeming a single soul. Between
the Holy
God and sinful man there is an infinite gulf; and only through' One who
is
Deity, who takes man's nature upon Himself and suffers and dies in his
stead,
thus giving infinite value and dignity to that suffering and death, can
man's
debt be paid. Nor could a Holy Spirit who comes short of Deity apply
that
redemption to human souls. Hence if salvation is to be had at all it
must be of
divine origin. If God were only unity, but not plurality, He might be
our
judge, but, so far as we can see, could not be our Saviour and
sanctifier. The
fact of the matter is that God is the way back to Himself, and that all
of the
hopes of our fallen race are centred in the truth of the Trinity.
It is difficult to
maintain in
the independence and self-sufficiency of God on any other than the
Trinitarian
basis. Those who believe in a uni-personal God almost instinctively
posit the
eternity of matter or an eternal and necessary creation in order to
preserve a
subjectiveobjective relationship. Even many Trinitarian theologians
have
heldwhether correctly or not there is difference of opinion-that the
Divine
nature demands either an eternal Christ or an eternal creation. It is
felt that
apart from a creation a unitary God would be a most lonely and solitary
Being,
limited in companionship, love, mercy, justice, etc., and hence not
self-sufficient. The Unitarian conception of God is unstable, and these
considerations to quite a large extent account for its distinct
tendency toward
Pantheism. In the New England theology, for instance, we find that the
high
Unitarianism of Charming degenerated into the half-fledged Pantheism of
Theodore Parker, and then into the full-fledged Pantheism of Ralph
Waldo
Emerson. As Trinitarians we feel that a God who is necessarily bound to
the
universe is not truly infinite, independent and free.
"A Unitarian,
one-personed
God," says Dr. Charles Hodge, "might possibly have existed, and if
revealed as such, it would have been our duty to have acknowledged His
lordship. But, nevertheless, He would have always remained utterly
inconceivable to us-one lone, fellowless conscious being; subject
without
object; conscious person without environment; righteous being without
fellowship or moral relation or sphere of right action. Where would
there be to
Him a sphere of love, truth, trust, or sympathetic feeling? Before
creation,
eternal darkness; after creation, only an endless game of solitaire,
with
worlds for pawns." (Systematic Theology, I, p. 127).
This Unitarian idea
of God
over-emphasizes His power at the expense of His other attributes, and
tends to
identify Him with abstract cause and thought. On the other hand the
doctrine of
the Trinity shows us that in His relations with us His love is primary,
and
that His power is exercised in the interests of His love rather than
that His
love is exercised in the interests of His power. The words, "God is
love" (I John 4:8) are not a rhetorical exaggeration, but an expression
of
truth concerning the Divine nature. We are convinced that the
trinitarian
conception of God, as judged by its piety and morality at home and its
missionary zeal abroad, is by all odds the highest: and once we have
thus
conceived of God and felt the new fullness, richness and force given
through
the divine fellowship we can never again be satisfied with a modalistic
or
Unitarian conception.
Something of the
invaluable
service rendered by the doctrine of the Trinity is brought out when we
see how
it embraces, combines and reconciles in itself all the half-truths of
the
various religions and heresies that have held sway over the minds of
men. There
have been in the main three outstanding false systems, namely,
Polytheism,
Pantheism, and Deism. That these systems embrace elements of important
truth
cannot be denied; yet upon the whole they are false and injurious.
The truth in
Polytheism, which is
that God exists in a plurality of persons and powers, abundantly
sufficient
within His own nature to allow free play to all of the moral and social
qualities or personality, is embraced in the doctrine of the Trinity;
but its
errors, that it destroys the unity of God, and that it separates and
personifies these various powers and worships them in isolation or
under some
visible manifestation such as the sun, moon, rivers, trees, animals,
images,
etc., is rejected.
The
truth of
Pantheism, which is
that God is everywhere present and active, the irresistible current of
force
which flows through all movements and all life,-a truth which, as Dr.
A. A.
Hodge says, "is realized in the Holy Ghost, who, while of the same
substance as the Father, is revealed to us as immanent in all things,
the basis
of all existence, the tide of all life, springing up like a well of
water from
within us, giving form to chaos and inspiration to reason, the
everpresent
executive of God, the Author of all beauty in the physical world, of
all true
philosophy, science and theology in the world of thought, and of
holiness in
the world of the Spirit",-is embraced in the doctrine of the Trinity;
but
the errors of Pantheism, which are that God has no personal existence
except as
He comes to consciousness in man, that His only life is the sum of all
creature
life, and that His immediate participation in every thought and act of
the
creatures makes Him the author of sin, is rejected. Furthermore, in the
incarnation of Christ the eternal Son God has stooped to a real and
permanent
incarnation, and has done sublimely what the incarnations of the
heathen
mythology have only caricatured.
The
truth of Deism, which is that God is the Creator of the universe, the
ultimate
source of all power, enthroned in the highest heaven, and that His
power is
manifested through second causes, namely through the unchanging order
of
natural law, is embraced in the doctrine of the Trinity; but the errors
of
Deism, which are that God is an absentee God, that He works only
through second
causes, that He is not in personal and loving contact with His people,
and that
Ile is therefore not concerned with their prayers and desires, is
rejected.
Similarly,
too, in regard to the heresies which have arisen within the Christian
Church. The
doctrine of the Trinity acknowledges the truth of Arianism, which is
that
Christ existed before the creation of the world and that He was
possessed of
supernatural power; but it rejects the errors of Arianism, which is
that Christ
was not co-eternal and co-equal with the Father, that He was in the
final
analysis only a creature and hence far short of Deity. With
Sabellianism it
acknowledges the full Deity and power of Christ and of the Holy Spirit,
but
denies its error, which is that it makes no proper distinctions between
the
Persons within the Godhead. With Nestorianism it acknowledges both the
true
Deity and the true humanity of Christ, but denies its error, which is
that it
separates the Divine and human natures in such a way as to render Him a
dual
personality.
Wherever
the doctrine of the Trinity has been abandoned, with Christ as the
connecting
link between Deity and humanity, the tendency has been toward an
abstract and
immobile form of monotheism, toward the far-off God of Deism, or,
recoiling
from that, to lose God in the world of Pantheism. To identify God with
nature
is to attribute evil as well as good to Him; and this kind of religion
had its
logical outcome in the old worship of Baal, the supreme male divinity
of the
ancient Phoenicians, and of Ashtaroth, the goddess of love and
fruitfulness,
with all of their attendant and unmentionable abominations. The
Christian
doctrine of the Trinity supplies us with safeguards against both these
errors,
and at the same time provides us with the link between God and man, the
link
which philosophical speculation has striven so vainly to find. It is
the true
protection of a living Theism, which otherwise oscillates uncertainly
between
the two extremes of Deism and Pantheism, either of which is fatal to
it.
This
doctrine should, of course, be preached in every Christian Church. It
is a
mistake to say that people will no longer listen to doctrinal
preaching. Let
the minister believe his doctrines; let him present them with
conviction and as
living issues, and he will find sympathetic audiences. To-day we see
thousands
of people turning away from pulpit discussions of current events,
social
topics, political issues, and merely ethical questions, and trying to
fill
themselves with the husks of occult and puerile philosophies. In many
ways we
are spiritually poorer than we should be, because in our theological
confusion
and bewilderment we have failed to do justice to these great doctrinal
principles. It rightly preached these doctrines are most interesting
and
profitable, and are in fact indispensable if the congregation is to be
well
grounded in the Faith. We arc convinced that the chief need of the
present age
is great theology, and that only the emergence and dominance of great
theology
will produce an adequate basis for true Christian living.
It
is certain that no merely speculative theory, and especially none so
mysterious
and so out of analogy with all other objects of human knowledge as is
that of
the Trinity, could ever have held such a prominent place and been so
emphasized
by all of the churches of Christendom as has this doctrine unless its
controlling principle were vital.
In
the nature of the case Anti-trinitarianism inevitably leads to a
radically
different system of religion. Historically the Church has always
refused to
recognize as Christians those who rejected the doctrine of the Trinity.
Also,
historically, every great revival of Christianity down through the ages
has
been a revival of adhesion to fullest Trinitarianism. It is not too
much to
say, therefore, that the Trinity is the point on which all Christian
ideas and
interests focus, at once the beginning and the end of all true insight
into
Christianity.