On Sat, 10 May 2008 17:45:20 -0400, "Carl" <saints@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>The following article by Van Lees concerns the Biblical doctrine of the
Holy
>Trinity. It is a enlightening and informative article.
>
>May God bless,
>Carl
>my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
>my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
>
>---
>
>THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY
>by Van Lees
>
>One of the more im****tant and central doctrines of Christianity is the
>doctrine of the Trinity. The concept that there is one God that subsists
in
>three persons is essential to the Christian faith. J. Oliver Buswell,
Jr.,
>in his Systematic Theology of the Christian Religion states, "The
doctrine
>of the Trinity is indispensable for the harmony and unity of other major
>doctrines in the Christian system" (p. 126). A good example of the
>essentiality of the doctrine of the Trinity is its relation to the
>incarnation of Christ. It would be impossible to conceive of God
becoming
>man, dying for the sins of man, and rising from the dead apart from the
>concept of the Trinity.
>
>"For God (the Father) so loved the world that he gave his only begotten
Son
>(the second person of the Trinity) that whosoever believeth in him
(through
>the conviction and enabling work of the Holy Spirit, John 16:8; Eph.
2:1-8)
>should not perish but have everlasting life (John 3:16) (Buswell., p.
128).
>
>The doctrine of the Trinity is not an arithmetic paradox; it does not
teach
>that one equals three. The doctrine propounds that there is but one God,
>that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is each God; and that the
>Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is each a distinct person - a
>self-conscious being.
THUS 3 G-D's
The classic definition of the Trinity is: God is one
You just said 3?
>in essence and three in person.
Thus 3 g-D's
The reason people usually have trouble
>understanding this is that we are accustomed to the idea that "one person
>equals one essence." While there is mystery involved in the Trinity, it
is
>not irrational; it does not present an antinomy.
>
>The doctrine of the Trinity is not explicitly, but rather implicitly set
>forth in the Scripture. This format, however, in which the doctrine is
>presented does not cause it to be an unbiblical concept. B. B. Warfield,
in
>his article, "The Biblical Doctrine of the Trinity" states: "The doctrine
of
>the Trinity lies in Scripture in solution; when it is crystallized from
its
>solvent it does not cease to be Scriptural, but only comes into clearer
view
>(Biblical and Theological Studies, p. 22)
the Doctrine is not even hinted at nor implied unless You read it into
it, by a confusing formula and double speak
the Word Trinity is not mentioned anywhere in scripture, so i quess
G-D overlooked something or had to hit the John, just before He
was going to put it in there, but forgot while wa****ng their hands.
>
>The entire Bible is Trinitarian to the core. It is incorrect to advocate
>that the New Testament is Trinitarian and the Old Testament is
monotheistic.
>The doctrine of the Trinity is present in the Old Testament, but it is
>enunciated more in the guise of intimation than direct revelation. Some
of
>the indications of the Trinity in the Old Testament are: the employment
of
>plural pronouns in reference to God (Gen. 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isa. 6:8),
>repetitions of the name of God that seem to distinguish between God and
God
>(Psa. 45:6,7; 110:1), and threefold liturgical formulas (Numbers 6:24,26;
>Isa. 6:3).
so when YHWH says to wor****p no other G-D than Him , and that thre was
no G-D either Before him, or after him, he was just kidding.
oh that YHWH, He is such a kidder.
>
>The Angel of God in the Old Testament is a particularly strong indication
of
>the Trinity (Gen. 16:7-13; 22:1,2, 11-18; 31:11-13; 48:15,16; Exo. 3:2-6;
>13:21 and 14:19; 23:20-23 and 33:14; 32:34 - compare Exo. passages with
>Judges 2:1-4 and Exo. 20:1,2; Josh. 5:5:13-15; Judges 6:11-23; 13:18-22;
2
>Sam. 24:16; Zech. 12:8). In every context the Angel of God speaks and
>performs deeds as if he were God himself, but distinguishes himself from
>God.
>
>The Old Testament also contains references to the Son (Psa. 2:12) and to
the
>Holy Spirit (Gen. 1:2). There are many passages which depict God's Word
and
>Spirit as co-causes with God of his work (Gen. 1:2; Psa. 33:6; Isa 42:1;
>Hag. 2:5,6). Included in this category are passages that tend to
>personalize God's Word (Psa. 33:6; 107:20; 147:15-18; Isa. 55:11; 63:10).
>
>The Trinity is also alluded to in those passages in which the Messiah as
a
>Divine speaker refers to the Lord and/or the Spirit as having sent him
(Isa.
>48:16; 61:1 [see: Luke 4:16-18]; Zech. 2:10,11). The distinct persons of
>the Trinity are also implied in Isaiah 63:9,10. Isaiah speaks of the
Lord,
>the Angel of his presence, and his Holy Spirit as distinct persons.
>
>These implications in the Old Testament that God is triune in his nature
>were prepatory for the fuller revelation of the New Testament (ibid., p.
>29,30). Concerning this B. B. Warfield states:
>
>The Old Testament 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
was
>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 (p. 30, 31).
>
>In the New Testament, the doctrine of the Trinity is not seen as a
gradually
>developing doctrine; it appears as a fully mature concept. The theme of
the
>New Testament caused the doctrine to be the fully established conception
of
>God within the Christian community. The process of redemption was God's
>complete revealing of himself to man; the incarnation and the subsequent
>manifestations of the Holy Spirit set forth the full revelation of the
>Trinity. Consequently, the New Testament writers did not consider
>themselves to be departing from the God of the Old Testament, but rather
>felt that the God of the Old Testament had made himself more fully known
to
>man through the redemptive process. The doctrine of the Trinity
constitutes
>the conception of God set forth through the incarnation of the Son and
the
>outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the basic proof that God is a
>Trinity lies in the sup****t for the deity of the Son and the deity of the
>Holy Spirit. Thus, the whole mass of the New Testament is evidence for
the
>Trinity because the core of the New Testament is concerned with the
>do***entation of the deity of Christ and the deity of the Holy Spirit
>(Warfield, p. 35).
>
>The New Testament abounds with proof for the deity of Jesus Christ. In
>eight passages, Jesus is described by the Greek word Theos (God): John
>1:1-3; 1:18; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:8; 2 Pet. 1:1; 1 John
5:20.
>Divine attributes, such as eternality (Isa. 9:6; John 1:1,2; Rev. 1:8;
>22:13), omnipresence (Matt. 18:20; 28:20; John 3:13), omniscience (John
>2:24,25; 21:17; Rev. 2:23), omnipotence (Isa. 9:6; Phil. 3:21; Rev. 1:8),
>immutability (Heb. 1:10-12; 13:8), and in general, every attribute of the
>Father is ascribed to the Son (Col. 2:9).
>
>The New Testament also depicts Jesus as exercising Divine prerogatives
and
>works: creation (John 1:3,10; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2,10), providence (Luke
>10:22; John 3:35; 17:2; Eph. 1:22; Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3), the forgiveness
of
>sins (Matt. 9:2-7; Mark 2:7-10; Col. 3:13), resurrection and judgment
(Matt.
>25:31,32; John 5:19-29; Acts 10:42; 17:31; Phil. 3:21; 2 Tim. 4:1), and
the
>final dissolution and renewal of all things (Eph. 1:10; Heb. 1:10-12;
Phil.
>3:21; Rev. 21:5) (see: Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof, p. 94, 95).
>
>The New Testament also affirms the deity of Jesus in calling him Yahweh.
>Old Testament prophecies concerning Yahweh are quoted in the New
Testament
>as being references to Jesus (compare Mal. 3:1 and Luke 1:76; Joel 2:32
and
>Rom. 10:13; Isa. 45:23 and Rom. 14:10). (Buswell, p. 104, 105). These
>examples are adequate to demonstrate that the New Testament contains a
>myriad of proof for the deity of Jesus Christ.
>
>The deity of the Holy Spirit may be proven through a line of reasoning
>similar to that used to demonstrate the deity of the Son. Peter uses the
>terms Holy Spirit and God interchangeably in Acts 5:3,4, thus directly
>calling the Holy Spirit God. Divine attributes are ascribed to the Holy
>Spirit: omnipresence (Psa. 139:7-10), omniscience (Isa. 40:13,14, compare
>with Romans 11:34), omnipotence (1 Cor. 2:11; Rom. 15:19), and eternality
>(Hebrews 9:14). Divine works are performed by the Holy Spirit such as
>creation (Gen. 1:2; Job 26:13), regeneration (John 3:4,5; Titus 3:5), and
>the resurrection of the dead (Rom. 8:11) (Berkhof, p. 97, 98).
>
>The Holy Spirit is also ascribed the qualities of personhood and
personality
>in Scripture. These qualities consist of mind, will, and emotions. For
>example, in Romans 8:26, 27, the Holy Spirit helps in prayer, searches
>hearts, is said to have a mind, and intercedes for the saints (see also 1
>Cor. 2:11).
>
>1 Corinthians 12:11 states that the Holy Spirit gives spiritual gifts to
>various Christians "just as he wills." Ephesians 4:30, in providing
ethical
>exhortations, urges Christians not to grieve the Holy Spirit of God, thus
>attributing emotion to the Holy Spirit. In Acts 5:3,4, Peter said that
>Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit. One does not lie to an impersonal
force.
>This passage not only affirms the deity of the Holy Spirit, but also
>demonstrates his personhood. The following passages teach that the Holy
>Spirit will teach, speak, guide, convict of sin, witness, comfort,
glorify
>Christ, give gifts, etc. All of these are qualities of personality: John
>14:26; 15:26; 16:14; Acts 13:1-3; 16:6,7; 20:22,23; 21:11; Rom. 8:14-16,
>26,27; 1 Cor. 2:10,11; 12:1-3, 12,13; Galatians 5:22-25; Ephesians
1:13,14;
>4:30; Titus 3:3-5; Hebrews 10:29; Jude 20; Revelation 22:17.
>
>These proofs of the deity of the Son and the Holy Spirit implicitly teach
>the triune nature of God.
>
>Even though the doctrine of the Trinity is basically taught implicitly in
>the New Testament, it is also explicitly set forth in numerous passages.
>The teaching of Jesus affirms a Trinitarian concept of God. Concerning
this
>B. B. Warfield states: He [Jesus] has much to say of God his Father, from
>whom as His Son He is in some true sense distinct, and with whom He as He
>represents the is in some equally true sense one. And He has much to say
of
>the Spirit, who represents Him Father, and by whom He works as the Father
>works by Him (ibid. p. 37).
>
>A good example of this is the discourses of Jesus in the gospel of John.
>Jesus is direct in his assertions that he and the Father are one (John
>10:30) and that this oneness entails a unity of interpenetration (John
>10:38; 14:10,11). Jesus' unity with the Father is seen clearly by his
claims
>of eternality (John 8:58; 17:5,18) (ibid. p. 38). His speaking of
himself
>as the Son of God (John 5:25; 9:35; 10:36; 11:4) also affirms his
equality
>with the Father because the Jewish usage of the term "son of. . ."
conveyed
>the idea of equality and identity of nature. The Jews understood that
when
>Jesus called himself the Son of God, he was identifying himself as equal
and
>identical with God (John 5:18; 10:33) (Buswell, p. 105). Jesus also
>stressed that he possessed a personal distinctness from the Father. He
>explained his presence in the world as involving a coming forth out of
God
>(John 8:42; 16:28). Jesus spoke objectively of the Father sending him
into
>the world (John 8:42; 17:21), of an interchange of emotions between the
>Father, himself, and his disciples (John 16:26, 28, 30; 17:33), and of
his
>having fellow****p with the Father (John 7:29). Therefore, Jesus not only
>claims a oneness with the Father, but also pur****ts that there is a
>distinction of person between them: a subject-object relation****p that
>involves an exchange of emotions, such as love (John 17:23,24) and of an
>action and reaction upon each other (John 17:8) (Warfield p. 39).
>
>The teaching of Jesus also sup****ts the deity of the Holy Spirit and
>declares that a subject-object relation****p also exist between the Father
>and the Son and the Holy Spirit. In Jesus farewell discourse, he stated:
>"These things I have spoken to you, while abiding with you. But the
Helper,
>the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you
all
>things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you (John
>14:25,26 NASB)." This passage demonstrates a personal distinctness
between
>the three persons of the Godhead. The unity of the Father, the Son, and
the
>Holy Spirit, however, is set forth in the same discourse. After stating
>that the Spirit would come in his stead, Jesus said that he would not
leave
>his disciples as orphans, but that he would come to them (John 14:18).
>Therefore, in this discourse, Jesus indicated that there is a unity
between
>himself and the Holy Spirit. Consequently, the teaching in John 14
>indicates a distinctness of the persons in the Godhead and also indicates
>that where the Spirit is present, so also is Christ, and where Christ is
>present, so also is the Father; both a distinction and unity of the
persons
>of the Godhead is suggested and, thus, the doctrine of the Trinity is
>presupposed (Buswell, p.114-115).
>
>The most direct pronouncement of Jesus concerning the Trinity is found in
>the great commission. Matthew 28:19 states: "Go therefore and make
disciples
>of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and
the
>Holy Spirit. . . (NASB)." Before examining what this passage asserts, it
is
>im****tant to note what it does not assert. It does not say, in the names
>(plural) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, as if to
>indicate three different persons. Neither does it state, in the name of
the
>Father, Son and Holy Spirit, as if to imply that the Father, Son, and
Holy
>Spirit are designations for a single person. The passage does declare
the
>unity of the Godhead in its singular use of "name;" it also sets forth
the
>distinctness of each person in the Godhead through the repetition of the
>definite article before each name. Therefore, this passage teaches the
>unity of the Godhead, in that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit
each
>have a common usage of the one name; it also designates a distinct
>personhood to each of the three members of the Trinity: the Father, the
Son,
>and the Holy Spirit (Warfield, p. 42).
>
>B. B. Warfield summarizes this well:
>
>This is a direct ascription to Jehovah the God of Israel, of a threefold
>personality, and is therewith the direct enunciation of the doctrine of
the
>Trinity. We are not witnessing here the birth of the doctrine of the
>Trinity; that is presupposed. What we are witnessing 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 (p. 44).
>
>The triune nature of God, evidenced in the redemptive process, underlies
the
>teaching of the New Testament. It is an assumed fact and a pivot upon
which
>the early Christian community's conception of God turned.
>
>Historically, a theological problem arose concerning the relation****p
>between the three persons of the Trinity. Neo-Stoic and Neo-Platonic
ideas
>existent in the second century influenced Christian thought. The result
was
>that a concept of the Godhead arose that proposed a subordination of the
Son
>and the Holy Spirit to the Father in their modes of subsistence
>(Logos-Christology). Monarchianism, a reaction against this concept of
the
>Godhead, stated that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit were only
>different expressions of the one Divine person. The Church, particularly
>through the work of Tertullian, came to a balance between these two
>positions. Under the leader****p of Athanasius, the Church's formal
>declaration of the Trinity was set forth by the Council of Nicea in A. D.
>325 (Warfield, p. 57-58). However, traces of subordinationist thought
were
>still present in the Nicean Creed in the form of the idea of an eternal
>generation of the Son. This concept is captured in the Nicean Creed by
its
>phrase: "God out of God" (theos ek theou). Eternal generation
essentially
>postulates that the Father is the beginning or author of the being of the
>Son. Consequently, only the Father has being in himself. Eternal
generation
>does not mean a creation of the Son by the Father and it does not suggest
a
>pattern modeled after human generation (i.e. there is no reference to a
>female personage in the Godhead). Neither does it attempt to separate or
>divide the Divine essence. The concept does claim that the Son is
eternally
>begotten or generated by the Father. The eternality of the Son was
>recognized by the Church at the time of the Council of Nicea in that
claimed
>that the Son was eternally begotten. This concept, however, tends to
>subordinate the Son to the Father in modes of subsistence as well as
>operation because it uses elements of language that are inherent from the
>Logos-Christology.
>
>These tendencies toward the essential subordination of the Son led to a
>misinterpretations of John 15:26. Instead of correctly interpreting the
>verse in its immediate context that after the ascension of Christ, the
Holy
>Spirit would be manifested in the Church, the early Church followed
>subordinationist ideas and postulated that the Holy Spirit "proceeded"
from
>the Father and the Son (the Eastern branch of the Church claimed the Holy
>Spirit "proceeded" only from the Father). The Church said this
procession,
>like the generation of the Son, is eternal and, therefore, protected the
>deity of the Holy Spirit. However, this concept also tended to
subordinate
>the Holy Spirit ontologically and, thus, make him a quasi-dependent being
>(Buswell, p. 119). Therefore, the Nicean Creed defended the essential
deity
>of the Son, but it contained components of subordinationist thought
which,
>if unwarrantably emphasized, could make the Son inferior to the Father
>ontologically. This same subordinationist thought could also lead to the
>Holy Spirit being understood as ontologically inferior. Because of these
>problems, it became necessary in later church history to reassert the
>self-existence of the Son and the Holy Spirit.
>
>John Calvin, in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, reemphasized
that
>the Son was God in himself. In Book 1, Chapter 13, Article 19 of the
>Institutes. . ., Calvin cites Augustine for sup****t and contends that the
>Father and the Son is each God in respect to himself, but each derives
his
>personhood of Father or Son from the relation****p he sustains with the
>Father or Son. Calvin emphasizes this point in 1,13,25 in stating that
each
>person of the Trinity is deity and exists in himself. However, the
>personhood of each member of the Trinity stems from his relation****p with
>the other persons of the Godhead. Therefore, the Father is not the
deifier
>of the Son. Finally, in 1,13,29, Calvin says, "Indeed it is foolish to
>imagine a continual act of begetting, since it is clear that three
persons
>have subsisted in God from eternity." In summary, Calvin contends that
the
>Son is God in himself and derives his hypostatic distinction of Son from
his
>relation****p to the Father and the Father is God in himself and derives
his
>hypostatic distinction of Father from his relation****p to the Son. The
>nature of this relation****p simply remains a mystery since God has not
>revealed it.
>
>The solution to the seeming paradox of an equality and subordination
>existing in the Trinity simultaneously lies in understanding the
difference
>between the ontological and economical Trinity. Ontologically, each
member
>of the Trinity is equal; each is God in himself and has self-existence.
>However, Scripture teaches a subordination of the Son to the Father and
the
>Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son in an economic or administrative
>sense. In the administrative aspects of redemption, the Father sends the
>Son and the Father and the Son send the Holy Spirit. There exists,
>therefore, a divine order in the intra-personal relation****ps of the
members
>of the Trinity. However, the modes of procession between the members of
the
>Godhead are a mystery; the mode of paternity or filiation between the
Father
>and the Son is an incommunicable property. Therefore, it is impossible
to
>explain the precise nature of the relation****ps between the different
>members of the Godhead. It is im****tant, however, to maintain a balance
>between the ontological Trinity and the economic Trinity; neither must be
>allowed to overshadow the other. Historically, serious errors have
occurred
>particularly when the administrative aspects of the Trinity have been
>applied in an ontological sense. This has usually resulted in the Son
and
>the Holy Spirit being demeaned.
>
>The Westminster Shorter Catechism summarizes the doctrine of the Trinity
>well:
>
>Are There more Gods than one? There is but one only, the living and true
>God. How many persons are there in the Godhead? There are three persons
in
>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 (Questions 5,
6).
>
>BIBLIOGRAPHY
>
>Berkhof, Louis. 1939. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Eardman's.
>
>Buswell, J. Oliver, Jr. 1962. A Systematic Theology of the Christian
>Religion. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
>
>Calvin, John. 1960. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Philadelphia:
The
>Westminster Press.
>
>Warfield, B. B. 1952. "The Biblical Doctrine of the Trinity." Biblical
and
>Theological Studies. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publi****ng
>Company.
>
|
