James Boyce originally wrote this over 100 years ago but his points
concerning the Biblically-based doctrine of the Trinity remain just as
valid
now as they did then. It's an interesting and educational look into an
essential Biblical doctrine. I hope you will save this article and read it
carefully.
May God bless,
Carl
website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
---
The Trinity
by Rev. James Petigru Boyce, D. D., LL. D.,
The Scripture doctrine of the Trinity is set forth in the abstract of
principles of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in these words
(Art.
III.): " God is revealed to us as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, each with
distinct personal attributes, but without division of nature, essence or
being.''
The peculiarity of this definition is that it is a mere statement of the
Scriptural facts revealed, while, at the same time, it includes every
point
involved in the doctrine of the Trinity as held by orthodox Christians of
all ages. There is no addition to the Scripture facts, but the complete
exhibition which these words make of the doctrine, shows that it has been
correctly formulated from what God has himself revealed. As he alone can
know and reveal what he is, so we must accept his statements, however
mysterious and incomprehensible may be his revelation.
This definition suggests to us a method of treatment by which, in the
utmost
simplicity and Scripturalness, the whole truth on this im****tant subject
may
be attained.
I. THE RELATION OF FATHER AND SON.
God is revealed to us as the Father; not merely in the general way in
which
he is called the Father of all created beings, and they his sons; nor in
that in which he is the Father of those who are his sons, in virtue of the
adoption, which is in Christ Jesus; but the Father as indicative of a
special relation between him and another person whom the Scriptures call
his
only begotten Son. There are several cl***** of Scripture passages which
reveal this.
1. That class in which, in recognition of this relation, Christ addresses
God as "Father." Matt. 11:25, 26; Mark 14:36; Luke 10:21; 22:42 ; 23:34,
46;
John 12:26, 27, 28 ; 17:1, 5, 11, 24, 25.
2. That class in which Christ speaks of him as peculiarly his Father. The
ex-pression "our Father" is never used by him, except in the Lord's prayer
when he is teaching the disciples how to pray. Matt. 10:32, 33 ; 15:13;
16:17; 18:10, 19; 20:23 ; 24:36; 25:34; 26:29, 39, 42, 53; Luke 2:49;
22:29;
24:49; John 5:17, 43; 6:32; 8:19, 38, 49, 54; 10:18, 25, 29, 30, 32, 37;
12:26; 14:7, 20, 21, 23; 15:1, 8, 10, 15, 23; 20:17; Rev. 2:27; 3:5.
3. That class in which the Father is spoken of as sending and as giving
the
Son.
This does not include many passages in which Christ is said to be sent,
but
only those in which he is referred to as sent by the Father. John 3:16,
17;
5:37; 6:37-40, 57; 8:16-19; 10:36 ; John 12:45, 49 ; 14:24 ; 17:18; 20:21.
4. A fourth class represents the Father as knowing and loving the Son.
Matt.
11:27; Luke 10:22; John 3:35; 5:20.
5. There is, also, a class in which Christ and the Father are said to be
co-workers, or in which the works of Christ are claimed to be the Father's
witness to him. John 5:17; 10:25, 32, 36, 37, 38.
6. That class in which the Father is said to put special honour on the
Son.
John 3:35; 5:23, 25, 26, 27.
7. There is yet another class in which peculiarity of relation is shown by
such terms, as
(1.) " My beloved Son;" the language is very strong and emphatic, "my Son,
the beloved." Matt. 3:17; 17:5; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22; 2 Pet. 1: 17.
(2.) " Only begotten Son." John 1:14, 18; 3: 16, 18; 1 John 4:9.
(3.) " His own Son." Rom.8:32. In connection with this, it should be
remembered that, in John 5: 18, the charge made against Christ by the Jews
was that he "called God his own Father making himself equal with God."
8. The statements that the Son alone has seen, and known, and revealed the
Father, also show peculiarity of this relation****p. John 1:18; 14:6-11;
17:25, 26.
9. The same peculiarity is shown by the manner in which Christ speaks of
the
works he does by virtue of it. See his Sabbath day discourse after curing
the man at the pool of Bethesda. John 5:19-31, 36, 37; also, John 14:10,
11.
II. THIS FATHER IS GOD
The relation pointed out above, is one borne by Christ to the supreme God.
It is he, whom the Scriptures call God in the true sense of that word, to
whom Christ is said by them to be Son to the Father.
1. There are the passages which expressly call Christ "Son of God." All
are
here omitted where the name is given by devils, or by the Centurion, or in
any other way in which the authority of inspired teaching may not be
claimed
for its use.
Mark 1:1 ; Luke 1:35; John 5:25; 10:36; 11:27; Acts 9:20; Gal. 4:4; 1 John
4:15; 5:5, 20, 21.
2. There are other passages in which the epithet "God" is ascribed to the
Father in this relation****p.
John 1:18; 3:16, 17; 6:18 ; Rom. 1:1-4; 8:31, 32; 2 Pet. 1:17; 1 John 4:9,
10; 2 John 3.
III. THIS SON IS GOD
1. He is expressly called God. It is not denied that this epithet, like
that
of Lord, is applied in an inferior sense to others. The mere use of these
titles would not prove that the one to whom they are attributed has the
divine nature. But the manner in which they are applied to Christ, and the
frequency of that application, become, along with the other evidences
presented, an incontestable proof, that he, as well as the Father, is true
God. If they were not ascribed to Christ in the Scriptures, their absence
would be conspicuous and well-fitted to cast doubt on the other evidence.
Matt. 1:23; John 1:1; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Titus 1:3; Heb. 1:8.
In the above are omitted, as, on various grounds, doubtful. Acts 20:28; 1
Tim. 3:16; and 1 John 5:20. An exegetical study of these passages will
show,
even with the text of the recent critics, that they strongly corroborate
the
doctrine that Christ is God.
2. Christ is also called Lord. This title is used in both the Old and New
Testaments still more generally than is that of God. An examination of the
texts here quoted, will show that, in a peculiar sense, only suited to
Christ as God, is it applied to him. Matt. 12:8; 22:41-45; Mark 2:28; Luke
6:46; 20:41-44; John 13:13, 14; Acts 10:36 ; Rom. 14:9; 1 Cor. 2:8; Gal.
1:3; 6:18; Phil. 2:11; 2 Thess. 2:16; Jude 4; Rev. 17:14; 19:13, 16.
3. He is a peculiar object of wor****p. The wor****p paid to him is not
merely
that reverential respect offered to kings and others in authority, but
such
wor****p as was refused by the apostles with horror, because they were mere
men (Acts 14:13-15), and against which, when offered to him by John, even
the mighty angel (Revelation 19:10; 22:9) earnestly protested. All
doubtful
cases of wor****p are here omitted, even that of the wise men (Matt. 2:2,
11)
in which perhaps divine wor****p was paid. Matt. 14:33; Luke 24:52; Acts
7:59, 60; 2 Cor. 12:8, 9; Phil. 2:10; Heb. 1:6; Rev. 5:8-14; 7:9-12.
4. He is to be honoured equally with the Father. John 5: 23.
5. His relations to the Father are those of identity and unity. John 1:18;
5:17-19; 8:16, 19; 10:30; 12:44, 45; 14:7-11; 15:24; Heb. 1:3; Col. 1:15,
19; 2:9; 1 John 2:23, 24.
6. They are equally known to each other, and unknown to all others. Matt.
11:27; Luke 10:22; John 1:18; 6:46; 10:15.
7. He is the creator of all things. John 1:3, 10; 1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:16;
Heb. 1:10.
8. He upholds and preserves all things. Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3.
9. He is the manifestation of the Divine Being in this world. John 1:10,
14,
18; 14:8-11; 16:28-30; Col. 1:15; 1 Tim. 3:16; 1 John 1:2.
10. He is greater than all others; greater than Moses, and David, and
Solomon, and Jonah, and the Baptist; and not greater than man only, but
than
all the spiritual intelligences of the universe. Matt. 3:11; 12:41,42;
Mark
12:37; Luke 11:31,32; John 1:17; Eph. 1:21; Phil. 2:9; Heb. 1:4,5; 3:3; 1
Pet. 3:22.
11, He is the source of all spiritual blessing.
(a) He gives the Holy Spirit. Luke 24:49; John 16:7; 20:22; Acts 2:33.
(b) He forgives sins. Mark 2:5-10; Luke 5:20-24; 7:47-49; Acts 5:31.
(c) He gives peculiar peace. John 14:27; 16:33. Is not he the one who is
called "God of Peace?" Rom. 15:33; 16:20; 2 Cor. 13:11; Phil. 4:9; 1
Thess.
5:23; Heb. 13:20.
(d) He gives light. John 1:4, 7, 8, 9; 8:12; 9:5; 12:35, 46; 1 John 1:5-7;
Rev. 21:23.
(e) He gives faith. Luke 17:5; Heb. 12:2.
(f) He gives eternal life. John 17: 2.
(g) He confers all the spiritual gifts bestowed upon his churches. Eph.
4:8-13.
12. All the incommunicable attributes of God are ascribed to him.
(a) Self-existence. He has power over his own life. John 2:19; 10:17, 18.
He
has life in himself, as has the Father. John 5:26.
(b) Eternity of existence. John 1:1, 2; 17:5, 24; Heb. 1:8, 10-12; 1 John
1:2.
(c) Omniscience. Matt. 9:4; 12:25; Mark 2:8; Luke 6:8; 9:47; 10:22; John
1:48; 2:24,25; 10:15; 16:30; 21:17; Col. 2:3; Rev. 2:23.
(d) Omnipresence. Matt. 18:20; 28:20; John 3:13; Eph. 1:23.
(e) Omnipotence. Matt. 28:18; Luke 21:15; John 1:3; 10:18; 1 Cor. l:24;
Eph.
l:22; Phi1.3:21; Col. 2:10; Rev. 1:18.
(f) Immutability. Heb. 1:11, 12; 13:8.
13. The judgement of the world is entrusted to him. Matt. 16:27; 24:30;
25:31; John 5:22, 27; Acts 10:42; 17:31; Rom. 2:16; 14:10; 2 Cor. 5:10; 2
Tim.4:1.
14. Absolute equality with the Father is ascribed to Him. This shows that
the unity and identity, before referred to, is not of will, but of nature;
and that the names, and wor****p, and attributes of God are not bestowed on
any other ground than that he is true God.
(a) Equality in works. John 5:17-23.
(b) Equality in knowledge. Luke 10:22; John 10:15.
(c) Equality in nature. John 5:18; 10:33; Phil. 2:6; Col. 2:9; Heb. 1:3.
It will be seen by the foregoing statements that the Scriptures distinctly
teach the existence of God in the personal relations of Father and Son,
and
that each of them is God. No reference has been made to the Old Testament,
in proof of the divinity of Christ. The New Testament is the most natural
source of such instruction, because it reveals to us the fulfilment of
God's
purpose in sending his Son into the world, and teaches us clearly his
nature
and relation to the Father. What the nature of this relation of Son and
Father is, will be hereafter examined in the discussion of the eternal
Son****p of Christ. What the Old Testament says of Christ will also be
presented hereafter.
There remains, however, to be shown that
IV. THE FATHER AND SON HAVE DISTINCT PERSONAL ATTRIBUTES.
This fact is so manifest, from the manner in which the Scripture speaks of
each, as to need but brief discussion.
The mere use of the names Father and Son points out a relation between two
persons. That to each of them is ascribed the attributes of character,
such
as love, hate, goodness, mercy, truth, and justice, which can only exist
in,
and be exercised by persons, shows separate personality. Neither, except
through distinct personal relation, can mutual love be said to be
exercised,
as by Christ to the Father, John 14:31; and by the Father to Christ, John
3:35; 5:20; 10:17; 17:24. Manifestly, also, there must be two persons,
when
one is said to send, and another to be sent; one to give, and another to
be
given; one to teach, and another to be taught; one to show, and another to
perceive what is shown; one to receive power, and another to bestow it;
and
one to be declared, with respect to another, to be "the effulgence of his
glory and the very image of his substance," Heb. 1:2; and, because in the
form of that other, to have "counted it not a prize to be on an equality
with God." Phil. 2:6.
We have here, therefore, not the one God, manifesting himself sometimes as
Father, and sometimes as Son; but a distinction of persons in the Godhead,
in which we are taught that in that Godhead there exists a personal
relation
of Father to Son, and Son to Father, with a distinct individuality and
personality of each.
V. THE HOLY SPIRIT A PERSON.
The Scriptures designate, by several very similar terms, the third
personality revealed in the Godhead. He is called "the Spirit," " the
Spirit
of God," " the Holy Spirit," " my Spirit," " the Spirit of the Lord," "the
Spirit of Christ," " thy good Spirit," " the Spirit of glory, "the Spirit
of
grace," " the Spirit of knowledge and understanding, the Spirit of counsel
and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord," "the Holy
Spirit of promise," "the Spirit of truth," and "the Spirit of wisdom."
Christ also called him "the Comforter," and "another Comforter."
The divine Spirit, thus denominated, must either be some power or
influence
exerted by God, or a distinct person in the Godhead. It cannot be simply
the
spiritual part of God, as is the spirit in man, for God is not compounded
of
spirit and body. This is manifest from his immateriality. Neither can it
be
in any way a part of his spiritual nature, as sometimes a distinction is
made in man, between his mind and spirit, or his soul and spirit. The
perfect simplicity of God, which forbids all composition, makes this
impossible. It is, therefore, either God himself exercising some power or
influence, or a person in the Godhead. An examination of the Scripture
shows
that it is the latter.
1. The evidences of personal action show that the Spirit is not merely a
power or influence from God, but is either God himself or a divine person.
(1.) The Scriptures speak of the Spirit as in a state of activity. Gen.
1:2;
Matt. 3:16; Acts 8:39. The language in these passages may be
anthropomorphic, but the state of activity taught is undoubtedly real.
(2.) They declare that the Spirit teaches and gives instruction. Luke
12:12;
John 14:26; 16:8, 13, 14; Acts 10:19; 1 Cor. 12:3.
(3.) The Spirit is also spoken of by them, as a witness of Christ to his
people. John 15:26.
(4.) They also assert that he witnesses to believers that they are the
children of God, and becomes the earnest of their inheritance. Rom. 8:16;
2
Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13, 14; 4:30.
(5.) He is spoken of as leading the sons of God. Rom. 8:14.
(6.) He is also said to dwell within them in such a way that his presence
is
that of God. John 14:16, 17; Rom. 8:9, 11; 1 Cor. 3:16, 17; 6:19.
(7.) We are taught that he is grieved. Eph. 4: 30.
(8.) Ananias is charged with having lied to him. Acts 5: 3.
(9.) Blasphemy against him is the unpardonable sin. Matt. 12:31, 32.
(10.) He is spoken of as resisted by men. Acts 7:51.
(11.) Also as vexed by them. Isa. 63:10.
(12.) As striving with them. Gen. 6:3.
(13.) As inspiring men. Acts 2:4; 8:29; 13:2; 15:28; 2 Pet. 1:21.
(14.) As interceding for them. Rom. 8:26, 27.
(15.) As bestowing diversities of gifts. 1 Cor. 12:4-11.
In all these cases there is personal activity, thought, and feeling. What
is
thus declared, cannot be true of a mere power, or influence. The only
question can be, whether this person is God, distinct from any plurality
of
personal relations, or whether he is another personality in the divine
nature.
2. The Scriptures show that he is a separate person from the Father and
the
Son.
(1.) It is stated that he proceeds from the Father. John 15:26. A personal
being, proceeding from a person, cannot be that person himself. The proofs
above given, therefore, of his personal action and emotion, show that this
Spirit is another person.
(2.) He is given, or sent by the Father. John 14:16, 26; Acts 5:32, and by
the Son, John 15:26; 16:7; Acts 2:33. He that is sent cannot be identical
with him that sends.
(3.) He is called the Spirit of the Father. Eph. 3:16; and also the Spirit
of Christ, and of the Son. Rom. 8:9; Gal. 4:6, perhaps also 2 Thess. 2:8.
(4.) The Son is said to send the Spirit from the Father. John 15:26; and
God
is said to send the Spirit of the Son. Gal. 4:6.
(5.) The Spirit is distinguished from the Father, and the Son, in passages
which directly connect them with each other. Matt. 3:16, 17; 28:19; John
14:26; 15:26; 16:13; Acts 2:33; Eph. 2:18; 1 Cor. 12:4-6; 2 Cor. 13:14; 1
Pet. 1:2.
(6.) The personality of the Spirit is also ably argued from "the use of
the
personal pronouns in relation to him," by Dr.Charles Hodge, Sys. Theol.,
Vol. I, p. 524. Not only are personal pronouns used by the Spirit, and of
the Spirit., but there is a departure from grammatical rule, in the use of
a
masculine pronoun in connection with a neuter noun, unless the masculine
is
warranted by the fact, that a person is referred to who may be called
"he."
VI. THE HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD.
So completely do the Scriptures identify the Spirit with the Supreme God,
that the fact of his personality having been established, his essential
divinity will at once be admitted. In the discussion of the Trinity,
therefore, the point of necessary proof as to the Spirit is his
personality,
while that as to the Son is his divinity. The abundant proof of the
divinity
of the Spirit is found :
1. In the passages which call him "the Spirit of God" and "the Spirit of
the
Lord," as well as those in which God calls him "my Spirit." These are
conclusive, in like manner, as is the divinity of Christ from those which
call him the Son of God. The titles "Spirit of God," and "Spirit of the
Lord," are each used about twenty-five times in the Bible. "My Spirit" is
used in reference to God's Spirit in Gen. 6:3; Prov. 1:23; Isa. 44:3;
59:21
; Ezek. 36:27; 39:29; Joel 2:28; Haggai 2:5; Zech. 4:6.; Matt. 12:18; Acts
2:17, 18.
2. The writers of the New Testament declare that certain things, which in
the Old Testament are ascribed to Jehovah, were said by the Spirit.
Compare
Acts 28:25-27, and Hebrews 3:7-9, with Isaiah 6:9, and also Heb. 9:8, with
Ex. 25:1, and 30:10.
3. The sacred writers of the Old Testament were the messengers of God, and
spake for him, yet the influence by which they became such is called in
the
New Testament the Holy Ghost. Compare Luke 1:70 with 2 Peter 1:21; 2 Tim.
3:16, and Heb. 1:1 with 1 Peter 1:11; also Jer. 31:31, 33, 34, with Heb.
10:15-17.
4. The creation of the world is ascribed to the Spirit. Gen. 1: 2; Job
26:13; Ps. 104:30.
5. He is said to search, and know even the deep things of God. 1Cor. 2:10.
6. He is spoken of as omnipresent. Ps. 139:7-10, and omniscient. Ps.
139:11;
1 Cor. 2:10.
7. The divinity of the Spirit is peculiarly proved by his influences over
Christ. It having been shown that Christ the Son is God, the connection of
the Spirit of God with Christ, though it were only in his human nature, is
a
convincing proof that the Spirit, which is not a mere power of God, but a
person, as we have seen above, must be also God.
(1.) In his birth. Matt. 1:18, 20; Luke 1:31-35.
(2.) Mental and spiritual influences from the Spirit were predicted. Isa.
11:2, and Isaiah 61:1.
(a) And these were fulfilled at his baptism. Matt. 3:16; John 1:33.
(b) At the time of the temptation in the wilderness. Matt. 4:1; Mark 1:12.
(c) In his preaching. Luke 4:14, 18-21.
(d) In his casting out devils. Matt. 12:28.
(3.) This spiritual influence was without measure. John 3:34.
8. The indwelling of the Spirit in the people of God is said to make them
the temple of God. Compare 1 Cor. 3:16, and 6:19 with 2 Cor. 6:16, and
Eph.
2:22.
9. The Spirit is expressly called God in connection with the falsehood of
Ananias and Sapphira. Acts 5:3, 4, 9.
VII. THE THREE REVEALED DISTINCTLY.
The scriptural proofs of the personality and divinity of the Father, Son
and
Holy Spirit having now been considered, it is proper to notice a few
passages of Scripture in which the Three are revealed distinctly, by being
mentioned, or manifested together. [See others under V. 2, (5), p. 132.]
1. At the baptism of Christ are seen the Son, who has just been baptized,
and the "Spirit of God descending as a dove," while, from Heaven above,
[and
therefore from the Father and not from the Spirit, who is thus manifested
distinctly from the Father,] is heard "a voice," "saying, this is my
beloved
Son, in whom I am well pleased." Matt. 3: 17.
2. An equally plain distinction is set forth in the language of Christ,
Matt. 28:19, in which he commanded baptism to be performed "into the name
of
the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." This act of baptism is
such as to involve the divinity as well as the personality of the Three,
for
it is an act of wor****p such as can be paid to God only; it is a
profession
of faith in God and his righteousness, which can be due to God only; and
it
is a pledge of fealty, such as God has plainly taught he will share with
no
other.
3. In our Lord's last discourse he promises to send "the Comforter," "even
the Holy Spirit," "from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which
proceedeth from the Father." Here the Son sends, the Spirit is sent, and
the
Spirit proceeds from the Father. He is also referred to as one "whom the
Father will send in my name." See John 14:26, and 15:26.
4. The apostle Paul evidently refers to this same Three, when he writes
the
Corinthians of "the same Spirit," "the same Lord," and "the same God." 1
Cor. 12: 4-6.
5. The benediction, with which Paul closes his second epistle to the
Corinthians, also presents unitedly, yet separately, the same Three;
certain
blessings are invoked, but with no apparent distinction of rank among
those
of whom they are asked. If there be any prominence, it is given the rather
to the Son than to the Father.
VIII. THESE THREE ARE ONE GOD.
Our definition states that these Three are revealed as without division of
nature, essence, or being. It is not intended to indicate, by the use of
these three words, any wide distinction between them. They are nearly
alike.
Yet some distinction exists. By nature is meant that peculiar character of
being which makes one kind of being to differ from another. Thus we speak
of
the divine nature, or the angelic nature, or the human nature, or the
brute
nature; meaning that peculiarity of life, and character, and personal
condition, which makes a God, or an angel, or a man, or a brute. By
essence
is meant, that peculiarity, in the nature itself, which constitutes what
is
necessary to its existence, so that we cannot say, in the absence of that
essence, that such a nature exists. Take away from human nature that which
is its essential quality, and it must cease to be human nature. Being is
the
essence of any nature becoming actually existent in that nature. In God
nature and essence must be identical, because everything in the nature of
God is necessary to his existence, and consequently the nature can neither
be greater nor less than the essence; indeed they must be the same.
Neither
can being be separated from the nature and essence of God, though it is
not
identical with them. The necessity of his actual existence is something
inherent in his nature. There could be no such nature without necessarily
involving the existence of some person or persons in it.
When it is affirmed, therefore, that there is no "division of nature,
essence, or being," all that is meant is simply that there is but one God;
that such is the divine nature that it cannot be multiplied, or divided,
or
distributed, any more than God can be thus divided in his omnipresence
with
all things. The divine nature is so possessed, by each of the persons in
the
Trinity, that neither has his own separate divine nature, but each
subsists
in one divine nature, common to the three. Otherwise the three persons
would
be three Gods. So also, in that divine nature, its essential quality is
not
divided in its relation through the nature to the persons. Were this so,
there would be three separate parts of the divine nature. But that this
cannot be, is manifest from the identity in God of nature and essence.
That
it is not so, is declared by the Scriptures, when they teach that there is
but one God. In God there is also but one divine being, because there is
but
one divine essence and nature. There is but one that can have actuality of
existence. The being of person, not being identical with that of nature, a
fact which is true of all natures, created or uncreated, the unity of the
nature, and of the essence does not forbid plurality of persons. The
threeness of the persons, therefore, does not destroy the unity of the
nature or essence, and consequently, not that of the being of God.
The Scriptures teach everywhere the unity of God explicitly and
emphatically. There can be no doubt that they reveal a God that is
exclusively one. But their other statements, which we have been examining,
should assure us that they also teach that there are three divine persons.
It is this peculiar twofold teaching, which is expressed by the word
"trinity." The revelation to us, is not that of tritheism or three Gods;
nor
of triplicity, which is threefoldness, and would involve composition, and
be
contrary to the simplicity of God; nor of mere manifestation of one person
in three forms, which is opposed to the revealed individuality of the
persons; but it is well expressed by the word trinity, which is
declarative,
not simply of threeness, but of three-oneness. That this word is not found
in Scripture is no objection to it, when the doctrine, expressed by it, is
so clearly set forth.
PERSONAL RELATIONS IN TRINITY.
The Scripture doctrine of the Trinity, as we have seen, presents three
persons occupying mutual relations to each other. There consequently arise
certain questions as to these relations. What is their nature? What has
originated them? When did they begin ? In what respects do the persons
differ from each other? Is there perfect equality between them? If there
is
any kind of subordination, in what does it consist ?
These questions will be best answered, first by some general statements
applicable to all the relations; next by special consideration of the
Son****p of Christ, and of the Procession of the Spirit; followed by an
examination of the equality, and subordination of the Son and Spirit.
I. GENERAL STATEMENTS.
1. The nature of these relations can be indicated in no other forms than
those set forth in Scripture. They are matters of pure revelation. The
fact
of their existence is beyond the attainment of reason. Nor, after the
revelation of the doctrine, has that fact been strengthened by any
philosophical speculations, or its difficulties removed by any arguments,
or
illustrations from analogy. [See statements of some of these in Hodge's
Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, pp. 478-482.] We are constrained to fall back
upon the simple Scripture statements. The only explanations of these,
which
are justifiable, are such as arise from recognizing that, as the persons,
transactions, and relations are divine, there must be separated from them
all that belongs to human conditions, and imperfections. But this must not
lead us so far as to deny the reality of these things, or the existence,
in
the highest degree, of relations of the nature indicated, of which our
best
conception is gained from the terms which are used. Thus no physical
generation, nor any that could begin, or end, or be measured by
succession,
can be ascribed to the divine Father. No dependent existence, nor previous
lack, and subsequent attainment of being, can be true of a Son who is
himself God. No communication, nor reception, of a ****tion of the divine
essence, or nature, is possible between two divine persons. If the term
"begotten" is intended to teach a communication of the divine essence to
the
Son by the Father, it must be one of the whole essence, otherwise there
would no longer be only one God, one divine nature, or essence. So also,
when the Spirit proceeds from the Father, there can be no breathing out of
a
part of the divine nature, nor can that breathing begin, or end, or exist
in
successive moments of time. These internal acts in God necessarily conform
to that eternity, and unity, of the nature of God, which exist even in his
purposes towards things which are without. All human imperfections must be
removed. But, this being done, the Scripture teachings must be accepted
with
unquestioning belief that relations, corresponding to these titles, exist
in
God, and that they, and the causes assigned for them, are duly expressed
by
the language of his word.
2. These relations exist in the nature of God. They are not revelations to
us of what God is not; but of what he is. It is because God is one in
three
persons, and because the three persons are one God, that he thus makes
himself known to us. Though it is true that the Father wills to beget the
Son, and the Father and Son will to send forth the Spirit; yet the will
thus
exercised, is not at mere good pleasure, but it results necessarily from
the
nature of God, that the Father should thus will the begetting, and the
Father and the Son the sending forth. The will, thus exercised, is not
like
that of his purposes, in which God acts of free pleasure, choosing between
various purposes which he might form; but, like that by which he
necessarily
wills his own existence. Otherwise, these relations might, or might not,
have existed. But, if this were possible, the Son, and the Spirit, would
only have been creatures of God, however exalted might have been their
nature, or extraordinary their faculties. Theirs would only have been
contingent existence, until made certain by the will of God. None of the
incommunicable attributes of God could have been ascribed to them. In no
sense could they have had self-existence, or eternity of existence, or
independent existence, or immutability of nature. When, therefore, we find
the Scriptures assigning such attributes to any other persons than the
Father, we have conclusive evidence that the divine nature of these
persons
is perfectly equal to that of the Father; and when it is also asserted,
that
God is but one, and yet that each of the three is God, we are plainly
taught, that all have the same undivided divine essence, or nature. That
of
the Son, or of the Spirit, is identical with that of the Father. It is not
simply a similar nature, but even numerically the same. Were it otherwise,
there would be three Gods. If, however, this be true, the relations belong
to the nature of God, and are not something superadded to that nature. The
simplicity of God is a proof of this. It could only be in a God compounded
of nature, and relations, that the relations would not be in, and of, that
nature itself.
3. These relations must also be eternal. 'The nature being eternal, so
also
must be the relations which are in, and of that nature. Moreover, if not
eternal, they must have had a beginning, and there must have been a time
when they did not exist. But this argues changeableness in God, in virtue
of
which he, who once was one person only, has now become three. It is no
reply
to this, that the expressions "begotten," and ''proceedeth from," involve
the idea of the antecedent existence of him who begets, and from whom
there
is procession. For these are terms of human language, applied to divine
actions, and must be understood suitably to God. There is no greater
difficulty here than in other cases in which this principle is readily
recognized. We cannot speak of the eternity of the life of God, without
using language which implies beginning, and succession. Neither can we
think
of his eternal purpose, except as numerous determinations formed and
thought
out in successive moments, and following upon God's infinite knowledge;
which, by placing before him all things possible, has presented various
objects and plans from which he has chosen. Nor yet can we talk of his
presence divested of the ideas and language that belong to space, nor
conceive of his immensity without the fiction of infinite space. This has
not been done even by the inspired authors of the Scriptures. Dealing,
therefore, with the terms expressive of the divine relations, it is
natural,
and right, that we treat them after the same fa****on, and divest them of
those ideas of time, and succession, which are known to have no place in
God. When this is done, nothing forbids the belief that, as these
relations
are in and of the nature of God, they are eternal.
4. So far as true divinity is involved, the persons must be absolutely
equal, As each possesses the undivided divine essence, so neither can, as
God, be superior, or inferior to the others. No difference in the mode, or
order of subsistence in that essence, can make an inequality in the
divinity
of either of them, inasmuch as that subsistence makes each of them
partakers
of the same essence, and undividedly of all of it. Even if there be
inequality relative to each other as persons, because of the respective
relations, this would no more require one to be an inferior God to the
others, than the three separate persons make necessary such a threefold
distinction in the divine nature, as to constitute them three Gods.
These general statements will shorten and simplify the separate
discussions
as to the Son****p of Christ, and the Procession of the Spirit. So far as
these have elements in common, a statement and explanation of these points
in each case is rendered unnecessary. They are also more plainly
exhibited,
as to both the relations, than they could be separately. Moreover, we have
in them answers to most of the questions suggested at the beginning. The
nature of the relations is perceived to be properly indicated by the
Scripture language which expresses them and to be such as belongs to the
essence and nature of God. They have originated in that essence, acting
through the person of the Father, and the persons of the Son and the
Father.
The perfect equality in that divine nature has been seen. It remains
simply
to inquire in what respects they differ from each other, and whether with
the equality, relative to the divine essence, there co-exists any
inequality
of person, or any kind of subordination. These points will be
appropriately
presented in the separate discussions of the Son****p of Christ, and of the
Procession of the Spirit, which discussions will, also, throw still
further
light upon the questions already answered.
II. THE ETERNAL SON****P OF CHRIST.
In the previous lecture it was shown that Christ is Son of God in a sense
peculiar to himself. The Father called him, at his baptism, "My beloved
Son;" and he is spoken of by the sacred writers as God's "only begotten
Son," and " his own Son."
The Scripture proofs were also presented, that this Son is not only called
"God;" but possesses all the incommunicable attributes of God, together
with
such unity and identity with the Father, as make him truly God; that he is
equal with the Father in his works, and knowledge, and nature; and, that
not
only to him are all the acts of creation, providence, and judgement to be
ascribed, but that he is to be honoured, and wor****pped equally with the
Father, he being indeed the manifestation in the world, of the divine
Father, "the image of the invisible God" (Col. 1:15), in whom "dwelleth
all
the fulness of the Godhead bodily," (Col. 2 : 9) "being the effulgence of
his glory, and the very image of his substance." Heb. 1 :3.
These proofs of this eternal Son****p may be strengthened by further
reference to the Scripture teaching both as to the nature and eternity of
the relation.
1. That the relation is one of nature, is additionally shown.
(a) By passages, which declare that the Son is so " from God," and " in
God," as to have perfect knowledge of him. John 1:18; 7:29; 16:27-30;
17:25.
He is here spoken of as proceeding from God, not merely being sent as a
messenger. The claim asserted, is one of intimate fellow****p in and
participation of the divine nature. It is made of him in the capacity of
God's Son. Consequently it betokens a son****p of nature, not one of mere
office, or name.
(b) By such passages as contrast the divine and human natures, ascribing
the
divine nature to the Son. Rom. 1:3,4; Phil. 2:5-11.
(c) The divine nature of the Son****p is plainly taught by John in the 1st
chapter of his gospel. "The only begotten Son," which "is in the bosom of
the Father," who alone has "seen God" and "declared him," v. 18, is "the
Word" that "became flesh, and dwelt among men," v. 14, and yet, which was
not only "in the beginning," but "was with God," and "was God." If the
Word
and the Son are identical, the divine nature ascribed to the Word is truly
the divine nature of the Son.
2. Of the eternity of this relation, we may also find further proof.
(1.) Christ's existence before birth in this world is taught
(a) In such passages as show that Christ, of his own will, assumed this
life. John 6:38; Phil. 2:7; Heb. 2:14,16; 10:5,9.
(b) Such as show peculiar coming into the world. John 3:13; 6:33, 38, 62.
(c) Where it is said, that he had seen and known the Father; which implies
a
previous state of existence. John 6:46.
(d) Such passages as declare, that he, the Son, was sent into the world by
the Father. See p. 126, 3.
(2.) His existence when creation occurred, is announced in John 1:3,10;
Col.
1:16; Heb. 1:10.
(3.) The Scriptures also declare that he was in the beginning, before all
things, when time began, which was, therefore, eternal existence. John
1:1;
17:5,24; Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:10.
(4.) They expressly state that it was eternal. 1 John 1:1-3.
In the general statements above, it has been argued that the relations,
borne by these two persons, are to be learned only from the Scripture
revelations, and that these are to be modified in no respect, except by
removing from them whatever is necessary to make them conform to divine
transactions. It was also urged that all the divine relations being in and
of God, who, with all his plurality of person, is but one God, these
relations are in the same undivided divine essence, and, consequently,
belong to the nature of God, and must be eternal.
In applying these statements and the scripture proofs to the relation of
Father and Son in God, we arrive at the doctrine commonly called the
Eternal
Son****p of Christ.
By this is meant, that paternity, and filiation in God are, not mere names
for something which does not exist, nor for some relation, different from
that of father and son, to which these titles were first applied in
connection with Christ's creation, or birth, or resurrection, or
exaltation;
but are realities which exist eternally in his nature, and are as properly
described by the names which express them are his attributes by the
various
terms of wisdom, power, truth, justice and love.
No attempt is made by those who accept this doctrine to state the nature
of
this generation. Some are even content to suppose that nothing more may be
meant than to express by son****p what would be the result of such a
relation. As human son****p is accompanied by earnest love between father
and
son, and implies likeness of character, and similarity of nature; so they
have been willing to rest at this point, and accept the divine son****p, as
meaning no more than the existence of perfect likeness, and infinite
mutual
love. But, manifestly, if nothing more than this be meant, the Father
might
equally be called Son, and the Son Father. The Scriptures, on the
contrary,
indicate that the likeness is the result of the relation, and not that the
terms of the relation are given because of the likeness. It is not the
resemblance of Christ to the Father, which is set forth as the reason he
is
called the Son, but it is because he is the Son that this resemblance
exists.
But, even if these titles could be ascribed because of the likeness, we
still have to account for the use of the peculiar word "begotten." This is
evidently intended to tell us something of a great mystery. It proclaims
some kind of activity in the divine Father, and passivity in the Son. We
cannot tell what it is, but it at least resembles, in some way, that
impartation of nature which occurs in the act of human begetting, and
conveys to us the idea of the communication of the essence of God by the
Father, through this act, to the Son. The continued unity of God shows
that
it is a communication of the whole essence, in which, however, the Father
still continues to subsist, while imparting to the Son subsistence also in
the same. Such impartation must partake of the nature of the "Eternal Now
"
in God. It never began and will never end, it has no succession, no past,
and no future. It is the ever present, having no reference even to a past,
or to a future. It is such a generation as constitutes eternal Son****p,
and
Fatherhood.
Many have rejected this doctrine because of misconceptions as to the
nature
of an Eternal Divine Son****p.
1. They have objected to the idea of Son****p itself.
(1.) They have urged that Son****p implies inferiority, and, therefore,
that
the Son cannot be truly God equal with the Father.
But how can we know what is and what is not possible in this matter with
God? If the Scriptures assert the Divine generation, and the equality of
the
Son and the Father, why should any deny their consistency with each other?
After all, however, does son****p imply inferiority of nature? There may be
subordination of rank, or office. But surely there is none of nature. Even
human son****p results from the impartation of the same nature by the
father;
not the same numerically, but the same in kind, and degree, the same
partitively. The son of any man partakes alike, and equally, with his
father, in human nature. The divine communication differs from the human
in
not so dividing the nature that two gods result, as in human generation do
two men.
That son****p may imply inferiority of official rank and personal relation,
is readily admitted. But it does not always do this. Such subordination of
person, indeed, seems to be taught of the Son of God to his Father. But it
is equality and sameness of nature, not of office, which makes the Son
truly
God. He is such, because he is a true subsistence in the Divine essence.
He
does not cease to be such because the Father is officially greater than
he,
nor even because the Father bestows, and the Son receives the
communication
of the divine essence.
(2) It has also been objected that Fatherhood implies priority of
existence,
and that this is impossible towards another divine person. But this is
based
upon a forgetfulness of the nature of eternal acts. Though we may not be
able to explain how they are so, we nevertheless know that, in such acts,
there is no beginning nor end, no first nor second, no antecedent nor
consequent, indeed, no succession of any kind. Were it otherwise, God
would
exist in successive moments. He would have had a beginning. He would form
new purposes, and would increase in knowledge from day to day.
Arguing from the nature of eternal acts in God, we, therefore, judge that
the eternal generation of the Son is not a single act, which was
accomplished at a definite moment in the divine nature; but one ever
continuing. With God there may be such definitely completed acts, when
they
are performed outside of himself, as in creation; but, not when they are
purely within. Such an act must be ever continuing, and completed only in
the sense of its being always perfect, though not ended. Even the
expression
"continuing" is imperfect so far as it involves the idea of successive
moments in God. It is only "ever continuing" as viewed by man. Son****p in
God, therefore, does not imply priority of existence. Even in man
paternity
and filiation are co-existent. One becomes a father, only, when another
becomes his son. Priority of existence is necessary, as a mere accident of
human birth, because of the necessity of growth, and maturity in a man
before he can become a father. But, even here, the son****p and fatherhood
exist at the same moment. In God, however, priority, even of the existence
of one person before another, can have no place, since he is
self-existent,
and eternal, who never began to be, and whose perfect maturity is not
attained by growth or increase.
(3) Again it is said, "If Christ is Son, if he is God of God, he is not
self-existent and independent. But self-existence, independence, etc., are
attributes of the divine essence, and not of one person in distinction
from
the others. It is the triune God, who is self-existent, and independent.
Subordination, as to the mode of subsistence, and operation, is a
scriptural
fact; and so also is the perfect and equal godhead of the Father, and the
Son, and, therefore, these facts must be consistent. In the consubstantial
identity of the human soul, there is a subordination of one faculty to
another, and so, however incomprehensible to us, there may be a
subordination in the trinity consistent with the identity of essence in
the
godhead." Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, 1, 474.
2. There are objections also made to the eternity of this relation. They
are
based upon scripture statements, and are, on that account, even more
worthy
of consideration.
It is well to remember, however, that Christ is revealed to us, in the
Scriptures, as one person in two natures, by virtue of which he is
frequently called the Theanthropos, or Godman. The doctrine of his person
will be hereafter discussed. It is sufficient here to state that, while
the
two natures are distinct, and preserve their respective attributes and
qualities, yet, because of the one personality in both natures, whatever
belongs to the person as person may be attributed to either nature. Thus
the
Spirit is not only called the Spirit of Christ, "but also the Spirit of
Jesus." Acts 16:7. Inasmuch, then, as the son****p expresses a mere
personal
relation in the godhead, the title Son of God may be applied to Christ in
mere human relations. That this is sometimes done, does not then destroy
the
force of its much more frequent application to him in his divine nature,
and
especially of such an application, when it is accompanied by the
ascription
to him of divine titles, attributes, acts, and wor****p, together with
assertions of equality, identity, and unity with the Father.
"Bishop Pearson, one of the most strenuous defenders of eternal
generation,
and of all the peculiarities of the Nicene doctrine of the Trinity, gives
four reasons why the Theanthropos, or Godman is called the Son of God.
(1.)
His miraculous conception. (2.) The high office to which he was
designated.
John 10:34, 35, 36. (3.) His resurrection according to one interpretation
of
Acts 13:33. 'The grave,' he says, 'is as the womb of the earth; Christ,
who
is raised from thence, is as it were begotten to another life, and God,
who
raised him, is his Father.' (4.) Because after his resurrection, he was
made
the heir of all things. Heb. 1:2-5. Having assigned these reasons why the
Godman is called Son, he goes on to show why the Logos is called Son.
There
is nothing, therefore, in the passages cited inconsistent with the church
doctrine of the eternal son****p of our Lord." Charles Hodge, Systematic
Theology, 1, 476.
1. The first objection to the eternity of the son****p, is that the title
"Son" is given because of his birth.
This is based upon Luke 1:35. "And the angel answered and said unto her,
The
Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall
overshadow thee: wherefore also that which is to be born shall be called
holy, the Son of God."
Upon this passage it may be remarked, as the foundation of all just
interpretation, that no relation to the Holy Ghost, which constitutes a
personal relation in the Godhead, can refer to the Son****p, because this
relation is one of Christ to the Father, and not to the Holy Ghost. Some
other reason, then, than the act of the Spirit in his conception, must be
found for the ascription here of the title "Son of God."
Again, it must be recognized, that the title "Son" is not here prophesied
of
in connection with the divine nature of our Lord, but is declared of that
"which is to be born," which was undoubtedly his human nature, or himself
in
his human nature.
One interpretation of the passage affixes to the term "Power of the
Highest"
a personal sense, explaining it as a title of the Divine Logos. According
to
this, it is the overshadowing and permanent abiding of the divine Son, in
union with the human nature conceived under the influence of the Holy
Ghost,
which will cause that "holy thing" to be "called the Son of God."
Instances
are quoted of the use of "Power" in a divine sense from Philo, and other
Jewish writers. The early Christian fathers are stated to have applied
generally the word "power" to the divine nature of Christ, and many of
them
are quoted as maintaining this interpretation of this passage. Acts 8:10,
and 1 Cor. 1:24 are referred to as illustrating this use of the word
power.
[See Treffry, on the Doctrine of the Eternal Son****p, 3rd edition, pp.
120-133, and 142-144.]
If this be the interpretation, then, it is the coming of the Eternal Son
upon this human nature, and his presence with it, that causes it to be
called the Son of God.
This is, therefore, perfectly consistent with both the requirements before
mentioned as necessary to the true interpretation. The Spirit is not
associated with the ascription of the title Son of God, and that title is
appropriately given to the human nature, and yet the eternity of the
divine
Son****p is not affected. If this use of the word "Power" can be fully
verified, no valid objection can be made to the interpretation. Treffry
gives very strong proof that it is so used.
If, however, we should adopt the more generally received interpretation,
which supposes that "the power of the Highest" is either descriptive of
the
Holy Ghost, or of the divine power which accompanied his coming upon Mary,
there will still be no difficulty in ascribing the title Son of God to the
presence of the Eternal Son, who in his divine personality "became flesh,
and dwelt among us." John 1:14. Such an explanation of the title would
still
be consistent with his relation, both to the Father and the Holy Ghost.
The
text would then still teach that the title Son of God is to be given to
Christ as man, in like manner as that of Lord, because we have not here a
mere human person, but simply a human nature, in which the divine Person,
the Son, subsists without ceasing also to subsist in the divine nature. As
that divine Person, and not the divine nature, is the Son, so also the
divine Person in his human nature, and not that human nature, or a mere
man
is called Son of God. The title, therefore, though given to him as man,
arises not from his birth, but from his eternal Son****p.
The Holy Ghost is, therefore, set forth here merely as the originator of
the
human nature of Christ. That nature is from God, not acting through the
divine essence, which is never affirmed of God in any of his acts, but
through a person in the Godhead, according to the usual mode as revealed
to
us, and as exhibited in creation, providence and redemption, and even in
the
eternal acts within the Godhead. The Scriptures make known no influence,
nor
action of the Spirit on the Son in his divine relations. On the contrary,
the Son acts through the Spirit, but not the Spirit through the Son. But
the
instances of the influence of the Spirit on the human nature are abundant.
At his birth, Luke 1:35, at his baptism, Matt. 3:16, in leading him to be
tempted, Matt. 4:1, in the working of his miracles, Matt. 12:28, in his
return from temptation "in the power of the Spirit into Galilee," Luke
4:14,
and in his giving commandments through the Holy Spirit to the Apostles,
Acts
1:2, we have express mention of this influence. Was it not to this that
the
author of Hebrews referred, "A body didst thou prepare for me?" Heb. 10:5.
2. Again it is objected, that Christ did not become Son of God until the
day
of his resurrection.
Two passages are quoted in favour of this objection.
(1.) That in Rom. 1:4. "Who was declared to be the Son of God with power,
according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the dead."
The word translated "declared" in this passage means "determined," "marked
out as." It has no reference to a new ascription of title. All that is
taught is that the resurrection of Christ plainly and distinctly evinced
that "Jesus Christ, our Lord" (v. 5) is "Son of God." Of this fact, the
resurrection from the dead of him who had constantly claimed to be the Son
of God, is an unquestionable proof.
(2.) The other passage is Acts 13:32, 33. This reads in the King James
version, "And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise that
was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us their
children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again;" as it is also written in
the second psalm, "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."
Upon this objection, Dr. Charles Hodge justly says: "Here there is no
reference to the resurrection. The glad tidings, which the Apostle
announced, was not the resurrection, but the advent of the Messiah. That
was
the promise made to the fathers, which God had fulfilled by raising up, i.
e., bringing into the world the promised deliverer. Compare Acts 2:30;
3:22,
26; 7:37; in all which passages where the same word is used, the 'raising
up' refers to the advent of Christ; as when it is said, 'A prophet shall
the
Lord God raise up unto you from among your brethren, like unto me.' The
word
is never used absolutely in reference to the resurrection, unless, as in
Acts 2:32, where the resurrection is spoken of in the context. Our
translators have obscured the meaning by rendering it, 'having raised up
again,' instead of simply 'having raised up,' as they render it
elsewhere."
Sys. Theo. 1, 475.
The Canterbury Revision has simply "raised up," omitting the word "again."
We might, then, rest the reply to this objection upon the denial that the
Son****p is spoken of as given in connection with the resurrection. But, on
the other hand, we might admit it to be thus given, and yet the doctrine
of
the Eternal Son****p would not be affected. For, so long as we may justly
confine any such declaration to the Theanthropos, it might still be true
that to the Godman the name could thus be given, and yet, all the
teachings
of Scripture relative to the eternity and nature of the divine son****p
remain true. The truth is, that it would be more difficult to establish
positively that the title Son of God ever was bestowed upon Christ, in
consequence of any event connected with his humanity, than that it is
confined to him in his human relations. At least, it is manifest from the
Scriptures that, if ever applied to this divine person because of his
birth,
or resurrection, that was not the first period of such application; for
the
title is given to him in connection with the acts of creation, and he is
said to have been before all things, their creator, in whom they consist,
as
the one who laid the foundations of the world, the existence of which is
perishable, while his is eternal.
(3.) A further objection is made by Arians, and others who deny the proper
divinity of Christ, and claim that he is but a creature. These assert that
the title Son of God was given to Christ by virtue of his creation. The
obvious reply to this objection, is to produce the Scripture teachings
which
prove the true deity of the Son, especially such as assert that he is God
and Lord, and to be honoured, and wor****pped, and that he performs all the
divine acts of creation, providence and redemption, and has all the
incommunicable attributes of God, together with perfect equality, exact
resemblance, absolute unity, and sameness of nature with the Father.
The passage in Col. 1:15, has been claimed in sup****t of this objection;
Christ being there called, according to the King James Version, "the first
born of every creature." But the true rendering is "the first born of all
creation," and it is so translated in the Canterbury Revision. There is a
similar passage in Rev. 3:14, where Christ calls himself "the beginning of
the creation of God." The word translated "beginning" in this passage,
means
also "the origin." It is also used for "the first place, or power, the
sovereignty." The "first born" in the former passage, is the same word
used
in Heb. 1:6, and there translated "first begotten." The "first created"
would have been differently expressed in the Greek. The fact that this is
a
begotten Son, and not a created being, and that he is not said to be born
at
the time of Creation, but before it, actually shows that the eternal
generation of the eternal Son, which took place before all things, is here
spoken of. Such pre-existence is plainly taught in the context of Hebrews,
but it is directly asserted in that of Colossians.
III. THE PROCESSION OF THE SPIRIT.
The relation of the Spirit, in the Godhead, differs from that of the Son
in
several respects. What is the ground, or reason of this, it is impossible
to
state. The Scriptures give no information upon this point. We must be
content, therefore, simply to point out what they reveal upon this
subject.
1. An obvious distinction is made between the names given to the two
persons. While the one is called the Son, the other is called "the
Spirit,"
and other names of like im****t, as stated p. 130, V. That these names are
indicative of some specific difference, may be argued from the fact that
they are never interchanged. The Spirit is never called the Son, nor is
the
Son ever called the Spirit. When it is remembered, that these names
describe
persons subsisting in the same divine essence, this fact becomes very
significant of some peculiar distinction between them in the mode of such
subsistence. The word "pneuma," which is the designation in the Greek
original, means spirit, breath, or wind, and seems to indicate some
influence, or power which proceeds from God, not impersonally, but with a
personal relation in the Godhead. The work of the Spirit, in the creation
and government of the world, in the inspiration of the sacred writers, in
the miraculous conception of, and gracious influences upon the human
nature
of Christ, and in the regeneration and sanctification of the people of
God,
points him out as the outwardly operating power of the Godhead in this
world.
2. A distinction is also revealed, between these persons, as to the mode
of
action by which they proceed from the Father. The Son is said to be
generated, the Spirit is simply said to proceed. The relation of the
Spirit
to the divine Father has been generally expressed by the term
"Procession."
This is admissible, if it be recognized as a term merely declarative of
such
a procession from the Father as is not exclusive of a procession also of
the
Son. This expression is applied to the Spirit upon the authority of
Christ,
who calls him in John 15:26, "the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from
the
Father." But our Lord uses a similar word as to himself, though not the
same, in John 16:28, "I came out from the Father, and am come into the
world." The disciples use this last word in John 16:30. The verb in these
two passages means sometimes "came out," and sometimes "went out," and, in
the latter signification, is precisely equivalent to the other verb, which
in a different tense appears in John 15:26. From the "proceeding from" of
the Spirit, therefore, cannot be argued a difference in his mode of
procedure from that of the Son. The terms applied to both are general, and
cannot express a difference. Procession, therefore, may be asserted of
both
the Son and the Spirit. The mode of the procession of the Son is
specifically designated by the generation which is asserted of him. That
of
the Spirit appears likewise to be pointed out by the name given to him. He
is the breath of God, which fact, already expressed in his name, was
taught
by our Lord when, on the evening of his resurrection, he breathed upon his
apostles, saying unto them: "Receive ye the Holy Ghost." John 20:22. It is
not unlikely, however, that the human breath of the Theanthropos was, on
that occasion, used as a symbol of the divine outbreathing of the Spirit
by
the divine Son. This may be well assumed as true, if, indeed, the Spirit
proceeds from the Son, as well as from the Father.
This outbreathing of God is even more difficult to interpret, and the
nature
of the relation thus indicated even more incomprehensible than that of the
generation of the Son. In this, therefore, as in that, we must be content
to
accept the statement, just as it is revealed, being only careful to
separate
from it all ideas inconsistent with acts of God. This would exclude
everything like a physical breathing, or several acts of breathing, at
various times, which may be successive. The procession of the Spirit,
must,
therefore, be regarded as eternal action, completed, only because perfect,
and continuing, only in the sense of not ended.
It seems therefore proper, that we should regard the peculiarity of the
mode
of the procedure of both these persons, to be indicated by the names given
respectively to each. The term "procession" may be especially appropriated
to the Spirit only, because, in his case, "Spirit" does not as distinctly
point out the mode of procedure, as does Son****p, in that of the Son.
The preposition, with which the verbs are compounded in each of these
three
passages of John, is the same, and shows a procession from within God.
Wherever the terms "Spirit of God" and "Spirit of Christ" appear, the
simple
genitive is used without a preposition, but this same preposition is found
with the genitive of God, in 1 Cor. 2:12 and Rev. 11:11. In this latter
passage, however, the Holy Spirit is probably not meant. The procedure is,
therefore, taught as being from within God, which shows that the coming
from, and the going forth from, are both in and of the Divine nature, and
are not to be limited to such action as occurs when an ambassador is sent
from a king, or one man simply proceeds from the presence of another.
3. Western Christendom, in opposition to Eastern, has maintained that
there
is also a distinction between the relations of Son and Spirit, as to the
source. The procession of the Spirit is said, by the East, to be from the
Father only, as is the generation of the Son; but by the West, to be from
both the Father and the Son.
Eastern Christians have urged that the Scriptures only actually declare
procession from the Father. It must be acknowledged that this is true,
inasmuch as there is but one passage of Scripture which speaks of his
Procession (John 15:26), the language of which is "which proceedeth from
the
Father." But in 1 Cor. 2:12 the Spirit of said to be "of God," which may
mean of the Father alone, or, as of God, so of the Son also. The Spirit is
also spoken of as the Spirit of Jesus (Acts 16:7) and of Christ, and of
the
Lord, and of the Son (Gal. 4:6), as well as the Spirit of the Father, and
the Spirit of God. Our Lord also declared, that he would send the Spirit.
More than this, the action of Christ, when he breathed upon the disciples,
and said, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost," (John 20:22) is very significant,
and
strongly indicates the procession of the Spirit from him. See also Acts
16:7. This act of Christ, however, may have been no more than giving the
Spirit to his disciples, without intending to teach any procession from
himself. The breathing, which in any event was symbolical, may have been
so
only of the divine act of the Father, from whom alone the Spirit may truly
proceed. In this event, may we not also believe that the relation to the
procession of the Son differs from that of the Father? Would it not be a
more exact statement of the Scripture teaching to say, that the Son, or
Christ, sends the Spirit, and gives the Spirit, which is his, because the
right to bestow it is his, either essentially, or as given him in his
office
as Messiah, and that the Spirit thus sent proceeds from the Father? In
this
event the Father would be the source of the procedure, and the Son the
agent
in sending it forth. Is not this bestowment on the Messiah, of this right
to
send the Spirit, suggested by Christ's declaration, "If I go not away, the
Comforter will not come unto you," (John 16:7) as well as by the language,
"The Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." John
7:39. These points are presented for consideration, while it is admitted
that the assertion, that the Spirit proceeds also from the Son, is less
objectionable than the denial. The Scriptures seem to leave it so
doubtful,
as to forbid any positive statement about it. But the preponderance of
evidence is in favour of a procession from both Father and Son.
IV. SUBORDINATION BETWEEN THE PERSONS
The absolute equality of each of these persons, as God, has already been
pointed out; and the possibility of inferiority, in other respects, was
then
intimated. There are some scriptural statements which seem to indicate
this.
Christ said expressly of himself, "The Father is greater than I." John
14:28. He also not only taught that the Father had sent him, but compared
with that his own sending of his disciples, (John 17:18) and declared that
he came, not to do his own will but that of him that sent him, (John
6:38);
that he came not of himself, (John 7:28); that he spoke not of himself,
but
that the Father had given him a commandment, what he should say, and
speak,
(John 12:49); that his teaching was not his own, (John 7:16); that the
word
they heard was not his, but his Father's, (John 14:24); that he had given
and spoken the words given him by the Father, (John 8:26; 17:8); that the
Father had given him to do the work he had accomplished, (John 17:4); that
he could do nothing of himself, but what he saw the Father doing, (John
5:19); that the Father was with him, and had not left him alone, (John
8:29); and that the Father had sanctified (consecrated) him, (John 10:36).
Peter also preached to Cornelius "Jesus of Nazareth, how that God anointed
him with the Holy Ghost, and with power," and that he performed beneficent
and miraculous acts because "God was with him." (Acts 10:38). Christ also
denied the goodness of any but God, (Matt. 19:17; Mark 10:38; Luke 18:19),
and as to the day of judgement, asserted that "of that day or that hour
knoweth no one, not even the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the
Father," (Mark 13:32, ["but the Father only," Matt. 24:36]); and, that to
sit on his right hand, and on his left, was not his to give, but that
these
positions shall be given to those for whom it is prepared of his Father,
(Matt. 20:23; Mark 10:40). We are told also of his prayers to God, of
which
the remarkable statement is made, that "in the days of his flesh," he
"offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto
him
that was able to save him from death, and having been heard for his godly
fear." (Heb. 5:7). Christ also speaks of the power he had over all flesh,
as
given him by the Father, (John 17:2), and Paul in Eph. 1:17, 20, assigns
his
exaltation over all things, and as head of the church, described in vv.
19-22, to "the Father of glory." While it is said that the Father "put all
things in subjection under his feet," we are told that "he is excepted,
who
did subject all things unto him," (1 Cor. 15:27), that "then cometh the
end,
when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father," (v. 24);
and
"when all things have been subjected unto him, then shall the Son also
himself be subjected unto him that did subject all things unto him, that
God
may be all in all," v. 28. The climax of these statements is reached, when
we find that not only did Paul say that "the head of Christ is God," (1
Cor.
11:3) and call the Father "the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of
glory," (Eph. 1:17); but our Lord himself spoke of him to Mary Magdalene
as
"my Father and your Father," and "my God and your God." John 20:17.
An examination of these, and all similar statements in the Scriptures,
shows
they are in no respect inconsistent with the perfect equality of the
persons
as to the divine nature.
1. Almost all of them have reference to Christ as man; or as the Son in
his
relations to his human nature; or as Messiah, securing for his people
eternal life, and bestowing it upon them, or ruling over the universe, and
the church.
2. This explanation may be thought by some insufficient to account fully
for
the subjection of the Son referred to in 1 Cor. 15:28, or for the superior
greatness ascribed to the Father in John 14:28. But, if so, we are only
taught an inferiority of one person in the Trinity to another, as a
person.
Nothing indicates that it is of one of them as God, to another as God, or
of
the Godhead of one to the Godhead of another. It is only of the Son to the
Father, and not of God the Son to God the Father. The subsistence of each
of
the persons in the same divine nature may still remain true, as well as
that
partaking of all of it by each, which makes all equally God.
3. The personal inferiority which is thus made possible, so far as it is
natural, is due doubtless to the difference in the modes of subsistence in
the divine essence. The Father thus subsists independently of the will, or
the action of any other person. He is thus simply God; not originated, not
begotten, not proceeding from. The Son is originated, his filiation is
willed, though necessarily, by the Father, and he is begotten, and is, as
the Athanasian creed asserts, "very God" of "very God." The Holy Spirit is
also originated; he is not however begotten, but proceeds from the Father,
or from the Father and the Son. His procession is also willed, though
necessarily, and he, likewise, is "very God" of "very God." In this mode
of
subsistence, therefore, inferiority of the person of the Son to the
Father,
and of the Spirit to the Father and Son, may be said to exist. Without any
superiority as God, therefore, the Father may be said to be greater than
the
Son, because of the personal relations in the Trinity.
4. But there is also a subordination of office or rank still more plainly
taught. By virtue of this, the Father sends the Son, and the Father and
Son
send the Spirit. This could exist between persons in all respects equal to
each other, both in nature and relation. In God, however, it is probable
that the official subordination is based upon that of the personal
relations. It corresponds exactly with the relations of the persons, from
which has probably resulted their official subordination in works without,
and especially in the work of redemption.
The order of this subordination is plainly apparent from the scriptural
names and statements about the relations. The Father is unquestionably
first, the Son second, and the Holy Spirit third. This is their rank, as
well because of the mode of subsistence, as of its order. Hence they are
commonly spoken of in this order, as the First, Second and Third Persons
of
the Trinity.
V. "THE INHABITATION OF THE PERSONS."
"As the essence of the Godhead is common to the several persons, they have
a
common intelligence, will, and power. There are not in God three
intelligences, three wills, three efficiencies. The Three are one God,
and,
therefore, have one mind and will. This intimate union was expressed in
the
Greek church by the word 'perichoresis,' which the Latin words
inexistentia,
inhabitatio, and intercommunio were used to explain. These terms were
intended to express the scriptural facts that the Son is in the Father,
and
the Father in the Son; that where the Father is, there the Son and Spirit
are; that what the one does, the others do." * * *
"This fact--of the intimate union, communion, and inhabitation of the
persons of the Trinity--is the reason why everywhere in Scripture and
instinctively by all Christians, God as God is addressed as a person, in
perfect consistency with the Tri-personality of the Godhead. We can, and
do
pray to each of the Persons separately; and we pray to God as God; for the
three persons are one God; one not only in substance, but in knowledge,
will, and power. To expect that we, who cannot understand anything, not
even
ourselves, should understand these mysteries of the Godhead, is to the
last
degree unreasonable. But as in every other sphere, we must believe what we
cannot understand; so we may believe all that God has revealed in his word
concerning himself, although we cannot understand the Almighty unto
perfection." Charles Hodge, Sys. Theol., vol. 1, pp. 461-462.
OUTWARD RELATIONS OF THE TRINITY
The universe, with all it is, and all it contains, is the result of the
outward working of the triune God. It exists, not because of any necessity
in God's nature to create it, but as the result purely of his will. It is
the form in which the voluntary activity of God manifests itself
outwardly.
Activity, in some form, is essential to a personal, intelligent being. God
must therefore he eternally active. But this necessity for eternal
activity
finds ample scope for its exercise, within the Godhead, in the acts
involved
in the mutual relations of the persons, and in the purposes which he forms
relative to things without. His outward workings are the results of those
purposes alone, and therefore proceed purely from his will. The universe
consequently hears no other relation to God than that of a mere creation
of
his wisdom and power. It is not eternal, but has those peculiarities of
beginning, and succession, which belong to time, as well as the
dependence,
change and imperfection, which are naturally found in that which is
neither
divine nor self-existent.
There are three kinds of divine acts.
Immanent, and intrinsic acts. These are within God, and have no reference
to
things without. Such are the generation of the Son, and the spiration of
the
Spirit.
Immanent, and extrinsic acts. These, also, are within God, but have
reference to things without. Such are his decrees.
Extrinsic, and transitive acts. These are outside of himself, having no
existence within him, but nevertheless proceed efficiently from him, and
terminate upon his creatures. Such are creation, providence and
redemption.
[See Turretine's Institutes, Book 4, Ques. 1, Sec. 4.]
The first kind of divine acts is revealed to us in what the scriptures
teach
of the personal relations within the Godhead. The second, and especially
the
third, are made known to us in what we are told of the creation of the
world, of God's Providential care over it, and of his redemption of man.
As
might have been anticipated, we find the activity of God in the second and
third kinds of acts manifested in accordance with the personal relations
revealed in the first. Each of the persons performs such divine acts as
show
that he is God. Each demands and accepts equal honour and wor****p from
man.
Each has his own especial relation to every work. In it the same
subordination, revealed in the personal relations, is preserved. Yet,
along
with this, we find that same intercommunion, by which what one does is
also
spoken of as done by each of the others. The evidence of this last point
needs especially and constantly to be borne in mind, lest we emphasize too
much the distinct acts of the persons, and forget that essential union,
and
intercommunion, which, as well as subsistence in the same undivided
essence,
or nature, makes the three persons only one God.
The method of this action, and the distinct subordination in it, will not
in
all cases appear equally plain. We must, therefore, observe with caution
what is exactly revealed. Whatever, from other cir***stances, may appear
probable, must he taken only as such. This is more especially necessary as
this method will he seen somewhat to vary, although, so far as exhibited,
the same order of subordination will be perceived.
I. IN CREATION.
Creation, as the first outward manifestation of God, demands the first
place
in this treatment.
(1.) Whatever distinction may sometimes appear, it is generally attributed
to the one God. This does not forbid that each person has performed his
distinctive part, for it is also referred to the Father, and to the Son,
and
to the Spirit. We have here only the evidence of that intercommunion
which,
even through the distinct action of each, still makes any divine act
performed by any one of the persons to be the act of the whole Godhead.
The
passages which teach this are the numerous ones in which "God" is spoken
of
as the creator. These must refer either to the triune God, or to the
Father
alone. But whatever may be the relation of the Father to this act, the
scriptures, by revealing that the Son and the Spirit were also associated
with him, show that creation was the act of the whole Godhead.
(2.) The method of this act is revealed in a few passages. These teach
that
creation came from the Father, as the source, that it was accomplished by,
or through the Son, as the efficient instrumental creating agent, and by,
or
through the Spirit, as the transforming power. The first two of these
facts
is taught in 1 Cor. 8:6, "Yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom
are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom
are all things, and we through him." Here the Father is declared to be the
source of all things, and Jesus Christ, the divine Son, the instrument
through whom they exist. We have the same truth in Heb. 1:2, "Through whom
also he made the worlds."
The creation is also attributed separately to the Father in Acts 4:24. He
is
indeed there called "Lord," but is shown to be the Father by the quotation
from the second psalm as well as by the reference to his "holy child
Jesus,"
which marks a distinction between two persons. In Rev. 4:11 it is
manifestly
the Father, to whom the four and twenty elders ascribe creation; for he is
distinguished from the Lamb that redeemed us. See Chap. 5:8, 9. In Eph.
3:9,
God is said to have created all things and the context shows that it is
God
the Father who is spoken of.
That the creation was by, or through the Son, is also separately declared.
John says of the divine word, "All things were made by him, and without
him
was not anything made that bath been made." * * * " He was in the world,
and
the world was made by him." John 1:3, 10. Paul says, that "in him were all
things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and
things
invisible, * * * all things have been created through him, and unto him."
Col. 1:16. See also Ps. 33:6.
The transforming power of the Spirit is shown in Gen. 1:2. Here the Hebrew
verb is in the Piel form, and means "to brood over," and, Gesenius in his
lexicon says, is used "tropically of the Spirit of God as thus brooding
over
and vivifying the chaotic mass of the earth." This work of the Spirit
seems
to have been known to Job and his friends. Job himself says : "By his
Spirit
the heavens are garnished," Job 26:13, and Elihu declares, "The Spirit of
God hath made me, and the breath (Spirit) of the Almighty giveth me life."
Job 33:4. In Psalm 33:6 it is also stated, that "By the word of the Lord
were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath (Spirit) of
his mouth." In Psalm 104:30, God is addressed thus: "Thou sendest forth
thy
Spirit, they are created; and thou renewest the face of the ground." The
creation here referred to is simply transformation.
The above statements show that the creation of the world is ascribed to
God
as One, yet that all things are of the Father, who is thus the source;
that
they were created by, or through the Son; and that the Spirit has been
their
transforming and life-giving power. We find then in this outward action of
the persons the same relations and subordination exhibited personally in
the
Trinity. The Father acts through the Son, (Eph. 3:14-19; Heb. 1:2,) and
sends forth the Spirit Ps. 104:30.
II. IN PROVIDENCE.
In the statements made as to the acts of Providence, the subordination of
the Son and Spirit is not distinctly taught. It is not denied, however,
and
there is no reason for supposing that it does not exist. Still, in the
absence of specific revelation, we dare not positively affirm that it
does.
Throughout the Scriptures, however, all the acts of providence are
ascribed
to God. Whether by this is meant the Father alone, or the Triune God, does
not appear. There is no revelation as to the method by which this is done.
But each of the persons is revealed as performing acts of providence.
Christ
declared this of the Father, Matt. 6:25-32, especially verse 32, and 10:
29-31. The upholding of the world is asserted of the Son, Heb. 1:3, and it
is said that "in him all things consist." Col. 1:17. The providential care
of the Spirit is abundantly exercised in connection with the life of
believers in Christ, who may well be said spiritually to "live, and move,
and have their being" in him. That this is done in the sphere of
redemption
makes it no less providential than if it were in that of creation. In this
latter, however, the Spirit is also spoken of as engaged in providential
acts. Isaiah 59:19; 63:14.
III. IN REDEMPTION.
The distinctive action of the three persons is more plainly exhibited in
connection with redemption. This is due, probably, to the fact that upon
this subject we have more full information than upon the acts of creation
or
providence. God is also brought nearer to us, and thus is more clearly
revealed. It is in connection with this that the revelation has been made
of
the relations within the Trinity, together with the equality of the
persons
in the divine nature, and their subordination within and in the work
without. The whole work of redemption is ascribed to the Triune God, but
each of the persons is revealed as sustaining distinct official relation
to
it.
1. All of this appears even in the manner in which it has been revealed.
(a) The Scriptures are explicitly declared to be from God, John 3:34;
10:35;
1 Cor. 2:9, l0; 1 Thess. 2:13; 2 Tim. 3:16; Heb. 1:1.
(b) Christ attributes to the Father his own power and authority to speak,
and declares him to be the source of what was revealed by himself. John
3:34; 7:16; 12:49; 15:15. The same truth is taught in Rev. 1:1, where the
distinction between the persons shows that "the Revelation of Jesus
Christ,
which God gave him," was given by the Father. It is from the Father also
as
a source, that the Spirit derives the truth which he reveals. It is as the
Spirit of truth that Christ declared that he proceeds from the Father.
John
15:26. The cause he assigned for his subsequent promise that the Spirit
should guide into all truth was "he shall not speak from himself; but what
things soever he shall hear, these shall he speak." John 16:13. That the
truth, thus spoken, should be from the Father, through the Son, appears
from
vv. 14 and 15. The same is also taught in 1 Cor. 2:7-11, in which it is
said
that "God revealed through the Spirit" the "deep things of God," which
"the
Spirit searcheth," "even the wisdom that hath been hidden, which God
foreordained before the worlds unto our glory." The whole context shows
that
it is the Father from whom these things are learned.
(c) But while the Father is thus declared to be the source of the
revelation
of redemption, it is the Son by whom he has made it known. He is, in his
divine relation, especially called the Word of God. Him we are commanded
by
the Father to hear as his "beloved Son." Matt. 17:5. In his own person he
so
manifested the Father that he could say, "He that hath seen me, hath seen
the Father." John 14:9. During his incarnation he spoke personally, as did
the prophets of old. Heb. 1:1, 2. He was that prophet whom Moses foretold,
Deut. 18:15-19; and is so proclaimed in Acts 3:20-22. He declared himself
to
be the light of the world. John 8:12. He foretold the future as to
himself,
his disciples, Jerusalem, and the world. He began the preaching of the
great
salvation. Heb. 2:3. He gave especial instruction to his apostles, both
before his death and after his resurrection, not only as to the gospel of
the kingdom, but as to all things which were to be observed by them, and
by
those whom they should teach. Especially, during this latter period, did
he
instruct them as to the relation of his sufferings and death to the
prophecies of the Old Testament.
(d) In this work of revelation, however, the Holy Spirit is made known to
us
as the operating agent. Everywhere it is the Spirit to whom the word sent
by
God is referred. "Men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Ghost." 2
Pet.
1:21. This is spoken of the Old Testament writers in general. It is
specifically declared of David, Matt. 22:43; Acts 1:16; and of Isaiah,
Acts
28:25, and of the author of the 96th Psalm, in Heb. 3:7. These Old
Testament
writers constantly attribute their instructions to the Spirit of God, as,
for example, David in 2 Sam. 23:2. Nehemiah asserts it of the prophets, by
whom God had warned his people. Neh. 9:30. Isaiah, (48: 16,) proclaims
"the
Lord God hath sent me and his Spirit."
The same is pre-eminently true of the inspired revelations of New
Testament
days. Even the ministry of our Lord was subjected to the Spirit. While, as
the Divine Son, he works through the Spirit in this, as in other divine
acts, yet, as the God-man, he was fostered in his human nature by its
influences, and was anointed by it for his work. Our Lord declared this in
the first act of his ministry, Luke 4:16-21. The immeasurable extent of
this
influence was taught by John the Baptist. John 3:34. In like manner, also,
were the Apostles of Christ prepared for their work. Eph. 3:5. The
teaching
of the Lord had not sufficed. In recalling and revealing that teaching
they
must needs he made infallible. Other truths were also to be made known.
Therefore the Spirit was promised, which promise was signally fulfilled on
the day of Pentecost; nor then only, nor upon those there alone, but
during
all the period of New Testament revelation, and upon multitudes who spake,
as well as upon those who wrote. The effect of this influence is
distinctly
asserted. At Pentecost they "began to speak with other tongues, as the
Spirit gave them utterance." Acts 2:4. The boldness with which such men as
those could speak of Christ, is attributed to their being filled with the
Spirit. Acts 4:31. Paul claimed that his preaching was in "demonstration
of
the Spirit and of power," 1 Cor. 2:4, and that he spake "not in words
which
man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Spirit teacheth." 1 Cor. 2:13.
2. If we turn now to the work of redemption itself, we shall still find
those mutual relations sustained. Salvation or redemption is ascribed
everywhere to the Triune God. Examples of this are to be found in Luke
1:68-71; 3:6; Acts 28:28; Rom. 1:16; 2 Thess. 2:13; Tit. 2:11.
(1.) But it is specifically assigned as to its source to the Father. Its
sphere is within the creation which is from him, and under the
providential
influences which originate in him. He is the lawgiver, whose law has been
broken, and who exacts the penalty; as the administrator of that law. The
redemption is the effect of his purpose. 1 Cor. 2:7; Eph. 3:11; 2 Tim.
1:9.
That purpose flows from his benevolent love for mankind. John 3:16. He has
even sent his own Son "that the world should be saved through him." John
3:17. It was his will that the Son came to fulfil. Heb. 10:7; John
6:38-40;
Gal. 1:3, 4. For this he delivered him up, (Rom. 8:32,) according to his
"determinate counsel," (Acts 2:23,) thus saving men "according to his own
purpose and grace," (2 Tim. 1:9,) and thus "gave unto us eternal life, and
this life is in his Son." 1 John 5:11. It is he, also, who "chose us" in
Christ "before the foundation of the world," and "freely bestowed on us in
the beloved his grace," Eph. 1:4, 6, and hath given us to Christ, John
17:6-11, to whom, says Christ himself, "no man can come" "except the
Father,
which sent me draw him," John 6:44, "having foreordained us unto adoption
as
sons through Jesus Christ unto himself according to the good pleasure of
his
will." Eph. 1:5. That men may thus be drawn, he promised and gave his
Spirit
to Christ, Acts (2:33,) and through him unto men, that they might be
regenerated, (John 3:5,) and "quickened," while "dead through tresp*****
and
sins," (Eph. 2:1,) that they might have faithfulness, (Gal. 6:22,) and the
spirit of son****p, (Gal. 4:6,) and may be sealed with the Holy Spirit of
promise, (Eph. 1:13,) which witnesses to believers that they are "children
of God; and, if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with
Christ" Rom. 8:16,17. It is thus, also, that God, having predestinated
that
they shall "be conformed to the image of his Son," sanctifies them, in the
sense of consecrating them, "in the truth," (John 17:17,) and, also, in
that
of cleansing and purifying them from sin, Eph. 5:26; 1 Thess. 4:7, and
causes them "to be transformed into the same image from glory to glory." 2
Cor. 3:18. Throughout all of this work the Father is also the person who
is
especially addressed in prayer in the name of Jesus, Eph. 2:18; 3:14,
through the moving of the Spirit, Eph. 6:18; Rom. 8:26, and from whom
comes
"Every good gift and every perfect boon," James 1:17, as well as the
justification, pardon, adoption and sanctification of believers, and also
the heavenly kingdom he has prepared for them.
These are some particulars which show how completely the Father is
identified with the redemption of man. They are not exhaustive of what we
are taught. Indeed the whole is from him as its source, and not merely in
a
general way in the gift of his Son and Spirit, but as working by and
through
them in each particular. In redemption, as in creation and providence, he
is
ever present, constantly willing, and continually working; though not
directly by himself, but through the Son and the Spirit.
Some ****tions of this work of the Father will need hereafter more full
discussion; though not so much as some of that of the Son, and of that of
the Spirit, all of the acts of whom must be more particularly and minutely
examined.
A short statement is, however, necessary here as a summary of what will be
discussed as to each hereafter, and also that the official subordination
may
be shown.
(2.) The action of the Son in redemption is briefly, yet almost fully
described in Phil. 2:5-11. We are there taught of that official
subordination to the Father which he willingly assumed for the discharge
of
this work, which corresponds with the statement, elsewhere, that he was
sent
by the Father. We are also told of that act of condescension, by which he
assumed our nature, and became man in his incarnation; of his voluntary
humiliation to the death of the cross; and of that honour, bestowed upon
him, in that nature, by which in his exaltation he has been made an object
of universal wor****p, "to the glory of God the Father."
We learn, elsewhere, that in the period of his earthly residence he became
our example as man, as he likewise in it set forth in his own person the
image of his Father. By his active obedience to the law he fulfilled for
his
people the righteousness due by them. By his sufferings, and death, he
paid
the penalty of their sin. As the reward of his work, he received the
promised Spirit which he sends forth for the salvation of those whom God
has
given him. All power has also been bestowed upon him, that his gospel may
be
preached with success, and he is now made king in Zion, and invested with
mediatorial dominion over all things. Sitting at the right hand of God, he
exercises the dominion thus conferred, and at the same time makes
intercession for his people. Thence shall he come to judge the world, and
to
assign to the righteous and the wicked their everlasting ****tions.
The subordination of office, in all the positions thus occupied, is
plainly
revealed. Speaking prophetically, when the hour had come for his betrayal
and crucifixion, as though already the work were over, Christ himself
declared of all that he had done, thus contemplated as finished, that it
was
the work the Father gave him to do, John 17:4. So also, had he said, that
he
came to do the Father's will, (John 6:38,) and to "work the works of him
that sent him." John 9:4. It was the Father whose law he honoured in the
fulfilment of all its demands, and unto whom, he, "though he was a Son,
yet
learned obedience by the things which he suffered." Heb. 5:8. The rewards
he
received were all given by the Father; namely, the Spirit, (Acts 2:33,)
his
people, (John 17:9,) and his exaltation, Acts 2:33, 36. Even the future
judgement of the world is to be his office, because of the ordination of
God, (Acts 10:42; 17:31; Rom. 2:16,) and has been committed to him by the
Father. John 5:22.
(3.) The works of the Spirit in redemption are even more numerous than
those
of the Son, and bring him into the most intimate relations to the people
of
God.
It was by him that the human body of Christ was prepared for the
indwelling
of the divine person, (Luke 1:35,) and by his gracious influences, that
the
mind and heart of Christ were fitted for his work. Isa. 11:1-5; John 3:34;
Luke 4:14. Likewise he prepares the Church which is the spiritual body of
Christ "for a habitation of God." Eph. 2:22. It is he, in whom they are so
baptized as to be thoroughly overwhelmed by the flood of his divine
influences, Matt. 3:11, and who "saved us through the wa****ng of
regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost." Titus 3:5. Through him they
are born anew. John 3:5-8. It is he that "strives with man," (Gen. 6:3,)
and
"convicts the world in respect of sin, and of righteousness, and of
judgement," (John 16:8,) and gives repentance, (Acts 5:31, 32, cf. Acts
2:33,) so warring against the lusts of the flesh, and bringing forth
spiritual fruit in them, Gal. 5:16-25, that they "walk not after the
flesh,
but after the Spirit." Rom. 8:2-4. He also produces faith, Eph. 3:17, and
"all joy and peace in believing, that" they "may abound in hope," Rom.
15:13, and knowledge of "the things which God hath prepared for them that
love him." 1 Cor. 2: 9, 10. "Through him we both have our access by one
Spirit unto the Father," Eph. 2:18, "With all prayer and supplication
praying at all seasons in the Spirit," Eph. 6:18, since we "have received
the Spirit of adoption whereby we cry, Abba, Father," and "the Spirit
himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God."
Rom.
8:15, 16. Thus does he become to us the author of justification by the
faith
produced, and of sanctification, both cleansing and consecration, 1 Cor.
6:11, and of the spirit of adoption. Gal. 4:6. Likewise he reveals the
glory
of Christ to the believer, and changes him into the same image. 2 Cor.
3:18.
This, as the context slows, is done through the word of God, which is the
sword of the Spirit. Eph. 6:17. It is also effected through the ordinances
of the gospel, so far as they are symbolical of his cleansing and
nouri****ng
work, as well as of the death and resurrection of Christ. Rom. 6:3, 4;
Eph.
5:26; Titus 3:5, 6; 1 Cor. 11:26; John 6:48-63.
In all of these, and in his other work, the Spirit comes into the most
intimate fellow****p with the people of God. As the Father attains nearness
by the endearing relation of the Fatherhood to sons who cry unto him with
the spirit of adoption, and as the Son becomes an object of supreme
affection because of his loving sacrifice and sufferings so the Spirit
seeks
the intimacy of an indweller in believers, that he may develop their
graces
and become to them a present witness and comforter in the bodily absence
of
their incarnate Lord. 1 Cor. 3:16, 17.
The subordination of the Spirit in this work is revealed, in general, in
the
statements that he is sent by the Father and the Son. John 14:16, 17;
15:26.
But it is taught also, more particularly. It is Christ that is to baptize
in
the Spirit, Matt. 3:11, and thus through him to produce the results of his
work. It is the Father unto whom men come through the Spirit in prayer.
Eph.
6:18. It is the Father who justifies and adopts, though through the
influences of the Spirit. It is the image of Christ, not of himself, into
which he transforms believers. The ordinances also are of (Christ's
appointment, and are especially fitted to set forth his work, and only
that
of the Spirit in a secondary way. Even the indwelling is that believers
may
be "builded together for an habitation of God." Eph. 2:22.
We have thus seen that in the various outward works of the Trinity, the
same
subordination of office appears as is found in the mode of subsistence
within. This subordination, in both respects, should be recognized because
taught in God's word. At the same time it must never be forgotten that the
same word declares as distinctly the perfect equality of the three persons
in the divine nature, which allows no inferiority of any one of them as
God.
|
