Carl wrote:
>
> The following is detailed examination and explanation of the Biblical
> doctrine of the Holy Trinity which orthodox Christian churches believe
and
> teach. It is a detailed article that is most likely best read slowly and
> carefully. I hope it benefits and edifies you.
>
> May God bless,
> Carl
> my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
> my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
>
> ---
A prime example of the lunacy of religion is set out below
by Carl
"Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is
freedom. Atheism is human concern, and intellectual honesty
to a degree that the religious mind cannot begin to
understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an
old religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact
it is not, and never has been, a religion at all. The
definition of Atheism is magnificent in its simplicity:
Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
[Atheism: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields]
[the last line is just for you Carl.]
>
> The Trinity (Triunity) of God
> by J. Hampton Keathley, III , Th.M.
>
> Introduction
>
> Because the word trinity is never found in the Bible some wonder about
> whether this is a biblical doctrine or not, but the absence of a term
used
> to describe a doctrine does not necessarily mean the term is not
biblical.
> The issue is, does the term accurately reflect what the Scripture
teaches?
> In reality, due to the incomprehensible nature of the truth this term
> reflects, some believe it is a poor word to describe exactly what the
Bible
> teaches us about this truth concerning God. When anyone studies a
doctrine
> like this, reads about it in a theology book, or in an article like this
> one, it may appear that the writer is saying, "Here are the doctrines we
> believe, and this is what you must believe, so believe them!" But as
Ryrie
> points out, "If that's the case it is only because you are looking at
the
> results of someone's study, not the process"1 that led to their position
on
> a particular doctrine.
>
> The goal is to investigate the facts of Scripture so one can see from
the
> process of investigation presented in this study just what the Bible
teaches
> us about how God exists. Historically, the church has believed that He
> exists in Holy Trinity or Triunity. The tri-personality of God is
> exclusively a Christian doctrine and a truth of Scripture. It is this
> doctrine that will be investigated in what follows. Our purpose, then,
is to
> demonstrate that the doctrine of the trinity (triunity) of the Godhead
is
> another biblical revelation that teaches us more about the nature of God
or
> how He exists. The Bible teaches us that God not only exists as a
personal
> Spirit being, but that He does so in Holy Trinity.
>
> The Nature of this Revelation About God
>
> Before we investigate the facts of Scripture, I want to begin by
pointing
> out that this is a doctrine beyond the scope of man's finite mind. It
lies
> outside the realm of natural reason or human logic. The late Dr. Walter
> Martin points out:
>
> No man can fully explain the Trinity, though in every age scholars have
> propounded theories and advanced hypotheses to explore this mysterious
> Biblical teaching. But despite the worthy efforts of these scholars, the
> Trinity is still largely incomprehensible to the mind of man.
>
> Perhaps the chief reason for this is that the Trinity is a-logical, or
> beyond logic. It, therefore, cannot be made subject to human reason or
> logic. Because of this, opponents of the doctrine argue that the idea of
the
> Trinity must be rejected as untenable. Such thinking, however, makes
man's
> corrupted human reason the sole criterion for determining the truth of
> divine revelation.2
> So what's the issue that faces us? The ultimate issue as always is, does
the
> biblical evidence sup****t the doctrine of the Trinity or tri-personality
of
> God? If biblical evidence sup****ts it, we can know it is true.
Comprehending
> it is another matter. John Wesley said, "Bring me a worm that can
comprehend
> a man, and then I will show you a man that can comprehend the triune
God."3
>
> We should not be bothered by this fact. Why? Because God's Word tells us
> that we should expect His revelation, the revelation of an infinite,
> omniscient, all-wise Creator, to contain an infinite depth that
corresponds
> to His infinite mind. In Isaiah, God tells us about this and says:
>
> "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Neither are your ways My ways,"
> declares the LORD. "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are
My
> ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts" (Isaiah
> 55:8-9).
>
> Kenneth Boa has an excellent word here concerning the concept of God's
> thoughts being higher than ours:
>
> It follows from all this that we cannot and should not expect to
understand
> the Bible exhaustively. If we could, the Bible would not be divine but
> limited to human intelligence. A very im****tant idea comes out of this,
> something over which many non-Christians and even Christians stumble:
Since
> the Bible is an infinite revelation, it often brings the reader beyond
the
> limit of his intelligence.
>
> As simple as the Bible is in its message of sin and of free salvation in
> Christ, an incredible subtlety and profundity underlies all its
doctrines.
> Even a child can receive Christ as his Savior, thereby appropriating the
> free gift of eternal life. Yet no philosopher has more than scratched
the
> surface regarding the things that happened at the Cross. The Bible
forces
> any reader to crash into the ceiling of his own comprehension, beyond
which
> he cannot go until he sees the Lord face-to-face.
>
> Until a person recognizes that his own wisdom and intelligence are not
> enough, he is not ready to listen to God's greater wisdom. Jesus alluded
to
> this when He said to God, "you have hidden these things from the wise
and
> learned, and revealed them to little children" (Luke 10:21).4
>
> God has communicated to men truly though not exhaustively. Moses
expressed
> this to us in Deuteronomy 29:29, "The secret things belong to the LORD
our
> God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that
we
> may observe all the words of this law."
>
> An understanding of the way the Greek word mystery was used in the New
> Testament may help us here. It is the Greek word musterion and refers to
> what was previously hidden, but is now revealed to us through the
revelation
> of the Word (1 Cor. 15:51; Eph. 3:3, 4, 9). Sometimes it is used simply
of
> that which God makes known through His revelation to man which man could
not
> know on his own (1 Cor. 2:7). But there is a sense in which some of
God's
> truth, though clearly revealed in the Bible, remains a mystery. Though
it is
> a truth revealed in Scripture, like the doctrine of the incarnation of
the
> Son of God or the divine/human nature of Jesus Christ, the Trinity is a
kind
> of mystery in that it goes beyond the boundaries of human comprehension.
God
> hasn't explained all the mysteries of His revelation to us undoubtedly
> because we simply cannot yet grasp them.
>
> The Apostle Paul wrote: "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face
to
> face; now I know in part, but then I shall know fully just as I also
have
> been fully known" (1 Cor. 13:12).
>
> A city like Corinth, famous for its bronze mirrors, would have
particularly
> appreciated Paul's final illustration. The perfection and imperfection
> mentioned in verse 10 were deftly likened to the contrasting images
obtained
> by the indirect reflection of one's face viewed in a bronze mirror and
the
> same face when viewed directly. Such, Paul said, was the contrast
between
> the imperfect time in which he then wrote and the perfect time which
awaited
> him and the church when the partial reflection of the present would give
way
> to the splendor of perfect vision. Then Paul would see God (cf. 15:28; 1
> John 3:2) as God now saw Paul. Then partial knowledge (cf. 1 Cor. 8:1-3)
> would be displaced by the perfect knowledge of God.5
>
> Because of our limited capacity in this life, some of the revelations of
God
> given to us in the Bible defy explanation and illustration. When seeking
to
> explain those truths that fall into this category, our explanations and
> especially our attempts to illustrate them must of necessity fall short
of
> our ability to clarify and comprehend them.
>
> Does this mean a doctrine cannot be true simply because it defies our
human
> imagination or ability to comprehend it? The answer is, of course not.
It
> would be nothing short of human arrogance to say it was. The truth is,
we
> must recognize our need to simply trust in God's special revelation to
us,
> the Bible, and submit our minds to that teaching which is truly
expressed in
> its pages. This does not mean we do not test the Scripture to make sure
> these things are truly taught, but once we are convinced that that is
what
> the Bible says, we must lay hold of it by faith and wait on the eternal
> future for complete understanding.
>
> It would be the height of egotism for a person to say that because an
idea
> in the Bible does not make sense (does not conform to his or her
reasoning),
> it cannot be true and the Bible must be in error on this point.6
>
> The doctrine of the trinity or triunity is part of God's revelation of
One
> who is infinite to those who are finite. So again we must ask, doesn't
it
> seem logical that in our study about God we are going to find things
that
> are incomprehensible, mysterious, and super-rational to finite man's
> rational thinking capacity? So, let's understand from the beginning of
this
> study, "God in His existence as the Three-in-One is beyond the limits of
> human comprehension."7
>
> There is another im****tant issue about the nature of this revelation in
> Scripture. We need to think a moment about the words, explicit and
implicit
> for these two words are im****tant to rightly understanding what
Scripture
> teaches about this doctrine. Explicit means "fully and clearly
expressed;
> leaving nothing implied; fully and clearly defined or formulated."
Implicit
> means "implied or understood, though not directly expressed."
>
> Ryrie writes:
>
> Trinity is, of course, not a biblical word. Neither are triunity, trine,
> trinal, subsistence, nor essence. Yet we employ them, and often
helpfully,
> in trying to express this doctrine which is so fraught with
difficulties.
> Furthermore, this is a doctrine which in the New Testament is not
explicit
> even though it is often said that it is implicit in the Old and explicit
in
> the New. But explicit means "characterized by full, clear expression,"
an
> adjective hard to apply to this doctrine. Nevertheless, the doctrine
grows
> out of the Scriptures, so it is a biblical teaching.8
>
> Historical Background
>
> Though the Bible taught truth of the Triunity of God implicitly in both
Old
> and New Testaments, the development and delineation of this doctrine was
> brought about by the rise of heretical groups or teachers who either
denied
> the deity of Christ or that of the Holy Spirit. This caused the early
church
> to formally crystallize the doctrine of the Triunity. Actually,
Tertullian
> in 215 A.D. was the first one to state this doctrine using the term,
> Trinity.9 Concerning the struggle the early church went through, Walter
> Martin writes:
>
> As the New Testament was completed toward the close of the first
century,
> the infant church was struggling for its life against old
foes-persecution
> and doctrinal error. On the one hand were the Roman empire, orthodox
> Judaism, and hostile pagan religions, and on the other hand were
heresies
> and divisive doctrines. Early Christianity was indeed a perilous
experiment.
>
> Probably no doctrine was the subject of more controversy in the early
church
> than that of the Trinity. Certainly the teaching of "one God in three
> Person" was accepted in the early church, but only as this teaching was
> challenged did a systematic doctrine of the Trinity emerge.
>
> The Gnostic heresy, for instance, (which permeated Christendom in the
> lifetime of the apostles) drew strong condemnation in Paul's Epistles to
the
> Colossians and John's First Epistle. Denying the deity of Christ, the
> Gnostics taught that he was inferior in nature to the Father, a type of
> super-angel of impersonal emanation from God.
>
> Following the Gnostics came such speculative theologians as Origen,
Lucian
> of Antioch, Paul of Samosota, Sabellius, and Arius of Alexandria. All of
> these propagated unbiblical views of the Trinity and of the divinity of
our
> Lord.
> But perhaps the most crucial test of Christian doctrine in the early
church
> was the "Arian heresy." It was this heresy which stimulated the
> crystallization of thought regarding both the Trinity and the deity of
> Christ...
>
> Today there are still remnants of the Gnostic heresy (Christian
Science),
> the Arian heresy (Jehovah's Witnesses), and the Socinian heresy
> (Unitarianism) circulating in Christendom. All of these errors have one
> thing in common-they give Christ every title except the one which
entitles
> Him to all the rest-the title of God and Savior.
>
> But the Christian doctrine of the Trinity did not "begin" at the Council
of
> Nicea, nor was it derived from "pagan influences." While Egyptian,
Chaldean,
> Hindu, and other pagan religions do incor****ate so-called "trinities,"
these
> have no resemblance to the Christian doctrine, which is unique and free
from
> any heathen cultural vagaries . 10
>
> The point, then, is simply this: While the term Trinity is never
> specifically used nor the doctrine explicitly explained in Scripture, it
is
> nevertheless implicitly stated. The church councils, in their fight
against
> heresy, were forced to think through what the Bible says about how God
> exists. The result was the doctrine of the Triunity, but let it be
> emphasized, the development of this doctrine was based on a careful
study of
> Scripture.
>
> Cairns discusses this time of theological controversy in the early
church
> and the extreme care given to this issue:
>
> It was an era when the main dogmas of the Christian Church were
developed.
> The unfavorable connotation conveyed by the word "dogma" in a day of
> doctrinal laxity, such as the present, should not obscure the value to
the
> Church of dogma. The word "dogma" came through the Latin from the Greek
word
> dogma, which was derived from the verb dodeo. This word meant to think.
The
> dogmas or doctrines formulated in this period were the result of intense
> thought and searching of the soul in order to interpret correctly the
> meaning of the Scriptures on the disputed points and to avoid the
erroneous
> opinions (doxai) of the philosophers.11
>
> Finally, it should be said that,
>
> . the doctrine of the Trinity is the distinctive mark of the Christian
> religion, setting it apart from all the other religions of the world.
> Working without the benefit of the revelations made in Scripture, men
have,
> it is true, arrived at some limited truths concerning the nature and
Person
> of God. The pagan religions, as well as all philosophical speculations,
are
> based on natural religion and can, therefore, rise to no higher
conception
> than that of the unity of God. In some systems we find monotheism with
its
> belief in only one God. In others we find polytheism with its belief in
many
> separate gods. But none of the pagan religions, nor any of the systems
of
> speculative philosophy have ever arrived at a trinitarian conception of
God.
> The fact of the matter is that apart from supernatural revelation there
is
> nothing in human consciousness or experience which can give man the
> slightest clue to the distinctive God of the Christian faith, the
triune,
> incarnate, redeeming, sanctifying God. Some of the pagan religions have
set
> forth triads of divinities, such as, for instance, the Egyptian triad of
> Osiris, Isis and Horus, which is somewhat analogous to the human family
with
> father, mother and child; or the Hindu triad of Brahma, Vishnu and
Schiva,
> which in the cycle of pantheistic evolution personifies the creative,
> preservative and destructive power of nature; or the triad set forth by
> Plato, of goodness, intellect and will-which are not examples of true
and
> proper tri-personality, not real persons who can be addressed and
> wor****pped, but only personifications of the faculties or attributes of
God.
> None of these systems have anything in common with the Christian
doctrine of
> the Trinity except the notion of "threeness."12
>
> Before we investigate the evidence for the Trinity, let's define it and
then
> study the evidence.
>
> Definition of the Trinity (Triunity) of God
>
> Trinity: Webster's dictionary gives the following definition of trinity:
> "The union of three divine persons (or hypostases), the Father, Son, and
> Holy Spirit, in one divinity, so that all the three are one God as to
> substance, but three Persons (or hypostases as to individuality)."
Synonyms
> sometimes used are triunity, trine, triality. The term "trinity" is
formed
> from "tri," three, and "nity," unity. Triunity is a better term than
> "trinity" because it better expresses the idea of three in one. God is
three
> in one. Hypostases is the plural of hypostasis which means "the
substance,
> the underlying reality, or essence."
>
> Ryrie writes:
>
> A definition of the Trinity is not easy to construct. Some are done by
> stating several propositions. Others err on the side either of oneness
or
> threeness. One of the best is Warfield's: "There is one only and true
God,
> but in the unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal
> Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistence."13
>
> Person: In speaking of the Triunity, the term "person" is not used in
same
> way it is in ordinary usage in which it means an identity completely
> distinct from other persons. Actually the word persons tends to detract
from
> the unity of the Trinity. According to the teaching of Scripture, the
three
> Persons are inseparable, interdependent, and eternally united in one
Divine
> Being.
>
> It is evident that the word "person" is not ideal for the purpose.
Orthodox
> writers have struggled over this term. Some have opted for the term
> subsistence (the mode or quality of existence), hence, "God has three
> substances." Most have continued to use persons because we have not been
> able to find a better term. "The word substance speaks of God's
essential
> nature or being and subsistence describes His mode or quality of
existence."14
>
> Essence: In its theological usage, essence refers to "the intrinsic or
> indispensable, permanent, and inseparable qualities that characterize or
> identify the being of God." The words triunity and trinity are used to
refer
> to the fact that the Bible speaks of one God, but attributes the
> characteristics of God to three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
>
> The doctrine of the trinity states that there is one God who is one in
> essence or substance, but three in personality. This does not mean three
> independent Gods existing as one, but three Persons who are co-equal,
> co-eternal, inseparable, interdependent, and eternally united in one
> absolute Divine Essence and Being.
>
> Typically, the words triunity and trinity are used to help us express a
> doctrine that is scriptural, though replete with difficulties for the
human
> mind. Again, it needs to be emphasized that this is a doctrine that is
not
> explicitly stated either in the Old or New Testaments, but it is
implicit in
> both. Note the following points:
>
> (1) Evangelical Christianity has believed in the doctrine of the
Trinity,
> Triunity, or the Triune Godhead because of the teaching of the Bible as
a
> whole (Old and New Testaments) and not because of one or two particular
> passages. As will be shown below, the whole of Scripture gives testimony
to
> this doctrine.
>
> (2) There are many specific passages which teach us there are three
distinct
> Persons who possess deity, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy
> Spirit, but the Bible also teaches us with equal emphasis that there is
but
> one true God or one Divine Essence or Substance and Being.
>
> (3) Taking the whole of Scripture, one can see that there is stress on:
(a)
> the unity of God, one Divine Being and Essence, and (b) on the diversity
of
> God in this unity, three Persons identified as Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit.
> It speaks of these Persons in such a way that it ascribes absolute
> undiminished deity and personality to each while stressing that there is
but
> one God in divine substance. It is the doctrine of the trinity that
> harmonizes and explains these two thrusts of Scripture-oneness in three
> personalities.
>
> When we see that the Bible teaches these three things: (a) there is but
one
> God, (b) that the Father, Son, and Spirit are each God, and (c) that
each is
> set forth as distinct Persons, we have enunciated the doctrine of the
> Triunity of God.
>
> The three Persons are the same in substance, i.e., in essence or in
their
> essential nature, but distinct in subsistence which describes God's mode
or
> quality of existence in three Persons. By mode of existence we do not
mean
> one God acting in three different ways, but one Divine Being existing in
> three distinct Persons within one Divine Substance or Essence. Again,
this
> is not exactly three individuals as we think of three personal
individuals,
> but one Divine Being who acts and thinks as one within a three-fold
> personality. This is incomprehensible to our finite and limited minds,
but
> it is the teaching of the Scripture. "In the Being of God there are not
> three individuals, but only three personal self distinctions within the
one
> Divine Essence."15
>
> Recognizable and Im****tant Distinctions
>
> The New Bible Dictionary has an excellent summary of this point:
>
> In the relation****p between the Persons there are recognizable
distinctions.
>
> a. Unity in diversity
>
> In most formularies the doctrine is stated by saying that God is One in
his
> essential being, but that in his being there are three Persons, yet so
as
> not to form separate and distinct individuals. They are three modes or
forms
> in which the divine essence exists. 'Person' is, however, an imperfect
> expression of the truth inasmuch as the term denotes to us a separate
> rational and moral individual. But in the being of God there are not
three
> individuals, but three personal self-distinctions within the one divine
> essence [italics mine]. Then again, personality in man implies
independence
> of will, actions and feelings leading to behavior peculiar to the
person.
> This cannot be thought of in connection with the Trinity. Each Person is
> self-conscious and self-directing, yet never acting independently or in
> opposition. When we say that God is a Unity we mean that, though God is
in
> himself a threefold centre of life, his life is not split into three. He
is
> one in essence, in personality and in will. When we say that God is a
> Trinity in Unity, we mean that there is a unity in diversity, and that
the
> diversity manifests itself in Persons, in characteristics and in
operations.
>
> b. Equality in dignity
>
> There is perfect equality in nature, honour and dignity between the
Persons.
> Fatherhood belongs to the very essence of the first Person and it was so
> from all eternity. It is a personal property of God 'from whom every
family
> in heaven and on earth is named' (Eph. 3:15).
>
> The Son is called the 'only begotten' perhaps to suggest uniqueness
rather
> than derivation. Christ always claimed for himself a unique relation****p
to
> God as Father, and the Jews who listened to him apparently had no
illusions
> about his claims. Indeed they sought to kill him because he 'called God
his
> own Father, making himself equal with God' (Jn. 5:18).
>
> The Spirit is revealed as the One who alone knows the depths of God's
> nature: 'For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God . No
one
> comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God' (1 Cor.
2:10f.).
> This is saying that the Spirit is 'just God himself in the innermost
essence
> of his being.'
>
> This puts the seal of NT teaching upon the doctrine of the equality of
the
> three Persons.
>
> c. Diversity in operation
>
> In the functions ascribed to each of the Persons in the Godhead,
especially
> in man's redemption, it is clear that a certain degree of subordination
is
> involved (in relation, though not in nature); the Father first, the Son
> second, the Spirit third. The Father works through the Son by the
Spirit.
> Thus Christ can say: 'My Father is greater than I.' As the Son is sent
by
> the Father, so the Spirit is sent by the Son. As it was the Son's office
to
> reveal the Father, so it is the Spirit's office to reveal the Son, as
Christ
> testified: 'He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and
declare it
> to you' (Jn. 16:14).
>
> It has to be recognized that the doctrine arose as the spontaneous
> expression of the Christian experience. The early Christians knew
themselves
> to be reconciled to God the Father, and that the reconciliation was
secured
> for them by the atoning work of the Son, and that it was mediated to
them as
> an experience by the Holy Spirit. Thus the Trinity was to them a fact
before
> it became a doctrine, but in order to preserve it in the credal faith of
the
> church the doctrine had to be formulated.16
>
> Errors to Avoid Concerning the Trinity
>
> Tri-theism. This is the teaching that there are three Gods who are
sometimes
> related, but only in a loose association. Such an approach, abandons the
> biblical oneness of God and the unity within the Trinity.
>
> Sabellianism or Modalism. Sabellius (A.D. 200), the originator of this
> viewpoint, spoke of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but he understood all
> three as no more than three manifestations of one God. This teaching
came to
> be known as modalism because it views one God who variously manifests
> Himself in three modes of existence: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
>
> Arianism. This doctrine had it roots in Tertullian, who made the Son
> subordinate to the Father. Origen took this further by teaching that the
Son
> was subordinate to the Father "in respect to essence." The result was
> ultimately Arianism which denied the deity of Christ. Arius taught that
only
> God was the uncreated One; because Christ was begotten of the Father it
> meant Christ was created by the Father. Arius believed there was a time
when
> Christ did not exist. Arius and his teaching was condemned at the
Council of
> Nicea in A.D. 325.17
>
> Biblical Sup****t for the Trinity
>
> Since the Trinity involves the key aspects of oneness and threeness,
sup****t
> for this doctrine will be dependent on the discovery of these two
aspects in
> Scripture as it reveals how God exists.
>
> Scriptures on the Oneness of God
>
> Old Testament Scriptures
>
> (1) Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is
one!"
> Verse 4 is subject to various translations, though the statement is
likely
> stressing the uniqueness of Yahweh and should be translated, "The LORD
is
> our God, the LORD alone."
>
> However, there is also a secondary emphasis-The Lord's indivisibility.
This
> is apparent in most English translations. This confession clearly
prepares
> the way for the later revelation of the Trinity, but how? "God" (Elohim)
is
> a plural word, and the word one (the Hebrew, echad) refers to one in a
> collective sense. As such, it is used of the union of Adam and Eve (Gen.
> 2:24) to describe two persons in one flesh. Further, it is used in a
> collective sense, like one cluster of grapes rather than in an absolute
> sense as in Numbers 13:23 when the spies brought back a single cluster
of
> grapes. Furthermore, the oneness of God is implied in those Old
Testament
> passages that declare that there is no other God beside Yahweh, the God
of
> Israel.
>
> (2) Deuteronomy 4:35 "To you it was shown that you might know that the
LORD,
> He is God; there is no other besides Him."
>
> (3) Isaiah 46:9 "Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and
> there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me."
>
> (4) Isaiah 43:10 "You are My witnesses," declares the LORD, "And My
servant
> whom I have chosen, In order that you may know and believe Me, And
> understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, And there
will
> be none after Me."
>
> The New Testament is even more explicit:
>
> (5) 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 "Therefore concerning the eating of things
> sacrificed to idols, we know that there is no such thing as an idol in
the
> world, and that there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called
> gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and
many
> lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all
> things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are
all
> things, and we exist through Him."
>
> (6) Ephesians 4:4-6 "There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you
were
> called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
one
> God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all."
>
> (7) James 2:19 "You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons
also
> believe, and shudder."
>
> Scriptures Demonstrating God, Who is One, is Also Three
>
> Old Testament Scriptures
>
> While there is no explicit statement in the Old Testament affirming the
> Triunity, we can confidently say that the Old Testament not only allows
for
> the Triunity, but also implies that God is a triune Being in a number of
> ways:
>
> (1) The name Elohim, translated God, is the plural form of El. While
this is
> what is called a plural of plenitude pointing to the power and majesty
of
> God, it certainly allows for the New Testament revelation of the
Triunity of
> God.
>
> (2) There are many instances where God uses the plural pronoun to
describe
> Himself (see Gen. 1:26; 3:22; 11:7; Isa. 6:8).
>
> (3) In the creation account, both God the Father and God the Holy Spirit
are
> seen in the work of creation. It is stated that God created heaven and
earth
> (Gen. 1:1), but that it was the Holy Spirit who moved over the earth to
> infuse it with life in the sense of protecting and participating in the
work
> of creation (Gen. 1:2).
>
> (4) Writing about the Messiah, Isaiah reveals Him to be equal with God,
> calling Him the "Mighty God" and "Eternal Father" (Isa. 9:6).
>
> (5) Several passages reveal a distinction of Persons within the Godhead.
>
> * In Psalm 110:1, David demonstrates there is a distinction of Persons
> between "LORD," the one speaking, and the one addressed called by David,
"my
> Lord." David was indicating the Messiah was no ordinary king, but his
own
> Lord, Adoni (my Lord), one who was God Himself. So God the first Person
> addresses God the second Person. This is precisely Peter's point when He
> quotes this Psalm to show the resurrection of the Messiah was
anticipated in
> the Old Testament.
>
> * The Redeemer (who must be divine, Isa. 7:14; 9:6) is distinguished
from
> the Lord (Isa. 59:20).
>
> * The Lord is distinguished from the Lord in Hosea 1:6-7. The one
speaking
> here is Yahweh, the Lord, yet, note the statement in verse 7, "I will
have
> compassion . and deliver them by the Lord their God."
>
> * The Spirit is distinguished from the Lord in a number of passages
(Isa.
> 48:16; 59:21; 63:9-10).
>
> (6) In the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 7:14, God made it clear that the
One
> who would be born of the virgin would also be Immanuel, God with us.
>
> (7) Two other passages which imply the Trinity are Isaiah 48:16 and
61:1. In
> Isaiah 48:16 all three Persons are mentioned and yet seen as distinct
from
> each other. See also Gen. 22:15-16.
>
> New Testament Scriptures
>
> The case for the Triunity of God is even stronger in the New Testament.
Here
> it can be unequivocally demonstrated the Father is God, the Son is God,
and
> the Holy Spirit is God. Furthermore, the New Testament teaches us that
these
> three names are not synonymous, but speak of three distinct and equal
> Persons.
>
> (1) The Father is called God (John 6:27; 20:17; 1 Cor. 8:6; Gal. 1:1;
Eph.
> 4:6; Phil. 2:11; 1 Pet. 1:2).
>
> (2) Jesus Christ, the Son is declared to be God. His deity is proven by
the
> divine names given to Him, by His works that only God could do
(upholding
> all things, Col. 1:17; creation, Col. 1:16, John 1:3; and future
judgment,
> John 5:27), by His divine attributes (eternality, John 17:5;
omnipresence,
> Matt. 28:20; omnipotence, Heb. 1:3; omniscience, Matt. 9:4), and by
explicit
> statements declaring His deity (John 1:1; 20:28; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:8).
>
> (3) The Holy Spirit is recognized as God. By comparing Peter's comments
in
> Acts 5:3 and 4, we see that in lying to the Holy Spirit (vs. 3), Ananias
was
> lying to God (vs. 4). He has the attributes which only God can possess
like
> omniscience (1 Cor. 2:10) and omnipresence (1 Cor. 6:19), and He
regenerates
> people to new life (John 3:5-6, 8; Tit. 3:5), which must of necessity be
a
> work of God for only God has the power of life. Finally, His deity is
> evident by the divine names used for the Spirit as "the Spirit of our
God,"
> (1 Cor. 6:11), which should be understood as "the Spirit, who is our
God."
>
> Ryrie writes: "Matthew 28:19 best states both the oneness and threeness
by
> associating equally the three Persons and uniting them in one singular
name.
> Other passages like Matthew 3:16-17 and 2 Corinthians 13:14 associate
> equally the three Persons but do not contain the strong emphasis on
unity as
> does Matthew 28:19."18
>
> The New Bible Dictionary, adds to this the following evidence:
>
> The evidence of the NT writings, apart from the Gospels, is sufficient
to
> show that Christ had instructed his disciples on this doctrine to a
greater
> extent than is recorded by any of the four Evangelists. They
whole-heartedly
> proclaim the doctrine of the Trinity as the threefold source of
redemption.
> The outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost brought the personality of the
> Spirit into greater prominence and at the same time shed light anew from
the
> Spirit upon the Son. Peter, in explaining the phenomenon of Pentecost,
> represents it as the activity of the Trinity: 'This Jesus . being .
exalted
> at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the
promise of
> the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which you see and hear' (Acts
> 2:32-33). So the church of Pentecost was founded on the doctrine of the
> Trinity.
>
> In 1 Cor. there is mention of the gifts of the Spirit, the varieties of
> service for the same Lord and the inspiration of the same God for the
work
> (1 Cor. 12:4-6).
>
> Peter traces salvation to the same triunal source: 'destined by God the
> Father and sanctified by the Spirit for obedience to Jesus Christ' (1
Pet.
> 1:2). The apostolic benediction: 'The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and
the
> love of God and the fellow****p of the Holy Spirit be with you all' (2
Cor.
> 13:14), not only sums up the apostolic teaching, but interprets the
deeper
> meaning of the Trinity in Christian experience, the saving grace of the
Son
> giving access to the love of the Father and to the communion of the
Spirit.
>
> What is amazing, however, is that this confession of God as One in Three
> took place without struggle and without controversy by a people
> indoctrinated for centuries in the faith of the one God, and that in
> entering the Christian church they were not conscious of any break with
> their ancient faith.19
>
> From the above evidence, it should be clear that the Scripture teaches
God
> is one and three.
>
> Difficulties With the Trinity Considered and Answered
>
> The Meaning of "Only-begotten"
>
> John 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld
His
> glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and
> truth.
> John 1:18 No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is
in
> the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
>
> In John 1:18, the King James Version has huios, "Son," in place of
theos,
> "God," and reads, "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten
Son,
> which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."
>
> Because to our mind the words "only begotten" suggest birth or
beginning,
> some have tried to take the use of this designation of Jesus Christ to
mean
> that Christ had a beginning, that He only became the Son of God. Such an
> understanding denies His eternality and also the concept of the trinity.
So
> what does John mean by the term "only begotten?"
>
> "Only begotten" is the Greek monogenes, a compound of monos, used as an
> adjective or adverb meaning "alone, only." Kittel writes: "In compounds
with
> genes, adverbs describe the nature rather than the source of derivation
> (emphasis mine). Hence monogenes is used for the only child. More
generally
> it means 'unique' or 'incomparable.'"20 In the New Testament the term
occurs
> only in Luke, John, and Hebrews, but an instructive use is found for us
in
> Hebrews 11:17 where it is used of Isaac as the monogenes of Abraham.
Isaac
> was not the only Son of the Patriarch, but he was the unique son of the
> promise of God. The emphasis is not on derivation but on his uniqueness
and
> special place in the heart of Abraham.
>
> Vine has an excellent summary of the use of monogenes in John 1:14 and
18:
> With reference to Christ, the phrase "the only begotten from the
Father,"
> John 1:14, R.V. (see also the marg.), indicates that as the Son of God
He
> was the sole representative of the Being and character of the One who
sent
> Him. In the original the definite article is omitted both before "only
> begotten" and before "Father," and its absence in each case serves to
lay
> stress upon the characteristics referred to in the terms used. The
Apostle's
> object is to demonstrate what sort of glory it was that he and his
fellow
> Apostles had seen. That he is not merely making a comparison with
earthly
> relation****ps is indicated by para, "from." The glory was that of a
unique
> relation****p and the word "begotten" does not imply a beginning of His
> Son****p. It suggests relation****p indeed, but must be distinguished from
> generation as applied to man.
>
> We can only rightly understand the term "the only begotten" when used of
the
> Son, in the sense of unoriginated relation****p. "The begetting is not an
> event of time, however remote, but a fact irrespective of time. The
Christ
> did not become, but necessarily and eternally is the Son. He, a Person,
> possesses every attribute of pure Godhood. This necessitates eternity,
> absolute being; in this respect He is not 'after' the Father" (Moule).
>
> In John 1:18 the clause "The Only Begotten Son, which is in the bosom of
the
> Father," expresses both His eternal union with the Father in the Godhead
and
> the ineffable intimacy and love between them, the Son sharing all the
Father's
> counsels and enjoying all His affections. Another reading is monogenes
> Theos, 'God only-begotten.' In John 3:16 the statement, "God so loved
the
> world that He gave His Only Begotten Son," must not be taken to mean
that
> Christ became the Only Begotten Son by Incarnation. The value and the
> greatness of the gift lay in the Son****p of Him who was given. His
Son****p
> was not the effect of His being given. In John 3:18 the phrase "the Name
of
> the Only Begotten Son of God" lays stress upon the full revelation of
God's
> character and will, His love and grace, as conveyed in the Name of One
who,
> being in a unique relation****p to Him, was provided by Him as the Object
of
> faith. In 1 John 4:9 the statement "God hath sent His Only Begotten Son
into
> the world" does not mean that God sent out into the world one who at His
> birth in Bethlehem had become His Son. Cp. the parallel statement, "God
sent
> forth the Spirit of His Son," Gal. 4:6, R.V., which could not mean that
God
> sent forth One who became His Spirit when He sent Him.21
>
> The Meaning of "First-born"
>
> Another term that has been misinterpreted by some as it is used of
Christ is
> the term "firstborn." It is used of Christ in Romans 8:29; Colossians
1:15,
> 18; Hebrews 1:6; and Revelation 1:5. Again, because of the thought of
birth
> that this word denotes in our minds, this passage has been used to teach
> that Christ was not the eternal second Person of the Trinity because He
had
> a beginning as the firstborn of God. "Firstborn" is the Greek prototokos
> (from protos, first, and tikto, to beget), but this word may mean (a)
first
> in time, or (b) first in priority. The point and focus of the word must
be
> taken from the context in which it is used.
>
> In Colossians 1:15, as verse 16 makes clear, it refers to Christ's
> sovereignty expressing His priority to and pre-eminence over creation,
not
> in the sense of time, the first to be born, but in the sense of (a)
being
> the sovereign Creator, the One in Whom were the plans of creation as
> architect ("by Him all things were created" can also mean, "in Him ."),
(b)
> by Whom all things were created as the builder ("all things were created
by
> Him"), and (c) for Whom all things were created as the owner ("and for
> Him"). Colossians 1:15 is declaring Christ's sovereignty as the
Creator. We
> can see this meaning of prototokos to express sovereignty or priority in
the
> Septuagint's use of this word in Psalm 89:27 where the clause that
follows
> explains the meaning of "firstborn" or prototokos. Psalm 89:27 reads, "I
> also shall make him My first-born, The highest of the kings of the
earth."
> Who is the firstborn? He is "the highest of the kings of the earth," the
> sovereign Lord.
>
> In the words of Colossians 1:18, "and He is the beginning, the
first-born
> from the dead," it means first in time, the first one to rise in an
immortal
> and glorified body. But even here, He is the first-born of the dead so
that
> He might come to be pre-eminent in all things as the head of the body,
the
> church (vs. 18b). The point is that prototokos can mean either first in
time
> or first in priority and it is the context which determines the meaning.
As
> the second Person of the Trinity, Christ is God and sovereign, but as
the
> God-Man who died for our sins and was raised from the dead, He is the
> pre-eminent head of the body of Christ, the church. In Colossians 2:9,
the
> Apostle confirmed this meaning when he wrote, "For in Him all the
fulness of
> deity dwells in bodily form."
>
> The word for "Deity" is theotetos, a strong word (used only here in the
NT)
> for Christ's essence as God. The full deity of Christ is nonetheless in
> bodily form-a full humanity (cf. Col. 1:22). Both Christ's deity and
> humanity were challenged by this early Gnostic-like heresy. Those
heretics
> diminished Christ to an angel whose "body" was only apparent, not real.
Paul
> affirmed here that Christ is both fully God and truly man (cf. 1 John
> 4:1-6).22
>
> Practical Ramifications of the Doctrine of Trinity
>
> All doctrine is practical and has specific ramifications to life. This
is no
> less true of the Triunity of the Godhead which draws our attention to
the
> concept of the tri-fold personality of God. This communicates all the
> elements of personality-moral agency, intelligence, will, emotion, and
> communion that exists within the three Persons of the Godhead. What are
some
> of the ramifications of this doctrine not only for theology, but for
> Christian experience and life?
>
> (1) It teaches us that God is a God of revelation and communion.
>
> Scripture teaches us that God is light, and one of the main functions of
> light is illumination. The act of revealing is as natural to God as it
is
> for the sun. Before the creation of any being, angel or human, there was
> revelation and communication taking place within the Persons of the Holy
> Trinity, the Father to the Son, the Son to the Father, and so on with
the
> Spirit. When, in the eternal decrees of God, He willed to create a
universe
> with angelic and human beings, it was merely the expression of this very
> nature of God.
>
> So if God is a fellow****p within himself he can let that fellow****p go
out
> to his creatures and communicate himself to them according to their
capacity
> to receive. This is what happened supremely when he came to redeem men:
he
> let his fellow****p bend down to reach outcast man and lift him up. And
so
> because God is a Trinity he has something to share: it is his own life
and
> communion.23
>
> (2) It means that the Trinity is the basis of all true fellow****p in the
> world.
>
> Since God is within himself a fellow****p, it means that his moral
creatures
> who are made in his image find fullness of life only within a
fellow****p.
> This is reflected in marriage, in the home, in society and above all in
the
> church whose koinonia is built upon the fellow****p of the three Persons.
> Christian fellow****p is, therefore, the divinest thing on earth, the
earthly
> counterpart of the divine life, as Christ indeed prayed for his
followers:
> 'That they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in
thee,
> that they also may be in us' (Jn. 17:21).24
>
> (3) It gives variety to the life of the universe.
>
> There is . diversity in the life of God. God the Father designs, God the
Son
> creates, God the Spirit quickens; a great diversity of life and
operation
> and activity. For that reason we can realize that if the universe is a
> manifestation of God, we can expect a diversity of life within the whole
of
> the created universe. We think that the so-called uniformity of nature
is
> utterly untrue. All the wonders of creation, all the forms of life, all
the
> movement in the universe, are a reflection, a mirroring, of the manifold
> life of God. There is no monotonous sameness, no large-scale uniformity
of
> pattern, for nature reflects the many-sidedness of the nature and
character
> of the living God.25
>
> What Are the Choices Regarding the Trinity?
>
> As in the case of God's sovereignty and man's volition (or the God-man
> mystery), there are three basic responses a person can make concerning
the
> biblical concept of the Trinity. First, historically, men have either
> ignored it or rejected it as illogical and incompatible with human
reason.
> Second, finding it incompatible with human reason, men have sought to
solve
> the problem by reducing it to their own reason and in the process, they
> typically gravitated toward one extreme or another maintaining that God
is
> one, or God is three, but He can't be both. Third, historically and for
the
> most part, the church has accepted it completely by holding both truths
(God
> is three in one, triune) in a proper balance. Based on all the data of
the
> Bible, the church has accepted this doctrine by faith though it is
> incomprehensible to our finite minds.26
>
> The Problem of the Two Extremes
>
> Any time man elevates his own reason above the clear revelation of
Scripture
> and he is faced with those truths in Scripture that defy his human
logic, he
> usually goes in one of two extremes. For instance, when faced with two
> truths which seem to contradict each other (e.g., God's sovereignty and
man's
> volition, or Christ's undiminished deity and true humanity in one
Person, or
> God is One and Three), one of two things happens. In his attempt to make
the
> truth harmonize with his reason, he will inevitably move to one extreme
or
> the other. He will accept one (truth A, God is one) either to the
neglect of
> the other or reject it completely (truth B, God a tri-personality), or
he
> will swing to the other side and either minimize or reject truth A and
> emphasize truth B.
>
> Kenneth Boa has some excellent comments on this issue:
>
> In an effort to water down the doctrine of the triune God many have
fallen
> into error. One such error is unitarianism. This view regards God as
only
> one Person. Since, for most this Person is God the Father, Jesus Christ
and
> the Holy Spirit are stripped of their genuine deity. Jesus is reduced to
a
> mere man ("the humble teacher from Nazareth"), and the Holy Spirit is
turned
> into an impersonal force or fluid that emanates from God. The
> Unitarian-Universalist Church is an example of this extreme.
>
> Jehovah's Witnesses are essentially unitarian because they deny the
deity of
> Jesus Christ and view the Holy Spirit as an impersonal force (Walter
Martin,
> The Kingdom of the Cults, Minneapolis: Bethany Fellow****p, 1965, p. 47).
> This new Arianism repudiates the Trinity because it holds it to be
> unreasonable.
>
> The second extreme is tritheism. This is a variation of polytheism
because
> the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are regarded as three separate Gods.
> Sometimes this is carried a step further into the idea that there are
many
> different gods, some perhaps associated with other worlds or realms.
> Mormonism is an example of tritheism, for it speaks of the Father, the
Son,
> and the Holy Spirit as three distinct Gods (Ibid., p. 178). Mormonism is
> actually polytheistic since it indicates that there are other gods
besides
> these three.
>
> The only way to avoid these extremes is to accept all the biblical facts
in
> a balanced way. The Trinity cannot be comprehended by the human mind
because
> it is super-rational. Nevertheless, when anyone places his faith in God
and
> the truth of His Word, he finds a satisfaction in this and other
difficult
> areas of revealed truth. There is no need for a continual struggle.27
>
> Conclusion
>
> The doctrine of the trinity is truly beyond human comprehension or the
> limits of our finite minds, but it is nevertheless a vital truth of the
> Bible. It is a doctrine that is closely connected to other key doctrines
> like the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit. In fact, our salvation is
> rooted in the mysterious nature of the Godhead who coexists as three
> distinct Persons all of whom are involved in our salvation in all its
> aspects, past, present, and future. It encomp***** everything we know
and
> practice as Christians-our sanctification, our fellow****p, our prayer
life,
> our Bible study, or our cor****ate wor****p. That this is true and a
precious
> truth for us to rest in is evident in Paul's closing benediction in 2
> Corinthians 13:14 and in Peter's salutation and doxology in 1 Peter
1:1-5.
>
> 2 Cor. 13:14. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God,
and
> the fellow****p of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.
>
> 1 Peter 1:1-5. Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who reside as
> aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and
> Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the
Father,
> by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, that you may obey Jesus Christ
and be
> sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in fullest
measure. 3
> Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to
His
> great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the
> resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to obtain an inheritance
which
> is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven
for
> you, 5 who are protected by the power of God through faith for a
salvation
> ready to be revealed in the last time.
> May the Lord bless you in your study of His precious Word and in your
walk
> with God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
>
> ---
>
> FOOTNOTES:
> 1 Charles C. Ryrie, A Survey of Bible Doctrine, Moody Press, Chicago,
1972,
> p. 29.
>
> 2 Walter Martin, Essential Christianity, Vision House, Santa Anna, 1975,
p.
> 21
>
> 3 Encyclopedia of 7700 Illustrations, Assurance Publishers, p. 504.
>
> 4 Kenneth Boa, Unraveling the Big Questions About God, Lamplighter
Books, p.
> 12.
>
> 5 The Bible Knowledge Commentary, NT, John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck,
> Editors, Victor Books, Electronic Media.
>
> 6 Ibid., p. 16.
>
> 7 Ibid., p. 42.
>
> 8 Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology, Victor Books, Wheaton, IL, 1987,
> electronic media.
>
> 9 Earle E. Cairns, Christianity Through the Centuries, Zondervan, Grand
> Rapids, 1967, p. 122.
>
> 10 Martin, pp. 22-23.
>
> 11 Cairns, p. 141.
>
> 12 Loraine Boettner, Studies in Theology, The Presbyterian and Reformed
> Publi****ng Company, 1976, pp. 80-81.
>
> 13 Ryrie, electronic media quoting B.B. Warfield, "Trinity," The
> International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, James Orr, ed., Grand
Rapids:
> Eerdmans, 1930, 5:3012.
>
> 14 Boa, p. 46.
>
> 15 R. A. Finlayson, "Trinity," The New Bible Dictionary, Eerdmans, p.
1300.
>
> 16 The New Bible Dictionary, Electronic Media, Logos Bible Software.
>
> 17 Paul Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology, Moody Press, p. 199.
>
> 18 Ryrie, Basic Theology, p. 53.
>
> 19 The New Bible Dictionary, Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House
Publishers,
> Inc., 1962, Electronic Media, Logos Bible Software.
>
> 20 Kittel, Gerhard, and Friedrich, Gerhard, Editors, The Theological
> Dictionary of the New Testament, Abridged in One Volume, Grand Rapids,
> Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publi****ng Company, 1985.
>
> 21 W. E. Vine, Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament
Words,
> (Grand Rapids, MI: Fleming H. Revell, 1981, pp. 140-141.
>
> 22 Norman L. Geisler, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament
edition,
> John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, Editors, Victor Books, p. 677.
>
> 23 The New Bible Dictionary, Logos Research Systems, Electronic Media.
>
> 24 Ibid.
>
> 25 Ibid.
>
> 26 Boa, p. 50.
>
> 27 Boa, pp. 50-51.
|
