(Continued-Chapter IV-The Triune Nature Of The God Of The Universe)

According to verse 3 this divine personality known as "the Word" is the one through whom the entire universe was made. Nothing has been created by anyone other than this one. A thought parallel to this one is found in the following quotation: "For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many and lords many; 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" (I Cor. 8:5,6). Here the Word--the Lord Jesus Christ--is the one "through whom are all things, and we through him." Paul, the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, declared that it was through the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, that God made the world (Heb. 1:1-4). The same teaching appears in Colossians 1:9-17. Note especially verses 16 and 17.

In John 1:4 the marvelous statement is made that this Word was life and that He was the light of men. He was shining in the darkness, but the darkness did not comprehend Him (verse 5). These verses assert that the Word, from the creation of man onward, was the life and light of men, although they have not perceived their utter dependence upon Him and His presence in human history.

As John unfolds this biography of the Word, we see that the next item which he mentions (verses 5 to 8) is the fact that God sent a man to be the forerunner for and to herald the advent of the Word. Although John was a mighty man of God, he was not the light but came to "bear witness of the light"-- the true light, "which lighteth every man, coming into the world," the Lord Jesus Christ, the light of the world.

From verses 10 and 11 we see a reference to the Word after He had entered the world through miraculous conception and virgin birth. He was here, but His own people did not recognize Him. Hence they as a nation did not receive Him. There were individuals, however, who had spiritual perception and who recognized that He was the long-expected Messiah. To those who thus accepted Him, the Word gave the right to become sons of God, even to those that believed on His name. Thus in verses 11-13 John, in unfolding the biography of our Lord, showed the rejection of Christ by His own people, Israel, but His being accepted by the few who believed Him. These verses bring us to the tragedy of 70 A.D., when God finally let His beloved people go off the main line of His purpose on to the siding--for the time being, the Christian Dispensation--because they did not receive the Word, who came to redeem them.

In verses 14 to 18 the apostle, following the "law of recurrence," gives another picture of the incarnation of the Word. He therefore declared in verse 14 that "the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us." Without doubt this verse refers to what we call the incarnation, which was the fulfillment of the prediction found in Isaiah 7:14. (This question will be discussed fully at the proper time.)

John declared that both he and those associated with the Lord Jesus beheld the glory of the Word, who was the only begotten from the Father full of grace and truth. Again, at this juncture he calls attention to the testimony given by John the Baptist concerning Jesus. Once more the apostle asserts that he and his brother apostles, together with all believers had received of the fullness of Christ "and grace for grace." "For," he asserts, "the law was given through Moses," whereas "grace and truth came through Jesus Christ."

John ends his prologue by asserting that, "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him" (literal translation, according to the best manuscripts).

We see in this introduction of John two personalities of whom it is asserted that they are co-eternal and co-equal. From this conclusion there can be no escape.

Though the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) emphasize what the Lord Jesus did and said, while John in his record lays stress upon what Jesus was, the God-man, there are several passages in the first three records of the life of Jesus which are indeed unique. For instance, in Matthew 11:25,26, we have a short prayer which Jesus uttered to God, the Father in heaven, and which closes with these words, "All things have been delivered unto me of my Father: and no one knoweth the Son, save the Father; neither doth any know the Father, save, the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal him" (Matt. 11:27). In this most serious statement He declared that no one knows the Son except the Father. This is a stupendous utterance. He also claimed that there was no one who comprehended Him, or could understand him except the Father, the infinite God. Following this amazing declaration, He asserted that no one knows the Father except the Son. The Father is an infinite being. It takes an infinite being to understand such a one. Since Jesus said that He comprehended God, His statement is equivalent to an assertion that He is an infinite being, equal with God the Father.

In an entirely different connection our Lord made an affirmation similar to the one at which we have just looked. "All things have been delivered unto me of my Father: and no one knoweth who the Son is save the Father; and who the Father is, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal him" (Luke 10:22). According to this passage, Jesus affirmed that it took the infinite mind of God to comprehend and to understand Him. At the same time He asserted that He was able to grasp the infinite mind of the Father. He also claimed equality with God.

Upon various occasions, as one can see from the context in each instance, different ones addressed Jesus as "Son of God" in a special and unique sense. He accepted this high honor without any protest or without repudiating the thought. This fact shows that He accepted this title as true. For instance, when the devil appeared to Him after He had fasted forty days, he said, "If thou art the Son of God, command that these stones become bread" (Matt. 4:3). (Satan's clause, "If thou art the Son of God," is an echo of God's statement to Jesus at the baptism: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.") Satan used a first-class conditional sentence, which assumed the correctness of the statement. Thus from the original Greek we see that the devil did not question Christ's being the Son of God in a special sense. He took it for granted and urged Him, since He was the Son of God, to make the stones become bread. Jesus accepted the implication of the devil's statement and then answered him, taking His stand upon the Scriptures. Thus by His actions He took to Himself this name which implied a special relationship to the Deity claimed by no other.

Once again, when Jesus went across the Sea of Galilee to the country of the Gadarenes, two men out of the tombs who were demon-possessed cried out, "What have we to do with thee, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" (Matt. 8:29). Here demons acknowledged that Jesus was the Son of God in a special, unique sense and admitted that He has authority over them and could torment them. Thus our Lord accepted their statement regarding Himself as true without protest, but would not allow them to bear their testimony concerning Him.

After feeding the five thousand on the east side of the Sea of Galilee, Jesus rescued Peter from drowning and stilled the storm at sea. These miracles led the disciples in the boat to fall down in worship before Him, saying, "Of a truth thou art the Son of God." (Matt. 14:33). Here those who were nearest to Jesus of Nazareth confessed that He was the Son of God in a unique sense. He accepted their statement as true. Once again, we see a similar situation at the cross, only with variations. According to Matthew 27:40, those passing by and seeing Jesus shouted in derision saying, "... if thou art the Son of God, come down from the cross." The chief priests standing by likewise said, "He trusteth on God; let him deliver him now, if he desireth him: for he said, I am the Son of God" (Matt. 27:43). These derisive utterances of His enemies were echoes of the claims made by Jesus, which were well known. When the spirit left His body, the Roman centurion together with those who were with him, watching Jesus and feeling the earthquake, feared and said, "Truly this was the Son of God" (Matt. 27:54). It is clear that, according to the record, those who derided Jesus knew that He claimed to be the Son of God in a special and unique sense. Of the correctness of this judgment regarding Him, the centurion and those standing by and observing what was transpiring said, "Truly this was the Son of God" (Matt. 27:54). There are many other passages which show that others acknowledged that Jesus was the Son of God and approached Him as such. Never once did He repudiate this honor. Either He was the Son of God in a special and unique sense, or He was a base hypocrite and an impostor.

All the New Testament writers were pronounced monotheists in the proper sense of that term. They bitterly opposed polytheism. For instance, Mark, in 10:18, informs us that Jesus said to one who was kneeling before Him, "Why callest thou me good? none is good save one, even God." When Jesus was asked by a lawyer what was the greatest commandment in the law, He replied, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind" (Matt. 22:37). Emphasis is laid upon the idea of the unity of God in this expression. In His great intercessory prayer the Lord Jesus said to the Father, "And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, even Jesus Christ" (John 17:3). This language emphasizes the unity of God.

The Apostle Paul was no less a monotheist (in the proper sense of the term) than was Jesus of Nazareth. In writing to the Corinthian church he declared that, "For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many, and lords many; 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" (I Cor. 8:5,6). Without doubt this statement is a clear declaration on the part of the Apostle Paul concerning the unity of God. In Galatians 3:20 the same apostle asserted, "Now a mediator is not a mediator of one; but God is one." Here again, we see the clear testimony regarding the unity of God. Paul's monotheism again crops out in such a passage as Romans 3:29,30: "Or is God the God of Jews only? is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yea, of Gentiles also: if so be that God is one, and he shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith." The drift of the argument shows conclusively that Paul was, in the passage, emphasizing the thought that there is one true and living God. Once more, we see his monotheism asserting itself in Ephesians 4:4-6: "There is one body, and one Spirit, even as also ye 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." Here we recognize the three distinct personalities and also their implied unity. Once more we hear him declaring, "For there is one God, one mediator also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all; the testimony to be borne in its own times" (I Tim. 2:5,6). Again emphasis is placed upon the unity of God in such a passage as I Timothy 1:17. Scriptures could be multiplied where the thought of one true and living God is emphasized. This situation we see throughout the New Testament.

In it we find three divine personalities associated in the most intimate manner. Moreover the fundamental, underlying teaching of the New Testament writers is that there is one true and living God. In other words, the very same situation which appears throughout the writings of Moses and the prophets reappears and is seen throughout the New Testament. When one is willing to look at all the facts and to admit unimpeachable evidence, one must accept this conclusion.

The only attitude for anyone to take in his quest for truth is to have an open mind, to be ready to receive any new truth or facts to which his attention has not already been called, to evaluate any newly discovered facts or principles in the light of related data, and to accept any necessary inferences that are demanded by the facts--regardless of whether or not the new light thus received accords with former beliefs and ideas. To follow this criterion is to be on the highway to truth; to fail to follow it is to shut out light and truth and to welcome error and falsehood.¹

Often there are certain facts and phenomena which seem to us irreconcilable. Nevertheless we accept such matters and act accordingly. For instance, every student of the Bible knows that the teaching found throughout its pages is that the God of the universe is an absolute Sovereign. Whatever He chooses to do, whether it be in the heavens above, on the earth beneath, in the sea, or underneath the earth, He does. There is no one who can withstand His will. He has His way in the whirlwind. Thus He is an absolute sovereign. But as we think of His omnipotence and of His authority, let us always bear in mind that He is righteous, just, merciful, and good, and that His grace endureth forever.

On the other hand the teaching of all the Scripture--from Genesis to Revelation--is that man was created a free moral agent. By this statement I mean that man is created with a will and an intellect, and that God allows him to make his own choices. In other words, the individual is sovereign within the sphere of his own spiritual and intellectual being. Although God is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent, He never coerces any man's will nor forces him to do anything contrary to his own free choice. While it is true that the Lord allows man to make his own choices, He does use moral suasion to influence him to do the right thing.

In this situation we see that, though God is the sovereign ruler of the universe, man, His creature, is independent and is supreme sovereign in his own little sphere of self. Nevertheless, the Scriptures teach most clearly and emphatically that God sees the end from the beginning and that He overrules and works out everything for the advancement of His plans and purposes. Neither philosopher nor theologian has ever been able to harmonize the sovereignty of God and the freedom of man. Nevertheless, they must accept these seemingly contradictory propositions. All the evidence proves that God is an absolute sovereign. Equally clear is the proposition that man is a free agent and makes his own choices without external coercion or force. Nevertheless, a careful biblical student and the one who is familiar with the course of History can see that there has been worked out and is still being developed a purpose of the ages, which will reach its culmination in the not-distant future. The scientific person will acknowledge these seemingly contradictory facts although he cannot harmonize them. He accepts them as being true and acts accordingly.

There are many things in nature which we cannot understand and comprehend. For instance, as I am writing this chapter, I am doing so by means of the dictating machine, which is run by an electrical current. At this moment it is dark and I am doing my work in the illumination that is furnished by an electric light. Do I understand the nature of electricity? No one does. We know that it exists and that under the proper conditions it runs the motor which is turning the machine into which I am talking. We accept the fact that the same current is furnishing the light by which I am doing my work. I accept this phenomena although I cannot understand it. I cannot understand how food can be assimilated by my system and how the blood can segregate the various elements and convey them to the proper organs of my body in order that they may function properly. Nevertheless, I, with all confidence and assurance, partake of three meals a day and with this sustenance and proper exercise keep my body in physical trim. There are myriad's of facts in the world around about us which we cannot understand but which we accept without question. Do the scientists understand the real underlying facts and principles which cause the sun to melt wax but to harden clay? Thus the rays of the sun have an exactly opposite effect upon these two substances. I could multiply indefinitely examples of things which we accept but which we do not understand. These instances will, I feel sure, suffice to make the point clear.

In this discussion we have seen from abundant examples that the Hebrew Scriptures unmistakably do present the doctrine that there are three divine personalities who stand on the same plane of equality one with the other, and yet are distinct, one from the other. At the same time, Moses and the prophets emphasized the unity of these divine personalities, the evidence for which has already been presented in the discussion above and which is overwhelming and cannot be gainsaid. We have seen that the same situation appears in the New Testament which is of one piece with the Hebrew Scriptures. There are however more references to these divine personalities and more is said about each of them in the New Testament than in the Old. The doctrine of the Holy Spirit stands out in bolder relief in the latter revelation than in the former: so does that of the Trinity. At the same time we see that the New Testament writers were monotheists in the strict and accurate sense of the term, for they declared that the Almighty is the one true and living God.

But for the sake of investigation, let us assume that God is one personality and not a trinity subsisting in the same divine substance or essence, although we have already learned that, in the eternity which preceded the creation of the world, Elohim, Gods, the Trinity alone existed. Being such a one, He possessed certain attributes or perfections. These of course were essential to His nature and were not conditioned upon anything. Love could not have been one of these attributes, while He was in this state, because there could be no such thing as love without an object to love. This principle we see from an examination of our own natures. We are logical in making this analogy since man was made in the image and after the likeness of God. In looking at myself I know that I cannot love one who does not exist. To show this fact most clearly let me call attention to a certain incident. During World War I there was a certain unbeliever who had an only son, and who was criticizing certain other young men for not enthusiastically entering the armed forces. In his discussion of the question he avowed with emphasis that, if he had two sons, he certainly would want one of them to go to war while the other one stayed at home and assisted him in his business. He dubbed as unpatriotic any man who would not insist upon one of his sons going to the front. In answer to his statement his wife, who was a Christian, asked him which of the sons he would want to go to war, if he had two--his own son or the one whom he did not have. Upon being pressed for an answer, he confessed that he would want his real son, in whom his life was wrapped up--as all those acquainted with the family knew--to remain with him and assist in his business and to enter the career which he had planned for him. But he would want the other son, who had no existence, to go and fight. I am simply calling attention to this circumstance to demonstrate that a person cannot love one who does not exist. It is psychologically impossible. Hence this man was willing for his imaginary son to go but would never consent for his own son of flesh and blood to give up the career which he had planned for him in order to fight for his country.

Since in the human realm it is impossible for men to love those who do not exist, it is like manner impossible for God to love someone who does not exist. If, therefore, back in eternity prior to the creation of the universe, God was a single Being, there was no one for Him to love. Love in such a Being was psychologically impossible. But, replies one, He was capable of loving because when He created the universe and peopled it with mankind, He loved His creatures. In reply let me say that such a love would not be an essential attribute of His character, but would be conditioned upon His own creation. Such a thought as this is unthinkable and is an impossibility.

But the Scriptures declare with no uncertain sound that God does love and go as far as to say, "God is love." This statement shows that love is a dominant characteristic of this self-existing one. It is essential to His nature. It is a part of His being. Since these statements are true, there must have been another upon whom God could bestow His affections. The scriptural explanation in its affirmation concerning the Trinity shows the possibility of love's being an essential characteristic of the Almighty. There are the three divine personalities subsisting in the same divine substance or essence. Thus there were mutual relations in the Trinity; therefore love in the highest and truest sense existed among these personalities.

From a philosophical standpoint the facts that are set forth in the Scriptures demand that we accept the position of God's existing in the form of three personalities who subsist in the same divine substance or essence. This conclusion, as we have already seen, is explained and set forth in many passages of the Scriptures. The facts found throughout both the Old and New Testaments demand our acceptance of this fundamental of all beliefs.

An examination of the physical universe, as all Bible students know, reveals what is known as the law of the octave. This phenomena is based upon the fundamental concept of a trinity. Speaking in terms of paper, we can say that the watermark of the Trinity is found throughout all nature. Is this by accident? or are we to attribute it to design? A little reflection will lead us to the conclusion that the latter is the case.

We therefore, who accept the Bible as the revealed Word of God, believe in the existence of one Supreme Being who exists as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as Moses and the prophets constantly proclaimed to Israel.

How can there be one God and at the same time three divine personalities? One cannot, in the literal sense, be three with the same meaning. One is one and three are three. By no juggling of figures can we expand one into three, or reduce three to one. Nevertheless the Scriptures are very clear and emphatic that God is one and that at the same time there are three divine personalities. What is the harmony between these two seemingly contradictory lines of teaching? The only concord between these two positions is that there is one divine substance or essence, but that this one God subsists in three personalities.

In order to bring out in clear, lucid language the real explanation of these seemingly contradictory positions, I wish again to quote from the late Dr. B.B. Warfield's article on the Trinity found in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia:

There is, of course, no question that in "modes of operation," as it is technically called--that is to say, in the functions ascribed to the several Persons of the Trinity in the redemptive process, and, more broadly, in the entire dealing of God with the world--the principle of subordination is clearly expressed, The Father is first the Son is second, and the Spirit is third, in the operations of God as revealed to us in general, and very especially in those operations by which redemption is accomplished. Whatever the Father does, He does through the Son (Rom. 2:16; 3:22; 5:1,11,17,21; Eph. 1:5; I Thess. 5:9; Tit. 3:5) by the Spirit. The Son is sent by the Father and does His Father's will (Jn. 6:38); the Spirit is sent by the Son and does not speak from Himself, but only takes of Christ's and shows it unto His people (Jn. 16:7ff); and we have our Lord's own word for it that 'one that is sent is not greater than he that sent him' (Jn. 13:16). In crisp decisiveness, our Lord even declared, indeed: 'My Father is greater than I' (Jn. 14:28); and Paul tells us that Christ is God's, even as we are Christ's (I Cor. 3:23), and that as Christ is 'the head of every man,' so God is 'the head of Christ' (I Cor. 11:3). But it is not so clear that the principle of subordination rules also in 'modes of subsistence,' as it is technically phrased; that is to say in the necessary relation of the Persons of the Trinity to one another. The very richness and variety of the expression of their subordination, the one to the other, in modes of operation create a difficulty in attaining certainty, whether they are represented as also subordinate the one to the other in modes of subsistence. Question is raised in each case of apparent intimation of subordination in modes of subsistence, whether it may not, after all, be explicable as only another expression of subordination in modes of operation. It may be natural to assume that a subordination in modes of operation rests on a subordination on modes of subsistence; that the reason why it is the Father that sends the Son and the Son that sends the Spirit is that the Son is subordinate to the Father, and the Spirit to the Son. But we are bound to bear in mind that these relations of subordination in modes of operation may just as well be due to a convention, and agreement, between the Persons of the Trinity,--a 'Covenant' as it is technically called--by virtue of which a distinct function in the work of redemption is voluntarily assumed by each. It is eminently desirable, therefore at the least, that some definite evidence of subordination in modes of subsistence should be discoverable before it is assumed. In the case of the relation of the Son to the Father, there is the added difficulty of the incarnation, in which the Son, by the assumption of a creaturely nature into union with Himself, enters into a new relation with the Father of a definitely subordinate character. Question has even been raised whether the very designation of Father and Son may not be expressive of these new relations, and therefore without significance with respect to the eternal relation of the persons so designated. This question must certainly be answered in the negative. Although, no doubt, in many of the instances in which the terms 'Father' and 'Son' occur, it would be possible to take them of merely economical relations. There ever remain some which are intractable to this treatment and we may be sure the 'Father' and 'Son' are applied to their eternal and necessary relations. But these terms, as we have seen, do not appear to imply relations of first and second, superiority and subordination, in modes of subsistence; and the fact of the humiliation of the Son of God for His earthly work does introduce a factor into the interpretation of the passages which import His subordination to the Father, which throws doubt upon the inference from them of an eternal relation of subordination in the Trinity itself. It must at least be said that in the presence of the great N.T. doctrines of the Covenant of Redemption on the one hand, and the Humiliation of the Son of God for His work's sake and of the Two Natures in the constitution of His Person as incarnated, on the other, the difficulty of interpreting subordinationist passages of eternal relations between the Father and the Son become extreme. The question continually obtrudes itself, whether they do not find their full explanation in the facts embodied in the doctrine of the Covenant, the Humiliation of Christ, and the Two Natures of His incarnated Person. Certainly in such circumstances it were thoroughly illegitimate to press such passages to suggest any subordination for the Son or the Spirit which would in any manner impair that complete identity with the Father in Being and that complete equality with the Father in powers which are constantly presupposed and frequently emphatically, though only incidentally, asserted for them throughout the whole fabric of the N.T.

From the quotation above we see that the most probable explanation of the two lines of seemingly contradictory teaching is that there is but one divine substance or essence, and at the same time there are three personalities. The God of the universe who revealed Himself to Israel, is none other than the triune God of the Scriptures.

The reasonableness of the scriptural teaching regarding the triune nature of the Eternal God may be seen in the light of the following facts. The amoeba is a one-cell animal--the simplest form of life. On the other hand, man is the highest type of creature upon this earth. His anatomy is complexity itself in comparison with the amoeba. His intellectual and spiritual life is immeasurably higher than the infinitesimally small degree of intellect of this little germ--if indeed it has any. Between these two extremes of life there is an ascending scale of forms of creatures--each a little higher than the one on the next round of the ladder of existence below it. It is utterly impossible for the amoeba to understand even the simplest things about men--if indeed it has sufficient intellect to have a single thought. This little animal is on the lowest round of this ascending ladder of existence. But man who is on a round infinitely higher than the highest type of animal can look down and see the various forms of creatures below him. Since he sees this ascending scale of life below, and since he can look up the ladder and see, by faith, the Eternal God on the topmost round--infinitely above him so that his mind staggers with amazement in contemplation of Him--he comes to the conclusion that it is impossible for his finite mind to formulate, even in the most limited degree, an adequate conception of God and the nature of His being. As far as man is concerned, God may be, in the constitution of His being, infinitely more complex above him than he is above the amoeba in its complexity.

It is therefore inappropriate for man to speculate as to the essential nature of the Almighty. We must depend upon what He has told us in His Word concerning Himself. We therefore most gladly receive all that He has made known to us.


Footnote:

¹ If anyone does not want truth, God will not force it upon him. In fact, truth and light are given only to the sincere and honest heart. The way any fact appears to anyone depends upon the attitude which he take. Facts and figures may be as clear and conclusive as the shining of the noonday sun; but, unless one loves truth and longs for God and fellowship with Him, one will be unable to recognize it. May God give all of us honest hearts and courageous spirits.

(Continued on the next page)