These articles are written especially for church societies and classes, study groups, and all others interested in knowing more about Reformed doctrine. The writer, Rev. John H. Piersma, is pastor of the Bethany Christian Reformed Church of South Holland, Illinois.

LESSON 5 – GOD’S REVELATION (C)

Scripture Reading: 2 Timothy 3:14–17; Psalm 19

In this lesson we conclude our treatment of God’s Revelation with special emphasis on the doctrine of Scripture. We will consider the all–important matters of divine inspiration, Scriptural authority, etc. In the Reformed Faith the place of the Word is second to none!

Special Revelation and Scripture

Special revelation was written or inscripturated in order that it might be preserved for all times and all peoples.

We must not identify special revelation and the Bible. Special revelation was received by God’s people long before the permanent recording of that revelation was begun. And not everything that Cod has so spoken or done is recorded in Scripture. John 21:25 says that “there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they should be written everyone, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that should be written.”

Only that is preserved which was necessary for the enlightenment and guidance of the church of all ages. We have in the Bible that which we need for our salvation.

And yet we may not separate special revelation from Scripture. The Bible is not merely the human record of special revelation. Scripture itself belongs to special revelation. It is as necessary and indispensable to special revelation as the keystone at the crown of an arch. Otherwise we would know nothing for certain of Jesus Christ and all assurance of salvation would be lacking.

Conclusion: Scripture is the indispensable, written special revelation given us in the way of inspiration by God.

Scriptural Proof for Inspiration Let us look first at some of the Biblical proof for the divine inspiration of the Old Testament. From the Old Testament itself we learn.

a. that God ordered Moses and the prophets to write, Ex. 34:27; Jer. 30:2;

b. that the prophets were aware that they were speaking and writing God’s Word as can be seen from these typical expressions: “And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying . . .”; “Thus saith the Lord Jehovah . . .”; “The word of Jehovah that came to Joel . . .” (Joel 1:1).

The New Testament confirms the fact that the Old Testament was divinely inspired:

a. Citations from the Old Testament are introduced by “the Lord saith,” “the Scripture saith . . .”

b. Jesus Christ bears witness to the inspired character of the Old Testament in such passages as Matthew 5:17, “Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfill”; and John 10:35, “If he called them gods, unto whom the Word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken) . . . .” This proof is not refuted by the assertion that Christ was accommodating Himself to a then prevalent opinion of the Jews.

c. The apostles offer abundant testimony concerning the inspired character of the Old Testament in such statements as: “Every Scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16); “For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21).

The inspired character of the New Testament is evident from

a. The calling and responsibility of the apostles to witness of Christ in all the world, a task which required the promise of the Holy Spirit who would make them truly aware of all that Christ had spoken to them, would lead them into all truth, and explain to them “the things that are to come” (John 16:13, 14).

b. The apostles and evangelists in the New Testament darc to say that they are speaking and writing the very Word of God: “And for this cause we also thank God without ceasing, that, when ye received from us the word of the message, even the Word of God, ye accepted it not as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of God, which also worketh in you that believe” (1 Thess. 2:13); “I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto them, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the holy city. which are written in this book” (Rev. 22:18, 19).

What is Inspiration?

The best statement of the inspired character of Scripture is given in 2 Timothy 3:16 (quoted above). There we read that all Scripture is inspired of God. “Inspired of God” is a translation of a word (theopneustos) which might be read “breathed by God.” Another clear and convincing testimony to the inspired character of Scripture is found in 2 Peter 1:21 (also quoted above). There Peter declares that holy men of God were moved (it might be possible to say, “were driven”) by the Holy Spirit so that they spoke the Word of God. This stands in contrast with the “leading of the Holy Spirit” in which all believers share (Rom. 8:14).

Very simply, the inspiration of Scripture means that we have in Scripture the special revelation of God which came to us by a special working of His Spirit and as His infallible Word.

The varying views of divine inspiration which have been proposed and defended may be summarized as follows:

a. Some have maintained that the inspiration of men to write the Bible is no different than that which moves any man to write any piece of good literature. The view that Scripture is inspired in a unique and special way by God is said to lead to the creation of “a paper pope.” This kind of unbelief forgets that the content of Scripture was never present in man‘s spirit. In fact, it goes quite contrary to that which resides within natural man.

b. Others have said that inspiration is only negative in character. This means that the writers wrote their own ideas, etc., and the Holy Spirit merely watched over them to prevent error. But then we would have in Scripture only an inerrant word of man and not the infallible Word of God Himself. God Himself would not be speaking to us in His Word, which means that it would be impossible for us by a faithful reading of Scripture to gain real contact with the Spirit of the divine Author.

c. There is also another partial view of inspiration, sometimes called the “fundamental” or dualistic, which asserts that the moral-spiritual truths of Scripture were inspired but not the historical accounts, etc. Many seem to be going in this kind of a direction today because of the vigorous attack of modem learning upon the factuality of the Bible. Truth and fact in Scripture, however, are one. The Bible reveals that truth has really entered into history and is therefore known only in connection with it. This means that fact can never be separated from truth.

d. Then there is a kind of personalistic or dynamic view of inspiration which teaches that the Bible is not the product of a specific, datable work of the Spirit, but is rather the result of a long-time, continuous working of the Spirit upon the hearts and lives of the writers. The human writers of Scripture merely give testimony therefore of their own personal experience. All pious, edifying speech and action in any day is then similar to any Biblical writing. There is, of course, a difference in degree, but that is only due to the fact that the Biblical writers were closer to the Gospel events. This view erases the distinction between the general leading of the Spirit and the special operation of the Spirit which moved holy men to write the holy Word of God.

e. One can find evidences among the church fathers and others of a rigidly mechanistic view of inspiration. This pictures the human writers as virtually dead robots. The Holy Spirit is said to have played upon the spiritual heart-strings of the human authors as we playa piano or harp. The intention of this view is commendable, namely, to preserve the truth of divine inspiration. The weaknesses of this view can be seen when it is contrasted with the organic view of inspiration.

f. The organic view of the divine inspiration of Scripture sees the secondary, human writers as living organs of the Holy Spirit. This view is supported by these givens: (1) sometimes Bible writers undertake preliminary study and research before they write (see the opening verses of Luke‘s Gospel); (2) the writers preserve their own language. style, and thought-patterns; (3) Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 2:8 that he wishes to share with his readers not only the Gospel of God but his own soul as well.

We must carefully distinguish the human and the divine aspects ( I am afraid of the word “factor”) in the special revelation of Scripture. These arc indicated, for example, in Matthew 1:22, “Now all this is come to pass. that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet . . . .” These two are united in the sense that the divine totally dominates the human and takes it up into its service. No doubt of it, the Scriptures are also thoroughly human in their character. However, the principal point of our faith here is that the Bible is primarily and predominantly and thoroughly divine. Nothing in Scripture is attributable to the human aspect alone, not even its form. The authority of the Spirit covers both form and content.

Basic Literary Forms in Scripture

The way that the Spirit works in the inspiration of Scripture does vary according to the character of the writing. In the lyrical psalms, for example, the Holy Spirit makes full use of the poet’s experience and feelings. In the Apocalypse (the Book of Revelation) the Spirit gives a totally new revelation. The following basic literary forms can be distinguished in Scripture:

a. The narrative form in the historical sections; 

b. The instructive or didactic form in the laws, the wisdom literature (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the didactic psalms, Job, Song of Solomon), the parables and speeches of our Lord, the epistles of the apostles;

c. The prophetic sections including the ApocaIypse;

d. The lyric poetry as found especially in the psalms.

The Forming of the Canon

“We believe that the Holy Scriptures are contained in two books, namely, the Old and the New Testament, which are canonical, against which nothing can be alleged. These are thus named in the Church of God.”

So begins the Fourth Article of the Belgic Confession. It confesses that in God’s church the sixty-six books of the Bible are the genuine and inspired Holy Scriptures. How did the Church reach this conclusion as to the composition of the Bible? How did it choose or recognize these books as the proper Word of God?

The establishment of the canonical Scriptures is not something which was done by the Church alone. We must remember that the Holy Spirit brought the Church into existence by the power of God’s Word as found in these writings so that from the very outset the Church owed everything to that Word. It is only the Word which nurtures and sustains the Church. So Peter urges: “as newborn babes, long for the spiritual milk which is without guile, that ye may grow thereby unto salvation” (1 Pet. 2:2).

History indicates that the road leading to the canonization of the sixty-six books was not without some rough spots. But as the Church came to realize that it was necessary to know which books did and which did not belong to the canon of Scripture the way came open under the Spirit’s guidance to the fixing of the Bible as we know it.

At the synods of Hippo Regius (393 A.D.) and Carthage (397 A.D.) the church did nothing more than to indicate its awareness as to the canonicity of the sixty-six books, an awareness which was wrought by the Holy Spirit.

When the Belgic Confession says that nothing may be alleged against these books it means to stress their authenticity and authority as the Word of God. We may not sit in judgment over these writings. On the contrary, as the Word of God this book sits in judgment over us!

The Attributes of Holy Scripture

The Reformed Faith has always had to resist Roman Catholicism on the one hand and a mystical Anabaptism on the other. Romanism places the pronouncements of the Church alongside, on a virtual par with the Word. Anabaptists often looked to some kind of inner word, allegedly from the Holy Spirit, which was at least as good if not really better than the written Word as we have it in the Bible. Over against these errors we confess the following to be the true attributes of Scripture:

a. Scripture is authoritative. Isaiah 8:20 says, “To the law and to the testimony! if they speak not according to this word, surely there is no morning for them.” Distinction is made between nonnative and historical authority. It is important to ask what a given passage meant for the time and people in which it was first written (historical authority) and what its universal meaning is for all times and all peoples (normative authority). But these may never be played off against each other. It is not possible that the historical authority of a given text be interpreted to mean something essentially different from its normative authority.

b. Scripture is necessary. John 5:39 says, “Ye search the Scriptures because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me.” Scripture is not only profitable and stimulating. it is absolutely indispensable if we are to know Jesus Christ. L. Berkhof says that “the Reformers . . . defended the position that the Word was necessary in virtue of the divine good pleasure to make the Word the seed of the Church.”

c. Scripture is clear or perspicuous. Psalm 119: 105 says, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and light unto my path.” The point here is that although valuable aid is received from the Church and from Bible expositors, the believer is not dependent upon out· side help to learn from Scripture that which he needs to know for his salvation. The Westminster Confession of Faith says:

All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed, for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them (Chap. I, VII).

d. Scripture is sufficient. Matthew 15:9 says, “But in vain do they worship me, teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men.” John 20:20,21 says “Many other signs therefore did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: but these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in his name.” In the Belgic Confession we declare that God “makes Himself more clearly and fully known to us by His holy and divine Word, that is to say, as far as is necessary for us to know in this life, to His glory and our salvation” (Art. II).

With the completion of Scripture the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is concluded so far as special revelation is concerned. Roman Catholic assertions that we have an on-gOing inspiration which comes to expression in the pronouncements of the Church must be rejected. Similarly, those who out of a false mysticism claim to have private and personal revelations directly from the Spirit are not to be followed. The Church believes only that which is in accordance with Scripture and judges it to be sufficient for the establishment of all truth.

The Testimony of the Holy Spirit

To those who are outside of the faith it is not possible to prove that the Bible is the Word of God. There are indeed strong external testimonies to the truthfulness of Scripture, such as its remarkable unity (in spite of its being composed of sixty-six books written by many authors over many centuries), and the literal fulfillment of its prophecies. The Belgic Confession can well say therefore that “the very blind are able to perceive that the things foretold in them are being fulfilled” (Art. V). But we can be convinced of the truth that Scripture is God‘s Word only when the Holy Spirit testifies in our hearts that it is from God.

This testimony of the Spirit does not possess a separate content alongside that of the Bible. On the contrary, the Spirit always makes us to hear the Scriptures as the Word of God. By the Spirit the Scriptures lay claim upon us so that we hear and believe and obey the Word of God.

This working of the Spirit does not occur apart from a relationship to the Church as the sphere in which the Scriptures arc confessed to be the Word of God and in which that Word is proclaimed with authority. As the Heidelberg Catechism says, the faith which makes us to share in Christ is worked in our hearts by the Holy Spirit through the preaching of the Gospel and confirmed by the use of the sacraments (Lord’s Day XXV).

Scripture and Creed

About the authority of the Church to issue binding confessional pronouncements we have spoken earlier. Creeds, however, do not stand above or even next to Scripture. They stand beneath the Word. Anything wrong in the creeds must be corrected by appeal to the Scriptures as the only norm. The unity of the Reformed churches is expressed in the creeds. This unity is, however, merely a common conviction that these creeds “do fully agree with the Word of Cod.”

The Reformed creeds are:

a. The Confession of Faith, or, more popularly, the Belgic Confession, 37 articles, composed by Guido de Bres in 1561;

b. The Heidelberg Catechism, written by Zacharias Ursinus and Caspar Olevianus, published in 1563;

c. The Canons of Dart or The Five Articles against the Remonstrants, composed at the Synod of Dort in 1618, 1619.

Besides these we share with the Christian Church three ecumenical creeds:

a. The Apostles’ Creed, said to have originated in connection with the confession required in the early church at baptism;

b. The Nicene Creed, a statement of the orthodox faith with special reference to the Arian heresy which denied the true divinity of Jesus Christ;

c. The Athanasian Creed, which sets forth the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity and the right relationship of the two natures of Christ.

To help with discussion:

1. Is it possible that God revealed or might show to any of His children things inconsistent with the revelation found in the Bible?

2. Is the Word of God a collection of many words or the revelation of “one word” (singular), i.e., a single, consistent whole? What does this mean for our understanding of the Bible? 3. If all human thought and writing is inspired by the Spirit of God, aren’t such great literary introductions as Shakespeare’s dramas equal in quality to Scripture? Why not? 4. Many say that they believe in plenary and verbal inspiration. Do Christians of orthodox Reformed persuasion share this faith? Why do Christians believe that we must understand that inspiration extends to the very words of Scripture? 5. What is the effect of translation and other linguistic problems on the truthfulness of Scripture? Can we really say that we have in the English language the Word of God? 6. Why is it important to speak of the canonicity of Scripture? What is the reason for the traditional emphasis upon the “dosed canon” in orthodox circles? Don‘t some people today possibly get direct messages from God? 7. Is it really possible to speak of the authority of Scripture when there seems to be so little agreement as to its right interpretation? 8. Is the clarity of Scripture an intellectual or a spiritual reality (or both)? How can we say that the Bible is sufficiently clear to those who are intellectually or culturally deprived? 9. When we say that we know the Scriptures to be true because the Spirit so witnesses in our hearts, aren’t we reasoning in a circle? 10. Why is there a growing disdain for and disagreement with the historic creeds in our time? Do you think that we need a new creed for our day?

LESSON 6 – THE BEING OF GOD

Scripture Reading: Isaiah 6:1–5; John 14:1–11

We speak of five things here: God‘s names, essence, attributes, persons, and works.

We trust that our discussion of the doctrine of God will be marked by piety and humility, by godly fear! It is hard to talk about these things without giving the impression that this is just another set of propositions about another facet of the Christian doctrine. Isaiah 6 must be taken very seriously!

The Knowability of God

We do not know God as He is in Himself. We know Him only in His relationship to us as His creatures. God’s revelation never spenks outside of this relationship. We do not know what God is, we cannot really define Him. We know Him and His character in terms of His relationship to us. That is, of course, a covenant relationship .

Taken in this sense we can say that God is knowable. This knowability is rejected by many. The argument against the knowability of God runs like this: Knowledge is only possible when there is a real similarity between knower and the known. God and we are not similar at all, for He is the Absolute One and we are part of all that is relative.

The fault in this reasoning can be seen from the following: Although sin has brought God and man into conflict with each other, and although God and the creature are incomparable so far as their essential nature goes, we were created in His image, and there are “in man since the fall, the glimmerings of natural light, whereby he retains some knowledge of God” (Canons of Dort, III–IV, 4). And we who are reborn are restored in His image (Col. 3:10).

We can know God by faith. Nevertheless, in His essence He remains forever the Incomprehensible One. As Elihu said to his friend, “Behold, God is great, and we know him not” (Job 36:26). We know Him only because and insofar as He has revealed Himself to us as our God.

The Nature of Our Knowledge of God

We have only a creaturely knowledge of God. This means that it is never equal to or identical with the knowledge which God has of Himself. We do not know God as He knows Himself. Again, we know Him only because He has been pleased to reveal Himself.

This revelation always comes to us in human forms. That is why we say that our knowledge of God is anthropomorphic (a representation of God in terms of human characteristics). In the revelation by which we come to know Him God graciously speaks to us in language we can understand.

This does not mean that our knowledge of God is merely symbolic. Anthropomorphic representations (the Psalms and the Book of Revelation are full of samples of these) can really cover the corresponding reality in God because we are also “theomorphic” as image-bearers of God. Our knowledge of God does in its own way truly correspond to the self–knowledge of God.

Our knowledge of God in this life is partial, however, 1 Cor. 13:12. This is due to the sin which continues to darken our minds, not to the inadequacy or imperfection of the revelation. We long for the day when that knowledge shall be complete!

We can summarize these ideas by saying that while our knowledge of God is ectypal, God‘s self–knowledge is archetypal. This formidable language is capable of simple explanation. Imagine a signet ring, the kind once worn by rulers and used by them to stamp certain documents as genuine. The image in the ring is the archetype. The impression in the wax which seals the envelope is the cctype. God’s self-knowledge is the archetype. Our knowledge as gained from His revelation is ectypal.

Once again: some day we will have a perfect knowledge of God insofar as our creaturely understanding can enjoy such knowledge. This will not come mechanically as the figure of the signet ring might suggest. Then as now it will come by faith in the Word of God.

Names of God

The names of God found in the Word of God are true revelations of His being. In these names God‘s virtues or attributes and works come to a most apt and beautiful expression.

God does not have a single name by which we can fully and completely indicate who He is. He is, after all, the Inexpressible One. As said before, we cannot really give a definition of God. For that reason He has given Himself many names by which we may know Him. These several names give us a rich revelation of the greatness and glory of our God. These names can be arranged as follows:

a. names of appellation or address: God, the Lord, the Almighty, Yahweh (I Am who I am), the Lord of Hosts, etc.;

b. names of description or attribute: all of these are really names of God since He possesses each of these virtues in the most absolute sense;

c. names of the divine Persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

God‘s Attributes

The place of the attributes of God in the Reformed Faith is important since it places great stress upon our calling to worship and glorify God. Calvin reflects this when he says that “the worship of God is . . . the only thing which renders men superior to brutes, and makes them aspire to immortality” (Institutes, Book I, Chap. III ). The Belgic Confession similarly declares:

We all believe with the heart and confess with the mouth that there is one only simple and spiritual Being, which we call God; and that He is eternal incomprehensible, invisible, immutable, infinite, almighty, perfectly wise, just, good, and the overflowing fountain of all good.

Theology has attempted to arrange the divine attributes according to various patterns. The most common, perhaps, is the one which groups God‘s virtues under two headings, communicable and incommunicable. The incommunicable attributes refer to those which are transcendent, the communicable to His immanence; the incommunicable speak of the difference between God and man, the communicable of the similarity. In other words: the incommunicable attributes refer to those virtues which are uniquely divine, the communicable to those which can be seen in some way or measure also in man.

The incommunicable attributes usually are listed as follows: God’s independence, immutability or unchangeableness, eternity, omnipresence, simplicity and oneness or unity. The communicable attributes are listed as follows: those of His spiritual nature: God is Spirit and invisible; those of His intellect and wisdom; those of His ethical nature: His goodness, justice and holiness; His dynamic virtues: the divine will and power; the attributes of His perfection: His self-sufficiency, blessedness and glory.

Although this communicable-incommunicable distinction can be useful, it must be noted that the incommunicable and the communicable attributes of God cannot really bf’ placed opposite each other. After all, God possesses all His communicable attributes in an incommunicable manner. For example, God makes us to share in His power, but power with God is always His almightiness, the Creator‘s power. Ours is always creaturely, dependent.

Most importantly, remember that God as He is has entered upon a covenant with us; by faith He has in all His perfections become a God who is near and dear. His incommunicable attributes are for God‘s Covenant people precisely the power and joy of their faith: as the God of sovereign grace He is dependent upon nothing in us; He is unchangeably faithful to the Word of His Promise; He loves us with an eternal love. He surrounds us on all sides (omnipresence) with His care. In His simplicity He is for us a light and there is in Him no darkness at all (1 John 1:5). And since He is the one only God, His glory and praise is our chief purpose in life.

Thus God‘s incommunicable attributes spread their blessed light over our lives: we are in our faith independent of anything outside of God, know by His grace a loyalty and faithfulness to Him, possess for ourselves eternal life, rise up in our spirits to the very throne of God, reject all double-heartedness, and know a fellowship with all the saints in which we are the one people of God.

From the attribute of God’s oneness it follows that none of His attributes is in conflict with any other. His mercy never conflicts with or contradicts His justice, for example. Nor may one attribute be placed above any other in importance; His love, for example, may not be placed ahead of His righteousness.

Proof from Scripture for the Tri-unity of God

That God is three in Persons is revealed in the Old Testament, although indistinctly when compared to the New Testament. The dominant note in the Old Testament is, “Hear, O Israel; Jehovah our God is one Jehovah” (Deut. 6:4). Israel needed repeated warnings against polytheism, the heathen doctrine of a plurality of gods serving most all of life‘s larger and smaller problems. This made for an emphasis on the oneness of God. Nevertheless evidence for the Trinity is not lacking in the Old Testament. And immediately, at the very outset of the New Testament such evidence is to be found. Here is a brief review of Old and New Testament proof for the tri-unity of God:

In the Old Testament:

a. the appearance of the Three Persons in its historical accounts: the repeated appearances of the Angel of the Lord, the references to a personal Wisdom in Proverbs 8, 9, the work of the Spirit in creation, Gen. 1:2. Since the Angel of the Lord and the Wisdom of the Proverbs are revelations of the Second Person, the existence of the First Person is implied.

b. Some texts make very obvious references to the Three Persons in God: the plural pronouns in the creation account (“And God said, Let us make man . . ” Gen. 1:26); the threefold benediction in Numbers 6:24–26; and especially Isaiah 63:9, 10, which reads, “In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. But they rebelled, and grieved his Holy Spirit . . . .”

Tn the New Testament:

a. the appearance of the Three Persons in certain historical events: at the conception and birth of Christ, Luke 1:35, “And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee; wherefore also the holy thing which is begotten shall be called the Son of God;” the Three Persons are also in evidence at Christ’s baptism: Luke 3:21, 22, “. . . and the Holy Spirit descended in a bodily form, as a dove . . . and a voice came out of heaven, Thou art my beloved Son . . .”

b. Certain texts make specific reference to the Three Persons: the command to baptize, Matthew 28:19; the benediction in 2 Corinthians 13:14: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.”

How do We Undersfond the Trinity?

In a most basic sense, of course, we can‘t “understand” the mystery of the Trinity. We can only say a few things about it, remembering that this doctrine is not only of very great Significance to the whole Christian religion, but that it is a dividing line between that which is and that which is not true Christianity.

God is one in Essence and three in Persons. The word person is to be understood as indicating an individual personality who as subject responsibly initiates all his actions and experiences.

The Being of the Godhead is not to be understood as a kind of collective in distinction from the individual Persons. That would land us in a kind of polytheism. Nor does the Being of God consist out of the Three Persons. God‘s Being exists in the Three Persons. Examples such as the American Rag (three colors on one banner) or a family (father, mother and children in one household ) are not of much use, therefore. The best illustration might be that of the sunshine in which we can distinguish an illuminating, a warming, and a healing power. But even this example fails if analyzed carefully.

There have been all kinds of heresies at this point: the modalistic monarchianism of Sabellius is one. He taught that the Three Persons are three subsequent kinds of revelation of God, etc. The Bible, however, teaches that the Persons stand in a very conscious, eternal relationship to each other, as can be read from John 1:1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

That Christ is truly Cod is explicitly stated in such pronouncements as Matthew 16:16, John 20:28, and especially Romans 9:5, “whose are the father‘s, and of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever.”

That the Holy Spirit is truly God appears plainly from Acts 5:3, 4, “But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land? . . . thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.” That the Holy Spirit is not a mere influence or divine power but a genuine Person is plain from Acts 13:2, 1 Corinthians 12:11, Ephesians 4:30.

The Relationship of the Persons to Each Other

This may seem to be so much “mumbo–jumbo,” but it is in fact a very crucial part of our Christian faith. The traditional form of the statement concerning the relationship of the Three Persons is: The Father eternally generates the Son and eternally causes the Spirit to proceed from Him. The Son is eternally generated by the Father and eternally causes the Spirit to proceed from Him. The Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son.

Some have said that this can be likened to the root, stem, and flower of a plant, but this is not true. The flower is the end result of the root and stem, while the Holy Spirit is not a product of the Father and the Son. He goes out from the Father and the Son eternally. And He goes out to the world as the Spirit of Christ.

The relationship of the Persons to each other ean be well thought of this way: the Father eternally sees Himself in His Son; the Holy Spirit is the eternal bond of love between the Father and the Son; thus the Father and the Son know each other eternally in love by the Spirit. 1 Corinthians 2:10 says this: “But unto us God revealed them through the Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.”

The Eastern, Greek Orthodox Church teaches that the Spirit proceeds from the Father only. This is a remnant of the idea that the Three Persons are subordinate to each other. In that view of the Trinity the Father stands above the Son and the Spirit, both of whom are out of Him. In Scripture, however, the Spirit is called the Spirit of the Son, Galatians 4:6. The Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father to the Son, and from the Son to the Father. Thus the illustration of the triangle can be used: the second line comes out of the first and both come together in the third.

We must see clearly that tile Three Persons are “all three one, in truth, in power, in goodness, and in mercy” ( Belgic Confession, Art. VIII).

The Relationship of the Persons of the Trinity to Creation

Creation is very simply and totally a work of the Triune God. And yet the work role of the Three Persons in creation differs. All things created are out of the Father, exist in and through the Son, and in their movement and development are upheld and guided by the Holy Spirit.

All this relates to the truth that God‘s love comes to us from the Father, that God speaks to us through the Son as the “Word” (logos) of John 1, through whom we are made capable of and adapted to fellowship with God, and that the Holy Spirit fastens our hearts upon the Word of God, working faith in God’s grace in us by the Word and in that way seeks to dwell within our hearts.

The Belgic Confession (Art. IX) says, “All this we know as well from the testimonies of Holy Writ as from their [the Persons of the Trinity, JHP] operations, and chiefly by those we feel in ourselves.” These workings or “operations” are not intended to indicate that there is some source of knowledge for us outside of the Scriptures. Only that which the Bible reveals of the Three Persons is known from their operations which we sense as taking place within us. It is noteworthy that the creed speaks precisely at this point of the workings which “we feel in ourselves.” This stands over against all purely theoretical, abstract rationalizing about the Trinity. Such discussion has no value. The Three Persons are known only in their real and personal relationship to us and in our relationship to them.

To he lp with discussion:

1. One of my lirst elders always asked this question on spiritual visits to the members of the congregation: “Do you believe that you have a real contact with God in your life as a Christian?” How do you evaluate this question? Do we realize as much as we ought the meaning of the claim that by faith we are in fact children who know the Heavenly Father?

2. How docs the Biblical doctrine of the knowability of God fare in the minds of those who believe that we can learn only by way of experimentation? Docs this partially explain why some young people are swept to unbelief by the charm and power of modern science? 3. How do we account for the persistence of man’s appeal to God in spite of his proud boastings that he no longer needs “the old time religion?” 4. When we read in Scripture that in heavenly glory we shall “know fully even as also I was fully known” (I Cor. 13:12), does that mean that in heaven our knowledge will be as great as God’s knowledge? 5. When we pray do we appeal to God on the basis of His power and glory revealed in His names and attributes or upon the basis of His grace and promise in Christ? What difference does our answer to this question make? 6. Is there a danger of becoming a victim of scholasticism when we speak of the attributes of God? (Scholasticism here might be identified with cold, rationalistic, formal, dead orthodoxy.) 7. Is it really important to see that God is Three in Persons and One in Being,? Do Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, “Jesus Only” people believe that God is triune? Can they be saved with this doctrine? 8. Can you see at least a trace of the tendency to isolate the Persons of the Godhead from each other in the current interest in and emphasis upon the Holy Spirit? 9. Can you see in our time a tendency toward an over-emphasis upon the divine attribute of love over against God’s justice?