Trinitarianism, Part 2

By Lewis Sperry Chafer

[Author’s Note: This discussion, the second in a series on the doctrine of the Trinity, will be continued, it is purposed, in several succeeding issues of Bibliotheca Sacra.]

I. The Fact of the Trinity (cont.)

4. Proof of the Trinitarian Doctrine.

Proofs of the essential doctrine of the Trinity may be drawn from both reason and revelation, though the usefulness and validity of the former have often been challenged. The fact that men of equal sincerity disagree relative to the possibility of reason serving in the field of this doctrine is evidence that unaided human minds fail in their attempts to search the deep things of God. But more objectionable than the attempts of reason, are the efforts to illustrate that which has no counterpart in human life or in nature. The triune existence of God is vastly more than the exercise of three primary functions such as power, intellect, and will; or correspondence to three divisions of a human being into body, soul, and spirit; or any suggestion created by motion, light, and heat as related to the sun; or three tones blending into one chord effect; or (as suggested by Sir D. Brewster) that a single ray of light may be decomposed by a prism into three primary colors—red, yellow, and blue with their varying intensity of chemical powers. Because of their irrelevance, such illustrations may be said to “darken counsel” with words which are void of import. Richard Baxter (1615) states: “But for my own part, as I unfeignedly account the doctrine of the trinity the very sum and kernel of the Christian religion, (as exprest in our baptism,) and Athanasius his creed, the best explication of it that ever I read; so I think it very unmeet in these tremendous mysteries to go farther than we have God’s own light to guide us.”[1] Not so much as a fraction of relevance can be established between such incidental occurrences within finite realms and the infinitude of reality which the triune mode of the existence of the One God presents. An illustration which fails to illustrate is somewhat worse than nothing.

a. Reason.

This approach to the doctrine of the triune mode of the existence of God is properly a continuance of that already presented under the rationalistic arguments for the reality which God is, and such qualifications as were there advanced and imposed respecting the scope and value of reason in the pursuance of things divine apply at this point as well. As before asserted, reason cannot give intelligent assent to all that revelation discloses; which fact is due to the limitations of reason. Nevertheless, there can be no final contradiction set up between reason and revelation, since revelation is, above all else, the disclosure of infinite reason. God is the ultimate perfection of reason and whatever He discloses is none other than the manifestation of infinite reason. Owen Feltham (1668) has testified: “I believe there is nothing in religion contrary to reason, if we knew it rightly.” It is equally true that, if it were really understood, there is no word of revelation to which reason would not give an affirmative response. Belief in the doctrine of the Trinity—One God subsisting in three modes of existence—should not be founded upon reason. It is a revelation. It is, however, quite legitimate to observe, as one may do with some attention, that reason, so far as it is able to go, acquiesces in that which revelation discloses. The Bible, being infinitely true, seeks no support from finite reason. Of this Hermann Venema maintains: “But although reason affords us no assistance by making any express affirmation on the subject, neither does it deny nor oppose. It teaches the unity of the divine essence; but, although it cannot prove that that essence subsists in several persons, it can advance nothing in refutation of such a doctrine. It leaves it in its own proper place.”[2]

A restatement is in order to the end that it may not be understood that reason is called upon to assent to the impossible notion that one is three and three are one. The doctrine of the triune existence of God bears no semblance to such abstract contradictions; the assertion being that in the Godhead there are distinctions in personal consciousness which are combined with identity of nature and of attributes. Previously it has been proven that there is no absurdity involved when it is contended that plurality does coexist with unity. The element of mystery which is present is normal. The problem is not the how of the mystery, but the fact. Any experienced logician will distinguish between these so widely different propositions.

In moving forward along lines of rationalistic contemplation of this great doctrine, no claim is made to originality. The arguments advanced are those employed by various writers—too many, indeed, for any identification as to human authorship. The line of reasoning will be in a series of independent propositions, namely:

(1) The divine attributes are eternal.

Since God exists eternally, His attributes, which exist necessarily, exist eternally. No attribute of God is derived, since this would make Him dependent to that degree. Likewise, no attribute of God is acquired since that would imply that God has existed at sometime as an imperfect Being. His attributes coexist with His existence. Since all-sufficiency, immutability, omnipresence, omniscience, omnipotence, goodness, love, holiness, and a disposition for communion are attributes of God now, they have been His attributes in precisely the same manner from all eternity.

(2) Eternal activity of the attributes.

The attributes of God are eternally active. This truth led some of the ancients to conclude that God, to satisfy His attributes, was eternally creating material things. Aristotle contends: “God, who is an immovable (immutable) nature, whose essence is energy, cannot be supposed to have rested or slept from eternity, doing nothing at all, and then, after infinite ages, to have begun to move the matter, or make the world.”[3] This line of reasoning fails in that it is based on the fallacy that God’s activity is confined to the creation of material things. Though the attributes of God have been eternally active, creation had its beginning. To assert of God that His omniscience has not been eternally active is to claim that there was a time when He knew nothing. There is no time when, in the exercise of omnipotence, He did nothing. Thus, and with specific meaning at this juncture, there was never a time when His disposition for communion was not active. No thought can be entertained that implies that there was ever a time when divine holiness, justice, and goodness, were not active. It is equally evident that as God lives in the realization of His attributes, they have been active from all eternity, and thus He will be related to His attributes for all eternity to come. It is to be observed, however, that God is not, as an automaton, governed by His attributes, but is ever acting in intelligence and reason which they may involve some variety in the emphasis given to some attributes over others under extenuating circumstances.

(3) The attributes require both agent and object.

The exercise of the divine attributes implies that there is required both an agent and an object. Power, love, and disposition to communion, like all other attributes, necessitate both agent and object. Similarly, generally speaking, the agent cannot be numerically, identically, and individually the same. Requiring reciprocal relations, they cannot arise and be exercised within one absolute unity. If any exception exists, it is in the realm of omniscience wherein self-knowledge is recognized. The familiar illustration is that of a spirit wholly isolated from all other beings with no knowledge that any other exists. Could such a spirit under such circumstances exercise objective power, love, or disposition for communion? Thus it would be with God. He is a perfect Agent in the exercise of infinite perfections and attributes; but who, it may be inquired, is the object? Creation presents a vast array of objects and these are all benefited by His agency; but the question is more demanding in that it inquires as to who served as object in the exercise of the eternal attributes in that situation which existed before ought was created. The attributes of God were active prior to creation and, if so, there must have been both agent and object then as now. To restrict the divine object to creation is to deprive God of the exercise of His qualities and characteristics during that period preceding creation. It also follows that, since creation was a matter of divine choice and thus contingent, it is to restrict the exercise of God’s attributes to that which is contingent. In such a case the divine attributes might as easily have never been exercised at all. All this suggests the absurdity that the divine attributes were not exercised in eternity past, that they might not under certain circumstances be exercised now, and that they might never be exercised at all. Such reasoning must be rejected. Cicero represents Velleius as proposing to his opponents the strange inquiry, “What was it that induced God to adorn the heavens with stars and bright luminaries? whether he was previously like one who lived in a dark and comfortless habitation, and desired a better residence? If so, why was he so long a period without the gratification of his desire?”[4] While this reference is more or less irrelevant to the point, it is true that the exercise of the divine attributes did not begin with creation. God was as tranquil and complete in Himself before creation as after. It is equally imperative to recognize that a finite universe has never been, nor can it ever be, the full satisfaction objectively of the infinite Being. A man may enjoy his faithful dog, but all the activities and capacities of a man are not satisfied with a dog as object. It may be noted here that even man who is made in the image of God is not finally satisfied with creation as his object. He finds no rest or complete satisfaction until he draws largely on the Infinite One. The Psalmist utters this truth when he says: “As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God” (Ps 42:1). The destiny of man is of eternal duration. He will observe the creation of new heavens and a new earth and, if redeemed, will enjoy them forever. Having received the gift of eternal life, he is little encouraged to set his affections on things of time and sense. He is rather enjoined to set his affections on things above where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God (Col 3:1–3).

God is not dependent upon creation as an object for the exercise of His qualities. He depends on nothing beyond Himself, hence:

(4) God is sufficient in Himself.

Reason thus asserts that there is within God that which corresponds both to agent and object. All attempts to discover an adequate divine object outside of God must fail. Something must be discovered, for it certainly exists, which is anterior and infinitely superior to all that creation affords. At this point it may be noted that the anticipation of creation could not serve as an adequate object; for, if creation, when realized, is insufficient to serve as an infinite object, it could not so serve when it existed as a mere archetypal idea. It is in harmony with the independence and infinite excellence of the Godhead to assert that His resources are in Himself, and it is equally true that He is also the answer to every desire of His own Being. In His relation to creation, He gives but receives nothing. He is the source of all blessing and He finds in Himself His own felicity. He is the only sphere in which He may exercise His own infinite nature. The exercise of His attributes is as essential as their existence. Thus, if there is no other sphere which corresponds to His infinity, these attributes must be exercised within Himself and within Himself He has found satisfaction throughout eternity. It is therefore necessary to conclude that the very mode of the divine Being answers all these demands. The agent and the object are embraced within Himself. A plurality is thus predicated to the Divine nature.

(5) The agent and object are persons.

Since the Divine Nature includes plurality, it must be a plurality of Persons. Such a plurality cannot be predicated of the Divine Essence, for the Scriptures distinctly testify to the truth that there is but One God. Similarly, this plurality cannot be that of mere offices or modes of manifestations, for such could not serve in their relation to each other as agent and object. Nothing short of Persons can serve in this reciprocity. In the case of the exercise of the attributes which are moral, both the Agent and the Object must exhibit intelligence, consciousness, and moral agency. In the experience of communion, the necessity is as much on the Object as it is on the Agent that there shall be similarity in thought, disposition, will, purpose, and affection. If the Agent be a Person, the Object must be a Person also; whatever pertains to Deity is of necessity eternal. Nothing in God, as has been seen, can be contingent or adventitious. Every attribute and divine quality is eternal, and, in like manner, the Person, or Persons, to whom these attributes pertain are eternal. None of these Persons within the Godhead could be lacking in the essential features and attributes of Deity and maintain any place in the communion which comprises the Godhead. By the most empirical necessity these Persons are coequal. No gradations belong to infinity. There is no sphere of existence intermediate between infinite Deity and finite creaturehood. Whatever is within the Essence of Deity is lacking nothing which belongs to infinite completeness. All must be equal in power, glory, wisdom, benevolence, dignity, and disposition to communion. These attributes ever have been and ever will be exercised by each Person within the Godhead. In all the fullness of infinity, these attributes have been eternally active in each Person. Therefore, as each Person has ever exercised these attributes to infinity and eternally, it becomes evident that each has been and ever will be infinitely active as Agent and Object. It is impossible for a finite mind to comprehend the intimate and enduring affection which infinite love has generated within the Godhead. Each loving and each receiving in return. Each with infinite understanding appreciating the perfections of the Others. The holy will of One in absolute agreement with the holy will of the Others. There need be no surprise that the Father said of the Son, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

(6) Plurality in God is a trinity.

Thus far in this argument, only a plurality within the Godhead has been asserted, but some proof may be advanced as evidence that this plurality is a trinity—no less, and no more. This is the clear testimony of revelation, but it is the purpose of this argument first to demonstrate whatever may be discovered through reason before turning to revelation. It has been seen that there must be a plurality of Persons in order that the divine attributes may be exercised within the Godhead and apart from creation, and that each Person must serve both as Agent and Object in the communion and reciprocity which belongs to the relationship; but if all forms of activity of Persons are to be experienced, there must be conjoint action as well as that which is individual. The united fellowship and agreement which has especial significance among men on earth (Matt 18:19) doubtless has its counterpart in the fellowship within the Godhead. To no small extent, such conjoint action is implied in communion and agreement between the Persons of the Godhead, which agreement has been recognized. It therefore follows that as the element of conjoint action as agent is experienced by two, there must be a third Person who serves as object. There is no need for more than three Persons in the Godhead and there could not be less. Three is the number of divine completeness, not only on the testimony of the Bible which is sufficient and final, but on the ground of the fact that within a triad of Persons every demand which reciprocity might present is satisfied. Two infinite Persons agreeing as Agents for the conjoint function of Beings must have as Object a third Person equally as qualified as themselves. Thus Father and Son being conjoint Agents, say, in the exercise of infinite love have the Holy Spirit as their Object; the Son and Spirit being conjoint Agents, have the Father as their Object; and the Father and the Spirit being conjoint Agents, have the Son as the Object of their love. Thus it is seen that there is a large measure of agreement between revelation and reason concerning the Godhead Three.

The individual objector to the trinitarian dogma will do well to give heed to the teachings of the Bible on this subject; but if he, through unbelief, is not amenable to the Word of God, he should attend upon the less exact, yet nevertheless empirical, dictates of reason. The starting point of the Christian witness, whether he be dealing with Jew, Unitarian, Mohammedan, or agnostic, is a defense of the unity of God. The Christian yields first place to none in his insistence that there is but One God. The Christian is in full possession of all that to which the Jew or Mohammedan lays claim, and infinitely more.

(7) The Bible sustains reason.

Yet, again, and continuing under the general theme of reason, it will be seen that the Bible sustains and justifies every rational conclusion as to the triune mode of the existence of God. Truth existed before any revelation in written form was made. It therefore does not depend on revelation for its truthfulness. To the same end, it may be said that some truths, though recorded and in no way opposed to reason, are not demonstrable by reason. If, as has been proven, revelation is infinitely true, it follows that, should reason advance a contradiction to revelation, reason is at fault. The doctrine of the Trinity is one of the most unequivocal teachings of the Bible. Though reason has no occasion to aid revelation in regard to this doctrine, revelation may assist reason. Attention is now drawn to this field of investigation. The available Scriptures will be only such as assert the eternal existence of the Godhead. Some things, the Scriptures aver, have existed from the foundation of the world, or within the boundaries of time; while other Scriptures affirm that some things existed before the foundation of the world, or from all eternity. Christ is said to have been slain from the foundation of the world (Rev 13:8), but to have been foreordained before the foundation of the world (1 Pet 1:20).

(a) The eternal exercise of love.

In His High-Priestly prayer Christ said to His Father: “for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:24). Love is a divine attribute which, like all attributes, as has been demonstrated, is not only eternal and therefore exercised before the creation of the universe and apart from the universe, but requires that it, as agent, shall have an object in every way coequal and reciprocal. This declaration on the part of Christ refers to that eternal exercise of love. By these words of Christ, the reader is carried back to that awful eternity which preceded creation, when there was no agent nor object other than the Persons within the Godhead. God did not, as an individual Person, merely love Himself, but He loved other Persons than Himself, who comprise the one Essence which God is.

(b) The exercise of mutual glory.

In the same prayer and when speaking directly to His Father of things perfectly understood between themselves, Christ said: “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was” (John 17:5). The phrase παρὰ σεαυτῷ (“with thine own self”) is definite, indicating a glory with the Person of the Father apart from external dignities or honors. The same is expressed again by the words, παρὰ σοί (“with thee”). From everlasting the Son has participated in the essential glory which belongs to Deity. The glory is that of dignity, perfection, and infinite blessedness. God, being immutable, His glory can never change. The dating of this glory should not be unobserved. It is before creation of worlds and doubtless prior to the existence of any angelic beings who were present to gaze upon that glory. Some intimation of this glory may be gained from Rev 21:23 where that same unchangeable glory is said to be manifest in eternal ages to come.

(c) The exercise of knowing.

A plurality of Persons in the Godhead provides for a mutual communion in knowledge between Agent and Object. Such is the case now and such it has ever been. The words of Christ on this aspect of eternal reciprocity are of great import: “As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father” (John 10:15), ”...no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son” (Matt 11:27). In like manner it is disclosed that the Spirit knows. It is written: “And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God” (Rom 8:27); “But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God” (1 Cor 2:10). Thus not only the reciprocity of Agent and Object in the sphere of knowledge is assured, but the eternity of both the Son and the Spirit are declared.

(d) The exercise of divine disposition to communion.

Had the triune existence been that of wholly distinct Beings without mutual relations to bind them, it would be easy, under such circumstances, for these Beings to have become separated from each other and disturbed by rival interests; but being of one Essence, there could be no separation prompted by self-interests. The significant word with is employed to denote this eternal communion. As noted above, Christ speaks to the Father of the glory which He had with Him in past ages, and John opens his gospel with the sublime declaration: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God” (John 1:1, 2). The same relationship is presented in 1 John 1:2. It is written of the Christ that He was “that eternal life, which was with the Father.” The phrase in the beginning, as used here by John, could hardly be a reference to aught else than the eternity past which was prior to the event mentioned in the next verse, namely, “All things were made by him.” At such a time and under such circumstances, it is asserted that the Son, or Logos, was with God, and also that then, as now, and as He ever will be, the Son, or Logos, was and is God. There never was, nor could there ever be, anything but mutual communion, all-satisfying to both Agent and Object, between these Persons of the Godhead. This communion, being apart from all that is created, was as perfect and complete before creation as after. It is within the sphere of the Godhead Three that there is an incomprehensible depth of meaning to the words: “The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father,” and, “As thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee,” and “I am in the Father, and the Father [is] in me,” and yet again, “All things that the Father hath are mine.”

Thus it is seen that the deductions which finite reason affirm are sustained by the Word of God, which is infinitely true. There is a plurality in the Godhead from all eternity and these in the reciprocity of Agent and Object have maintained mutual love, glory, knowledge, and communion from everlasting—a relationship so sufficient that infinite demands have been satisfied. To this, creation, coming later in time could add nothing.

b. Revelation.

As the Scriptures assume the existence of God on the ground of the fact that He never began to be, thus, and in like manner and for the same reason, the Scriptures assume the triune mode of the existence of Deity. The three Persons concur as the Authors of revelation and are, on that account, not to be magnified alone as the subjects of revelation. The existence of the author of any book is assumed, and, true to these realities, the doctrine of the triune existence is not based upon direct Biblical assertion, or any use of the word trinity, which word is not found in the Sacred Text. The word trinity came into use in the second century. It is of great import that the names of God are self-revealed and that, in the Old Testament, the name Elohim is plural, and that, in the New Testament, the name Θεός, though singular, is represented in triune plurality as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is noted, also, that the primary Old Testament message respecting Deity is of His unity, but there are many indications that there is a plurality of Persons. So, and to the same purpose, it is to be noted that the New Testament having to do with the various aspects of redemption, which parts are assumed by the different Persons of the Godhead, its primary message relative to God is of the three Persons with definite indications that, back of this representation, there is but one God.

(1) The doctrine of the Trinity as set forth in the Old Testament.

Attention has been called earlier in this treatise to the importance of the truth that the word Elohim is plural and that it is used properly with plural forms of speech; but this, like much Old Testament doctrine, is incomplete apart from the progress of doctrine which is consummated in the New Testament, where the distinctions between Father, Son, and Spirit appear. Why should the declaration that the Old Testament name Elohim is a veiled reference to the trinity of Persons in the Godhead be resisted, when the New Testament states that the trinity of Persons exists and has always existed? If there were no further development of the trinitarian doctrine than the intimation advanced by the plural form of Elohim, the case would be different, for the plural of Elohim is not sufficient and final proof of the triune mode of existence; but does not the singular form of Θεός, when by authoritative Scripture it is seen to represent three distinct Persons, guide unerringly in the right solution of the problem which the plural of Elohim generates? The case is even stronger when it is discovered that the objector offers no argument against this interpretation, but would merely substitute another notion.

By no means is the Old Testament witness to the plurality of Persons in the Godhead restricted to that which may be derived from the plural form of Elohim and its associated forms of speech. Definite distinction is made in the Second Psalm between Jehovah and His Messiah (vs. 2). In this Psalm Jehovah states, “Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion” (vs. 6), and the Son, who is the King, declares, “Jehovah hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” Similarly, a distinction is drawn in many passages between Jehovah and Jehovah’s Servant, or the Angel of Jehovah. Quite in keeping with the truth that God is one Essence in which three Persons subsist, is the fact that the Angel of Jehovah is at times distinct from Jehovah, and at other times He is Jehovah Himself. Again, in the Twenty-second Psalm, which records the prayer of Christ addressed to His Father when Christ was on the cross, it is recorded that He said, “My God, my God, why thou forsaken me?” (vs. 1); so, also, in verse 15, “And thou hast brought me into the dust of death.” Thus, likewise, the name Immanuel is interpreted by inspiration to mean “God with us,” which indicates no less a fact than that God has entered the human sphere in the incarnation of the Son, who became flesh and dwelt among us. Nor is it of small importance that the three primary names of Deity in the Old Testament are directly ascribed to each of the three Persons. That the First Person is Jehovah, Elohim, and Adonai need not be pointed out. Yet it is equally true that these names are applied to the Second Person. He is called Elohim (Isa 9:6), Jehovah (Ps 68:18; Isa 6:1–3; 45:21). So, also, the Spirit is called Jehovah (Isa 11:2, literally Spirit Jehovah; cf. Judg 15:14), and the Spirit is Elohim (Exod 31:3, literally Spirit Elohim). Thought should be given, also, to the benediction which the high priest used in invoking a blessing upon the people of Israel, and by divine authority: “The LORD bless thee, and keep thee: the LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee; the LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them” (Num 6:24–27). The three parts of this benediction comport with the ministries of the three Persons in the Godhead. The following from Smith’s Person of Christ presents this feature of truth well: “The first member of the formula expresses the benevolent ‘love of God;’ the father of mercies and fountain of all good: the second well comports with the redeeming and reconciling ‘grace of our Lord Jesus Christ;’ and the last is appropriate to the purity, consolation, and joy, which are received from the ‘communion of the Holy Spirit.’” There is a striking correspondence here with the benedictions recorded in the epistles of the New Testament, which so clearly name the Persons of the Godhead and assign to them their respective ministries (cf. 2 Cor 13:14).

Because of its great meaning, attention is directed to the threefold ascription of Isaiah 6:3. On this passage Dr. Richard Watson has written: “The inner part of the Jewish sanctuary was called the holy of holies, that is, the holy place of the Holy Ones; and the number of these is indicated, and limited to three, in the celebrated vision of Isaiah, and that with great explicitness. The scene of that vision is the holy place of the temple, and lies therefore in the very abode and residence of the Holy Ones, here celebrated by the seraphs who veiled their faces before them. And one cried tinto another, and said, ‘Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts.’ This passage, if it stood alone, might be eluded by saying that this act of Divine adoration here mentioned, is merely emphatic, or in the Hebrew mode of expressing a superlative; though that is assumed, and by no means proved. It is however worthy of serious notice, that this distinct trine act of adoration, which has been so often supposed to mark a plurality of persons as the objects of it, is answered by a voice from that excellent glory which overwhelmed the mind of the prophet when he was favoured with the vision, responding in the same language of plurality in which the doxology of the seraphs is expressed. ‘Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?’ But this is not the only evidence that in this passage the Holy Ones, who were addressed each by his appropriate and equal designation of holy, were the three Divine subsistences in the Godhead. The being addressed is the ‘Lord of hosts.’ This all acknowledge to include the Father; but the Evangelist John, xii,41, in manifest reference to this transaction, observes, ‘These things said Esaias, when he saw his (Christ’s) glory, and spake of him.’ In this vision, therefore, we have the Son also, whose glory on this occasion the prophet is said to have beheld. Acts xxviii, 25, determines that there was also the presence of the Holy Ghost. ‘Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear and not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive,’ &c. These words, quoted from Isaiah, the Apostle Paul declares to have been spoken by the Holy Ghost, and Isaiah declares them to have been spoken on this very occasion by the ‘Lord of hosts.’ ‘And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not, and see ye indeed, but perceive not,’ &c.

“Now let all these circumstances be placed together-THE PLACE, the holy place of the Holy Ones; the repetition of the homage, THREE times, Holy, holy, holy—the ONE Jehovah of hosts, to whom it was addressed,—the plural pronoun used by this ONE Jehovah, US; the declaration of an evangelist, that on this occasion Isaiah saw the glory of CHRIST; the declaration of St. Paul, that the Lord of hosts who spoke on that occasion was the HOLY GHOST; and the conclusion will not appear to be without most powerful authority, both circumstantial and declaratory, that the adoration, Holy, holy, holy, referred to the Divine three, in the one essence of the Lord of hosts. Accordingly, in the book of Revelation, where ‘the Lamb’ is so constantly represented as sitting upon the Divine throne, and where he by name is associated with the Father, as the object of the equal homage and praise of saints and angels; this scene from Isaiah is transferred into the fourth chapter, and the ‘living creatures,’ the seraphim of the prophet, are heard in the same strain, and with the same trine repetition, saying, ‘Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.’”[5]

Similarly, the threefold benediction which Jacob implored on the sons of Joseph is well described by Hermann Venema: ”‘God, before whom my fathers...did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day, the Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads’ Gen. xlviii.15, 16. If the doctrine of the Trinity be not revealed in this passage, it will be difficult to account for so long a preface. But let us examine it a little more closely. We have mention made in the words of Jacob of three distinct persons—’God, before whom my fathers did walk,’ and ‘the Angel who redeemed me’—here we have at least two persons; but it is further said, ‘the God which fed me.’ The last of these is unquestionably distinguished from the Angel, and also from God before whom his fathers walked. There are thus three distinct persons, under three personal names and performing distinct works. ‘The God which fed me’ and ‘the Angel who redeemed me’ are each represented as possessed of what is peculiar to a divine person, and as standing on the same footing with the true God. Divine works are ascribed to each. They are mentioned as the object of divine worship and as the source of blessing. Jacob invokes a blessing from the three. But the true God is the only object of worship—the only being to whom prayer may be addressed. We nowhere read of the Old Testament saints praying to or invoking blessings from any except God. As if Jacob had said, Let him who is the fountain of blessing bless the lads. No creature can effectually bless them. The other two, therefore, whom Jacob mentions are really divine persons. This is confirmed by Scripture which describes God the Father as the leader, the teacher, or him before whom our fathers walked—the Son of God as the Goël, the Angel who redeemed,—and God who is the author of all illumination, sanctification, and comfort, as the Holy Spirit who furnishes us with spiritual food and feeds us therewith.”[6]

Three distinct Persons are indicated in 2 Samuel 23:2, 3; Isaiah 48:16; 63:7–10. Likewise, in view of the fact that creation is predicated to each Person of the Godhead separately as well as to Elohim by the words, “And Elohim said, Let us make man in our image” (Gen 1:26), it is a strong confirmation of the same truth that Ecclesiastes 12:1 is plural, reading, as it does, “Remember now thy creators in the days of thy youth,” and Isaiah 54:5 which reads, “Thy Makers is thy husband.”

As a summarization of the doctrine of the Trinity as found in the Old Testament, Dr. W. H. Griffith-Thomas states in his Principles of Theology (pp. 25, 26), and under the heading ”The Doctrine Anticipated”: “At this stage, and only here, we may seek another support for the doctrine. In the light of the facts of the New Testament we cannot refrain from asking whether there may not have been some adumbrations of it in the Old Testament. As the doctrine arises directly out of the facts of the New Testament, we do not look for any full discovery of it in the Old Testament. We must not expect too much, because as Israel’s function was to emphasize the unity of God (Deut. vi.4), any premature revelation might have been disastrous. But if the doctrine be true, we might expect that Christian Jews, at any rate, would seek for some anticipation of it in the Old Testament. We believe we find it there. (a) The use of the plural ”Elohim,” with the singular verb, ”bara,” is at least noteworthy, and seems to call for some recognition, especially as the same grammatical solecism is found used by St. Paul (I Thess. iii.11, Greek). Then, too, the use of the plurals “our” (Gen. i.26), “us” (iii.22), “us” (xi.7), seems to indicate some selfconverse in God. It is not satisfactory to refer this to angels because they were not associated with God in creation. Whatever may be the meaning of this usage, it seems, at any rate, to imply that Hebrew Monotheism was an intensely living reality. (b) The references to the “Angel of Jehovah” prepare the way for the Christian doctrine of a distinction in the Godhead (Gen. xviii.2, 17; xvii.22 with xix.1; Josh. v.13–15 with vi.2; Jud. xiii.8–21; Zech. xiii.7). (c) Allusions to the “Spirit of Jehovah” form another line of Old Testament teaching. In Genesis i.2 the Spirit is an energy only, but in subsequent books an agent (Isa. xl.13; xlviii.16; lix.19; lxiii.10f). (d) The personification of Divine Wisdom is also to be observed, for the connection between the personification of Wisdom in Prov. viii, the Logos of John i.1–18, and the “wisdom” of 1 Cor. i.24 can hardly be accidental. (e) There are also other hints, such as the Triplicity of the Divine Names (Numb. vi.24–27; Psa. xxix.3–5; Isa. vi.1–3), which, while they may not be pressed, cannot be overlooked. Hints are all that were to be expected until the fulness of time should have come. The special work of Israel was to guard God’s transcendence and omnipresence; it was for Christianity to develop the doctrine of the Godhead into the fullness, depth, and richness that we find in the revelation of the Incarnate Son of God.”

(2) The doctrine of the Trinity as set forth in the New Testament.

Within the New Testament, the field of testimony and investigation relative to the doctrine of the Trinity is greatly enlarged. There are those, and not a few, who declare that no certain proof of the triune mode of existence can be established from the Old Testament; that is, apart from the retroactive influence of the New Testament revelation. Certain godly Jews did, it is evident, sense the plural aspect of the divine existence. Such men as served as translators of the LXX did search the Scriptures, but little is on record as assurance that they came to any clear understanding of a triune mode of existence of the One God whom they worshipped. The instruction was vigorously given to them to defend the monotheistic conception of Deity. As is true of all saints of all the ages, their belief concealed in itself vast realities to which they did not attain. Even if the plural aspect of Deity were divinely apprehended by some, more than others, the full-orbed disclosure awaited the fullness of the time.

The New Testament revelation is all but limitless. The mention of a name of Deity or its related pronoun is at once the declaration of a trinitarian distinction. Like the element of moral virtue in the Christian’s prescribed conduct, the triune mode of existence of Deity is everywhere present and assumed throughout the New Testament. It is so completely the sphere of all relationships that it defies analysis. Nonetheless, some of the most glorious features of this truth may be considered separately with profit. Four general lines of investigation follow, namely, (a) The names of God, (b) The attributes of God, (c) The works of God, and (d) The worship of God.

(a) The Trinity and the names of God.

Direct application is made of the names of God to each of the three Persons. There is no question raised as to the divine titles belonging properly to the Father. Yet the Son and Spirit bear the same designations. The Son is called God (John 1:1), the true God (1 John 5:20), the blessed God (Rom 9:5), the great God (Titus 2:13). So, also, the Holy Spirit is called God (Acts 5:3–9), and Lord (2 Cor 3:18).

While the different names of the Persons in the Godhead are everywhere fully employed throughout the New Testament, the complete designation for God as revealed in the New Covenant is declared in, and as a part of, the Great Commission, to wit: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matt 28:19). As baptism stands as the initial act of a believer into a public witness for Christ, so, on that threshold, the full title is proclaimed of the God into whose fellowship the candidate enters. In this connection, it is significant that the first public appearance of Christ was that of His baptism, and that, though no formula is recorded as having been pronounced over Christ by John on that occasion, the three Persons of the Godhead were present and identified. The Father owned the Son—“This is my beloved Son”—; the Son was visibly present; and the Spirit was seen to descend upon Christ in the form of a dove. Direction is given in the Great Commission that baptism should be administered in the name, not names—the one name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. The phrase, the name, is a strong declaration of the divine unity which subsists as Father, Son, and Spirit. The ordinance in view is to be performed by the authority of that incomparable name; but that name is threefold.

(b) The Trinity and the attributes of God.

It is a challenging fact that the attributes of Deity are ascribed to each of the Blessed Three. (a) Of the Father it is said, “From everlasting to everlasting, thou art God” (Ps 90:2); of the Son it is said that He is the “Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last,” that He “was in the beginning with God,” and that His goings forth have been from the days of eternity (Rev 22:13; John 1:2; Micah 5:2); of the Spirit it is written, “Christ, through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God” (Heb 9:14). (b) Infinite power is exercised by each Person. Of the Father it is said: “Who are kept by the power of God” (1 Pet 1:5); of the Son—“Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me” (2 Cor 12:9); of the Spirit—signs and wonders were wrought “by the power of the Spirit of God” (Rom 15:19). (c) Omniscience is ascribed to each of the triune Persons: The Father “searcheth the heart” (Jer 17:10); the Son—“All the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts” (Rev 2:23); the Spirit—“Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God” (1 Cor 2:11). (d) So, omnipresence belongs to each Person: God has said, “Do not I fill heaven and earth?” (Jer 23:24); Christ said, “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matt 18:20); the Psalmist wrote of the Spirit, “Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?” (Ps 139:7). (e) Holiness is the character of each of the Trinity: Of the First Person it is inquired, “Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name, for thou only art holy?” (Rev 15:4); Christ is the Holy One-“But ye denied the Holy One” (Acts 3:14); and the Spirit is everywhere said to be the Holy Spirit. It is not to be wondered that angels exclaim “Holy, holy, holy, is Jehovah of hosts” (Isa 6:3, A.S.V.). (f) Truth is ascribed to each Person: Of the Father, Christ said, “He that sent me is true” (John 7:28); of the Christ it is written, “These things saith he that is holy, he that is true” (Rev 3:7); and of the Spirit, “It is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth” (1 John 5:6). (g) Equally, indeed, are the three Persons benevolent: Of the Father it is declared, “The goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance” (Rom 2:4); Christ loved the church (Eph 5:25); “Thy good spirit” (Neh 9:20). (h) The disposition for communion is shared by each Person: The Father and Son are said to have fellowship with saints, “And truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:3); and testimony is borne as to the communion of the Holy Spirit (2 Cor 13:14).

The same equality might be set forth concerning every aspect of the character of God. What is true of one Person is true of each of the others and this is conclusive evidence that the Godhead is a Trinity of infinite Persons; yet One God.

There is no intimation that One Person of the Godhead sustains these attributes in respect to the other two Persons, or that the attributes are held in any partnership. All is predicated to each as though no others existed. Thus the peculiar relationship of One in Three, and Three in One, is upheld apart from those usual interdependent sharings which characterize all human combinations and mutual manifestations. The fact that each Person possesses all the divine characteristics and so completely that it would seem that no other need to possess them, speaks of the distinction between the Persons as such. On the other hand, the fact that they all manifest these characteristics in identically the same ways and to the same measure speaks of the unity from which their mode of existence springs.

(c) The Trinity and the works of God.

Each distinctive work of God is not only said to be wrought by a Person of the Godhead, but the major works of God are predicated to each of the Three Persons. In no instance are these Persons said to be combined in what they do; it is rather that the same thing in one Scripture is attributed to one Person that is in another Scripture attributed to another, and so on until each of the Three are credited with the work and, in each case, it is as though no other Person was ever related to it. No outward partnership is recognized. The fact that each One is announced as wholly achieving a given undertaking, quite apart from the Others, indicates the truth that the Persons maintain a distinction the One from the Others. On the other hand, the fact that each do completely and perfectly the given task and in a way that it would imply that no other need undertake it, indicates a mysterious unity far more vitally concentrated than is known in any aspect of human experience. Some of these major works of God which are declared to be wholly wrought by each Person and quite independent of the others should be noted specifically:

First, Creation of the universe.

The stupendous enterprise of calling an immeasurable universe into existence is set forth as being wrought by each Person quite apart from partnership sharing or cooperation. Of God the First Person it is stated, “Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands” (Ps 102:25); of Christ it is stated, “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible” (Col 1:16); and of the Spirit it is written, “The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” (Gen 1:2), and, “By his Spirit he hath garnished the heavens” (Job 26:13). All of this is combined in the one sublime statement that, “In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth” (Gen 1:1). The separate, yet complete, act of creation on the part of each Person is gathered up in the assertion that Elohim—which name portends the mystery of plurality in unity and unity in plurality—achieved the undertaking.

Second, Creation of man.

The creation of man is the creative act of God since of no other has it been said that the thing created is made in His image and likeness. This creative act of God is also the work of the separate Persons in the Trinity; Jehovah Elohim, it is said, “formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Gen 2:7); of Christ it is written that “by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible” (Col 1:16); so, to the same end, it is declared, “The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life” (Job 33:4). In view of this, the wise man admonishes, “Remember now thy Creator [plural] in the days of thy youth” (Eccl 12:1); and to Israel it is written, “Thy Maker [plural] is thine husband” (Isa 54:5).

Third, The incarnation.

Three Persons are present in the incarnation: the Spirit generates the Son, but in such a manner as that the Son ever addresses the First Person as Father. Such is the nature of regeneration of lost souls. While that regeneration is wrought by the Spirit, the saved one ever, from that time forth, addresses the First Person as Father.

Fourth, The life and ministry of Christ.

He, the Son, did always the will of the Father, and, to this end, the Spirit was given to the Son without measure.

Fifth, The death of Christ.

When on the cross and there addressing His Father, it is recorded of Christ that He said, “And thou hast brought me into the dust of death” (Ps 22:15). Similiarly, it is written of the Father, “He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all” (Rom 8:32). Likewise, “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son” (John 3:16); the Son spoke for Himself saying, “No man taketh my life from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down” (John 10:18). Again, Paul testified concerning the sacrifice of Christ, “Who loved me, and gave himself for me” (Gal 2:20). Of the Spirit’s part in Christ’s death it is said, “Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God” (Heb 9:14).

Sixth, The resurrection of Christ.

Among many direct statements which assert that the Father raised the Son from the dead, one declares, “Whom God hath raised up” (Acts 2:24); and the Son said of His life in resurrection, “I have power to take it again” (John 10:18), and “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19). Of the Spirit, in this same connection, it is said, Christ “was put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit (1 Pet 3:18).

Seventh, The resurrection of all mankind.

It is recorded of both the Father and the Son, “For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will” (John 5:21), and of the Third Person it is stated: “But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you” (Rom 8:11).

Eighth, The inspiration of the Scriptures.

Here the Three Persons appear in various passages: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tim 3:16); “The prophets...searched...what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow” (1 Pet 1:10, 11); and of the Spirit—“but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Pet 1:21).

Ninth, The minister’s authority.

It is written of the Father, “Our sufficiency is of God; who also hath made us able ministers of the New Testament” (2 Cor 3:5, 6); and of the Son the Apostle testified, “He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry” (1 Tim 1:12); and the same Apostle instructs the elders of the Church in Ephesus, “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood” (Acts 20:28).

Tenth, The indwelling Presence.

There is “one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all” (Eph 4:6). The believer’s new life is declared to be “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col 1:27). And, “Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you?” (1 Cor 6:19).

Eleventh, The work of sanctification.

Jude writes to believers as those “that are sanctified by God the Father” (Jude 1); again, of Christ it is said, “For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren” (Heb 2:11). Thus, also, the Apostle writes of the Holy Spirit in relation to believers, “Ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor 6:11).

Twelfth, The believer’s safe-keeping.

Various aspects of this feature of truth might be presented. Christ declared of the Father that, “No man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand” (John 10:29), and not only is the same thing promised by the Son Himself (John 10:28), but the Son has wrought in four effectual ways to the same end. It is written, “Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us” (Rom 8.34). Nothing could be more assuring than that the believer is “sealed [by the Spirit] unto the day of redemption” (Eph 4:30).

Marvelous, indeed, are the works of God and of surpassing import is the fact that these works are, in each case, said to be wholly wrought by each of the Trinity separately, not in partnership or mutual cooperation, but sufficiently in each instance to make it appear to be unnecessary for the work to be undertaken by Another! Thus unity and plurality are demonstrated as existing in the Godhead on a plane of relationship above and beyond the range of human experience.

(d) The Trinity and the worship of God.

All created intelligences are appointed to render worship to God, and their worship, such as it is, comprehends the triune Godhead.

First, By Angels.

As has been observed, the angels ascribe worship to three Persons when they say, “Holy, holy holy, is the LORD of hosts” (Isa 6:3), and the “living creatures” are saying, “Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come” (Rev 4:8).

Second, By saints.

All prayer and worship is now directed, by divine instruction, to the Father, in the name of the Son, and in the enabling power of the Holy Spirit (John 16:23, 24; Eph 6:18).

Third, The benedictions.

In Numbers 6:24–26, the blessing imposed by the high priest upon the people is recorded as, “The LORD bless thee, and keep thee: the LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: the LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.” In 2 Corinthians 13:14 the most used benediction of the church is recorded, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.”

As a summarization of his extended discussion bearing on the doctrine of the Trinity, Dr. Horace Bushnell writes: “To hold this grand subtonic mystery, in the ring of whose deep reverberation we receive our heaviest impressions of God, as if it were only a thing just receivable, not profitable; a dead truth, not a living; a theologic article, wholly one side of the practical life; a truth so scholastic and subtle as to have in fact no relation to Christian experience; nothing, we are sure, can be less adequate than this, or bring a loss to religion that is more deplorable, unless it be a flat denial of the mystery itself. In this view we cannot but hope that what we have been able to say may have a certain value...preparing some to find how glorious and how blessed a gift to experience, how vast an opening of God to man, how powerful, transforming, transporting, this great mystery of God may be. We can wish the reader nothing more beatific in this life than to have found and fully brought into feeling the practical significance of this eternal act or fact of God, which we call the Christian Trinity. Nowhere else do the bonds of limitation burst away as here. Nowhere else does the soul launch upon immensity as here; nowhere fill her burning censer with the eternal fires of God, as when she sings,

One inexplicably three,
One in simplest unity.

...Neither will it do for us to suffer any impatience or be hurried into any act of presumption, because the Trinity of God costs us some struggles of thought, and because we cannot find immediately how to hold it without some feeling of disturbance and distraction. Simply because God is too great for our extempore and merely childish comprehension, he ought to be given us in forms that cost us labor and put us on a stretch of endeavor. So it is with all great themes... Let no shallow presumption turn us away, then, from this glorious mystery till we have given it time enough and opened to it windows enough by our praises and our prayers, to let in the revelation of its glory. Let it also be a welcome commendation to our reverence, that so many friends of God and righteous men of the past ages, such as bore a greater fight than we and grew to greater ripeness in their saintly walk, bowed themselves adoringly before this holy mystery, and sang it with hallelujahs in the worship of their temples, in their desert fastings and their fires of testimony. And as their Gloria Patri, the sublimest of their doxologies, is in form a hymn for the ages, framed to be continuously chanted by the long procession of times till times are lapsed in eternity, what can we better do than let the wave lift us that lifted them, and bid it roll on: Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.”[7]

“Praise God, from whom all blessings flow;
Praise Him, all creatures here below;
Praise Him above, ye heavenly hosts;
Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.—Amen.”

Dallas, Texas

Notes

1. Christian Religion.
2. System of Theology, p. 197.
3. Met. Lib., xiv, c. 6.
4. De Natura Deorum, Lib. i, c. 9.
5. Theological Institutes, Vol. I, pp. 470, 471.
6. System of Theology, p. 210.
7. New Englander, Vol. 12, Nov, 1854.