Last Updated on : |
|||
|
|||
[CONTENTS] || [PREVIOUS] || [NEXT] |
|||
The Doctrine of the Trinity:
|
|||
|
|||
So long as the doctrine of the Trinity is urged, as consisting of Three Persons, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance, so surely will the impossibility of such a position be argued. An old truth or a well-worn argument does not by age or constant repetition become on the one hand, error, nor on the other hand, a weak charge to be lightly ignored. That Trinitarians themselves readily acknowledge the difficulty or the impossibility of the position, is seen by a perusal of their writings. Cardinal Wiseman freely admits the poignancy of the charge. He says:
While the Rev. Dr. Robert Flint, writing his article in the Encyclopedia Britannica on "Theism," calls attention forcibly to the same impossible theory:
This plea of "mystery" has already received attention, but one is sorely tempted to introduce here an irrelevancy, to remark that if this doctrine truly be a mystery, it is beyond man's comprehension, and he therefore is not in a position to perceive nor to think thereon. Such a position, in spite of its absurdity and impossibility of thinking upon, or believing that which can be neither perceived nor comprehended, is what the Athanasian Creed, as already quoted, calls for:
It therefore is obvious of this doctrine that it is admittedly impossible to realize its definition, and accordingly the Creed itself is found contradictory and impossible within its own bounds, when it requires that:
If the Creed which alone divulges this great system of mysteries cannot be discovered as an agreeable synthetic whole; how shall confidence be placed in its demands upon us in the most sacred doctrine of the Christian religion? First, let the proverb be applied:
And only when the authors of these statements of faith have satisfied themselves upon a proper basis of unity, let them produce their Creed for reverential examination and Scriptural comparison. Reverting to the question of the relation of the Persons the following extracts are produced, without comment, to testify how even the disciples of Trinitarianism are willing to admit their confusion and inability to explain their affirmations; that three distinct persons, with faculties and personalities do in the Godhead form but one Substance, one Person: DR. JOHN HEY:
DR. JOHN WALLIS, another English Divine:
DR. WM. SHERLOCK, Dean of St. Paul, disputant in "Trinity" Debate with Dr. South:
REV. JOHN HUNT:
THE DUKE OF SUSSEX, one time President of Royal Society:
Upon this point of the "Persons," Scripture has some very definite statements. The writer to the Hebrews opening his Epistle, first shows how that God in times past spoke to man by the prophets, but in later times by His Son. This reference is quite certain and clear; it refers to Jesus when He testified in person and bodily form for the Father's work. Listen, then, to the description of Jesus when on earth by the same writer, and in the same chapter:
Listen yet to a fuller statement, which will suffice as the evidence of Scripture. The Apostle Paul says much regarding rules of conduct in the Church, and this further point arises in his instructions and arguments:
Therefore the difference is drawn between man and woman in relation to the likeness to God. Could anything be more exact and binding? God indeed is a Person; Scripture has declared it as plainly and as forcibly as words can convey ideas. As surely as Jesus when on earth nineteen hundred years ago was here as a person in bodily form, so surely is God in heaven a Person; for Jesus was, on Apostolic authority, "the express image of His person," and on the same indisputable authority man and not woman is in the form of God. Such being the well-attested "bodily person" of the Father and of the Son, how can the Two Persons blend their Beings with the Third Person of the Holy Ghost into the unsubstantial three-person-Godhead? Before leaving this matter it is well, perhaps, to point to an apparent contradiction in the Articles of Religion of the Established Church. Article 1. requires that-
Now in this God, the Article declares there to be Three persons converging in one complete and harmonious bodiless whole. For one of the Three to receive a body, and to retain the same eternally, would irrevocably disintegrate this agreement and inter-relationship of the Trinity in Unity; it would deny the very first and fundamental idea of the three-person-God, and continually distinguish between their persons. Yet, this is precisely what Article II. calls upon man to believe -- it must indeed find place for it, as Scripture is so certain upon its declaration that Jesus the second Person--
What, one humbly enquires, would be the position of the Son with the body, parts, and passions, with the remaining two Persons in the Godhead, who have neither body, parts, nor passions? The doctrine in the Statement of Faith of the Church is contradictory, and how shall man then believe firmly in God his Creator, and in Christ his Saviour. Yea, indeed!
|
|||
|
All Books/Booklets, Editorials, and Articles are FREE and can be downloaded without permission. |
|