| || |The Berean Expositor Volume 41 - Page 219 of 246 Index | Zoom | |
"The whole mystery (of the Trinity) is raised by our bringing them together, and
attempting to reconcile . . . . . The Scripture delivers certain separate propositions, and
thus it leaves them" (Dr. Chalmers).
(3) Many `heresies' may be traced to the misuse or misunderstanding of the word `person'.
(4) The titles `Father' and `Son' are relative. The title "The Only begotten Son" must be
taken to mean just exactly what the words imply.
(5) Those who transfer the title `The Father' from time and make it the title of the Infinite
and Unconditional, are forced by their very error, to perpetuate even greater errors, by
maintaining that the Father is `the proper God'; `Eternally and originally God',
destroying by so saying the very quality of the Son that they seek to establish.
(6) The Trinity is economical i.e. not essential. It describes the assumed relations of
God for the purpose of Creation and Redemption (The Son, The Man), (The Word,
(7) All the revealed titles of God are facets of the Godhead assumed like the name Jehovah
"for the age" and "unto all generations", but like the name Jehovah itself, to be so
blessedly fulfilled as to be actually so partly quoted as we have seen in Rev. 11: 17, the
third part of the title `art to come' being swallowed up in the actual Coming. In like
manner will all other titles be `fulfilled'.
(8) Instead of the expression `The eternal generations of the Son' fortifying His Deity, it
robs Him. If this teaching be true, for then the Father must for ever have precedence
over the Son, and the actual begetting, and consequently the glorious reality of His
Manhood in the fullness of time is imperilled. Such a statement substitutes mysticism
and metaphysics for the sober words of Revelation.
(9) God Who in times past spake to the fathers by the prophets at the Incarnation of the
Saviour, spoke to us "In Son". Not "by His Son", not "In His Son" but en huioi "in
Son", even as in days of old we read:
"I appeared unto Abraham" . . . B'el Shaddai "in God Almighty" (Exod. 6: 3).
(10) We are compelled to believe, by the usage of the title in both Old and New Testaments,
that the "one Lord" of the N.T. is the Jehovah of the O.T. We can and confess with
Thomas, that the Saviour we have believed is "God" and "Lord".
(11) We await the consummation of the ages, when not only shall the name Jehovah be
fulfilled, but at long last the "Son" Himself shall be subject unto the "Father", that
GOD (not the Father, not the Son, nor the Holy Ghost) but "that GOD", as never
before, "may be all in all" (I Cor. 15: 28). We gladly acknowledge the "Mystery of
God in Christ" (Col. 2: 2).
On several occasions, in this series, we have placed the word heresy within quotation
marks, "heresy", for what is heresy to the orthodox at one time, may not be heresy at
another. A disinterested reader can see a number of incipient heresies in the language
employed by Athanaias in his Apologies and Controversies, and we remember that the
Apostle Paul said:
"The way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my father" (Acts 24: 14).
Many of the heretical opinions which eventually led to the formulation of the Creeds,
arose from the fact that many of the early Christians brought a great deal of ancient
philosophy with them into the church and into its teaching.