SCRIPTURE
STUDIES
VOLUME FIVE - THE
ATONEMENT BETWEEN GOD AND MAN
STUDY
II
THE AUTHOR OF THE ATONEMENT
The
Almighty, Jehovah — The Savior of Sinners, Through Christ — “Worthy is the Lamb”
— “The Self-Existing One” — The I Am — A False
Tradition — Based on Forgery — The Unity of Father and Son Scripturally Shown
— The Scriptural Usage of the Word Jehovah and the Title Lord
— The word God in the Old Testament — In the New
Testament — The Harmonious Bible Testimony — “He that Hath Seen Me Hath
Seen the Father” — He
Thought it not Robbery to be Equal — “To Us there is One God, The Father, and One Lord, Jesus Christ.”
JEHOVAH God claims for himself the authorship of the great
plan of Atonement, which we have just seen is in progress of development;
which began at Calvary and will not be complete until the close of the
Millennial age, when the Lord Jesus Christ, the mediator of the Atonement,
shall deliver up the dominion of earth, restored and in full subordination
to the Father. In harmony
with this are numerous statements of the Scriptures; for instance, “I am
Jehovah thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Savior.”
Again, “I am Jehovah and beside me there is no Savior.”
Again, “I Jehovah am thy Savior and thy Redeemer, the Holy One of
Jacob.” And again, “I am Jehovah thy God from the land of Egypt, and
thou shalt know no God but me: for there is no Savior beside me.”
Again, “To the only wise God, our Savior, be glory and majesty,
dominion and power, both now and ever, amen.”
Again, “We trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men,
especially of those that believe.” Isa. 43:3,11; 60:16; Hos. 13:4; Jude
25; 1 Tim. 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10
If this thought were fully received—that the Almighty Jehovah,
himself, is the Savior, the Author of the great plan of salvation, and the
executor of it, through his willing [page 34]
agents and representatives—it would deliver many
from false conceptions of the relationship between the heavenly Father and
his heavenly Son, in respect to the salvation of mankind. It would leave no room for the almost blasphemous view of the
matter, held by a considerable number of professing Christians; viz., that
the heavenly Father stood in wrath, seeking to slay or to torture the
human sinner, and that the heavenly Son, our Lord Jesus, full of love and
mercy (which according to this theory the Father lacked), interposed, and
satisfied the heavenly Father’s malice and anger by receiving the blow
of wrath in man’s stead: and that now Jehovah is placated, merely
because, being just, he cannot require at the hands of the sinner, again,
that which has already been paid through the precious blood of Christ.
The sooner this terrible erroneous view of the Atonement is gotten
rid of by those who hold it, the better will be the prospect for their
progress in spiritual things—in the knowledge, in the grace, and in the
love of the true
God.
The proper view of the matter shows us the heavenly Father perfect
in all the attributes of nobility of character: perfect in his justice, so
that the just sentence of his righteous law cannot be infracted, even by
himself: perfect in wisdom, so that his plan and arrangement, not only
with respect to man’s creation, but also with respect to man’s
salvation, the Atonement, etc., were all so complete that no contingency
or failure could arise, nor any necessity for change of the divine plan;
as it is written, “I am the same, I change not, saith the Lord,” and,
“Known unto the Lord are all his works, from the foundation of the
world:” perfect also in his love, than which there could be no greater
love possible, and yet that love in full balance and accord with the other
divine attributes, so that it could spare the sinner only in harmony with
the just program marked out by divine wisdom: perfect also in power, so
that all his good purposes, and good intentions, and just program, and
loving designs, fully co-ordinated, shall be executed, and bring the [page 35]
originally designed result; as it is written, “My
word that goeth forth out of my mouth shall not return to me void; it
shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing
whereto I sent it.” Isa. 55:11; Mal. 3:6; Acts 15:18
When we thus see, from the Scriptural standpoint, that the great
Jehovah himself is the Author of the salvation brought unto us by our Lord
Jesus, it leads us to more fully and more properly honor and love our
Almighty God, while it does not detract from the honor, love and esteem in
which we properly hold and reverence our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
For we see in the Heavenly Son the Heavenly Father’s image, and
recognize him as the “Messenger of the Covenant,” through whom all the
covenanted blessings of Jehovah are to be brought to mankind, and without
whom none of the divine blessings are obtainable.
In harmony with this thought, that our Lord Jesus in all matters
acts as the representative
of the Father, Jehovah, in the work of salvation, note the following
statements of the Scriptures:
“The kindness and love of God
our Savior toward man appeared ....He saved us by the washing of
regeneration and renewing of the holy Spirit; which he shed on us
abundantly through
Jesus Christ our Savior.” Tit. 3:4-6
“Him
hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Savior,
for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.” Acts 5:31
“We have seen and do testify that the Father
sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.” 1 John 4:14
“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to an appointment of
God our Savior and of
Jesus Christ our hope.” 1 Tim. 1:1
“This is good and acceptable in the sight of God
our Savior. ...For there is one God and one Mediator between God
and men, the man Christ Jesus.” 1 Tim. 2:3,5
Note also our Lord Jesus’ own words on this subject:
“The Father sent not the Son into the world to condemn [page 36]
the world, but that the world through him might be
saved.” John 3:17
“I can of mine own self do nothing; as I hear I judge.” John
5:30
“As the Father hath sent me, so likewise I send you
[disciples].” John 20:21
“Of that day and hour [when the heavenly Kingdom should be set
up] knoweth no man, no not the angels in heaven, neither
the Son, but my Father only.” Mark 13:32
“The times and seasons the Father hath put in his own power.”
Acts 1:7
“The works which I do in my Father’s name bear witness.” John
10:25
“I send the promise of my Father upon you.” Luke 24:49
“I am come in my Father’s name.” John 5:43
“Whatsoever I speak, therefore, even as the Father said unto me,
so I speak.” John 12:50
“My Father is greater than I.” John 14:28
“I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your
God.” John 20:17
“Worthy
the Lamb that Was Slain”
Our Lord Jesus himself has furnished us, in the last book of the
Bible, “The revelation of Jesus Christ, which
God gave unto him, to show unto his
servants” (Rev. 1:1), a most beautiful picture of this subject of the
Atonement, illustrating the general plan of man’s redemption from sin
and its curse. This is found
in Rev. 5. There the Heavenly
Father, the Ancient of Days, is shown seated on the heavenly throne, and
in his hand a scroll written inside and outside, sealed with seven seals.
That scroll, representing the divine plan, known only to the
Father, Jehovah himself, was kept in his own power—in his own
hand—until some one should [page 37]
be proved
worthy to know it, and become its executor as Jehovah’s honored agent
and representative. The
symbolic picture proceeds to show that up to the time our Lord Jesus
suffered for us at Calvary, “the just for the unjust, that he might
bring us to God,” no one had ever been found (proved) worthy to take up
the divine plan and even understand its contents.
But when our Lord Jesus had proven
his loyalty to the Heavenly Father by his obedience, not only in humbling
himself to take man’s estate for the suffering of death, but also in his
obedience “even unto death,” and still further, “even unto the
[ignominious] death of the cross,” then and thereby he did prove himself
worthy of every confidence and trust.
As the Apostle declares, “Wherefore
him hath God highly exalted and given him a name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, both of things in heaven
and things on earth.” (Phil. 2:9-11) It is at this point that the
picture we are considering (Rev. 5:9-13) shows our Lord Jesus as the Lamb
that had been slain, before whom obeisance was made, and who was
proclaimed, Worthy the Lamb! “Thou
art worthy to take the scroll and to open the seals thereof, because thou
wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred
and tongue and people and nation.”
Thus is pictured to us the high exaltation of the Heavenly
Father’s representative, the “Messenger [servant] of the Covenant.”
Because of his humility and complete submission and obedience to the
Father’s will he is proclaimed thenceforth the sharer of the Father’s
throne, and, by the Father’s own arrangement, the proclamation was made
throughout the heavenly hosts, “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power, and
riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing”;
and finally “every creature” shall catch the thought that Jehovah has
very highly exalted his Only Begotten Son, even to association with
himself in the Kingdom, and shout their approval, saying, [page 38]
“The blessing, and the honor, and the glory, and
the power be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne [of the
universe—Jehovah] and unto the Lamb, for ever and ever!”
No wonder, then that we are instructed that thenceforth all men
shall honor the exalted Son even as they honor the Father who thus highly
exalted him. John 5:23
The Apostle declares that this glorification of Jesus furnishes an
illustration of divine law, that “He that humbleth himself shall be
exalted.” But let us also
notice in this symbolic picture (vs. 13) that the exaltation of our Lord
Jesus Christ to glory and honor and power and dominion does not imply that
the Heavenly Father abdicates the throne of heaven in his favor, nor that
the Father and the Son are one in person, for both persons are recognized,
the Father, as always, being given the first place in praise and honor.
And this again reminds us of our Lord’s words, “As the Father
hath appointed unto me a Kingdom, so I appoint also unto you [my
disciples] a kingdom.” (Luke 22:29)
And again he says to his faithful followers, “Him that overcometh
will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am
set down with my Father in his throne.” Rev. 3:21
As a further evidence that the entire work of redemption is of the Father though
through the Son, note the Apostle’s declaration, that God “in these
last days hath spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of
all things [promised], by whom also he made the worlds, who... when he had
by himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on
High [Jehovah], being made so much better than the angels.”
And again he declares of him: “We have such a High Priest, who is
set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty of the Heavens
[Jehovah], a servant of holy things, and of the true tabernacle, which the
Lord [Jehovah] pitched, and not man.”
And again the same Apostle declares, “This man [our Lord Jesus]
after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right
hand of God.” (Heb. 1:2-4; 8:1; 10:12) Again he exhorts us to continue
“looking unto Jesus, the [page 39] Author [starter] and finisher of our faith, who for
the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame,
and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.” Again he
exhorts us to consider “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ,
the Father of glory,” and “what is the exceeding greatness of his
power to usward who believe, according to the operation of the might of
his power, which he wrought in Christ,
when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the
heavenlies, far above all principality, and power, and might, and
dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world but also in
that which is to come, and hath put all things under his feet.” (Heb.
12:2; Eph. 1:17-22) Again the
Apostle Peter declares of our Lord Jesus that he “is gone into heaven,
and is at the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being
made subject unto him [by the Father].” 1 Pet. 3:22
All these various scriptures indicate most clearly the very high
exaltation of our Lord Jesus Christ, as the Father’s
reward for his wonderful obedience and manifestation of the
Father’s spirit of love, in the sacrifice of himself on behalf of
sinners; but they neither indicate that the Lord Jesus was the Father, nor
that he has been exalted to take the Father’s place upon the heavenly
throne, or in the affection and worship of his intelligent creatures.
On the contrary, they expressly show the Heavenly Father as the
superior in honor and power, as the Benefactor who thus glorified and
exalted the Son, and set him at his own right hand, or place of chief
favor, and made him a sharer in the throne or dominion of the heavenly
kingdom, angels and all the hosts of heaven being subjected to him.
Indeed, so strong is the language sometimes used in respect to the
high exaltation of our Lord Jesus, and the plenitude of power bestowed
upon him by the Father, that in one instance the inspired writer deemed it
very proper to call attention to the fact that none of these statements of
his high exaltation implied either that he was the equal with the Father
nor his superior: hence he says, speaking of the Millennial reign of
Christ, [page 40]
“He [Christ] must reign till he hath put all
enemies under his feet. The
last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
For he [the Father] hath put all things under his [the Son’s]
feet. But when he [the Father] saith, ‘All things are put under him [the
Son],’ it is manifest that he [the
Father] is excepted, which
did put all things under him [the Son].
And when all things [earthly] shall be subdued under him [the Son],
then shall the Son himself be subject unto him [the Father] that put all
things under him [the Son], that God [the Father] may be all in all.” 1
Cor. 15:25-28
“The
Self-Existing One”
The Almighty God has appropriated to himself and declared his name
to be Jehovah, which signifies the “Self-Existing One” or “The
Immortal One.” Thus we read
his declaration to Moses, saying: “I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac
and unto Jacob by the name of God Almighty [the superior or most mighty
God], but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them.” (Exod. 6:3)
By this name, Jehovah, God was thereafter recognized amongst his
people. The name is used
hundreds of times throughout the Old Testament, but is covered, in a large
degree, from the English reader, through an error of the translators, who
have rendered it “LORD.” It
can, however, be recognized readily, being always printed in small
capitals when used to translate their sacred name, Jehovah.
Thus in the first Commandment given to Israel the Lord said, “I
am Jehovah, thy God...thou shalt have no other gods [mighty ones] before
me [my equals]...for I Jehovah thy God am a jealous God.” Exod. 20:2-5
Again Moses declares, “Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one—Jehovah; and thou
shalt love Jehovah thy God with all thine heart and with all thy soul and
with all thy might.” (Deut. 6:4,5)
And this is the very passage of scripture which our Lord Jesus
himself commended as the very [page 41]
essence of truth.
When inquired of respecting the greatest commandment, he said,
quoting this scripture, “Thou shalt love the Lord [Jehovah] thy God with
all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind; this is the
primary and great commandment.” (Matt. 22:37,38)
Again we read, “I am Jehovah; that is my name: and my glory
[honor] will I not give to another.” (Isa. 42:8)
And let not the context escape our notice, for this positive
declaration that the name Jehovah is exclusively that of “the Father of
Lights with whom is no variableness” immediately follows his prophetic
proclamation of Messiah as Jehovah’s honored and elect Son-servant,
saying:
“Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my
spirit upon him. He shall
bring forth judgment to the Gentiles....He shall not fail nor be
discouraged until he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall
wait for his law. Thus saith
God, Jehovah, I Jehovah have called thee in righteousness and will hold
thine hand and will keep thee, and will give thee for a covenant of the
people, for a light of the Gentiles; to open the blind eyes, to bring out
the prisoners from the prison [death], and them that sit in darkness out
of the prison-house. I am Jehovah: THAT IS MY NAME.” Isa. 42:1-8
The
Name Jehovah
Applied
Only to the Father of Glory
The claim is sometimes made that the name Jehovah is applied in
Scripture to our Lord Jesus and hence that it is not the distinctive and
special name of the Heavenly Father. This is a mistake; but for the
benefit of all we will here examine the passages supposed by some to
support this claim. We will
show that they do not contradict the foregoing scriptures which declare it
to be the proper and special name of the great “I AM.”
[page 42]
(1) The text chiefly relied on to prove that Jehovah may properly
be considered the name of Christ Jesus reads, “I will raise unto David a
righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute
judgment and justice in the earth....And this is the name whereby he shall
be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.” Jer. 23:5,6
Evidently our Lord Jesus and his Millennial reign are referred to;
and the name in the Hebrew is Jehovah-Tsidkenu. What is the explanation?
Merely this: the translators, in their zeal to find a place where
the name Jehovah was associated with Jesus as a name, have given us a poor
translation. No difficulty would appear if it had been translated, “This
is the name with which he shall be called, Our
Righteousness of
Jehovah.” And how
appropriate is this name to the work and office of our Lord Jesus.
Did he not stand as the representative of God’s righteousness and
suffer the penalty of Justice as man’s ransom—that God might be just
and yet be the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus?
Surely no name could be more appropriate.
It should not be overlooked, that this same name precisely, Jehovah Tsidkenu, occurs
again in the writings of the same Prophet.
But our friends never call attention to it, and the translators,
although rendering it by the same English words, do not put those words in
large capital letters as in the other case.
Why? Because the
connections show that Jehovah Tsidkenu will be the name of the entire Church, the New
Jerusalem; “And this is the name wherewith she shall be called [Jehovah
Tsidkenu], our Righteousness of Jehovah.” Jer. 33:16
And that this name will be appropriate to the glorified Church all
can readily see: she not only shares her Lord’s sufferings for
righteousness “filling up that which is behind of the afflictions of
Christ” (Col. 1:24; 1 Pet. 5:9), but is also promised a share in all the
glories of her Lord, as a wife shares her husband’s honors and name:
just as the Church bears the name of Christ as members of the body of
Christ. Rev. 3:12; 19:7; 21:9 [page 43]
Nor are these the only instances of the name Jehovah being used to
compound another
name. Note that the mount
upon which Abraham offered Isaac and where God provided him a ram for
sacrifice as a substitute for Isaac, was called by him, Mount of
Jehovah’s Providence—Jehovah-Jireh.
(Gen. 22:14) Moses named an
altar which he built Jehovah-Nissi or Banner of Jehovah. (Exod. 17:15)
Gideon built an altar and called its name Jehovah-Shalom—The
Peace of Jehovah. (Judges 6:23,24) Ezekiel
prophesied of a city to come, whose name shall be Jehovah-Shammah—The
Wonder of Jehovah—Ezek. 48:35.
(2) It is suggested that when it is recorded that Jehovah appeared
to Abraham (Gen. 18:1), and again to Moses (Exod. 3:3-15), it must have
been Christ Jesus in his pre-human condition; and hence that the name
would be his. We answer that such reasoning is unwarranted: that if the
name were applied to another it would merely indicate that such servant
was highly esteemed of Jehovah and really treated for the occasion as a
steward or representative—commissioned to exercise divine power as well.
In Exodus 3:2, we are distinctly informed that the one representing
Jehovah and using his most distinguished name, “I am,” was “the angel [messenger] of
Jehovah.” That this honored
messenger
was “the Word” of John 1:1, our Lord Jesus in his pre-human estate, we do
not for a moment question. But
the highest and most honored messenger should not be confounded with the
one whom he represents and in whose name he speaks and whose power he
exercised and bestowed upon Moses.
(3) Isaiah 40:3 refers to John the Baptist’s mission, “Prepare
ye the way of Jehovah”;
and we are asked to consider this a proof that Jesus is but another name
for Jehovah. But again we
answer, Not so! Jesus was
indeed the honored servant of Jehovah, and his representative
among men in the fullest sense; but he himself declares, “The Father
hath sent me”; “As I hear I judge”; “Of mine own self I can do
nothing”; “The Father is greater than I.”
And we must believe [page 44]
the messenger. The
fact is, as we have already shown,* that
John the Baptist but foreshadowed a greater Messenger, even the entire
Christian Church in the flesh; which in turn will usher in the Christ,
head and body, in spiritual glory, and the work of that glorified Christ
will still be a further step in the same great work of preparing the way
of Jehovah and making the place of his feet glorious.
And this work, when closed at the end of the Millennium, will be
the full accomplishment of this prophecy.
See 1 Cor. 15:24-28; John 6:57; 5:30; 10:28.
—————
*Vol. II, Chap. 8.
(4) Our Lord Jesus is spoken of by the Apostle as “the Lord of
Glory” (1 Cor. 2:8), and we are asked to consider this a proof that he
is the Father, Jehovah, because the latter in Psa. 24:7-10 is styled the
“King of glory.” We
answer that such flimsy arguments as this prove only the weakness of the
theory they are advanced to support.
Our Lord Jesus will indeed be majestic, a King of Glory, when
during the Millennial age he shall wield the scepter of earth in
Jehovah’s name and power: but the same inspired apostle shows clearly,
in the same epistle in which he declares Jesus “the Lord of glory,”
that when his Kingdom shall reach its highest degree of glory it will be
delivered over to the Father “who did put all things under him [the Son]
that he [the Father] may be all in all.”
(5) In two of the prophetic pen-pictures of Christ’s Millennial
Kingdom it is declared, “In the last days it shall come to pass, that
the mountain [kingdom] of the house of Jehovah shall be established in the top of the mountains
[overruling other kingdoms]...and many people shall say, Come ye, let us
go up to the mountain [kingdom] of Jehovah
...and he will teach us of his ways and we will walk in his paths...And he
shall judge among the nations.” Isa. 2:2-4; Micah 4:1-3.
It is held that since Christ is to reign and judge and possess the
Kingdom during the Millennium, the name Jehovah [page
45] here should be considered as the name of Christ.
We answer, Not so! It
must not be forgotten that all blessings are of
the Father though all are by
the Son. (1 Cor. 8:6) And so
our Lord Jesus taught us in his model prayer to say, “Our Father which
art in heaven...Thy Kingdom come, thy
will be done on earth as in heaven.” (Matt. 6:10)
This is shown also in the connections (Micah 4:8) where the Christ
(“head” and “body”—the New Jerusalem) is referred to as the
“Tower of the flock” to whom shall come the first dominion—lost by
Adam in Eden, redeemed by Jesus at Calvary.
(6) “Bethlehem Ephrath...out of thee shall he come forth unto me
that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been of
old, from everlasting.” (Micah 5:2)
These words we are asked to accept as proofs that Jesus was
Jehovah—from everlasting to everlasting—because Moses declared, “Jehovah...from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.” Psa.
90:1,2
We reply that this is asking that an unreasonable inference should
be drawn—contradictory not only of the hundreds of instances of the use
of the name Jehovah in other scriptures, but contradictory also of the
connections in which these words are found.
Reading onward to Micah 5:4, we find it stated of Messiah: “He
shall stand and feed [Jehovah’s flock—Psa. 23:1] in the strength of
Jehovah; in the majesty of the name of
Jehovah, his God.”
Nothing could be more explicit on the subject.
What then is meant by the words of Micah 5:2? We answer that they can be well understood thus—“Whose
goings forth have been [foretold] from of old, from everlasting [his
coming and Messiahship were purposed and provided for in the divine
plan].”
(7) We are referred to the prophecy of the Millennial Kingdom in
Isaiah 25:6-9, and asked to consider this a proof that the name Jehovah is applicable to
our Lord Jesus: because it is there stated that—“In the mountain
[kingdom] shall Jehovah of hosts make unto all people a feast of fat [page 46]
things....He will swallow up death in victory; and my
Lord Jehovah will wipe away tears from off all faces.”
No, we reply. This is
far from being a proof of that. We
must notice indeed that our Lord, the glorified Christ, is represented as
the speaker, and his work of the Millennial age is briefly summed up in
the first verse of this chapter—“O Jehovah my God; I will exalt
[honor] thee, I will praise thy name.”
This will be the result of the Millennial reign, and at its close
all things will be back in subjection to Jehovah whose power it is,
working in the Christ, that shall put all things under him.
Messiah comes to earth as Jehovah’s mighty servant and
vicegerent, Immanuel, “God with us.” This view is corroborated
absolutely by the Apostle Paul, who after quoting from this prophecy and
pointing to its fulfilment in the destroying of Adamic death during the
Millennium says—“Thanks be unto God
who giveth us the victory [deliverance—triumph] through
our Lord Jesus Christ.” 1 Cor. 15:57
(8) We are asked to consider as a proof that the name Jehovah
properly belongs to our Lord Jesus, the fact that he is named—Wonderful,
Counsellor [or guide, or miraculous pattern], Mighty God, Everlasting
Father, Prince of Peace. Isa. 9:6
We will examine the full meaning of this scripture later on, merely
remarking under this head that nothing in it justifies us in applying the
name Jehovah to our adorable Lord and Master, Jesus.
Note, however, that if such had been the thought, no better place
than this could have been found for adding the name Jehovah among the
other titles. But, on the contrary, the very next verse declares, “The
zeal of Jehovah of hosts will accomplish this [prophecy].” Verse 7
(9) “Say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God! Behold my Lord [Adonai]
Jehovah will come with strong hand; and his arm shall rule for him...He
shall feed his flock like a shepherd.” Isa. 40:9,10,11
We are told that here surely is one passage in which our [page 47]
Redeemer is called by the great name Jehovah.
But we answer, No—he is here called the “arm”
of Jehovah as in other places: the mighty Arm of Jehovah “shall rule
for him,” until he shall have put down all authority and power
opposed to Jehovah and his righteous law—until he shall have brought
forth judgment unto victory: until he shall have made the place of
Jehovah’s feet (the earth his footstool) glorious—and shall have
delivered up the Kingdom to God, even the Father. 1 Cor. 15:24-28; Matt.
12:20
Other instances in which our Lord Jesus is prophetically
represented as the “right arm” or strength of Jehovah are:
“Who hath believed our report [preaching]?
And to whom is the ARM of Jehovah revealed? [Few recognize the Lord’s Arm during this age—“not many
great,” etc.]...He is despised and rejected of men.” Isa. 53; John
12:38
“The isles shall wait upon me, and on mine ARM shall they
trust.” Isa. 51:5,9
“Jehovah hath made bare his holy ARM in the eyes of all nations
[at the setting up of his Kingdom]; and all the ends of the earth shall
see the salvation of our God.” Isa. 52:10
“His [Jehovah’s] ARM brought salvation for him....And the
Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from ungodliness in
Jacob, saith Jehovah.” Isa. 59:15-20
(10) In John 12:41 we read, “These things said Esaias [Greek for
Isaiah], when he saw his glory and spoke of him.” We are asked to
concede that this probably applies to Isaiah 6:1. We reply that we believe
it does: but notice that the Hebrew word rendered Lord
in that verse is not Jehovah
but Adonai;
our present contention is that the name Jehovah does not properly apply to
any one except the Heavenly Father—although it may be applied to his
special messengers while they are speaking or acting for him
representatively in his name.
Nor do we dispute that Adonai is sometimes used as one of the many titles of the
Heavenly Father. We claim
that in this text it does not apply to the Father but to the Son. Similarly [page 48]
the same word Adonai
is used in referring to Christ and his Millennial kingdom in the second
Psalm (4-9): “The Lord [Adonai]
shall have them in derision. Then
shall he speak to them in his wrath and trouble them in his sore
displeasure ....The Lord [Jehovah] hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I
begotten thee.”
But some one may perhaps claim that Adonai
of Isa. 6:1 must refer to the same person as Jehovah of verses 3 and 5. We answer, Not so: the “Messenger
of the Covenant,” the representative of Jehovah, might well be saluted
with praise in the name of the Father whom he represented. Note again that
in verse 8 it is not Jehovah
that gives the message, nor that pronounces the judgment, but Adonai;
for the Father “hath committed all judgment unto the Son.” Matt.
23:34,36,38; John 5:22,27
Other instances of references to our Lord Jesus in close connection
with the name Jehovah,
and yet another word used in the Hebrew, but translated also Lord
in our Common Version Bibles, might be cited.
Note Malachi’s statement, “Behold I will send my messenger, and
he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord [Adon
from the same root as Adonai]
whom ye seek shall suddenly come to his temple, even the Messenger of the
Covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord
[Jehovah] of hosts.... He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as
gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord [Jehovah]
an offering of righteousness.” Mal. 3:1-4
Another familiar reference of this kind is found in the noble
Messianic Psalm which declares, “Thou art fairer than the children of
men; grace is poured upon thy lips: therefore God hath blessed thee
forever....Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever: the scepter of thy
kingdom is a right scepter. Thou lovest righteousness and hatest wickedness: therefore
God, thy
God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy
fellows.” Then the Church
is referred to as the daughter of the Father, and as the bride, the
Lamb’s wife, and she is exhorted to reverence the King’s [page 49]
Son as her Lord—“So shall the King greatly desire
thy beauty: for he is thy Lord
[Adon—not Jehovah] and
worship thou him.” Psa. 45:2-11; Heb. 1:8,9; 1 Cor. 11:3; Eph. 5:23;
John 5:23
(11) We are asked to consider Isaiah’s statement (8:13,14) a
proof that the name Jehovah is properly applicable to our Lord Jesus. It reads: “Sanctify Jehovah of hosts himself; and let him
be your fear, and let him be your dread.” The stress is laid upon the
next verse, which without specifying who, declares, “He shall be for a stone of stumbling and for a
rock of offense to both the houses of Israel.”
We can not admit this as proof; for quite to the contrary the
context shows a third party (besides Jehovah and the Prophet) even our
Lord Jesus, who says, “Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my
disciples. And I will wait
upon Jehovah....Behold I and
the children whom Jehovah hath given me.” Isa. 8:16-18; compare Heb. 2:13.
(12) Psalm 110 is referred to as proof that our Lord Jesus is in
Scripture called Jehovah.
We reply that no argument could be farther fetched or more untrue.
On the contrary, it proves the reverse.
“Jehovah
said unto Adon, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy
footstool.... Adonai at thy [Jehovah’s] right hand shall strike,” etc.
Again, “Jehovah
hath sworn and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order
of Melchizedek.” Psa. 110:1,4,5
Whoever cannot see that the one referred to is exalted to
Jehovah’s right hand or position of chief favor, and made a priest of a
new Order, is surely blinded
by his prejudice. We refer
such, however, to our Lord’s own interpretation and application of these
words to himself; showing himself to be the Adon,
David’s Lord, exalted by his Lord, Jehovah. Matt. 22:44,45
The Apostle Peter, speaking under the influence of the holy Spirit
at Pentecost, made the same application of these words.
And the Apostle Paul also refers to them with similar import. Acts
2:34; Heb. 1:13; 10:12,13 [page 50]
(13) Since our Lord Jesus is acknowledged to be the Great Teacher,
it is claimed that he fulfilled the prediction—“All thy children shall
be taught of Jehovah.”
(Isa. 54:13) In answer and contradiction we refer to our Lord Jesus’ own
words. He quoted these very
words of the Prophet in his discourse, and clearly showed that he was not
and did not claim to be the Jehovah of this prophecy. His words were,
“It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God.
Every man, therefore, that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father,
cometh unto me.” John 6:45
The Father himself, the great Jehovah, is not only the great
law-giver but also the Great Teacher of his own law. His own great plan
for human salvation will yet be seen by all of his intelligent sons to
contain the grandest possible exemplifications of Justice, Love and Wisdom
in combination, and yet each perfect, inviolate.
Our Lord Jesus was and still is the Great Teacher of men by the
appointment of the Heavenly Father, the great Master Teacher above all. And this is precisely what our dear Redeemer claimed and
taught. Did he not publicly
declare that his teachings were of things he had already learned of the
Father? saying, “I speak that which I have seen with my Father.” “My doctrine [teaching] is not mine, but his that sent me.
If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether
it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. ...He that seeketh the glory of him that sent him the same is true.”
“The word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.” “I
have given them thy
word.” “They have kept thy
word.” “Sanctify them
through thy
truth: thy word is truth.” John 7:16-18; 8:38; 14:24; 17:6,14,17
Likewise our Lord appointed special teachers under him, the
Apostles; and still others in the church to be teachers and
under-shepherds of the Lord’s flock, instructing them, “Feed my
sheep”; “feed my lambs.” “Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, over which
the holy Spirit hath made you overseers, to feed the Church of God which
he hath purchased with blood of his own [Beloved Son].” [page 51]
(Acts 20:28) Yet
none of these teachers were to teach doctrines of their
own, which could be only “wisdom of this world.”
The people of God were to be all taught of Jehovah,
and none can be true teachers save as they present to men the words and
plan and character of Jehovah as the standards of truth and excellence.
In doing this they necessarily call attention to “the doctrines
of Christ” and “the Apostle’s doctrines,” all of which were but
expressions and inculcations of the Father’s grand and eternal law.
Unlike some who style themselves teachers today, neither our Lord
Jesus nor his apostles attempted or claimed originality.
Mark the humble words of our Lord Jesus, than which nothing could be more
beautiful—“I do nothing of myself, but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.” (John
8:28) Can we wonder that one
found so humble and so loyal to Jehovah could be and was entrusted with so
great honor and power—so highly exalted to the Father’s right hand?
And that the lessons thus taught
our Lord Jesus were well learned
by him we have the inspired testimony—“Though he were a Son, yet learned
he obedience by the things which he suffered.” Heb. 5:8; Phil. 2:8
Moreover, the Lord showed through the prophets that Jesus, the
Great Teacher appointed by the Master Teacher, Jehovah, would be himself
taught of Jehovah; and in order that he might become “a merciful and
faithful High Priest” to humanity, and be proved worthy to be “the
Captain of our salvation,” it was needful that he be perfected
in experiences through things which he suffered. (Heb. 2:9,10)
Note how clearly the following prophecies declared long before that
our Lord would be taught of Jehovah, and
would learn well the lessons, and manifest love for the law and
obedience to the Law-giver:
“My Lord Jehovah [Adonai Jehovah] hath given me the tongue of the learned
[instructed], that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that
is weary: he wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as
the learned [instructed]. My
Lord Jehovah [Adonai
Jehovah] hath opened mine ear, and I was not rebellious, neither [page 52]
turned away back [from his teachings].
I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked
off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting.” Isa. 50:4-10;
Matt. 26:67; 27:26,30; Isa. 53:11
Hear further on this subject the word of the Lord’s testimony
respecting the preparation of our Lord Jesus for the grand office of Royal
High Priest for mankind:
“The spirit of Jehovah shall rest upon him—the spirit of wisdom
and understanding, the spirit of counsel and of might, the spirit of
knowledge and of the fear [reverence] of Jehovah; and shall make him of
quick understanding in the fear [reverence] of Jehovah: so that he shall
not judge after the sight of his eyes”; for he has been touched with a
feeling of our infirmities and is therefore the better able to succor all
who come unto God by him—his Church now, and by and by the world, during
his Millennial Kingdom. Isa. 11:1-10; Heb. 2:18
Again prophetically Messiah is represented as saying: “Thou wilt show me [cause me to have
knowledge of] the path of life.” “I
will bless Jehovah, who hath given me counsel.” These expressions occur
in connections quoted by the Apostles as applicable to our Savior, “the
man Christ Jesus.” (Psa. 16:7-11) Thus
is confirmed by prophecy the statement of the Evangelist, “And the child
[Jesus] grew, and waxed strong in spirit [mind], filled
with wisdom; and the grace [blessing] of God was upon him....Jesus
increased
in wisdom and in stature and
in favor with God and man.” Luke 2:40,52
Having examined the strongest Bible texts presented on the subject,
we are confident that the Scriptures do not authorize the use of the great
name Jehovah as the appellative for any other being than our Heavenly
Father: we are confident that they restrict its use and forbid its
application to another.
All can see the propriety of the Almighty’s decision that he
shall be recognized as the center of authority, wisdom, justice, love and
power; because this is the truth, and anything else would be untruth and
to that extent evil, injurious. [page 53]
And we have seen from the foregoing quotations from
our Lord’s own words, and from the words of the Apostles, whom he
specially instructed by word of mouth, and inspired after Pentecost with
the holy Spirit, that none of them ever intimated either that the Heavenly
Father and the Heavenly Son were one in person,
nor that they are equal in glory and in power—as is, without divine
authority, declared in the creeds and catechisms of men.
Nevertheless, the Heavenly Father has manifested no jealousy of the
greatness of his great Chief Servant, the “Messenger of the Covenant
whom ye delight in:” on the contrary he has highly exalted him to be
next to himself in dignity and in power.
Hearken to the words of our Lord Jesus himself: “The Son can do
nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things
soever he [the Father] doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that
himself doeth: and he will show him greater works than these, that ye may
marvel. For as the Father
raiseth up and makes alive the dead, so also the Son makes alive whom he
pleases. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment
unto the Son: that all men should honor the Son, even
as they honor the Father. He
that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father which hath sent him.”
John 5:19-23
It is only as we get clearly in mind the Scriptural declaration
respecting the great Author of the plan of Atonement, Jehovah, and see the
distinction between him and his honored Servant, “The Only Begotten of
the Father,” his “Beloved Son,” in the work of the Atonement, that
we are properly prepared to understand the philosophy of the Atonement.
It is in great measure because of the confusion of thought
respecting the Father and the Son that very many Christian people are
thoroughly confused respecting the Atonement, and therefore in danger of
letting slip their faith in this fundamental and most important doctrine
of divine revelation.
The Apostle Paul presents the matter of the relationship [page 54]
between the Father and the Son in respect to our
redemption most clearly and most forcefully, saying: “There is no other
God but One...To us there is but One God, the Father, of whom are all things,
and we in him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by
whom are all things, and we by
him.” (1 Cor. 8:4,6) That is to say, there is only the one eternal and
Almighty God, the Author and Source of all things, to whom we belong, and
there is only the one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom the Heavenly Father
operates in respect to all the various features of his plan, and by and
through whom alone we have had remission of sins, through faith in his
blood, and access to the Father, and to the grace wherein we stand,
rejoicing in hope of the glory of God. Rom. 5:1
A
Tradition of the Fathers Supported
by a
Forgery—an Interpolation
We are leaving to following chapters for consideration the
greatness and worthiness of our Lord Jesus Christ, through
whom the entire work of Atonement has been and will be
accomplished—and the great honor bestowed upon him, not only since he
redeemed the world, but also the great honor and dignity which were his
before he became the world’s Redeemer. We are now seeking to distinguish clearly something
respecting the great Author of the plan: but inasmuch as the general
thought of Christendom is greatly perplexed by what is known as “The
doctrine of the Trinity,” a doctrine which its most pronounced advocates
admit they
do not understand and cannot comprehend or explain, therefore it
is appropriate that we here examine those texts of Scripture which are
supposed to give some color or support to this confusing doctrine of men, for which
no authority can be found in the Word of God. We have already called attention to various scriptures which
emphatically state that there is but one
Almighty God—not two, nor three, nor more.
We now call attention to the fact that the word “Trinity” does
not occur in the Scriptures; nor does any word occur there of equivalent
meaning; nor is any [page 55]
statement made which even unreasonably could be
interpreted to signify any such thing.
Indeed, those who hold to the doctrine of the Trinity, in
attempting to explain their own thought, hopelessly entangle themselves,
as well as their hearers. They
declare in one breath that there is only one God (because the Scriptures so positively emphasize this
point that it cannot be ignored), yet in the same breath they declare that
there are three Gods (because to this theory they are committed by
“traditions of the fathers” handed down from earliest Papacy).
But how could there be three Gods and yet only one
God? If there are three Gods, “equal
in power and in glory,” as the catechisms declare, then it is untrue to
say there is only one God. If there
is only “One God, the Father, of whom are all things,” as St. Paul
asserts; and if, as Jesus declared, the Father is greater
than his honored Son; and if the Father raised his Beloved Son from the
dead, and exalted him on high,
honored him, and has appointed for him a Kingdom; and if ultimately the
Son will deliver up the Kingdom again to the Father, that the Father may
be all in all; then it cannot be true that there are several
Gods of equal power. Nevertheless,
we shall show conclusively in the succeeding chapter that our Lord Jesus
Christ is a God, but that, while he
is to be honored even as the Father is honored, and that in honoring him
we honor the Father who exalted him, still the united voice of the
Scriptures most emphatically asserts there is but one Almighty God, the
Father of all. As the Apostle
declares, “The head
of the woman is the man, the head
of man is Christ, and the head
of Christ is God.” 1 Cor. 11:3
There is one statement found in the Scriptures, and only one, which
seems in the slightest degree to even imply the doctrine of a Trinity of
Gods; and that passage is now admitted by all scholars to be spurious—an
interpolation. It is
therefore omitted from the Revised Version of the New Testament, although
the translators of that Revised Version, so far as we are aware, were
every one of them Trinitarians. While they would have liked to retain this
passage, as the [page 56]
only Scripture support (and then very imperfect in
statement), they could not retain it conscientiously.
Nor were the translators of our Common Version of the Bible
blameworthy for inserting this interpolation, because at the time of that
translation it was impossible to know of its spurious character.
Since its translation hundreds of old Greek manuscripts have been
found, but none of these of earlier date than the seventh century contains
this clause, which favors the Trinity.
It is therefore not denied by scholars, without respect to
denominational proclivities, that the spurious words were inserted to give
support to the doctrine of the Trinity, at a time when the discussion of
that doctrine was rife in the Church, and when the advocates of the
doctrine of the Trinity were perplexed before their opponents, because
they had no Scriptural evidence to bring in substantiation of their
theory. The spurious words
were no doubt interpolated by some over-zealous monk, who felt sure of the
doctrine himself, and thought that the holy Spirit had blundered in not
stating the matter in the Scriptures: his intention, no doubt, was to help
God and the truth out of a difficulty by perpetrating a fraud.
But all such suggestions, to the effect that God has not given us a
complete revelation, “sufficient that the man of God may be thoroughly
furnished,” and that it needs adding to, are of the Adversary, as was
this suggestion that it would be proper to commit a wrong, a forgery, for
the sake of doing good, and rectifying the mistake of the Almighty.
The monk-scribe or priest who committed this forgery, apparently
about the beginning of the seventh century, has much to answer for, in his
addition to the Word of God, and the evil influence which it has exerted
over God’s people, who, seeking for the truth on this subject, were
misled by his forgery.
The spurious interpolation is found in 1 John 5:7, and consists of
the words, “in
heaven the Father, the Word and the holy Spirit, and these three are
one. And there are three that
bear witness in earth.” These
words, omitted from the text, leave it [page 57]
simple and easy to be understood, and fully in accord
with all the remainder of the Scriptures; but with these words in the
text, as they have stood for centuries, confusion is produced; for
nonsense is asserted. For
instance, with these words remaining in the text, the sense would be that
the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit agreed in bearing one testimony
in heaven, namely, that Jesus is the Christ.
How absurd! Who is
there in heaven ignorant of the fact that Jesus is the Christ?
To whom, therefore, would it be necessary for the Father, the Son
and the holy Spirit to bear this record or testimony?
None. But it was a
convenient place for the Adversary to get in his work of corruption of the
truth, and he found a servant willing to serve him.
Not only does the Revised Version omit this verse, but so also do
all modern translations—the Emphatic Diaglott, Young’s Bible
translation, the American Bible Union translation, the Improved Version.
The latter says:
“This text concerning the Heavenly Witnesses is not contained in
any Greek MS. which was written earlier than the fifth century.
It is not cited by any of the Greek ecclesiastical writers; nor by
any of the early Latin fathers, even when the subjects upon which they
treated would naturally have led them to appeal to its authority: it is,
therefore, evidently spurious.”
Lang’s Critical Commentary, referring to this spurious passage,
says:
“Said words are wanting in all the Greek codices; also in the
Codex Sinaiticus [the oldest known Greek MS.], and in all the ancient
versions, including the Latin, as late as the eighth century; and [in MSS.
written] since that time they are found in three variations.
Notwithstanding the Trinitarian controversies, they are not
referred to by a single Greek Father, or by any of the old Latin Church
Fathers.”
Hudson’s Greek and English Concordance says:
“The words are found in no Greek MS. before the 15th or 16th
century, and in no early version.”
The passage is pronounced an interpolation by the following Bible
scholars of recognized ability—Sir Isaac Newton, [page 58]
Benson, Clark, Horne, Griesbach, Tischendorf,
Tregelles, Lachman and Alford. The
latter says:
“Unless pure caprice is to be followed in the criticism of the
sacred text, there is no shadow of reason for supposing them genuine.”
Dr. Constantine Tischendorf says:
“That this spurious addition should continue to be published as a
part of the Epistle I regard as an impiety.”
Prof. T. B. Wolsey inquires:
“Do not truth and honesty require that such a passage should be
struck out of our English Bibles—a passage which Luther would not
express in his translation, and which did not creep into the German Bible
until nearly fifty years after his death?”
Dr. Adam Clarke commenting on this passage says:
“It is likely this verse is not genuine.
It is wanting in every MS. of this epistle written before the
invention of printing, one excepted—the Codex Montfortii, in Trinity
College, Dublin. The others
which omit this verse amount to one hundred and twelve.
It is wanting in both the Syriac, all the Arabic, Ethiopic, Coptic,
Sahadic, Arminian, Slavonic, etc.; in a word, in all the ancient versions
but the Vulgate; and even of this version, many of the most ancient and
correct copies have it not. It
is wanting also in all the ancient Greek Fathers, and in most even of the
Latin.”
John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, endeavored to support the
doctrine of the Trinity, yet in one of his sermons from this text he
quoted the words of Servetus: “I scruple using the words ‘trinity’
and ‘persons’ because I do not find those terms in the Bible”—and
to this quotation Wesley added, “I would insist only on the direct
words, unexplained, as they lie in the text.”
He labored to prove the doctrine of the Trinity, because he
believed this spurious passage was genuine, positive information from the
ancient MSS of the Bible being of recent acquisition.
For instance, at the time of the preparation of our King James or
Common Version Bible (A.D. 1611), the translators had the advantage of but
eight Greek MSS, and none of those of earlier date than the tenth century.
Now, however, there are about seven hundred MSS, some of which,
especially the [page 59]
Sinaitic MS and the Vatican MS No. 1209, are very
old, reaching back to about A.D. 350.
The
Scripture Teaching Respecting the
Father
and the Son and Their Unity
A sharp distinction should be drawn between a confession of faith
in a Trinity, and a confession of faith in the Unity of the heavenly
Father, Jehovah, and the heavenly Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and the holy
Spirit. The doctrine of the
Trinity holds that the Father, the Son and the holy Spirit “are one in
person, equal in glory and in power,” as stated in the Church creeds.
The Bible, while showing the absolute Unity between the Father
and Son and holy Spirit in the various steps of the great plan of
salvation, most positively contradicts the thought that the Father and Son
are one in person, denies that they are equal in majesty and in power,
except as before shown, that the Father has glorified the Son, has highly
exalted him and given him a name above all others except his own, making
him his agent and representative in the exercise of “all power in heaven
and in earth.” All the
various scriptures agree in their statements to the effect that the Father
sent
the Son into the world; and that the Son, for the joy set before
him by the Father, endured the cross, and despised the shame; and that he
was the heavenly Father’s first and only begotten Son; and that after he
shall have accomplished the work which the Father has given him to do, he
shall deliver up the Kingdom of earth, at the close of the Millennial Age,
to the Father; and the additional statements already called to attention,
in which the Son cheerfully and fully acknowledges that he “came forth
from the Father,” that he “came not to do his own will” but the
Father’s will; and that the power he used was not his own power, but the
Father’s power; also his statement, “The Father is greater than I,”
and the declaration of the prophecy, that he is the Messenger or servant
of the Covenant, and not the Maker of the [page 60]
Covenant; together with the repeated declarations of
the New Testament Scriptures, that he is the Mediator of the New
Covenant—the one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a
ransom for all.” These various scriptures all consistently and
harmoniously teach a distinction of person and glory and power as between
the heavenly Father and the heavenly Son; but a most absolute and profound
unity of plan, will, purpose: for the Son was worthy
to be the executor of the great plan of Jehovah, because
he had no will of his own, but renounced his own will that he might be
filled with the Father’s spirit and do his will in every particular.
John 6:38,39
Moreover, the very words “Father” and “Son” imply a
difference, and contradict the thoughts of the Trinity and oneness of
person, because the word “father” signifies life-giver, while the word “son” signifies the one
who has received life
from another. The heavenly
Father received life from no one; he is the fountain, the source of life,
not only to our Lord Jesus, his only
begotten Son, but through him the source of life to all others of
his creatures. And all this
is fully in accord with the scripture which stands at the head of this
chapter, in which the Apostle plainly denies that the Father and the Son
are one in person or in power, saying, “To us there is one God, the
Father, of whom are all
things...and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by
whom are all things.”
The thoughtful reader will at once recognize the Scriptural harmony
and simplicity of the view herein presented, while all will admit that the
doctrine of the Trinity is impossible of reasonable understanding or
explanation. Its most earnest
advocates admit this, and instead of endeavoring to do the impossible
thing of explaining it, they avoid discussion, claiming that it’s “a
great mystery,” unexplainable. But, strange to say, this doctrine of
three Gods in one God, which not only has no Scriptural support, but is
opposed by the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation, both directly and
indirectly, and which is so opposed to reason as to be unreasonable, is
nevertheless a strongly entrenched [page 61] doctrine amongst Christians, even amongst
Protestants—those who profess faith in the Bible and to protest against
any teachings not found therein. Why
is this? We answer, that it
is one of the dark
mysteries by which Satan, through the Papacy, has beclouded the
Word and character and plan of God. As
it is written, “The god of this world hath blinded the minds of them
that believe not, lest light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the
image of God, should shine unto them.” 2 Cor. 4:4
He has put upon the poor world utter blindness and doctrinal veils,
darkening counsel and falsifying mysteries, to hinder those who have found
the Lord from coming to a clear knowledge of the truth.
But how would Satan be interested in adding to the luster of the
glory of our Lord Jesus Christ? Would
it not rather be his work to detract from the glory of Christ?
We answer, that it has always been Satan’s policy to misrepresent
the truth, to misrepresent the Bible, and to make its teachings appear
unreasonable and self-contradictory, in order to hinder mankind from
seeing the great beauty and reasonableness and harmony which inhere in the
divine plan and Word. The
more absurdities Satan can get interwoven into man’s views respecting
the Creator, the better he will succeed in separating from the service of
God those who are of reasonable and logical mind; and proportionately the
more unreasonable he succeeds in making the creeds of men, the more does
he destroy real faith amongst those who advocate those creeds, and the
more he does to favor mere credulity, instead of genuine faith.
Thus for centuries the great Adversary has been working most
successfully to rid the Church of all the most reasonably disposed, and to
gather into it the more credulous and superstitious and unreasoning class. He has covered and hidden some of the most precious truths
under the most specious and repulsive errors, and the progress of the
Lord’s people has been correspondingly slow.
But, thank God, we are now living in the time when the veil of
ignorance is being dissolved, and when the Lord’s people are learning to
[page 62]
look away from the creeds formed for their
enslavement during the dark ages, and to look directly to the Word of God
itself. But, alas, this comes
too late for many, especially the worldly-wise: they have already so
associated the creeds with the Bible that in rejecting the former they are
rejecting the latter also; and instead of seeking true light from the Word
of God, they are more inclined to ignore or reject it and to lean to their
own understandings—to human philosophies.
Hence it is that Higher Criticism, Evolution, Christian Science,
Theosophy and other Bible-denying theories, are today making rapid
progress; while the old creeds are falling to pieces or being abandoned.
Only the comparatively few have learned that the mistake is not in
the Bible, but in the creeds, and are seeking the “old paths,” and
“the faith once delivered unto the saints.” Jer. 6:16; Jude 3
But how could the doctrine of the Trinity ever become so widespread
amongst Christians, if it were not the teaching of the primitive Church?
Is it not one of the oldest doctrines in the Church, extending back
to the third century? Yes, we
answer: the doctrine of the Trinity had its rise, its small beginning,
in the second and third centuries. It
must be very evident to any one who will search the Scriptures with an
unprejudiced mind that the doctrine of the Trinity was not received in any
measure or degree during the first century, for this is clearly shown by
the writings of the apostles in the New Testament.
The doctrine of the Trinity arose in a very natural way—at first
through combativeness.
The apostles, in their teachings during the first century, claim
most emphatically for Christ, not that he was the Father, not that he was
Jehovah, but that he was the Son of Jehovah, the Messiah, sent into the
world to bless the world, and to establish God’s Kingdom, and to finally
bring order out of the present condition of sin and disorder. The claim
that he was the Son of God was met by counterclaims: some claimed that
Jesus was an imposter: some that he was
merely a good man: some that he had a miraculous [page 63]
birth, but never
had a pre-existence; and others held the truth, viz., that he had
pre-existence as a Son of God on a spiritual plane, that he became the Son
of God on a human plane, in order to redeem mankind and that now he is
highly exalted, so that all are commanded to honor “the Son even as they
honor the Father.” But as
is well known, the disposition to combat leads to exaggeration of claims;
and hence it was that many of those who attempted to deny the various
false views respecting our Lord went to the other extreme of claiming that
he was the Father, Jehovah himself.
The Religious Dictionary, of which the Rev. Dr. Lyman Abbott, a
professed Trinitarian, was one of the compilers and editors, on page 944
says:
“It was not until the beginning of the fourth century that the
Trinitarian view began to be elaborated and formulated into a doctrine, and an
endeavor made to reconcile it with the belief of the Church in one God....Out
of the attempt to solve this problem sprang the doctrine of the
Trinity....Trinity is a very marked feature in Hinduism, and is
discernible in Persian, Egyptian, Roman, Japanese, Indian and the most
ancient Grecian mythologies.”
The idea of more deities than one was very common in olden times,
with all except the one nation, Israel.
As everybody knows, Grecian mythology is full of deities, many of
whom have practically the same power; and to these the Jewish idea of one
God seemed ridiculous, and implied a scarcity of gods.
Hence it would appear that the Trinitarian view would find ready
acceptance amongst the Gentile converts: it was a compromise between the
general view of the world, called Polytheism (the belief in more gods than
one) and Monotheism (the doctrine of one God) held by Israel. The idea of
claiming three Gods, and at the
same time claiming that the three were only one God, was, no doubt,
considered a masterstroke in theology, by which the views of many
believers converted from amongst the Jews could be brought into closer
accord with the general sentiments of the Gentiles, who, it was desired
should be pleased and brought into the Church.
Similarly Mariolatry—the worship of the Virgin Mary—was
introduced to meet, to gratify [page 64] and to attach itself upon, the superstition which had
long prevailed amongst the heathen in respect to Isis, Diana, the other
goddesses, who had their millions of worshipers. It should be remembered that at the time of the introduction
of these doctrines the leaders of the Church had abandoned their hope in
the second coming of the Lord to establish his Kingdom, and had obtained a
new hope, namely, a hope of converting the world, and of thus establishing the earthly
Church as a Hierarchy, or Kingdom of God, in which a representative or
pope would reign instead of Christ, as his vicegerent.*
—————
*See Scripture Studies, Vol. II, Chap. 9; Vol. III, Chap. 4.
The general acceptance of the doctrine of the Trinity, and the
tenacity with which it is held, is based upon the superstitious fear
inculcated by the Roman clergy, and later also by the Protestant clergy,
under the implied threat that whoever denies the Trinity is taking the
straight road to eternal torture. At
the same time it is admitted that the doctrine is incomprehensible, and therefore that nobody really believes it,
because nobody can, in a true sense, believe an incomprehensible thing.
And various doctrines and practices, not only of Protestantism, but
also of Catholicism, deny the doctrine of the Trinity: note, for instance,
that all Protestants pray to the Father, “in
the name of Jesus,” “for Jesus’ sake,” etc., thus
recognizing the fact that they are two separate persons, and not one in
person. Roman Catholics
similarly recognize the distinction of person: for they pray to the lower
saints to intercede for them with Mary, that she may intercede with Jesus,
and have Jesus intercede for them with the Father.
So firmly entrenched is this false doctrine, received by
Protestants from Papacy during the dark ages, and still held with
tenacious grasp, that belief in this incomprehensible, unreasonable and
unscriptural doctrine is made a test of orthodoxy.
Whoever disbelieves this is declared to be a heretic, not only by
the Church of Rome, but [page
65] by the greatest standard of authority amongst
Protestants—The Evangelical Alliance.
Truth is mighty and shall ultimately prevail: nevertheless,
meantime, the conditions which God has permitted are such as to form tests
of character and of loyalty to God and his Word amongst those who profess
to be his people and to be taught of God.
It therefore behooves every truthseeker to deal honestly with
himself and with the heavenly Father’s Word, which alone is able to make
us wise unto salvation. Let
us remember that the truth alone sanctifies, and that error, on the
contrary, always tends to evil.
God
the Father and God the Son
This may be the proper point at which to introduce and examine a
few scriptures supposed to favor the doctrine of the Trinity, although
they do not state it.
(1) It is claimed that our Lord Jesus is spoken of as God, and that
there is but one God, and that hence God the Father and God the Son must
be two names for the one person. Let us examine this question in the light
of the divine Word, taking nothing for granted, but proving every step of
our way. We labor under the
disadvantage that almost all translators of the Old Testament have not
been exact or uniform
in their translations of the several appellatives to deity.*
For instance:
—————
*The appearance is that the Trinitarians
who translated our Common Version
Bible feared to render the name Jehovah as a proper name in every instance, lest the people should realize the fact which
theology denies—that the title Jehovah belongs
only to the great “I AM,” the Father.
Similarly Leeser’s English translation made for the Jews covers
the word; possibly because of
fear that some of the Jews might stumble over
some of the few uses of the word reviewed preceding.
The Jew prefers and uses the word Lord, possibly in the hope that
fellow Jews will recognize
the word Lord as applicable only to Jehovah and therefore
feel a resentment toward those who speak of Jesus as “our Lord
and Savior Jesus Christ”—thinking this blasphemy.
The Trinitarian translators probably preferred to use the word Lord
instead of Jehovah, in order that Christians accustomed to use the
word Lord as a title for our
Savior, Jesus, might in reading the Old Testament
think that he, and not the Father, Jehovah, is usually referred to.
Appellations
of Deity in the Old Testament
(1) The name Jehovah is properly rendered only four times, where it seemed
impossible to do otherwise (Exod. 6:3; Psa. 83:18; Isa. 12:2; 26:4); it is
rendered God 298 times, and Lord
over 5,000 times. [page 66]
(2) The title Adonai, generally properly rendered Lord, is once rendered God.
(3) The title Adon is rendered Sir,
Master, Lord.
(4) The word elohim, with its modifications eloah, elah and el,
occurs over 2,500 times. These
most frequently refer to Jehovah; but in many instances with evident
propriety are applied to others: hence the connections must determine who is referred to.
We will give Scripture illustrations which will make the matter
perfectly clear, and prove beyond a doubt that elohim
signifies mighty. It is
properly applied to Jehovah, because he is All-mighty,
all-powerful. It is properly
applied to any angel, for they are mighty, powerful, and in their visits to man recorded in the Old
Testament they were specially mighty
because representatives of Jehovah, the All-mighty.
Great, influential men were also properly described as elohim—mighty.
Like our English word “sheep,” elohim
is used either in the singular or plural as occasion may require.
These are facts, and our quotations from the Common Version Bible
will substantiate them thoroughly; and thus will demonstrate the
Scriptural propriety and consistency in referring to our Lord Jesus Christ
as God [elohim] and as Adon
[Master, Lord] and as Adonai
[my Lord], and yet never as Jehovah. [page 67]
Elohim
[Mighty] Translated “Angels”
Psalm 8:5—“Thou [Jehovah, vs. 1] hast made him a little lower
than the angels
[elohim], and hast crowned him with glory and honor.”
That this is a proper rendering of elohim
is proven by the fact that the inspired Apostle translated it thus into
the Greek, angelos—when, referring
to how our Lord humbled himself, he says—“Thou madest him a little
lower than angels.”
Heb. 2:7,9
Elohim
[Mighty] Translated “Gods”
In referring to false gods of the heathen, the word elohim [mighty] is used
196 times; and quite properly, too, for they were mighty or influential to
their devotees.
Jehovah
the [All-Mighty] Elohim Contrasted
With
Other Elohim [Mighty Ones]
Psalm 86:6-8—“Give ear O Jehovah unto my prayer.... Among all
the gods [elohim—mighty
ones] there is none like unto thee.”
Psalm 95:3—“Jehovah is a great God [el—mighty
one] and a great King above all gods [elohim—mighty
ones].”
Psalm 50:1—“The mighty God [lit. God
of gods—el elohim—the mighty of
the mighty], Jehovah, hath spoken.”
Psalm 29:1—“Give unto Jehovah O ye mighty
[el—gods], ascribe unto
Jehovah glory and strength. Give
unto Jehovah the honor of his name; and worship Jehovah in the beauty of
holiness.”
Genesis 17:1—“Jehovah appeared to Abraham and said unto him, I
am the Almighty God
[el].”
Exodus 15:11—“Who is like unto thee, O Jehovah, among the gods [el—mighty
ones].” See margin.
Genesis 14:22—“Abraham said, I have lifted up my hand unto
Jehovah, the most high God [el],
possessor of heaven and earth.” [page 68]
Psalm 96:4—“Jehovah is great, and greatly to be praised: he is
to be feared above all gods
[elohim—mighty
ones.]”
These instances suffice as samples: others may be found by those
who desire and seek them.
Elohim
Applied to Men
In the aforementioned 196 translations of elohim
by the word gods,
probably fully one-half refer to men—mighty ones—kings, princes,
nobles, etc., but now we notice a few instances in which elohim
is applied to the Lord’s people.
Genesis 23:6—Abraham is styled elohim,
the word being translated mighty
in our Common Version Bible. “Thou
art a mighty
[elohim]
prince among us.”
Exodus 7:1—Moses is denominated the god
[elohim] of Pharaoh.
“I have made thee a god [elohim] to Pharaoh.”
Exodus 21:6—The judges [rulers, mighty
ones] of Israel were styled elohim.
“His master shall bring him unto the judges
[elohim].”
Exodus 22:8,10—“If the thief be not found, then the master of
the house shall be brought into the judges [elohim].
...Both parties shall come before the judges [elohim];
and whom the judges
[elohim]
shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbor.”
Exodus 22:28—“Thou shalt not revile the
gods [elohim—margin,
judges].” Note the
Apostle’s sanction of this translation. Acts 23:5
The
Saints Called Elohim
Psalm 82:6,7—“I have said, Ye are gods
[elohim—mighty ones], all
of you sons of the highest, ye yet shall all die like [other] men, falling
like one of the princes [heads].” The
saints must all die, but like Christ Jesus their “head,”
sacrificially, and not as Adam for his own sin.
This passage was quoted by our Lord Jesus, and applied to those who
received the word of God at his lips—those [page 69]
having ears “to hear”: and it applies still to
the same class.* “Beloved, now are we
the sons of God,” reckonedly, hoping by divine grace to “become
partakers of the divine nature.” John 10:34,35; 1 John 3:2; 2 Pet. 1:4
—————
*This entire Psalm (82) seems to refer to
our Lord Jesus as the divinely appointed
Deliverer and Judge of Christendom, now, in the time of his
parousia.
To Him we apply the words, “God [elohim,
Christ appointed by the
Father to judge the world now] standeth in the assemblage of the mighty [amongst the financial, political and ecclesiastical
princes]; he judgeth among
[these] gods
[elohim—mighty
ones].” He is represented
first as reproving these
princes and calling for equity, but “They heed not,
neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness [respecting
what will be the result of
their policy]: all the foundations of the earth [the
social world] are out of the course”; is his decision: it is
useless to attempt to patch
present institutions; they must all be “dissolved,” that the new
heavens and new earth—the new social world—may come instead. Then verses 6
and 7 are addressed to his faithful “little flock.”
When they are gathered—when
all the “elect” Church by dying shall have passed beyond the veil—then Christ will be called upon, “Arise, O God [elohim],
judge the earth: for thou hast inherited all nations.”
It will be to establish his
Kingdom that he will let loose the judgments which in “a great time
of trouble such as never was since there was a nation,” shall
abase the proud and exalt the
humble and usher in the “times of restitution” long
promised by all the holy prophets. Acts 3:19-23
Elohim
Rendered “Great,” “Strong,” Etc.
This word is sometimes rendered strong,
power, great, etc., in connection with inanimate things; as “Great
[elohim—mighty]
tremblings” (1 Sam. 14:15); “Great
[elohim—mighty]
wrestlings” (Gen. 30:8); “Great
[el—mighty] mountains”
(Psa. 36:6); “The strong [el]
among the mighty” (Ezek. 32:21); “It is in the power [el]
of my hand.” Gen. 31:29
“God”
and “Lord” in the New Testament
In the New Testament the matter is simplified by the use of fewer
words; but it may be said that nothing whatever in the words
used distinguishes the Father from the Son in the [page 70]
words rendered Lord and God.
The matter is left entirely to the judgment of the reader, and
indicated only by the construction of the sentence—except that where the
word Theos is used twice in the same clause the Greek Prepositive
Article is sometimes used, so as to give the effect of the
God in contrast with a
God. An illustration of this is found in John 1:1—“The Word
was with the
God [ho
theos] and the Word was a
God [theos].”
But the careful student (freed from prejudice) will generally have
no difficulty in determining the thought of the Apostle.
Indeed, the language is so explicit that the wonder is that we were
heedless of it so long.
The word God in our New Testament, whether in referring to our
Heavenly Father or to his Heavenly Son, our Lord Jesus, or to false gods,
is almost invariably the translation of the Greek word Theos. Exceptions are that the word kurios
is once translated God
when it should have been rendered Lord or Master, namely in Acts 19:20;
and in Acts 17:18 daimonion is rendered gods,
and should be demons.
The title “Lord,” whether applied to Jehovah, or Christ, or
man, or angels, is generally the translation of the Greek word kurios signifying Master,
or Lord. It is frequently
translated Sir
and Master.
Exceptions are that in five places Lord is the translation of despotes, where it would better have been translated Sovereign
or Autocrat.
The cases are:
(1) Luke 2:29—“Lord [despotes] now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace.”
(2) Acts 4:24—“Lord [despotes] thou art God which hast made heaven and earth....The
rulers were gathered together against the Lord [kurios] and against his
Christ. For of a truth
against thy holy Son Jesus, whom thou hast anointed,...were gathered.”
(3) 2 Pet. 2:1—“Heresies, even denying the Lord [despotes]
that bought them.”
(4) Jude 4—“Denying the only Lord [despotes]
God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.” [page 71]
(5) Rev. 6:10—“How long, O Lord [despotes],
holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood?”
Rabboni
[master]
is once rendered Lord. Mark 10:51
Kurieno
[to
be lords] is once rendered lords.
1 Tim. 6:15
The
Godhead
The translators of our New Testament were extremely unfortunate in
selecting and using the word “godhead” three times to translate three
different words—none of which have any such significance as comes from
this word to the mind of the ordinary English reader: namely—a God with
several bodies and but one head. Its
occurrences are:
(1) Ho
Theios is rendered Godhead
in Acts 17:29 whereas it should be “the Deity,”—“We ought not to think that the Godhead
[ho
Theios—the Deity] is like unto gold or silver or stone.”
The same word is translated divine
in the only two other instances of its occurrence in the New Testament;
viz., 2 Pet. 1:3,4.
(2) Theiotes
is rendered Godhead in Romans 1:20; whereas it should be translated Divinity
or Deity,—“God
hath showed it unto them,...even his eternal power and godhead [Theiotes—Deity].”
This is the only occurrence of this word in the New Testament.
(3) Theotes
is rendered Godhead in Colossians 2:9; whereas it should be translated Deity,—“For
in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead [Theotes—Deity]
bodily.” This is the only
occurrence of this word in the New Testament.
In the glorified Christ, who is the head of the Church, dwells all
fulness; plenitude of wisdom, grace and power, not only to guide all the
affairs of the Church, his body, but also as the Father’s representative
to do any and every thing necessary to be done in carrying forward to
successful completion the great divine plan committed to his care. [page 72]
“Thou
Shalt Worship the Lord Thy God
And
Him Only Shalt Thou Serve.”
—Matt.
4:10—
It is claimed by some that the fact that our Lord Jesus received
worship without rebuke signifies that he is Jehovah. Our Lord’s words
above quoted are supposed to imply that for any being but Jehovah to
receive worship would be wrong. We
answer, Not so! To so interpret these words is to think into them a meaning
which they do not contain, and to make them contradictory to the teachings
of other scriptures. Jehovah’s decree respecting Christ, “Thou art my Son, this day have I
begotten thee,” had already been recorded through the prophets; and also
his decree, “Let all the angels of God worship
him.” (Psa. 2:7; 97:7; Heb. 1:5,6)
Our Lord Jesus knew this. He
also knew that the angelic messengers of Jehovah had in the past been worshiped
as representatives of
Jehovah; and that he himself was the chief messenger, the Only
Begotten Son, the “Messenger of the Covenant,” whom the Father had
sanctified and sent into the world: he knew consequently that whoever
honored him honored the Father also.
Indeed, his own words were, “He that honoreth not the Son
honoreth not the Father which sent him.” John 5:23; Mal. 3:1
The Greek word translated worship
in the New Testament is proskuneo,
which signifies “to kiss the hand,” as a dog licks the hand of his master.
The significance is reverence.
The Hebrew word rendered worship
in the Old Testament is shaw-kaw
and signifies to bow down. The
significance is reverence. The
word occurs 170 times and only about one-half of this number refer to the
worship of God. But this fact
is hidden from the English reader by reason of its having been 74 times
translated bow
down, bowed himself, did reverence,
did obeisance, etc., when referring to homage to great earthly
beings. We will give
examples:
[page 73]
Abraham “bowed
himself [shaw-kaw] toward the ground, and said, My Lords [Adonai]...let
a little water be fetched and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under
the tree.” These words and acts were while he thought them merely
“three men.” Gen. 18:2-4
Lot “bowed
down [shaw-kaw]” to two of the same three. Gen. 19:1
Abraham “bowed
himself [shaw-kaw]” to the people of Canaan. Gen. 23:7,12
Isaac blessed Jacob, saying, “Let nations bow
down [shaw-kaw] unto thee;...and
let thy mother’s sons bow
down [shaw-kaw] unto thee.”
Gen. 27:29
“David stooped and bowed himself [shaw-kaw]
to the earth” to king Saul. 1 Sam. 24:8
Abigail “bowed
herself [shaw-kaw] to the ground” to David; and again to David’s
representatives. 1 Sam. 25:23,41
The woman of Tekoah “fell on her face...and did
obeisance [shaw-kaw]” to king
David. And Joab and Absalom
did likewise, translated “bowed
himself [shaw-kaw].” 2 Sam.
14:4,22,33
“When Mephibosheth...was come unto David, he fell on his face and did reverence [shaw-kaw].”
2 Sam. 9:6
From these evidences it will be apparent to all that the
prohibition of the First Commandment—“Thou shalt not bow
down thyself [shaw-kaw]
to them nor serve them,” was not understood, nor meant to be understood,
as a prohibition of reverence, homage, etc., to the honorable, or to those in
honored positions among men. Nor
did the Jews err in doing reverence
[shaw-kaw] to angels who
came with messages in Jehovah’s name and acknowledging him.
And such reverence was approved—never reproved.
The Commandment warns against image worship or any worship of any rival
gods. This Jehovah cannot
tolerate. Hence there was no
impropriety for any Jew who recognized Jesus as the “Sent of God” to
do him reverence, obeisance; and
much more proper is it for all those who recognize our Lord Jesus
according to his claims—as
the Son of God. [page 74]
Indeed, we may be sure that those Pharisees who took up stones to
kill our Lord because he declared himself the Son
of God would have been wild beyond bounds, and not only have stoned our
Lord Jesus, but also his worshipers,
claiming idolatry, had they entertained as a people any such extreme
thought of worship, obeisance (proskuneo), as is entertained by those whose extreme views
respecting this word we are combating and have proved erroneous.
Exceptions to this liberty would be in cases where the man to whom reverence,
obeisance or worship
is rendered is the recognized representative of a false god—as a pseudo-Christ or false
Christ—Antichrist. Homage
to the popes would, we believe, come under this head of false or wrong
worship; because in his office he claims falsely to be “Vicegerent
Christ.” It was on this
ground that our Lord Jesus refused to acknowledge Satan and his great
power in the world. It was an
actively evil power,
designedly opposed to the laws of Jehovah.
Hence the proposition that by not opposing evil, by respecting or reverencing
evil customs already established under Satan’s regime, Satan would
cooperate with our Lord in the establishment of his kingdom, was at once
declined and the answer signified—I am in full accord with Jehovah God
and therefore in full accord with the prophetic declaration: “Thou shalt
reverence Jehovah thy God
and him shalt thou serve”—and since you are his wilful opponent I can
render no reverence
to you or your methods, nor could I either serve your cause or cooperate
with you. Our causes are
distinctly separate. I will
have nothing to do with you. Compare
Matt. 4:10; Deut. 10:20,21.
Had our Lord Jesus set himself as a rival
to Jehovah instead of as his Son and servant, any homage to him would have
signified disrespect to the Father and would have been
sinful—idolatrous. On the
contrary, however, while accepting homage reverence as the Son of
God he declared most positively and publicly, “The Father is greater
than I,” and taught his disciples to make their petitions to the Father,
saying, “Whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he will give
it you.” John 16:23
[page 75]
“I
and My Father Are One.”
—John
10:30—
This text is considered a proof that our Lord Jesus is entitled to
the name Jehovah—that he was both the Father and the Son; or that he had
no Father and was not a Son.
Having vague, mysterious thoughts respecting “trinity,” a
remarkably large number of otherwise intelligent people seem to forget
that there is any other kind of
oneness than personal oneness. On
the contrary, however, in all
other uses of the word the thought is that of harmony—oneness of plan, purpose, will, mind.
How blind a theory can make us is well illustrated by the fact that
our Lord’s own explanation and illustration of the manner in which he
and the Father are one
is very generally overlooked. He
said in prayer to the Father—
“I pray not for the world but for them which thou hast given me,
for they are thine...neither pray I for these alone, but for them also
which believe on me through their word; that they all may be ONE, as thou, Father, art in me and I in
thee, that they also may be ONE IN US...that they may be ONE, even
as we are ONE: I in them and thou in me, that they may be MADE
PERFECT IN ONE.” John 17:9,20-23
Here the oneness of the Church, for which the Lord prayed, is
specially stated to be exactly the same as the oneness between the Father
and the Son. That the oneness
of the Church is oneness
of mind and not a personal oneness needs no discussion.
Evidently the thought in the Redeemer’s mind was oneness of
heart, oneness of purpose, oneness of will, amongst his followers; and that oneness identical with the oneness between the Father and himself.
And this oneness was to be attained
on the part of the Church in the same manner exactly as the oneness
between the Father and the Son was attained. The Son was at one with the Father because he fully accepted
as his own the Father’s will, saying, “Not my will but thine be
done.” So each member of
the Church is to come into perfect harmony with the Father, and with the
Son, by doing not their own wills, but by setting aside their [page 76]
own wills and accepting the will of Christ, which is
the will
of the Father. Thus,
and thus only, will the Church ever come into the oneness for which our Lord
here prayed, and which he refers to as of the same kind as the oneness
between the Father and himself. How
strange that any should attempt to misuse and pervert these our Lord’s
words, to make them support the unreasonable and unscriptural doctrine of
a Trinity—three Gods in one
person. On the
contrary, how beautiful and reasonable is the Scriptural oneness
of the spirit of the Father and Son and Church.
“He
That Hath Seen Me Hath Seen The Father”
After our Lord had declared himself to be the Way, the Truth and
the Life, and that no man could come to the Father but by him, and that
whoever knew him would know the Father also, Philip said to our Lord
Jesus, “Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.”
Jesus answered him, “Have I been so long time with you, and yet
hast thou not known me, Philip? He
that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us
the Father? Believest thou
not that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words that I speak
unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he
doeth the works.” John 14:7-10
We are asked to accept this statement by our Lord Jesus as proof
that he is Jehovah (and not Jehovah’s Son), and that as such the name
Jehovah is properly applicable to him.
But all should notice that the entire context shows a distinction
between the Father and the Son, such as no reasonable person would use if
he desired to give the impression which Trinitarians seek to draw from it. The whole question, therefore, is, What did our Lord wish us
to understand by his words, “He that hath seen me hath seen the
Father?” We answer, he
meant us to understand that it is impossible for man (a fleshy, earthly
being) to see God, a [page 77] spirit being. Thus
the Apostle John testified, “No one has seen God at any time: the
Only-Begotten God—the One existing within the bosom of the Father—he
interpreted [him].” (John 1:18—Rotherham’s
Translation) He meant
them to understand what the Lord declared to Moses, “No man can see my
face and live:” and hence that if the Father would show himself to
humanity, it could only be either by miraculously opening man’s eyes to
discern the spiritual glory (thus exposing man to death), or else by God’s manifesting himself
in a body of flesh;—in such a manner that men could discern
something of his character by contact and intercourse.
And was not this exactly what God did do?
God’s mind, God’s will, was fully
represented in his Only Begotten Son, our Lord, when he was made
flesh and dwelt amongst men. He
therefore was the best, the closest, the most positive representation of
God that it was or ever would be possible
to give to mankind. In
seeing and knowing the Lord Jesus intimately, Philip and the other
Apostles knew the Father in the most absolute sense possible for humanity
to know him. They knew him in the most absolute sense possible for the
Father to reveal himself to mankind.
There never was, there never would be, there never could be, a
clearer, a more absolute, a more complete manifestation of God to man than
in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ; for when “made flesh” he was
“God manifested [Greek, rendered apparent] in the
flesh.” (1 Tim. 3:16) Similarly
the Apostle declares of the Church, the faithful members of Christ—We
are delivered unto death, “that the life also of Jesus might be made
manifest [Greek, rendered
apparent] IN OUR MORTAL FLESH.” 2 Cor. 4:11
The perfect
man is a perfect image of the invisible God, and hence the best
conception or illustration that could be presented. Similarly during the
Millennium the ancient worthies perfected
will be the best representatives among men of the Heavenly Father, the
Heavenly Son and the Heavenly Bride of Christ.
Whoever sees them will see God manifest in [page 78]
the flesh—God’s likeness
in flesh. And it will be to
this sublime condition that the entire groaning creation will be
privileged to attain, if they will, under the guidance of the Royal Priest
and his “brethren” the under priests, ministering through the ancient
worthies who, as the fleshly representatives of the Kingdom, will be
earth’s “princes.” Psa. 45:16
The
Blessed and Only Potentate,
The
King of Kings and Lord of Lords, Who
Only
Hath Immortality—1 Tim. 6:15,16—
Many consider this passage to signify that at his appearing, at his
second advent, our Lord Jesus will exhibit or make known to the world the
Heavenly Father’s greatness. But although that view has some reasonable
aspects, we incline on the whole to apply the statement to the glory and
honor of Christ—dating from the beginning of the Millennial age.
True, he will cause all who accept his way to recognize Jehovah God
also, but this will not be at his appearing but at the close of his reign,
when he shall “deliver up the Kingdom to God, even the Father.” 1 Cor.
15:24-28
To apply the passage to the Father would be to deny that our Lord
possesses immortality, whereas the Scriptures explicitly teach that he and
all who share in the First Resurrection obtain therein immortality and
that thus the Father, who hath life-inherent (self-existence—immortality), gave
to the Son that he should have life-inherent
(self-existence—immortality). 1 Cor. 15:42-44,53,54; John 5:26
But to apply this scripture to the Son seems to fit every condition
perfectly, and by no means ignores the Father, Jehovah—nor proves that
our Lord Jesus is the Father, Jehovah—for we are in all such cases to
remember the invariable [page 79]
rule laid down by the inspired Apostle—namely, that
in comparisons, honors, etc., mentioned respecting the Son, the Father is always
excepted as being inexpressibly above all comparisons.
His words are, “It is manifest that he [the Father] is excepted,” and not to be considered under or subject to our
Lord Jesus and the various powers conferred by the Father upon him.
For when the Son shall have subdued sin in the world, “then shall
the Son also himself be subject unto him [the Father] that did put all
things under him [the Son].” 1 Cor. 15:27
Another very similar statement of the glory of our Lord Jesus’
kingdom given him by the Father is that “He is at the head of all
principality and power.” (Col. 2:10)
The answer to this is the same.
The Father’s government and authority are never contrasted with that of the Son; for the latter is at one
with the former and is his representative.
“Thought
it not Robbery to be Equal with God”
In Phil. 2:6 our common English version represents the Apostle Paul
as making the astounding statement that Christ, “being in the form of
God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”
It should be noticed, first of all, that this passage surely does
not teach the doctrine of the Trinity, nor that our Lord Jesus is the Father, Jehovah:
for if so where would be the room for meditating a robbery or considering an equality?
These words “robbery” and “equal” positively teach that the
Father and the Son are not one
in person, but two.
But how strange it seems that the Apostle’s words are so
different from those of our Lord on this subject. He declares, “The
Father is greater than I”; “Of mine own self I can do nothing.”
We ask, Did our Lord Jesus lose his humility that he later
concluded to be equal
with God the Father?
But, secondly, we notice how much such a view conflicts [page 80]
with the lesson which the Apostle was seeking to
inculcate. Was the Apostle seeking to have the Church aspire to and grasp
after the honor of the Father or the honor of each other? Surely not! On
the contrary, he is urging against vainglory and in favor of lowliness of
mind, and that each should esteem the other better
than himself. He
assures his readers that this humility of mind was our Lord Jesus’
disposition, and says, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ
Jesus.” If the mind which
was in Christ Jesus was to grasp the Father’s glory and honor, and to
think it not robbery to do so, then the same mind in the Lord’s Church
would mean that each one of us should be grasping after all the glory and
honor possible to be attained, and should consider that the proper course,
and that we thus would have the mind or disposition which Christ
manifested.
But this is all wrong: It is the translation that is at fault.
It is a wretched one, and gives the very opposite of the
Apostle’s meaning. The
Greek word, harpagmos, here rendered “robbery,” only occurs this once in
the New Testament, and has associated with it the thought of robbery, or
unlawful acquisition, but the Apostle’s meaning is exactly reversed by
the misarrangement of the sentence. His
thought could be translated in almost the same words but with an opposite
meaning, thus—“Who thought not by robbery to be equal with God.”
Our Lord Jesus’ course is thus contrasted with that of Satan who
did attempt to usurp God’s position and honor. (Isa. 14:12-14)
This is clearly shown by the context preceding and following—that
nothing be done for vainglory—that Christ was very humble-minded, and that we also should be humble-minded and thus
walk in his footsteps. Note
the following translations of this word harpagmos,
preferred by eminent scholars of various denominations:
“Did not think it a matter to be earnestly desired.” Clarke.
“Did not think of eagerly retaining.”
Wakefield
“Did not regard...as an object of solicitous desire.” Stewart
[page 81]
“Who in God’s form subsisting, not
a thing to be seized on esteemed the being equal with God.”
Rotherham
“Who being [margin, originally] in the form of God, counted it not a prize [margin,
a thing to be grasped] to be on an equality with God.”
Revised
Version
“Who existing in the form of God, counted
not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped.” Amer. Rev. Committee
“Thought not...a thing to be seized.”
Sharpe
“Did not eagerly grasp.” Neeland
“Did not violently strive.”
Dickenson
“Did not meditate a usurpation.”
Turnbull
The last definition seems to fit best with the context, and is the
translation preferred and given in the Emphatic
Diaglott, which renders the entire passage thus:
“Who, though being in God’s form, yet did not meditate a
usurpation to be like God, but divested himself, taking a bondman’s
form.”
This translation is consistent, not only with the facts of the
case, but also with the Apostle’s argument, of which it forms a part. Its statement, amplified, is that when our Lord Jesus was a
spirit being, when he had a God-like form and nature, he was not filled
with an ambitious spirit, and a desire to usurp divine authority and power
and glory and homage—he was not of the spirit of Satan, who strove to
exalt himself, saying, “I will be as the Most High.”
On the contrary, although he occupied the highest position, next to
the Heavenly Father, he was so humble minded that, in obedience to the
Father’s will, he divested himself of the glories and majesty of his
spirit condition, exchanging that higher nature and glory for a lower
condition, a human condition, “a little lower than the angels.”
The Apostle then proceeds to show that not only was this humility
manifested, but that subsequently a still greater humility was shown, in
that our Lord Jesus, as the man Christ Jesus, became subject to death,
even the ignominious death of the Cross.
And all this humbling of himself, the Apostle declares, [page 82]
was in obedience to the divine will, the Father’s
will. Then the Apostle points out the result of this, saying, “Wherefore
[on
this account, because of his exhibition of loyalty, humility, and
obedience even unto death] God [the Father] has highly exalted him, and
given him a name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every
knee should bow and every tongue confess...to the glory of God the
Father.” Heb. 2:7,9; 1 Tim. 2:5,6; Phil. 2:11
Thus seen, this text, so far from being an aid or a comfort to the
doctrine of the Trinity, most strongly opposes it, and places itself in
full harmony with the entire Word of God, and with sanctified common sense
and reason.
We leave this feature of our subject with an enhanced appreciation
of the lengths and breadths and heights and depths of the Heavenly
Father’s greatness of person, character and plan, and with a greater
esteem than ever for his great Son, whose wonderful love, loyalty and
trust in the Father’s wisdom, grace and power have been so royally
rewarded; rejoicing, indeed, to “honor the Son even
as we honor the Father.” And
after full, explicit examination of the revelation given us in God’s
Word, we fully concur in the Apostle Paul’s inspired testimony: “To us
there is but one [supreme] God, the Father, out
of whom are all things and we for
him, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through
whom are all things and we through
him.” 1 Cor. 8:6
“Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord
Jesus Christ. Blessed be the
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all
spiritual blessings in the heavenlies, in Christ: according as he hath
chosen us in him ...having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to
himself....The God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, give
unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him.”
Eph. 1:2-17
