Chapter XXIV

THAT THE THREE CREEDS ARE DEDUCIBLE FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Only three Doctrines can be disputed.

(_A._) THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY.

In addition to belief in God the Father, the New Testament
teaches--

(1.) The Divinity of Christ.
(2.) The Divinity of the Holy Spirit; so there are
(3.) Three Divine Persons and yet but One God.

(_B._) THE FINAL STATE OF THE WICKED.

The only alternatives are:

(1.) Their endless misery: very strong texts in favour of
this; its difficulties considered.
(2.) Their endless happiness: most improbable.
(3.) Their destruction: more likely than the last, but still
improbable. On the whole the statement of the
Creed seems fully justified.

(_C._) THE IMPORTANCE OF A TRUE BELIEF.

This is strongly insisted on in the warning clauses of the
Athanasian Creed.

(1.) Their meaning.
(2.) Their truthfulness: they merely repeat similar warnings
in the New Testament.
(3.) The objection as to dogmatism.

We have now reached the last stage in our inquiry. We have shown in the previous chapters that there is very strong evidence in favour of what may be called in a general sense, Christianity or the Christian Religion--_i.e.,_ the Religion founded by Christ and taught in the New Testament. We have, lastly, to inquire, is this Religion correctly summarised in the doctrines and statements of the _Three Creeds_? And the only doctrines that can be disputed, are found in the Athanasian Creed, and refer to the _Trinity_; the _Final State of the Wicked;_ and the importance of a _True Belief_: each of which we will examine in turn.

(_A._) THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY.

Now, although there are no statements in the New Testament identical with those in the Creed, yet the latter are merely logical deductions from the former. For the New Testament asserts that, besides God the Father, there are two other Divine Persons, Christ and the Holy Spirit, and yet but one God.

(1.) _The Divinity of Christ_.

This has already been discussed in Chapter XXI., where we showed that Christ claimed to be not only Superhuman, but Divine; and that this is how His contemporaries, both friends and foes, understood Him. The doctrine is also asserted by St. Paul, as well as by St. John, who in the opening verse of his Gospel, states it very concisely, saying that the Word (_i.e._, Christ) _was with God_, implying a distinction of Persons, and _was_ God, implying a unity of Nature; which is the exact doctrine of the Creed.

(2.) _The Divinity of the Holy Spirit._

This also follows at once from the New Testament. For the Holy Spirit is called by Divine names, such as God and Lord; He is given Divine attributes, such as Eternity and Omniscience; and He is identified with Jehovah, the Lord of Hosts, of the Old Testament.[463]

[Footnote 463: Acts 5. 3, 4; 2 Cor. 3.17; Heb. 9. 14; 1 Cor. 2. 10; Acts 28. 25; Isa. 6. 5-10.]

And yet, He is a distinct _Person_: for, to quote a decisive text,[464] Christ prays the Father to send His disciples _another_ Comforter when He goes away; thus showing that the Holy Spirit is a different Person, both from the Father and the Son. And elsewhere we are told that the Spirit _makes intercession for us_, which again shows that He must be a different Person from the Father, with Whom He intercedes.[465] While in another passage blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is said to be the worst of all sins;[466] which shows both that He is a _Person_, or He could not be blasphemed; and that He is _God_, or blasphemy against God would be a greater sin.

[Footnote 464: John 14. 16, 26; 15. 26.]

[Footnote 465: Rom. 8. 26.]

[Footnote 466: Matt. 12. 31, 32; Mark 3. 28, 29.]

No doubt the actual word _Person_ is not applied to the Holy Spirit in the New Testament, just as it is not applied to either the Father or the Son, but it cannot be thought inappropriate, provided it is not taken in a literal, or human sense. For the relations between Them closely _resemble_ those between human persons, as They love one another, speak to one another, and use the personal pronouns I, Thou, He, and We.

(3.) _Three Divine Persons and yet but One God._

It is clear, then, from the New Testament, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all Persons, and all Divine; and yet the fact of there being but one God is at times plainly asserted.[467] Now the only means of reconciling all this is by the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity. And this is plainly hinted at in the New Testament itself, for the Three Persons are often closely associated together, as for instance in the text just alluded to, where _Christ_ prays _the Father_ to give His disciples _another Comforter_.

[Footnote 467: Mark 12. 29; 1 Cor. 8. 4.]

Quite naturally, then, just before His Ascension, Christ completed this earlier teaching by finally, and for ever, joining the Three Persons together, when He commanded Christians to be baptized _into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost_.[468] And this alone is sufficient to prove the doctrine, for it shows that there are _Three_ distinct Persons, and that each is _Divine_, for who but God could be thus associated with God? While the expression into the _name_ and not _names_, implies a unity in this Trinity.

[Footnote 468: Matt. 28. 19.]

And we happen to have indirect evidence from the _Acts_, that baptism was administered in this way. For when St. Paul found some disciples, who said they knew nothing about the Holy Ghost; he at once asked, 'Into what then were ye _baptized_?'[469] Obviously, then, the baptism to which St. Paul was accustomed must have been into the name of the Holy Ghost, as well as into that of Christ; and the Father's name could scarcely have been omitted. Yet immediately afterwards we are told that they were baptized _into the Name of the Lord Jesus_. In the same way the 'Teaching of the Twelve' once speaks of baptism as _into the Name of the Lord_; and twice as _into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost_.[470] The former seems to have been only a short way of describing Christian baptism, (in distinction from that of the Jews, or of St. John the Baptist), while the latter represented the actual words used.[471]

[Footnote 469: Acts 19. 3.]

[Footnote 470: Teaching, chaps. vii. and ix.]

[Footnote 471: _Comp._ Acts 2. 38; 8. 16; 18. 25; I Cor. 10. 2.]

Similarly St. Paul sometimes closes his Epistles with the shorter form of blessing. _The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you_; once with an intermediate form, naming the Father and Christ; and once with the longer form, _The Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all_.[472] This latter passage, the genuineness of which is undisputed, is of course extremely important, in fact like the preceding one it is practically conclusive; for again we must ask, who but God could be thus associated with God? If Christ were a mere human prophet, like Isaiah for instance; and the Holy Spirit a mere influence for good; what strange language it would be. Can we imagine anyone blessing his converts with, The grace of Isaiah, the love of God, and the fellowship of a holy influence--God, it will be noticed, being placed _between_ the other two, so there can be no ascending or descending scale, they must all be equal?

[Footnote 472: 1 Cor. 16. 23; Gal. 6. 18; Eph. 6. 23; 2 Cor. 13. 14.]

And as St. Paul takes for granted that his readers would understand his meaning, it implies that they had had some previous teaching on the subject, which must clearly have been given them by St. Paul himself on his first visit. And at that early date (about A.D. 50) such teaching could scarcely have originated except from what Christ Himself had taught. This passage, then, implies more than it says, and needs explanation; and as far as we know the former one alone can explain it.

And of course the same is true, though to a lesser degree, of numerous other Trinitarian passages which occur all through the Epistles, including the earliest (1 Thess., about A.D. 50).[473] Nowhere do the writers seem to be explaining anything new to their converts; but merely to be touching on a truth, with which all Christians were of course familiar. Indeed, the very fact of their never attempting to explain or defend the doctrine, shows conclusively that it did not originate with _them_. Persons do not preach a new doctrine without a word of explanation or comment, as if every one already believed it.

[Footnote 473: _E.g._, Rom. 15. 30; Eph. 4. 4-6; 1 Thess. 1. 3-5; 1 Peter 1. 2; Jude 20-21.]

Thus, to put it shortly, according to the New Testament, there are _Three_ distinct Persons; each is God, each is Lord, each is Eternal, each is Omniscient, into the Name of each converts are baptized, each is referred to in Blessing; and yet there is but _One_ God. This is what the Bible says, and the Creed says the same, though it says it in more logical language.

(_B._) THE FINAL STATE OF THE WICKED.

We pass on now to what is perhaps the most difficult of all subjects, the final state of the wicked. The Creed asserts that all men are to rise again with their bodies, and be judged according to their _works_; and that then, _they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil into everlasting fire_. This latter expression can scarcely be taken literally, since it is associated in the Bible with another--_the worm that dieth not_--which cannot be literal, as worms do not live for ever, and cannot live at all in fire. While it is said to have been prepared for evil spirits who have no material bodies. Moreover, the joys of heaven are also represented by terms which are clearly not literal; such as attending a wedding, feasting with Abraham, and wearing crowns. Probably we are not at present able to understand the realities in either case, so figures of some kind have to be used; and those associated with gladness and happiness are of course chosen for the one, and those with pain and woe for the other.

But the language certainly implies some form of _endless misery_; and as there are obvious difficulties in accepting such a view, we must discuss the subject carefully. It may be pointed out at starting that we have only three theories to choose from; for unless the wicked are to be in a continual state of change, which seems almost incredible (for a state of change cannot go on for ever, unless it is recurring) they must finally either exist for ever in _misery_, or exist for ever in _happiness_, or be _destroyed_, and not exist for ever.

(1.) _Their endless misery._

It would be difficult to exaggerate the strength of the texts in favour of this. We are told that the wicked, or at all events some of them, are to awake to shame and everlasting contempt; that they are to be cast into the eternal fire; that they are to depart into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; that they are to go away into _eternal punishment_; that they are guilty of an eternal sin; that their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched; and that they are to be cast into the lake of fire, there to be tormented day and night for ever and ever.[474] The fourth of these texts is perhaps the most important, since Christ uses the same word for _eternal_ punishment as for _eternal_ life; therefore, though the Greek word does not necessarily mean _endless_, it certainly seems to do so here. Similarly in Daniel the same Hebrew word is used for the _everlasting_ life of the righteous, as for the _everlasting_ contempt of the wicked. Moreover the doctrine is _implied_ in numerous other passages;[475] so altogether the New Testament teaching on the subject seems about as plain as it can be.

[Footnote 474: Dan. 12. 2; Matt. 18. 8; 25. 41, 46; Mark 3. 29; 9. 48; Rev. 14. 11; 20. 15.]

[Footnote 475: _E.g._, Matt. 7. 13, 23; 8. 12; 10. 33; 12. 32; 13. 42, 50, etc.]

Yet everyone must admit that there are great difficulties in accepting it. For the _endless misery_ of the wicked appears to be inconsistent with the great attributes of God, especially His power, His justice, and His mercy; as well as with the endless happiness of the righteous. We will consider these points in turn.

And first as to God's _power_. The eternal existence of sinners against God means, it is said, a never-ending conflict between good and evil; and this is most improbable. No doubt it seems so, but then the existence of evil at all is a difficulty; yet as shown in