TOPIC ONE: THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
I. SOME DEFINITIONS
1. Theology.
In its restricted sense Theology means the Doctrine of God.
2. Theism.
Theism is the belief in the existence of a personal God, Creator,
Preserver, and Ruler of all things.
3. Deism.
Deism is a denial of God’s providence.
4. Atheism.
Atheism is a denial of God’s existence.
5. Skepticism and Infidelity.
These two terms mean a doubt of or disbelief in the existence of God.
6. Agnosticism.
Agnosticism is a denial that God can be known.
NOTE: Etymologically,
agnostic and ignoramus mean the same thing. The former is from the Greek, the
latter from the Latin. However, an agnostic would be insulted were he to be
called an ignoramus.
II. DEFINITION OF GOD
A. Scriptural.
1. God is Spirit: John 4:24.
2. God is light: I John 1:5.
3. God is love: I John 4:16.
4. God is a consuming fire: Hebrews 12:29.
NOTE: These are perhaps
not exact definitions so much as popular descriptions of God. The article
before Spirit is not found in Greek or Hebrew.
B. Theological.
1. “By God we understand the one absolutely and infinitely perfect
Spirit who is the creator of all” (Catholic Dictionary).
2. “God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in His being,
wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth” (Westminster Shorter
Catechism).
3. “God is the infinite and perfect Spirit in whom all things have their
source, support, and end” (Strong).
III. ORIGIN OF THE IDEA OF GOD
The idea of God is an intuition of the moral reason; that is, it is
innate in the human race. “The knowledge of God’s existence is a rational
intuition. Logically, it precedes and conditions all observation and reasoning.
Chronologically, only reflection upon the phenomena of nature and of mind
occasions its rise in consciousness” (Strong). Intuition simply means direct
knowledge; it is to be distinguished from observation and reasoning, which give
knowledge by indirect means.
1. The belief in a personal God is called a primary or
first truth.
“A First Truth is a knowledge which, though developed upon occasion of
observation and reflection, is not derived from reflection and observation; a
knowledge on the contrary which has such logical priority that it must be
assumed or supposed in order to make any observation or reflection possible.
Such truths are not, therefore, recognized first in order of time; some of them
are assented to somewhat late in the mind’s growth; by the great majority of
men they are never consciously formulated at all. Yet they constitute the
necessary assumptions upon which all other knowledge rests, and the mind has
not only the inborn capacity to evolve them as soon as the proper occasions are
presented, but the recognition of them is inevitable as soon as the mind begins
to give account to itself of its own knowledge” (Strong).
Other rational intuitions or first truths are:
(1) intuitions of relations,
as time and space;
(2) intuitions of principles,
as substance, cause, final cause, right, etc.;
(3) intuitions of absolute Being,
Power, Reason, Perfection, Personality, as God.
2. Primary or first truths, which may be taken as
synonymous with rational intuitions, have three unfailing marks, viz:
universality, necessity, and logical independence and priority.
a. By universality is meant
“not that all men assent to them or understand them when propounded in
scientific form, but that all men manifest a practical belief in them by their
language, actions, and expectations” (Strong).
The belief in God as a first truth meets this test: no race or tribe has
ever been found without at least a rudimentary conception of the existence of a
Supreme Being.
b. By necessity is meant “not
that it is impossible to deny these truths, but that the mind is compelled by
its very constitution to recognize them upon the occurrence of the proper
conditions, and to employ them in its arguments to prove their non-existence”
(Strong).
The belief in God as first truth meets this test: infinity is the inevitable
correlative of finiteness; the race has an innate capacity for religion; the
denial of God’s existence involves logical processes whose validity rests upon
the assumption of His existence.
c. By logical independence and
priority is meant “that these truths can be resolved into no others, and
proved by no others; that they are presupposed in the acquisition of all other
knowledge, and can therefore be derived from no other source than an original
cognitive power of the mind” (Strong).
The belief in God as a first truth meets this test: “the intuition of an
absolute reason is:
“(1) the necessary presupposition of all other knowledge, so that we
cannot know anything else to exist except by assuming first of all that God
exists;
“(2) the necessary basis of all logical thought, so that we cannot put
confidence in any one of our reasoning processes except by taking for granted
that a thinking Deity has constructed our minds with reference to the universe
and to truth;
“(3) the necessary implication of our primitive belief in design, so
that we can assume all things to exist for a purpose, only by making the prior
assumption that a purposing God exists, can regard the universe as a thought,
only by postulating the existence of an absolute Thinker;
“(4) the necessary foundation of our conviction of moral obligation, so
that we can believe in the universal authority of right, only by assuming that
there exists a God of righteousness who reveals His will both in the individual
conscience and in the moral universe at large. We cannot prove that God is; but
we can show that in order to the existence of any knowledge, thought, reason,
conscience in man, man must assume that God is” (Strong).
3. By reflection and careful analysis it is learned
that the belief in God’s existence as a rational intuition or first truth has a
fourfold content, viz:
a. A Reason, in which man’s
mental processes are grounded.
b. A Power, awakening a sense
of dependence.
c. Perfection, imposing law
upon the moral nature.
d. A Personality, recognized
in forms of worship and prayer.
4. There are some mistaken sources of the idea of God:
a. The Bible.
We cannot attempt to prove from the Scriptures that God exists, and then
try to prove that the Scriptures are from God. This would be reasoning in
circle. “A revelation takes for granted that he to whom it is made has some
knowledge of God, though it may enlarge and purify that knowledge” (H. B.
Smith). The sundial calls for the sun without which it has no significance or
use.
b. Experience.
Individual experience comes from sense -perception followed by
reflection; but God is supersensible, and hence does not come within the range
of experience. If by experience is meant “the accumulated results of the
sensations and associations of past generations of the race”, it may be asked,
How did the original generation or first man at the head of the series acquire
the belief in God to transmit, except as a rational intuition?
c. Reason.
Reason often brings into consciousness the belief in God but cannot
cause it.
“The actual rise of this knowledge in the great majority of minds is not
the result of any conscious process of reasoning . . . The strength of men’s
faith in God is not proportioned to the strength of the reasoning faculty. On
the other hand, men of greatest logical power are often inveterate skeptics,
while men of unwavering faith are found among those who cannot even understand
the arguments for God’s existence” (Strong).
IV. CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE OF GOD’S EXISTENCE
The Scriptures do not attempt to prove God’s existence, but everywhere
either assume or affirm it:
Genesis 1:1; John 1:1. The Scriptures declare that the knowledge of God
is universal: Romans 1:19-21, 28, 32; 2:15. God has inlaid the evidence of this
fundamental truth in the very nature of man, so that nowhere is He without
witness. The preacher may confidently follow the example of Scripture by
assuming it. But he must explicitly declare it, as the Scripture does.
“For the invisible things of him
since the creation of the world are clearly seen” (that is, spiritually
viewed); the organ given for this purpose is the mind; but then—and this forms
the transition to our next division of the subject—they are “understood by the things that are made”:
Romans 1:20.
The fact is, the existence of God is incapable of direct proof.
There is, however, a fivefold line of indirect proof which corroborates
our rational intuition. By indirect proof is meant evidence which points to
God’s existence as the necessary ground and condition of the existence of
anything else. The five arguments for the divine existence are as follows:
- The Cosmological Argument,
- The Teleological Argument,
- The Anthropological Argument,
- The Ontological Argument,
- The Christological Argument.
Says Strong: “These arguments are
probable, not demonstrative. For this reason they supplement each other, and
constitute a series of evidence which is cumulative in nature. Though, taken
singly, none of them can be considered absolutely decisive, they together
furnish a corroboration of our primitive conviction of God’s existence which is
of great practical value, and is in itself sufficient to bind the moral action
of men. A consideration of these arguments may also serve to explicate the
contents of an intuition which has remained obscure and only half conscious for
lack of reflection.
“The arguments, indeed, are the efforts of the mind that already has a
conviction of God’s existence to give to itself a formal account of its belief.
An exact estimate of their logical value and of their relation to the intuition
which they seek to express in syllogistic form is essential to any proper
refutation of the prevalent atheistic and pantheistic reasoning”.
A. The Cosmological Argument, or Argument from Change
in Nature.
(Cosmological comes from the Greek kosmos, world or orderly arrangement,
i. e., of the universe).
1. Statement.
“Everything begun, whether substance or phenomenon, owes its existence
to some producing cause. The universe, at least so far as its present form is
concerned, is a thing begun, and owes its existence to a cause which is equal
to its production. This cause must be indefinitely great” (Strong). The same
author continues: “This is not properly an argument from effect to cause; for
the proposition that every effect must have a cause is simply identical and
means only that every caused event must have a cause. It is rather an argument
from begun existence to a sufficient cause of that beginning”.
2. Value.
This argument proves that the cause of the universe must be indefinitely
great. But it cannot prove:
a. Whether this cause is a cause of matter or of phenomenon only.
b. Whether it is a cause apart from the universe or one with it.
c. Whether it is a caused or an uncaused cause.
d. Whether it is finite or infinite.
e. Whether it is intelligent or unintelligent.
f. Whether it is one cause or
many causes.
B. The Teleological Argument, or Argument from Order
or Useful Collocation in Nature.
(Teleological comes from the Greek telos,
end or design).
1. Statement.
“Order and useful collocation pervading a system respectively imply
intelligence and purpose as the cause of that order and collocation. Since
order and collocation pervade the universe, there must exist an intelligence
adequate to the production of this order, and a will adequate to direct this
collocation to useful ends” (Strong).
The argument as above expressed is in syllogistic form. The major
premise expresses a primitive conviction, not invalidated:
(1) by the objection that the order and useful collocation of a system
may exist without being purposed;
(2) by the objection that they may be the result of physical laws and
forces.
The minor premise is the working principle of physical science, not
invalidated:
(1) by the objection that we do not always understand the end subserved
by the order and collocation pervading the universe;
(2) by the objection that we recognize in many things an imperfect order
and collocation—due undoubtedly to sin.
2. Value.
The teleological argument proves that there exists an intelligence and
will adequate to the contrivance of the universe in its present form.
“But”, as Strong says, “whether
this intelligence and will is personal or impersonal, creator or only
fashioner, one or many, finite or infinite, eternal or owing its being to
another, necessary or free, this argument cannot assure us”.
C. The Anthropological Argument, or Argument from
Man’s Mental and Moral Nature.
(Anthropological comes from the Greek anthropos, man).
NOTE: This is sometimes
called the “Moral Argument”, but moral is too restricted a term, since man’s
mental constitution is considered as well as his moral nature.
1. Statement.
The argument may be represented in three parts:
a. Man’s intellectual and moral
nature requires for its author an intellectual and moral Being. Mind cannot
evolve from matter, nor spirit from flesh. Consequently, a Being having both
mind and spirit must have created man.
b. Man’s moral nature proves the
existence of a holy Lawgiver and Judge. Otherwise, conscience cannot be
satisfactorily explained.
c. Man’s emotional and volitional
nature requires for its author a Being, who, as Strong says, “can furnish in Himself a
satisfying object of human affection and an end which will call forth man’s
highest activities and ensure his highest progress”. This author continues:
“Only a Being of power, wisdom, holiness, and goodness, and all these
indefinitely greater than any that we know upon the earth, can meet this demand
of the human soul. Such a Being must exist. Otherwise man’s greatest need would
be unsupplied, and belief in a lie be more productive of virtue than belief in
the truth”.
2. Value.
In the words of Strong: “It assures us of the existence of a Personal
Being, who rules us in righteousness, and who is the proper object of supreme
affection and service. But whether this Being is the original creator of all
things, or merely the author of our own existence, whether He is infinite or
finite, whether He is a Being of simple righteousness or also of mercy, this
argument cannot assure us”.
D. The Ontological Argument, or the Argument from Our
Abstract and Necessary Ideas.
(Ontological comes from the Greek on,
being).
NOTE: The three
arguments we have just considered are called a posteriori arguments, that is, from effect to cause. This one is
called a priori argument, that is,
from cause to effect.
1. Statement.
This is the most difficult of all the corroborative proofs of God’s
existence. Indeed, it is obscure—so obscure that many keen minds confess their
inability to comprehend it.
It has been likened to the Scotchman’s definition of metaphysics: “one
man talking about something of which he knows nothing to another man who does
not understand him!” The argument has three forms:
First. That of Samuel Clarke,
an English metaphysician of the 18th century:
“Space and time are attributes of substance or being. But space and time
are respectively infinite and eternal. There must therefore be an infinite and
eternal substance or Being to whom these attributes belong”.
Gillespie, a Scotch theologian, put it this way: “Space and time are
modes of existence. Bu space and time are respectively infinite and eternal.
There must therefore be an infinite and eternal Being who subsists in these
modes”.
To all this it can be replied: space and time are not attributes of
substance nor modes of existence. The argument would prove if the reasoning
were valid, that God is not mind but matter, for, according to the argument,
space and time are attributes or modes of matter.
Second. That of Descartes, a
French metaphysician of the 16th century:
“We have the idea of an infinite and perfect Being. This idea cannot be
derived from the imperfect and finite things. There must, therefore, be an
infinite and perfect Being who is the cause”. But to this it may be replied:
the argument confounds the idea of the infinite with an infinite idea; “man’s
idea of the finite is not infinite but finite, and from a finite effect we
cannot argue an infinite cause” (Strong).
Third. That of Anselm, a
schoolman of the Middle Ages:
“We have the idea of an absolutely perfect Being. But existence is an
attribute of perfection. An absolutely perfect Being must, therefore, exist”.
To this the answer is: the argument confounds ideal existence with real
existence.
“Our ideas are not the measure of external reality” (Strong). This
author continues: “A Being indefinitely great, a personal Cause, Contriver, and
Lawgiver, has been proved by the preceding arguments . . . To this one Being we
may now ascribe infinity and perfection, the idea of which lies at the basis of
the Ontological Argument— ascribe them, not because they are demonstrably His,
but because our mental constitution will not allow us to think otherwise. Thus clothing
Him with all perfections which the human mind can conceive, and these in
illimitable fulness, we have One whom we may justly call God”.
E. The Christological Argument.
(Christological comes from the Greek Christos,
the Anointed, i. e., the Messiah).
This argument rests on the following pillars:
1. The Bible must be accounted for.
2. The fulfillment of prophecy must be accounted for.
3. Miracles must be accounted for.
4. The supernatural character and divine mission of
Christ must be accounted for.
5. The influence of Christianity in the world must be
accounted for.
6. The fact of conversion must be accounted for.
And these things, severally or together, cannot be accounted for apart
from the existence of God.
“While not one of the above arguments taken by itself can be called
decisive, yet taken together they constitute a series of evidences cumulative
and conclusive. A whole bundle of rods cannot be broken, though each rod might
be broken separately” (Farr).
TOPIC TWO: THE PERSONALITY OF GOD
I. THE DEFINITION OF PERSONALITY
Personality may be defined as sentient existence possessed of
self-consciousness and the power of self-determination in view of moral ends.
NOTE: The
distinguishing difference between a human being on the one hand and a plant or
animal on the other hand is understood to be that while a human being has
self-consciousness (that is, the capacity for self-knowledge) a plant and an
animal have not.
II. THE CONSTITUENT ELEMENTS OF PERSONALITY
The constituent elements of personality are three: intellect, or the
power of thinking; sensibility, or the power of feeling; and volition, or the
power of willing. Associated with these are conscience and the freedom of
choice.
III. THE DIVINE PERSONALITY
If it can be proved that to God are ascribed operations of intellect,
sensibility, and will, then we may affirm His personality.
QUERY: Has God a
conscience?
1. Intellect: The following
passages, to cite only a few of many, ascribe to God operations of intellect:
Proverbs 15:3; Jeremiah 29:11; Acts 15:18; Hebrews 4:13.
2. Sensibility: The following
passages, to cite only a few of many, ascribe to God the power of feeling:
Psalm 33:5; 103. 8-13; Hebrews 12:29; James 5-11.
3. Volition: The following
passages, to cite only a few of many, ascribe to God the power of will: Psalm
115:3; Isaiah 46:10, 11; Daniel 4:35; Matthew 19:26.
TOPIC THREE: THE TRINITY OF GOD
I. DEFINITION OF TRINITY
The Trinity of God is His tri-personal existence as Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit.
NOTE: It is not certain
by whom the term trinity was invented as applied to the Godhead. Theophilus,
Bishop of Antioch (A. D. 168-183), seems to have been the first one to use it.
Trinity is from the Latin trinus, threefold.
II. CONTENTS OF DOCTRINE
The trinity of the Godhead involves two elements, namely:
1. The unity of God: Exodus 20:3-7; Deuteronomy 6:4, 5.
2. The distinction of persons in the Godhead: Matthew 28:19; John 14-16, 17, 20-23; II Corinthians
13:14.
NOTE: With reference to
the Godhead the word “person” must be understood in a somewhat modified sense,
namely, to signify that the distinctions between the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit are of a personal nature. Thus, the Scriptures reveal:
1. The deity of each member of the Godhead: John 1:1; Acts 5:3, 4.
2. Their mutual knowledge and love: Matthew 11:27; I Corinthians 2:10; Matthew 3:17;
John 3:35; 4:34; 5:30; Romans 8:27.
3. Their distinct yet relative offices: I Corinthians 12:4-6; Ephesians 2:18-22.
III. ORTHODOX FORMULA
The orthodox formula of the doctrine of the trinity is: “Three in One
and One in Three”.
NOTE: By maintaining
the two elements of the trinity as above stated and by holding fast to the
orthodox formula we are preserved from several serious errors, namely:
1. Sabellianism, or a modal
trinity which holds that there are but three aspects or manifestations of one
person.
2. Arianism, which holds that
the Son is subordinate to the Father.
3. Swedenborgianism, which
holds that “the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three essentials of one God,
which make one, just as the soul, body, and spirit make one in man”.
4. Tritheism, which holds to
three Gods. Midway between Sabellianism and Tritheism, which holds to three
Gods, is Trinitarianism, which is the orthodox position.
The Athanasian Creed reads: “We worship one God in trinity and trinity
in unity, neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance”.
The Century Dictionary well says: “The received doctrine of the
Christian Church among Trinitarians may be fairly stated to be that we are
taught by the Scriptures to believe that there is but one God and yet three
equal subjects in the Godhead, who are described as persons, but that we are
unable to determine in what sense these three are separate and in, what Sense
they are united in one”.
IV. SCRIPTURE PROOF OF TRINITY
As to statement the Scripture revelation of the doctrine of the trinity
is not definite and explicit, there are some that claim that I John 5:7 is an
interpolated passage. However, the proof of the trinity is conclusive and
satisfactory, because indirect and apparently incidental.
Notice the following:
1. The plural noun Elohim (God) with a singular verb bara (created) in
Genesis 1:1.
2. The expression “Let us make”
in Genesis 1:26.
3. The priestly benediction, in Numbers 6:24-27.
4. The Tersanctus or Trisagion, in Isaiah 6:3 and Revelation 4:8.
5. The formula of baptism in Matthew 28:19.
6. The Apostolic benediction in II Corinthians 13:14.
V. ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE TRINITY
The trinity is purely a matter of revelation. Moreover, it is a profound
mystery. Analogies to it in nature there are none, for it is above finite
experience and human reason, though not contrary thereto. “All attempts
therefore”, says Farr, “to represent it
are in vain, and while illustrations are sometimes useful in overcoming
objections, it is unwise to press them too far”.
The following illustrations have been suggested:
1. The fountain, stream, and river.
2. The cloud, rain, and rising mist.
3. Color, shape, and size.
4. The actinic, luminiferous, and calorific elements
in the ray of light.
5. The three infinite dimensions of space.
6. The union of intellect, sensibility, and will in
personality.
7. The thinker, the thought, and the relation between
them.
8. The thought, the breath, and the uttered word.
9. The three angles of a triangle.
10. The spirit, soul and body in man.
11. The legislative, judicial and executive functions
of government.
NOTE: Of these the
tenth in order would seem to be the best.
TOPIC FOUR: THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD
I. DEFINITION OF ATTRIBUTE
An Attribute may be defined as an essential, permanent and
distinguishing quality or characteristic, which may be affirmed of a subject;
as, the color and fragrance of a rose.
NOTE: In thought an attribute
is separable from its subject, but not so in experience; thus, we can think of
the color or fragrance of a rose as an abstract quality, apart from the
substance of the rose, but we could not take the color or fragrance away from
the rose without thereby losing the rose.
II. DEFINITION OF DIVINE ATTRIBUTES
The Divine Attributes are those essential, permanent, and distinguishing
characteristics, which may be affirmed of the Triune God.
NOTE: The divine
attributes may be considered by themselves, but they essentially inhere in God,
in the sense that if we were to take them away from God we should thereby lose
God Himself.
III. BASIS OF CLASSIFICATION
This should be on the ground of that which is determinative in the
subject. In God this is Personality.
NOTE: Theologians are
not in agreement as to the classification or number of the divine attributes.
Some include as attributes everything which may be predicated of God from the
light of nature, the deduction of reason, and the revelation of Scripture. The
alphabet could be exhausted more than once in this way.
Strong makes two great classes:
the Absolute, or Immanent, and the Relative, or Transitive attributes.
- The first class involve the mutual relations of the Godhead, as life,
personality, self-existence, immutability, unity, truth, love, holiness.
- The second class involve God’s relations to the universe, as eternity,
immensity, omnipresence, omniscience, omnipotence, veracity and faithfulness,
mercy and goodness, justice and holiness.
IV. THE DIVINE ATTRIBUTES
There are three divine attributes corresponding to the three essential
elements of personality.
- The three essential elements of personality are: Intellect,
Sensibility, and Will.
- The three divine attributes are: Omniscience, Goodness, or
Benevolence, and Omnipotence.
A. Omniscience—Infinity of knowledge.
(The word omniscience comes from two Latin words, viz: omnis signifying all, and scientia signifying knowledge).
The following passages of Scripture reveal and prove the omniscience of
God: I Samuel 16:7; I Kings 8:39; I Chronicles 28:9; II Chronicles 16:9; Job
26:6; 28:23, 24; 34:22, 25; 37:16; 42:2; Psalm 44-21; 94:11; 103:14; 119:168;
139 (whole psalm); 147:4; Proverbs 3:19, 20; 5:21; 16:2; 24:12; Isaiah 29:15;
40:13, 14, 27, 28; 41:4; 42:9; 44:7; 45:4; 46:10; 48:5, 6; Jeremiah 17:10;
23:24; 32:19; 51:15; Ezekiel 11:5; Daniel 2:20, 22, 28; Amos 4:13; 9:2-4;
Matthew 6:4, 18, 32; 10:29, 30; Acts 1:24; 2:23; Romans 8:27-29; 11:33, 34; I
Corinthians 3:20; I Thessalonians 2:4; II Timothy 2:19; Hebrews 4:13; I John
3:20.
NOTE: I. Calvin defined
omniscience as “that attribute whereby God knows Himself and all other things
in one eternal and most simple act”.
NOTE: 2. Wisdom may be
classed under omniscience. It is that whereby God produces the best possible
results by the best possible means.
B. Goodness, or Benevolences—Infinity of feeling.
Farr says: “Benevolence means
that God desires the welfare of His creatures with a desire that is supremely
powerful and pure”.
Of the divine goodness, or benevolence, there are five modes or
manifestations:
1. Holiness, or Righteousness.
Fundamentally and Scripturally, holiness and righteousness are the same.
By many this is made to be the essential attribute of God. It is not
altogether easy to define divine holiness. Thus Oehler, contrasting it with
glory, says: “Holiness is glory concealed; glory is holiness revealed”. But
this is a description, not a definition.
Strong says: “Holiness is self-affirming purity. In virtue of this attribute
of His nature, God eternally wills and maintains His own moral excellence. In
this definition are contained three elements: first, purity; secondly, purity
willing; thirdly, purity willing itself”.
Clarke says: “Holiness is the fulness of the glorious goodness of God,
consistently held as the principle of His own action, and the standard for His
creatures”.
The following passages reveal and prove the holiness of God: Exodus
15:11; Leviticus 11:44; l9:2; 20:26; 21:8; Deuteronomy 32:4; Joshua 24:19; I
Samuel 2:2; 6:20; Job 6:10; 34:10; Psalm 11:7; 22:3; 30:4; 47:8; 60:6; 89:35;
92-15; 99-3, 5. 95 119-142; Isaiah 5:16; 6:3; 43:14, 15; 47:4; 49:7; 57:15;
Hosea 11:9; Habakkuk 1:12; Matthew 5:48; Luke 1:49; John 17:11; I Peter 1:15,
16; I John 1:5; 2:20; Revelation 4:8; 6:10; 15:4.
2. Justice.
Justice has been called transitive holiness; that is, holiness dealing
with moral beings. The term righteousness is frequently employed in this sense.
Thus, someone has said, “Justice is the execution of righteousness”.
Strong says: “By justice and
righteousness we mean the transitive holiness of God, in virtue of which His
treatment of His creatures conforms to the purity of His nature, righteousness
demanding from all moral beings conformity to the moral perfection of God, and
justice visiting nonconformity to that perfection with penal loss and suffering”.
The divine justice is both individual and public, that is, it is visited
upon an individual for his private sins and upon a nation or a people for their
corporate sins: Matthew 22:12-14; 25:2-12; Amos 1:1-15; Matthew 11. 20-24;
Revelation 20:11-15.
The following passages reveal and prove the justice of God: Genesis
18:23-33; Deuteronomy 10:17; 324; Joshua 24:19; I Samuel 2:3; Job 37:23; Psalm
11:4, 7; 19:9; 33:5; 62:12; 84:11; 96:13; 103:6; 129:4; Isaiah 30; Jeremiah
9:24; Ezekiel 33:7-19; Acts 17:31; Romans 1:32; 2:2-16; 11:22; II Thessalonians
1:5-9; Hebrews 6:10; 12:22, 23, 29; I Peter 1:17; II Peter 2:9; I John 1:9;
Jude 6; Revelation 11:18; 16:5-7; 19:2.
3. Mercy.
Mercy has been defined as that “eternal principle of God’s nature which
leads Him to seek the temporal good and eternal salvation of those who have
opposed themselves to His will, even at the cost of infinite self-sacrifice”.
Farr says:
- “The grace of God is His benevolence exercised toward the guilty or
undeserving.
- “The mercy of God is His benevolence exercised toward the miserable as
well as guilty.
- “The patience of God is His benevolence exercised in forbearing to
punish the guilty without delay.
- “The wisdom of God is His omniscience guided by His benevolence in
securing the best ends by the best means”.
The following passages reveal and prove the mercy of God: Genesis
18:26-32; Exodus 15:13; 20:2, 6; 22:27; 33:19; Numbers 14:18 -20; Deuteronomy
7:9; I Kings 8:23; I Chronicles 16:34; Nehemiah 9:17, 27-31; Job 33:14-30;
Psalm 25:6; 36:5; 62:12; 69:16; 103:3-17; Isaiah 55:7-9; Jeremiah 33:8-11;
Lamentations 3:22-33; Daniel 9:4; Joel 2:13; Jonah 4:2; Matthew 18:11-14; Luke
1:50, 77, 78; Acts 3:19; Ephesians 2:4; I Timothy 1:13; Hebrews 4:16; 8:12;
James 2:13; 5:11; I Peter 1:3; II Peter 3:9.
4. Love.
Like holiness, many believe love to be the central attribute of God. It
is indeed of the very essence of His being: I John 4:16.
Strong makes love a composite of
mercy and goodness, defining the latter thus:
“Goodness is the eternal principle of God’s nature which leads Him to
communicate of His own life and blessedness to those who are like Him in moral
character. Goodness, therefore, is nearly identical with the love of
complacency; mercy, with the love of benevolence”.
The author quotes these passages: Romans 2:4; Titus 3:4; Matthew 5:44,
45; John 3:16; II Peter 1:3; Romans 8:32; I John 4:10.
The following passages, in addition, reveal and prove the love of God:
Deuteronomy 4:37; 7:7, 8, 13; 33:3; Job 7:17; Psalm 42:8; 63:3; 103:13; 146:8;
Isaiah 43:4; Jeremiah 31:3; Hosea 11:1; Malachi 1:2; John 3:16; 14:21; 16:27;
17:23, 26; Romans 1:7; 5:8; Galatians 2:20; Ephesians 2:4; Hebrews 12:6; I John
3:1; 4:8-16; Jude 20, 21.
5. Truth.
The divine truthfulness takes two forms, namely, veracity and
faithfulness.
Strong says: “By veracity and
faithfulness we mean the transitive (that is, active) truth of God in its
twofold relation to His creatures in general and to His redeemed people in
particular… In virtue of His veracity, all His revelations to creatures consist
with His essential being and with each other. In virtue of His faithfulness, He
fulfils all His promises to His people, whether expressed in words or implied
in the constitution He has given them”.
The author quotes these passages: Psalm 138:2; John 3:33; Romans 3:4;
1:25; John 14:17; I John 5:6; I Corinthians 1:9; I Thessalonians 5:24; I Peter
4:19; II Corinthians 1:20; Numbers 23:19; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18; I John 1:9;
Psalm 84:11; 91:4; Matthew 6:33; I Corinthians 2:9 (the order is that of Strong).
The following passages in addition reveal and prove the veracity of God:
Deuteronomy 32:4; I Samuel 15:29; Psalm 25:10; 33:4; 43:3; 100:5; Isaiah 25:1;
Jeremiah 10:10; John 17:17; Titus 1:2. The following passages, in addition,
reveal and prove the faithfulness of God: Genesis 9:16; 28:15; Deuteronomy 7:8,
9; I Kings 8:23, 24, 56; Psalm 36:5; 89:1; 92:1, 2; Isaiah 42:16; 51:6;
Jeremiah 29:10; 33:14; Hebrews 6:10-19; 10:23; II Peter 3:9; I John 1:9.
C. Omnipotence—Infinity of Power.
(The word omnipotent comes from two Latin words, viz: omnis signifying all, and potentia or Potens signifying power). The following passages reveal and prove
the omnipotence of God: Genesis 17:1; 18:14; Job 42:2; Isaiah 26:4; Matthew
19:26; Luke 1:37; Acts 26:8; Revelation 19:6; 31:22.
NOTE: “The omnipotence
of God must be explained in such wise as not to contradict either the nature of
God or the nature of things. It is morally impossible for God to lie or to die,
and is naturally impossible for God to make two parallel lines meet, or to
create two mountains without a valley between them” (Farr).
TOPIC FIVE: THE PERFECTIONS OF GOD
There are several modes of the divine existence, usually classed as
divine attributes, which are better regarded as divine perfections. They are:
spirituality, unity, independence, immutability, eternity, and omnipresence.
I. SPIRITUALITY
Like personality, spirituality is fundamental to the Being of God: John
4:24. It is not an attribute but rather a mode of God’s complete and tripartite
existence. Says Farr: “God is something
more than a condition of being like space or time. He acts as well as exists.
He is an Agent, an Actor, a Living Being, and Spirit Life: John 6:63; Genesis
1:3; Psalm 139:7; John 4:24; Exodus 20:4; Isaiah 40:26; Romans 1:20; Colossians
1:15; I Timothy 1:17. In Psalm 139:7 and John 4:24, God’s omnipresence seems to
be accounted for by His spirituality. Matter presupposes the existence of space
as a condition of its existence, but spirit does not. There is no evidence that
spirit fills any part of space, or that the Infinite Spirit is dependent on
space”.
II. UNITY
There is but one God. The trinity must be held in harmony with the
singleness of the divine essence or substance: Deuteronomy 6:4; II Samuel 7:22;
Psalm 86:10; Isaiah 43:10; Matthew 19:17; I Corinthians 8:6; Galatians 3:20; I
Timothy 2:5.
III. INDEPENDENCE
Independence may be affirmed of God with respect to four things:
1. His existence, which is underived and absolute: Exodus 3:14; John 5:26.
2. His knowledge: Hebrews 4:13.
3. His action: Genesis 1:1; Acts 17:24.
4. His happiness: Ephesians 1:3; I Timothy 6:15, 16.
IV. IMMUTABILITY
Immutability means unchangeableness. “God always remains what He is
without development or change. He cannot change for the better, because He is
best; nor for the worse, because He would thereby cease to be perfect” (Farr):
Psalm 102:27; Isaiah 40:28; Malachi 3:6; James 1:17; Hebrews 1:12.
V. ETERNITY
Eternity means existence without beginning or end: Psalm 90:2. See also
Deuteronomy 32:40; Isaiah 41:4; I Timothy 1:17; II Peter 3:8; Revelation 10:6.
“Some suppose that the idea of timeless being is also involved in the word (i.
e., eternity). It seems implied in John 3:13, 8:58, and James I:17, and
existence in time also seems inseparable from imperfections and limitations”.
He continues: “On the other hand, the Scriptures generally speak of God as
if His life were divisible into periods of past and future, and our minds are
unable to conceive of real existence independent of time. Eternity is infinity
in duration” (Farr).
VI. OMNIPRESENCE
“The Scriptures represent God as filling immensity. He is present
everywhere and there is no point in the universe where He is not” (Farr). God
is omnipresent both in His works and in His personality: I Kings 8:23; II
Chronicles 6:18; Isaiah 43:2; 66:1; Jeremiah 23:24; Amos 9:2; Psalm 139:7-12;
Acts 17:27, 28; Matthew 28:20.
NOTE: The atheist
wrote, “God is nowhere”. But his little daughter read it, “God is now here”.
And it converted him. The omnipresence of God must be held in harmony with His
transcendence and immanence.
- Divine transcendence means that God is above His works;
- Divine immanence means that He is within them.
Again, immanence must be distinguished from pantheism. One who holds to
the divine immanence separates God from His works; but the pantheist identifies
God with His works.
TOPIC SIX: THE NAMES OF GOD
In our modern occidental life, proper names, particularly names of
persons, have no special significance, except perhaps Indian names and those of
some other primitive tribes. But in the ancient East (and to some extent in the
modern East) it was otherwise.
In the Bible, proper names are invested with peculiar significance.
- The Lord appears unto Jacob, and he calls the place “Bethel”, “the house of God”: Genesis 28:16-19.
- Rachel dies and calls her son “Benoni”,
“the son of my sorrow”: Genesis
35:18.
Again, the same person or place often had two names.
- The ancient name of Bethel was Luz, signifying “almond tree”.
- Jacob called Benoni, Benjamin, meaning “son of my right hand”: Genesis 28:19; 35:18.
In His names God reveals His character and His manifold relations to His
creatures. New crises or peculiar needs among His people called forth fresh
names; and there can be no emergency among believers to which some name of God
does not apply. “Even human nature and sin but evoke new and fuller revelations
of the divine fulness”.
The principal names of God are nine, falling into three classes of three
names each and suggesting, many think, the trinity.
FIRST
There are three primary names: God, LORD, and Lord.
I. God
The Hebrew is El, Elah, or Elohim. See Genesis 1:11. El means strength or the Strong One. Alah, the verb from which Elah and Elohim come, means to bind oneself by an oath, i. e., faithfulness.
Elohim is a plural noun with singular meaning; in it the trinity is latent. See
Genesis 1:26, 27; 3:22.
II. LORD
The Hebrew is Yahwe, English
form Jehovah. See Genesis 2:4 where Yahwe
Elohim occurs. Yahwe comes from
the verb havah signifying both to be
and to become, and means “the self-existent One who reveals Himself”, or, “the
Coming One”. See Exodus 3:13-17. Also Genesis 4:16.
- Elohim is the creation name
of God;
- Yahwe the covenant-keeping
or redemptive name.
Accordingly, Elohim occurs in
Genesis 1 and Yahwe in Genesis 2.
LORD, representing Yahwe, is printed
in capitals.
NOTE: Jehovah is a
hybrid word, composed of the consonants of the unpronounceable sacred name
represented by Yahwe and the vowels of the Hebrew word for master.
III. Lord
The Hebrew is Adon or Adonai. See Genesis 15:2. Adonai, master, is applied to both God
and man; when applied to man it is written with a small letter l. Adonai
means master, or husband. See Genesis 24:9, 10, 12; 18:12.
To us Christ is both Master and Husband. See Hosea 21:6, 20; John 13:13;
II Corinthians 11:2, 3.
SECOND
There are three names compounded with El: Almighty God, Most High, or Most High God, and Everlasting God.
I. Almighty God
The Hebrew is El Shaddai. See
Genesis 17:1. El signifies, of course, the Strong One. The meaning of Shaddai is uncertain. “The God who is enough”, “the All-sufficient One”, “the All-bountiful One” have been
suggested.
It is quite probable that Shaddai
comes from the Hebrew noun shad
signifying breast, and “invariably used in Scripture for a woman’s breast”:
Genesis 49:25; Job 3:12; Psalm 22:9; Song of Solomon 1:13; 4-5; 7:3, 7, 8; 8:1,
8, 10; Isaiah 28:9; Ezekiel 16:7.
“Shaddai therefore means
primarily ‘the breasted.’ God is Shaddai
because He is the Nourisher, the Strength-giver and so, in a secondary sense,
the Satisfier, who pours Himself into believing lives. As a fretful,
unsatisfied babe is not only strengthened and nourished from the mother’s
breast, but also is quieted, rested, and satisfied, so El Shaddai is that name
of God which sets Him forth as the Strength-giver and Satisfier of His people”.
Both fruitfulness and chastening are in this word: Genesis 17:1-8; 28:3,
4; Hebrews 11:12; Ruth 1:20; John 15:2; Hebrews 12:10.
II. Most High or Most High God
The Hebrew is El Elyon, Elyon signifying highest See Genesis
14:17-24. The distinctive meaning of the name is given in verse 19, “the most high God, possessor of heaven and
earth”. El Elyon seems to be the
name of God known by and in reference to the Gentile nations: Deuteronomy 32:8;
Daniel 3:26; 4:17, 24, 25, 32; 5:18, 21; see also Isaiah 14:13, 14; Matthew
28:18; II Samuel 22:14, 15 Psalm 9:2-5; 21:7; 47-2-45 57-2, 3 5 82-6 8; 83:18;
91:1-12.
III. Everlasting God
The Hebrew is El Olam. See
Genesis 21:33. Olan expresses eternal
duration: Psalm 90:2. It is the equivalent of the Greek axon, signifying age or dispensation. Olam also expresses the idea of secrecy or hidingness. “The
Everlasting God is therefore that name of Deity in virtue of which He is the
God whose wisdom has divided all time and eternity into the mystery of successive
ages or dispensations. It is not merely that He is everlasting, but that He is
God over everlasting things”: Ephesians 1:9, 10; 3:3-6.
THIRD
There are three names compounded with Yahwe: LORD God, Lord LORD, and LORD of Hosts.
I. LORD God
The Hebrew is Yahwe Elohim.
See Genesis 2:4. This divine name is used, first, of God’s relationship to man:
- As Creator, Genesis 2:7-15;
- As Master, Genesis 2:16, 17;
- As Ruler, Genesis 2:18-24; 3:14-19, 22-24;
- As Redeemer, Genesis 3:8-15, 21.
And second, of God’s relationship to Israel, Genesis 24:7; Exodus 3:15,
18; Deuteronomy 12:1.
II. Lord LORD
The Hebrew is Adonai Yahwe.
See Genesis 15:2. This compound name emphasizes the first part rather than the
second part, that is, the thought of Master: Genesis 15:1, 8; Deuteronomy 3:24;
9:26; Joshua 7:7.
III. LORD of Hosts
The Hebrew is Yahwe Sabaoth.
See I Samuel 1:3. Sabaoth signifies
host or hosts.
The word occurs with special reference to warfare or service. It is used
of Jehovah as manifesting His power and glory: Psalm 24:10. It occurs in the
Old Testament mostly in the crises of Israel’s need. Thus, in his extremity the
psalmist cries out, “The Lord of hosts
is with us; the God of Jacob is our refuge”: Psalm 46:7, 11.
By hosts, “primarily the angels are meant, but the name gathers into
itself the idea of all divine or heavenly power as available for the needs of
God’s people”.
Yahwe is
compounded with seven names or words, thus:
1. Jehovah-jireh, “the LORD will provide”: Genesis 22:13,
14.
2. Jehovah-rapha, “the LORD that healeth”: Exodus 15:26.
3. Jehovah-nissi, “the LORD our banner”: Exodus I7-8-I5-
4. Jehovah-shalom, “the LORD our peace”, or “the LORD send
peace”: Judges 6:24.
5. Jehovah-ro’i, “the LORD my shepherd”: Psalm 23.
6. Jehovah-tsidkenu, “the LORD our righteousness”: Jeremiah
23:6.
7. Jehovah-shammah, “the LORD
is present”: Ezekiel 48:35.
