John Calvin on the Unity and Distinction of the Trinity

"The Scriptures demonstrate that there is some distinction between the Father and the Word, the Word and the Spirit; but the magnitude of the mystery reminds us of the great reverence and soberness which ought to be employed in discussing it.  It seems to me, that nothing can be more admirable than the words of Gregory Nazianzen: 'I cannot think of the unity without being irradiated by the Trinity: I cannot distinguish between the Trinity without being carried up to the unity.'  Therefore, let us beware of imagining such a Trinity of persons as will distract our thoughts, instead of bringing them instantly back to the unity.  The words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit certainly indicate a real distinction, not allowing us to suppose that they are merely epithets by which God is variously designated from his works.  Still they indicate distinction only, not division.  The passages we have already quoted show that the Son has a distinct subsistence from the Father, because the Word could not have been with God unless he were distinct from the Father; nor but for this could he have had his glory with the Father.  In like manner, Christ distinguishes the Father from himself when he says that there is another who bears witness of him (John 5:32; 8:16).  To the same effect is it elsewhere said, that the Father made all things by the Word.  This could not be, if he were not in some respect distinct from him.  Besides, it was not the Father that descended to the earth, but he who came forth from the Father; nor was it the Father that died and rose again, but he whom the Father sent.  This distinction did not take its beginning at the incarnation: for it is clear that the only Begotten Son previously existed in the bosom of the Father (John 1:18).  For who will dare to affirm that the Son entered his Father's bosom for the first time, when he came down from heaven to assume human nature?  Therefore, he was previously in the bosom of the Father, and had his glory with the Father.  Christ intimates the distinction between the Holy Spirit and the Father, when he says that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, and between the Holy Spirit and himself, when he speaks of him as another as he does when he declares that he will send another Comforter; and in many other passages besides (John 14:6; 15:26; 14:16)" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.17).

John Calvin on One God, One Faith, and One Baptism

"As God has manifested himself more clearly by the advent of Christ, so he has made himself more familiarly known in the three persons.  Of many proofs let this one suffice.  Paul connects together these three, God, faith, and baptism, and reasons from the one to the other, i.e., because there is one faith he infers that there is one God; and because there is one baptism he infers that there is one faith. Therefore, if by baptism we are initiated into the faith and worship of one God, we must of necessity believe that he into whose name we are baptized is the true God.  And there cannot be a doubt that our Savior wished to testify, by a solemn rehearsal, that the perfect light of faith is now exhibited, when he said, 'Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit' (Matt 28:19), since this is the same thing as to be baptized into the name of the one God, who has been fully manifested in the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.  Hence it plainly appears, that the three persons, in whom alone God is known, subsist in the divine essence.  And since faith certainly ought not to look hither and thither, or run up and down after various objets, but to like, refer, and cleave to God alone, it is obvious that were there various kinds of faith, there behooved also to be various gods.  Then, as the baptism of faith is a sacrament, its unity assures us of the unity of God.  Hence also it is proved that it is lawful only to be baptized into one God, because we make a profession of faith in him in whose name we are baptized.  What, then, is our Savior's meaning in commanding baptism to be administered in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, if it be not that we are to believe with one faith in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Hoy Spirit?  But is this anything else than to declare that the Father, Son, and Spirit, are one God?  Wherefore, since it must be held certain that there is one God, not more than one, we conclude the the Word and Spirit are of the very essence of God" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.16).

John Calvin on the Holy Spirit as the True Jehovah

"Nor does the Scripture, in speaking of [the Holy Spirit], withhold the name of God.  Paul infers that we are the temple of God, from the fact that 'the Spirit of God dwelleth in us' (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; and 2 Cor 6:16).  Now it out not to be slightly overlooked, that all the promises which God makes of choosing us to himself as a temple, receive their only fulfillment by his Spirit dwelling in us.  Surely, as it is admirably express by Augustine (Epist. 66 ad Maximinum), 'were we ordered to make a temple of wood and stone to the Spirit, inasmuch as such worship is due to God alone, it would be a clear proof of the Spirit's divinity; how much clearer a proof in that we are not to make a temple to him, but to be ourselves that temple.'  And the apostle says at one time that we are the temple of God, and at another time, in the same sense, that we are the temple of the Holy Spirit.  Peter, when he rebukes Ananias for having lied to the Holy Spirit, said, that he had not lied unto men, but unto God.  And when Isaiah had introduced the Lord of Hosts as speaking, Paul says, it was the Holy Sprit that spoke (Acts 28:25, 26).  No, words uniformly said by the prophets to have been spoken by the Lord of Hosts, are by Christ and his apostles ascribed to the Holy Spirit.  Hence it follows that the Spirit is the true Jehovah who dictated the prophecies" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.15).

John Calvin on Christ's Eternal Godhead (Part 2 of 2)

"It was [Jesus Christ] who arose and pitied Zion - he who claimed for himself dominion over all nations and islands.  And why should John have hesitated to ascribe the majesty of God to Christ, after saying in his preface that the Word was God? (John 1:14).  Why should Paul have feared to place Christ on the judgment-seat of God (2 Cor 5:10), after he had so openly proclaimed his divinity, when he said that he was God over all, blessed for ever? And to show how consistent he is in this respect, he elsewhere says that 'God was manifest in the flesh' (1 Tim 3:16).  If he is God blessed forever, he therefore it is to whom alone, as Paul affirms in another place, all glory and honor is due.  Paul does not disguise this, but openly exclaims, that 'being in the form of God (he) thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation' (Phil 2:6).  And lest the wicked should clamor and say that he was a kind of spurious God, John goes farther, and affirms, 'This is the true God, and eternal life.'  Though it ought to be enough for us that he is called God, especially by a witness who distinctly testifies that we have no more gods than one, Paul says, 'Though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth (as there be gods many, and lord many), but to us there is but one God' (1 Cor 8:5,6).  When we hear from the same lips that God was manifest in the flesh, that God purchased the church with his own blood, why do we dream of any second God, to whom he makes not the least allusion?  And there is no room to doubt that all the godly entertained the same view.  Thomas, by addressing him as his Lord and God, certainly professes that he was the only God whom he had ever adored (John 20:28)" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.11).

John Calvin on Christ's Eternal Godhead (Part 1 of 2)

"Though the apostles spoke of [Jesus] after his appearance in the flesh as Mediator, every passage which I deduce will be sufficient to prove his eternal Godhead.  And the first thing deserving of special observation is that predictions concerning the eternal God are applied to Christ, as either already fulfilled in him, or to be fulfilled at some future period.  Isaiah prophesies, that 'the Lord of hosts' shall be 'for a stone of stumbling, and for a rock of offense' (Isa 8:14).  Paul asserts that this prophecy was fulfilled in Christ (Rom 9:33), and therefore declares that Christ is that Lord of Hosts.  In like manner, he says in another passage, 'We shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ.  For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.'  Since in Isaiah God predicts this of himself (Isa 45:23), and Christ exhibits the reality fulfilled in himself, it follows that he is the very God, whose glory cannot be given to another.  It is clear also, that the passage from the psalms (Ps 68:19) which he quotes in the Epistle to the Ephesians, is applicable only to God, 'When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive' (Eph 4:8).  Understanding that such an ascension was shadowed forth when the Lord exerted his power, and gained a glorious victory over heathen nations, he intimates that what was thus shadowed was more fully manifested in Christ.  So John testifies that it was the glory of the Son which was revealed to Isaiah in a vision (John 12:41; Isa 6:4), though Isaiah himself expressly says that what he saw was the majesty of God.  Again, there can be no doubt that those qualities which, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, are applied to the Son, are the brightest attributes of God, 'Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, ' etc., and, 'Let all the angels of God worship him' (Heb 1:6).  And yet he does not pervert the passages in thus applying them to Christ, since Christ alone performed the things which these passages celebrate" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 1.13.11).

John Calvin on the Distinction of Persons in the Trinity

"By person, then, I mean a subsistence [a state of existence] in the divine essence [inward nature]- a subsistence which, while related to the other two [that is, the other two persons of the Trinity], is distinguished from them by incommunicable properties.  By subsistence we wish something else to be understood than essence.  For if the Word [Jesus] were God simply and had not some property peculiar to himself, John could not have said correctly that he had always been with God.  When he adds immediately after, the the Word was God, he calls us back to the one essence.  But because he could not be with God without dwelling in the Father, hence arises that subsistence, which, though connected with the essence by an indissoluble tie, being incapable of separation, yet has a special mark by which it is distinguished from it.  Now, I say that each of the three subsistences while related to the others is distinguished by its own properties.  Here relation is distinctly expressed, because, when God is mentioned simply and indefinitely the same belongs not less to the Son and Spirit than to the Father.  But whenever the Father is compared with the Son, the peculiar property of each distinguishes the one from the other.  Again, whatever is proper to each I affirm to be [incapable of being shared], because nothing can apply or be transferred to the Son which is attributed to the Father as a mark of distinction.  I have no objections to adopt the definition of Tertullian, provided it is properly understood, 'That there is in God a certain arrangement or economy, which makes no change on the unity of essence.' -Tertullian, Adversus Praxeam" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.6).

John Calvin on the Use of Words to Fight Heresy

"The early Christians, when harassed with the disputes which heresies produced, were forced to declare their sentiments in terms most scrupulously exact in order that no indirect [deception] might remain to ungodly men, to whom [double meaning] of expression was a kind of hiding-place.  Arius confessed that Christ was God, and the Son of God; because the passages of Scripture to this effect were too clear to be resisted, and then, as if he had done well, pretended to concur with others.  But, meanwhile, he ceased not to give out that Christ was created, and had a beginning like other creatures.  To drag this man of wiles out of his lurking-places, the ancient church took a further step, and declared that Christ is the eternal Son of the Father, and consubstantial (of one and the same substance, essence, or nature) with the Father.  The [heresy] was fully disclosed when the Arians began to declare their hatred and utter detestation of the term ὁμοούσιος (homoousios).  Had their first confession, i.e., that Christ was God, been sincere and from the heart, they would not have denied that he was consubstantial with the Father.  Who dare charge those ancient writers as men of strife and contention, for having debated so warmly, and disturbed the quiet of the church for a single word?  That little word distinguished between Christians of pure faith and the blasphemous Arians.  Next Sabellius arose, who counted the names of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as almost nonentities; maintaining that they were not used to mark out some distinction, but that they were different attributes of God, like many others of a similar kind.  When the matter was debated, he acknowledged his belief that the Father was God, the Son God, the Spirit God; but then he had the evasion ready, that he had said nothing more than if he had called God powerful and just and wise.  Accordingly, he sang another note, i.e., that the Father was the Son, and the Holy Spirit the Father, without order or distinction.  The worthy doctors who then had the interests of piety at heart, in order to defeat this man's dishonesty, proclaimed that three subsistences were to be truly acknowledged in the one God.  That they might protect themselves against tortuous craftiness by the simple open truth, they affirmed that a Trinity of person subsisted in the one God, or (which is the same thing) in the unity of God" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion).

John Calvin on the Use of Words Not Found in Scripture

"Though heretics may snarl and the excessively [demanding and critical unreasonably find fault] at the word person as inadmissible, in consequence of its human origin, since they cannot displace us from our position that three are named, each of whom is perfect God, and yet that there is no plurality of gods, it is most uncandid to attack the terms which do nothing more than explain what the Scriptures declare and sanction.  'It were better,' they say, 'to confine not only our meanings but our words within the bounds of Scripture, and not scatter about foreign terms to become the future seed-beds of brawls and dissensions.  In this way, men grow tired of quarrels about words; the truth is lost in altercation, and charity melts away amid hateful strife.'  If they call it a foreign term, because it cannot be pointed out in Scripture in so many syllables, they certainly impose an unjust law - a law which would condemn every interpretation of Scripture that is not composed of other words of Scripture.  But if by foreign they mean that which, after being idly devised, is superstitiously defended - which tends more to strife than edification - which is used either out of place, or with no benefit which offends pious ears by its harshness, and leads them away from the simplicity of God's word, I embrace their soberness with all my heart.  For I think we are bound to speak of God as reverently as we are bound to think of him.  As our own thoughts respecting him are foolish, so our own language respecting him is absurd.  Still, however, some medium must be observed.  The unerring standard both of thinking and speaking must be derived from the Scriptures: by it all the thoughts of our minds, and the words of our mouths, should be tested.  But in regard to those parts of Scripture which, to our capacities, are dark and intricate, what forbids us to explain them in clearer terms - terms, however, kept in reverent and faithful subordination to Scripture truth, used sparingly and modestly, and not without occasion?  Of this we are not without many examples.  When it has been proved that the church was impelled, by the strongest necessity, to use the words Trinity and person, will not he who still [vehemently attacks] against novelty of terms be deservedly suspected of taking offense at the light of truth, and of having no other ground for his [violent denunciation], than that the truth is made plain and transparent?"  (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion)

John Calvin on the Three Persons of God

"While [God] proclaims his unity, he distinctly sets it before us as existing in three persons.  These we must hold, unless the bare and empty name of Deity merely is to flutter in our brain without any genuine knowledge.  Moreover, lest any one should dream of a threefold God, or think that the simple essence is divided by the three persons, we must here seek a brief and easy definition which may effectually guard us from error.  But as some strongly [rail] against the term person as being merely of human invention, let us first consider how far they have any ground for doing so.  When the apostle calls the Son of God 'the express image of his person' (Her 1:3), he undoubtedly does assign to the Father some subsistence in which he differs from the Son.  For to hold with some interpreters that the term is equivalent to essence (as if Christ represented the substance of the Father like the impression of a seal upon wax), were not only harsh but absurd.  For the essence of God being simple and undivided, and contained in himself entire, in full perfection, without partition or [being diminished], it is improper, no ridiculous, to call it his express image χαρακτήρ (character).  But because the Father, though distinguished by his own peculiar properties, has expressed himself wholly in the Son, he is said with perfect reason to have rendered his person (hypostasis) manifest in him.  And this aptly accords with what is immediately added, i.e., that he is 'the brightness of his glory.'  The fair inference from the apostle's words is, that there is a proper subsistence (hypostasis) of the Father, which shines [radiantly] in the Son.  From this, again it is easy to infer that there is a subsistence (hypostasis) of the Son which distinguishes him from the Father.  The same holds in the case of the Holy Spirit; for we will immediately prove both that he is God, and that he has a separate subsistence from the Father.  This, moreover, is not a distinction of essence, which it were [lacking reverence for God] to multiply.  If credit, then, is given to the apostle's testimony, it follows that there are three persons (hypostases) in God" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion).

J.C. Ryle on Christ as All in the Religion of All True Christians

"I wish to guard myself against being misunderstood.  I hold the absolute necessity of the election of God the Father, and the sanctification of God the Spirit, in order to effect the salvation of everyone that is saved.  I hold that there is a perfect harmony and unison in the action of the three People of the Trinity, in bringing any man to glory, and that all three cooperate and work a joint work in his deliverance from sin and hell.  Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.  The Father is merciful, the Son is merciful, the Holy Spirit is merciful.  The same Three who said at the beginning, 'Let us create,' said also, 'Let us redeem and save.'  I hold that everyone who reaches heaven will ascribe all the glory of this salvation to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, three People in one God.

"But, at the same time, I see clear proof in Scripture, that it is the mind of the blessed Trinity that Christ should be prominently and distinctly exalted, in the matter of saving souls.  Christ is set forth as the Word, through whom God's love to sinners is made known.  Christ's incarnation and atoning death on the cross are the great cornerstone on which the whole plan of salvation rests.  Christ is the way and door, by which alone approaches to God are to be made.  Christ is the root into which all elect sinners must be grafted.  Christ is the only meeting-place between God and man, between heaven and earth, between the Holy Trinity and the poor sinful child of Adam.  It is Christ whom God the Father has sealed and appointed to convey life to a dead world (John 6:27).  It is Christ to whom the Father has given a people to be brought to glory.  It is Christ of whom the Spirit testifies, and to whom He always leads a soul for pardon and peace.  In short, it has 'pleased the Father that in Christ all fullness should dwell' (Col. 1:19).  What the sun is in the skies of heaven, that Christ is in true Christianity" (Holiness, J.C. Ryle).

The Doctrine of the Trinity

Ephesians 1:10 (ESV)
¹⁰ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

There are some doctrines in our Christian faith that are difficult to understand.  One of these is the doctrine of the Trinity.  How can one God be in essence three distinct persons?  Our limited minds cannot comprehend such depth.  Those who are looking to prove Christianity as a farce point to this doctrine.  After all, the word Trinity isn't even found in Scripture.  Though the term Trinity is not found in God's Word does not make the doctrine untrue for it summarizes the truth of God as three distinct Persons yet one God.

TableTalk explains this doctrine well.

We see in [Ephesians 1:3-6] that the Father planned redemption, having predestines His people to eternal life in Christ.  The Song of God carried out the work necessary to secure the salvation our Father planned and promised.  Jesus Christ, the God-man who is the perfect union of the second person of the Trinity with our humanity, shed His blood to bring us forgiveness and, due to His obedience, is exalted as King over all (Ephesians 1:7-12).  God the Holy Spirit seals the work of Christ to us, applying the benefits of salvation and marking us off as our Creator's special possession (Ephesians 1:13-14).  Each person works distinctively to bring salvation, yet harmony pervades the process, for the works of the Trinity are undivided - all of the persons of the Godhead work together to achieve the same end and never stand at cross purposes with one another.  God, therefore, is irreducibly three in person - Father, Son, and Spirit - and one in essence.

We can stand firm in our faith that God the Father, Son, and Spirit are one, working together for the will of the Father.  May His name be glorified by our lives as we grow and are sanctified in Him.

The Holy Spirit is in the Trunk

1 Corinthians 2:13 (ESV)
And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.

Baptist have many traditions that we hold on to dearly: baptism by immersion, communion as a remembrance. And other traditions we don't really admit to. One of these traditions is to put the Holy Spirit on the back burner. We would never admit to doing this, but in reality the Holy Spirit does not play an intricate part in our daily walk. I truly think this is because we have a history of fighting against the charismatic movement. Yes, the my charismatic brothers tend to focus too much on the Holy Spirit and put the Father and the Son on the back burner of the Trinity. But as baptists we place Christ in the driver's seat, reduce the Father to a back-seat driver, and put the Spirit in the trunk hoping that no one in the car hears the muffled voice in the back. Again, as baptists we hold the Trinity high in speech, but in action we reduce the role of the Spirit.

But we can no longer do this. I am not suggesting we grab some tambourines and banners and use them on Sunday morning services(although it might help people get out of their comfort zone). I am suggesting that we teach and preach the Trinity as it is: three equally influential persons of one God.

The Spirit gave the disciples the power to preach the word after Christ was gone (John 20:22). The Spirit gave the disciples the ability to speak in different tongues to add 3000 people the kingdom of God at Pentecost (Acts 2). It is the spiritual rebirth brought upon by baptism of the Spirit that brings salvation (John 3:5). These are just a few examples of the work of the Spirit in history and our lives.

As baptist we must change our understanding of the Spirit from a person of the Trinity that isn't much use today to a power person of the Trinity that changes lives, guides our lives, and speaks to the Father on our behalf.

Made in the image of God or the Holy Court?

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." Genesis 1:26a(ESV)

This is something that I have struggled over since my Old Testament class in seminary with Dr. Gordon Harris. In my opinion there are really two views to this passage. First, God is addressing the Holy Court. The word "us" refers to God addressing all those a part of His royal court. Second, God is addressing the Trinity. Here the word "us" refers to the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ. There may be other options, but these are the only two I have heard.

Let's take them one at a time. If the word "us" refers to the Holy Court then by inference male and female would be created not only in the image of God but also of angels or other beings (like the creatures with eyes all over their body). Now, I'm no Hebrew scholar and the two commentaries I have looked at seem to avoid the issue all together (or maybe they think it is so obvious they don't feel the need to address it), but why would God tell the entire court that he is going to make man in their image? Especially since the next verse says we were created in the image of God. So, even though Gordon Harris may know more about the Old Testament than I do I get a sense that he is wrong.

If the word "us" refers to the Trinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit then the passage would make more sense. We are not only made in the image of the Father, but also the rest of the Trinity. We are not made in the image of everyone in the Holy Court, only God. So, I believe that this is the earliest reference to the Trinity in the scriptures.

Again, I'm not a Hebrew scholar. So disagree with me if I am wrong. What do you think?