← Back to sermon library

You can turn in your confessions 
to chapter 2. Remember, it's what we are studying, 
what we have been studying in the Second London Baptist Confession 
of Faith of 1677 forward slash 1689. We're now at the paragraph concerning 
the Trinity, paragraph 3. I'll read paragraphs 1, 2, and 
3, though, as we get into this important study of the Blessed 
Trinity. So, paragraphs 1, 2, and 3. The Lord our God is but one living 
and true God, whose subsistence is in and of himself, infinite 
in being and perfection, whose essence cannot be comprehended 
by any but himself, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, 
parts, or passions, who only hath immortality dwelling in 
the light which no man can approach unto. who is immutable, immense, 
eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, every way infinite, most holy, 
most wise, most free, most absolute, working all things according 
to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will for his 
own glory, most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant 
in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and 
sin, the rewarder of them that diligently seek him, and with 
all most just and terrible in his judgments, hating all sin, 
and who will by no means clear the guilty. God, having all life, 
glory, goodness, blessedness in and of himself, is alone in 
and unto himself all sufficient. not standing in need of any creature 
which he hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only 
manifesting his own glory in, by, unto, and upon them. He is 
the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to 
whom are all things, and he hath most sovereign dominion over 
all creatures, to do by them, for them, or upon them whatsoever 
himself pleaseth. In his sight all things are open 
and manifest, His knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent 
upon the creature. So as nothing is to him contingent 
or uncertain, he is most holy in all his counsels, in all his 
works, and in all his commands. To him is due from angels and 
men whatsoever worship, service, or obedience as creatures they 
owe unto the creator, and whatever he is further pleased to require 
of them. In this divine and infinite being, 
there are three subsistences the Father, the Word or Son, 
and Holy Spirit, of one substance, power, and eternity, each having 
the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided. The Father 
is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding. The Son is eternally 
begotten of the Father, the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father 
and the Son, all infinite, without beginning. Therefore, but one 
God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished 
by several peculiar relative properties and personal relations, 
which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our 
communion with God and comfortable dependence on Him." So we're 
now at paragraph three, a study in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. 
And just by way of a very brief review, we have looked at the 
confession in the stuff of paragraphs one and two, the essence and 
the attributes of God, focusing first off on the unity of God. And a qualification there, because 
when we study the unity of God, we are not studying unity to 
the exclusion of Trinity. When we talked about the unity 
of God, we had occasion to note that that has to do with the 
unity of singularity, which simply means that God's essence cannot 
be divided, that God's essence cannot be multiplied, and maybe 
more recognizable that God is, the triune God of Holy Scripture, 
is the only living and true God. There is only one God, the living 
and true God revealed in the Holy Scriptures. We noted as 
well that there is the unity of simplicity, that God is without 
parts. Some of the rest of the confession 
in paragraphs one and two speaks to that reality, that God is 
without parts. He is not the sum of his attributes. He is not composed of perfections, 
but rather is identical with all of those things that we attribute 
to him. God is love. And so when we study 
unity, we are not saying that God is not triune, but rather 
those things that we have already stated. And that will come up 
more as we study. As we study paragraph three, 
it must be understood that all of those things that we looked 
at with regards to God in his essence and attributes are true 
of each of the three persons of the Trinity. In other words, 
omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience are true of all the 
three persons of the blessed triune God. It's not the case 
that the Father is omnipotent, the Son is omnipresent, and the 
Spirit is omniscient, or that the Father only has those three 
things. communicates them in a small 
measure to the other two or some strange idea, but rather that 
all three have everything. And what is true of everything 
in paragraphs one and two is true of the three that are brought 
out in paragraph three. The importance of the doctrine 
of the Trinity, some introductory matters here before we look at 
the sum and substance of paragraph three there, but the importance 
of the doctrine of the Trinity. essential and foundational truth 
in Christianity and for Christianity. If Christianity is to truly be 
Christianity, it must be radically Trinitarian. It must be explicitly 
Trinitarian. It must be evangelically Trinitarian. It must be apologetically Trinitarian. And it must be polemically Trinitarian. In other words, as we go about 
our Christian lives, and maybe more specifically within the 
context of church and worship, our church and worship or Christianity 
is to be explicitly Trinitarian. We are not to somehow whisper 
the Trinity as we gather together as a church, but we are to be 
outwardly and explicitly Trinitarian, recognizing father, son, and 
Holy Spirit. It is to be evangelically Trinitarian, 
that is, in our proclamation of the Gospel, we are preaching 
concerning the saving perfections of the Triune God, Father, Son, 
and Holy Spirit. It is to be, we are to be, Christianity 
is to be apologetically Trinitarian, that is, we defend the faith 
as it concerns Trinitarian theology. We are to defend against those 
attacks of the heretics, even within the ranks of those who 
might call themselves Christian, we are to defend the doctrine 
of the Trinity, and we are to be polemically Trinitarian. That 
is, we attack the strongholds of heresy, those who would be 
anti-Trinitarian. We tear down the daggons, if 
you will, of modalism, of tritheism, of subordinationism, so that 
we ensure the pristine doctrine of the triune God is upheld and 
believed. It is a foundational doctrine, 
and so therefore it is not an ivory tower doctrine. It's not 
something that only the doctors of divinity are to be concerned 
with. But if it is the case, as our 
confession states, that the doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation 
of all our communion with God and comfortable dependence on 
Him, then the doctrine of the Trinity is as much for the shepherd 
boy as it is for the wise men from the east. The doctrine of 
the Trinity is as much for the seller of linen and the Macedonian 
corrections officer as it is for the doctors of divinity. 
And so it is foundational. Therefore, it is not the stuff. 
It is high and lofty, but it is for the mechanic as much as 
it is for the Doctor of Theology. This doctrine of the Trinity 
is now and has been before and no doubt always will be under 
attack. From the outset of Christianity 
in the first century to our present day, there have been those who 
have sought to destroy the doctrine of the Trinity that have taught 
against it. We have seen within Christendom, 
if we can use that term, people deviating from and attacking 
and distorting and confounding the doctrine of the Trinity as 
it is set forth in the Holy Scriptures and that will no doubt come out 
or will have occasion to allude to various heresies as we work 
through the doctrine of the Trinity. So that's the importance of the 
doctrine of the Trinity. Secondly, the classical and reformed 
pedigree of the particular Baptists. There is a heritage that the 
particular Baptists uphold and perpetuate in their formulation 
in paragraph three. First off, the classical pedigree. And when we say classical, we're 
talking about the creedal formulations of the Trinity in the early church. 
The Baptists do not depart from the creedal history of the first 
five centuries of the church, but rather uphold and reiterate 
the formulations of the ancient divines. In paragraph three, 
we can hear the ancient divines speaking to us through the language 
upheld here in this paragraph by the Baptists. The stuff of 
the Nicene Council, the Constantinopolitan Creed, the Chalcedonian Creed 
in 451, the Athanasian Creed as well. We hear the language 
coming through and upheld affirmed by the Baptists. So we need to 
see that the Baptists did not say, OK, those old and ancient 
divines did not formulate it properly. Let's revise and reformulate. But rather, they recognized the 
brilliance and the genius that the fathers had in formulating 
and defending the doctrine of the Trinity from the scriptures, 
and so upheld and perpetuated those truths that they set forth 
and formulated. The reformed pedigree. The Baptists 
do not differ from their Presbyterian and congregational contemporaries, 
but are theologically and terminologically in step with the Westminster 
and Savoy documents, as well as the reformers that preceded 
in the 16th century. So they are in line with, they 
have that classical and reformed pedigree. There is a consistency, 
a continuation of this doctrine the outset of Christianity in 
the first century up until this point, and by virtue of the fact 
that we're now studying it in the year 2014, it continues. Thirdly, the technical and terminological 
improvements. Kids, terminological simply means 
talking about terms, the use of words and the use of phrases. 
So the technical and terminological improvements of the reformed 
Baptists, there are additions and changes compared with the 
Westminster Confession of Faith and with the Savoy Declaration. 
Not theological changes, they're not improving anything theologically, 
but they're providing or expanding and bringing out nuances with 
regards to the Trinity. The paragraph three in the Baptist 
Confession here is twice the size as the Westminster Confession 
of Faith. They add in this divine and infinite 
being, there are three subsistences, and they change persons to subsistences. And we'll look at that in a little 
bit more detail later. They include the last statement 
that the Savoy added, which doctrine of the Trinity is, et cetera. 
And there are some other phrases. There are some other phrases 
and words that they add here. And in fact, it is almost a verbatim 
repetition of the first Baptist confession of faith of 1644, 
and maybe more particularly, the revised edition of 1646. 
So just to note that. There are technical and terminological 
improvements that the particular Baptists made. but not theological 
differences. And some things to consider as, 
remember, when we opened up with the doctrine of God a number 
of Sundays ago, we talked about interpretive helps and aids as 
we study the God of Holy Scripture. Here are some things specifically 
with regards to the Trinity that we can keep in the back of our 
minds. First, the foundation of the doctrine is the Holy Scripture. Contrary to the attacks of anti-Trinitarians, 
contrary to the attacks of those who would claim to be Christian 
and yet deny the Trinity, it is not the case that the doctrine 
of the Trinity finds its foundations in the formulations of the early 
church. In other words, those divines 
of, let's say, the Nicene Council, didn't run or rail against primitive 
and pristine Christianity and now saying God is The nature 
of God is such that in this divine and infinite being there are 
three persons or subsist subsistences But rather the foundation of 
the Holy Scripture or rather the foundation of the doctrine 
of the Trinity is the Holy Scriptures not the early church that in 
for in some way deviated from pristine Christianity the early 
church fathers in formulating the creeds were upholding and 
opening up the Holy Scriptures as it speaks to the Trinity in 
order to oppose those who were contra the Scriptures at this 
point. And in the Scriptures we find 
three foundational assertions regarding the Trinity. Three 
foundational assertions regarding the Trinity and these are as 
summarized by James White in his book, The Forgotten Trinity. 
The first foundation is this, Monotheism the stuff of Deuteronomy 
6 for the first Corinthians 8 6 other passages but monotheism there 
is but one living and true God the second foundation is there 
are three distinct persons So the first foundation monotheism 
the second foundation in this divine and infinite being there 
are three subsistences and then the third foundation is the persons 
are co-equal and co-eternal. So really, the foundations, those 
foundations are found. In fact, that could be a nice 
little outline of chapter two. Monotheism, paragraphs one and 
two, and the attributes of that one God, and then paragraph three, 
the persons, the distinct persons and their co-equality and co-eternality. Secondly, the revelatory development 
or disclosure of the doctrine of the Trinity. The revelatory 
development or disclosure of the doctrine of the Trinity. 
And kids, that just means, whenever we talk revelatory, that just 
simply means God's revelation to us, generally speaking. So 
God has revealed, revelatory, the revelatory disclosure of 
the Trinity. And this is bobbing on this point, 
the revelatory development of the Trinity in the scriptures. 
While the true development of the Trinitarian ideas of the 
Old Testament is found in the New Testament, the seeds that 
developed into the full flower of New Testament Trinitarian 
revelation are already planted in the Old Testament. In the 
economy of the New Testament, more specifically, in the events 
of the incarnation of the Son and the outpouring of the Spirit, 
this one true God reveals himself as Father, Son, and Spirit. In 
other words, we don't have the full flower of the Trinity revealed 
in Genesis chapter 1. We don't have that full flower 
revealed to us, but rather the seeds are planted by divine design 
in Old Covenant revelation and then are fully revealed in the 
New Testament in that full flower that blooms as we see in the 
incarnation and in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day 
of Pentecost. That doesn't mean that somehow 
ontologically God was not a Trinity prior to the Incarnation, but 
much rather that in terms of God revealing himself, he's free 
to reveal himself, his nature and his being as he sees fit 
in the Holy Scriptures. One man has put it this way, 
that the doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament is like 
a chamber dimly lighted. When we get to the New Testament, 
the light of the New Testament shines, and it doesn't reveal 
anything that was not there before. It doesn't introduce new furniture 
and new aspects to the chamber, but rather shines the light with 
more clarity on what was already there in the Old Testament. So 
a chamber dimly lighted, the Trinity in the Old Testament. 
The New Testament, the light is turned on, and we see what 
was no doubt there before in seed form. the propriety and 
utility of extra-biblical language. Propriety simply means the rightness 
or the appropriateness of something. So the propriety of extra-biblical 
language, the creeds, and our reformed confession uses language 
that we don't find in the scriptures, but it is useful and it is right 
to do so in order to formulate and preach the doctrine and as well in order to combat 
those who contradict. So the propriety and utility 
of extra-biblical language. And then lastly, the abiding 
relevance of Trinitarian apologetics. That simply means that we are 
to defend the Trinity. There is the necessity to defend 
the Trinity until Christ comes again. Because there have always 
been anti-Trinitarians out there lurking in the weeds and they're 
in the churches, they're out there seeking to tear away the 
stuff of our communion with God and comfortable dependence on 
him. The time of the writing, you see, in the 17th century, 
we don't have the time of the writing of our confession, we 
don't have the, you know, the landscape of Christianity wasn't 
such that everybody just skipped along affirming Trinitarianism. The confession is delivered to 
us in the landscape of anti-Trinitarian theology. Prior to the penning 
of this confession and actually contemporaneous to at the same 
time as the first London Confession of Faith, there were those such 
as Paul Best and John Biddle who were preaching a Unitarian 
God, a God that is not triune, saying the sort of the stuff 
of Sassanianism before them, that there is one God, the Father, 
and there is Christ or the Son of another substance or created, 
and the Spirit some sort of impersonal force. That may be simplistic, 
but the point is at the time of the writing of the confession 
there were those who claimed to be pristine Christians who 
were saying that the Trinity is a farce and if you believe 
this doctrine you are not believing in the God of Holy Scripture. 
And so there was a necessity to formulate and to uphold the 
ancient and pure doctrine of the Trinity in the face of such 
attacks. John Owen, of the Savoy Declaration 
and Francis Channel of the Westminster Assembly were two prominent Trinitarian 
apologists who attacked Best and Biddle and those like them 
in defending the true doctrine of the Trinity. So the confession, 
the framers of the confession are writing recognizing ancient 
heresy leading up to their particular time targeting those in their 
own era who were anti-Trinitarian, and no doubt for the prosperity 
of the church, those who follow, providing a formulation that 
we, 400 years, well not 400 years, but however many years later 
from 1689, if anybody wants to do the quick math, 325, 325 years 
later we have this deposit of truth and apologetic in order to affirm 
with great faith the doctrine of the Trinity. So let's move 
in then to the stuff of the paragraph. The stuff of the paragraph. And 
there are five things that we'll look at. Five things that we 
will look at. First, the doctrine of the Trinity 
summarily contained. The doctrine of the Trinity summarily 
contained. And we see that in the very first 
statement. In this divine and infinite being, 
There are three subsistences, the Father, the Word or Son, 
and Holy Spirit. So there we have the doctrine 
of the Trinity summarily contained. Notice first the oneness and 
the threeness of God are clearly stated there at the beginning 
of paragraph three. In this divine and infinite being, 
the oneness of God is upheld. It's singular in this divine 
and infinite being. In this one being that is God, 
the oneness of God is upheld. We do not have, in the case of 
the Trinity, or we do have, let's say positively, in the case of 
the Trinity, one in one way and three in another way. Negatively 
speaking, we cannot say with the Trinity that we have one 
in one way and then three, in that same way. In other words, 
we don't say one being that is God and three beings that are 
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. We don't say the 
one person of God who is also in three persons, Father, Son, 
and Holy Spirit, but rather we have one in one way in this divine 
and infinite being and then three in another way in that divine 
and infinite being there are three subsistences so we do not 
have one God yet three gods we do not have one being but also 
three beings we do not have one essence and three essences remember 
the essence undivided and the essence not multiplied and we 
do not have one person and three persons but quite clearly we 
have one God in three persons blessed Trinity in this divine 
and infinite being there are three subsistences secondly The 
three are identified by name. The three are identified by name. This is Richard Barcelos quoting 
Hodge. As Hodge said, we must realize 
that these titles, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are not different 
names of the same person in different relations, but of different persons. And then Barcelos continues, 
the names are not descriptions of the same person existing in 
different modes or manifestations, but official titles for distinct 
persons who share the same essential properties of divinity. This 
sharing of the essential properties of divinity is asserted in the 
very next section of the Confession. The fact that there are three 
persons within the Godhead can be seen in the following text, 
which we will look at in a moment. But this must be understood, 
we identify three persons or God reveals himself in three 
persons. And in that we don't have three 
modes of the same being or three modes of the same person. We 
don't have three manifestations of the one being or one person, 
but rather we have three distinct persons in this one divine and 
infinite being. Why do we need to, well hopefully 
we already covered that in the introduction, but why do we need 
to study this? Because churches are being planted 
that are unitarian, that are oneness, that deny the Trinity 
today. A number of years ago, James White debated a fellow 
by the name of Roger Perkins, I believe a oneness Pentecostal. 
And he, In his introduction, he said 
that I'm planning a church, or when I return from Australia, 
where the debate was held, I'm going to be planning another 
oneness church. That's horrible. There are people 
who call themselves Christian out there that reject the Trinity. 
Remember, we said earlier that Christianity is to be radically 
Trinitarian. It must be explicitly and evangelically 
so. Well, in the evangel of the oneness 
Pentecostals, they are explicitly anti-Trinitarian, radically anti-Father, 
Son, and Holy Spirit, as defined by the historic church. And so 
this is most certainly relevant. So when we talk about persons, 
we're not talking about that modally, where God becomes, or 
the Father becomes the Son in the incarnation, and then the 
Son becomes the Spirit at the outpouring of the Spirit on the 
day of Pentecost, or something like that. Or that that one God 
is in three manifestations. He manifests himself as father, 
he manifests himself as son, and he manifests himself as spirit. 
Those are heretical and damnable, but rather we have three persons 
distinct and distinguished by several peculiar relative properties 
and personal relations in the divine and infinite being God. So the three are identified by 
name. First off, we have the father. 
And we need to understand that when we study the father or consider 
the father with respect to the trinity, he is not named such 
by virtue of his relation to creation or his creatures. So when we talk about the father 
as it respects the trinity, we're not calling the father the father 
because of his creative fatherhood over humanity. and all things. The Bible does use that language 
with regards to divine fatherhood, Acts 17, 28. We are not referring 
to the father's fatherhood with regards to his theocratic relationship 
to the nation of Israel. In the Old Testament, that simply 
means God as the ruler and the king over his son Israel. That's not where we get the name 
Father as it respects the Trinity. As well, the redemptive fatherhood 
of the Father in the New Covenant, for example, when we get to passages 
such as Romans 8, 15 and Galatians, in Galatians 4, 4 to 7, where 
it talks about the fact that we've been redeemed and we've 
been given the adoptions as sons, whereby through the Spirit we 
cry out, Abba, Father. That is not how we see in the 
Trinity the father or how the father gets his name with respect 
to the study of God. Though all of those things are 
true, he is a creative father. He is a theocratic father. He 
was a theocratic father. He is a redemptive father. We are his sons by adoption through 
Jesus Christ the Lord. But rather, the father, as we 
study the Trinity, is the father in, as Bavinck says, a unique 
metaphysical sense. A unique metaphysical sense. 
When we say metaphysical, we might equate that with ontological, 
which, again, is studying the nature and the being and the 
existence of things. So when we talk about being the 
Father in a unique metaphysical sense, we could say, as it pertains 
to the being of God, the Father is named the Father. And what 
do we mean by that? Well, simply, as we get later 
down in the paragraph, the Father is the Father by virtue of his 
relationship to the Son, and reciprocally so. So again, the 
Father is not in the Trinity, the Father, because of the identification 
that he is the father creatively, theocratically, or redemptively, 
but rather metaphysically so. Because we read, the father is 
of none, neither begotten nor proceeding, the son is eternally 
begotten of the father. So the father is the father by 
virtue of that inner Trinitarian relationship to the son. We see 
this, we see that with regards to the Godhead in John 14, 6 
to 13. in other places, but in John 14, 6 to 13, and in John 
17, 25 and 26. Remember when Jesus is praying 
with respect to the father, I and my father are one. And so we 
have the fatherhood of God specifically in relation to the son. We have 
the person, and this is Barcelos again, the personhood of the 
father is proved from the following texts. Matthew 6, 9, and Matthew 
28, 19 to 20, he has a name or a personal identity. In that 
Great Commission, we see that baptistic formula, if you will, 
the manner in which a recipient of the ordinance of baptism is 
to be baptized is in the name of the father and of the son. and of the Holy Spirit. We have 
the fact that God knows his personality in Psalm 139 1-4 and in Hebrews 
4.13 and then he loves in John 3.16 and 14.21 and then he makes 
choices. This is just with regards to 
his personality Romans 9.18, Ephesians 1.4 and 1st Peter 1.1-2. 
So we have the Father, we have the Word or Son. not name such son because of 
his incarnate birth or as the Messiah. So again, as with the 
father, the son does not gain his name with respect to the 
being of God and the three subsistences in this divine and infinite being 
by virtue of him being born of the Virgin Mary in the incarnation 
or by virtue of him being the anti-typical son of God in his 
messianic role to which the typical sonhood of Israel pointed forward. All of that to say that the Son 
of God gets his name or that the Son of God is such by virtue 
of or in a metaphysical sense by nature and from eternity, 
John 118 and John 316. We have there the sonhood of 
the Son, not by virtue again of something that happens at 
or after the incarnation, but by virtue of an eternal truth 
within the divine and infinite being that is God. So the Father 
is the Father in that metaphysical sense, by virtue of the nature 
and the being of God, and so is the Son. We have that self-same 
idea regarding the personhood of the Son proved in texts such 
as Matthew 1, 21, 28, 19 to 20. We do have the fact of his knowing, 
his loving, and his making of choices, as Barcelos brings out 
to argue for his personality. In other words, there are those 
errors in the history of the Church, and that abide today, 
that would say that we have, in Oneness Pentecostalism, for 
example, we have God the Father and the Son is not real in a 
pre-incarnate state, but rather the Logos is simply an idea in 
the mind of God that is brought to bear in the incarnation and 
made flesh in the incarnation. So when it speaks of, in this 
heresy, when it speaks of the word became flesh, it wasn't 
the son of God eternally abiding in this divine and infinite being. But rather, it was this eternal 
idea in the mind of God, impersonal, that was made flesh in the incarnation. And so when we study the Son, 
it is that we are studying, or the word of God, John 1.1, it 
is that we are studying a personal subsistence in the Trinity that 
was and is eternally so. There is personhood, both with 
regards to the Father and with regards to the Son. Now the spirit. So we have father, the word or 
son, and we have the spirit and the spirit is not named such 
because of some sort of distinction whereby he is spirit as opposed 
to the father and the son, the son, you know, the son, the father 
and the son are something else, but the Holy Spirit is spirit 
ontologically. So as opposed to father and son, 
but rather, He owes his name, as Bobbink says, to his special 
mode of subsistence. Spirit actually means wind or 
breath. So just as the father gets his 
name by virtue of him begetting eternally the son, and the son 
gets his name by virtue of being eternally begotten of the father, 
the spirit gets his name by virtue of being eternally proceeding 
from the Father and the Son. So that's why we see here Father, 
Son, and Holy Spirit, and we see their names, really the reality 
or the foundation of their names given in this statement, the 
Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding, the Son is eternally 
begotten of the Father, the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father 
and the Son. The Spirit gets his name by virtue 
of that distinction. proceeding from the father and 
the son. The son gets his name by virtue 
of this distinction. He is eternally begotten of the 
father. And the father of none gets his distinct name by being 
the one who begets or the one who eternally generates the son. Now, again, if there are any 
questions after this, kids, words, statements, anything, write them 
down. I'll happily answer them for you. Adults, same thing. When we close in prayer in 20 
minutes, if there are any questions, please feel free to ask. As we 
work through these things, there are important things. And I don't 
want anything to get lost in the technical language. I don't 
want anything to get lost in these important formulations 
that we study. So if there are any questions, 
by all means, please ask when we close after prayer. A note 
on the language of subsistences as it's found in this first statement. Note that we read, in this divine 
and infinite being, there are three subsistences. In the other 
two confessions that preceded the London Baptist, we have the 
language of, in fact, I have it here. I didn't print it out, 
but let me just read it for you, because the language is theologically 
the same, but it is different when we read it. In the Westminster 
and the Savoy, we read at the beginning of paragraph three, 
in the unity of the Godhead, there be three persons. In the unity of the Godhead, 
there be three persons. And here in ours, we have in 
this divine and infinite being, there are three subsistences. 
I would submit that the Baptist Confession is better in the sense 
that it improved terminologically the language with respect to 
the Trinity. It is not theologically different, 
but it is a better and an improved formulation. This is Sam Renahan 
on subsistences versus person. Why the change? While there is 
no doctrinal difference, the term subsistence is more technical 
and carries less linguistic baggage. Person carries with it the linguistic 
baggage of human personhood connected to human essence, while subsistence 
can express better the unity and trinity of God because it 
connects to the singular and unique essence of deity. In other 
words, when the word person is used, though we can use it and 
though we can sing it, when it is used, perhaps in a person 
that might not understand or be able to distinguish, they 
have a preconception in their mind of human personhood and 
individuality separate from one thing. In human personhood, we 
all share or we all have the essence of human beingness, if 
you will, but we are all separate individuals and we do not all 
have wholly the essence of human beingness. We're separate. We 
don't have a unity. But in the infinite, in the infinitude 
of God, the eternal and divine and infinite being, This reality 
of personhood is not to be conceived as just a greater and exalted 
version of human personhood, but rather it is much different. 
In fact, Boevinck says there is no similar meaning in person 
as used with father, son, and spirit as with human persons. And so subsistence is just better 
language, if you will, in order to bring out this, the unity 
and the trinity of God, in connecting a person, whether father, son, 
and spirit, to the divine singular and unique essence of deity. So the Baptists chose to use 
that word. Again, Sam Renahan, a careful 
examination and comparison of the Second London Baptist Confession 
and Westminster Confession yields a variety of differences and 
nuances, some more obvious than others. One such difference is 
found in the second chapter of God and of the Holy Trinity, 
The London Confession is considerably more detailed and technical in 
its formulation of the doctrine of God, which is not to imply 
any lack of orthodoxy on the part of the Westminster Confession 
of Faith. This technicality is seen in 
the Baptist Confession's use of subsistence instead of person. So if there are any questions 
about that afterwards, just let me know. But to sum it up, Bob 
Incke says, in the dogma of the Trinity, the word person simply 
means that the three persons in the divine being are not modes, 
but have a distinct existence of their own. So as opposed to 
a modalism where there is no real definable distinction between 
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, there is in person a distinction 
made to put away those notions of modality or manifestation. with regards to a unitarian conception 
of God. God truly is God in three persons, 
blessed Trinity. Secondly, we have, so that's 
the doctrine of the Trinity summarily contained in that first statement. Secondly, we have the unity and 
the equality of the Trinity maintained. Notice the confession continues, 
of one substance, power and eternity, each having the whole divine 
essence yet the essence undivided. So we have the unity and the 
equality of the Trinity maintained. They are Father, Son, and Holy 
Spirit of one substance. There has been in the history 
of heretical Christianity the notion that they are not of one 
substance. For example, that the Father 
is of one substance, but the son is of either a like or a 
different substance. There is battles in the early 
church over language and over concepts and over theological 
conclusions with regards to the Trinity. Is the Trinity, or do 
we have in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all three of one substance? Yes, historic Christianity says, 
and so do our particular Baptist forefathers, Or do we have the 
father of one substance greater, and then the son of either a 
like or a different substance, and then the spirit likewise? 
So the confession upholds the necessary commitment that in 
the distinction of the persons, we nevertheless have the fact 
that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are of one substance. We would see this in that all 
of the persons are called God, in that all of the persons are 
called God. For example, first, in 1 Corinthians 
8.6, we have the Father. In 1 Corinthians 8.6, we could 
see the persons called God. So one of the ways that we would 
go to the Bible and say that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit 
are of one substance would simply be to go to passages in the scriptures 
where we see that all the persons are called God, in 1 Corinthians 
8 and verse 6. Yet for us there is one God, 
the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him, and one Lord 
Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom 
we live. So we have there the Father and 
the person of the Father called God. If we turn to John 1-1, 
a passage that should be very well known by each and every 
one of us, we have the person of the Son called God. In John 1-1, we have, in the 
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word 
was God. And in that simple statement 
in that sent in that glorious sentence. We have the eternality 
of this person of the divine and infinite being God set forth 
in the beginning was the word that the word had an eternal 
preexistence before coming into the flesh. And in time and in 
history, we have the eternal preexistence of the sun or the 
word. We have a distinction between 
the word and the Father, the Word or Son, and the Father, 
and the Word was with God. And even in that distinction, 
we nevertheless have communion. There is distinction, the Word 
was with God, but we have the with. There is distinction and 
there is intimate communion. And then we have the fact that 
the Word was, by His very nature, God. Notice again, and the Word 
was God. So we have most certainly The 
reality that the father is called God and the son is called God. 
We also have the son called God in Romans 9 5. Wonderful text 
speaking to the deity of the sun. In Romans 9 and verse 5 
of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, 
Christ came, who is overall the eternally blessed God. Amen. And then the deity of the Spirit 
set forth in one among other places, but set forth in Acts 
5, 3 to 4. In Acts 5, 3 to 4. So these are 
texts that argue for this reality that the Father, the Son, and 
the Holy Spirit are of one substance. In Acts chapter 5, we have in 
verses 3 and 4, but Peter said, Ananias, why has Satan filled 
your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit? keep back part of the 
price of the land for yourself? While it remained, was it not 
your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing 
in your heart? You have not lied to men, but 
to God." So you see, the identification of the fact that Ananias lied 
to the Holy Spirit, and then the affirmation of deity there 
with respect to the Holy Spirit, because he closes that particular 
portion by saying, you have not lied to men, but to God. So there we had, did I say Paul? 
I didn't mean to say Paul, but anyway. We have here the statement, 
the Holy Spirit, the Ananias has lied to the Holy Spirit. 
And then the further identification that that was lying to God or 
that the Holy Spirit is by virtue of that recognition. God most 
high so we have the fact of the unity and equality of the Trinity 
maintained in the fact that the confession sets forth That they 
are all of one substance Argued for the from the fact that the 
scriptures reveal Father Son and Holy Spirit as God They are 
of one power So if we were to talk about another defense for 
the deity of Christ and the Spirit, but also for the triune God and 
the doctrine of the Trinity, we have the fact that Father, 
Son, and Spirit are of one substance, but then they're also of one 
power. Creation, for example. The creative power of God is 
attributed to Father, to Son, and to Holy Spirit. It's attributed 
to the Father in Hebrews 1, 1 to 2. Through the agency of the 
Son, no doubt, but nevertheless the Father creates and as well 
in Genesis chapter 1, 1 and 2. We have the Son and His creative 
power in Colossians 1, 16 and in John 1 to 3. In fact, right 
after that portion that we read in John 1, 1, We have the creative 
power of the sun brought out in the statement that follows 
1.1 in verse 1.3. In verse 3 of John 1, we read 
this, all things were made through him and without him, nothing 
was made that was made. We have the creative power of 
the spirit in Genesis 1 and verse 2 and in Job 33.4. And you see, 
the doctrine of the Trinity, remember we said earlier, it 
might not have its full blossoming as a flower in the Old Covenant, 
in the Old Testament, but rather the seeds are most certainly 
planted and they are present. The chamber is dimly lighted, 
but it is lighted. And in Genesis 1 verses 1 and 
2, we have the triune God at work in creation. In the beginning 
God created the heavens and the earth the earth was without form 
and void and Darkness was on the face of the deep and the 
spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters then God 
said Let there be light we have father word and spirit in the 
first three sentences of the Bible and so we have this reality 
that father son and spirit are of one substance and They are 
of one power and we see that exercised in creation for only 
one example. We see it also exemplified in 
redemption, don't we? We see the acts of redemption 
and we look at a place like Ephesians chapter 1, we see God the Father, 
God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit active in salvation. They have redemptive power. They 
are all at work in the salvation of sinners. We see some of those 
same things attributed to all three persons of the Trinity 
with respect to salvation. Well, sometimes we would see, 
for example, with regeneration, we see the Spirit as the one 
who is active in that irresistible grace. We do have as well the 
Father making alive those in Christ Jesus who were once dead 
in their trespasses and sins. So we have power exercised in 
creation and redemption. And then the confession says 
as well that they are of one eternity. Father, Son, and Holy 
Spirit are of one eternity. You may know that it's 1025, 
so we'll probably continue with it. I had sort of anticipated 
that we may have to continue with the Trinity I tend to do 
that a lot, possibly because I don't have time management 
skills with the presentation of material. But hopefully you 
see at least this, that the weight of the subject matter sometimes 
demands a couple Lord's Days. Perhaps once we've gotten some 
of this terminological language in the background, it will still 
be there that we can pull from it. We can mine the scriptures 
as we see the deity of the sun and the deity of the spirit affirmed. 
and other things made clear by the Holy Scriptures with regards 
to this doctrine. But as we continue for the next 
five minutes, the three persons of the triune God are of one 
eternity. The father is eternal, Exodus 
3.14 and Psalm 90 verse 2. The son is eternal, Micah 5.2. Remember what Micah 5.2 says 
in that prophecy of the coming king who would be born, that 
he is from of old. from everlasting, the one who 
would be born in Bethlehem, whose goings forth are from old, from 
everlasting. John 8, 58, we see the eternality 
of the Son. Other places to be sure. We see 
the eternality of the Spirit in Hebrews 9, 14. So the idea 
to the confession here is that we do not have in the persons 
of the Trinity one substance of the Father and then a like 
or different substance in the Son and the Spirit. But rather, 
we have all three of one substance, power and eternity. Thirdly, we have, and we'll start 
this and continue next time, but thirdly, we have the personal 
distinctions expressed and qualifications asserted. The personal distinctions 
expressed and qualifications asserted. Notice, after we read, 
of one substance, power and eternity, each having the whole divine 
essence, yet the essence undivided, we read, the Father is of none, 
neither begotten nor proceeding. The Son is eternally begotten 
of the Father, the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and 
the Son. There we have the personal distinctions 
expressed, and then we have qualifications asserted, or we might say qualifications 
reasserted, all infinite without So the distinctions, the personal 
distinctions with regards to the triune God are seen first 
with the father. He is of none, neither begotten 
nor proceeding. So how do we distinguish the 
father from the son and from the spirit? Well, we distinguish 
the father from the son and the spirit from the fact that the 
father is not begotten and he does not proceed from either. 
from any of the members of the blessed triune. So that is the 
distinction of the father. We see how is the son distinguished 
from the father and the spirit. The son is distinguished from 
the father in the fact that the son is begotten of the father, 
eternally so. He's distinguished from the spirit 
in that he does not proceed from the father. and he does not proceed 
from the spirit. How is the spirit distinguished 
from the father and the son? He is neither, he is not begotten, 
but he does proceed from the father and the son. And when 
we get to this statement, but distinguished by several peculiar 
relative properties and personal relations, we are not to see 
in that the redemptive work of the triune God in time and in 
history. In other words, the distinctions 
between the persons of the triune God are not to be seen in their 
redemptive acts in history, but rather, their distinctions are 
to be seen in their relationships to one another. We do most certainly 
have in the Bible, and as you see, this is, as we noted a number 
of Sundays ago, first principle in the holy scriptures it is 
foundational to what follows in the confession and so when 
we get to of God's decree we are to have chapter 2 in the 
back of our minds when we get to Providence and when we get 
to all those aspects of redemption in light of the fall of man and 
and man's recovery by divine grace, we are to see those ad 
extra, or those outside of God acts of redemption that the Father, 
Son, and Spirit engage in, and truly we read of that. But those 
things that distinguish them in those several peculiar relative 
properties and personal relations, the confession is not talking 
about their redeeming activity at that point, but simply what 
preceded. The Father is of none, neither 
begotten nor proceeding. The Son is eternally begotten 
of the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and 
from the Son." So next time, we will continue with that, the 
personal distinctions expressed and qualifications asserted. 
We'll bring out, and we'll have time to do so, some more quotes 
from Spurgeon, from Gill, and other men with regards to the 
the practical benefits of this doctrine of the Trinity. Kids 
and everybody else, we spent some time in some technical and 
terminological language with regards to the Trinity. And this 
will come up perhaps less so as we continue, but still so. 
And it's important to set that foundation so that we do not 
entertain and do not speak to others heresy with regards to 
the doctrine of the Trinity, but rather that we uphold that 
in this divine and infinite being, There are three subsistences, 
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, of one substance, 
power and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet 
the essence undivided. Well, let's pray, and then if 
there are any questions, please feel free to ask them. Heavenly 
Father, we rejoice that we can study doctrine. We can rejoice 
that we can study you, Lord God. We thank you for revealing yourself 
in the Holy Scriptures. We thank you for revealing yourself 
as a divine and infinite being, wherein we have Father, Son, 
and Holy Spirit of one substance, power and eternity. And we do 
pray that you'd help us to glory in this truth, that our Christianity 
would be radically Trinitarian, that we would acknowledge even 
daily Father, Son and Holy Spirit and rejoice in you, our God. And we do pray that you'd go 
with us now into worship, that you would help us to worship 
you in spirit and in truth, that we would, Lord God, rejoice in 
having been saved by amazing and victorious grace and seek 
to return to you the praises and the honor that is due your 
most high name. And it's in Christ's precious 
name that we pray. Amen.