John Calvin - Holy Spirit - Trinity Explained

History knows that the word TRIAS was adopted from paganism AFTER Arius began his teachings. Here is some Calvin to prove that these are RHETORICAL DEVICES to try to explain the false teaching. It is a fact that Calvin had given little thought to the nature of the SON and SPIRIT until after Servetus gave a much more scholarly definition. Calvin was never known as an ecclesiastical person but a civil leader and could not tolerate any challenges.

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 impious to multiply. If credit, then, is given to the Apostle's testimony, it follows that there are three persons (hypostases) in God.

That word meaning something as a foundation or assurance: Servetus argued that only Christ was a hypostases because only Christ was made known to the world.

The Latins having used the word Persona to express the same thing as the Greek "hupostatis", it betrays excessive fastidiousness and even perverseness to quarrel with the term. The most literal translation would be subsistence. Many have used substance in the same sense. Nor, indeed, was the use of the term Person confined to the Latin Church.

Substance is NEVER a PERSON but something on which faith subsists: a foundation.

For the Greek Church in like manner, perhaps, for the purpose of testifying their consent, have taught that there are three "prosopa" (aspects) in God. All these, however, whether Greeks or Latins, though differing as to the word, are perfectly agreed in substance.

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Matt 28:18
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name (singular) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Mt.28:19

Father, Son and Spirit are not three names but three aspects of God which are never separated.

3. The expression "Trinity" and "Person" AID the interpretation of Scripture and are therefore admissible

Now, then, though heretics may snarl and the excessively fastidious carp 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 he 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 inveighs against novelty of terms be deservedly suspected of taking offence at the light of truth, and of having no other ground for his invective, than that the truth is made plain and transparent?

4. The church has regarded expressions like "Trinity", "Person," etc., as necessary to unmask false teachers

Such novelty (if novelty it should be called) becomes most requisite, when the truth is to be maintained against false accusers who evade it by quibbling. Of this, we of the present day have too much experience in being constantly called upon to attack the enemies of pure and sound doctrine. These slippery snakes escape by their swift and tortuous windings, if not strenuously pursued, and when caught, firmly held. Thus 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 subterfuges might remain to ungodly men, to whom ambiguity 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 with the Father.

Again:
Your attitude should be the kind that was shown us by Jesus Christ, Phil 2:5LIV
who, though he was God, did not demand and cling to his rights as God, Phil 2:6
but laid aside his mighty power and glory, taking the disguise of a slave and becoming like men. Phil 2:7
And he humbled himself even further, going so far as actually to die a criminal's death on a cross. Phil 2:8

The impiety was fully disclosed when the Arians began to declare their hatred and utter detestation of the term "homo-ousios".

Had their first confession, viz., 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 sung another note, viz., 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 it is man's dishonesty, proclaimed that three subsistence 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 Persons subsisted in the one God, or (which is the same thing) in the unity of God.

5. Limits and necessity of theological terms

Where names have not been invented rashly, we must beware lest we become chargeable with arrogance and rashness in rejecting them. I wish, indeed, that such names were buried, provided all would concur in the belief that the Father, Son, and Spirit, are one God, and yet that the Son is not the Father, nor the Spirit the Son, but that each has his peculiar subsistence.

I am not so minutely precise as to fight furiously for mere words. For I observe, that the writers of the ancient Church, while they uniformly spoke with great reverence on these matters, neither agreed with each other, nor were always consistent with themselves. How strange the formula used by Councils, and defended by Hilary! How extravagant the view which Augustine sometimes takes! How unlike the Greeks are to the Latins! But let one example of variance suffice. The Latins, in translating "homo-ousios" used "consubstantialis" (consubstantial,)

intimating that there was one substance of the Father and the Son, and thus using the word Substance for Essence. Hence Jerome, in his Letter to Damasus, says it is profane to affirm that there are three substances in God.

But in Hilary you will find it said more than a hundred times that there are three substances in God. Then how greatly is Jerome perplexed with the word Hypostasis! He suspects some lurking poison, when it is said that there are three Hypostases in God. And he does not disguise his belief that the expression, though used in a pious sense, is improper; if, indeed, he was sincere in saying this, and did not rather designedly endeavour, by an unfounded calumny, to throw odium on the Eastern bishops whom he hated. He certainly shows little candour in asserting, that in all heathen schools "ousia" is equivalent to Hypostasis - an assertion completely refuted by trite and common use.

More courtesy and moderation is shown by Augustine, (DeTrinity. lib. 5 c. 8 and 9,) who, although he says that Hypostasis in this sense is new to Latin ears, is still so far from objecting to the ordinary use of the term by the Greeks, that he is even tolerant of the Latins, who had imitated the Greek phraseology.

The purport of what Socrates says of the term, in the Sixth Book of the Tripartite History, is, that it had been improperly applied to this purpose by the unskilful. Hilary (De Trinitat. lib. 2) charges it upon the heretics as a great crime, that their misconduct had rendered it necessary to subject to the peril of human utterance things which ought to have been reverently confined within the mind, not disguising his opinion that those who do so, do what is unlawful, speak what is ineffable, and pry into what is forbidden.

Shortly after, he apologises at great length for presuming to introduce new terms. For, after putting down the natural names of Father, Son, and Spirit, he adds, that all further inquiry transcends the significance of words, the discernment of sense, and the apprehension of intellect. And in another place, (De Conciliis,) he congratulates the Bishops of France in not having framed any other confession, but received, without alteration, the ancient and most simple confession received by all Churches from the days of the Apostles. Not unlike this is the apology of Augustine, that the term had been wrung from him by necessity from the poverty of human language in so high a matter: not that the reality could be thereby expressed, but that he might not pass on in silence without attempting to show how the Father, Son, and Spirit, are three.

The modesty of these holy men should be an admonition to us not instantly to dip our pen in gall, and sternly denounce those who maybe unwilling to swear to the terms which we have devised, provided they do not in this betray pride, or petulance, or unbecoming heat, but are willing to ponder the necessity which compels us so to speak, and may thus become gradually accustomed to a useful form of expression. Let men also studiously beware, that in opposing the Asians on the one hand, and the Sabellians on the other, and eagerly endeavouring to deprive both of any handle for cavil, they do not bring themselves under some suspicion of being the disciples of either Arius or Sabellius. Arius says that Christ is God, and then mutters that he was made and had a beginning. He says, that he is one with the Father; but secretly whispers in the ears of his party, made one, like other believers, though with special privilege. Say,he is consubstantial, and you immediately pluck the mask from this chameleon, though you add nothing to Scripture. Sabellius says that the Father, Son, and Spirit, indicate some distinction in God. Say, they are three, and he will bawl out that you are making three Gods. Say, that there is a Trinity of Persons in one Divine essence, you will only express in one word what the Scriptures say, and stop his empty prattle. Should any be so superstitiously precise as not to tolerate these terms, still do their worst, they will not be able to deny that when one is spoken of, a unity of substance must be understood, and when three in one essence, the persons in this Trinity are denoted. When this is confessed without equivocations we dwell not on words. But I was long ago made aware, and, indeed, on more than one occasion, that those who contend pertinaciously about words are tainted with some hidden poison; and, therefore, that it is more expedient to provoke them purposely, than to court their favour by speaking obscurely.

6. The meaning of the most important conception

But to say nothing more of words, let us now attend to the thing signified. By person, then, I mean a subsistence in the Divine essence, - a subsistence which, while related to the other two, is distinguished from them by incommunicable properties. By subsistence we wish something else to be understood than essence. For if the Word 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, that 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 name 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 incommunicable, 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." - Tertull. Lib. contra Praxeam.

(The eternal diety of the Son, 7-13)
7. The deity of the Word

Before proceeding farther, it will be necessary to prove the divinity of the Son and the Holy Spirit. Thereafter, we shall see how they differ from each other.

When the Word of God is set before us in the Scriptures, it were certainly most absurd to imagine that it is only a fleeting and evanescent voice, which is sent out into the air, and comes forth beyond God himself, as was the case with the communications made to the patriarchs, and all the prophecies.

The reference is rather to the wisdom ever dwelling with God, and by which all oracles and prophecies were inspired.

For, as Peter testifies, (1 Pet. 1: 11,) the ancient prophets spake by the Spirit of Christ just as did the apostles, and all who after them were ministers of the heavenly doctrine.

But as Christ was not yet manifested, we necessarily understand that the Word was begotten of the Father before all ages.

But if that Spirit, whose organs the prophets were, belonged to the Word, the inference is irresistible, that the Word was truly God.

And this is clearly enough shown by Moses in his account of the creation, where he places the Word as intermediate. For why does he distinctly narrate that God, in creating each of his works, said, Let there be this - let there be that, unless that the unsearchable glory of God might shine forth in his image? I know prattlers would easily evade this, by saying that Word is used for order or command;

but the apostles are better expositors, when they tell us that the worlds were created by the Son, and that he sustains all things by his mighty word, (Heb. 1:2.)

For we here see that "word" is used for the nod or command of the Son, who is himself the eternal and essential Word of the Father.

And no man of sane mind can have any doubt as to Solomon' smeaning, when he introduces Wisdom as begotten by God, and presiding at the creation of the world, and all other divine operations, (Prov. 8: 22.)

You will note that both Word and Wisdom are treated the same way: Wisdom or Sophia is even personified. However, Wisdom and Word are not separated into distinct Divine Beings.

Prov 8:22 The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
Prov 8:23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
Prov 8:24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
Prov 8:25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:
Prov 8:26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
Prov 8:27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
Prov 8:28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:
Prov 8:29 When he gave to the sea his decree,
that the waters should not pass his commandment:
when he appointed the foundations of the earth:
Prov 8:30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;
Prov 8:31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.

For it were trifling and foolish to imagine any temporary command at a time when God was pleased to execute his fixed and eternal counsel, and something more still mysterious. To this our Saviour's words refer, "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work," (John 5: 17.) In thus affirming, that from the foundation of the world he constantly worked with the Father, he gives a clearer explanation of what Moses simply touched.

The meaning therefore is, that God spoke in such a manner as left the Word his peculiar part in the work, and thus made the operation common to both. But the clearest explanation is given by John, when he states that the Word- which was from the beginning, God and with God, was, together with God the Father, the maker of all things.

For he both attributes a substantial and permanent essence to the Word, assigning to it a certain peculiarity, and distinctly showing how God spoke the world into being. Therefore, as all revelations from heaven are duly designated by the title of the Word of God, so the highest place must be assigned to that substantial Word, the source of all inspiration, which, as being liable to no variation, remains forever one and the same with God, and is God.

8.The eternity of the Word

Here an outcry is made by certain men, who, while they dare not openly deny his divinity, secretly rob him of his eternity. For they contend that the Word only began to be when God opened his sacred mouth in the creation of the world. Thus, with excessive temerity, they imagine some change in the essence of God. For as the names of God, which have respect to external work, began to be ascribed to him from the existence of the work, (as when he is called the Creator of heaven and earth,) so piety does not recognise or admit any name which might indicate that a change had taken place in God himself. For if any thing adventitious took place, the saying of James would cease to be true, that "every good gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning,"(James 1: 17.)

Nothing, therefore, is more intolerable than to fancy a beginning to that Word which was always God, and afterwards was the Creator of the world.

But they think they argue acutely, in maintaining that Moses, when he says that God then spoke for the first time, must be held to intimate that till then no Word existed in him. This is the merest trifling. It does not surely follow, that because a thing begins to be manifested at a certain time, it never existed previously. I draw a very different conclusion. Since at the very moment when God said, "Let there be light," the energy of the Word-was immediately exerted, it must have existed long before. If any inquire how long, he will find it was without beginning. No certain period of time is defined, when he himself says, "Now O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was," (John 17: 5.) Nor is this omitted by John: for before he descends to the creation of the world (John 1:3), he says, that "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God." We, therefore, again conclude, that the Word was eternally begotten by God, and dwelt with him from everlasting. In this way, his true essence, his eternity, and divinity, are established.

9. The deity of Christ in the Old Testament

But though I am not now treating of the office of the Mediator, having deferred it till the subject of redemption is considered, yet because it ought to be clear and incontrovertible to all, that Christ is that Word become incarnate, this seems the most appropriate place to introduce those passages which assert the Divinity of Christ. When it is said in the forty-fifth Psalm, "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever," the Jews quibble that the name Elohim is applied to angels and sovereign powers.

But no passage is to be found in Scripture, where an eternal throne is set up for a creature. For he is not called God simply, but also the eternal Ruler. Besides, the title is not conferred on any man, without some addition, as when it is said that Moses would be a God to Pharaoh, (Exod. 7: 1.) Some read as if it were in the genitive case, but this is too insipid. I admit, that anything possessed of singular excellence is often called divine, but it is clear from the context, that this meaning here were harsh and forced, and totally inapplicable.

But if their perverseness still refuses to yield, surely there is no obscurity in Isaiah, where Christ is introduced both as God, and as possessed of supreme powers one of the peculiar attributes of God, "His name shall be called the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace," (Isa. 9: 6.) Here, too,the Jews object, and invert the passage thus, This is the name by which the mighty God, the Everlasting Father, will call him; so that all which they leave to the Son is, " Prince of Peace."

But why should so many epithets be here accumulated on God the Father,seeing the prophet's design is to present the Messiah with certain distinguished properties which may induce us to put our faith in him?

There can be no doubt, therefore, that he who a little before was called Emmanuel, is here called the Mighty God.

Moreover, there can be nothing clearer than the words of Jeremiah, "This is the name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS," (Jer. 23:6.) For as the Jews themselves teach that the other names of God are mere epithets, whereas this, which they call the ineffable name, is substantive, and expresses his essence,

we infer, that the only begotten Son IS the eternal God, who elsewhere declares, "My glory will I not give to another," (Isa. 42: 8.)

For thus saith the Lord (Jehovah) that created the heavens; God (Elohim) himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited:

I am the Lord; and there is none else. Isaiah.45:18

An attempt is made to evade this from the fact, that this name is given by Moses to the altar which he built, and by Ezekiel to the New Jerusalem. But who sees not that the altar was erected as a memorial to show that God was the exalter of Moses, and that the name of God was applied to Jerusalem, merely to testify the Divine presence? For thus the prophet speaks, "The name of the city from that day shall be, The Lord is there," (Ezek. 48: 35.) In the same way, "Moses built an altar, and called the name of it JEHOVAH-nissi," (Jehovah my exaltation.) But it would seem the point is still more keenly disputed as to another passage in Jeremiah, where the same title is applied to Jerusalem in these words, "In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely; and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The Lord our Righteousness." But so far is this passage from being adverse to the truth which we defend, that it rather supports it. The prophet having formerly declared that Christ is the true Jehovah from whom righteousness flows, now declares that the Church would be made so sensible of this as to be able to glory in assuming his very name. In the former passage, therefore, the fountain and cause of righteousness is set down, in the latter, the effect is described.

10. The "Angel of the Eternal God"

But if this does not satisfy the Jews, I know not what cavils will enable them to evade the numerous passages in which Jehovah is said to have appeared in the form of an Angel, (Judges 6:7: 13: 16-23, &c.;)

This Angel claims for himself the name of the Eternal God. Should it be alleged that this is done in respect of the office which he bears, the difficulty is by no means solved.
No servant would rob God of his honour, by allowing sacrifice to be offered to himself.
        But the Angel, by refusing to eat bread, orders the sacrifice due to Jehovah to be offered to him (Judges 13:16).
        Thus the fact itself proves that he was truly Jehovah.
Accordingly, Manoah and his wife infer from the sign, that they had seen not only an angel, but God. Hence Manoah's exclamation,
        "We shall die; for we have seen the Lord."(13:22).

When the woman replies, "If Jehovah had wished to slay us, he would not have received the sacrifice at our hand,"

she acknowledges that he who is previously called an angel was certainly God. We may add, that the angel's own reply removes all doubt, "Why do ye ask my name, which is wonderful?" (13:18).

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6

King

Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel, and his redeemer the Lord of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. Isaiah 44:6

Wonderful Counselor

Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or being his counsellor hath taught him? Isaiah 40:13
---For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 1 Timothy 2:5

The Son is

Mighty God

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. Revelation 1:8

Ever-

lasting

Father

Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O Lord, art our father, our redeemer; thy name is from everlasting. Isaiah 63:16
---Art thou not from everlasting, O Lord my God, mine Holy One? we shall not die. O Lord, thou hast ordained them for judgment; and, O mighty God, thou hast established them for correction. Revelation 1:12

Prince of

Peace

Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Acts 5:31
And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him. Is.59:16

Hence the impiety of Servetus was the more detestable, when he maintained that God was never manifested to Abraham and the Patriarchs, but that an angel was worshipped in his stead. The orthodox doctors of the Church have correctly and wisely expounded,

that the Word of God was the supreme angel, who then began, as it were by anticipation, to perform the office of Mediator.

For though he were not clothed with flesh, yet he descended as in an intermediate form, that he might have more familiar access to the faithful.
This closer intercourse procured for him the name of the Angel; still, however, he retained the character which justly belonged to him - that of the God of ineffable glory.

The same thing is intimated by Hosea, who, after mentioning the wrestling of Jacob with the angel, says, "Even the Lord (Jehovah) God (Elohim) of hosts; the Lord is his memorial," (Hosea 12: 5.)

Yea, he had power over the angel, and prevailed: he wept, and made supplication unto him: he found him in Beth-el (house of God), and there he spake with us; Hosea 12:4

Even the Lord God of hosts; the Lord is his memorial [name]. Hosea 12:5

Servetus again insinuates that God personated an angel; as if the prophet did not confirm what had been said by Moses, "Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name?" (Gen. 32: 29, 30.) And the confession of the holy Patriarch sufficiently declares that he was not a created angel, but one in whom the fulness of the Godhead dwelt, when he says,

"I have seen God face to face." Hence also Paul's statement, that Christ led the people in the wilderness, (1Cor. 10: 4. See also Calvin on Acts 7: 30, and infra, chap. 14 s.9.)

And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. 1 Co 10:4

Although the time of humiliation had not yet arrived, the eternal Word exhibited a type of the office which he was to fulfil. Again, if the first chapter of Zechariah (ver. 9, &c.;) and the second (ver. 3, &c.;) be candidly considered,

it will be seen that the angel who sends the other angel is immediately after declared to be the Lord of hosts, and that supreme power is ascribed to him.

Zech 6:9 And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,

Zech 6:11 Then take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest;

Yehowshuwa (h3091) yeh-ho-shoo'-ah; or y�howsua yeh-ho-shoo'-ah; from 3068 and 3467; Jehovah-saved; Jehoshua (i. e. Joshua), the Jewish leader: - Jehoshua, Jehoshuah, Joshua. Comp. 1954, 3442

Yasha (h3467) yaw-shah'; a prim. root; prop. to be open, wide or free, i. e. (by impl.) to be safe; causat. to free or succor: - * at all, avenging, defend, deliver (-er), help, preserve, rescue, be safe, bring (having) salvation, save (-iour), get victory.

Is.59:16 And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him.

The Father is:

Jehowcadaq (h3087) yeh-ho-tsaw-dawk'; from 3068 and 6663; Jehovah- righted; Jehotsadak, an Isr.: - Jehozadek, Josedech. Comp. 3136.

Cadaq (h6663) tsaw-dak'; a prim. root; to be (causat. make) right (in a moral or forensic sense): - cleanse, clear self, (be, do) just (- ice, -ify, -ify self), (be, turn to) righteous (-ness).

Is.53:11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

Zech 6:12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord:

The BRANCH is part of the Menorah holding the seven LAMPS or SPIRITS of Divine knowledge.

Isa 11:1 AND there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:

Isa 11: 2 And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord;

Isa 11: 3 And shall make him of quick understanding [spiritual] in the fear of the Lord: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:

Isa 11: 4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath [SPIRIT] of his lips shall he slay the wicked.

These are the SEVEN SPIRITS OF GOD.

Zech 6:13 Even

he shall build the temple of the Lord;
and he shall bear the glory,
and shall sit and rule upon his throne;
and he shall be a priest upon his throne:
and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

The KING and PRIEST are not TWO PEOPLE!!

I omit numberless passages in which our faith rests secure, though they may not have much weight with the Jews. For when it is said in Isaiah, "Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, and he will save us; this is the Lord: we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation," (Isa. 25: 9,) even the blind may see that the God referred to is he who again rises up for the deliverance of his people. And the emphatic description, twice repeated, precludes the idea that reference is made to any other than to Christ. Still clearer and stronger is the passage of Malachi, in which a promise is made that the messenger who was then expected would come to his own temple, (Mal. 3: 1.) The temple certainly was dedicated to Almighty God only, and yet the prophet claims it for Christ. Hence it follows, that he is the God who was always worshipped by the Jews.

Isa 25:8 He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the Lord hath spoken it.

Isa 25:9 And it shall be said in that day,

Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him,

and he will save us: this is the Lord; we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation.

Yeshuwah (h3444) yesh-oo'-aw; fem. pass. part. of 3467; something saved, i. e. (abstr.) deliverance; hence aid, victory, prosperity: - deliverance, health, help (-ing), salvation, save, saving (health), welfare.

Essentially, the "gospel" in the NT is the good news that the kingdom of God has come in Jesus (Matt. 4:23, 9:35, Mark 1:14, Luke 4:43, Acts 20:24f).3 "Kingdom" is (1) God's sovereign power, (2) his sovereign authority, and (3) his coming into history to defeat Satan and bring about salvation with all its consequences.4 God's kingdom power includes all his mighty acts in history, especially including the Resurrection of Christ.

God's kingdom authority is the reiteration of his commandments. When the kingdom appears in power, it is time for people to repent. They must obey (hupakouo) the gospel (2 Thess. 1:8, compare apeitheo in 1 Pet. 4:17). The gospel itself requires a certain kind of conduct (Acts 14:15, Gal. 2:14, Phil. 1:27; cf. Rom 2:16).

When God comes into history, he brings his power and authority to bear on his creatures. In kingdom power, he establishes peace. So NT writers frequently refer to the "gospel of peace" (Eph. 6:15; cf. Acts 10:36, Rom. 10:15), sometimes referring to the "mystery" of God bringing Gentiles and Jews together in one body (Rom. 16:25, Eph. 6:19).

11.The divinity of Christ in the New Testament: witness of the apostles

The New Testament teems with innumerable passages, and our object must therefore be, the selection of a few, rather than an accumulation of the whole. But though the Apostles spoke of him after his appearance in the flesh as Mediator, every passage which I adduce 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 offence," (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 judgement-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. 68:18) 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 morefully 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," &c.;, and, "Let all the angels of God worship him," (Heb. 1: 10, 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. It was he 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 judgement-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," (1Tim. 3: 16.) If he is God blessed for ever, he therefore it is to whom alone, as Paul affirms in another place, all glory and honour 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 glamour and say that he was a kind of spurious God, John goes farther, and affirms, "This is the true God, and eternal life." (1 John 5:20). 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 lords 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.)

12. The divinity of Christ is demonstrated in his works

The divinity of Christ, if judged by the works which are ascribed to him in Scripture, becomes still more evident. When he said of himself, "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work," the Jews, though most dull in regard to his other sayings, perceived that he was laying claim to divine power. And, therefore, as John relates,(John 5: 17,) they sought the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. What, then, will be our stupidity if we do not perceive from the same passage that his divinity is plainly instructed? To govern the world by his power and providence, and regulate all things by an energy inherent in himself, (this an Apostle ascribes to him, Heb. 1: 3,) surely belongs to none but the Creator. Nor does he merely share the government of the world with the Father, but also each of the other offices, which cannot be communicated to creatures. The Lord proclaims by his prophets "I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake," (Is. 43: 25.) When, in accordance with this declaration, the Jews thought that injustice was done to God when Christ forgave sins, he not only asserted, in distinct terms, that this power belonged to him, but also proved it by a miracle, (Matth. 9: 6.) We thus see that he possessed in himself not the ministry of forgiving sins, but the inherent power which the Lord declares he will not give to another. What! Is it not the province of God alone to penetrate and interrogate the secret thoughts of the heart? But Christ also had this power, and therefore we infer that Christ is God.

13.The divinity of Christ is demonstrated by his miracles

How clearly and transparently does this appear in his miracles? I admit that similar and equal miracles were performed by the prophets and apostles; but there is this very essential difference, that they dispensed the gifts of God as his ministers, where as he exerted his own inherent might. Sometimes, indeed, he used prayer, that he might ascribe glory to the Father, but we see that for the most part his own proper power is displayed.

And how should not he be the true author of miracles, who, of his own authority, commissions others to perform them?

For the Evangelist relates that he gave power to the apostles to cast out devils, cure the lepers, raise the dead, &c.; And they, by the mode in which they performed this ministry, showed plainly that their whole power was derived from Christ. "In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth," says Peter, (Acts 3: 6,) "rise up and walk." It is not surprising, then, that Christ appealed to his miracles in order to subdue the unbelief of the Jews, in asmuch as these were performed by his own energy, and therefore bore the most ample testimony to his divinity.

Again, if out of God there is no salvation, no righteousness, no life, Christ, having all these in himself, is certainly God. Let no one object that life or salvation is transfused into him by God. For it is said not that he received, but that he himself is salvation. And if there is none good but God, how could a mere man be pure, how could he be, I say not good and just, but goodness and justice? Then what shall we say to the testimony of the Evangelist, that from the very beginning of the creation "in him was life, and this life was the light of men?" Trusting to such proofs, we can boldly put our hope and faith in him, though we know it is blasphemous impiety to confide in any creature. "Ye believe in God,"says he, "believe also in me," (John 14: 1.) And so Paul (Rom. 10:11, and 15: 12) interprets two passages of Isaiah "Whose believeth in him shall not be confounded," (Isa. 28: 16;) and, "In that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek," (Isa. 11: 10.) But why adduce more passages of Scripture on this head, when we so often meet with the expression, "He that believeth in me has eternal life?" Again, the prayer of faith is addressed to him - prayer, which specially belongs to the divine majesty, if anything so belongs. For the Prophet Joel says, "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord (Jehovah) shall be delivered"(Joel 2: 32.) And another says, "The name of the Lord (Jehovah) is a strong tower; the righteous runneth into it and is safe," (Prov. 18:10.) But the name of Christ is invoked for salvation, and therefore it follows that he is Jehovah. Moreover, we have an example of invocation in Stephen, when he said, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit;" and there after in the whole Church, when Ananias says in the same book, "Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he has done to thy saints at Jerusalem; and here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name,"(Acts 9: 13, 14.) And to make it more clearly understood that in Christ dwelt the whole fulness of the Godhead bodily, the Apostle declares that the only doctrine which he professed to the Corinthians, the only doctrine which he taught, was the knowledge of Christ, (1 Cor. 2: 2.)

Consider what kind of thing it is, and how great, that the name of the Son alone is preached to us, though God command us to glory only in the knowledge of himself, (Jer. 9: 24.)Who will dare to maintain that he, whom to know forms our only ground of glorying, is a mere creature? To this we may add, that the salutations prefixed to the Epistles of Paul pray for the same blessings from the Son as from the Father. By this we are taught, not only that the blessings which our heavenly Father bestows come to us through his intercession, but that by a partnership in power, the Son himself is their author. This practical knowledge is doubtless surer and more solid than any idle speculation. For the pious soul has the best view of God, and may almost be said to handle him, when it feels that it is quickened, enlightened, saved, justified, and sanctified by him.

(The eternal deity of the Spirit, 14-15)
14.The divinity of the Spirit is demonstrated in his work

In asserting the divinity of the Spirit, the proof must be derived from the same sources. And it is by no means an obscure testimony which Moses bears in the history of the creation, when he says that the Spirit of God was expanded over the abyss or shapeless matter; for it shows not only that the beauty which the world displays is maintained by the invigorating power of the Spirit, but that even before this beauty existed the Spirit was at work cherishing the confused mass.

Again, no cavils can explain away the force of what Isaiah says, "And now the Lord God, and his Spirit, has sent me," (Isa. 48: 16,) thus ascribing a share in the sovereign power of sending the prophets to the Holy Spirit. (Calvin in Acts 20: 28.) In this his divine majesty is clear. But, as I observed, the best proof to us is our familiar experience. For nothing can be more alien from a creature, than the office which the Scriptures ascribe to him, and which the pious actually feel him discharging, - his being diffused over all space, sustaining, invigorating, and quickening all things, both in heaven and on the earth. The mere fact of his not being circumscribed by any limits raises him above the rank of creatures, while his transfusing vigour into all things, breathing into them being, life, and motion, is plainly divine.

Again, if regeneration to incorruptible life is higher, and much more excellent than any present quickening, what must be thought of him by whose energy it is produced? Now, many passages of Scripture show that he is the author of regeneration, not by a borrowed, but by an intrinsic energy; and not only so, but that he is also the author of future immortality. In short, all the peculiar attributes of the Godhead are ascribed to him in the same way as to the Son. He searches the deep things of Gods (1 Cor. 2:10) and has no counsellor among the creatures (Romans 11:34); he bestows wisdom and the faculty of speech (1 Cor. 12:10), though God declares to Moses (Exod. 4: 11) that this is his own peculiar province. In like manner, by means of him we become partakers of the divine nature, so as in a manner to feel his quickening energy within us.

Our justification is his work; from him is power, sanctification, truth, grace, and every good thought,

since it is from the Spirit alone that all good gifts proceed.
Particular attention is due to Paul's expression, that though there are diversities of gifts, "all these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit," (1 Cor. 12: 11,) he being not only the beginning or origin, but also the author; as is even more clearly expressed immediately after in these words

"dividing to every man severally as he will."

For were he not something subsisting in God, will and arbitrary disposal would never be ascribed to him. Most clearly, therefore does Paul ascribe divine power to the Spirit, and demonstrate that he dwells hypostatically in God.

15. Express testimonies for the deity of the Spirit

Nor does the Scripture, in speaking of him, 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 ought not to be slightly overlooked, that all the promises which God makes of choosing us to himself as a temple, receive their only fulfilment by his Spirit dwelling in us. Surely, as it is admirably expressed by Augustine, (Ad Maximinum,Ep. 66,)

"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 rebuked 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 Spirit that spoke, (Acts 28: 25, 26.)

And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, Act 28:25

Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: Acts 28:26

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 1 Pet 1:11

And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. Rev 19:10

Nay, 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. Again, when God complains that he was provoked to anger by the stubbornness of the people, in place of Him, Isaiah says that his Holy Spirit was grieved, (Isa. 63: 10.)

For he said, Surely they are my people, children that will not lie:
........ so he was their Saviour. Isa 63:8

In all their affliction he was afflicted,
........ and the angel of his presence saved them:
........ in his love and in his pity he redeemed them;
........ and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. Isa 63:9

But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit:
........ therefore he was turned to be their enemy,
........ and he fought against them. Isa 63:10

They soon forgat his works; they waited not for his counsel: Psa 106:13

That led them by the right hand of Moses with his glorious arm, dividing the water before them, to make himself an everlasting name? Isa 63:12

Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey. And the Lord saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment. Isa 59:15

And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him. Isa 59:16

Lastly, while blasphemy against the Spirit is not forgiven, either in the present life or that which is to come, whereas he who has blasphemed against the Son may obtain pardon, that majesty must certainly be divine which it is an inexpiable crime to offend or impair.

I designedly omit several passages which the ancient fathers adduced. They thought it plausible to quote from David, "By the word (2) of the Lord (1) were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath (3) (Spirit) of his mouth," (Ps. 33: 6,) in order to prove that the world was not less the work of the Holy Spirit than of the Son

Full invisible Deity	*Manifestations (personae)*
	Father in me	Works
Son of God
	I in HIm	Speaks

	King	Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel, and his redeemer the Lord of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. Isaiah 44:6
	Wonderful Counselor	Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or being his counsellor hath taught him? Isaiah 40:13 ---For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 1 Timothy 2:5
The Son is	Mighty God	I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. Revelation 1:8
	Ever- lasting Father	Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O Lord, art our father, our redeemer; thy name is from everlasting. Isaiah 63:16 ---Art thou not from everlasting, O Lord my God, mine Holy One? we shall not die. O Lord, thou hast ordained them for judgment; and, O mighty God, thou hast established them for correction. Revelation 1:12
	Prince of Peace	Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Acts 5:31 And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him. Is.59:16

John Calvin - Holy Spirit - Trinity Explained

13. THE UNITY OF THE DIVINE ESSENCE IN THREE PERSONS TAUGHT, IN SCRIPTURE, FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.