CHAPTER IV.

DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY.

Introductory Remarks.-Mystery.-Fundamental Objection. Use of Unessential Terms.-Questions to a Trinitarian. The truth may be divine-but the name human.-Proof by illustration.—Mode of Teaching in the Bible.-Too much evidence required.-Christ had a human body and soul.-Connection with the Deity. -Necessary dependence on God.-Prayers of Christ. -Limited knowledge.-Fear of making Christ a deceiver.-Christ before Abraham.-Questions to a Unitarian. The two natures in Christ.-Mystery admitted to be no objection.

It was our intention at first to enlarge the former part of these 'Remarks' by inserting several pages upon the subject of the Trinity. But as this is the subject which interests the mind of almost every one at the time that he is

56

Introductory Remarks.

an inquirer for the truth, it was thought best to arrange what might be said upon this topic by itself. In order that the objections to the doctrine may be exhibited as fairly as possible, we have selected No 58. of the 1st Series of Unitarian Tracts, called an' Outline of the Testimony of Scripture against the Trinity', by Rev. Henry Ware, Jr., as presenting these objections with a good degree of conciseness and plausibility.

This Tract is the substance of an Address delivered before the Unitarian Association of York County, Maine. On many accounts it is one of the best efforts to disprove "the doctrine of the Trinity" which we have lately seen. The Author makes no appeal to popular prejudice, builds no argument on the authority of great names; vaunteth not himself and is not puffed up because the gifted mind of a Milton or a Newton or a Locke failed to discover the doctrine, but goes directly like a good Protestant to the only and sufficient rule of faith and practice. Here we are glad to meet him. Had we any of those feelings which the mere mention of this controversy, like the voice of a war-trumpet usually inspires, we

should in the present instance certainly obey the command, Put up thy sword into the sheath. For though the 'Calm Inquiry' was in many respects a misnomer, there is something in that name extremely befitting this subject. We are glad that in this Tract which we now undertake to answer there is nothing to move unpleasant feelings on either side. It is true the author frequently relies upon an emphatic No! to settle a point, and sometimes feels satisfied that a thing is 'Impossiblecertainly impossible :'-but this arises from a commendable earnestness in his subject, and we hope to be able to show that some things are not quite so impossible as he supposes.

The Author begins by saying that his reason for not believing the doctrine of the Trinity is

66

Not because the doctrine is a mystery—that is, if you mean by mystery something which we cannot fully understand or explain. This circumstance may create a difficulty in many minds; but notwithstanding this, if we found it testified to in Scripture, as an unquestionable and essential doctrine, we should not hesitate to believe it, any more than we hesitate to believe that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, or that God foreknows all things, and that yet man is a

58

Fundamental Objection.

free agent. We only ask for PROOF that it is taught in the Bible. We have looked for it, and do not find it. Therefore we cannot believe it."

We are very glad that the opposers of this doctrine are willing to drop the argument of mystery and mysticism, so unsatisfactory to men of sense, and all sufficient for the use of passionate and prejudiced minds. The foregoing paragraph is an uncommon instance of fairness, which appearing as it does on the first page of the Tract secures to the author the reader's best feelings.

The grand proposition with which the writer begins his Treatise is this; 'We do not find in Scripture that God is revealed to be three. This we consider a most unfortunate proposition; for every enlightened Trinitarian will, in a certain sense, immediately subscribe to its truth. For we are willing to adopt the precise words of the Tract and say,

We no

"The words Trinity-triune-Jehovah-Jesus -God-man-are not in the Scriptures. where find the expression God the Son, but always the Son of God; nowhere God the Holy Spirit, but the Spirit of God, or the Holy Spirit.

Use of Unessential Terms.

59

The expressions first person, second person, third person, three persons, are not found."

The following sentences, however, contain, we think, a false assumption and then an inconclusive inference. The italics are ours.

Now if the very words, which are necessary to express the doctrine, are not in the Scriptures, how can we suppose the doctrine itself to be there? If the sacred writers meant to teach this doctrine, how is it possible they should not sometimes have used the words which are now used in regard to it?"

The word Trinity was invented by Theologians for the sake of convenience. It prevents circumlocution. The fact that it is not a Scripture word proves as much as the fact that the terms, 'Sacrament,' Perseverance of the Saints,'' Omniscience,' Unity of God,' are not in the Bible. The word Trinity is no more necessary to the doctrine, than the term "Perseverance of the saints" is to the truth which it symbolizes. Should any man deny the "Perseverance of the Saints," and say, "We where find the expression :" it would be deemed a sufficient answer that the doctrine is unequivocally revealed, though this precise form

e no