GOD
The
meaning
of
the
doctrine
of
the
universal
fatherhood
is
that
God
is
love
(1
Jn
48),
and
that
He
manifests
His
love
by
sending
His
Son
into
the
world
to
save
it
(see
above).
8.
Distinctionsin
the
Godhead.
—Weshouldnotexpect
to
And
the
nomenclature
of
Christian
theology
in
the
NT.
The
writings
contained
therein
are
not
a
manual
of
theology;
and
the
object
of
the
technical
terms
invented
or
adopted
by
the
Church
was
to
explain
the
doctrine
of
the
Bible
in
a
form
intelligible
to
the
Christian
learner.
They
do
not
mark
a
development
of
doctrine
in
times
subsequent
to
the
Gospel
age.
The
use
of
the
words
'Persons'
and
'Trinity'
affords
an
example
of
this.
They
were
adopted
in
order
to
express
the
teaching
of
the
NT
that
there
are
distinctions
in
the
Godhead;
that
Jesus
is
no
mere
man,
but
that
He
came
down
from
heaven
to
take
our
nature
upon
Him
;
that
He
and
the
Father
are
one
thing
(Jn
10'°,
see
below),
and
yet
are
distinct
(Mk
IS''')
;
that
the
Spirit
is
God,
and
yet
distinct
from
the
Father
and
the
Son
(Ro
8',
see
below).
At
the
same
time
Christian
theology
takes
care
that
we
should
not
conceive
of
the
Three
Persons
as
of
three
indi-viduals.
The
meaning
of
the
word
'Trinity'
is,
in
the
language
of
the
Quicungue
mdt,
that
'
the
Father
is
God,
the
Son
is
God,
and
the
Holy
Ghost
is
God
;
and
yet
they
are
not
three
Gods,
but
one
God.'
The
present
writer
must
profoundly
dissent
from
the
view
that
Jesus'
teaching
about
God
showed
but
little
advance
on
that
of
the
prophets,
and
that
the
'Trinitarian'
idea
as
found
in
the
Fourth
Gospel
and
in
Mt
28"
was
a
development
of
a
later
age,
say
of
the
very
end
of
the
1st
century.
Confessedly
a
great
and
marvellous
develop-ment
took
place.
To
whom
are
we
to
assign
it,
if
not
to
our
Lord?
Had
a
great
teacher,
or
a
school
of
teachers,
arisen,
who
could
of
themselves
produce
such
an
absolute
revolution
in
thought,
how
is
it
that
contemporary
writers
and
posterity
alike
put
them
completely
in
the
background,
and
gave
to
Jesus
the
place
of
the
Great
Teacher
of
the
world?
This
can
be
accounted
for
only
by
the
revolution
of
thought
being
the
work
of
Jesus
Himself.
An
examination
of
the
literature
will
lead
us
to
the
same
conclusion.
(a)
We
begin
with
St.
Paul,
as
our
earliest
authority.
The
'ApostoUc
benediction'
(2
Co
13")
which,
as
Dr.
Sanday
remarks
(Hastings'
DB
ii.
213),
has
no
dogmatic
object
and
expounds
no
new
doctrine
—
indeed
expounds
no
doctrine
at
all
—
unequivocally
groups
together
Jesus
Christ,
God
[the
Father],
and
the
Holy
Ghost
as
the
source
of
blessing,
and
in
that
remarkable
order.
It
is
inconceivable
that
St.
Paul
would
have
done
this
had
he
looked
on
Jesus
Christ
as
a
mere
man,
or
even
as
a
created
angel,
and
on
the
Holy
Ghost
only
as
an
influence
of
the
Father.
But
how
did
he
arrive
at
this
triple
grouping,
which
is
strictly
consistent
with
his
doctrine
elsewhere?
We
cannot
think
that
he
invented
it;
and
it
is
only
natural
to
suppose
that
be
founded
it
upon
some
words
of
our
Lord.
(6)
The
command
to
baptize
into
the
name
of
the
Father
and
of
the
Son
and
of
the
Holy
Ghost
(Mt
28"),
it
spoken
by
our
Lord,
—
whatever
the
exact
meaning
of
the
words,
whether
as
a
formula
to
be
used,
or
as
expressing
the
result
of
Christian
baptism
—
would
amply
account
for
St.
Paul's
benediction
in
2
Co
13".
But
it
has
been
strenuously
denied
that
these
words
are
authentic,
or,
if
they
are
authentic,
that
they
are
our
Lord's
own
utterance.
We
must
carefully
distinguish
these
two
allegations.
First,
it
is
denied
that
they
are
part
of
the
First
Gospel.
It
has
been
maintained
by
Mr.
Conybeare
that
they
are
an
interpolation
of
the
2nd
cent.,
and
that
the
original
text
had:
'Make
disciples
of
all
the
nations
in
my
name,
teaching
them,"
etc.
All
extant
manuscripts
and
versions
have
our
present
text
(the
Old
Syriac
is
wanting
here)
;
but
in
several
passages
of
Eusebius
(c.
a.d.
260-340)
which
refer
to
the
verse,
the
words
about
baptism
are
not
mentioned,
and
in
some
of
them
the
words
'in
my
name'
are
added.
The
GOD
allegation
is
carefully
and
impartially
examined
by
Bp.
Chase
in
JThSt
vi.
483
tf.,
and
is
judged
by
him
to
be
baseless.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
nothing
is
more
common
in
ancient
writers
than
to
omit,
in
referring
to
a
Scripture
passage,
any
words
which
are
not
relevant
to
their
argu-ment.
Dean
Robinson
(JThSt
vii.
186),
who
controverts
Bp.
Chase's
interpretation
of
the
baptismal
command,
is
yet
entirely
satisfied
with
his
defence
of
its
authenticity.
Secondly,
it
is
denied
that
the
words
in
question
were
spoken
by
our
Lord
;
it
is
said
that
they
belong
to
that
later
stage
of
thought
to
which
the
Fourth
Gospel
is
ascribed.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
it
is
urged,
the
earliest
baptisms
were
not
into
the
name
of
the
Father,
Son,
and
Holy
Ghost,
but
in
the
name
of
Jesus
Christ,
or
into
the
name
of
the
Lord
Jesus,
or
into
Christ
Jesus,
or
into
Christ
(Ac
238
gis
10*8
19»,
Ro
68,
Gal
3").
Now
it
is
not
necessary
to
maintain
that
in
any
of
these
places
a
formula
of
baptism
is
prescribed
or
mentioned.
The
reverse
is
perhaps
more
probable
(see
Chase,
I.e.).
The
phrases
in
Acts
need
mean
only
that
converts
were
united
to
Jesus
or
that
they
became
Christians
(cf.
1
Co
10^)
;
the
phrase
in
Mt
28"
may
mean
that
disciples
were
to
be
united
to
Father,
Son,
and
Holy
Ghost
by
baptism,
without
any
formula
being
enjoined
;
or
if
we
take
what
seems
to
be
the
less
probable
interpretation
(that
of
Dean
Robinson),
that
'in
the
name'
means
'by
the
authority
of,'
a
similar
result
holds
good.
We
need
not
even
hold
that
Mt
28"
represents
our
Lord's
ipsis-sima
verba.
But
that
it
faithfully
represents
our
Lord's
teaching
seems
to
follow
from
the
use
of
the
benediction
in
2
Co
13"
(above),
and
from
the
fact
that
immediately
after
the
Apostolic
age
the
sole
form
of
baptizing
that
we
read
of
was
that
of
Mt
28",
as
in
Didache
7
(the
words
quoted
exactly,
though
in
§
9
Christians
are
said
to
have
beenbaptized
into
the
nameof
the
Lord),in
JustinMartyr,
Apol.
i.
61
(he
does
not
quote
the
actual
words,
but
paraphrases,
and
at
the
end
of
the
same
chapter
says
that
'
he
who
is
illuminated
is
washed
in
the
name
of
Jesus
Christ'),
and
in
TertuUian,
adv.
Prax.
26
(para-phrase),
de
Bapt.
13
(exactly),
de
Prwscr.
Hosr.
20
(paraphrase).
Thus
the
second
generation
of
Christians
must
have
understood
the
words
to
be
our
Lord's.
But
the
same
doctrine
is
found
also
in
numerous
other
passages
of
the
NT,
and
we
may
now
proceed
briefly
to
compare
some
of
them
with
Mt
28",
prefacing
the
in-vestigation
with
the
remark
that
the
suspected
words
in
that
verse
occur
in
the
most
Jewish
of
the
Gospels,
where
such
teaching
is
improbable
unless
it
comes
from
our
Lord
(so
Scott
in
Hastings'
DB,
Ext.
vol.
p.
313).
(c)
That
the
Fourth
Gospel
is
full
of
the
doctrine
of
'
Father,
Son,
and
Spirit
'
is
allowed
by
all
(see
esp.
Jn
14-16).
The
Son
and
the
Spirit
are
both
Paracletes,
sent
by
the
Father;
the
Spirit
is
sent
by
the
Father
and
also
by
Jesus;
Jesus
has
all
things
whatsoever
the
Father
has;
the
Spirit
takes
the
things
of
Jesus
and
declares
them
unto
us.
In
Jn
lO'"
our
Lord
says:
'I
and
the
Father
are
one
thing'
(the
numeral
is
neuter),
i.e.
one
essence
—
the
words
cannot
fall
short
of
this
(
Westcott,
in
loc.
)
.
But
the
same
doctrine
is
found
in
all
parts
of
the
NT.
Our
Lord
is
the
only-begotten
Son
(see
§
7
above),
who
was
pre-existent,
and
was
David's
Lord
in
heaven
before
He
came
to
earth
(Mt
22«:
this
is
the
force
of
the
argument).
He
claims
to
judge
the
world
and
to
bestow
glory
(Mt
25'«,
Lk
22»8;
cf.
2
Co
5"),
to
forgive
sins
and
to
bestow
the
power
of
binding
and
loosing
(Mk
26-
",
Mt
28"
and
18";
cf.
Jn
20^8);
He
invites
sinners
to
come
to
Him
(Mt
1
1^8;
cf
.
108',
Lk
14»)
;
He
is
the
teacher
of
the
world
(Mt
ll^');
He
casts
out
devils
as
Son
of
God,
and
gives
authority
to
His
disciples
to
cast
them
out
(Mk
3»'-
").
The
claims
of
Jesus
are
as
tremendous,
and
(in
the
great
example
of
humility)
at
first
sight
as
surprising,
in
the
Synoptics
as
in
Jn.
(Liddon,
BL
v.
iv.).
Similarly,
in
the
Pauline
Epistles
the
Apostle
clearly
teaches
that
Jesus
is
God
(see
art.
Paul
the
Apostle,
iii.
3.
4).
In
them
God
the
Father
and
Jesus
Christ
are
constantly
joined
together
(just
as
