It is with a genuine sense of gladness that I can report to you as God's people that we live in an age of great resurgence of understanding the doctrine of the Trinity. Now again, God's people in all ages have always believed in the doctrine of the Trinity. We perhaps can say we've less understood it, yet we believed it, even in the absence of a full understanding, even of what the church historically has taught on the subject. And certainly in the early church, in the midst of much theological debate and dispute and ugliness and heartache, The church came to thrash out through these ecumenical councils. We've begun to look at just what scripture does teach, what the historic teaching of Christianity is with respect to the God we worship and serve, with respect to the Redeemer who's come in the flesh to save us from our sins. And it's good that we have in the modern era a resurgence, a revival of coming to understand these things. There's too much to read on the subject of the things that are being written today. I could not say that 30 years ago when I began my ministry, that there's a lot of books on the subject of the Trinity. There are a few, but they're usually written a couple hundred years ago or written in the early church. In the early church, almost everybody wrote an important writing on the subject of the Trinity. Whether you think of Athanasius or whether you think of, we're going to talk about the Cappadocian fathers perhaps a bit today, or there's a guy by the name of Hillary, Hilary of Portiers wrote a wonderful book on the subject of the Trinity, sometimes very confusing, sometimes richly rewarding. And these were stalwart defenders of the biblical teaching of the Trinity, especially over and against what was being taught by that group called the Arians. And it was the rising of the Arian heresy that led to the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. A couple weeks ago, we endeavored to look at something of the composition of that council. Bishops of some 300 of them met to address the subject of this Arian teaching that had begun by this presbyter in Alexandria by the name of Arius, opposed by his bishop, Alexander, and yet bringing great division within the churches and Constantine, the emperor, determined that if he couldn't get them to agree that this wasn't all that important to fight over, and he couldn't, he wrote them a letter trying to secure unity between them. Did not work. How do you provide unity between those that assert that there's a God who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and and those that assert, well, there is a God who created a son. You just can't bridge the gap. It's a different understanding, a different belief with reference to God, and it is a crucial matter. And so because of Constantine desiring to see the unity of his empire and the unity of the church within that empire, He wanted them to just say, well, this is much ado about nothing, but it didn't work, and therefore there was the need for the council to be convened. Constantine himself convened the council, and it's the first of the ecumenical church councils, because it had representatives from all over the Christian world, all the bishops who were invited to attend. Some did not, but there were some 300 that did. And over the course of a couple of years, they convened and they talked about many things, but we're not interested in the many things that they talked about. We're interested in their conclusions with respect to the Trinity. And what we have as part of their conclusions with respect to the Trinity is what's called the Nicene Creed. And we began to look at that last time. So I'm gonna ask you to turn in your hymnals to the Nicene Creed. Just before we do, any questions about the council itself? I mean, we covered it about as well as I desire to cover it. We can move into more and more details, but why? I think you got the gist of why the council was called and what the council was concerned to do. And any questions about it? Well, in the absence of questions, let's move on to what they produced in terms of the creed. Now, this is not exactly what they produced, but it is what is in, I believe it's in Athanasius' writings, and also was confirmed by the Council of Nicaea in 451. I think it also was, I think it's often called the Nicene-Constantinople Creed, because it was also affirmed by the Second Council at Constantinople in 381, I believe it was. But like the Apostles' Creed, it is divided in a Trinitarian fashion, threefold. There's three paragraphs, one with respect to the Father, and one with respect to the Son, that's the biggest of all. of the paragraphs, and then the Holy Spirit is mentioned along with other things in the final paragraph. But it is a triad in terms of the paragraphs dealing with Father, Son, and Spirit, because this is a council that's affirming that God is triune, He is one God, and yet existing in three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And the statement with respect to the Father is pretty much what you find in the Apostles' Creed. I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth. And they had the expression, and of all things, visible and invisible. and in one Lord Jesus Christ. Now, the important thing to see in the statement with respect to Jesus is if you put a line here, I think I've done this with you before, and above the line is all that we can call God, and under here is all that is not God, you'll find that these statements with respect to Christ, Jesus in the second paragraph, pretty much in the beginning, all go above the line. All these expressions which begin, begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, light of lights, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father by whom all things were made." All those expressions belong above the line. It's not until you get to the next statement, who for us men, and that includes women, at least in the ancient expression of the generic use of men, For us men and our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary and was made man. That is this great statement of justification by faith in a real sense. If you want to say, well, where's the Reformation teaching in the Nicene Creed? It is right there. It is right there. Who for us men and our salvation came down from heaven. There was no other way. There was no other good enough to pay the price of sin. He only could unlock the gate of heaven and let us in. He was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, made man, crucified also for us. There's a substitutionary nature of the atonement. Crucified for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried. And the third day rose again according to the scriptures. So the great concern that we have with respect to the doctrine of the Trinity is to understand what this said prior to who for us men in our salvation came down from heaven. It's everything in that really that first great sentence. Now a lot of the things in this first sentence the Arians could agree with to a point. They could talk about Jesus as the only begotten son, and probably think of that more in terms of incarnation. They would put that term beneath the line. They might think of him in terms of God of gods, although you put the first God with a small G rather than a capital G. Light of lights, certainly emanation of light that came from God, belonged to him. Very God of very God, maybe a bit of a problem there. Begotten, not made. Now that's a problem. Begotten, not made. They're thinking of begotten in the scriptural language as the key thing that says, well, there was a time when he was not. Because to beget something means it originates. Now, here's one of the problems with understanding the older writings. You can't be a language cop in this stuff. Because people use certain language that you might think means what they don't intend. And so you've got to give them a certain measure of liberty in terms of the things that they write. For instance, I'm reading Hillary, and Hillary uses the term that he was originated, but he's thinking of eternal origination. He's thinking of an origination that really had no point in time. It always was. It always existed. There was never a time when he was not. And yet he thinks in terms of Jesus having his existence in God, from God, being the second person, not the first person, as a part of an eternal relationship. You see, use modern language. The older writers are using the language of sonship and fatherhood to emphasize relationship. Not origin, not origin. Again, in human procreation, our sons and daughters are originated when they are conceived in the womb. Well, Jesus, who was conceived of the Virgin Mary in terms of his manhood, had pre-existence. And the pre-existence he had was in relationship to the Father, John says, as the Word, or as John says later, the Son. The Word was made flesh and dwelt amongst us and we beheld his glory, the glory of the only begotten of the Father. He's the only begotten. And he's the Son. He's the Son of God made flesh. And so the Eternal Word or the Eternal Son exists in relationship to the Father in an eternal relationship. But there's an eternal relationship of one who is begotten of the Father eternally. What does that mean? We do not know. How is that to be conceived? In ways we worship, not in ways we can fully comprehend or fully understand. We are dealing with God. We're dealing with the eternality of God. We're dealing with concepts the human mind has no ability to conceive of, but we have to see it this way because there's really no other way the Bible can present it to us. As soon as John wrote the words, the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, the Word was God, we have to deal with the fact that there is an eternal relationship, where one is not the other in terms of their persons. In one sense they have identity, one was God, There's identity, but there's difference. And how is that to be conceived? Well, in terms of that relationship, a father, son, and spirit, which is not just names that are given to the three members of the Trinity because of temple relations. It's not just given to, I mean, the son was the son. He was the eternal word. That was the one who was made flesh. God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Always was God was Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Always will be Father, Son, and Holy Spirit before incarnation, before creation. in the relationships that the persons of the Trinity had with one another. So whose mind is ready to burst here? I think all of us. Our mind is ready to burst trying to conceive of this. But it's trying to conceptualize in human language this relationship where there is difference and there is identity. There is both. It's an eternal relationship in which difference exists and identity exists. The word was with God. When you're with someone, there's difference, right? One is with the other, and yet the one that is with the other is the other. So there's also identity. Not saying, how do you figure that out? That's what Nicene is trying to do. Trying to give us at least ways to conceptualize it in an accurately biblical form. Yeah, Tim, were you gonna ask a question? Yeah, I was reading something on begotten. And I think it was in one of the scriptures, I can't find it, it said that Isaac was the only begotten son. Yes. Of Abraham. Yes. So that, you know, I get mixed up. but it's a different term that's used as far as begotten, other than born. You know, Abraham had other sons. Isaac was his only begotten son. Yes. Meaning, this is the unique one. This is a kind one. All the other ones could be naturally explained. This one was the son of the promise. This one came as a result of God's promise that Abraham would bear a son. Ishmael, there's a natural explanation. This one is not a natural explanation. So he's the only begotten. It speaks of uniqueness. It also speaks, I believe, of intensity of relationship and love. This is the only begotten son whom you love. Whom you love, it says in Genesis chapter 22. God so loved the world, he gave his only begotten son. He's also called the son of his love. I think it's in the book of Colossians. So there's that note of intimacy, of relationship, of love, of uniqueness, of difference. This is something that's not ordinary. You know, God has many sons, just like Abraham did. Are you son of God? As many as believed, he gave the authority to become children of God. We're sons of God. God has many sons and daughters. He has only one unique son. He has only one only begotten son. Jesus is the unique son. It's interesting in John's gospel, Jesus himself seems to make a difference between his relationship to the Father as his God and his Father, and the relationship of the disciples to God as their God and their Father. He says, I ascend unto my God and to your God, to my Father and to your Father. He didn't say our Father. He didn't say our Father. There's a difference in relationship. One is natural, it's always been. The other is grace formed. It's as a result of adoption. It's a result of our being brought into God's family through faith in Jesus Christ. That's God's work of, in one sense, bringing people down here. because of our need of salvation, into union with what's going on up here, that we share in the divine nature, in 1 Peter, we share in the life of God. Not becoming God, but yet participating. in what's going on in the Trinity, this relationship of intimacy and love and commitment. God is a God who shares that with us. He didn't have to create the world. He wasn't lonely. There was no lack of fellowship. But for the sake of God glorifying His own great name, as well as in love, embracing a world that He's made, that enter into union and communion with Him, God made this world for that end and that purpose. Astounding, astounding. But again, our relationship to God as Father is not the same as Jesus' relationship to God as His God and His Father. And again, part of what is confusing is that What happens in the Trinity, eternally, gets, in some ways, reenacted in time. That the son who's eternally begotten becomes begotten of Mary. It's conceived in the womb of the Virgin. born of Mary. And the language of the angel to Mary is that which is conceived of you will be called the Son of God. Wait a minute. Does that mean he becomes the Son of God when he was incarnate? I mean, that's something that Evan was struggling with a couple weeks ago when he was here when he raised that question. That certainly is a biblical truth. That Jesus was incarnate in the womb of the Virgin, was born of Mary, is the Son of God by reason of his birth. But the fact that he is the son of God in terms of birth is a picture of a relationship that happened, a relationship that he had with his father eternally. Why is it appropriate that it's the son who is incarnate and not the father? Why didn't the son send the father? Or why didn't the Holy Spirit become incarnate in the womb of the Virgin? You see, the person of the Trinity that comes in the flesh, comes in the flesh because there's something that corresponds in the eternal relationship that he has with the Father that makes that appropriate. So in a real sense, what happens in, say it again, what happens in the mission, or the economy, that's what the old language is, the economy of salvation, what happens in the economy doesn't stay in the economy. What happens in the economy, what happens in the mission is a reflection of what happens in the immanence of God's being. This is revelatory. This shows us who our God is. It's this God who comes to save who's revealed in the mission. That the God who comes to save is the God who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And how he saves reveals who he is. Does that make sense? Well, we'll say more of this when we get to the opening up of the biblical teaching. But I do just want to go back to Mycenae just briefly. That the distinction is there in the text of the Nicene Creed. That he's begotten, not made. He didn't get begotten by an act of creation. He was begotten because of an eternal relationship with God. Now, again, sonship is not just a question of origin. It's also a question of relationship. And the children we beget are like us, are they not? They possess our nature. They possess our genes. They possess likeness to us. And so the son possesses likeness. He possesses, he's the expressed image of the father. That's the language of scripture. He's the image of the invisible God, the God you cannot see, you do see in the incarnation. Now you don't see the son eternally either. You know, the eternal word you'd never see. You see the eternal word made flesh. who dwelt among us and we behold as gory. We behold as gory in flesh. We don't behold as gory as he eternally was before creation. He's the eternal son. Before Abraham was, I am. But that aspect of his existence, we do not behold. That's deity. That's every bit as much deity as the deity of the father. He doesn't possess a lesser deity. But yet He is not the Father. He is the Son. But He is God. Every bit as much as the Father is God. And that's what the Nicene Creed is endeavoring to say. It's in the language light, God of God, light of light. Very God of very God. And then in answer to the Arians, they say, begotten, not made, being one substance with the Father. There's one substance that is God, and the Son has it. There's one substance that is God and the Father has it. There's one substance that is God and the Holy Spirit has it. They share the same substance. All that is in God is in the Son. All that is in God is in the Father. All that is in God is in the Holy Spirit. We don't have three gods, we have one God. So they have this identity, but there's also this distinction. and that the father is not the son and the son is not the spirit, et cetera, et cetera. So I'm not asking if you understand this. We don't, but we affirm it. We confess it and we do it on the basis of that which is taught in scripture and that which is revealed in the mission. This is your God who comes to save you. This is Yahweh who said he will come to the temple. He will come. and take upon himself the whole armor of God and deliver his people from their sins. That's what the God of the Old Testament promised. And that's what the God of the Old Testament does in the incarnation of Jesus. So you have the awareness throughout the gospels that Jesus is Israel's God in flesh. The things that are said of Yahweh are said of Jesus. To me, every knee shall bow, every tongue shall confess. He's a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense. Those are all language that the New Testament uses with respect to Jesus. The Lord is my shepherd. Yahweh is my shepherd. Jesus comes and says, I am the good shepherd. So Jesus reveals himself as Israel's God. Before Abraham was I. And again, none of that is an actual statement of Trinitarian truth, but all of it can't be figured out apart from Trinitarian truth. It's only the doctrine of the Trinity that makes sense of these statements of the scriptures. So, yes, Don, please. Is there a boat product? It's real. For instance, God's own son will judge the world in the end days. The son is going to be the judge, is that correct? Yeah, but, but yeah, I would just say that the son is the one who will appear on the throne of judgment as all the nations are brought before him. But remember, he's the only one that's in the enfleshed one. So if God's going to hold a judgment in which he judges the world in righteousness, he's going to do it by the man whom he has ordained according to Acts chapter seven. So it's actually, it's, it's really through Christ God judges. So in other words, in everything that pertains to the mission, though you might see parts of the mission in which the sun is at the, the, um, the, um, spotlight is placed upon the sun in this aspect of mission, or the spotlight is placed on the spirit in this act of the mission. It's all the saving mission of the triune God. I tied that in with him not knowing when he'd come again, that only God the Father knows. It's the mission of each. segment of the triune God. Yeah. Well, I think part of the ignorance is also the fact that the Son is enfleshed, but that's another issue of the two natures in Jesus and how that works out. But I think according to the divine nature of Jesus, which we confess that he possessed, it has full equality with the Spirit and the Father, and they're all involved in the mission. I think of the resurrection as a good example. Who raised Jesus from the dead? I'm sorry? You can find scripture passages that speak of the resurrection as the work of each member of the Trinity. It said God raised him from the dead, the father. Jesus said, destroy this temple in three days, I will raise it. And you have the Spirit of Him that raised Jesus from the dead. Now that's a hard one. It's the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead. That seems to be the Spirit. But it also seems to be the Father in that. The point is, they all are one. As well as three. And whenever you see the oneness, the threeness is not far behind. Whenever you see the act of one of the members of the Trinity, the other members of the Trinity are not far behind, because this is the work of the one God who is three persons. So again, scripture will attribute things to Jesus. He says, all judgment has been given to the son. The father has given the son to have life in himself. He's given him to have all judgment. There's all these statements about what the father gives to the son. But when the father gives to the son the authority to do this, that, or the next, it's not as if the father is not active and involved in that which he gives the son to do. I mean, creation is a good example of this. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth, and yet all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. And then, of course, from the New Testament vantage point, from the vantage point of the revelation of God as Father, Son, and Spirit, we can look back to the Old Testament. And in the Old Testament, We see creation going on in Genesis 1, and we understand that's the work of the God who is Father, Son, and Spirit. God didn't become Father, Son, and Spirit when Jesus was incarnate and the Spirit was given at Pentecost. God did not change. God always has been and always will be Father, Son, and Spirit. So now when we go back to the Old Testament, then we look at the creation account, and we see that in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. when the earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And then we read that the Spirit of God hovered over the face of the water. Now we might not have understood that from just the Old Testament vantage point. We might have just said, well, the Spirit of God is God. as God working as a spirit. God as spirit. You might just think that's just God as spirit hovering over the face of the waters. But I think from the whole canon, you go back and you say, well, that's the personalized Holy Spirit of God that hovered over the face of the waters. And then God said, And you can't look at, and God said, without considering he's called the word. The son is called the word in John chapter one. And also without also seeing that the Paul says that Christ is the power of God, as well as the wisdom of God. And so the power of God that created is the word. All things are made through him and without him is not anything made that is made. So when you think of any act of God, I mean really any act of God, You think of the three persons. They're all involved in some way, fashion or form. Although scripture might put the spotlight on one. Yet it's still the act of the three. Does that make sense? We start reading the Bible that way. We're good Trinitarians. Right? No, we become heretics. Because we don't like to live with tension. So you give up one thing in an endeavor to explain the unexplainable. We have to get back to our first studies in the doctrine of God. Go back to the incomprehensibility of God. We are mortals endeavoring to understand the immortal. We are creatures endeavoring to understand the uncreated. We are in a realm of thought of as temple creatures trying to understand the eternality. You can't, you can't. What you should do is worship. What you should do is just sit back at some point and say, Lord, bless your holy name. You know, what marvels you've made known about yourself. And I'm so thankful that all the three members of the Godhead are at work for me. Amazing, amazing. The Father's for me, the Son is for me, the Spirit is for me. Oh, what a tremendous amount of confidence. you ought to have in the recognition of that reality. Yeah. Well, we don't have to understand all this for salvation. I mean, we have to have faith. God said it, we believe it. I don't understand how you made a leoparded person become whole. How a person who couldn't see become whole. We have to have the faith to believe what God told us and shared to us. Here's what happens is often we read the scriptures without any imagination. We're not really thinking through what's going on here. Put yourself in the midst of it, and then try to figure out all the things you never thought of before. I mean, just think of the confession of the, we're going to say it this morning, of the centurion. Saying to Jesus, I'm a man of authority, like you're under authority, obviously. You've been given the authority of God to do the things that you do. I've been given the authority by Caesar to do the things that I do. Only a paltry comparison in terms of what you do and what I do. But yet you can speak a word and my servant will be healed. And you need to think, what does that imply about the faith of the man? What actually is he seeing when he looks at Jesus? I mean, first of all, you speak the word. And you think this guy, well, this guy, you know, he loved the Jewish nation. He built them a synagogue. You've got to think he knows something about the Old Testament scriptures. And you've got to think, you speak a word, and this is going to happen. You've got to think he's thinking in terms of, you're the incarnation of the God who spoke the words into existence. You created man. You can heal a disease with a word. You did all this with a word. You can do this with a word. And you've created distance and space and time. It's ridiculous that you need to be under my roof to get this thing done. You don't. Absolutely you do not. So you begin to read in between the lines, what's this saying? And you get back to the reality of Jesus' deity. It's there on every single page. He is Yahweh enfleshed. Israel's God come in the flesh. I never get tired of saying that because it's true and we don't see it as often as we should in our reading of the scriptures. And this really is more often than not the poverty of our own imaginations. That's one of the benefits of reading some of those older writers. These guys have nothing else to do but think great thoughts about God and read scripture. And sometimes they say absurd things, reading into things, things that really are not there. Many times they just open up the door to understanding of things you never would have thought of before. Anyway, but they were thinking like Trinitarians when they came to the scriptures. They read the scriptures like Trinitarian Christians. And when you do that, it really begins to open up. Now you don't need to know these things to be saved, but as a saved person, you want to see God in his word and you want to understand God and who he is. And you know, you're not going to figure him out unto perfection, but the whole purpose of the revelation is again, to expand your own soul. I mean, is this not a soul-expanding exercise to think about God? I mean, if we're really thinking through these things, it can't help but expand your own mind, and your heart, and your love, and your commitment. This is expansive stuff. And therefore, it's important stuff to feed upon. Yes, Tom? I have a couple of questions. What's the benefit of that being in here? And number two, that word substance. I'm not sure I understand. I have my own concept of what I think substance means. Yes, it means they share the same deity. Godhead. The substance of God is all that is in God. That's divine substance. And so they share that. Their one substance. Right, but we have, we don't, again, we don't, we have no concept at all of anything to relate that to. We don't know, like substance means something in my brain and I don't know that my being. Yeah, again, this is a translation of a Greek text. So exactly what, I don't even have in my mind what the word is that's translated to substance. I think it might be the thing that we get hypostasis from. But that's an English transliteration, I think of it. It might be hypostasis. But I think the point is, it's the state of things that is in God. It is all the things that are in God. Everything that you would associate with Godhead or God or deity. Jesus possesses it. Yeah. And then the statement being of one substance is simply, summarizing. So the light is in God, and God is light, the Father is light, the Son is light, the Spirit is light. If love is in God, the Father is love, the Son is love, and the Spirit is love. So all that's the substance of God. That's all that is in God. And all that is in God is God. I think it is. I think it is. Being of one substance with God by whom all things were made. I think that's really summarizing. everything that comes before. So to everything that you see that is in God, which is particularized. I mean, Jesus has, in a sense, what he has from the Father in terms of this eternal beginning. Again, confusing, don't understand it, but he's not the Father. He's different from the Father. And so there is this possession of his, of what he is, that is derived from. not in time, not as an act of God's will, not as something that changed God in any shape or fashion. Again, we're dealing with human concepts to understand the eternal God. God is in his eternity. is Father, Son, and Spirit, and there's this relationship. And this relationship involves begetting of the Father to the Son, the Father is unbegotten, the Son is begotten, and the procession of the Spirit from the Father and Son. And that's eternal, that exists in God. And that helps us to understand what happens again in the mission. Why the Son becomes incarnate, why the Spirit is sent of the Father and the Son. Okay? But this is speaking about God in himself. Again, it doesn't get to God and creation until the next phrase, who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. Then it begins the mission. But everything before that is above the line. Okay? So is it clear what the Nicene Creed is trying to do? It's trying to identify who Jesus is. It's trying to identify who Jesus is with references eternal existence in relationship to the Father. Now, maybe I ought to say this because much of what is said about, and Don brought this up, about the Father and Son, that seems to be the area where scripture and confessions tend to emphasize things. I mean, for instance, you have the third statement in the third paragraph, and I believe in the Holy Ghost, and that's basically what the Apostles' Creed says. You know, I believe in the Holy Spirit and then a bunch of other things. And not more said here, a little bit more said, he's the Lord and giver of life. And then the statement, he proceeds from the father and the son. That's also the one above the line. Now it's also true in terms of what happens in the mission, but I think it's endeavoring to say, as Lord and giver of life, that's his relationship to God. He is the one who is Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and Son together is worshiped. Now maybe that's more in terms of the mission. I'm not really sure. I'm not really sure what the intent was. But I think one of the things that you see, both in scripture and in confessions, is that the emphasized is a part of the Father, and it's a part of the Son. So you might ask the question, why are we Binitarians? Why are we Trinitarians? Much of it doesn't really address the subject of the Spirit. I mean, it does in the Nicene Creed, and even as you move along, in terms of the further councils, more is said about the subject of the Spirit. But it's not really the point of emphasis. Why the Nicene Creed was created to begin with is this question of who is Jesus over and against what the Aryans were saying about Jesus. And we're not blessed if the Holy Spirit comes at the end of the equation. And yet, we know essentially, the name of the God of whom we are baptized is the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And so if the Father and the Son are above the Son, we know the Holy Spirit also is above the Son. He's part of the Godhead, that there is And that is, what is it about the Holy Spirit that would make this state of things appropriate? I think it's what Jesus says about the Spirit in John 4 through 16. He does not come to glorify himself. He comes to glorify me. He is the one whom Jesus says, I will send, and the Father will send, and his work is to testify. He will testify. He will tell you. He will bring all things to your remembrance. It seems to me that the biblical revelation of the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit is that member of the Trinity who does operate more in the background than in the foreground. that, again, is not lesser God, but just in the economy of salvation, that is what seems to be. In the mission, that's what seems to be. And you can't say in the eminence of God, what God is in itself, that he's any lesser than God. but that he does seem to operate in terms of the mission in a lesser way, not in the spotlight, but in the background. But he operates as God, and he is holy God, and he is to be worshipped as God, and if we worship this God and he's part of the God of his neighbor baptized and we give all honor praise and glory and we sing glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost and that's white and it's proper and it's good and it's Christian and it's biblical but yet it's also biblical to see that the way he operates is not always in the forefront. the cults and the heretics seem to attack the faith of the church. So hence, the church becomes defensive and looks to gird up its teaching ministry to come against the false teaching. OK? Just something? No, I was just thinking. understanding is that at least a whole bulk of the World War Church of God has actually become Trinitarian. And Gardner Ted, he was kicked out. He had too many affairs, right? Yeah. You know who we're talking about, that old radio preacher, Herbert Armstrong? He had sexual issues and he was kicked out by his father. That's what I didn't understand. Yeah, for the most part. But it took them another 10 years before they finally said, you know what? Okay, well, there's hope for some of these groups, though. There's hope. That's why it's important to be clear in our statements. Now, this brings me to one other thing that I did want to say about the Nicene Council. I was hoping to get further this morning, but I hope this at least has been helpful where we've been. Is there something in the Nicene Creed that was produced and affirmed by Chalcedon, I believe also by Constantinople, There's another paragraph that we don't have in our hymnal, we don't have in the traditional recitations of the Nicene Creed. And that is the anathemas of the Nicene Creed. You know what an anathema is? You read it in Galatians chapter 1, Paul says, if we or an angel from heaven preach to you any other gospel than that which we preach, let it be anathema. and this idea of anathema, it really has to do with being cursed of God. It has to do with the things that were devoted to destruction in the Old Testament. I believe that word is used. I'm pretty sure, but not absolutely certain. And it's subdugent of the Old Testament with respect to that. There's an anathematization of those things. They're no part of the things of God at all. And so Paul, as an apostle, declares there are certain teachings that put you outside of the fold of true saving faith, of true saving religion. If you hold to these beliefs and opinions, you basically have denied the gospel. And that's what the church, that's what the Nicene Fathers were endeavoring to say with regard to those who taught Arian things. But to those who say they, this is what I'm going to read it to you, but those who say there was when the Son of God was not, remember that's what Arius was saying, there was when he was not. Now they're saying, those who say there was when the Son of God was not, and before he was begotten he was not, and that he came into being from things that are not, or that he's of a different hypostasis or substance, or that he is mutable or alterable, the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes. So there is this blanket anathematization, this statement of this is outside the pale of true and saving religion. And that's that they put at the end of the Nicene Creed. Just to make it clear, you Aryans, you're not within the fold. You're outside of the fold quite clearly. Now, my own opinion is it's best not to anathematize. I know. Good people have done it. Good people have done a lot of things. Paul did it, but he's an apostle. And, you know, when I encounter somebody that's teaching a falsehood or teaching something that's not true, and let's say they're teaching something like you've got to be circumcised to be a Christian. You've got to keep the Old Testament law to be a Christian. I want to call their attention, hey, look, you're teaching something that the Apostle Paul says this about. You ought to be pretty, pretty scared about where you're standing with reference to God and utter a clear warning to them. But I don't think the church should be going around and anathematizing. I think the church should be teaching. The church should be saying, here's what we say. And those who say contrary are not teaching the truth. But to say you're damned, basically, to say that you are going to hell for holding these opinions tends to, tends to, well, not make many bridges, let's put it that way, towards the people holding these opinions. And I don't want to lose their ears, I really don't. I think one of the things that happened after Chalcedon was, I'm not saying just because of the anathematizations, but there was a lot of bitterness. Theological controversies can get very ugly, and people can take positions that they think are justified in a very non-Christian spirit. And I don't think that's very valuable in terms of the progress of truth in the world. Now, the aftermath of Nicaea, the aftermath of the Council of Nicaea didn't think a whole lot of the product that came out of the Council of Nicaea. You might have thought, look, 300 bishops meet, and the overwhelming majority of them affirm this statement of faith. End of the story. Isn't that what the Catholic Church tells us? They tell us their ecumenical councils are inspired of God. They say they're absolutely authoritative. Eastern Orthodoxy says the same thing. Somehow that message did not get into the ears of a lot of people that were in Nicaea. And even some of the people that were, I think there were a couple of the bishops that wouldn't sign on to it. Certainly Arius did not sign on to it. There was a guy named Eusebius, not the historian Eusebius of Caesarea, but Eusebius of Nicosia. Ah, Nicodemia? I forget. I forget exactly what the name of the town was. But anyway, he would not sign on to it. In fact, he became one of the leading agitators in favor of the Arian position. And what ended up happening, you might ask yourself, my wife asked me this, well, look, if the Council of Nicaea made these declarations, how did it happen that you had Athanasius against the world? You all here remember that? Remember? Athanasius Contramundo? Anybody? Nobody? OK. You've heard of that? Oh, I told you that. OK. Yeah. Well, how did it happen that Athanasius stood against the world? That's one of the famous things that was said about Athanasius, is that he stood against the world. And the reason he stood against the world is that not too long, not too many decades after the Council of Nicaea, Saint Jerome had said that we, to our great I forget exactly the usage of the words that he used, but through our shock and consternation, we woke up and the whole world was Arian. Imagine waking up and the whole world is Jehovah's Witness. It's kind of the shock of what happened. The whole world had become Arian. Well, the fact of the matter was, first of all, Constantine, who convened the Council of Nicea, he died. He had one of his sons. He had a couple of his sons, and all of his sons, for some reason, some derivative, some form of Constantine. There was Constans, and then there was Constantius. So there was some derivative of his name that all of his kids had. And they were fighting against control of the empire. And I think, ultimately, It passed into the hands of, well, first of all, Constantius himself was pretty much in favor of the Arian position, and he gave a lot of support, and he was one of the reasons that some, two of the exiles, I believe, of Athanasius took place, where he was actually exiled from Alexandria. And then there were other emperors that came afterwards. And it wasn't until a little while before the Second Ecumenical Council that there was a guy, I believe his name was Theodorus. He became the emperor and affirmed the conclusions of the Nicene Council. So there's lots of stuff that went on in the intervening period between the Nicene Council and the First Council of Constantinople. And I don't have the time to get into it today, but the fact of who God raised up to be great defenders of the truth. Of course, Athanasius continued his writings against the Arians and his clear exposition of Trinitarian truth along with him. Well, the Cappadocian Fathers, I always love to tell you about the Cappadocian Fathers. They've made important contributions to theology, and God willing, next week I'll tell you what those contributions were. We don't have time to do it, but those were three. And then there was this man I told you about, Hilary of Portiers, that also wrote on the subject of the Trinity very wisely, very well, very powerfully. And so there were some amazing servants of Christ that were raised up during this period of time to further clarify, articulate truth over and against other errors that had come to the fore. And so next week, we're going to deal with the errors. We're going to deal with the champions of God who stood up in the face of error to defend the truth. And that'll lead us up to the Second Council of Constantinople and the matters that they came to address. So just to whet your appetite a little bit for what's to come. I hope you can find it interesting. Let's commit our thoughts to the Lord as we go to Him in prayer. Father, we are thankful for the blessings we've known as your people, as we've considered the truths of Scripture, as we've endeavored to follow after the way in which these truths were understood and came to be articulated in the history of the Church. And we are thankful for the champions that you raised up, men of faith, men of scripture, men who endeavored to articulate with clarity what the Word of God taught on these matters. And we pray that, Lord, as we are beneficiaries of their wisdom, that, Lord, we would be able to Not only see what they saw but by your grace even see a bit further into the great mysteries of godliness Now we ask your blessing to be with us as we greet one another this morning As we enter into your worship in the morning hour We pray that your great name would be honored as we seek you together in Jesus name. Amen