9. Montaigne’s The Essays

In the 20th century, [Montaigne] is fully recognized in all his aspects as a great writer, and his public is worldwide. Most of his readers see him as friend, mentor, and master of the essay, of the “art of being truthful,” and of the art of living. (page 396, volume 12, The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Encyclopedia Britannica, 1974)

In my rereading of selections from Great Books of the Western World guided by The Great Ideas Program, I’ve again reached Montaigne’s The Essays. The eighth reading in the eighth volume of The Great Ideas Program, Ethics: The Study of Moral Values by Mortimer J. Adler and Seymour Cain (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1962) considers another selection of the essays (11 of 107) in The Essays.

Adler and Cain consider the characteristics of Montaigne’s essays, the selected essays, and five specific questions on the reading. Here I’ll sketch Montaigne’s life, comment on Montaigne’s use of the essay, list the titles of the essays assigned for the reading, outline Adler and Cain’s guide to the essays, and share the questions which Adler and Cain ask about the reading.

Montaigne’s Life

This summary of Montaigne’s life is copied from my earlier article on The Essays, https://opentheism.wordpress.com/2017/12/08/9-montaignes-the-essays/. My primary sources for it were the biographical note on pages v-vi of the volume on Montaigne in Great Books of the Western World (volume 25; Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952) and “Montaigne, Michel de” in The New Encyclopedia Britannica (volume 12; Encyclopedia Britannica, 1974).

Montaigne was born Michel Eyquem on February 28, 1533, in the Château of Montaigne near Bordeaux. His father was a prosperous merchant and lord of the seigneury of Montaigne, and his mother was descended from a family of Spanish Jews that had recently converted to Catholicism. He was their third son, but by the death of his older brothers became heir to the estate.

Montaigne was brought up gently and until he was six was taught to speak only Latin. At that age he was sent to the Collège de Guyenne in Bordeaux. After seven disappointing years there, he studied law at Toulouse. In 1554 his father obtained a position for him in a new tax court in Bordeaux. In 1557 the court was abolished and its members were absorbed into one of the regional bodies that composed the Parlement of France, the king’s highest court of justice.

In 1565 Montaigne married Françoise de La Chassaigne, whose father was also a member of the the Parlement of Bordeaux. Although fond of women, he accepted marriage unenthusiastically as a social duty. However he lived on excellent terms with his wife and bestowed some pains on the education of their daughter, Léonore, the only one of six children to survive infancy.

In 1568 Montaigne’s father died, leaving him the lord of Montaigne. Two years later he sold his Parlement position, abandoned the name of Eyquem, and retired to his estate, intending to collect his ideas and write. While there (1571-1580) he wrote the first two books of The Essays, which were published in 1580 at Bordeaux.

The year after publishing The Essays Montaigne left the estate for extensive travel determined to find relief from internal disorders that had been troubling him. In 1581 while he was at La Villa in Italy, he learned that he had been elected mayor of Bordeaux. Returning there he served as mayor efficiently and was re-elected to a second term, which ended in 1585. He again retired to Montaigne but shortly after was driven from his estate by the plague.

Montaigne had begun revising The Essays almost immediately after their publication, perfecting their form and added new ones. While in Paris in 1588, he supervised the publication of the fifth edition of The Essays, the first to contain Book III. However he continued working on The Essays after returning to his estate, not writing any new books or chapters but adding numerous passages.

Sometime after returning to his estate in 1588, Montaigne was stricken with quinsy, which brought about a paralysis of the tongue. On the evening of September 13, 1592, he had his wife call together some of his neighbours so that he might bid them farewell. He requested mass to be said in his room and died while it was being said. He was 59.

Montaigne’s Use of the Essay

This comment on Montaigne’s use of the essay is copied from my earlier article on The Essays, https://opentheism.wordpress.com/2017/12/08/9-montaignes-the-essays/.

An essay is “a literary composition of moderate length, dealing in an easy, cursory way with a single subject, usually representing the writer’s personal experience and outlook” (page 963 of volume III of The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Encyclopedia Britannica, 1974). Although earlier authors wrote essays, the term essai was first applied to the form by Montaigne, to emphasize that his compositions were just attempts to express his personal thoughts and experiences.

Adler and Wolff say that the most outstanding property of Montaigne’s essays is their intensely personal nature. They note that he often observes that his essays are products of leisurely speculation rather than products of experimentation and that he establishes his position by use of quotations and examples rather than by argument. Thus “both in method and intent … Montaigne is not a philosopher” (page 103, Mortimer J. Adler and Peter Wolff , A General Introduction to the Great Books and to a Liberal Education, Encyclopedia Britannica, 1959).

However they continue by asserting that “in aim and outlook, though not in method, Montaigne is akin to the modern social scientist. His concerns and subject matter fall into the field of history, anthropology, psychology, and sociology; all of these are the branches of social or behavioral science. And so, though the matter of his book is on one way himself, in another it is all of human behavior.” (same source as the previous quotation).

Essays Assigned in the Reading

That to study philosophy is to learn to die
Of moderation
Of cannibals
That we are to avoid pleasure, even at the expense of life
That the relish of good and evil depends in a great measure upon the opinion we have of them
Of drunkenness
Of cruelty
Of glory
Of virtue
Of anger
Of repentance

The Essays can be read at https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/3600/pg3600-images.html.

Outline of Adler and Cain’s Guide to the Assigned Essays

I uses the beginning of “Of repentance” to show how Montaigne uses himself to illustrate the human condition and to show his sense of the changeability of things. I also identifies three characteristics of Montaigne’s essays that may prove irritating if the reader is looking for a definite doctrine: 1. he copies copiously from the writings of the past; 2. he indulges in various digressions from the subject he is dealing with; and 3. it is often hard to tell what the main topic of an essay is.
II shows how these three essays demonstrate Montaigne’s closeness to the ancient Stoics: “That to study philosophy is to learn to die”, “That the relish of good and veil depends in a great measure upon the opinion we have of them”, and “Of glory.”
III considers what Montaigne views as the main virtue, moderation, in “Of moderation” ; a deplorable but not so bad vice, drunkenness, in “Of drunkenness”; and what he views as one of the most dangerous of passions, anger, in “Of anger.”
IV discusses in “Of cruelty” the nature of virtue. In it Montaigne distinguishes three types or levels of virtue: the state in which virtue has become a fixed and settled habit of soul, the state in which a person struggles successfully with very urgent and powerful natural impulses, and a state of natural innocence and goodness. The vice which upsets Montaigne most is cruelty. The unfavourable comparison between civilized and primitive society made in “Of cruelty” is developed fully in “Of cannibals.”
V considers “Of repentance.” Montaigne defines repentance as “a recanting of the will and an opposition to our fancies.” He observes that it is a matter of action, not of mere thoughts or wishes, and that it should be directed to the future, to what can be changed, not to the past, which he regards for all practical purposes as determined.

Questions Asked by Adler and Cain on the Assigned Essays

• Does Montaigne think that good and evil are merely a matter of opinion?
• Does Montaigne believe that our conduct should be governed by the moral standards of our place and time?
• Is man good in a state of nature?
• Is a man’s treatment of animals subject to ethical judgment?
• Does Montaigne have a social ethic?

John 7:1-52

Yesterday evening our Life group studied John 7:1-52. It describes Jesus’ visit to Jerusalem on the Feast of Tabernacles. The Feast of Tabernacles primarily celebrated the completion of harvest but also commemorated the goodness of God to His people during the wilderness wanderings. The name “tabernacles” refers to the custom of building leafy shelters to be lived in during the festival. See Leviticus 23:33-43. The following questions on the chapter are taken from The NIV Serendipity Bible for Study Groups, which Serendipity House, Littleton, Colorado, 1988, gave me permission to use in small group study.

Jesus Goes to the Feast of Tabernacles (7:1-13)

1. Why did the religious leaders want to kill Jesus (see 5:18)?
   The religious leaders wanted to kill Jesus because he broke the Sabbath and because he called God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
2. In urging Jesus to attend this feast, are the brothers being sincere or sarcastic (vv. 2-5; see 6:42,66)? Explain.
   The brothers’ advice was not given sincerely because they didn’t yet believe in Jesus.
3. What rumors are circulating about Jesus in Jerusalem? Hence, why do you think he chose to go secretly?
   Some say that Jesus is a good man, but others say that he deceives the people. Jesus chose to go secretly or privately because he didn’t want to attract the publicity that his brothers had recommended.

Jesus Teaches at the Feast (7:14-24)

1. Given the risk, why does Jesus go to the festival? How do people react to his teaching? Why?
   Jesus goes to the festival to teach. People react to his teaching in amazement, asking where he gets such learning (knowledge of Scripture) without having studied under a recognized rabbi.
2. What do Jesus’ responses reveal about his authority? About their authority? Their objections to his healing? Their judgments?
   Jesus’ responses reveal that his authority comes from God but that their authority came from themselves. He claims that if circumcising a child on the Sabbath was in agreement with the Law of Moses so was healing a man whole on the Sabbath. He says that they judged by mere appearances rather than by right judgment.

Is Jesus the Christ? (7:25-44)

1. Who is saying what about Jesus in this passage? What is causing the confusion?
   Some people of Jerusalem observe that Jesus is the man the religious leaders want to kill but that he is speaking publicly and they aren’t saying anything to him. They wonder if this means that they really know that he is the Christ.
2. Why does Jesus’ teaching in verses 14-29 provoke the responses of verses 30-31? How do you account for the wide range of opinions about him? For the “timing” involved?
   In verses 14-29 Jesus claims that God sent him and that his authority came from God. Some tried to arrest Jesus, but others put their faith in him because they couldn’t conceive the Christ doing more miracles than Jesus did. We suggested that his time (verse 8) had come.
3. Every day at the feast, water would be poured out as a symbol of thanks for God’s provision. In this context, what does Jesus’ statement in verses 37-38 mean? What are some of the ways that the Spirit’s work is like water (compare 4:13-14)? How is the Spirit received?
   I understand verses 37-38 to mean that mean that ones who believe in Jesus will be moved by the Holy Spirit to express thanks to God. According to 4:13-14 just as water quenches thirst the Holy Spirit gives eternal life. The Holy Spirit is received by believing in Jesus.
4. How does the confusion over Jesus’ birthplace (vv.41-42) cloud the issue of his identity even more?
   Micah 5:2 said that the Messiah would be come from Bethlehem, but the crowd thought that Jesu came from Galilee.

Unbelief of the Jewish Leaders (7:45-52)

2. What justification do the Pharisees offer in refuting the guards? Nicodemus? Why would Nicodemus risk defending Jesus?
   The Pharisees suggested that Jesus had deceived the guards, their being impressed by Jesus although none of the religious leaders or of the Pharisees believed in him. They told Nicodemus that no prophet had come from Galilee. Nicodemus risked defending Jesus because of his previous conversation with Jesus (chapter 3)

Reflect Questions

• Are you more likely to be cautious or daring in sharing your faith with your family? Why?
  Our answers to this question varied.
• When have you been ridiculed for your faith? What did you do?
  We couldn’t remember having been ridiculed for our faith.

John 6:1-71

Friday evening our Life group held its weekly meeting. Six members attended,. We studied John 6, and had lunch. We studied John 6 using questions from The NIV Serendipity Bible for Study Groups, which Serendipity House, Littleton, Colorado, 1988, gave me permission to use. Because of the length of the passage, I assigned fewer than half of the questions asked there. These are the questions and what I can remember of our answers to them.

Jesus Feeds the Five Thousand (6:1-15)

1. Why did the crowd follow Jesus? What did they think about him?
   The crowd followed Jesus because they had seen the miracles that he had performed by healing the sick. They thought that Jesus was the Prophet like Moses that God promised to raise up (Deut. 18:15,18).
2. What is the significance of the fact that there was more left over after the feeding than there was food to start with? What truths about Jesus does this miracle show?
   The significance of there being more left over after the feeding than there had been food to start with is that it shows that Jesus supplies abundantly. The miracle shows that Jesus provides for people’s needs.

Jesus Walks on the Water (6:16-24)

1. On a dark and stormy night, weary from rowing and afraid of capsizing, how would you have reacted if you saw Jesus on the water? When he climbed aboard?
   If I saw Jesus on the water, I would be frightened, thinking that he was a ghost. When he climbed aboard, I would be relieved. (According to the account in Matthew 14:22-33 and Mark 6:45-51, the disciples were terrified, thinking that he was a ghost, when they saw Jesus walking on the water and they were amazed and worshipped him when he climbed aboard and the wind died down.)

Jesus the Bread of Life (6:25-59)

2. How does Jesus’ response to [the crowd’s] question show the difference between his interests and theirs?
   Jesus’ response to the crowd’s question show that he was interested in spiritual matters rather than in physical matters as they were.
3. How are they to work for the food that leads to eternal life?
   They are to work for the food that leads to eternal life by believing in Jesus.
4. How does Jesus use their interest in food to illustrate what he wants them to understand? What are the similarities and differences between manna and the “bread of life” (v.35)?
   I can’t remember how we answered the first question. Similarities and differences: both manna and the “bread of life” satisfy a person’s hunger, but the former satisfies physical hunger and the latter satisfies spiritual hunger and the person who eats the former will hunger again but the person who eats the latter will never go hungry.
5. What claims does Jesus make in verses 35-40? What do these claims emphasize about his being the bread of life? About the will of the Father?
   Jesus claims that whoever comes to him will never go hungry or be thirsty and will have eternal life, that all that the Father gives him will come to him, that he came down from Heaven to do the Father’s will, and that he won’t lose any that the Father gives him. The will of the Father is that everyone who believes in the Son will have eternal life.
6. What part is played by God and by the people in the process of coming to know Jesus (vv.44-45)? What promise is repeated three times for those who come to him? Why the emphasis on this?
   God draws the people to Jesus and they listen to and learn from Him. The promise is that those who come to Jesus will receive eternal life. I can’t remember how we answered the third question.
7. From the passage as a whole, what does Jesus mean by “eating his flesh” and “drinking his blood” (compare v.40 with v.54)? How does the image of eating and drinking clarify what he means by believing in him?
   Our group said that Jesus’ saying “eating his flesh” and “drinking his blood” made them think of our participating in communion. However I observed that since Jesus hadn’t yet instituted communion, the disciples wouldn’t think of that. We agreed that although Jesus may have had communion in mind, for the disciples he meant believing in him. I can’t remember how we answered the second question.

Many Disciples Desert Jesus (6:60-71)

1. What teaching do Jesus’ followers find so unacceptable (6:54-56)? How has their attitude changed since verses 14-15?
   The teaching that Jesus’ followers find so unacceptable is the eating his flesh and drinking his blood will give them eternal life. In verses 14-15 they viewed him as the Prophet and wanted to make him king, but now they question him and quit following him.

Reflect Questions

In your culture, what is the main reason for following Jesus? What was your original motive?
We gave different answers tp the first question, including that we are raised in a church environment.
When times are hard, what keeps you from junking your faith and going on to something else?
I can’t remember how we answered this question.

John 5:1-47

Thursday evening our Life group held its weekly meeting. All seven members attended,. We studied John 5, and had lunch. We studied John 5 using questions from The NIV Serendipity Bible for Study Groups, which Serendipity House, Littleton, Colorado, 1988, gave me permission to use. Because of the length of the passage, I assigned only some of the questions asked there. These are the questions and what I can remember of our answers to them.

The Healing at the Pool (5:1-15)

2. … What does Jesus mean by his question in verse 6? What did the invalid hope Jesus might do?
   Some in the group thought that Jesus was just asking the man if he wanted to get well and others thought that Jesus was offering to make the man well. The invalid hoped that Jesus would help him get into the pool when the water was stirred.
3. As an invalid, what do you feel in verses 8-9? In verses 10-12? In verse 13? In verse 14?
   We gave different answers to these questions. I said that I would feel thankful in verses 8-9, frightened in verses 10-12, frustrated in verse 13, and relieved in verse 14.
4. Why were the leaders so upset? How do you suppose they responded to his medical update (v.15)?
   The leaders were upset because the man’s carrying the mat and Jesus’ making him well occurred on the Sabbath. We gave different answers to the second question. I said that I supposed that they felt angry at Jesus.

Life Through the Son (5:16-30)

1. What was the result for Jesus of healing the man in verses 1-15?
   The result for Jesus of healing the man was that the Jewish leaders began to persecute him.
2. How did his response to the Jewish leaders only heighten their opposition? Why would Jesus do this?
   Jesus’ response to the Jewish leaders heightened their opposition because he claimed a special relationship with God (the Father). We gave different answers to the second question. I said that Jesus did it to justify his making the man well on the Sabbath.
3. In what ways is Jesus equal to the Father? What terms are used to show the relationship between the two? How does this relate to 1:1 and 1:18?
   Jesus is equal to the Father because he does the things that the Father does, gives life to the dead, and will judge the dead. ‘The Father” and “the Son” show the relationship between them. 1:1 and 1:18 identify Jesus with God.
4. What claims does Jesus make about himself in verse 24? What is the promise? When does someone start to possess this promise?
   In verse 24 Jesus claims that whoever listens to him and believes in God has eternal life. That life begins now.
5. What happens to those who hear and believe (vv.24-30)? To those who so not?
   Those who hear and believe will rise from their graves to live. Those who do not will rise to be condemned.

Testimonies About Jesus (5:31-47)

2. Who or what testifies in favor of Jesus? How do you think the religious leaders felt when Jesus refers to these witnesses (already discounted by these authorities)?
   Who or what testifies in favour of Jesus are John the Baptist, the works of Jesus, the Father, the Scriptures, and Moses. We gave different answers to the second question. I said that I thought that the religious leaders were skeptical when Jesus referred to these witnesses.
3. How does Jesus throw back at the religious leaders their own Scriptures? Since lack of information was not their problem, what was?
   Jesus told the religious leaders that their own Scriptures tell about him. Their problem was that they didn’t believe that the Scriptures told about Jesus.

Reflect

What “witnesses” have convinced you that Jesus is indeed the one who gives life?
I said that “witnesses” that have convinced me that Jesus is indeed the one who gives life are the Bible, my parents, the church, and things that have happened to me personally. The others gave similar answers.

7. Hobbes’ Leviathan

“Hobbes’s ethical thought is of special interest to the present-day reader, because it attempts to interpret human behavior in terms of physical bodies and their movements—inner emotion in terms of outer motion. Hobbes’s materialistic account of human psychology and conduct, based on the mechanico-mathematical world picture of his day, provides us with a first look at a type of interpretation that became more prominent in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This view is presented with the force and vigor of Hobbes’s magnificant and ideosyncratic prose style.” (Mortimer J. Adler and Seymour Cain, Ethics: The Study of Moral Values, Encyclopedia Britannica, 1962, pages 107-08)

The above comes from Adler and Cain’s introduction to their guide to Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan as it is given in Volume 23 of Great Books of the Western World (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952). The full text of Leviathan can be read online at https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/hobbes/Leviathan.pdf. Here I’ll give just the titles of its chapters that Adler and Cain give a guide to and the questions which they ask about those chapters.

These are the titles of the chapters of Leviathan than Adler and Cain comment on in their guide:
(Part I. Of Man)

6. Of the Interior Beginnings of Voluntary Motions, Commonly Called the Passions; and the Speeches by Which They Are Expressed
7. Of the Virtues, Commonly Called Intellectual, and Their Contrary Defects
8. Of Power, Worth, Dignity, Honour, and Worthiness
9. Of the Difference of Manners
10. Of the Natural Condition of Mankind as Concerning Their Felicity and Misery
11. Of the First and Second Natural Laws, and Contracts
12. Of Other Laws of Nature
    The other parts of Leviathan are:
    II. Of Commonwealth
    III. Of a Christian Commonwealth
    IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness

These are the questions which Adler and Cain ask about the chapters of Leviathan listed above and a few observations on their answers to the questions:

• Does Hobbes’s description of human nature provide any ethical norms?
  Adler and Cain observe that Aristotle also find a basis for ethics in human nature. They also ask if peace and order are ethical norms for Hobbes and why men “ought to endeavour peace.”
• Can psychological analysis provide the basis for ethics?
  Adler and Cain seem to agree with Hobbes that making ethical judgments is a matter of psychological predispositions and preferences even though we generalize them and allow for the action of the object.
• How are the ethical and the social related in Hobbes?
  Adler and Cain say that according to Hobbes man’s natural fears and desires, as well as his rational apprehension of the laws of nature, change man into a social/ethical human being.
• Is it possible to see the ethical state of the natural man in a different way than Hobbes did?
  Adler and Cain observe that throughout history many have seen natural man as a perfectly good and happy being. They question whether that view or Hobbes’ view is closer to reality.

John 4:1-54

Thursday evening our Life group held its weekly meeting. Only three of the six regulars were able to attend, but a friend of Leonora joined us and so we held the meeting. We studied John 4 and had lunch. We studied John 4 using questions from The NIV Serendipity Bible for Study Groups, which Serendipity House, Littleton, Colorado, 1988, gave me permission to use. These are the questions that we discussed and what I can remember of our answers to them.

Jesus Talks With a Samaritan Woman (4:1-26)

4. How would you describe the woman’s response in verse 9?
   The woman’s response in verse 9—How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria?—indicates that she was confused by a Jew, Jesus, addressing her, a Samaritan woman. (Samaritan) 2 Kings 17:24-33 records how the king of Assyria brought outsiders into Samaria who continued worshipping their own gods as well as worshipping the Lord. Although later they rejected their polytheistic origins and followed the teachings of Moses, they accepted only the Pentateuch and had their own temple (at Mount Gerizim). The verse observes that “the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.” (woman) Jewish men didn’t associate with women in public.
5. In the woman’s reply in verses 11-12, what is she really saying? How is she like Nicodemus?
   The woman’s reply in verses 11-12—Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water? Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?—shows that she thinks of physical water when Jesus refers to living water just as Nicodemus had thought of physical birth when Jesus spoke to him of being born again.
6. Why do you think this woman changed the conversation to focus on a religious controversy? In the context of this scene, what does Jesus mean by telling her that God is interested in worshippers who will do so in “spirit and truth”?
   Probably the woman changed the conversation to focus on a religious controversy because she didn’t like the turn the conversation had taken to her living with someone who was not her husband. In the context by telling the woman that God is interested in worshippers who will do so in “spirit and truth” Jesus means that where people worship isn’t important as long as they worship Him in accordance with His nature.
7. What is significant about Jesus choosing this woman as the first person to whom he revealed himself (see also vv.39-42)?
   Jesus’ choosing this woman as the first person to whom he revealed himself is significant because it shows that the Gospel is for everyone, not just for the Jews.

The Disciples Rejoin Jesus (4:27-38) & Many Samaritans Believe (4:39-42)

4. How does the parable of the harvesters apply to the disciples?
   John the Baptist and his followers had sowed the seed and the disciples of Jesus were now to reap from what they had sowed.
5. Given the social barriers between Jews and Samaritans, what do verses 40-42 teach you about Jesus? As a disciple, how would you feel about spending two days as a guest of people against whom you were prejudiced?
   Verses 40-42 teach that Jesus came for all people, not just Jews. Our answers to the second question varied.

Jesus Heals the Official’s Son (4:43-54)

3. What motivates the royal official to travel so far? How would you have responded to what Jesus told him to do? What was the result of his action?
   Concern for his son motivated the royal official to travel so far. We hoped that we would have responded as the royal official did. The result of his action was the healing of his son.
4. What does this “miraculous sign” point to about Jesus? How does it add to what was demonstrated by his first sign (see 2:1-11)?
   This “miraculous sign” pointed to Jesus’ power. It demonstrated that he could to heal at a distance.

Reflect Questions

What discussion aspects of Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan woman could you use as a model for your own discussions with searching friends?
Our answers varied.

What do you learn about being a witness from the woman? From the parable in vv. 35-38?
Our answers varied.

John 3:1-36

Yesterday evening our Life group studied John 3:1-36 guided by questions from The NIV Serendipity Bible for Study Groups (1988) that I’d given the group with the permission of Serendipity House, Littleton, Colorado in our previous meeting. Below are the questions and what I can remember of our answers.

Jesus Teaches Nicodemus (3:1-21)

DIG

1. What can you find out about Nicodemus in verses 1-2? What is significant about his coming to Jesus? Why at night (see vv. 19-20)? Why was Jesus so direct with him?
   Nicodemus was a Pharisee and a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin (“a ruler of the Jews”). His coming to Jesus was significant because of his position. We observed that he probably came at night so that others wouldn’t know that he came to Jesus or so that he could have a long talk with him which would have been hard in the daytime with the crowds around Jesus. However some Bible scholars think that “night” is symbolic of the spiritual darkness that Nicodemus lived in. Perhaps Jesus was so direct with him because Jesus realized that Nicodemus was sincere.
2. What two ideas about birth are Jesus and Nicodemus thinking of? What point is Jesus making by comparing spiritual birth to the wind? How does Jesus account for Nicodemus’ lack of understanding?
   Jesus is thinking of spiritual birth, and Nicodemus is thinking of physical birth. We observed that both are sovereign over their activities. I shared this from Arthur W. Pink’s commentary on John, “The comparison is a double one. First, both are sovereign in their activities; and second, both are mysterious in their operations.” Jesus attributes Nicodemus’ lack of understanding to his knowing only earthly things.
3. What does Jesus claim about himself in verses 13-15? How does the “snake in the desert” (Nu 21:4-9) illustrate what he has come to do?
   Jesus claims that he (the Son of Man) came from heaven and is going to be lifted up. Numbers 21:8-9 tells how Moses put a bronze snake on a pole so that people who had bitten by a snake could look on it and live. In the same way Jesus would be lifted up on a cross so that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.
4. From verses 16-18, what stands out to you about God? About what he wants to do? About how a person is condemned? How will belief show itself (vv. 15-21)?
   What stood out to us about God is His love. He wants everyone to have eternal life. A person is condemned by no believing in Jesus to be the Son of God. Belief will show itself in good works.
5. How is Jesus’ use of the words “born again” similar and different from the way it is used today? How would you define what it means to a person who had never heard the phrases?
   We couldn’t answer the first question. We said that we’d define “born again” as being born spiritually.

REFLECT

1. What first aroused your interest in Jesus? Why?
2. Where are you right now in the birthing process of eternal life: Not yet conceived? Developing, but not so anyone could tell? Heavy with child and writhing? Kicking and screaming like an infant? Growing daily? Explain.

John the Baptist’s Testimony About Jesus (3:22-36)

DIG

1. Given the different ideas about baptisms, what do you think happened at the river? What do you think the “certain Jew” had said? How would you have felt if you were one of John’s disciples at this point?
   We thought that John was baptizing people in the river by immersion. D. A. Carson says in his commentary on John, “Possibly the clash arose over the relation between John’s baptism and more traditional Jewish practices, or the practices of other prominent Jewish religious figures.” We said that if we were one of John’s disciples, we would likely have felt discouraged and jealous that more people were going to Jesus to be baptized by his disciples (John 4:2) than to John.
2. How does John the Baptist respond? What is the point of the story about the bride and bridegroom? What does John’s response tell you about him?
   John responded by saying that God was responsible for more people going the Jesus than to John. Andreas J. Kostenberger says in a note in the ESV Study Bible, “The Baptist’s reference to Jesus as the bridegroom (cf. Matt. 9:15 par.) identifies Jesus as Israel’s long-waited King and Messiah. In the OT, Israel is frequently depicted as God’s “bride” (e.g., Isa. 62:4-5; Jer. 2:2; Hos. 2:16-20). The Baptist’s role is that of the bridegroom’s friend, who selflessly rejoices with the groom (cf. John 1:6-9, 15, 19-36). On Christ as the bridegroom, see Eph. 5:25-27; Rev. 19:7-8.” Arthur W. Pink argues in his commentary on John that here the bride is regenerated Jews rather that the Church. What John’s response tells me about him is he recognized and accepted his subordination to Jesus.
3. What facts about Jesus does John bring out in verses 31-36?
   Facts that John (the apostle or the Baptist) brings out about Jesus are that he came from heaven, that he spoke the words of God, and that God had placed everything under him.
4. How does the phrase “rejecting the Son” stand in contrast to what “belief” really means? What are the results of each response to him?
   “Rejecting the Son” standing in contrast to what “belief” really means indicates that “believes in the Son” means to accept Jesus as the Son of God. The results of them are continuing to experience God’s wrath for rejecting the Son and eternal life for believing in him.

REFLECT

1. Other than the way John the Baptist did, how can you express the express the role and place of Jesus in your life?
2. In a scientific world in which everything must be measured or proven, what proof can you put forward for your hope of eternal life?
   We suggested the Bible and our change in life as supports for our hope of eternal life.

John 2:1-25

Yesterday evening our Life group studied John 2:1-25 guided by questions that I had given them in our previous meeting. Below are the questions and what I remember of our answers.

Jesus Turns Water into Wine (2:1-12)

What did Jesus mean by telling Mary, “My hour has not yet come” (KJV; NIV and others: “My time has not yet come”)?
We made different suggestions. I supported one of them with Leon Morris’s comment in the NIV Study Bible, “Several similar expressions scattered through this Gospel (See 7:6,8,30; 8:20) picture Jesus moving inevitably toward the destiny for which he had come: the time of his sacrificial death on the cross. At the crucifixion and resurrection Jesus’ ‘hour’ had truly come (see 12:23,27; 13:1; 16:32; 17:1).”

How did Jesus perform the miracle?
After telling the servants to fill the six water jars with water, Jesus turned the water in the jars into wine and then told the servants to serve the freshly made wine. I observed that D. A. Carson and Leon Morris refer in their commentaries on John to Westcott’s view that the water turned into wine was freshly drawn from the well after the water jars had been filled, and Morris argues against it. We disagreed with it.

Most modern versions report that John calls Jesus’ changing of water into wine a “sign” (KJV has “miracle”). What does this particular sign reveal about Jesus?
John says that Jesus revealed his glory through the signs. I observed that in the ESV Study Bible Leon Morris comments, “This miracle showed the glory of Jesus as the sovereign Creator and ruler of the material universe and also as the merciful God who provides abundantly for his people’s needs (cf. 1:14).”

How did this first sign affect Jesus’ disciples?
This first sign caused Jesus’ disciples to believe in him. On what this means, I referred to John 20:30-31, “30 Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”

Jesus Cleanses the Temple (2:13-25)

Why did the people attending the Passover need to buy cattle, sheep, and doves and to exchange money?
People attending the Passover needed cattle, sheep, and doves to offer as sacrifices. It was more convenient for people who came great distances to buy them locally rather than to bring them with them. Money changers were needed to change the people’s money into local currency to pay the annual Temple tax.

Why did Jesus oppose the sellers and moneychangers?
Jesus opposed the sellers and moneychangers because they were conducting business in the outer courts of the Temple, which were the only places in the Temple where Gentiles were allowed to worship. I observed that when Jesus cleared the Temple at the end of his ministry, he said, “Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves” (Mark 11:17; parallels Matthew 21:13 and Luke 19:46). However John doesn’t record him as saying this during this earlier cleansing of the Temple and so Jesus’ opposition then would seem to be just against conducting business in the Temple.

How was Jesus going to prove his authority to drive the vendors out of the Temple? Jesus was going to prove his authority to drive the vendors out of the Temple by rising from the dead.

Why did many people believe in Jesus’ name, and why wouldn’t he commit himself to them?
Many people believed in Jesus’ name because of the miracles that he worked. He wouldn’t commit himself to them because he they their hearts and realized that their faith was spurious.

Application Questions

Summarize what the chapter reveals about Jesus?
Our answers focussed on Jesus’ compassion and power.

What insight from the chapter seems most significant to you personally?
The most popular answer given by us was the extraordinary things that Jesus did. I also found it significant that Jesus knew at the beginning of his ministry that he was going to be killed and to rise from the dead after three days.

John 1:19-51

In our Life group meeting this week we studied John 1:19-51. In our previous meeting I’d given the group some questions on the passage to guide them in preparing for our group study of it. In this meeting we discussed those questions Here is what I can remember from our discussion of them augmented by comments from my answers to the questions in my personal study of the passage.

John the Baptist Denies Being the Messiah (1:19-28)

What questions did the priests and Levites sent by the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem ask John the Baptist?
The priests and Levites asked John who he was and if he was the Messiah (apparently), Elijah, or the Prophet. “The Messiah” or “Christ” was the one whom the Jews were looking forward to delivering them from their enemies and ruling them. The Jews remembered that Elijah had not died and believed that he would come back to earth to announce the end time. “The Prophet” was the prophet like him that Moses told the Israelites that God would raise up among them in Deuteronomy 18:15.

What was the purpose of John’s ministry?
The purpose of John’s ministry was to get people to repent and be baptized as a sign of repentance in preparation for the coming of the Messiah (see Mark 1:4).

John Testifies About Jesus (1:29-34)

What did John mean by calling Jesus “the Lamb of God” and “the Son of God”?
By calling Jesus “the Lamb of God” John may have been pointing to the sacrificial offering that Jesus would become. See Exodus 12:1-13 and Isaiah 53:7. By calling Jesus “the Son of God” he would be emphasizing that Jesus was divine as well as human. Some manuscripts and versions have “God’s Chosen One” instead of “the Son of God,” referring to Isaiah 42:1.

What proof did John give to support his claim?
In support of his claim, John testified that he seen the Holy Spirit descend from heaven as a dove and remain on Jesus.

Jesus’ First Disciples (1:35-42)
Jesus Calls Philip and Nathanael (1:42-51)

What titles are used to describe Jesus in verses 35-51?
Titles used in verses 35-51 to describe Jesus are the Lamb of God, Rabbi or Teacher, the Messiah or Christ, the Son of God, and the Son of Man.

What do you think each of them means?
The Lamb of God may identify Jesus with the Passover lamb (see 1 Corinthians 5:7). Rabbi or Teacher refers to Jesus’ role in teaching his disciples. The Messiah or Christ refers to the one whom the Jews were looking forward to delivering them from their enemies and ruling them. The Son of God refers to Jesus as the eternal son of God. The Son of Man refers to the one like a son of man described in Daniel 7:13-14.

How was contact made with each of the five people called in verses 35-51?
John the Baptist pointed out Jesus to Andrew and the apostle John; Andrew told Peter about Jesus; Jesus found Philip; and Philip told Nathanael about Jesus.

What did each of them know about Jesus when he decided to follow Jesus?
John the Baptist referred to Jesus as the Lamb of God when he pointed him out to Andrew and John; Andrew told Peter that they had found the Messiah; and Philip told Nathanael that they had found the one Moses and the prophets had written about and that Jesus was the son of Joseph and came from Nazareth. We commented on the importance of witnessing.

Application

How were you first introduced to Jesus?
All of us referred to Sunday School as being where we were introduced to Jesus, but we also observed that probably our parents had introduced us to Jesus before we started attending Sunday School.

Which of the titles used for Jesus in the passage means the most to you, and why?
We identified the Lamb of God and the Messiah or Christ as the titles used for Jesus in the passage that meant the most to us, the Lamb of God because it points out what he did for us in saving us and the Messiah or Christ because it points to his return. However I observed that, as Pastor Ryan brought out in his series of studies on the names given for God and of Jesus, each name tells us something about Jesus and thus helps us realize who he is.

In the meeting we decided to meet weekly instead of biweekly and to be flexible on what day and what time we meet. Also the group agreed with my proposal that we study a chapter each meeting with the aim of completing our study of the Gospel of John before the summer break. After the meeting I decided to revert to using the questions in Serendipity Bible for Study Groups instead of composing my own questions as a foundation for our study.

The Trinity

In our recent Life group study of John 1:1-18 we observed that verse 1 describes the Word (Jesus) as being with God and as being God. How can he be both? Orthodox Christianity’s explanation is the doctrine of the Trinity, which says that God is one being but exists in three persons–the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit–each of whom is fully God. In yesterday evening’s Life group meeting we studied the Trinity guided by parts of Chapter 14, “God in Three Persons: The Trinity,” of Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology (Zondervan, 1994). All Bible quotes are from the ESV unless otherwise noted.

New Testament Evidence

When Jesus came up out of the water after being baptized by John the Baptist, “he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased’” (Mark 1:10-11). Thus each member of the Trinity performed a specific activity: Jesus was baptized, the Holy Spirit descended from heaven and rested upon him, and the Father spoke to him from heaven. The incident is also recorded in Matthew 3:16-17 and Luke 3:21-22.

Before returning to heaven at the end of his earthly ministry, Jesus told the eleven disciples, “Go…make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19). His naming the three persons of the Trinity in the same way (“of the [name]”) indicates that each is a person and of equal value as the other two.

Paul introduces the list of spiritual gifts that he gives in 1 Corinthians 12:4-6 with, “Now there are varieties of gifts, but one Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone.” Since the New Testament epistles commonly refer to God the Father as “God” and to God the Son as “Lord,” all three persons of the Trinity are referred to in the passage.

Paul closes 2 Corinthians with the following benediction, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (2 Corinthians 13:14), again naming all three persons of the Trinity.

Paul also refers to all three persons of the Trinity in Ephesians 4:4-6, saying, “There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord [Jesus Christ], one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.”

Peter mentions all three persons of the Trinity in opening 1 Peter, saying, “according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood” (1 Peter 1:2).

Grudem closes his considerations of the passages in the New Testament that name all three persons of the Trinity together by explaining why he doesn’t include “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (1 John 5:7. KJV). The reason is that the verse is found in only a few, late Greek manuscripts.

God Is Three Persons

The Gospel of John opens with, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). Since John 1:14 identifies “the Word” with Jesus Christ, John 1:1 portrays Jesus Christ as eternally being distinct from God and yet being God. Another Bible passage which indicates that Jesus Christ is eternal and distinct from God the Father is John 17:24, in which Jesus prays to the Father that those who believe in him may “see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world.” Thus the Father and the Son (Jesus Christ) are distinct persons.

In his Farewell Discourse to his disciples Jesus tells them, “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you” (John 14:26). Thus the Holy Spirit is a distinct person from either the Father, whom He would be sent by, and the Son, in whose name He would be sent. Later in the Farewell Discourse Jesus tells his disciples, “If I do not go away, the Helper will will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you” (John 16:7), reaffirming that he and the Holy Spirit are distinct from each other.

From the beginning of consideration of the relationship among the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, some have understood the Holy Spirit to be the power of God at work in the world rather than being a distinct person. Grudem draws closely on Louis Berkhof’s Systematic Theology (Eerdmans, 1939) to show that the Holy Spirit is a person. Berkhof gives these proofs from the Bible:

• (1) “Designations that are proper to personality are given to him.” Although pneuma (the Greek word for “Spirit”) is neuter, a masculine pronoun is used of the Holy Spirit in John 14:16.
• (2) “The characteristics of a person are ascribed to him.” Berkhof cites several passages which show that the Holy Spirit shows intelligence, will, and affections. He also observes that the Holy Spirit performs personal activities such as teaching (see John 14:26, quoted above). Both Berkhof and Grudem give several examples of these activities.
• (3) “He is represented as standing in such relations to other persons as imply His own personality.” I quoted several passages showing this in “New Testament Evidence.”
• (4) “There are also passages in which the Holy Spirit is distinguished from his own power.” Such passages would make no sense if the Holy Spirit is understood as the power of God rather than as a distinct person. For example, Luke 4:14, “And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee,” would mean, “And Jesus returned in the power of the power to Galilee.”

Each Person Is Fully God

God the Father Is Fully God

The Bible opens with a record of God’s creating everything (Genesis 1) and closes with a vision of His sitting on a throne in the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21-22). In-between it portrays Him as sovereign Lord over all. Clearly He is fully God.

God the Son Is Fully God

We’ve already considered the deity of Jesus Christ at length in our “The Deity and Humanity of Christ” study, and so here I’ll give just a few passages that speak of Jesus Christ as fully God.

John 1:1-3 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” In the passage John observes that the Word, whom he identifies as Jesus Christ further on in the chapter, was in the beginning, that he was with God, that he was God, and that rather than being created he shared in creating everything. Thus John not only speaks of Jesus Christ as fully God but also affirms that he always was fully God.

Other Bible passages that speak of Jesus Christ as fully God are:

• “Thomas answered him [Jesus], ‘My Lord and my God!’” (John 20:28).
• “Christ, who is God over all” (Romans 9:5).
• “In him [Christ Jesus] the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9).
• “He [the Son of God] is the exact imprint of his [God the Father’s] nature” (Hebrews 1:3).
• “But of the Son he [God] says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever’” (Hebrews 1:8, quoting from Psalm 45:6).
• “The glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13).
• “The righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:1).

God the Holy Spirit Is Fully God

In “New Testament Evidence” I quoted several passages in which all three persons of the Trinity are named together. In “God the Father Is Fully God” and “God the Son Is Fully God” I provided evidence that the Father and the Son are each fully God. If all three persons are named together and two of them are fully God, it is reasonable to assume that the third is also fully God.

Other Bible passages that speak of the Holy Spirit as fully God are:

• “Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence?” (Psalm 139:7). David identifies trying to escape from God’s Spirit with trying to escape from God.
• “But Peter said, ‘Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit…? You have not lied to men but to God?’” (Acts 5:3-4) Peter identifies lying to the Holy Spirit with lying to God.
• “Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?” (1 Corinthians 4:16) Peter identifies God’s dwelling in us with the Holy Spirit’s dwelling in us.

There Is One God

So far I’ve showed that (1) God is three persons and (2) Each person is fully God. This would suggest that there are three Gods. However that is not what the Bible teaches. Instead, as I’ll show you next, the Bible teaches that there is one God.

“I am the LORD, and there is no other,
besides me there is no God;
I equip you, though you do not know me,
that people may know, from the rising of the sun
and from the west, that there is none besides me;
I am the LORD, and there is no other.”
(Isaiah 45:5-6)

From beginning to end the Bible asserts that the three persons of the Trinity—the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit—are one not only in purpose and thought but also in essence (essential nature). In other words, that there is only one God, not three Gods. Here are some other passages cited by Grudem that convey a similar message:

• “Who is like you, O LORD, among the gods? Who is like you, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?” (Exodus 15:11) This is part of the song that Moses and the people of Israel sang to God after crossing the Red Sea. Obviously the answer to their questions is, “No one is!”
• “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.” (Deuteronomy 6:4-5) This passage is called the Shema (from the Hebrew word for “Hear”) and is part of an address that Moses made to the people of Israel as they prepared to enter the Promised Land.
• “There is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me. Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.” (Isaiah 45:21-22) Like the passage with which I opened this post, this is part of an address that God made to Jewish exiles in Babylon in which He comforts them by promising to display His glory.
• “Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one.” (Romans 3:29-30)
• “Although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth…yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist.” (Romans 8:5-6)
• “You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe–and shudder!” (James 2:19) James claims that even the demons realize that God is one. He adds that they shudder, knowing that more than believing is needed for salvation—accepting and acting on the Gospel are also required. However, despite that, he commends those who believe, saying that they “do well.”

Modalism

The doctrine of the Trinity says that God is one but exists as three persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, each of whom is fully God. So far in my consideration of it I’ve looked at Old Testament intimations of and New Testament evidence for the Trinity and provided Biblical evidence for each of these statements about it: (1) God is three persons, (2) Each person is fully God, and (3) There is one God. However at least the first two of these statements have been challenged in the past and are denied today by groups calling themselves Christian. I’ll consider some errors that have arisen through denying one or more of the three statements.

I’ll begin with modalism, which claims that instead of being three persons, God is one person who has appeared to us in three different modes (forms). Modalism is sometimes called Sabellianism after a teacher who lived in Rome in the early third century A.D., Sabellius. According to modalism, God is not three persons but one person who appears in different modes at different times. He appeared as “the Father” in Old Testament times, as “the Son” in the time of Jesus’ life and ministry, and as “the Spirit” after Pentecost.

Modalism is attractive because it emphasizes that there is only one God. Thus it can claim support from Bible passages which affirm that God is one, several of which I cited in “There Is One God.” It can also claim support from passages like John 10:30, “I and my Father are one,” and John 14:9, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.” However, as Grudem points out, in both passages Jesus can be understood as just affirming that he and the Father are one in purpose and character rather than that they are one person.

On the other hand modalism must deny the personal relationships between the persons of the Trinity that the Bible describes. For example, at Jesus’ baptism he (the Son) was baptized, the Father spoke from heaven, and the Spirit descended on him like a dove (Matthew 4:13-17; Mark 1:9-11; Luke 3:21-22). Other examples referred to by Grudem are Jesus’ praying to the Father, his or the Holy Spirit’s interceding for us before the Father, and the separate roles played by the Father and the Son in providing for our salvation.

In his The Oneness of God (Word Aflame Press, 1983), David K. Bernard (General Superintendent of the United Pentecostal Church International – see below) attributes what happened at the baptism of Jesus to the omnipresence of God. He claims that according to John 1:32-34 the dove was a sign to John the Baptist and in accordance with John 12:28-30 the voice from heaven was a sign for the people, both being caused by the omnipresent God. However both Matthew and Mark state clearly that Jesus saw the dove (Matthew 3:16; Mark 1:10) and Mark and Luke record the voice as addressing Jesus as “You” (Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22), suggesting that if the dove and the voice were just signs they were signs to Jesus as well as to John the Baptist. Moreover, John the Baptist doesn’t even mention hearing the voice.

One present Protestant denomination, the United Pentecostal Church, is modalist. One night in 1913, a participant in a Pentecostal camp meeting near Los Angeles, John G. Scheppe, woke everybody up by shouting the name of Jesus. He had just received a vision of Jesus that made him feel that Jesus needed to be given greater honour. Then one of the pastors, Frank J. Ewart, began teaching that the way to give honour to Jesus was to be baptized in his name. Both Scheppe and Ewart had been influenced by a sermon preached by evangelist R. E. McAlister in which he claimed that the apostles had baptized in the name of Jesus only rather than in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Soon others were spreading this “New Issue.” They declared that those who refused to be rebaptized would lose their salvation and that there is only one Person in the Godhead, Jesus, who filled the different offices of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as the occasion demanded.

The view spread rapidly, and many leaders of the Pentecostal movement were rebaptized. Soon after the Assemblies of God was formed in 1914, it decided that it had to take action on the matter. Its General Council met in October, 1916, and approved a Statement of Fundamental Truths which included a lengthy section, “The Essentials as to the Godhead,” affirming the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity. It also demanded that the Jesus Only faction accept the Trinitarian baptismal formula and the doctrine of the Trinity or leave the Fellowship. About a quarter of the ministers withdrew. Various Oneness organizations were formed in the years that followed, two of which merged in 1945 to form the United Pentecostal Church.

In his consideration of modalism, Grudem claimed that because the United Pentecostal Church is modalistic it is doubtful that it should be considered genuinely Christian. Our Life group discussed Grudem’s claim and also whether or not the Assemblies of God should have expelled Jesus Only ministers. We disagreed with Grudem’s claim, thinking that members of the United Pentecostal Church meet the condition laid down for being a Christian in John 20:31, believing that Jesus is the Son of God. However we agreed with the Assemblies of God in their expelling Jesus Only ministers, thinking that an organization has the right to impose conditions for membership in it.

Arianism

“Arianism” is derived from Arius, a presbyter or elder of Alexandria whose views were condemned at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. He held that God the Son didn’t always exist but was created by God the Father at a point in time. Thus, although the Son was created before and was greater than the rest of creation and could be even described as like the Father, he was not of the same substance as the Father. The best-known Arians today are the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

The Arians focused on Bible passages which called Jesus Christ the “only begotten” Son of God’ I’ll quote the passages from the KJV instead of from the ESV because in them the ESV has “only” instead of “only begotten.”

• (John 1:14) “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth.”
• (John 3:16) “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosover believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
• (John 3:18) “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”
• (1 John 4:9) “In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.”
  They reasoned that if Jesus Christ were “begotten” by God the Father he must have been brought into existence by Him, “beget” referring to a father’s role in conceiving a child.

Two other Bible passages that Arians used were:

• (Proverbs 8:22) “The LORD possessed me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old.”
• (Colossians 1:15) “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.”
  They argued that “first” and “firstborn” imply that the Son was brought into existence at some time. They gained even more support from Proverbs 8:22 because the Septuagint (Greek version of the Old Testament) has “The Lord created me” instead of “The Lord possessed me.” However Grudem argues that “firstborn” is better understood to mean that Jesus Christ has the rights or privileges of the first-born and points out that the NIV translates Colossian 1:15’s “firstborn of all creation” as “firstborn over all creation.” Grudem also observes regarding the passages which called Jesus Christ the “only begotten” Son of God that the early church felt so strongly the force of the many Bible passages showing that Jesus Christ was fully God that it concluded that “only begotten” couldn’t mean “created.” Thus the Nicene Creed in 325 affirmed that Jesus Christ was “begotten, not made” and the phrase was reaffirmed at the Council of Constantinople in 381. The Nicene Creed also insisted that Jesus Christ was “of one substance with the Father” (not just “of similar substance,” which Arius was willing to agree with) and this was also reaffirmed by the Council of Constantinople.

Distinctions between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit

Their Different Primary Functions in Creation and Redemption

In creation the Father spoke the words that brought things into existence, the Son carried out the Father’s creative decrees, and the Holy Spirit apparently represented God’s immediate presence in His creation. Bible passages showing this are:

• “And God [the Father] said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light” (Genesis 1:3). See also Genesis 1:6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26.
• “All things were made through him [‘the Word’], and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:3). See also 1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:16; and Hebrews 1:2.
• “The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters” (Genesis 1:3).

In redemption the Father planned redemption and sent His Son into the world, the Son accomplished our redemption by coming and dying for our sins, and the Holy Spirit applies redemption to us:

• “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). See also Galatians 3:4 and Ephesians 1:9-10.
• “When Christ came into the world, he said, ‘Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me; in burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure. Then said I, ‘” (Hebrews 10:5-7, with Christ quoting from Psalm 40:6-8). See also John 6:38, etc.
• “Jesus answered [Nicodemus], ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of the water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.’” (John 3:5-6). See also Romans 8:13 and 1 Peter 1:2 on the Holy Spirit’s role in sanctification and Acts 1:8 and 1 Corinthians 12:7-11 on the Holy Spirit’s role in empowering us.

Their Eternal Existence as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

That the Son was subordinate in function to the Father before the creation of the world is indicated by Ephesians 1:3-4, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him [the Father].”

That the Son will remain subordinate in function to the Father in the future is indicated by 1 Corinthians 15:28, “When all things are subjected to him [Christ], then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.”

Similarly the Holy Spirit’s relationship with the Father and the Son before the creation of the world and in the future was and will be similar to what it was/is in creation and redemption.

Although we can accept that the Bible teaches that God is three persons, each person is fully God, and there is one God. we can’t understand how to fit the statements together. It is a mystery.