Who is Jesus?/Book 2/Chapter 2
II. THE CONTENTION OF THE ATHANASIANS
—
WE HAVE already devoted a great deal of time and attention to the Athanasian contention that God exists in three persons, and we have shown that such a belief logically means polytheism in spite of all declarations to the contrary, and since polytheism is ruled out of the possibilities, so must Athanasianism go. We have, however, claimed that it was Divinely permitted to continue as the dominant faith of the Church in spite of its implied polytheism, because it was the only faith which emphasized the essential deity of Christ at the same time that it insisted upon the dual nature of Christ. We do not mean at all to say that the followers of Athanasius in the Christian Church have consciously been polytheists. They have insisted upon the formula that God is one, in spite of the fact that their creed, logically viewed, asserted the contrary. They have thought of themselves as monotheists, and conscientiously so proclaimed themselves; but the simple fact is that if they believe the assertions of their creed, they are not. It is highly probable that, as we have previously indicated, many of them are actually Arians, thinking of Christ as really subordinate to the Father, although of the royal family of heaven. Jesus to them is a prince. God, the Father, is king. But this is not Scriptural, for Jesus is "King of kings and Lord of lords."
It is certain that they think of the Trinity as a trinity of persons—as three different persons. They think of God as existing in three separate identities, in three separate and distinct persons, each of whom is of the same God-essence, and is "by Himself God and Lord"; thus in three co-equal Gods. This makes three Infinites—an absurdity, since we know that only one Infinite can exist. Three Infinites make three finites, one limited by another, hence no Infinite.
But the Athanasians condemn the belief of God in one person. They think that it is impossible, under such a theory, to avoid the error of the Patripassians, that of the Father suffering and dying on the cross, or the error of Sabellius, that His suffering and dying was only an appearance, not a fact. They think that Christ must have been in the very nature of the case a different person, and they have founded their doctrine of salvation wholly upon the condition that Christ and the Father, although related as Father and Son, are unequivocally two different beings.
It may not be so difficult as they fancy to show that while Jesus is "King of kings and Lord of lords," thus the only God of heaven and earth, in whom all power in heaven and earth inheres because he is this only God, in whom "dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily," yet he was, after all, in his earth life, perfect man with a reasonable soul, and not distinct from the Father as from another person or identity.
Even they must realize the great confusion which exists in their thought concerning the person of Christ. They sing—
"All hail the power of Jesus' name;
Let angels prostrate fall;
Bring forth the royal diadem
And crown him Lord of all."
And they mean the thought and spirit of this and innumerable other songs where Jesus is praised as God, supreme over all. Let us see if, in other chapters, we may not perceive just how Jesus is God and man.