2. _The World's Need of a Revelation of God:_ In all the survey

we have taken of men's conceptions of God in Ancient, Mediaeval and

Modern times, in all their doctrines, outside of the revelations of

God--nowhere have we found a knowledge of the true and living God.

Nowhere a teacher who comes with definite knowledge of this subject

of all subjects--a subject so closely related to eternal life, that

to know God is said in the scriptures to be life eternal; and, of

course, the corollary naturally follows, viz.: not to know God is not

to possess eternal life. We can form no other conclusion from the

survey we have taken of the world's ideas respecting the existence and

nature of God, than that forced upon us--the world stood in sore need

of a revelation of God. He whom the Egyptians and Hindoos sought for

in their pantheism must be made known. God, whom Confucius would have

men respect, but keep at a distance, must draw near. The "Alfader" of

the Goths, undefined, incomprehensible to them, must be brought out of

the northern darkness into glorious light. The God-idea that prevailed

among the Greek philosophers must be brought from the mists of their

speculations and made to stand before the world. He whom the Jews were

seeking to deny and forsake must be revealed again to the children of

men. And lo! when the veil falls from the revelation that God gives

of Himself, what form is that which steps forth from the background

of the world's ignorance and mystery? A Man, as God lives! Jesus of

Nazareth--the great Peasant Teacher of Judea. He is God revealed

henceforth to the world. They who thought God impersonal, without form,

must know Him henceforth as a person in the form of man. They who have

held Him to be without quality, must henceforth know Him as possessed

of the qualities of Jesus of Nazareth. They who have regarded him

as infinitely terrible, must henceforth know Him also as infinitely

gentle. Those who would hold Him at a distance, will now permit Him to

draw near. This is the world's mystery revealed. This is God manifested

in the flesh. This is the Son of God, who comes to reveal the Father,

for He is the express image and likeness of that Father's person, and

the likeness of that Father's mind. Henceforth when men shall say, Show

us the Father, He shall point to Himself as the complete revelation of

the Father, and say, "He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father also."

Henceforth, when men shall dispute about the "being" and "nature"

of God, it shall be a perfect answer to uphold Jesus Christ as the

complete, perfect revelation and manifestation of God, and through all

the ages it shall be so; there shall be no excuse for men saying they

know not God, for all may know Him, from the least to the greatest, so

tangible, so real a revelation has God given of Himself in the person

and character of Jesus Christ. He lived His life on earth--a life of

sorrow and of gentleness, its pathway strewn with actions fraught with

mercy, kindness and love. A man He was, approved of God among men, by

miracles and wonders and signs which God did by Him. Being delivered

by the determinate counsel and fore-knowledge of God, men took, and

by wicked hands crucified and slew him; but God raised him up, having

loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should

be holden of it; and exalted Him on high at the right hand of God,

whence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead. (This synopsis of

the Christ's life is in Acts, ch. ii.)

Mark you, in all this there is not a word about the mysterious,

ineffable generation of the Son of God from the Father, together with

all the mysteries that men have gathered together in their learned

disquisitions about God. No question is raised as to whether Jesus

was made out of nothing or begotten by ineffable generation from the

substance of the Father. Whether He is consubstantial, that is, of the

_same_ substance with the Father, or only of a similar substance.

Nor is there any question raised as to whether Jesus was "begotten

before or after time began." All these and a hundred other questions

arose after the Christian doctrine of Deity began to come in contact

with the Greek and other philosophies. Jesus accepted the existence of

God as a settled fact, and proclaimed Himself to be the Son of God:

offending the Jews by so doing, for they saw that He made Himself

equal with God, (John v, 18) and being a man, held forth Himself to be

God (John v: 30-33.) Slow, indeed, were they to learn the great truth

plainly revealed in Jesus Christ, _that God is a perfect man_. Such

was Jesus Christ, and He was God manifested in the flesh. "Was," did

I say? Nay, "_is_," I should have said; and such will He remain

forever; a spirit He is, clothed with an immortal body, a resurrected

body of tangible flesh and bones made eternal, and now dwelling in

heaven with His Father, of whom He is the express image and likeness,

as well now as when He was on earth; and hence the Father also must be

a personage of flesh and bones, as tangible as the exalted man, Christ

Jesus the Lord.

3. _Jesus Is Called God In the Scriptures:_ "The first proof I

offer for this statement, is from the writings of Isaiah. You remember,

perhaps, my former quotation from Isaiah, wherein that prophet says,

"Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his

name Immanuel," (Isaiah vii: 14) the interpretation of which name

is, according to Matthew "God with us." (Matt. i: 23.) So that this

man-child, born of a woman, and called "Immanuel," is God; and,

moreover, is "God with us"--that is, with men. The same prophet also

says: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the

government shall be upon His shoulder; and His name shall be called

Wonderful, Counselor, _The Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the

Prince of Peace_." (Isaiah ix: 6.)

All concede that this is in plain allusion to Jesus Christ, and the

scriptures here directly call Him "_The Mighty God_." He is also

called God in the testimony of John. Mark this language, for it is a

passage around which many ideas center, and to which we shall have

occasion to refer several times. In the preface to his Gospel, John

says: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, _and

the Word was God_. The same was in the beginning with God. * * *

_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."

There can be no question but direct reference is here made to the Lord

Jesus Christ, as being the "Word;" and the "Word," or Jesus being with

the Father in the beginning, and the "Word," or Jesus Christ, also

being God. The "Word," then, as used here by John, is one of the titles

of Jesus in his pre-existent estate. Why called the "Word" I do not

know, unless it is that by a "word" we make an expression; and since

Jesus Christ was to be the expression of God, the revelation of God to

the children of men, he was for that reason called the "Word."

4. _Jesus Declares Himself to be God--the Son of God:_ Jesus was

crucified on the charge that He was an imposter--that he, being a man,

said that "God was His Father, making Himself equal with God." (John

v:18.)

And again: "For a good work we stone Thee not, but for blasphemy, and

because that Thou being a man, makest thyself God." (John x:33.)

Again: when accused before Pilate, who declared he could "find no fault

in Him," the Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by our law He ought

to die, because He made Himself the Son of God." Moreover, the high

priest, in the course of the trial before the Sanhedrim of the Jews,

directly said to Jesus, "I adjure Thee by the living God, that Thou

tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus said unto

him, Thou hast said: nevertheless, I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye

see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in

the clouds of heaven." (Matt. xxvii: 63, 64.)

And finally, when Jesus appeared to the eleven disciples after His

resurrection, He said unto them, "All power is given unto Me, in heaven

and in earth, go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in

the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Matt.

xxviii: 18, 19.) A clearer proclamation of his divinity could not be

made than in the statement, "all power is given unto Me in heaven and

in earth," especially when it is followed by placing Himself on equal

footing with the Father and the Holy Ghost, which He does when he

commands His disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the

Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Nothing can be added to this, except it be

the words of God the Father directly addressed to Jesus, when he says,

"Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever." (Heb. i:8.)

5. _Jesus Christ to be Worshipped, Hence God:_ Jesus Christ is to

be worshipped by men and angels; and worship is an honor to be paid

only to true Deity. The angels of heaven refuse the adoration we call

worship. You remember when the Apostle John was on the Isle of Patmos,

and God sent a heavenly messenger to him, how the Apostle, over-awed by

the brightness of the angel's glory, fell upon his face to worship him,

and the angel said: "See thou do it not; for I am thy fellow servant,

and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of

this book: Worship God." (Rev. xix:10.) So you see the angels refuse

divine honors. But the scriptures prove that Jesus was especially to be

worshipped; hence He must be Deity:

"For unto which of the angels said He at any time, Thou are My son,

this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to Him a Father,

and He shall be to me a Son. And again, when He bringeth in the First

Begotten into the world, He saith, let all the angels of God worship

him." (Heb. i: 5, 6.)

The same doctrine is taught in the epistle to the Philippians:

"Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which

is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,

of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the

glory of God the Father." (Phil. ii: 9, 10.)

There are other passages to the same effect, but it is perhaps

unnecessary for me to turn to each of these, since the ones here quoted

will be sufficient to establish in your minds the fact contended for.

6. _Jesus Christ is the Creator Hence God:_ Jesus Christ is the

Creator. Evidence of this is found in the testimony of John from which

I have already quoted: "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was

with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.

All things were made by Him, and without Him was not any thing made

that was made. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men."

(John i: 1-4.)

Again in the epistle to the Colossians: "The Father * * * hath

delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into

the kingdom of His dear Son. * * * Who is the image of the invisible

God, the firstborn of every creature. For by Him were all things

created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and

invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, or principalities, or

powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him." (Col. i: 12-17.)

Again in Hebrews: "God, Who at sundry times and in divers manners spake

in times past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days

spoken unto us by His Son, whom He hath appointed heir of all things,

by whom also He made the worlds." (Heb. i: 1.)

Now we begin to see the relation of the Father and the Son; for though

the "Word" be God, though "Immanuel" is God, that is, "God with us," He

does not displace God the Father, but stands in the relationship of a

son to Him. Under the direction of the Father, He created worlds, and

in this manner is the Creator of our earth, and the heavens connected

with the earth. And everywhere the scriptures command that men should

worship the Creator. In fact, the burden of the cry of that angel

who is to restore the gospel in the hour of God's judgment is: "Fear

God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come; and

worship Him that made heaven and earth and the seas and the fountains

of waters." (Rev. xiv: 7.)

7. _Jesus Christ Equal with God the Father, Hence God:_ After the

resurrection, Jesus appeared unto His disciples, and said to them, as

recorded in the closing chapter of Matthew: "All power is given unto

Me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations,

baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the

Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have

commanded you." (Matt. xxviii: 18, 19.)

Observe that the Lord Jesus Christ is placed upon a footing of equal

dignity with God the Father, and with the Holy Ghost. This brings to

mind the scripture of Paul, where he says, speaking of Jesus: "Who,

being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."

(Phil. ii: 6.)

So also is Christ given equal station with the Father and with the Holy

Ghost in the apostolic benediction over and over again. "May the grace

of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God and the communion of the Holy

Ghost be with you all."

In these several passages we have Jesus Christ, after His resurrection,

asserting that all power had been given unto Him, both in heaven and

in earth; He is placed upon a footing of equal dignity with God the

Father in the holy Trinity--in the Grand Triumvirate which constitutes

the Presiding Council or Godhead reigning over our heavens and our

earth--hence God.

I now wish to give you the proof that Jesus Christ is the express

image of the Father; the express image of His person, as well as the

revelation of the attributes of God.

Following that language in Hebrews where Jesus is spoken of as having

created worlds under the direction of the Father, it is said: "Who

being the brightness of His [the Father's] glory, and the express image

of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when

He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the

Majesty on high." (Heb. iii: 3.)

So Paul to the Corinthians: "The God of this world hath blinded the

minds of those which believe not, lest the light of the glorious Gospel

of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (II Cor.

iv: 4.)

So also, in his letter to the Colossians, when speaking of Christ, Paul

says: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the first born of every

creature." (Col. i: 5.)

Being "the express image of His person," then the "image of the

invisible God," Jesus becomes a revelation of the person of God to

the children of men, as well as a revelation of His character and

attributes. Again, you have the scriptures saying: "For it pleased the

Father that in Him [Christ Jesus] should all fulness dwell. * * * For

in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." (Col. i: 19;

ii: 9.)

All there is, then, in God, there is in Jesus Christ. All that Jesus

Christ is, God is. And Jesus Christ is an immortal man of flesh and

bone and spirit, and with His Father and the Holy Spirit will reign

eternally in the heavens, verily the Godhead.

8. _God Created Man in His Own Image:_ Let us now consider the

form of God. In those scriptures which take us back to the days of

creation, when God created the earth and all things therein--God is

represented as saying to someone: "Let us make man in Our image, after

Our likeness. * * * So God created man in His own image, in the image

of God created He him, male and female created He them." (Gen. i: 26,

27.)

Now, if that were untouched by "philosophy," I think it would not be

difficult to understand. Man was created in the image and likeness of

God. What idea does this language convey to the mind of man, except

that man, when his creation was completed, stood forth the counterpart

of God in form? But neither philosophers nor theologians have been

willing to let it stand so. They will not have God limited to any form.

They will not have Him prescribed by the extensions of His person to

some line or other of limitation. No: He must needs be in His person,

as well as in mind or spirit, all-pervading, filling the universe with

His "being," with a center nowhere, with a circumference everywhere.

We must expand the person of God out until it fills the universe. And

so they tell us that this plain, simple, straightforward language of

Moses, which says that man was created in the image of God--and which

everybody can understand--means, not the "full length" image of God,

but God's "moral image!" Man was created in the "moral image" of God,

they say.

The meaning of this language from the 26th and 27th verses of the

first chapter of Genesis, is made perfectly clear when compared with

the third verse of the fifth chapter of Genesis, where it is written:

"And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own

likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth." What do these

words imply, but that Seth was like his father in features, and also,

doubtless, in intellectual and moral qualities? And if, when it is said

Adam begat a son in his "own likeness, after his image," it simply

means that Seth, in form and features, and intellectual and moral

qualities, was like his father--then there can be no other conclusion

formed upon the passage that says God created man in his own image and

likeness, than that man, in a general way, in form and feature, and

intellectual and moral qualities, was like God.

9. _Bodily Form May Not be Excluded from Being "In God's Image":_

It is rather refreshing, in the midst of so much nonsense that is

uttered upon this subject, in order to hide the truth and perpetuate

the false notions of a paganized Christianity, to find now and then a

Christian scholar who rises out of the vagaries of modern Christianity

and proclaims the straightforward truth. Let me read to you the words

of such an one--the Rev. Dr. Charles A. Briggs. It may be said, of

course, by Presbyterians that Dr. Briggs is a heretic; that he has been

cast out of their church. Grant it; but with open arms he has been

received by the Episcopal church, and ordained into its priesthood;

and has an influence that is considerable in the Christian world. But

however heretical Dr. Briggs' opinions may be considered by his former

Presbyterian brethren, his scholarship at least cannot be challenged.

Speaking of man being formed in the image and likeness of God, he says:

"Some theologians refer the form to the higher nature of man [that

is, to that 'moral image' in likeness of which it is supposed man was

created]; but there is nothing in the text or context to suggest such

an interpretation. The context urges us to think of the entire man as

distinguished from the lower forms of creation--that which is essential

to man, and may be communicated by descent to his seed.--The bodily

form cannot be excluded from the representation." (Messianic Prophecy,

p. 70.)

I say it is rather refreshing to hear one speak like that, whose

scholarship, at least, is above all question. And yet still another

voice; and this time from one who stands high in scientific circles,

one who has written a work on the "Harmony of the Bible and Science,"

which is a most valuable contribution to that branch of literature. The

gentleman I speak of is a Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society,

and principal of the College at Highbury New Park, England. On this

subject of man being created in the image of God, he says: "I think

the statement that man was made in the Divine image is intended to be

more literal than we generally suppose; for judging from what we read

throughout the scriptures, it seems very clear that our Lord, as well

as the angels, had a bodily form similar to that of man, only far more

spiritual and far more glorious; but which, however, is invisible to

man, unless special capabilities of sight are given him, like that

experienced by Elisha's servant when, in answer to the prophet's

prayer, he saw the heavenly hosts surrounding the city of Dothan."

After discussing this question at some length, and bringing to bear

upon it numerous Biblical illustrations, this celebrated man--Dr.

Samuel Kinns--whose scientific and scholarly standing I have already

referred to, speaks of the effect of this belief upon man, and thus

concludes his statement on that head: "I am sure if a man would only

consider a little more the divinity of His human form, and would

remember that God has indeed created him in His own image, the thought

would so elevate and refine him that he would feel it his duty to

glorify God in His body as well as in His spirit."

10. _Captain of the Lord's Host--A Deity:_ But we have higher and

better authority to which we can appeal--the scriptures. And here I

pass by that marvelous appearance of God unto Abraham in the plains of

Mamre, when three "men" came into his tent, one of whom was the Lord,

who conversed with him, and partook of his hospitality, and disclosed

to him His intention with reference to the destruction of Sodom and

Gomorrah. (Gen. xviii.)

I come now to that marvelous revelation of God to Joshua, when Joshua

drew near to Jericho and saw a person in the form of a man standing

with sword in hand. Joshua approached him and said: "Art thou for us,

or for our adversaries?" "Nay," replied the person, "but as captain

of the host of the Lord am I now come." And Joshua bowed himself to

the very earth in reverence, and worshipped that august warrior.

(Joshua v: 13, 14.) Do not tell me that it was an "angel"; for had it

been an angel, the divine homage paid by Israel's grand old warrior

would have been forbidden. Do you not remember the time when John,

the beloved disciple, stood in the presence of an angel and, awed by

the glory of his presence, he bowed down to worship him, and how the

angel quickly caught him up and said: "See thou do it not; for I am

thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them

which keep the sayings of this book: worship God!" (Rev. xvii: 8, 9.

Also Rev. xix: 10.) The fact that this personage, before whom Joshua

bowed to the earth, received without protest divine worship from him,

proclaims trumpet-tongued that He indeed was God. Furthermore, that

personage bade Joshua to remove the shoes from his feet for even the

ground on which he stood was holy.

I call attention to that marvelous vision given of the Son of God to

the pagan king of Babylon. This king had cast the three Hebrew children

into the fiery furnace, and lo! before his startled vision were "four

men" walking about in the furnace, "and," said he, "the form of the

fourth is like the Son of God." (Dan. iii: 25.)

The great Apostle to the Gentiles, writing to the Colossian saints,

speaks of the Lord Jesus Christ, "in whom we have redemption through

His blood, even the forgiveness of sins," as being in the "image of

the invisible God." (Col. i, 15.) Again, writing to the Hebrew saints,

and speaking of Jesus, he says: "Who, being the brightness of his [the

Father's] glory, and the express image of his [the Father's] person,

and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by

Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on

high." (Heb. i: 1, 2.)

In the face of these scriptures, will anyone who believes in the Bible

say that it is blasphemy to speak of God as being possessed of a bodily

form? We find that the Son of God Himself stood among His fellows a

man, with all the limitations, as to His body, which pertain to man's

body; with head, trunk, and limbs; with eyes, mouth and ears; with

affections, with passions; for He exhibited anger as well as love in

the course of His ministry; He was a man susceptible to all that man

could suffer, called by way of pre-eminence, the "man of sorrows," and

one "acquainted with grief"; for in addition to His own, He bore the

world's sins, and suffered that men might not suffer if they would but

obey His gospel.

11. _"What Think Ye of Christ?"_ What think ye of Christ? Is he

God? Yes. Is he man? Yes--there is no doubting it. His resurrection,

and the immortality of His body, as well as of His spirit that succeeds

His resurrection, is a reality. He Himself attested it in various ways.

He appeared to a number of the apostles, who, when they saw him, were

seized with fright, supposing they had seen a spirit; but He said unto

them, "Why are ye troubled? And why do thoughts arise in your hearts?

Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; handle Me and see;

for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me have." (Luke xxiv:

36-39.) Then, in further attestation of the reality of His existence,

as if to put away all doubt, He said, "Have ye here any meat?" And they

brought Him some broiled fish and honeycomb, and "He did eat before

them." (Luke xxiv: 41-43.) Think of it! A resurrected, immortal person

actually eating of material food! I wonder that our spiritually-minded

friends, both philosophers and theologians, do not arraign Him for such

a material act as that after His resurrection!

But not only did the risen Messiah eat in the presence of His

disciples, but with His resurrected hands He prepared a meal on the

seashore for His own disciples, and invited them to partake of the food

which He, with His resurrected hands, had provided. (John xxi: 9-13,

and Acts x: 41.) Moreover, for forty days He continued ministering to

His disciples after His resurrection, eating and drinking with them

(Acts x: 41, and Acts i: 2, 3); and then, as they gathered together on

one occasion, lo! He ascended from their midst, and a cloud received

Him out of their sight. Presently two personages in white apparel stood

beside them and said. "Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into

heaven? This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall

so come in like manner as ye have seen Him go into heaven." (Acts

I:11.) What! With His body of flesh and bones, with the marks in His

hands and in His feet? Shall He come again in that form? The old Jewish

prophet, Zechariah, foresaw that He would. He describes the time of His

glorious coming, when His blessed, nail-pierced feet shall touch the

Mount of Olives again, and it shall cleave in twain, and open a great

valley for the escape of the distressed house of Judah, sore oppressed

in the siege of their great city, Jerusalem. We are told that "They

shall look upon Him Whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for

Him as one mourneth for his only son," and one shall look upon Him in

that day and shall say, "What are these wounds in Thy hands and in Thy

feet?" and He shall answer, "These are the wounds that I received in

the house of my friends." (Zech. the 12th, 13th and 14th chapters).

What think ye of Christ? Will that resurrected, immortal, glorified man

ever be distilled into some bodiless, formless essence, to be diffused

as the perfume of a rose is diffused throughout the circumambient air?

Will He become an impersonal, incorporeal, immaterial God, without

body, without parts, without passions? Will it be? Can it be? What

think ye of Christ? Is He God? Is He an exalted man? Yes; in the name

of all the Gods He is. And one wonders why Christian ministers arraign

the faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because

they believe and affirm that God is an exalted man, and that He has a

body, tangible, immortal, indestructible, and will so remain embodied

throughout the countless ages of eternity?--And since the Son is in

the form and likeness of the Father, being, as Paul tells us, "in the

express image of His [the Father's] person"--so, too, the Father, God

must be a man of immortal tabernacle, glorified and exalted: for as the

Son is, so also is the Father, a personage of tabernacle, of flesh and

of bone as tangible as man's, as tangible as Christ's most glorious,

resurrected body (See article in Improvement Era for March, 1910, for

further treatment of this theme).

LESSON XXXIV.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

_THE CHARACTER OF GOD REVEALED IN JESUS CHRIST._

_ANALYSIS._ _REFERENCES._

_I. Humility._ Note 1, and the Scripture

references within

_II. Obedience._ the note.

_III. Compassion and Impartiality of Note 2 and the Scriptures

God:_ quoted.

1. Ministration to Rich and Poor Note 3, and citations

Alike; in the note.

2. His Treatment of Sinners; Notes 4 and 5.

3. His Mercy and Toleration. Note 6, and citations

of Scriptures in the

_IV. His Love Manifested in the Atonement._ notes.

_V. The Justice and Severity of God._ Note 7.

_VI. The Revelation of God Complete in Note 8, and Lectures

Jesus Christ._ on Faith, Doc. & Cov.,

Lecture III.

_SPECIAL TEXT: "God was manifested on the flesh (margin), justified in

the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in

the world, received up into glory." I Tim. ii:16._

_NOTES._

The notes of this Lesson are taken from two discourses by the author:

one the "Mormon Doctrine of Deity"; the other "Jesus Christ, the

Revelation of God," hence the personal character and direct address

style that appears in the notes.

1. _The Humility of God Manifested Through Jesus Christ:_ First

of all, I call your attention to the deep, the profound humility of

God; His great condescension in living among men, as He did, for their

instruction; and from that circumstance would draw to your attention

the lesson of humility His life teaches. The heights of glory to

which Jesus had attained, the power and dignity of His position in

the heavenly kingdom, of course, cannot be comprehended by us in our

present finite condition, and with our limited knowledge of things.

Great and exalted as we might think Him to be, you may depend upon it

He was exalted infinitely higher than that. Then when you think of one

living and moving in the courts of heaven and mingling in the councils

of the Gods, consenting to come down to this earth and pass through

the conditions that Jesus passed through, do you not marvel at His

humility? To be born under such circumstances as would enable wicked

man to cast reflection upon His very birth! (St. John viii:41.) To be

born, too, in a stable, and to be cradled in a manger! To grow up a

peasant, with a peasant's labor to perform, and a peasant's fare to

subsist upon from childhood to manhood--do you not marvel at this great

humility, at this great condescension of God? And by His humility, are

not men taught humility, as they are taught it by no other circumstance

whatsoever?

2. _The Obedience of God Manifested Through Jesus Christ:_ Of His

youth, we know but little; but the little we know reveals a shining

quality, either for God or man to possess. You must remember, in all

our consideration of the life of Messiah, one great truth, which

comes to us from the scriptures in an incidental way, viz., that "In

His humiliation His judgment was taken from Him." (Acts viii:33.) As

the veil is drawn over our minds when our pre-existent spirits come

into this world and we forget the Father and mother of the spirit

world, and the positions we occupied there, so, too, with Jesus; in

His humiliation His judgment was taken from Him; He knew not at first

whence He came, nor the dignity of His station in heaven. It was only

by degrees that He felt the Spirit working within Him and gradually

unfolding the sublime idea that He was peculiarly and pre-eminently the

Son of God in very deed. When at Jerusalem, about twelve years of age,

He began to be conscious of the suggestions of the Spirit within Him,

that he had a work to do in the world for His Father, and hence allowed

the caravan with which He had come from distant Galilee to Judea to

start upon the return journey without Him, much to the perplexity and

sorrow of His supposed father, Joseph, and His mother, Mary. They

missing Him, returned and found Him in the temple disputing with the

doctors and lawyers. They reprimanded Him, as they would reprimand any

boy guilty of similar conduct; but when they reproved Him, He answered,

"Wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business." He began to

understand His mission. The spirit promptings were at work in His

soul. And while ultimately the spirit was given without measure unto

Him (John iii:24), it was not so at first, for "He received not of the

fulness at the first, but received grace for grace." (Doc. and Cov.,

Sec. 93: 12, 13.) The child Jesus "grew, and waxed strong in spirit,

filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him. * * * And Jesus

increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man." (Luke

ii; 40, 52.) But notwithstanding, Jesus, at twelve years of age, and

earlier, began to experience the operations of the Spirit calling

His soul to His mission, still we are told that He returned with His

parents to Galilee, "and was subject unto them," He who had given the

law, "Honor thy father and thy mother," in this act exemplified the

honor that He entertained for that law, in His practice of it.

We next see Him coming to the banks of Jordan, where a prophet of God

is baptizing--one of those strange, eccentric men, who lived for the

most part in the wilderness, whose food was locusts and wild honey,

and whose clothing was the skins of wild animals; and yet through all

this eccentricity, through all this oddness of character, shone the

divine powers of God in this messenger, and multitudes of people were

gathered by his preaching to the Jordan, where he baptized them for the

remission of their sins. By and by, Jesus comes and demands baptism at

this man's hands; and as he enters the water, the prophet stays Him,

and says, "I have need to be baptized of Thee, and comest Thou to me?"

Already, doubtless, shining through this "expression of God,"--this

Jesus of Nazareth,--the servant of the Lord, in attune, through the

spirit of inspiration, with the very God who was approaching Him,

felt the divinity of His presence, and would fain acknowledge His own

inferiority. What was the reply? "Suffer it to be so now: for thus it

becometh us to fulfill all righteousness." He Who had said that men

must be baptized for the remission of sins, though Himself sinless,

would honor that law by obedience unto it. Thus we learn that God not

only gives law, but He obeys law.

3. _The Compassion and Impartiality of God:_ Jesus was possessed

of infinite compassion. The incidents that I shall relate to you, in

support of this statement, are in quotations that are free, and yet,

I think, justified by the spirit of the several occasions. After all,

it is the spirit that giveth life; the letter killeth; so let us look

at these things in the spirit of them. You see Him one day with some

of His disciples approaching the little village of Nain, "His raiment

dusty and His sandals worn." As they draw near, the gate is opened and

a funeral procession marches out. The mother of the young man whose

body is being borne by his neighbors to the final resting place, walks

feebly and weeping beside the bier, desolate in her loneliness. As

Jesus saw that poor woman in the midst of her sorrow, His heart--I pray

you think of it, for we are speaking of God when we speak of Jesus

Christ, the Creator of heaven and earth--the heart of God is moved with

compassion towards this woman. He stops the bier, takes the dead by

the hand, and says, "Young man, I say unto you, Arise." And he arose.

Jesus Christ gave this woman back her son. It was an act of beautiful

compassion, one of many, which illustrates how tender and sympathetic

is the heart of our God!

Nor was His ministry confined exclusively to the poor, to the widows,

to the lonely. He despised not rulers, nor the rich, because they were

rich; but was willing, if only they could put themselves in a position

to receive the manifestations of His compassion--He was willing to

minister unto them. This is proved in the case of Jairus, one of the

rulers of the Jews, and a man of great wealth. You will remember that

he came running to the Master with his sorrow--his daughter was lying

dangerously ill at home; and such was his faith that if the Master

would but speak the word, she would be healed. While yet he spake, one

of his servants came running, saying, "Thy daughter is dead: trouble

not the Master." But Jesus heeded not the word of the servant. He had

heard Jairus' cry of faith, and responsive to that faith-cry, he made

His way to the home of the ruler, put out those who were unbelieving,

and taking the maid by the hand, gave her back to the gladness of life,

into the arms of the joyous father. The faith of that rich man was as

great as the faith of any we meet with in all the ministry of the Lord.

So, wealth is not necessarily a hindrance to faith. God is as close

to the faithful rich as to the faithful poor, and as ready to grant

them his mercy, according to their faith. I sometimes think we make a

mistake when we would flout those who are rich and put them outside the

pale of God's mercy and compassion because of what may be nothing but a

prejudice--which in reality may be envy--of the rich.

While on the way to the ruler's house, another incident happened that

is very remarkable. A woman in the throng, a long time afflicted with

a grievous ailment, said in her heart as she saw Him pass, "If I may

but touch His garment, I shall be whole." Accordingly, she crowded her

way forward, dropped upon her knee, clutched the garment, and received

the divine power from Him which cleansed her body and healed her

completely. Jesus, observing that something had happened to him, turned

to the apostles, and said, "Who touched Me?" They replied, "Master,

the multitude throng Thee and press Thee, and sayest thou, Who touched

ME?" as if that was not to be expected in such a crowd. But, said

Jesus, but "I perceive that virtue is gone out of me." What was it?

Simply that through this poor woman's faith--who supposed herself so

far removed from God that she dare not come into His presence and ask

for the blessing she desired, but undertook to obtain it by indirect

means--through her faith and touching the garment of the Lord--the

healing virtues passed from God to her in such a tangible manner that

He felt their departure, just as some of you elders, when administering

to one who was full of faith have felt your spiritual strength and

life go out from you, leaving you weak and almost helpless, but giving

healthful life to the afflicted. I speak to men who have experience in

these things, and I know that scores of you could bear witness to the

truth of this phenomenon. If our lives can but touch the life of God,

such is His nature that we shall partake of the virtues that go out

from Him.

What shall I say of lepers that crowded into Messiah's presence, and

who, notwithstanding the loathsomeness of their disease, found sympathy

and help from contact with him? What of the blind, the lame, the halt?

Why, let us not speak of them; for though it is a great thing that

their bodies should be healed, and they should go through the community

singing the praises of Him who had restored them, there are better

things to speak of--the healing of men's souls, the purifying of their

spirits.

4. _God's Treatment of Sinners:_ Let us ask, rather, how did Jesus

Christ--God--deal with sinners? I take one incident that has always

appealed very strongly to me, and illustrates the spirit in which

Christ deals with sinners; for this God of ours is peculiarly the

friend of sinners, not because of their sins, however, but in spite of

them; and because of His compassion upon those so unfortunate as to

be under the bondage of sin. The over-righteous Pharisees of Christ's

time would not on any account come in contact with sinful men, lest

they themselves should be polluted. They gathered the robes of their

sanctity about them, and considered themselves in such close relation

with God that they could afford to despise His poor, unfortunate,

sinful children, instead of holding out the hand that would bring

them from the kingdom of darkness into the brightness and glory of

the kingdom of God. But not so with Jesus Christ. When He was accused

by this class of men of mingling with publicans and sinners, His

answer to them was, "They that are whole need not a physician; but

they that are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to

repentance." As if He had said, you who are righteous and have no need

of healing for sin, stand by yourselves; My mission is not to you,

but to those who have need of God's help. Such was the spirit of His

answer. The incident to which I refer as illustrative of His compassion

for sinners, is this: The Jews were always on the alert to entrap the

Messiah's feet and bring Him into contradiction with the law of Moses.

The law of Moses, as first given to Israel, was that if any should

be found in adultery they should be stoned to death; but the Rabbis,

by nice discriminations of words, practically had rendered that law

a dead letter, by reason of which the adulterers in Israel escaped

the punishment that God had decreed against them. Therefore, they

thought if they could take a person who unquestionably had been guilty

of this crime and bring him or her into the presence of Jesus, they

would either bring Him in conflict with the law of Moses, or with the

tradition of the elders, and in either case would have sufficient cause

to denounce Him before the people. So they found a woman, caught in the

act; they dragged her through the streets, and cast her at His feet.

"Master," said they, "this woman was taken in adultery, in the very

act. Now Moses, in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned;

but what sayest Thou?" He replied, "He that is without sin among you,

let him first cast a stone at her." One by one they slunk away, until

the woman was left alone with Jesus. When Jesus looked around and saw

none but the woman, He said to her, "Woman, where are thine accusers?

hath no man condemned thee?" "No man, Lord," she said. Then Jesus said:

"Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more." That is how God deals

with sinners. It is written that God cannot look upon sin with the

least degree of allowance, and that is true, he cannot; but how about

the sinner? Why, He may look upon the sinner with infinite compassion.

While sin must always be hateful, yet will He help and love the sinner,

if he will but go his way and sin no more. Such is our human weakness,

and so nearly the level upon which we all move, that there is none of

us but will plead mightily for mercy; and, thank God, we shall not

plead in vain; for, while our Judge cannot look upon sin with any

degree of allowance, his heart goes out in compassion and love to men,

and He will help them to overcome sin, to fight a good fight, to keep

the faith, and at last enable them to win the crown of righteousness in

the kingdom of God.

5. _God's Toleration:_ Jesus, moreover, was tolerant. You will

recall the circumstance of His having to go through Samaria, and you

remember that the Samaritans hated the Jews, and Jesus was a Jew. Some

of His disciples went into a village of Samaria, through which Jesus

would have to pass, and sought to make arrangements for the Master to

stay over night; but the Samaritans closed their doors against Him.

They had heard of Him; He was a Jew; and in the narrowness of their

minds they would not admit the hated Jew into their homes. This very

much angered the disciple John, who loved Jesus dearly. He was one of

the "sons of thunder," and possessed of a spirit that could love; and

being strong in love, as is often the case--I was going to say as is

always the case--he was likewise strong in hating. He was the type of

man that does both heartily. Hence, he went to the Master and asked Him

if he might not call down fire from heaven upon those Samaritans for

thus rejecting the Master. Jesus replied: "Ye know not what spirit ye

are of. The Son of Man came to save, not to destroy." A broadness, a

liberality truly glorious.

Jesus was properly broad minded--liberal. On one occasion some of the

disciples found one casting out devils in the name of Jesus, and they

forbade him, because he followed not the Master. When they came into

the presence of Jesus, they reported this case and told what they had

done. Jesus said, "Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do

a miracle in My name, that can lightly speak evil of me." Then He gave

the other half of that truth, "He that is not for Me is against Me," by

saying, "For he that is not against us is for us." Thus He corrected

the narrow-mindedness of His own apostles.

6. _The Love of God:_ "He that loveth not, knoweth not God: for

God is love:--and he that dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God and God in

him." (I John iv: 8-16).

"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must

the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in Him should

not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He

gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not

perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not His Son into the

world to condemn the world; but that the world, through Him, might be

saved." (John iii: 14-18).

I can think of no greater evidence of God's love than that exhibited

in the act of permitting his Son, Jesus Christ, to come to the earth

and suffer as He did for the sins of the world, that they might not

suffer if they would but conform to His laws, and thus accept the

terms of Salvation. (Doc. & Cov., Sec. 19). It would seem, too, that

the same attribute of love exists in the breast of the Son, for the

sacrifice He made for the redemption of the world was a voluntary act.

He was not compelled to make the Atonement, but of His own free will

He volunteered to become our ransom. (Pearl of Great Price, p. 41.) He

himself testified: "Therefore doth My Father love me, because I lay

down My life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from Me, but

I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power

to take it again. This commandment have I received of My Father." (John

x: 17, 18.)

Thus, the atonement of Jesus, for the children of men, was a voluntary

act; and His death and suffering for the world, was the strongest

expression of love it is possible to conceive--"Greater love hath no

man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." (John xv:

13).

7. _The Justice and the Severity of God:_ "Justice and judgment are

the habitation of Thy Throne." (Psalms lxxxix:14.) "A just God and a

Savior." (Isaiah xlv: 21). "Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold thy

king cometh unto thee: He is just and having salvation." (Zach. ix:9).

"A God of Truth, and without iniquity, just and right is He." (Deut.

xxxii:4).

Notwithstanding all God's mercy, as manifested through the Christ,

His tolerance, His patience and gentleness, there were times when He

Who was so infinitely merciful, could also be infinitely just; He

Who was so infinitely compassionate, could be infinitely severe. I

give you an instance of it. He had struggled long and hard with those

hypocrites, the Scribes and Pharisees; and finally the voice of justice

and reproof, as it is to be found in God, speaks forth through Jesus

Christ, and this is what He said: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,

hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye

neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to

go in. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour

widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayers: therefore ye

shall receive the greater damnation." (Matt. xxiii:13, 14.)

That is not so gentle: Listen again: "Woe unto you, scribes and

Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one

proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child

of hell than yourselves. Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say,

Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever

shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! Ye fools and

blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth

the gold? And, whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing;

but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty. Ye

fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that

sanctifieth the gift? * * * Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat,

and swallow a camel. Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees! for ye make

clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are

full of extortion and excess. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that

which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be

clean also. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are

like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward,

but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Even

so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are

full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees,

hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the

sepulchres of the righteous, and say, if we had been in the days of our

fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of

the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are

the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up, then, the

measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can

ye escape the damnation of hell?" (Matt. xxiii:15-33).

And this from that gentle, compassionate man! The voice of God in its

severity speaks through these tones, and bids us understand that it

must be a terrible thing to fall under the displeasure of God. Think of

the infinite difference between that sweet compassion which He has for

the penitent sinner, and this severe but just arraignment of those who

persist in their sins! A warning to all men to beware of the justice of

God, when once it shall be aroused!

8. _God Completely Revealed Through Christ:_ Jesus Christ is God

manifested in the flesh, proved to be so from the scripture; the

character of God is revealed in the wonderful life that Jesus, the Son

of God, lived on earth; in it we see God in action; and from it we see

the gentleness, the compassion, the love, and also the justice and

severity of God. Jesus Christ is God; and He is also man; but I deplore

those sectarian refinements which try to tell us about the humanity

of Jesus being separate from the divinity of Jesus. He Himself made

no such distinctions. He was divine, spirit and body, and spirit and

body was exalted to the throne of His Father, and sits there now with

all the powers of the Godhead residing in Him bodily, an immortal,

glorified, exalted man! The express image and likeness God of the

Father; for as the Son is, so is the Father. Yet when the Latter Day

Saints announce to the world that we believe God to be an exalted man,

we are told that we are blasphemers. But as long as the throne of Jesus

Christ stands sure, so long as His spirit remains in His immortal

body of flesh and bones, glorified and everlasting, shall keep His

place by the side of the Father, so long will the doctrine that God

is an exalted man hold its place against the idle sophistries of the

learned world. The doctrine is true. It cannot be unthroned. A truth

is a solemn thing. Not the mockery of ages, not the lampooning of the

schoolmen, not the derision of the multitude, not the blasphemy of the

world, can affect it; it will always remain true. And this doctrine,

announced by Joseph Smith to the world, that God is an exalted man,

that Jesus Christ is the revelation of God to the world and that He is

just like his Father, and that those who are His brethren may become as

He is, when they have walked in His footsteps--that is a doctrine that

will stand sure and fast as the throne of God itself. For Jesus Christ

was God manifested in the flesh. He was the revelation of God to the

world. He was and is and ever will remain an exalted man. He is, and

always will remain, God.

LESSON XXXV.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

_THE GODHEAD._

_ANALYSIS._ _REFERENCES._

_I. Plurality of Persons in the Godhead._ The notes of this Lesson

and Scriptural references

_II. Plurality of Divine Intelligences._ in the notes, 1 to 5.

The references in

Richards and Little's

Compendium, Art. "Plurality

of Gods," p. 184.

The notes, and Scripture

citations within

them, this Lesson.

Also "Avatars of

God," Improvement Era

for March, 1910.

_SPECIAL TEXT: "God standeth in the congregations of the mighty; he

judgeth among the Gods. * * * I have said ye are Gods; and all of you

are children of the Most High."_

_NOTES._

The notes of this Lesson are taken from two discourses by the Author:

one the "Mormon Doctrine of Deity"; the other, "Jesus Christ, the

Revelation of God," hence the personal character and direct address

style that appears in the notes. The discourses referred to will be

found in "Mormon Doctrine of Deity."

1. _The Three Persons of the Godhead Revealed--The Father:_ It is

to be observed in passing that Jesus Himself came with no abstract

definition of God. Nowhere in His teachings can you find any argument

about the existence of God. That He takes for granted; assumes as

true; and from that basis proceeds as a teacher of men. Nay, more; He

claims God as His Father. It is not necessary to quote texts in proof

of this statement; the New Testament is replete with declarations

of that character. What may be of more importance for us at the

present moment is to call attention to the fact that God Himself also

acknowledged the relationship which Jesus claimed. Most emphatically

did He do so on the memorable occasion of the baptism of Jesus in the

river Jordan. You remember how the scriptures, according to Matthew,

tell us that as Jesus came up out of the water from His baptism, the

heavens were opened, and the Spirit of God descended like a dove upon

Him; and at the same moment, out of the stillness came the voice of

God, saying, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." On

another occasion the Father acknowledges the relationship--at the

transfiguration of Jesus in the mount, in the presence of three of His

apostles, Peter and James and John, and the angels Moses and Elias.

The company was overshadowed by a glorious light, and the voice of

God was heard to say of Jesus, "This is My beloved Son; hear him." Of

this, the apostles in subsequent years testified, and we have on record

their testimony. So that the existence of God the Father, and the

relationship of Jesus to Him, is most clearly shown in these scriptures.

2. _The Son:_ Jesus, Himself, claimed to be the Son of God, and in

this connection there is clearly claimed for Him divinity, that is to

say, Godship. Let me read to you a direct passage upon that subject;

it is to be found in the gospel according to St. John, and reads as

follows: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and

the Word was God. * * * 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 i:1-3.)

The identity between Jesus of Nazareth--"The Word made flesh"--and the

"Word" that was "with God in the beginning," and that "was God," is so

clear that it cannot possibly be doubted. So the Son is God, as well

as the Father. Other evidences go to establish the fact that Jesus had

the Godlike power of creation. In the very passage I have just read,

it is said: "All things were made by Him [that is, by the Word, Who is

Jesus]; and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was

life; and the life was the light of men." (John i: 3-4.)

One other scripture of like import, but perhaps even more emphatic than

the foregoing, is that saying of Paul's in the epistle to the Hebrews:

"God, Who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto

the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by

His Son, whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also He

made the worlds." (Heb. i: 1-3.)

Not only one world, but many "worlds," for the word is used in the

plural. So that we find that the Son of God was God the Father's agent

in the work of creation, and that under the Father's direction He

created many worlds. There can be no question then as to the divinity,

the Godship, of Jesus of Nazareth, since He is not only God the Son,

but God the Creator also--of course, under the direction of the Father.

3. _The Holy Spirit:_ Again, the Holy Ghost is spoken of in the

scriptures as God. I think, perchance, the clearest verification of

that statement is to be found in connection with the circumstance of

Ananias and his wife attempting to deceive the apostles with reference

to the price for which they had sold a certain parcel of land they

owned, which price they proposed putting into the common fund of the

Church; but selfishness asserted itself, and they concluded to lie as

to the price of the land, and only consecrate a part to the common

fund. It was an attempt to get credit for a full consecration of what

they possessed, on what was a partial dedication of their goods. They

proposed to live a lie, and to tell one, if necessary, to cover the

lie they proposed to live. When Ananias stood in the presence of the

apostles, Peter put this very pointed question to him: "Why hath Satan

filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost?" * * * "Thou hast not lied

unto men, but unto God." (Acts v.) To lie to the Holy Ghost is to lie

to God, because the Holy Ghost is God. And frequently in the scriptures

the Holy Spirit is spoken of in this way.

4. _The Holy Trinity:_ These three, the father, Son, and the Holy

Ghost, it is true, are spoken of in the most definite manner as being

God--one; but the distinction of one from the other is also clearly

marked in the scriptures. Take that circumstance to which I have

already alluded--note 1--the baptism of Jesus. There we may see the

three distinct personalities most clearly. The Son coming up out of

the water from His baptism; the heavens opening and the Holy Spirit

descending upon Him; while out of heaven the voice of God the Father

is heard saying, "This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased."

Here three Gods are distinctly apparent. They are seen to be distinct

from each other. They appear simultaneously, not as one, but as three,

each one being a different person, so that however completely they may

be one in spirit, in purpose, in will, they are clearly distinct as

persons--as individuals.

5. _Each of the Three Equal in Dignity:_ In several instances in

the scriptures these three personages are accorded equal dignity in

the Godhead. An example is found in the commission which Jesus gave to

His disciples after His resurrection, when He sent them out into the

world to preach the gospel to all nations. He stood in the presence

of the eleven, and said: "All power is given unto Me in heaven and in

earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the

name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Matt.

xxviii:18-20.)

Each of the three is here given equal dignity in the Godhead. Again, in

the apostolic benediction: "May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the

love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all."

In one particular, at least, Jesus came very nearly exalting the

Holy Ghost to a seeming superiority over the other personages in

the Godhead; for He said: "All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be

forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not

be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of

Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy

Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in

the world to come." (Matt. xii:31, 32.)

I take it, however, that this seeming superior dignity accorded to

the Holy Ghost by the Son of God, is owing to the nature of the third

personage in the Trinity, and the kind of testimony He can impart unto

the soul of man because of His being a personage of spirit--a testimony

that is better than the seeing of the eye, more sure than the hearing

of the ear, because it is spirit testifying to spirit--soul communing

with soul--it is the soul of God imparting to the soul of man; and if

men, after receiving that Witness from God, shall blaspheme against

Him, farewell hope of forgiveness for such a sin, in this world or in

the world to come!

These three personages, then, are of equal dignity in the Godhead,

according to the teachings of the New Testament. Each is equally

divine--equally God; hence Jesus is God equally with God the Father,

and with God the Holy Ghost.

This simple Christian teaching respecting the Godhead gave birth to

what, in ecclesiastical history, is called "The Apostles' Creed." A

vague tradition has it that before the Apostles dispersed to go into

the world to preach the gospel, they formulated a creed with respect of

the Church's belief in God. Whether that tradition be true or not, I do

not know, and for matter of that, it makes little difference. Suffice

it to say that the so-called "Apostles' Creed," for two centuries,

expressed the faith of the early Christians upon the question of God,

and is as follows: "I believe in God, the Father, Almighty; and in

Jesus Christ, His Only Begotten Son, our Lord, Who was born of the

Virgin Mary by the Holy Ghost, was crucified under Pontius Pilate,

buried, arose from the dead on the third day, ascended to the heavens,

and sits at the right hand of the Father, whence He will come, to judge

the living and the dead; and in the Holy Ghost."

6. _Plurality of Divine Intelligences:_ We have already shown that

the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three separate and distinct

persons, and, so far as personality is concerned, are three Gods. Their

"oneness" consists in being possessed of the same mind; they are one,

too, in wisdom, in knowledge, in will and purpose; but as individuals

they are three, each separate and distinct from the other, and three

is plural. Now, that is a long way on the road towards proving the

plurality of Gods. But, in addition to this, I would like to know from

our friends--the critical sectarian ministers who complain of this

part of our faith--the meaning of the following expressions, carefully

selected from the scriptures:

"The Lord your God is God of Gods, and Lord of Lords." (Deut. x:17.)

That is from Moses.

"The Lord God of Gods, the Lord God of Gods, He knoweth, and Israel He

shall know." (Josh. xxii:22.) That is from Joshua.

"O give thanks unto the God of Gods! * * * O give thanks to the Lord of

Lords!" (Psalm cxxxvi: 2, 3.) That is David.

"And shall speak marvelous things against the God of Gods." (Daniel xi:

36.) That is Daniel.

"The Lamb shall overcome them; for He is Lord of Lords, and King of

Kings." (Rev. xvii:14.) That is the beloved disciple of Jesus--John the

Revelator.

Had I taken such expressions from the lips of the pagan kings or false

prophets, who are sometimes represented as speaking in the scriptures,

you might question the propriety of making such quotations in support

of the doctrine I teach; but since these expressions come from prophets

and recognized servants of God, I ask those who criticize our faith in

the matter of a plurality of Gods, to explain away those expressions of

the scriptures. Furthermore, there is Paul's language, in his letter

to the Corinthians, already quoted, where he says, "that there be Gods

many and Lords many, whether in heaven or in earth." Had his expression

been confined to those that are called gods in earth, it is possible

that there might be some good ground for claiming that he had reference

to the heathen gods, and not true Gods; but he speaks of those that

"are Gods in heaven" as well as gods in earth. Right in line with this

idea is the following passage from the Psalms of the Prophet David:

"God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; He judgeth among the

Gods." (Psalm lxxxii:1.) These, undoubtedly, are the Gods in heaven to

whom Paul alludes, among whom the God referred to stands; among whom He

judges. This is no reference to the heathen gods, but to the Gods in

heaven, the true Gods.

In this same Psalm, too, is the passage which seems to introduce some

telling evidence from the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, viz.: "I have said

ye are Gods, and all of you are the children of the Most High." You

remember how on one occasion the Jews took up stones to stone Jesus,

and He called a halt for just a moment, for He wanted to reason with

them about it. He said: "Many good works have I shown you from the

Father; for which of these works do ye stone me?"

Their answer was: "For a good work we stone Thee not; but for

blasphemy; and because that Thou, being a man, makest Thyself God."

What an opportunity here for Jesus to teach them that there was but one

God! But He did not do that. On the contrary, He affirmed the doctrine

of a plurality of Gods. He said to them: "Is it not written in your

law, I said, Ye are Gods? If He called them Gods, unto whom the word

of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; say ye of Him, Whom

the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest;

because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of My

Father, believe Me not. But if I do, though ye believe not Me, believe

the works."

Higher authority on this question cannot be quoted than the Son of God

Himself.

7. _Further Evidence for a Plurality of Divine Intelligences:_ I

find a word on the subject fitly spoken by the late Orson Pratt, in a

discourse delivered in 1855, in Salt Lake City. He said: There is one

revelation that this people are not generally acquainted with. I think

it has never been published, but probably it will be in the Church

History. It is given in questions and answers. The first question

is, "What is the name of God in the pure language?" The answer says,

"Ahman." "What is the name of the Son of God?" Answer, "Son Ahman, the

greatest of all the parts of God, excepting Ahman." "What is the name

of men?" "Sons Ahman," is the answer. "What is the name of angels in

the pure language?" "Anglo--man." The revelation goes on to say that

Sons Ahman are the greatest of all the parts of God excepting Son

Ahman, and Ahman, and that Anglo-man are the greatest of all the parts

of God excepting Sons Ahman, Son Ahman and Ahman, showing that the

angels are a little lower than man.[1] What is the conclusion to be

drawn from this? It is that these intelligent beings are all parts of

God. (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 342.)

This, it will be said, is a bold doctrine; and indeed it is bold. I

love it for its boldness, but not so much for that, as for the reason

that it is true. It is in harmony with another revelation given through

Joseph Smith, wherein it is said:

"Man was also [as well as Jesus] in the beginning with God.

Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither

indeed can be. * * * For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and

spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fullness of joy;

and when separated, man cannot receive a fullness of joy. The elements

are the tabernacle of God; yea, man in the tabernacle of God, even

temples" (Doc. and Cov., sec. 93: 29-35).

Nor is the doctrine less in harmony with the Jewish scriptures:

"For it became him, for whom are all things and by whom are all

things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their

salvation perfect through suffering. For both he that sanctifieth and

they who are sanctified are all of one; for which cause he is not

ashamed to call them brethren."

In this same chapter of Hebrews, Jesus, as well as man, is spoken of

as being made "a little while inferior to the angels" (verses 7 and 9

marginal reading); and he is spoken of by the same apostle in another

place as being but "the first born among many brethren" (Rom. 8:29).

Also in his great discourse in Mars Hill, Paul not only declares that

God "hath made of one blood all nations of men"--but he also quoted

with approval the Greek poet Aratus,[2] where the latter says: "For

we are also his [God's] offspring;" and to this the apostle adds:

"For as much, then, as we are the offspring of God [hence of the same

race and nature], we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto

gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art after man's device" (Acts 17:

26-30). The nature of our own being, one might add, in continuation of

the apostle's reasoning, should teach those who recognize men as the

offspring of God, better than to think of the Godhead as of gold, or

silver, or stone, graven by art after man's device, since the nature of

the offspring partakes of the nature of the parent; and our own nature

teaches us that men are not as stocks and stones, though the latter be

graven by art after the devices of men.

Paul might also have quoted the great Hebrew poet: "God standeth in the

congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the Gods. * * * I have

said ye are Gods; and all of you are children of the Most High" (Ps.

82: 1, 6, 7); and though he adds, "But ye shall die like men, and fall

like one of the princes," it does not detract from the assertion, "and

all of you are children of the Most High;" for Jesus died, even as men

die; but he was the Son of God, nevertheless, and he himself a Deity.

The matter is clear, then, men and Gods are of the same race; Jesus

is the Son of God, and so, too, are all men the offspring of God, and

Jesus but the first born of many brethren. Eternal Intelligences are

begotten of God, spirits, and hence are sons of God--a dignity that

never leaves them. "Beloved," said one of old, "now are we the sons of

God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that when

he [Christ] shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as

he is" (I John 3:2). For additional matter on this point see "Avatars

of God" in March and April Nos. of Improvement Era, 1910.

8. _Of God the Spirit of the Gods:_ From the presence of the Gods

goes out the influence and power men sometimes call God, or the Spirit

of God; from whose presence David could not flee:

"If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there; if I make my bed in hell,

behold thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in

the uttermost parts of the sea; even there shall thy hand lead me, and

thy right hand shall hold me. Yea the darkness hideth not from thee;

but the light shineth as the day; the darkness and the light are both

alike to thee" (Ps. 139: 7-12).

This Spirit is that "Something sacred and sublime," which men recognize

as moving "wool-shod" behind the worlds; "weighing the stars; weighing

the deeds of men." (Edward Markham.) This that Spirit that permeates

all space; that makes all presence bright; all motion guides; the Power

"unchanged through time's all-devastating flight;" that upholds and

sustains all worlds. Hence it is said, in one of the most beautiful of

the revelations God has given in this last dispensation:

"As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power

thereof by which it was made. As also the light of the stars and the

power thereof by which they were made. And the earth also and the power

thereof; even the earth upon which you stand. And the light which now

shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your

eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings;

which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the

immensity of space. The light which is in all things; which giveth

light to all things; which is the law by which all things are governed:

even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom

of eternity, who is in the midst of all things; * * * The earth rolls

upon her wings, and the sun giveth his light by day, and the moon

giveth her light by night, and the stars also give their light, as they

roll upon their wings in their glory, in the midst of the power of God.

* * * Behold, all these are kingdoms, and any man who hath seen any

or the least of these, hath seen God moving in his majesty and power"

(Doc. and Cov., sec. 88 8-13 and 45, 47).

This, then, is God, who is not far removed from every one of us; in

whom we live, and move, and have our being. This is God immanent in

nature.

And as we dwell in him, so, too, dwells he in us; and, as man more

expands towards divinity, more and more of the divine enters into his

being, until he attains unto a fullness of light and truth; of power

and glory; until he becomes perfectly one in God, and God in him. This

the meaning of the Messiah's prayer, made for all those who become his

disciples--"That they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I

in thee: that they also may be one in us" (John 17: 21).

To the same effect Paul also prayed:

"For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus

Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named that

he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be

strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; that Christ may

dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in

love, may be able to comprehend with all Saints what is the breadth,

and length, and depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ which

passeth knowledge, that ye may be filled with all the fullness of God"

(Eph. 3: 14-19).

Then again he said: Let this mind be in you which was also in Jesus

Christ: who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be

equal with God (Philippians 2: 5, 6).

It is possible for the mind of God to be in man, to will and to do, as

seemeth [God] good. The nature of the Whole clings to the Parts, and

they may carry with them the light and truth and glory of the Whole.

Moreover, by appointment, any One or Three of the unit Intelligences

may become the embodiment and representative of all the power and

glory and authority of the sum total of the Divine Intelligences; in

which capacity either the One or the Three would no longer stand only

in their individual characters as Gods, but they would stand also as

the sign and symbol of all that is divine--and would act as and be

to all intents and purposes The One God. And so in every inhabited

world, and in every system of worlds, a God presides. Deity in his

own right and person, and by virtue of the essence of him; and also

by virtue of his being the sign and symbol of the Collectivity of

the Divine Intelligences of the universe. Having access to all the

councils of the Gods, each individual Deity becomes a partaker of the

collective knowledge, wisdom, honor, power, majesty, and glory of the

Body Divine--in a word, the embodiment of the Spirit of the Gods whose

influence permeates the universe.

This doctrine of Deity teaches a divine government for the world that

is in harmony with our modern knowledge of the universe; for, as I

have remarked elsewhere in effect: (New Witness for God, pp. 473-5.)

An infinitude of worlds and systems of worlds rising one above another

in ever-increasing splendor, in limitless space and eternal duration,

have, as a concomitant, an endless line of exalted, divine men to

preside over and within them, as Priests, Kings, Patriarchs, Gods! Nor

is there confusion, disorder, or strife in their vast dominions; for

they all govern upon the same righteous principles that characterize

the government of God everywhere. These Divine Intelligences have

attained unto the excellence that Jesus prayed for in behalf of his

apostles, and those who might believe on their word, when he said:

"Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given

me, that they may be one as we are." I say Divine Intelligences have

attained unto the excellence of oneness that Jesus prayed his disciples

might possess, and since they have attained unto it, and all govern

their worlds and systems of worlds by the same spirit, and by the same

principles, there is a unity in their government that makes it one even

as they are one. Let worlds and systems of worlds galaxies of systems

and universes, extend as they may throughout limitless space, Joseph

Smith has revealed the existence of a divine government which, while

characterized by unity, is co-extensive with all these worlds and

world-systems.

Footnotes

1. It may be thought, at the first reading of this statement, "the

angels are a little lower than man," is in conflict with the scripture,

"Thou madest him [man] a little lower than the angels" (Heb. 2: 7).

But I call attention to the marginal rendering of the passage in

King James' translation, "Thou madest him a little while inferior to

the angels." Without stopping here to consider which is the better

translation of the passage, it may be said of the latter that it is in

better harmony with the context of the passage as it stands here in

Hebrews, and also in Psalms, than the preferred rendering of it in the

regular text; for in both places it says of man, "Thou crownedst him

with glory and honor, and didst set him over the works of thy hands;

thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he

put all things in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put

under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him." Moreover,

we see the same thing is said of Jesus that is said of man: "We see

Jesus who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of

death, crowned with glory and honor" (Heb. 2: 9). Surely "made a little

lower than the angels," when said of Jesus could be but for "a little

while inferior to," etc.; and that only in the matter of "the suffering

of death." So, too, with man; he is made "a little while inferior to

the angels," after which period he would rise to the dignity of his

place, when it would be seen, as said in the text with which this note

deals, "the angels are a little lower than man," that is, of course,

when man shall have attained unto his exaltation and glory.

2. He was a poet of Cilicia, of which province Tarsus, Paul's native

city, was the capital. He wrote about four hundred years before Paul's

time.

LESSON XXXVI.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

_SOME OBJECTIONS TO THE TRUE DOCTRINE OF DEITY._

_ANALYSIS._ _REFERENCES._

_I. God Is a Spirit, Hence Not Material--Without The Mormon Doctrine

Form or Body._ of Deity--Roberts-Van Der Donckt

Discussion.

_II. God Is Invisible--Hence Immaterial, Chs. i, ii, iii and the

Without Body or Form._ notes of this Lesson.

_III. Anthromorphic Appearances and Descriptions Also Chapter v in the

of God Only Used to above work. It is a

Make Plain Spiritual Things._ Collection of Passages

from leading Elders of

_IV. The Answers._ the Church, setting

forth "Mormon Views of the Deity."

_SPECIAL TEXT: Stephen, "being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up

steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing

on the right hand of God, and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened,

and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God." Acts vii: 55, 56._

_NOTES._

These notes are taken from the Roberts-Van Der Donkt Discussion on

Deity. The Catholic Father states the objections and presents the

argument for them; Elder Roberts gives the answers, and argues for

their accuracy and efficiency. The debate in full is found in "Mormon

Doctrine of Deity," chs. ii and iii.

1. _The First Objection--God is a Spirit--Hence Immaterial:_ "God

is a Spirit" (John iv., 24). "Another strong and explicit statement

is: 'Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona, because flesh and blood hath

not revealed it unto thee, but My Father who is in heaven.' (Matt.

xvi). "As the Christ has asked, what[1] do men say the Son of Man

is (Matt. xvi, 16, 17), there is an evident antithesis and contrast

between the opinions of men and the profession of Peter, which is based

upon revelation. The striking opposition between _men, flesh and

blood_, and the Father, evidently conveys the sense that God hath

not flesh and blood like man, but is a Spirit (Roberts-Van Der Donckt

Discussion--Mormon Doctrine of Deity--p. 45).

2. _God is Invisible, Hence Immaterial:_ It is also held that God

is described as being "invisible," in the Bible. Then it is added:

"All material beings are visible. Absolute invisible beings are

immaterial or bodiless: God is absolutely invisible, therefore God

is immaterial or bodiless. * * * * * * Tertullian, (A. D. 160-245),

Ambrose (330-397), Augustine (354-430) and other Fathers, whose deep

scholarship is acknowledged by Protestants and Catholics alike, informs

us that God the Father is called invisible because He never appeared

to bodily eyes; whereas the Son manifested Himself as an angel, or

through an angel, and as man, after His incarnation. He is the eternal

revelation of the Father. It is necessary to remark that whenever the

eternal Son of God, or angels at God's behest, showed themselves to

man, they became visible only through a body or a material garb assumed

for the occasion (see Cardinal Newman's "Development of Christian

Doctrine," 9th edition, pp. 136 and 138)." (Ibid.)

3. _The Purpose of Anthropomorphic Appearances and Descriptions of

God:_ "Again, Our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but

against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits

of this wickedness"--Eph. vi: 12--Could plainer words be found to teach

that angels both good and bad, are spirits devoid of bodies. Now, the

Creator is certainly more perfect than His creatures, and pure minds

are more perfect than minds united to bodies (men). ["The corruptible

body is a load upon the soul, and the earthly habitation presseth down

the mind" (Wis 9:15.) "Who shall deliver me from this body of death?"

(St. Paul).] Therefore, the Creator is a pure spirit.

"It is a well known fact that all men, after the example of

the inspired Writings, make frequent use of the figure called

anthropomorphism, attributing to the Deity a human body, human members,

human passions, etc.; and that is done, not to imply that God is

possessed of form, limbs, etc., but simply to make spiritual things or

certain truths more intelligible to man, who, while he tarries in this

world, can perceive things and even ideas only through his senses or

through bodily organs." (Ibid).

4. _The Answers:_ The whole fabric of this objection and argument,

is built upon the assumption that "spirit" is immaterial. I say

"assumption," because it is nowhere declared in revelation that

"spirit" is immaterial. On the other hand, whenever spirits have been

seen, or God has been revealed, they have appeared to the eyes of

the beholder in human form. They were tangible to human sight; they

had configuration; they occupied space; and as form and extension

are qualities of matter, spirits must be material, albeit of finer

substance than the bodies tangible to the senses in normal states

of consciousness. The argument quoted in the preceding notes of the

lesson, were treated in part in the following manner:

5. _Of God Being a Spirit:_ "Mr. Van Der Donckt's first premise

is that "God is a Spirit," quoting the words of the Savior (John 4:

24); and Paul's words, "The Lord is a spirit," (II Cor. 3: 17.) He

then argues that a spirit is different from a man, and quotes the

remark of Jesus to His disciples, when He appeared to them after His

resurrection: "A spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me have"

(Luke 24: 37-39). Also the words of Jesus to Peter, "Flesh and blood

hath not revealed it [that is, that Jesus is the Christ] unto thee,

but My Father Who is in heaven." (Matt. 16: 17.) The gentleman, in all

this, sees a striking contrast between men, flesh and blood, and the

Father; which "conveys the sense that God hath not flesh and blood like

man, but is a spirit." * * * * With reference to the passage--"Flesh

and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father Who is in

heaven," and the Reverend gentleman's remarks thereon, I wish to say,

in passing, that the antithesis between man and God in the passage,

extends merely to the fact that the source of Peter's revelation was

God, not man; and is no attempt at defining a difference between the

nature of God and the nature of man. Here, also, I may say, that the

Latter-day Saints do not hold that God is a personage of flesh and

blood, but a personage of flesh and bone, inhabited by a spirit, just

as Jesus was after His resurrection. Joseph Smith taught, concerning

the resurrection, that "all [men] will be raised by the power of God,

having spirit in their bodies, and not blood." Again, in speaking of

the general assembly and church of the first-born in heaven (Heb.

12:23), he said: "Flesh and blood cannot go there; but flesh and

bones, quickened by the Spirit of God, can." So it must be remembered,

throughout this discussion, that the Latter-day Saints do not believe

that God is a personage of flesh and blood; but a personage of flesh

and bone and spirit, united. * * * * * * * * But now for the "Mormon"

exposition of the text. Is Jesus Christ God? Was He God as He stood

there among His disciples in His glorious and, to use Mr. V's own

word, "sacred," resurrected body? There is but one answer that the

Reverend Catholic gentleman or any orthodox Protestant can give, and

that is in the affirmative--"yes, Jesus is God." But "God is a spirit!"

True, He is; but Jesus is a spirit inside a body--inside an immortal,

indestructible body of flesh and bone; therefore, if Jesus is God,

and God is a spirit, He is an embodied spirit, just as the Latter-day

Saints teach.

Mr. Van Der Donckt endeavors to anticipate the "Mormon" answer to

this argument by saying: "I am well aware that the Latter-day Saints

interpret those texts as meaning a spirit clothed with a body, but what

nearly the whole of mankind, Christians, Jews, and Mohammedans, have

believed for ages, cannot be upset by the gratuitous assertions of a

religious innovator of this last century."

At this point, I will not appeal to or quote the "gratuitous assertions

of a religious innovator of this last century"--meaning Joseph Smith.

There is no need of that. If I were an unbeliever in the true Deity of

Christ, I might take up the gentleman's argument in this way: You say

God is a spirit, and hence bodiless, immaterial? His answer must be,

"Yes." But Jesus says, "a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me

have."--Hence Jesus is not God, because He is a personage of flesh and

bone, in the form of man--not bodiless or immaterial. (This refers to

the Christ after his resurrection when he was a resurrected man and

immortal in that state). This, of course, is not my point. I merely

refer to it in the beaten way of good fellowship, and by way of caution

to my Catholic friend, who, I am sure, in his way, is as anxious to

maintain the true Deity of the Nazarene as I am; but his method of

handling the text, "God is a spirit," might lead him into serious

difficulty in upholding the truth that Jesus was and is true Deity, if

in argument with an infidel.

6. _Of God Being Invisible:_ Mr. Van Der Donckt thinks he sees

further proof of God's being a "Spirit," and therefore immaterial

or bodiless, in the fact that He is spoken of in the Bible as being

"invisible." Moses "was strong as seeing Him that is invisible," (Heb.

11:27); "No man hath seen God at any time" (I John 4: 12). "The King

of kings--whom no man hath seen nor can see," (I Tim. 6: 16); are the

passages he relies upon for the proof of his contention.

Of course, Mr. V. is aware of the fact--for he mentions it--that these

passages are confronted with the explicit statement of scripture

that God has been seen by men. Moses saw Him. At one stage of his

experience, the great Hebrew prophet was told that he could not see

God's face; "for," said the Lord, "there shall no man see Me and live."

But even at that time, Moses was placed in a cleft of the rock, "and

thou shalt see My back parts," said the Lord to him; "but My face shall

not be seen" (Exodus 23: 18-23). On another occasion, Moses, Aaron,

Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, saw God. "And

they saw the God of Israel; and there was under His feet as it were, a

paved work of sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his

clearness. And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not

his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink." (Ex. 24: 9-11).

Isaiah saw Him: 'I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted

up, and His train filled the temple.' At the same time the seraphims

proclaimed His holiness, saying, "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of

hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory." Then said Isaiah: "Woe is

me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell

in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for mine eyes have seen the

King, the Lord of hosts." (Isaiah 6: 1-5).

To harmonize these apparitions of God to men with his theory of the

invisibility of God, Mr. V. appeals to the writings of some of the

Christian fathers, and Cardinal Newman, from whose teachings he

concludes that God the Father is called "invisible" because "he never

appeared to bodily eyes; whereas the Son manifested Himself as an

angel, and as a man after His incarnation. * * * Whenever the Eternal

Son of God, or angels at God's behest, showed themselves to man, they

became visible only through a body, or a material garb assumed for the

occasion!" "Surely Tertullian, Ambrose, Augustine, the great English

Cardinal of the Roman church, and Mr. V. are in sore straits when they

must needs take refuge in the belief of such jugglery with matter as

this, in order to reconcile apparently conflicting scriptures. And

what a shuffling off and on of material garbs there must have been,

as from time to time hosts of angels and spirits appeared unto men!

It is but the materialization of the spiritualist mediums on a little

larger scale. But there is a better way of harmonizing the seeming

contradictions; and better authority for the conclusion to be reached

than the Christian fathers and Cardinal Newman. I mean the scriptures

themselves." (The argument in illustration of the last statement is

too extended to quote here. See Roberts-Van Der Donckt Discussion, pp.

80-84.)

7. _Of Anthropomorphism and Understanding the Bible Literally:_

I must say a word upon Mr. V's remarks respecting the plain

anthropomorphism of the Bible, and the matter of understanding that

sacred book literally. With reference to the first he says: "All men,

after the example of the inspired writings, make frequent use of the

figure called anthropomorphism, attributing to the Deity a human

body, human members, human passions, etc., and that is done, not to

imply that God is possessed of form, limbs, etc., but simply to make

spiritual things or certain truths more intelligible to man."

I would like to know upon what authority Mr. V. adjudges the "inspired

writings" not to imply that God is really possessed of form, limbs,

passions, etc., after attributing them to Him in the clearest manner.

The "inspired writings" plainly and most forcibly attribute to Deity

a form like man's, with limbs, organs, etc., but the Bible does not

teach that this ascription of form, limbs, organs and passions to God,

is unreal, and "simply to make spiritual things or certain truths

more intelligible to man." On the contrary, the Bible emphasizes the

doctrine of anthropomorphism by declaring in its very first chapter

that man was created in the image of God: "So God created man in His

own image, in the image of God created he him." The explanation is

offered that it was necessary to attribute human form, members and

passions, to God, in order to make spiritual things intelligible to

man; but what is the reason for ascribing the divine form to man, as in

the passage just quoted? Was that done to make human beings or certain

truths more intelligible to God? Or was it placed in the word of God

because it is simply true?

The truth that God in form is like man, is further emphasized by the

fact that Jesus is declared to have been in "the express image" of the

Father's person (Heb. 1: 3); and until Mr. V. or some other person of

his school of thought, can prove very clearly that the word of God

supports his theory of the unreality of the Bible's ascription of form,

organs, proportions, passions and feelings, to God and other heavenly

beings, the truth that God in form is like man, will stand secure on

the foundation of the revelations it has pleased God to give of His own

being and nature.

8. _"The Morbid Terror of Anthropomorphism":_ Dean Mansel, in his

"Limits of Religious Thought," administers a scathing reproof to the

German philosophers Kant and Fichte (and also to Professor Jowett,

in his note xxii in Lecture 1) for what he calls "that morbid terror

of what they are pleased to call anthropomorphism, which poisons the

speculation of so many modern philosophers, when they attempt to be

wise above what is written, and seek for a metaphysical exposition of

God's nature and attributes." These philosophers, while holding in

abhorrence the idea that God has a form such as man's--or any form

whatsoever--parts, organs, affections, sympathies, passions or any

attributes seen in man's spirit, are, nevertheless, under the necessity

of representing God as conscious, as knowing, as determining; all of

which, as pointed out by Dean Mansel in the passage which follows,

are, after all, qualities of the human mind as well as attributes of

Deity; and hence the philosophers, after all their labor, have not

escaped from anthropomorphism, but have merely represented Deity to

our consciousness, shorn of some of the higher qualities of the human

mind, which God is represented in the scriptures as possessing in their

perfection--such as love, mercy, justice. (The very extended passage

from Mansel's work will be found as foot note in "Mormon Doctrine of

Deity," pp. 85-88.)

9. _Angels Bodiless Beings:_ According to Mr. Van Der Donckt's

doctrine, "Angels as well as God are bodiless beings." Angels, both

good and bad, are spirits, devoid of bodies. The Creator is more

perfect than His creatures, and pure minds [minds separated from

bodies] are more perfect than minds united to bodies. * * * Therefore

the Creator is a pure spirit." But where does this leave Jesus? Was

and is Jesus God--true Deity? Yes. But Jesus is a spirit and body

united into one glorious personage. His mind was and is now united

to and dwelling in a body. Our Catholic friend says, "pure minds [i.

e., minds not united to bodies] are more perfect than minds united to

bodies." He also says, "Angels, both good and bad, are spirits (i. e.,

minds) devoid of bodies." Therefore, it must follow from his premises

and argument, that angels are superior to Jesus, since His spirit is

united to a body, while they are minds not united to bodies! I will

not press the point, that the same conclusions could be drawn from his

premises and argument with reference even to bad spirits, whom he says

are bodiless, and hence, upon his theory, superior to minds or spirits

united to bodies, for that would be ungenerous upon my part, and would

lay upon his faulty argument the imputation of awful blasphemy, which I

am sure was not intended, and would be as revolting to him as it would

be to myself. Mr. V., I am sure, would contend as earnestly as I would

that Jesus is superior to the angels, though it is perfectly clear that

He is a spirit united to a body.

Footnotes

1. The Catholic priest, Van Der Donckt, who is stating this objection,

uses the word "what," although that word is not used in either the

common English version, nor in the Douay (Catholic) Bible. "Whom do men

say that I the Son of man am?" Then to the apostles "But whom say ye

that I am? (Matt. xvi, 13-14). This is from the common English version.

The Douay Bible gives the same passages, "Who do men say that the son

of man is?" and "Who do you say that I am?" So really the question is

not _what_ the son of man is, but _who_; hence there is no

significance added to the matter from the questions asked.

LESSON XXXVII.

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

_SOME OBJECTIONS TO THE TRUE DOCTRINE OF DEITY. (Continued.)_

_ANALYSIS._ _REFERENCES._

_V. Objection: The Unity of God Excludes The same as in Lesson

the Idea of Plurality of xxxvi.

Gods._

_VI. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost

Are One and the Same Identical

Divine Essence of Being--Not

Three Separate Individuals._

_VII. The Answers._

_SPECIAL TEXT: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Love of God,

and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen." II Cor.

xiii:14_.

_NOTES._

These notes are taken from the Roberts-Van Der Donckt Discussion on

Deity. The Catholic Father states the objections and presents the

argument for them; Elder Roberts gives the answers and argues for

their accuracy and efficiency. The Debate in full is found in "Mormon

Doctrine of Deity," Chs. ii and iii.

1. _Unity of God:_ Mr. Van Der Donckt says: The first chapter of

the Bible reveals the supreme fact that there is One Only and Living

God, the Creator and moral Governor of the universe. As Moses opened

the sacred Writings by proclaiming Him, so the Jew, in all subsequent

generations, has continued to witness for Him, till from the household

of Abraham, faith in the one only living and true God has spread

through Jerusalem, Christianity and Mahometanism well-nigh over the

earth.[1] Primeval revelations of God had everywhere become corrupted

in the days of Moses, save among the chosen people. Therefore, the

first leaf of the Mosaic record, as Jean Paul says, has more weight

than all the folies of men of science and philosophers.

While all nations over the earth have developed a religious tendency

which acknowledged a higher than human power in the universe, Israel is

the only one which has risen to the grandeur of conceiving this power

as the One Only Living God. If we are asked how it was that Abraham

possessed not only the primitive conception of the Divinity, as He had

revealed Himself to all mankind, but passed through the denial of all

other gods, to the knowledge of the One God, we are content to answer,

that it was by a special divine revelation.[2]

The record of this divine revelation is to be found in the Bible:

"Hear, Israel: Our God is one Lord." "I alone am, and there is no other

God besides me" (Deut. 6:4 and 32:39). "I am the first and I am the

last, and after me there shall be none" (Isaiah 44:6; 43:10.) "I will

not give my glory to another" (Isaiah 42: 8; 45: 5, etc., etc.)

And as Mr. Roberts admits that our conception of God must be in harmony

with the New Testament, it as well as the Old witnesses continually to

One True God. Suffice it to quote: "One is good, God" (Matthew 19: 17;)

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God" (Luke 10: 27); "My Father of whom

you say that he is your God" (John 8: 54). Here Christ testified that

the Jews believed in only one God.

"The Lord is a God of all Knowledge" (I Kings 2). ("Mormon" Catechism

v. Q. 10 and 11). "Of that day and hour no one knoweth, no not the

angels of heaven, but the Father alone" (Matthew 24: 36). No one

knoweth who the Son is but the Father (Luke 10: 22). Therefore, no one

is God but one, the Heavenly Father.

In another form: The All-knowing alone is God. The Father alone is

all-knowing. Therefore the Father alone is God[3]

From these clear statements of the Divine Book it is evident that all

the texts quoted by Mr. Roberts do not bear the inference he draws from

them; on the contrary, they directly make against him, plainly proving

the unity of God.

First, then, if God so emphatically declares, both in the Old and in

the New Testament, that there is but one God, has anyone the right to

contradict Him and to say that there are several or many Gods? But Mr.

Roberts insists that the Bible contradicts the Bible; in other words,

that God, the author of the Bible, contradicts Himself. To say such a

thing is downright blasphemy.

The liability of self-contradiction is characteristic of human frailty.

It is incompatible with God's infinite perfections. Therefore, I most

emphatically protest that there is no real contradiction in the Bible,

though here and there may exist an apparent one."

2. _"The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost Are One and the Same

Identical Divine Essence or Being:_ 'I and the Father are one.' (John

10-30.) Christ asserts His physical, not merely moral, unity with the

Father.

"My sheep hear My voice * * * and I give them everlasting life; and

they shall not perish forever, and no man shall pluck them out of My

hand."

The following argument, by which Christ proves that no man shall pluck

His sheep from His hand, proves His consubstantiality, or the unity of

His nature or essence with His Father's:

"My Father who gave Me the sheep is greater than all men or creatures

(v. 29), and therefore no one can snatch the sheep or aught else from

His hand. (Supreme or almighty power is here predicated of the Father.)

"Now, I and the Father are one (thing, one being), (v. 30). (Therefore,

no one can snatch the sheep or aught else from My hand.)

To perceive the full meaning and strength of Jesus' argument, one must

read and understand the original text of St. John's Gospel, that is,

the Greek; or the Latin translation: Ego et Pater unum sumus.

If Christ had meant one in mind, or one morally, and not substantially,

He would have used the masculine gender, Greek eis, (unus)--and not

the neuter en, (unum)--as He did. No better interpreters of our Lord's

meaning can be found than His own hearers. Had He simply declared His

moral union with the Father, the Jews would not have taken up stones in

protest against His making Himself God, and asserting His identity with

the Father. Far from retracting His statement or correcting the Jews'

impression, Jesus insists that as He is the Son of God, He has far

more right to declare Himself God than the scripture had to call mere

human judges gods, and He corroborates His affirmation of His physical

unity with His Father by saying: 'The Father is in Me, and I am in the

Father,' which evidently signifies the same as verse 30: 'I and the

Father are one and the same individual being, the One God.'

The preceding argument is reinforced by John xiv:8-11: 'Philip saith to

him: Lord, show us the Father. * * * Jesus saith: So long a time have

I been with you and thou hast not known Me. Philip, he that seeth Me

seeth the Father also. How sayest thou: Show us the Father. Do you not

believe that I am in the Father and the Father in Me? The words that I

speak, I speak not of Myself. But the Father Who abideth in Me, He doth

the works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me.

What things soever the Father doth, these the Son also doth likewise.

(John v:19.)

These words are a clear assertion of the physical unity of the Son and

the Father. It is plain from the context that Christ means more than

a physical resemblance, no matter how complete, between Him and His

Father. Of mere resemblance and moral union could never be said that

one is the other, and that the words uttered by one are actually spoken

by the other. To see the Son and the Father at the same time in the

Son, the Son and the Father must be numerically one Being. Now, Christ

says: 'He that seeth the Father.' Therefore, He and the Father are

numerically one Being."

3. _The Holy Ghost:_ There remains to prove that the Holy Ghost

is inseparably one with the Father and the Son. There are three who

give testimony in heaven, and these three are one. (1 John v:8.) As

Christ proved His identity and unity with the Father by texts quoted:

'The words that I speak, I speak not of Myself. But the Father Who

abideth in Me, He doth the works,' so He now shows His unity with the

Holy Ghost by almost the selfsame sentences: 'When the Spirit of Truth

will have come, He will teach you all truth; for He will not speak of

Himself, but He will speak whatever He will hear, and will announce to

you the things to come. He will glorify Me, because He will receive of

mine and announce to you: whatever the Father hath are Mine. Therefore,

I said: because He will receive of Mine and announce it to you.' (John

xvi:13-15.)

That the Holy Ghost is one with the Son, or Jesus, is proved also by

the fact that the Christian baptism is indiscriminately called the

Baptism of the Holy Ghost, the Baptism in or with the Holy Ghost and

the Baptism of or in Jesus: 'He [Christ] shall baptize in the Holy

Ghost and fire' (that is, the Holy Ghost acting as purifying fire)

(Matthew iii:11); 'have you received the Holy Ghost? We have not so

much as heard whether there be a Holy Ghost.' He said: 'In what, then

[in whose name, then] were you baptized?' Who said: 'In John's baptism

* * * Having the instrument of the Father? heard these things they were

baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 2:9). All we who are

baptized in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 6:3).

4. _The Answers: Of the Unity of God:_ The Latter-day Saints

believe in the unity of the creative and governing force or power of

the universe as absolutely as any orthodox Christian sect in the world.

One cannot help being profoundly impressed with the great truth that

creation, throughout its whole extent, bears evidence of being one

system, presents at every point unity of design, and harmony in its

government. Nor am I unmindful of the force there is in the deduction

usually drawn from these premises, viz.: that the Creator and Governor

of the universe must necessarily be one. But I am also profoundly

impressed by another fact that comes within the experience of man,

at least to a limited extent, viz.: the possibility of intelligences

arriving at perfect agreement, so as to act in absolute unity. We see

manifestations of this principle in human governments, and other human

associations of various kinds. And this, too, is observable, viz.:

that the greater and more perfect the intelligence, the more perfect

can the unity of purpose and of effort become: so that one needs only

the existence of perfect intelligences to operate together in order to

secure perfect oneness, whence shall come the one system evident in

the universe, exhibiting at every point unity of design, and perfect

harmony in its government. In other words, "oneness" can be the result

of perfect agreement among Many Intelligences, as surely as it can

be the result of the existence of One Only Intelligence. Also, the

decrees and purposes of the perfectly united Many can be as absolute

as the decrees and purposes of the One Only Intelligence. One is also

confronted with the undeniable fact that inclines him to the latter

view as the reasonable explanation of the "Oneness" that is evidently

in control of the universe--the fact that there are in existence many

Intelligences, and, endowed as they are with free will, it cannot be

denied that they influence, to some extent, the course of events and

the conditions that obtain. Moreover, it will be found, on careful

inquiry, that the explanation of the "Oneness" controlling in the

universe, on the theory that it results from the perfect agreement or

unity of Many Intelligences,[4] is more in harmony with the revelations

of God on the subject than the theory that there is but One Only

Personal Intelligence that enters into its government. This theory Mr.

Van Der Donckt, of course, denies, and this is the issue between us

that remains to be tested.

5. _The Meaning of Elohim:_ The Reverend gentleman affirms that the

first chapter of the Bible "reveals the supreme fact that there is but

One Only and Living God." This I deny; and affirm the fact that the

first chapter of the Bible reveals the existence of a plurality of Gods.

It is a matter of common knowledge that the word translated "God" in

the first chapter of our English version of the Bible, in the Hebrew,

is Elohim--plural of Eloah--and should be rendered "Gods"--so as to

read, "In the beginning the Gods created the heavens and the earth,"

etc. * * * The Gods said, "Let there be light." * * * The Gods said,

"Let us make man," etc., etc. So notorious is the fact that the Hebrew

plural, Elohim, is used by Moses, that a variety of devices have been

employed to make the first chapter of Genesis conform to the "One Only

God" idea. Some Jews, in explanation of it, and in defense of their

belief in One Only God, hold that there are several Hebrew words which

have a plural form but singular meaning--of which Elohim is one--and

they quote as proof of this the word maim, meaning water, shamaim,

meaning heaven, and panim, meaning the face or surface of a person or

thing. "But," says a Christian Jewish scholar,[5] "if we examine these

words, we shall find that though apparently they may have a singular

meaning, yet, in reality, they have a plural or collective one; thus,

for instance, 'maim,' water, means a collection of waters, forming

one collective whole; and thus again 'shamaim,' heaven, is also, in

reality as well as form, of the plural number, meaning what we call in

a similar way in English 'the heavens'; comprehending all the various

regions which are included under that title."

Other Jewish scholars content themselves in accounting for this

inconvenient plural in the opening chapter of Genesis, by saying that

in the Hebrew, Elohim better represents the idea of "Strong," "Mighty,"

than the singular form would, and for this reason it was used--a view

accepted by not a few Christians. (The argument on the plural Elohim

continues through eight more pages in "Mormon Doctrine of Deity," from

p. 139 to p. 147. It is too elaborate to be reproduced here.)

6. _Of the Father Alone Being God:_ Referring to the admission in

my discourse that conceptions of God, to be true, must be in harmony

with the New Testament, Mr. Van Der Donckt proceeds to quote passages

from the New Testament, in support of the idea that there is but one

God:

"One is good, God (Matt. xix:17). Thou shalt love the Lord thy God

(Luke x:27). My Father, of whom you say that He is your God (John

viii:54). Here Christ testified that the Jews believed in only one God.

The Lord is a God of all knowledge (1 Kings ii). ("Mormon" Catechism

V. Q. 10 and 2, 11). Of that day and hour no one knoweth, no, not

the angels of heaven, but the Father alone (Matthew xxiv:36). No one

knoweth who the Son is but the Father (Luke x:22). Therefore, no one

is God but one, the Heavenly Father. In another form: the All-knowing

alone is God. The Father alone is all-knowing. Therefore, the Father

alone is God."

In the conclusion of the syllogism, "Therefore, the Father alone is

God," Mr. V. himself seems to have become suddenly conscious of having

stumbled upon a difficulty which he ineffectually seeks to remove in

a foot note. If it be true, as Mr. V. asserts it is, that the Father

alone is God, then it must follow that the Son of God, Jesus Christ,

is not God; that the Holy Ghost is not God! Yet the New Testament, in

representing the Father as addressing Jesus, says--"Thy throne, O God,

is forever and forever" (Heb. i:8). Here is the positive word of the

Father that Jesus, the Son, is God; for He addresses Him as such. To

say, then, that the Father alone is God, is to contradict the Father.

Slightly paraphrasing the rather stern language of Mr. V., I might ask:

If God the Father so emphatically declares that Jesus is God, has any

one the right to contradict him by affirming that the Father alone is

God? But Mr. V. insists that the Bible contradicts the Bible; in other

words, that God, the author of the Bible, contradicts himself: "To

say such a thing, is downright blasphemy!" But Mr. V. will say he has

explained all that in his foot note. Has he? Let us see. "Therefore,

the Father alone is God," is the conclusion of his syllogism; and the

foot note--"To the exclusion of another or separate divine being, but

not to the denial of the distinct divine personalities of the Son

and the Holy Ghost in the One Divine Being." But that is the mere

assumption of my Catholic friend. When he says that the Father alone

is God, it must be to the exclusion of every other being, or part of

being, or person, and everything else, or language means nothing. Mr.

V.'s foot note helps him out of his difficulty not at all.

7. _"The All-Knowing Alone is God":_ (See note 1 this Lesson). The

creed to which Mr. Van Der Donckt subscribes--the Athanasian--says: "So

the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God." Now, if

the quality of "all-knowing" is essential to the attributes of true

Deity, then Jesus and the Holy Ghost must be all-knowing, or else not

true deity.

But what of the difficulty presented by Mr. V's contention: "The

All-knowing alone is God, the Father alone is All-knowing, therefore,

the Father alone is God?" Mr. V. constructs this mighty syllogism

upon a very precarious basis. It reminds one of a pyramid standing on

its apex. He starts with the premise that "The Lord is a God of all

knowledge:" then he discovers that there is one thing that Jesus, the

Son of God does not know--the day and hour when Jesus will come to

earth in his glory--"Of that day and hour no one knoweth; no, not the

angels of heaven, but the Father alone (Matt. 24: 36)--therefore, the

Father alone is God!" In consideration of facts such as are included

in Mr. V's middle term, one is bound, in the nature of things, to take

into account time, place and circumstances. In the case in question,

the Twelve disciples had come to Jesus, and among other questions asked

him what should be the sign of his own glorious coming to earth again.

The Master told them the signs, but said of the day and hour of that

coming no one knew, but his Father only. Hence, Jesus did not know,

hence Jesus did not possess all knowledge, hence, according to Mr. V.,

Jesus was not God! But Jesus was referring to the state of matters at

the particular time when he was speaking; and it does not follow that

the Father would exclude his Son Jesus forever, or for any considerable

time, from the knowledge of the time of the glorious advent of the Son

of God to the earth. As Jesus rose to the possession of all power "in

heaven and in earth" (Matt. 28: 18), so also, doubtless, he rose to the

possession of all knowledge in heaven and in earth; "For the Father

loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that he himself doeth" (John

5: 20), and, in sharing with the Son his power, and his purposes, would

doubtless make known to him the day and hour of the glorious advent of

Christ to the earth.

8. _Of the Oneness of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Is it Physical

Identity:_ I next consider Mr. Van Der Donckt's argument concerning

the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost being "the same identical Divine

Essence." Mr. V. bases this part of his argument on the words of

Messiah--"I and my Father are one (John 10:30); and claims that here

"Christ asserts his physical, not merely moral, union with the Father."

* * * * * * I shall test Mr. V's exegesis of the passage in question,

by the examination of another passage involving the same ideas, the

same expressions; and this in the Latin as well as in the English.

Jesus prayed for His disciples as follows:

"Holy Father, keep through Thine own name those whom Thou hast given

Me, that they may be one, as We are. * * * * Neither pray I for these

[the disciples] alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me

through their word; that they all may be one: * * * that they may be

one, even as we are one." (St. John 17:11, 20, 21, 22.)

In Latin, the clauses written in the above, stand: Ut sint unum, sicut

et nos (verse 11), "that they may be one, just as We." So in verse 22:

Ut sint unum, sicut et nos unum sumus; "that they may be one in Us,

even as We one are." Here unum, "one," is used in the same manner as

it is in St. John, 10:30--"Ego et Pater unum sumus." "I and Father one

are." Mr. V. says that unum in the last sentence means, "one thing,"

one essence; hence, Christ's physical union, or identity of substance,

with the Father; not agreement of mind, or concord of purpose, or moral

union. Very well, for the moment let us adopt his exposition, and see

where it will lead us. If unum in the sentence, Ego et Pater unum

sumus, means "one thing," "one substance, or essence," and denotes the

physical union of the Father and Son in one substance, then it means

the same in the sentence--ut sint unum, sicut et nos; that is, "that

they [the disciples] may be one [unum] just as We are." So in the other

passage before quoted where the same words occur.

Again, to Messiah's statement: "Ego et Pater unum sumus"--"I and my

Father are one."--Mr. V. thinks his view of this passage--that it

asserts the identity or physical union of the Father and the Son--is

strengthened by the fact that it is followed with these remarks of

Jesus: "The Father is in Me, and I am in the Father." "Which evidently

signifies," says Mr. V., "the same as verse 30 (John 10); I and the

Father are one and the same individual being, the one God."

But the passage from the prayer of Jesus concerning the oneness of the

disciples with the Father and the Son, is emphasized by well-nigh the

same words in the context, as those which occur in John 10:30 and upon

which Mr. V. lays so much stress as sustaining his exposition of the

physical union, viz: "The Father is in Me, and I in Him" (verse 38).

"Which evidently signifies," Mr. V. remarks, "the same as verse 30: I

and my Father are one." Good; then listen: "Holy Father, keep through

Thine own name those whom Thou hast given Me, that they may be one as

We are: * * as thou Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they may

be one in Us." There can be no doubt now but what the union between

the disciples and the Father and Son, is to be of the same nature as

that subsisting between the Father and Son. If the Father and Son are

physically one substance or essence, so, too, if the prayer of Jesus

is to be realized--as surely it will be--then the disciples are to be

physically united with God, in one essence or substance--not just the

Twelve disciples, either, for whom Jesus immediately prayed, but those,

also, in all generations who shall believe on Christ through the words

of His first disciples; that is, all the faithful believers, through

all generations, are to become physically united with God, become

the same substance or essence as God Himself! Is Mr. Van Der Donckt

prepared to accept the inevitable conclusion of his own exposition

of John 10:30? If so, then what advantage has the Christian over

the Hindoo, whom he has called a heathen, for so many generations?

The sincerest desire of the Hindoo is to be "physically united with

God," even if that involve "a blowing out," or the attainment of

Nirvana--annihilation--to encompass it.[6] Of course, we had all hoped

for better things from the Christian religion. We had hoped for the

immortality of the individual man; for his persistence through the

ages as an individual entity, associated with God in loving converse

and dearest relations of moral union; but not absorbed, or lost, in

absolute physical union with Him. But if Mr. V's exposition of John

10:30 be correct, and a physical union is meant by the words--"I and my

Father are one," then all Christians are to be made physically one with

God under the prayer of Christ--"That they may be one, as we are"--i.

e., as the Father and Son are one. * * * * * *

My point is, that the text, "I and my Father are one," refers to a

moral union--to a perfect union of purpose and will--not to a unity

or identity of substance, or essence: and any other view than this is

shown from the argument to be absurd.

But Mr. Van Der Donckt would cry out against the physical union

of man with God. Both his interpretation of scripture and his

philosophy--especially the latter--would require it. Man and God, in

his philosophy, are not of the same nature. God is not physical, while

man is. God is not material, but spiritual, that is, according to Mr.

V., immaterial, while man is material. Man is finite, God infinite;

nothing can be added to the infinite, therefore, man cannot be added

to the infinite in physical union. "The nature of the parts would

cling to the whole," and the infinity of God would be marred by the

physical union of finite parts to Him; hence, the oneness of Christians

with Christ and God the Father, is not a physical oneness. But if the

union of the Christians with Christ and God is not to be physical,

then neither is the union of Christ and God the Father physical, for

the oneness in the one case, is to be the same as the oneness in the

other--"that they all may be one; as thou Father, are in me, and I in

thee, that they may also be one in us * * * * that they may be one even

as We are one." (John 17:21, 22).

The doctrine of physical union between the Father and the Son,

contended for by Mr. V., must be abandoned. There is no help for it,

unless he is prepared to admit also the physical union of all the

disciples with God--a thing most repugnant to Mr. V's principles. With

the doctrine of physical identity gone, the "oneness" of the Father

and the Son, that Mr. V. contends for, goes also, and two separate and

distinct personalities, or Gods, are seen, in the Father and the Son,

whose oneness consists not of physical identity, but of agreement of

mind, concord of will, and unity of purpose [the same holds also as to

the Holy Ghost]; a oneness born of perfect knowledge, equality of power

and dominion. But if a perfect oneness, as above set forth, may subsist

between two persons, [or three] it may subsist with equal consistency

among any number of persons capable of attaining to the same degree of

intelligence and power, and thus there would appear some reason for

the prayer of the Christ, that all His disciples might be one, even

as He and the Father are one. And thus one may account for the saying

of David: "God standeth in the congregation of the mighty: He judgeth

among the Gods" (Psalm 82: 1); for such congregations existed in heaven

before the foundations of the earth were laid; and such a congregation

may yet be made up of the redeemed from our own earth, when they attain

to perfect union with God and Christ.

Footnotes

1. "Hours with the Bible," by Geikie, Vol. I, Chapters i, ii.

2. "Chips From a German Workshop," by Max Muller, vol. 1, pp. 345-372.

3. To the exclusion of another or separate divine being, but not to the

denial of the distinct Divine Personalities of the Son and the Holy

Ghost in the One Divine Being.

4. John Stuart Mill, in his Essay on Theism, in speaking of the evident

unity in nature, which suggests that nature is governed by One Being,

comes very near stating the exact truth in an alternative statement

to his first remark, viz.: "At least, if a plurality be supposed, it

is necessary to assume so complete a concert of action and unity of

will among them, that the difference is, for most purposes, immaterial

between such a theory and that of the absolute unity of the Godhead."

(Essays on Religion--Theism, p. 133.)

5. This is Rev. H. Highton, M. A., and Fellow of Queen's College,

Oxford. I quote from his lecture on "God a Unity and Plurality,"

published in a Christian Jewish periodical called "The Voice of

Israel," February number, 1844.

6. Max Muller, "Chips From a German Workshop," Vol. 1, p. 285.