9

The doctrine of the clarity of Scripture (often called the perspicuity of Scripture) is a Protestant Christian position teaching that

"...those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed, for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them". Westminster Confession of Faith

According to denominations which hold to the doctrine of the clarity of scripture, is Trinitarianism something which is necessary to be known and believed for salvation, and therefore clearly propounded and opened such that not only the learned, but the unlearned may attain to a sufficient understanding of them?

Only True God
  • 6,628
  • 1
  • 18
  • 55
  • Jesus said, "Before Abraham was, I AM". Thomas confessed Christ as "my God". Now, Unitarians have other explanations of these verses, but I think Trinitarians have a pretty good case that these verses (and others) make the matter pretty clear. – Matthew May 29 '22 at 15:48
  • @Matthew The beggar also said "I AM". What does that put us at, 4 Persons in the Trinity? ;) – Only True God May 30 '22 at 05:07
  • Uh, citation, please? – Matthew May 30 '22 at 14:35
  • @Matthew John 9:9. The Greek is identical. 'I AM' is a tendentious translation put forth by Trinitarians who want to think Jesus was claiming to be Yahweh. Normally, this phrase is just translated as 'I am he' or 'I am the one'. It's a self-identifier from a question from the context. Jesus says the same thing also in John 4:26, but there translators don't usually mess around and instead translate it as the obvious 'I am he', i.e., the Messiah. It's the same identifier at John 8:58, which is referring to his identity as Messiah at John 8:56. "The Messiah Abraham saw? It's me." – Only True God May 30 '22 at 15:59
  • @Matthew Remember, the whole point of John is to show that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God. Not God the Son. Don't believe me? Then perhaps you'll believe John himself, who states the purpose of his Gospel at John 20:31. "these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God" If Thomas was actually claiming Jesus was God Almighty, don't you think John would have noted that in his summary? – Only True God May 30 '22 at 16:38
  • @Matthew But if you want to do an answer that says 'yes' and cites the typical Trinitarian proof-texts, go for it. – Only True God May 30 '22 at 16:44
  • I've actually seen some interesting things said on why God didn't inspire the text to be more explicit about certain things. Might be food for thought (if you like, I can probably dredge up some sources). As to John 8:56, did the Jews try to stone Jesus for claiming to be the Messiah, or for claiming to be God? – Matthew May 30 '22 at 18:02
  • @Matthew Yes, they wanted to stone him for claiming to be the Messiah, the Son of God. Remember, Jesus has just called these Jews 'liars' and 'sons of the Devil'. They are P.O.ed. Look at St. Stephen's treatment. He never claimed Jesus was God, but he got stoned all the same. Go back to John 8:39. "now you are trying to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God." Note Jesus plainly says here he is a man and the separation between him and God (heard from God). ... – Only True God May 30 '22 at 18:12
  • @Matthew ... So, already, they are trying to kill him, before he says "Before Abraham was, I am". – Only True God May 30 '22 at 18:12
  • @Matthew Go back to John 7. There, the Jews are clearly debating whether Jesus is in fact the Messiah. The authorities clearly have decided he is not, and therefore is blaspheming by claiming so. In particular 7:40-52. As for them trying to kill him, again, look at 7:19 and 7:25. Well before John 8:48, the authorities want to kill him. – Only True God May 30 '22 at 18:21

1 Answers1

6

The section of the Westminster Confession you have quoted, Chapter I, section VII, explains how there is no limiting factor within the scripture, regarding those things necessary for salvation, which gives advantage to the learned over the unlearned.

Just prior to that Chapter 1 Section VI reads (in part):

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.(m) Nevertheless we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word

And again in Section X:

The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined; and in whose sentence we are to rest; can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture.

In short the spiritual truths necessarily relating to our salvation are spiritual truths recorded in a physical media and are thus to be discerned in both ways. The natural man cannot, by nature alone, apprehend the things of the Spirit:

Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual. The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. - 1 Cor 2:12-14

For one example, Peter confessed Jesus to be the Son of the Living God and Jesus declared that Peter did not come by that knowledge through flesh and blood. Another example is Nicodemus' complete ignorance regarding the new birth even though he was 'the' teacher of Israel.

Trinitarian belief is necessary for salvation (according to Trinitarians) for two major reasons outlined in the confession:

  1. Chapter VII, section 1 - The gulf between Holy God and creature is so unbridgeable and immense to man that reconciliation must be an act of God:

The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto Him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of Him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God’s part, which He hath been pleased to express by way of covenant.

  1. Chapter VIII, section II - Jesus Christ is that voluntary condescension of God, taking upon Himself the nature of a created being to accomplish as a man and for mankind, what man is utterly incapable of doing:

The Son of God, the second person in the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance and equal with the Father, did, when the fulness of time was come, take upon Him man’s nature, with all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin: being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, of her substance. So that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. Which person is very God, and very man, yet one Christ, the only Mediator between God and man.

The Holy Spirit is said to be eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son in Chapter II, section III:

In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power, and eternity; God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither begotten, nor proceeding: the Son is eternally begotten of the Father: the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son.

This is that Spirit that searches all things, even the deep things of God; who has been sent into the world to convince the world of sin and of righteousness and of judgement; severally referred to as the Spirit of God, the Spirit from God, the Spirit of Truth, and the Spirit of Christ and who dwelt in the flesh of Jesus without measure. This same Spirit was present and active in creation, inspired and illuminates Scripture to human hearts, regenerates and adopts the lost, lives and strives within the redeemed to produce conformity to Christ, and guarantees the inheritance. It is the same eternal Spirit by which Christ offered Himself without blemish to God on our behalf and who Jesus promised to send to be with us and in us forever.

Simply put Trinitarians are convinced from Scripture by natural apprehension and spiritual illumination of what is written that a Jesus who is not the only begotten Son of God, the Logos who was God in the beginning and never ceased to be God during the incarnation, is not capable of providing salvation to all mankind because the chasm between God and Man is uncrossable to Man. Therefore trinitarian belief is considered necessary for salvation because a merely human Jesus cannot save and man, unaided by the Holy Spirit, cannot apprehend salvation.

This is not to say that full doctrinal understanding is necessary in advance. Indeed, all (in whatever condition they currently exist) who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved. Following the new birth, however, the Holy Spirit will never illuminate scripture and enable understanding of that which is untrue. A saved individual, then, who from a sincere heart desires to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ can reasonably expect, over time through prayer, study, and a heart of obedience, to increase in apprehension of the Triune God.

Mike Borden
  • 16,820
  • 2
  • 18
  • 50
  • 1
    'a merely human Jesus cannot save' This is the heart of the deception thrust onto the early church. To have God, as Jesus, be tempted by the devil, and win against all temptation that is common for man, makes a mockery of what was accomplished and therefore, 'He had to be made like His brothers in every way.' is just another lie. Heb 2:17 – steveowen Mar 03 '21 at 09:14
  • 2
    @user47952 "Truly no man can ransom another, or give to God the price of his life, for the ransom of their life is costly and can never suffice, that he should live on forever and never see the pit. - Psalm 49:7-9" – Mike Borden Mar 03 '21 at 12:52
  • It's a bit like looking in a 1939 Britannica to check the price of Gold today! Jesus is not like us if he is God. If he is God, he is not like us in every way. Look into that instead of trying to wriggle out from the simple and plain revelation with a proof text taken out of context.. – steveowen Mar 04 '21 at 02:11
  • 2
    @user47952 Perhaps you are pressing "like us in every way" beyond it's intention. Jesus is God (Spirit) and Man (flesh). "Like us in every way" then would refer to Jesus' humanity; the flesh and blood of which he partook (participated/shared). Logos took on flesh not metamorphosed into flesh. – Mike Borden Mar 04 '21 at 12:46
  • :) rubbish - you jam the text into a narrow definition constrained by a theology. Let the text show the way. "like us in every way" is but one of many verses that say the same thing - Jesus was a man - period. – steveowen Mar 04 '21 at 19:55
  • 'Logos took on flesh' is not of the text either. You should be asking what the 'God the son' is doing all this time - why isn't HE taking on flesh. – steveowen Mar 04 '21 at 19:57
  • @user47952 "Then what if you were to see the Son of Man (Jesus' very favorite name for himself) ascending to where he was before? - John 6:62" What an absolutely insane thing for a mere man to ask. – Mike Borden Mar 05 '21 at 13:13
  • https://www.biblicalunitarian.com/verses/john-6-62 Jesus said he was not of this world, Just as he said the disciples were not of this world because they were his. Being without sin is heavenly, being set free from sin is heavenly, just as God sent manna. Jesus was sent from God. God doesn't need to have the manna up there to send it either. If Jesus was there before you expect him to 'return'. Return has been added in every instance. – steveowen Mar 05 '21 at 21:35
  • John 16:5,28, 13:1,3, 20:17, 14:28 'return' or 'going back' Why add this to the text? Only reason is to bias the reader to think that he came from there in the first place - requiring pre-existence. Wow, the gall, the hubris, the sneakiness to alter the inspired text to make it say what you want. – steveowen Mar 06 '21 at 07:09
  • @user47952 John 16:28; 13:3;17:5. You really have to want to not see it. 16:28 for example... Came from the Father into the world/leaving the world to go to the Father. – Mike Borden Mar 06 '21 at 12:52
  • @user47952 I came from my house and came into the store now I'm leaving the store and going to my house. Wait...I didn't say the word "return". Does that mean I was never at my house to begin with? – Mike Borden Mar 06 '21 at 13:04
  • there's no need to trivialise the text - either we honour the intent or we fiddle with it to comply more with the bias. No need either to hang everything on one or two verse when several other clearer ones speak easy to understand truth. God didn't send manna literally from heaven did He? So why using the same words must Jesus come from heaven literally? – steveowen Mar 06 '21 at 13:11
  • God didn't inspire John to write return or go back anywhere He could have when referring to Jesus going to Him at the end of the mission - it would have made perfect sense if it was true. I know why He didn't - it would have been at odds with too many other texts. – steveowen Mar 06 '21 at 13:20
  • @user47952 I agree about clear statements. "And now, glorify me, Thou Father, with Thyself, with the glory that I had before the world was, with Thee." – Mike Borden Mar 07 '21 at 14:34
  • As the logos, Jesus knew intimately what the father's plan was from the beginning - that HE was the plan. It was a glorious plan and it was about to reach it's zenith. IF Jesus was God, he wouldn't need to be glorified. You see you cannot keep having him God one minute and not God another... – steveowen Mar 07 '21 at 21:27
  • @user47952 The point is that Jesus is asking to "return" to a condition of glory which He previously held. No mere man can claim to have had glory with the Father before the world was. You have Jesus saying "With the glory that I had back when I was Logos and wasn't really this me yet...". – Mike Borden Mar 08 '21 at 12:52
  • yes, it's an odd, but similarly, so is this, 'This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time,' 2 Tim1:9 The concept of God saying what is before it is, is not uncommon. Jesus knew that. Now he's looking forward to the actualisation of his glory - just as we are. – steveowen Mar 08 '21 at 22:30
  • @user47952 But we are not looking forward to a glory that we had before, as Jesus is here. – Mike Borden Mar 09 '21 at 00:37
  • ok m8, you stick with these odd ones that seem to say what you want. I think we're done with this line. You didn't address 'a merely human Jesus cannot save' adequately. There is no text to support this, do you have anything biblical other than a Psalm? – steveowen Mar 09 '21 at 01:03
  • did you read the passage - v3 And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. Wow, Jesus must be really confused - one sentence proclaiming the only true God - his Father, and he now wants recognition of being God too? v2 he is given authority by God. Kept in context, the verse about glory isn't a paradox. – steveowen Mar 09 '21 at 01:22
  • one more, Jesus said: “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Messiah should suffer these things and enter into his glory?”Luke 24:25-26 Nothing about retaking or reclaiming – steveowen Mar 09 '21 at 02:57
  • @user47952 Jesus is perfectly clear regarding who he is...the eternal Word of God become flesh to show us the Father, to glorify the Father, to give us the Father's Word, to condemn sin in the flesh and usher in reconciliation. Logos is the Divine Mind. Of course God's Logos receives authority from God (is God not in control of His mind?). Of course God's Logos points unerringly to the only true God (Are God's thoughts in rebellion?). Of course God's Logos is One with God (Is someone else thinking for God?). Of course Jesus behaved much like a man: He emptied Himself to do it. – Mike Borden Mar 09 '21 at 12:45
  • No, God is not in control of Jesus! Jesus had his own will which differed from the Father. Which then was not the same as God/logos. This is why He cannot be God, he deferred and obeyed - making him complete/perfect. Yet, the Jesus/God still cannot die or be made like us unless you fabricate a manifestation to die instead. You say of the logos as if there are verses to show this - receiving authority? How can logos not be at one - it's God's own words! – steveowen Mar 10 '21 at 01:11
  • Strangely, you have essentially ignored the thrust of the Q. "the clarity of scripture" - you have used one verse in the entire answer, and that of little substance regarding the topic. So according to your view of scripture, the trinity is not clear? – steveowen Mar 10 '21 at 01:23
  • @user47952 The answer, building off of the question, is all about what the Westminster Confession says regarding the clarity of Scripture. – Mike Borden Mar 10 '21 at 13:42
  • @user47952 Correct. God cannot die and flesh can. Jesus did both. – Mike Borden Mar 10 '21 at 13:43
  • @MikeBorden Follow up question here https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/91318/what-is-the-scriptural-basis-for-the-belief-that-a-man-is-not-capable-of-providi – Only True God May 27 '22 at 22:11
  • I'll agree that the Bible makes it clear that salvation isn't possible without the help of God's holy spirit, but there's nothing in this answer that shows why the authors of the Westminster Confession think it is clear that God's spirit is a distinct person rather than simply the force he works through. Why is that part of the Trinity Doctrine considered to be made clear in the Bible? – Ray Butterworth May 27 '22 at 22:37