Posted by Milo Hurley for January 7, 2012 Sabbath School

Once a Muslim asked me to explain the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. (Remember that Muslims see a three-person Godhead as a denial of monotheism — the belief that there is only one God, whom they call Allah.)1 After doing my best to give him an on-the-spot answer, he reacted: “So, there are three Gods, but only one God? That doesn’t make sense!”

I wish I had read this week’s lesson before that conversation. On Sunday’s page of the Adult Study Guide, the author makes a captivating comparison between Deuteronomy 6:4 and Genesis 2:24. In the first verse, Jehovah is “one” (echad), but so are a man and a woman when they become “one [echad] flesh” — still two distinct persons, but now one in purpose. So it is with the Triune God.

I could give you proof texts that uphold the distinct divinity of each person in the Godhead, but the lesson already does that. Instead, let’s focus our attention on another issue: the eternal pre-existence of the Second Person, God the Son.

Although “the Lord Jesus Christ, the divine Son of God, existed from eternity, a distinct person, yet one with the Father”;2 although “Christ was God essentially, and in the highest sense . . . with God from all eternity”;3 many continue to believe otherwise. Oh yes, these individuals still pay lip-service to His divine nature by saying that He inherited all the attributes of God when He was “begotten” — a term they apply literally to the Son coming forth from, or out of, the Father. And of course, to emphasize the Son’s distinction from “created” beings, His “begetting” happened ions before God created angels or humans.

What many need to understand is “Christ’s relation to the law.” Indeed, it is “but faintly understood.”4 I’d like to present this relationship in three syllogisms,5 the first concluding that the law is eternal:

1. God’s nature is eternal.
2. “The law of God is an expression of His very nature.”6
3. Therefore, the law is also eternal.

Although, after the entrance of sin, the language of the law was changed to meet man in his fallen condition, the principles of the law remained fixed. In The Signs of the Times, we read that “the law of God existed before the creation of man or else Adam could not have sinned.”7 And if that is true for man, it is also true for angels. God’s law existed before the creation of angels, or else Lucifer could not have sinned.

But how far back should we imagine God’s law to have existed? Notice how Ellen White mentions both God’s nature and His law in relation to love. In Step to Christ we read that “His nature, His law, is love. It ever has been; it ever will be.”8 Does this mean that God’s law, being “an expression of His very nature,” has always existed? Or are we trying to probe a mystery which God has not revealed? When we read that the law is, both “infinite, and eternal,”9 should we take such terms to mean no beginning as well as no end? At least we can know such terms have never applied to created beings, be they men or angels.

Now let’s look at our second syllogism:

1. God’s law is eternal.
2. A created being is not eternal.
3. Therefore, a created being is inferior to God’s law.

No, not even Gabriel could have taken Adam’s place under the law. “In all the universe there was but one who could, in behalf of man, satisfy its claims. Since the divine law is as sacred as God Himself, only one equal with God could make atonement for its transgression.”10 Such a being was found in the Second Person of the Godhead, who, unlike the angels, was not inferior to His own “infinite, and eternal,” law. A third syllogism might therefore look like this:

1. A created being is inferior to the law.
2. Christ was not a created being.
3. Therefore, Christ was not inferior to the law, and so could pay its penalty.

In closing, remember that the divinity of Christ has always been the object of Satan’s malice. We know this to be true because “when God said to His Son, ‘Let us make man in our image,’ Satan was jealous of Jesus. He wished to be consulted concerning the formation of man, and because he was not, he was filled with envy, jealousy, and hatred.”11

My reader, think about what is at stake. Had “the self-existent One”12 been merely a being who inherited the attributes of God, would there not have been some validity to Lucifer’s jealousy? After all, if the Father can bestow His attributes upon His “begotten” Son, could He not also bestow them upon His beloved Lucifer? Those who believe that there was a time when Christ did not exist — please explain to Lucifer why he too should not receive divine powers!

__________

1. A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam, Some Basic Islamic Beliefs.

2. The Review and Herald, April 5, 1906, par. 7.

3. Ibid., par. 6.

4. The Review and Herald, Feb. 4, 1890, par. 2.

5. A form of deductive reasoning in which a conclusion is derived from two premises.

6. Steps to Christ, page 60.

7. The Signs of the Times, March 14, 1878, par. 3.

8. Patriarchs and Prophets, page 33.

9. The Review and Herald, April 22, 1902, par. 17.

10. Patriarchs and Prophets, page 63.

11. Early Writings, page 145.

12. The Desire of Ages, page 470.

.