Beyond The Basics 3: The Trinity

Father, thank you for this opportunity we have to meet this morning, even in the rain, to be reminded of your goodness in providing a shelter, a place to meet, the protection afforded to us by our

Constitution that allows us to gather together and without fear to come and worship you.

Lord, would you bless our time this morning as we look at what you have revealed to us about yourself?

I pray that this would be a good time for us in Christ's name, amen. Well, oh,

I'm just stealing somebody else's notes. Sorry. We're going to, we've been talking about the attributes of God and I was going, we, well, last week we were in Cape Cod and that was, that was fun for us.

But this morning we're going to be talking about the doctrine of the Trinity. I think Pastor Mike gave a sermon about it some time ago and he said, how many sermons have you ever heard about the

Trinity? And the answer was, you know, not many. The Trinity is a difficult thing to grasp.

In fact, I've said before that I think coming from Mormon background and, you know, I mean,

I grew up with a diverse set of kids, diverse in the theological sense, not diverse in any other kind of sense.

And we would go on field trips and we would sit there, a Mormon, a

Jehovah witness, a Catholic and a Jew, and we would argue about the

Trinity. What else would we do? You know, it's fun stuff. Not very productive, though, may

I say, and we'll talk about that later, but we would argue about such things. Why? Because to our minds, to an unsaved person who doesn't believe the word of God, the

Trinity is a difficult doctrine indeed. In fact, when I was first coming, you know,

I don't want to say I was in the process of being saved, but when I was learning about God, when I was finally understanding who

Jesus Christ was, one of the last stumbling blocks for me was the doctrine of the Trinity because it is hard to understand unless you always grew up believing it.

Who can summarize the doctrine of the Trinity for us? Who wants to establish their doctorate of theology this morning?

A THD. I see that hand, Brian Bartlett. Anybody want to argue with that?

All right, then, let's close in prayer. How can we understand the doctrine of the

Trinity? I mean, when we think about God, okay, here's, is this, well, let's see, what's the apparent paradox?

When it's not really a paradox, it's a, it's a what? Antinomy. Or is that one of those things in the ocean?

And so it's something that is very difficult for us to grasp.

How can one God exist in three persons? How can that be?

Does he have a split personality? How can we explain this?

How can we fully grasp this? How do we wrap our arms around the doctrine of the Trinity? How do we wrap our arms around the doctrine of God is sovereign and man is responsible?

How do we wrap our arms around the doctrine that Jesus Christ is 100 % God and 100 % man?

How do we wrap our arms around the doctrine that the Bible is fully inspired by God and fully written by man?

How do we get that? How do we do these things? How do we reconcile them?

I see that hand, Dr. Steve Nelson. Which is the theme of this whole class, is the things that God has revealed are for us to know and to study and to learn and to treasure.

But with regard to all the antinomies I just, you know, here, Jesus Christ, 100 % God, 100 % man.

Well, wait a minute. 100 % plus 100 % equals 200%. How can anybody be 200 %?

Well, you can't be, but he's fully God, fully man. How do

I believe these things? Because God says them. I am a child of God.

He has given me his word. I believe what he has written. And so I say, you know what? Maybe I can't fully understand it, but God has said it.

I believe it. And I need to learn more about it so that I can understand it better so that I can worship him more fully.

Some basic principles. God is infinite. Man is finite. When we say that, what we're saying is, listen, we can't fully grasp the mind of God.

Does God ever say that? Does he ever say no one knows the mind of God but God himself?

Does he ever say that? Where's that written in scripture? Anyway. My ways are higher than yours.

Yes. Okay. Which is in.

Okay. Job. He certainly says something similar to that. Anything in the

New Testament? I guess it must only be in my

Bible. First Corinthians.

Chapter two. Verse ten.

For to us, God revealed them. What? Mysteries.

Difficult things to understand. For to us, God revealed them through the spirit. For the spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.

For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him?

In other words, who knows everything that you're thinking except for you, right?

Even so, the thoughts of God no one knows except the spirit of God.

So who knows all the thoughts of God? Who knows all the ways of God? God. All we know is what he has chosen to reveal about himself.

Second principle there. God is the creator. Man is the creation. Again, you know, one of the fallacies and let's just quickly go into Scott Brown's cult class.

One of the marks of a cult is that they will take God and bring him down to the level of man and they will take man and exalt him.

It's kind of this thing, you know, they put them both on an elevator until they're just about equal or maybe God's a little bit better.

We need to keep firmly fixed on our minds the difference that exists between God and us.

What Bible verse can bring forth this point? Let's look at Romans 9 .20.

We've already looked at 1 Corinthians 2. And I, you know,

I've said a few times that, you know, maybe the last sermon

I think I'd like to give in my life would probably be from Romans chapter 9. And the reason it would be the last sermon

I ever give in my life is because I'd like to entitle it something like, shut up, you know, and I think that would pretty much do it.

Probably wouldn't be, you know, invited back after that. He's talking about here,

Paul is, about God's sovereignty and salvation. And he anticipates in verse 19 the question of the fairness of it all.

You know, God selects some and he doesn't select others. How is that fair? He says in verse 19, In other words, if God chooses some for salvation and not others, then how can he blame anyone?

And he goes on, Who resists the will of God? And the answer, obviously, is no one.

Verse 20. On the contrary, and this is why I call it the, you know, shut up verse. On the contrary, who are you, oh man, who answers back to God?

You want to ask questions of the creator? You want to ask him why things are this way? Or you want to object to his fairness?

And Paul says, stop your mouth. Don't even think about it.

God is the creator. You are the creation. Remember your place. We don't understand fully the mind of God.

We understand what he has revealed to us. And that's all we understand. So with that said,

Point B. Divine inspiration, because it's what he's told us about himself.

How he's revealed himself to us. Not that we fully say, yes, I fully grasp the complexities of God.

Point C. And why is that even in this outline?

It's one of the objections they always come up with. Well, you know, Trinity is, you know, the Bible. Okay, I lose.

I have to go away then. If it's not, if it doesn't say Trinity in the Bible, therefore it must not be true. Is that a good argument?

Why not? Neither is theocracy, okay, which we're trying to establish.

No. Theocracy is what? A description of what Israel lived under, right? In other words, if this word

Trinity helps us to, if it describes, if it makes plain truths that are evident inside the

Bible, the fact that the word Trinity does not exist in the Bible doesn't negate it. Some other terms that aren't there, virgin birth.

Born of a virgin, but it never says virgin birth. Does it ever say original sin?

What is original sin? Too many of you skipped

Sunday school as kids. I can tell, Brian. Because of Adam's sin, everyone is cursed, right?

Because of the fall of Adam, each of us is born with a sin nature. It's that original sin.

Rapture, not in there. Second coming, the phrase second coming is not there. Definition of the

Trinity, well, I think Brian gave us a pretty good one, so we'll pass over that. The Bible teaches there is only one true

God. Who can cite Deuteronomy 6 .4 and give me a close approximation? Hear, O Israel, the

Lord thy God is one. Okay? So there is one God. There is one

God. We are not polytheists. We do not believe in a multiplicity of gods. One God, capital

G. What does the Bible say about the Trinity? First of all, notice that the

Father is God. Look at 1 Peter 1 .3. And could

I encourage you? I've added some things that I didn't have in the original class notes.

I've added some things. This is a, I mean, it's not a comprehensive thing or whatever, but it's a pretty good reference tool.

Now, if you want to go ahead and do the foolish thing of arguing about the Trinity. 1

Peter 1 .3. Anybody there want to read it? Okay.

And when you see God and Father, that is equating as the same person, same level.

It's like comma. Father, God, same person. Jesus Christ is

God. For that, we'll turn to Matthew 28, verses 16 to 20, which is, what's that known as?

The Great Commission. I'll go ahead and read that.

But the 11 disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated. When they saw him, they worshipped him.

What were they thinking? They worshipped him. Didn't they know that they could only worship

God? But some were doubtful. And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying,

All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth. Well, I guess if he has all authority, then it's okay to worship him.

Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the

Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you, and lo,

I am with you always, even to the end of the age. Now, some questions pop up in my mind.

Anybody have any other observations about specifically verses 19 and 20 that would lead us to believe that Jesus Christ is, in fact,

God? Baptized in the name of, and that's exactly right, in part because that construction there, the

Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, I mean, right there it proves the Trinity because that construction equates all three of them.

They are on the same level as it were in the Greek. Anything else?

Okay. In singular name? Okay. Right.

In the names of the Father and the Son. Okay. Excellent.

Excellent. And where did you get that? Because it would be one thing, imagine this, if you were just, let's say, talking to Peter, and he said, you know what,

Peter, I'm going to be with you until the end of the age. But he didn't promise that to one person. He promised it to many people.

Okay. Anything else? I mean, it's also kind of interesting that he is able to issue commandments,

I think, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you. So, all those things would indicate to us that Jesus Christ is, in fact,

God. The Holy Spirit is God, Luke 1 .35. And who has that?

Carl? Okay, so who is the

Holy Spirit? Yeah, the Most High. In fact, if you look in your authorized version down at the bottom, it says,

I don't know, it's my rebel nature. The Holy Spirit will come upon you.

This was a creative act of the Holy Spirit, not the sort of divine human cohabitation sometimes seen in pagan mythology, or seen, for example, in, am

I blaspheming Mormons this morning? In Mormon theology, because that's what they believe, some kind of divine human cohabitation.

Okay, so we have three persons that are called God, and yet the

Bible teaches that there are how many gods? So we have one God existing in three persons.

They are three separate persons. Let's look at Matthew 3, 16 and 17.

And again, you know, considering you can write a whole book on it, like Dr. James White did, there's a lot to this issue, but we're just introducing, reaffirming it, giving you some basic points on it.

They are three separate persons. Matthew 3, 16 and 17, who has that? I do.

Okay. After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the

Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on him. And behold, a voice out of the heavens said,

This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Now, what do you suppose a cultist will do with that?

Well, I can tell you what this former cultist used to do with that. I'd say this disproves the Trinity. Why would

I say that? Besides the fact that I was a liar.

Yes, Mr. Bilton. Separate places, okay? You have the

Father in heaven, the Holy Spirit descending like a dove, and Jesus being baptized.

Does that disprove the Trinity? It proves it.

Why? It proves they're separate personages. That's right. Separate persons.

And, again, we have to go back to the foundational truth of the Bible, which is one

God, three persons. One God existing in three persons. They work in harmony and unity.

In fact, let's go to Isaiah 48, 16. Just a really rich scripture, and one that I've mentioned before.

This is just so amazing. I mean, you think you're going to catch the watchtower, the

Jehovah Witnesses. You think you're going to catch them off guard, that you're going to just get them with some kind of verse like this.

But it doesn't work because they've already gone in and changed it. Isaiah 48, 16.

This is the pre -incarnate Christ speaking. You don't have to take my word for it. You can stay in the context for yourself.

But for now, just bear with me, and then later on you can figure out that I was right. Come near to me.

Listen to this. From the first I have not spoken in secret. From the time it took place, as my page changes, from the time it took place

I was there. And now the Lord God has sent me and his spirit.

The Lord Jesus Christ anticipating his own incarnation. Now, when

I say they work in harmony and unity, how does that verse show that? I'm sorry?

Okay. The Lord God has sent me.

And what this really shows is that God the Father sent the Son, and he sent the

Spirit. Which shows us, now, they are all equal in persons, or equal in terms of their essence.

They're equal in terms of their power. But there is a different functionality in terms of roles.

God the Father sends the Son and the Spirit, that verse tells us. Does the

Son ever say that, or does the Bible ever tell us that the Son told the

Father to go do something? Or, you know, we don't see that. In other words, there are different roles, and we might even argue, some might argue that there's a hierarchy.

Is that correct, necessarily? And this is what

I would liken it to, and one of the reasons I was reading an article this week about how the doctrine of the Trinity is under assault in some

Christian camps because it is a picture of submission of equals.

What is that a problem with nowadays? They don't believe in that because, you know, wives submit to your husbands.

Well, wait a minute. If I have to submit, then I'm not equal. Different roles. Look at God the

Father, God the Son, God the Spirit. And so now we have to re -examine that whole thing because we don't really like that idea.

So let's deconstruct the Trinity so that we can prove our feminist point.

Yes? Yeah, he was just saying, you know, in the ancient world, the

Father would lay out the plans, the Son would carry them forth, and we have the same picture here.

And for some, that's really not, you know, this idea of submission is not one that brings us any comfort. Let's go on and move on to other things here.

Who raised Jesus from the dead? Who raised

Jesus from the dead? Well, the Father did. Look at 1 Thessalonians 1 verses 9 and 10. Paul writes,

For they themselves report about us what kind of reception we had with you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true

God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead.

That is Jesus who rescues us from the wrath to come. So there we have the Father raising him.

We would also see the Son himself. What did he say? What did Jesus say about his resurrection? Bruce?

To take it up again. That's right. He did say that. Absolutely. Okay. He told them that they would take the temple down, and he would build it back up in three days.

Is that where you're going, Brian? Okay. Okay. And also the

Spirit raised him from the dead. And I just want to kind of move on a little bit faster here so that we can get to the end of this today.

Who created the world? We're told in Job 38, for it was the Father. We're told in Colossians 1 .16.

Let's turn there just because I enjoy that one so much. I enjoy them all, but especially this one.

A fascinating picture of the supremacy of Christ, the prominence of Christ, and how he is the creator and sustainer of everything.

Colossians 1 .16. Anyone have that? Okay. Eric? Now, it's interesting to me.

I mean, there are several reasons why I like that verse. First of all, what would that say about the idea of Jesus Christ himself being a created being?

He couldn't create himself. I mean, that's just kind of like if you create all things, can you yourself be created?

That's a pretty tough argument to make. But I like it. You know what it reminds me of?

It reminds me of Paul's argumentation in Romans 8 when he's talking about the security of believers.

What does he say in that passage there? He says that nothing created, and he talks about the depths and the heights and everything else, things that we can see, things that we can't see.

Nothing can separate us from the love of God and Christ. And in that same kind of way here in Colossians 1, he's saying, listen, in the heavens and the earth, things that are visible and invisible, thrones or dominions, and he's talking about, again, rulers in terms of things that we can see, rulers in dominions that we can't see, meaning demons and whatnot.

Nothing that has been created was created any other way except by him and for him.

The Holy Spirit was active in creation. He was hovering over the waters in Genesis 1.

Now, I'm going to cite these historical proves of the doctrine of the

Trinity, not because I want to make it clear that I'm not saying in any way, I'm not arguing that we have to have the

Bible, plus we have to have history, the church fathers, and church teaching, and that they're somehow on the same level, and there's a reason

I'm not arguing that this morning. It's because I'm not Roman Catholic. But the historical proves are interesting, and the reason they're interesting is because there are arguments by, again, usually by cultists and conspiracy theorists, that the doctrine of the

Trinity was invented, and when was it invented? The Nicene Creed, Council of Nicaea, the

Nicene Creed, all that. And it's interesting, almost everything, I mean, that must have been some cloak.

I mean, I think all the CIA and the KGB and everybody must have been at the

Council of Nicaea, because all these nefarious things happened. Books were thrown out of the Bible, and they edited things, and they kicked out all the

Gnostic truth, and all these terrible things happened. And when you read, actually, what happened in history, it was nothing like that.

Historical proves of the doctrine. Now, these precede the Council of Nicaea. Pauli Karp said this,

So there's an eternality that he is presenting that we would not associate with a non -Trinitarian view.

Justin Martyr says this, And of our

Savior, Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then received the washing with water.

Again, talking about baptism and equating all three of them together as, in fact,

God. Ignatius of Antioch, we also have, as a physician, the

Lord, our God, Jesus the Christ, the only begotten

Son and Word, before time began, etc., etc., etc. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons.

Again, look at the dates. The Council of Nicaea is what, like 435 or something like that A .D.?

425, 435, one of those two. And so this is several centuries before that.

And he says, Obviously, from being the second person of the

Trinity. For our salvation, etc.,

etc., etc. Then Tertullian. Which brings about unity in Trinity, interrelating the three, the

Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance, but in form. So, I mean, they're wrestling with this whole idea of the

Trinity. Let's go down to H, historical variations from the doctrine, which

I then, you know, using Cobb -Tock, who knows what AKA is? Also known as, very good, heresy.

That's what we call when you venture from the acceptable path.

It's heresy. Modalism, which is also known as Sabellianism, and those other things, which

I'm not even going to try to say, teaches that the three persons of the Trinity exist as different modes of the

Godhead. Talked about this before, T .D. Jakes, one of the top, best -selling

Christian authors, doesn't believe in the Trinity. Is it possible to be a

Christian and not be Trinitarian? That sounds pretty harsh and judgmental.

Who are you to set up that standard? Look, we didn't set up the standard. In other words, if being a

Christian means that I subscribe to everything that Jesus Christ himself taught, do I have to be a

Trinitarian? Yes. I don't care if you want to be a modalist, you can be any kind of pagan you want, just don't call yourself a

Christian. Arianism holds that the preexistent

Christ was the first and greatest of God's creatures. I mentioned that briefly earlier. I didn't call it Arianism, but that's what it is.

It's named after Arius, one of the great heretics of history. And this was a major fight, and what actually led to the

Nicene Creed, and now I'm thinking about it, the Council of Nicaea is actually 325. I knew there was a three, and I just, you know, 325.

If you're taking notes. The Mormons today are Arians, and I'm going to be talking about that on Thursday night, about Mormonism at the

IBS class. Docetism teaches that Jesus Christ is, was, a purely divine being who only had the appearance of being human.

Regarding his suffering, some variations taught that Jesus' divinity abandoned him or left him upon the cross, while others claimed that he only appeared to suffer.

Now this would be what? I put there, Gnostics believe that.

Why? Because they always believe that God is only spirit, that the spirit is good, that the flesh is bad.

So the idea for a Gnostic, and this is why all these books that are written, what's a dopey book that turned into a movie?

Da Vinci Code. Here's the basic theme of that book, was that these books that were written by Gnostics, these so -called other

Gospels, should be in the Bible. And the only problem is, not only, well there are several problems, but these books are not inspired, they weren't

Gospels, I could go all down that road, but they present a completely different Jesus. I love, you know, when people say, well those should be in the

Bible, and I go, well you know, according to the Gospel of Thomas, in order to go to heaven, women have to become men.

So, you know, only problem with the Gospel of Thomas, not a Gospel not written by Thomas, other than that it's pretty good.

But this whole idea of Gnosticism, or really Gnosticism, is that the physical is bad, the spirit is good, and the physical is so bad that Jesus Christ could not possibly have taken on a physical body.

That would be evil, he couldn't do that, so they deny all that. And it's interesting, because I put here elements of Islam, why would

I say that? Why is there an element of Gnosticism to Islam, concerning Jesus Christ?

Yeah, he only appeared to suffer, because they say he didn't really die on the cross. In Islam, Jesus didn't really die on the cross, he only appeared to die.

Christian scientists, yeah, they're major Gnostics. You know, again, Christian scientists, neither

Christian nor scientists, and if you want to have fun with a Christian scientist, just ask him, is that tree real?

They're just way out there. Yeah, well,

I think they would say that he was probably unjustly indicted, but the main thing is,

I remember talking to a Muslim in the jail once, because he was mopping the floors for me, and he told me he was a

Muslim, and he said some other things, and he said, you know, Jesus never claimed to be God, and so we went through John 8, 58, and he goes, well, he didn't say he was

God there, and I said, well, let's just keep reading, let's look what the audience reaction was, as we go through the Gospel of John, and they wanted to stone him, why?

Not for good work? Because he made himself out to be God, so that's right, and kind of shook his world a little bit.

Now, it's interesting, because these other things I really wasn't that familiar with, and I can't even say them.

Ebionitism, you can see why I didn't catch on, you can't really say it. But Jesus was endowed with particular charismatic gifts, not gifts of the

Spirit, but he was a very charismatic person, which distinguished him from other humans, but nonetheless regarded him as a purely human figure, and I put down there, modern atheists, you know, because they'll say, you know, that Jesus Christ, he was popular, he was a rebel, he was this, he was a good teacher, he was a good example, but he was just a human being.

I mean, there are a lot of problems with that, but that's one of the things that they would say, but, you know, there's nothing biblical about that.

Macedonism, the Holy Spirit, I'd never even heard of this, the Holy Spirit is a created being, that's just, I've heard the whole idea of a force or whatever, but not that one.

Adoptionism, Jesus was born totally human, and only later was adopted, and I thought, you know, again, this is kind of Mormonism in a way, because if you say, was

Jesus Christ always God, they'll say no, that he was originally a spirit, just like all of us were originally spirits, it's all complicated, and it doesn't really make any sense, but just go with it, and that he eventually became

God. So it's just a completely different way of understanding things, but all of those are unbiblical, they're outside of the

Bible, there are no biblical proofs for them, and they are, therefore, heresy.

So what are some of the practical considerations and effects of the doctrine of the Trinity? I'm going to go pretty fast, because I have one or two things else

I wanted to talk about, I don't know if we'll get to them or not. Charles Ryrie. The doctrine of redemption is an obvious example for all persons of the

Godhead are involved in that great work. Thus refuting modalism.

Why would that refute modalism? I didn't really explain modalism all that well. Let's just put it this way. Here's modalism.

I'm going to give you a very kind of crass example, just so you'll understand this. I am now the father.

When I take off my jacket, and mess up my face, and lose my microphone, then

I become the son. And then I put on another disguise, and I become the spirit. In other words, modalists say that God is either the father, or he's the son, or he's the spirit.

And they would largely say that God was the father, basically in the Old Testament era, that he was the son, in the period we have of the gospels, and then now, in the church age, he is the spirit.

Now, can he vary a little bit, go into the divine phone booth, as it were, and change? Yes. But that's what they say.

He's either, or, either, or, and that's that. And there are a number of problems, which

I'm sure they can tap dance around, but that's the basic idea of modalism. But if you think about God the father drawing, the

Holy Spirit drawing, the Holy Spirit convicting of sin, the Son dying for our sins, all these different aspects of the divine work of salvation, it really kind of defies modalism, or it doesn't really help the cause there.

Ryrie also, the doctrine of Revelation serves as another example, the Son and Spirit both being involved in communicating

God's truth. What did Jesus say all the time? He said, I'm not here to do my will, but the

Father's will. Or he would say things, you know, this is the

Father's will, and he would express what the Father had revealed to him.

Moving right along, prayers, practice, and trinity, lots of good stuff here, but I wanted to just kind of get to the end so we could do a little bit of discussion on a few things.

Last point there, should you debate the Trinity with an unbeliever? Should you debate the

Trinity with an unbeliever? Okay, I would say if it is difficult for a believer to understand the doctrine of the

Trinity, it would be impossible for an unbeliever. I mean, let's put it this way, apart from the

Spirit of God, what can an unbeliever understand about God? Nothing. What do they consider the gospel?

The doctrine of Christ as a Savior? Stomach block, rock of offense, I mean, all these things are all applied to it, foolishness.

So if I go to, if a non -Christian comes to me and he says, well, you know what, you're a fool for being a

Christian, let me explain why, because the doctrine of the Trinity can be disproved, it's absolutely foolhardy, and that's why you should leave

Christianity. So then do I set about trying to prove the Trinity to him or her?

Dr. Lewis? And that's exactly right.

We don't want to debate this. I'm not going to, you know, the Jehovah Witnesses come to my door. Now I might try, and I did try this once, to go to Isaiah 48, 16, not for the purpose of debating the

Trinity, but just to show them how they have everything wrong, and of course they've already changed it, so it didn't really do me any good.

But, the point is, I don't want to debate the Trinity with an unbeliever, because suppose I win that argument.

Yeah, the guy says, well, you know what, yeah, the Bible, that flawed document that it is, does in fact speak of the

Trinity. Well, I don't want to win that argument. I want to present the truth of the

Gospel, as Lewis said to them, and hope that the Lord will so work in their lives that He will save them.

That's what I want. So, I think it's, in this case, or in any case, it is virtually pointless to argue doctrine with an unbeliever.

You never want to do that. You want to preach the Gospel, preach the Gospel, preach the Gospel, and then after you preach the Gospel to them several times and they haven't believed, think of another way to preach the

Gospel and go at it again. As many times as they'll listen, you should give them the Gospel. Well, I wanted to just briefly talk about this.

This is an interesting article. Sometimes Mike photocopies interesting articles for me, and this is one of them.

Reading this this week about answering the new atheists. And I thought, this is helpful, too, just in thinking of different discussions that we might get in where someone says, you know what,

Christianity is wrong because Christians do bad things. And he makes some great arguments in this.

Now, is it true that Christians have done bad things? And people in the name of Christ, they always point to the

Crusades. The Crusades are the biggest evil, or the Inquisition. Anybody know how many people died during the Inquisition? I mean, it sounds horrible.

And I think the number was less than 300 or something. It's certainly not great, but the question is, how many

Protestants were involved in the Inquisition? I don't know, but I think they were all victims. But I digress.

Sorry about that. And yet, the atheists in the 20th century killed how many people?

Maybe as many as 100 million. By the time you figure that China was good for 50 million.

Soviet Union 70. And you throw in Hitler and Pol Pot.

I mean, the greatest examples of murder in history, we can't even throw

Islam into that mix. As much as they have wreaked havoc over the centuries, they wouldn't even rate in terms of comparing them to Mao or Stalin or Hitler.

But what does that, even if evil is done in the name of Jesus Christ, what does that tell us about the existence of God?

Because he must exist because? You don't have a shadow without a light.

So the point is, without God, without an ultimate good, there can be no evil.

In fact, what I like to argue with atheists is, you say that there's evil. What standard do you have for that?

Humanistic altruism. And I mean, one of the arguments they make here too is, you know what?

Go to the hospital. There's some six -year -old dying of cancer. Try to grieve or try to comfort the family with an atheistic, altruistic, humanistic perspective.

There's no comfort in that. But religious evil doesn't say anything about the existence of God.

The fact that people do bad things in the name of any God doesn't say anything about that God, doesn't say anything about that religion.

If you want to blame Jesus Christ for the sins of things that people have done, then you have to look at his teaching and say, well, what in his teaching would have justified this?

What in the teaching of Christ would have justified what was done during the Inquisition? What would have justified the crusades?

Did Jesus say, you know what? If anybody ever takes Jerusalem, I want you to send the women and children —well, they sent the children at one point—

I want you to send the children back to take it. I mean, there are a lot of interesting things here.

I like this here, this quote. Atheism doesn't require mass murder, but it has few ideological resources to resist it.

In other words, what about atheism? What about denying the existence of God would ever stop any kind of murder?

How does it ever promote good things? And he turns this whole argument around, you know, where they say, well, bad things are done in the name of Christianity, therefore

Christianity must be false. Listen to this, and then we'll close. But I just thought this was interesting, and just the kind of thing when you interact with atheists, these are kind of interesting things to be thinking about.

He says here, if it is true that because bad things are done in the name of Christianity, the

Christian God must not exist, he says this. Turn the argument around, and the flaw becomes even more obvious.

Christopher Hitchens, who's a well -known atheist, believes God does not exist. Hitchens is an immoral man.

Therefore, God does exist. Even if it were true that Hitchens were immoral, and he says

I'm not commenting either way, this fact alone cannot possibly confirm theism.

In other words, Christopher Hitchens doesn't believe in God, Christopher Hitchens is a bad man, therefore everything he believes is false.

And so if you flip it around, Christians say they believe in that Christian God, they do bad things, therefore the

Christian God does not exist. That doesn't make any sense. But they say they say that bad things have been done in the name of Christianity, therefore the

God of the Bible cannot exist. And I say bad things have been done in the name of atheism, therefore God does exist.

That's a loser. You know, and they would reject that argument straight out, but that's the argument they're using against Christianity.

But time and time again, what do we do to refute their foolishness? I mean, we can make arguments like that, but what do we need to follow up with?

We go back to the Gospel, we go back to the Word of God. Why? Because our best arguments, on our best day, might confound them a little bit, but nothing is going to pierce through their heart, convince them that they need to repent of their sin other than the

Bible. These truths about the Trinity, they're all true, and in fact understanding the nature of God can help you in presenting the

Gospel to people. But no one is saved alone by understanding the doctrine of the

Trinity. There are plenty of men who have written a lot of books who are going to hell, and they've written with correct views about the

Trinity. You need to understand it, you need to believe it. Not because it will save you, but this is the

God who exists. We need to worship the God who is, not the one of our own choosing.

Let's pray. Father, we praise you that you have revealed these truths to us, that we can understand the

Godhead as Father, Son, and Spirit. We're thankful that you have revealed yourself to us in this way.

Lord, we would pray not to grab hold of these things for mere intellectual curiosity,

Lord, but that you would just encourage us to study more, to know you more, to love you more, to grow, to just grapple with all the truth that you have given us, that we might just adore you, worship you, and Lord, that we would do these things as our joy, as it were, as our entertainment.

That we might just be pleased with all that you've given us and not get bogged down in the things that we can't fully grasp.

Lord, we thank you that most of all that you are a God who forgives, a God who saves, a

God who, in the person of the Father, chose us, who drew us in the person of the

Son, who came, died for us, who rose on the third day in the person of the Spirit, who convicted us of sin, who enlightened our eyes that we might see you for who you are.