Language:  Farsi or Persian, the main language of Iran, about half of Afghanistan, and Tajikistan, and parts of Uzbekistan.

It is wonderful that former Muslims from Iran, have been saved by Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, purchased by His blood, and they are growing in fellowships around the world, and some have written songs in their cultural music style with Biblical words and a sound theology.  Glory to God!

Translation:  words from Revelation chapter 5

Chorus

Praise, Honor, Glory, and Strength to Him who sits on the throne, and unto the Lamb forever!

Praise, Honor, Glory, and Strength to Him who sits on the throne, and unto the Lamb forever!

The Lamb of God sacrificed His life for the salvation of people,

He is worthy to receive Glory and strength and wisdom and riches,

Chorus

Praise, Honor, Glory, and Strength to Him who sits on the throne, and unto the Lamb forever! (2 times)

You are worthy to take the scroll from Your Father and break the seals,

You are worthy to read the scroll, because You sacrificed Your soul,

Chorus

Praise, Honor, Glory, and Strength to Him who sits on the throne, and unto the Lamb forever! (2 times)

By Your own blood, You have purchased people from every nation and freed them,

They are like a beautiful gift in the Father’s presence that You offered.

Chorus

Praise, Honor, Glory, and Strength to Him who sits on the throne, and unto the Lamb forever! (2 times)

They have become priests to our God in the kingdom,

We praise Your Name O Our Lord  God, O Our Lord God !”

Chorus

Praise, Honor, Glory, and Strength to Him who sits on the throne, and unto the Lamb forever! (2 times)

________

Key verses from Revelation chapter 5:

“Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain, standing at the center of the throne, encircled by the four living creatures and the elders. . . . ”  Revelation 5:6

And they sang a new song, saying:

Valens Aqueduct in Istanbul, originally built in 368 AD, by the Roman Emperor Valens

This is an amazing ancient structure, that was originally much smaller started by the Roman Emperor Hadrian sometime between 117 – 138 AD and then developed by Constantine after 312 AD, in order to supply water to the city of Constantinople. We used to live near this structure in 1993-1995 and it was an amazing site to see when we took a taxi or bus ride through it.

“The construction of a water supply system for the city (then still called Byzantium) had begun already under the Roman emperor Hadrian. Under Constantine I, when the city was rebuilt and increased in size, the system needed to be greatly expanded to meet the needs of the rapidly growing population.” Source

Why do I even mention this? Only that I remembered it while looking at other pictures of Turkey, and I cannot find my own pictures/slides of it (I hope they are not damaged somewhere in the Attic), and it brought back good memories. It is amazing to see ancient buildings and structures that go back to the days of the Roman Empire.

It is even more amazing that the area of Turkey was not Turkey in the New Testament days.  It was called “Asia Minor” in the western end, and in the central part was Galatia and Cappadocia (see 1 Peter 1:1), and Phrygia, and the east was Armenia.  Around the Black Sea was Pontus and Bythynia, and other areas to the south was Pamphylia and Cilicia.  The church was there in the NT and early church history.

The Turkic peoples lived in Central Asia, what is known today as areas such as Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Kirgiztan, Kazakhstan.  The Arab Muslims converted them to Islam in the 900s AD and they soon became the major fighting force for the Arab Muslim Empire.  Tajikistan was a Persian/Farsi speaking area, not a Turkic speaking area.

But today there is not much left of Christianity in the area now knows as Turkey.  The Seljuk Turks conquered the eastern part at the battle of Manzikurt near Van in 1071 AD.  That was one of the immediate causes of the Crusades, from 1095-1299 AD.  Muslims continued their “Jihad” wars and eventually, the Ottoman Turks conquered the western part of Turkey and the city of Constantinople in 1453, and renamed the city Istanbul.  The Turks have not been touched with the gospel much until today.

See earlier posts on church history in these areas:

How and Why Did Churches Become Mosques in the Middle East? (Part 1) 

Muhammad and the Arabs just did not get a credible and Biblical witness. (How and Why Did Churches Become Mosques in the Middle East? (Part 2)  

An Evangelical Introduction to Church History (Part 1)  

An Evangelical Introduction to Church History (Part 2)  

An Evangelical Introduction to Church History (Part 3)  

(From the Council of Orange in 529 AD to the Council of Trent in 1545 -1563 AD)

I am reading the “Presuppositional Method of Apologetics” by John Frame, again, in the book, Five Views on Apologetics, seeking to understand the Presuppositional Method of Apologetics better.   Cornelius Van Till is the most famous of the Presuppositional Method, and Greg Bahnsen also employed it, and today John Frame is another proponent of it, as is Dr. James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries.

I came across some excellent statements about Francis Schaeffer, one in the Five Views book, and another in a past issue of the CRI Journal.  Francis Schaeffer  applied the Presuppositional method in his evangelism at L’Abri Fellowship; but he didn’t just debate or win arguments, he loved people who were seeking answers, sometimes they were skeptics and unbelievers and Schaeffer really listened to them and interacted with them and answered their questions honestly and also did so in an environment of hospitality.

Western Christians need to learn that in applying good evangelism and Biblical apologetics to reaching out to Muslims.  It is going to take sacrifice and love and a willingness to eat meals with Muslims and invite them into your home and accept their hospitality, and learn some things about their culture, in order to get into an environment to where they are going to really listen to what we are saying.

“Francis and Edith Schaeffer led many to Christ through their ministry at L’Abri in Switzerland. In my view, the power of their ministry was found in the combination of a thoughtful apologetic (“honest answers to honest questions”) and a loving ministry of hospitality.”

John Frame, “Presuppositional Apologetics”, in Five Views on Apologetics,  (Zondervan, 2000, edited by Steven B. Cowan), p. 220, footnote 17.

Cornelius Van Til in a letter to Francis Schaeffer:

“You have the advantage over me. You converse constantly with modern artists, modern existentialists, etc. as they eat at your table, you study their literature; whereas I am only a book-worm”

Cornelius Van Til, “A Letter to Francis Schaeffer”, in The Works of Cornelius Van Til: 1895-1987, edited by Eric Sigward. (Jackson Heights, NY: Labels Army, 1997) Cited in CRI Journal, “Armchair Apologetics, Eric Brook, volume 25, number 4, 2003, p. 62.

This is what is greatly needed today in the Evangelical church; both equipping in sound Biblical apologetics and Evangelism; along with hospitality and listening and love.

Iran documentary by Rick Steves

This is a nice documentary by Rick Steves on Iran. Tears came to my eyes when the man from his car said, “Your heart is very kind.” and “We wish the relationship between Iran and America become good.” (at the 27:16 mark)

We should pray for Iran and the Iranian people. They have good family values, a rich and deep culture, amazing and beautiful architecture, art, profound poetry, and a glorious history. In my opinion, Iranians are the friendliest and most hospitable people in the world! They have very delicious food also!

خیلی خوش مزه (Khailee Khosh maze)

“Very delicious!”

Generally, Muslims fear and respect God and many of the non-fanatical Muslims have a kind of “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Proverbs 9:10) kind of worldview, and have a basic kind of 10 commandments morality. Most Muslims just don’t know who Jesus really is and don’t understand the gospel and don’t understand true Christianity; and in fact have been taught the wrong meanings of phrases like “the Son of God” and the Trinity and the purpose of Jesus’ atonement on the cross.

But in the past 30 years, many Iranian Muslims have become disillusioned with Islam and are open to Christ and His gospel. God is working in many hearts as never before in history in the Muslim world!

May God bless them and protect the people of Iran, and the people of Israel from whatever the governments decide to do.

Iranians have a very interesting saying,

“siyasat pedar o madar nadareh” سیاست پدر و مادر نداره

It means – “Politics has no father or mother”; meaning politics is illegitimate and mean and cruel and inhuman.

Pray also for the Jewish people and Israel. (Psalm 122; Romans chapter 11)

Pray for peace and that no war will happen. God is sovereign (Proverbs 21:1; Ezra 1:1-4, Psalm 47:8-9; Daniel 2:19-23), and we don’t know the future as to what will happen, but we can still pray and hope for peace and no more wars in the Middle East. People are tired and weary of these wars after Afghanistan and Iraq.

Just as God moved the heart of great kings of Iran like Cyrus کورش, (in Ezra chapter 1, Isaiah 44:28-45:1 ff) Dariush (English: Darius) the Great داریوش کبیر , (Ezra chapters 5- 6; Zechariah 1:1, Haggai 1:1) and Artaxerxes اردشیر (Ardeshir) (the book of Nehemiah; Malachi) to be kind to the Jews in their empire, we pray that God would again move in the hearts of Iranian leaders today to be kind to the Jewish people.

Maybe I am too idealistic. The most idealistic prayer is to pray that the regime in Iran will change without any American or Israel intervention. I am not completely naive, even if that should happen, the government of Iran will still blame everything on USA and Israel and England.

Pray for the people of Iran to rise up and take matters into their own hands. (As they tried to in the apparently rigged elections in 2009.) Pray that Muslims will be disillusioned with Islam and seek out the Injeel (the NT) and the Bible and read it, and that the Spirit of God will work in their hearts and change hearts. (Acts 16:14) Muslims are people, created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-28) who need the love of God in Jesus Christ.

“But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” Romans 5:8

اما خدا محبت خود را نسبت به ما کاملآ ثابت کرده است زیرا در آن هنگام که هنوز گناهکار بونیم مسیح بخاطر ما مرد . رومیان ۸:۵

(Romans 5:8 in Farsi)

Pray for wisdom for the government leaders of USA, Iran, and Israel. (I Timothy 2:1-5)

Israel is understandably concerned for its own existence. Israel is so small, one nuclear strike would be a very devastating event. Jewish people all over the world are reading from the book of Esther right now, as they celebrate the feast of Purim, where God used Esther to protect the Jews from the evil plots of wicked Haman. In the end, God’s justice was done against evil Haman, and the Jewish people in the land of Israel were able to defend themselves. It is interesting that the result of the events of God’s protection caused “many of the peoples of the land to become Jews” (Esther 8:17) Pagan peoples converted to the true God!

Even though it seems very improbable, by human standards as we look at the world and the events and politics and we hear of “wars and rumors of wars” (Matthew 24:6); we can still pray for the leaders of USA and Iran and Israel that somehow they might come to hear and understand the gospel of Jesus Christ and be saved. We wish God’s blessing on them, that they might know true repentance and faith in Jesus Al Masih عیسی المسیح/ Yashua HaMashiakh ישׁוע המשׁיח (Jesus the Messiah) and come to know the true God, the God of the Bible, and have true peace (John 14:27; Romans 5:1-11). Salvation from sin and guilt and hell is God’s greatest blessing. USA leaders need salvation in Christ also. We pray the somehow God will give them all wisdom on what to do.

Pray for the gospel to go forth with the power of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 4:31) (2 Thessalonians 3:1-3)

Daniel 2:19-23

19 Then the mystery was revealed to Daniel in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven;

20 Daniel said,

“Let the name of God be blessed forever and ever,
For wisdom and power belong to Him.
21 “It is He who changes the times and the epochs;
He removes kings and establishes kings;
He gives wisdom to wise men
And knowledge to men of understanding.
22 “It is He who reveals the profound and hidden things;
He knows what is in the darkness,
And the light dwells with Him.
23 “To You, O God of my fathers, I give thanks and praise,
For You have given me wisdom and power;
Even now You have made known to me what we requested of You,
For You have made known to us the king’s matter.”

Proverbs 21:1

The king’s heart is like channels of water in the hand of the LORD; He turns it wherever He wishes.

Ezra 1:1-4

1 Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he sent a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and also put it in writing, saying:

2 “Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, ‘The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and He has appointed me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. 3 Whoever there is among you of all His people, may his God be with him! Let him go up to Jerusalem which is in Judah and rebuild the house of the LORD, the God of Israel; He is the God who is in Jerusalem. 4 Every survivor, at whatever place he may live, let the men of that place support him with silver and gold, with goods and cattle, together with a freewill offering for the house of God which is in Jerusalem.’”

2 Thessalonians 3:1-3

“Finally, brothers, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may speed ahead and be honored, as happened among you,

2 and that we may be delivered from wicked and evil men. For not all have faith.

3 But the Lord is faithful. He will establish you and guard you against the evil one.”

Pray for the right priorities

We also pray that certain American churches and TV preachers will stop trying to predict the rapture and the Second coming of Christ, and instead focus on prayer, evangelism, missions, walking in the Spirit, sound doctrine, sober and careful exegesis of Scripture, and holiness.

Regarding His second coming at the end of time, Jesus clearly said, “no one knows the day or the hour” (Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32)

Jesus said that the Father has fixed in His authority the future events. And Jesus said to the disciples “it is not for you to know the times or seasons which the Father has fixed by His own authority . . . ” (Acts 1:6-8)

Even after the resurrection, it seems the disciples thought that now Jesus was going to lead a military expedition against the Romans and “restore the kingdom to Israel”. (Acts 1:6) Jesus said essentially, “no”. Jesus clearly took the kingdom of God away from political and theocratic Israel in Matthew 21:43 – “the kingdom of God will be taken away from you, and given to a nation producing the fruit of it.” (see the whole parable in Matthew 21:33-46 and that the Pharisees and chief priests understood that Jesus was talking about them. Remember Jesus’ words to Pilate: “My Kingdom is not of this world, if it was of this world, My servants would be fighting, that I might not be delivered up to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.” (John 18:36)

Concerning John 1:1, the Greek Grammar, and Jehovah’s Witnesses

A Roman Catholic wrote:

“For example, “the Word was God” was interpreted as “the Word was a god,” which is possible in Greek.” This was claimed in the context of saying the Jehovah Witnesses follow Sola Scriptura and the claim that we need an infallible council of an infallible church with an infallible church in order to interpret Scripture properly.

Actually, it is not really possible with a sound knowledge of Greek. It is only “possible” for those with a very shallow knowledge of Greek, who don’t understand the intricacies of the definite articles (in English grammar, the definite article is “the”; in Greek, there are many forms) and predicate nominative issues.

What is a “predicate nominative” in Grammar? It means when one is using the verb “to be” – “is”, “was”, “am”, “are”, “were”, etc. and is declaring something about the subject. So “The word was God” involves the predicate nominative grammatical issue. (Don’t you wish you learned English grammar better in High school, Christians? (smile) I know I do; so that I can understand Greek grammar issues better!

If one only has a beginning knowledge of Greek, it is very dangerous. The grammar and Greek syntax of John 1:1 determines the right theology. The doctrine of the Deity of Christ and the eternality of the Son is based on Scripture, not the Council of Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea is based on Scripture, and derives secondary authority from the only infallible authority – the Scriptures.

Another Roman Catholic, “Nick the Catholic” also has an article with a title that claims that the Jehovah’s Witnesses were right about John 1:1 . “JWs are correct about John 1:1; Jesus is not God” ( !!!)

Then he clarifies later from his controversial, heretical, and inflammatory title. He says they were right if they mean “the Father is not Jesus”; ie the same person; but they are not right in that the JWs deny that Jesus is God or Deity.

The predicate nominative issue, and the word order in Greek, are the key interpretive issues, more important than the definite article issue. The Word was God.

καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

Kai Theos ain ho logos

“And God was the Word”.

Daniel Wallace has a good word on this issue:

“We know that “the Word” is the subject because it has the definite article, and we translate it accordingly: “and the Word was God.” Two questions, both of them of theological import, should come to mind: 1) Why was θεὸς (Theos) thrown forward? And 2) why does it lack the article? In brief, its emphatic position stresses its essence or quality: “What God was, the Word was” is how one translation brings out this force. Its lack of a definite article keeps us from identifying the person of the Word (Jesus Christ) with the person of “God” (the Father). That is to say, the word order tells us that Jesus Christ has all the divine attributes that the Father has; lack of the article tells us that Jesus Christ is not the Father. John’s wording here is beautifully compact! It is, in fact, one of the most elegantly terse theological statements one could ever find. As Martin Luther said, the lack of an article is against Sabellianism [Modalism; Sabellius was a heretic in the early church who was condemned because of what he taught, that the Father became the Son, and after His ascension, the Son became the Spirit.]; the word order is against Arianism.

To state it another way, look at how the different Greek constructions would be rendered:

καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν ὁ θεὸς
( ho logos ain ho Theos) = “and the Word was the God”
( ie, the Father, Sabellianism, [or Modalism - the heresy that God is not three persons, but three "modes" at different times - that the Father became the Son in the incarnation, the Son became the Spirit after His ascension. This is a heresy.]) The Father and Son are both God, but they are not the same person. They are one in essence/substance/nature, but distinct in person; they know each other in personal relationship from all eternity. (see also John 17:5) ]

καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν θεὸς
(kai ho logos ain Theos)
= “and the Word was a god” (Arianism) [also Jehovah’s Witness theology]

καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
(kai Theos ain ho logos) = “and the Word was God” (orthodoxy) [sound, Biblical doctrine) [So the reason why there is no definite article for "God" is because it is teaching something about the nature/substance of the "the Word". The Word is God by nature, but the Word is not the Father.]

Jesus Christ is God and has all the attributes that the Father has. But He is not the first person of the Trinity. [the Son is not the Father] All this is concisely affirmed in καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. “

Basics of Biblical Greek, William D. Mounce, Zondervan, 1993, p. 28-29. (Quoting Daniel Wallace) [My comments in brackets and bold.]

So, here we have the principle of Sola Scriptura as the basis for all sound doctrine and theology. The first four Ecumenical councils were right, only because they got the Bible right. We don’t need Popes or any idea of an “infallible church council”. The Scriptures themselves teach us sound doctrine, and the good and right decisions in the Ecumenical councils derive their rightness from Scripture itself. Only Scripture is infallible. Here we see the Greek grammar and syntax teaching us the distinction between nature and person. God revealed the doctrine of the Trinity based on the Scriptures alone; Sola Scriptura stands.

This is an update of an earlier article I wrote on July 26, 2010. I originally wrote this at Beggar’s All blog, where I am a guest blogger of James Swan, who runs “Beggar’s All” and who is a student on Martin Luther. (I would say he is an expert, but he does not claim that. He does not claim to be a scholar, but he has researched thoroughly, used scholarly works, and even hired a German translator sometimes for accuracy.) Check out Beggar’s All Blog for lots of good information on Luther and Reformed Apologetics and Church history issues. If you want to know accurate details about Martin Luther, especially in correcting mis-information about Luther by Roman Catholics, James Swan is the man to go to.

I highly recommend this book, Contending for Our All, as it is one of the best Christian biographies that draws principles from heroes of the past.  Chapter 1 is about Athanasius, chapter 2 is about John Owen, and chapter 3 is about J. Gresham Machen.

Especially good is chapter 1 on Athanasius, who lived from 298 – 373 AD.

Athanasius was a deacon at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD.

He later became bishop of Alexandria in 328 AD.

Athanasius contended for the faith by defending the doctrines of the full Deity of Christ, the Trinity, and the Deity of the Holy Spirit. (see Jude 3 – “contend earnestly for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints”)

The false teacher Arius was the cause of the Nicean Council being called in 325 AD.

He was exiled 5 times because of his stance against the heretics, the Arians.   Arius was a false teacher who said that Jesus was a created being and not eternal.  The doctrine of the Arians was close to the doctrine of the modern cult, the Jehovah’s Witnesses of today.

The Arians had taken over most of the churches over a sixty year period after the Council of Nicea by political intrigue.  Athanasius earned the title:  ”Athanasius contra mundum” = “Athanasius against the world!”

Athanasius is also famous for his list of the 27 books of the New Testament in his Festal Letter 39 on Easter of 367 AD.

Every Christian should read this book, especially chapter 1 on Athanasius.

Every young Christian wanting to be a missionary / worker/ church-planter in the Muslim world should definitely read this book.

Dr. Piper does an excellent job of drawing very important principles from Athanasius’ life that are amazingly precise in speaking to the missions and contextualization controversies of today.

Here is a very significant quote from Dr. Piper’s chapter on Athanasius that relates to defending doctrine and how important this is:

” Loving Christ includes loving true propositions about Christ

What was clear to Athanasius was that propositions about Christ carried convictions that could send you to heaven or to hell. There were propositions like: “There was a time when the Son of God was not,” and, “He was not before he was made,” and, “the Son of God is created.” [Statements that the heretic Arius taught.]  These propositions were strictly damnable. If they were spread and believed they would damn the souls which embraced them. And therefore Athanasius labored with all his might to formulate propositions that would conform to reality and lead the soul to faith and worship and heaven.

I believe Athanasius would have abominated, with tears, the contemporary call for “de-propositionalizing” that you hear among many of the so-called “reformists” and “the emerging church,”younger evangelicals,”postfundamentalists,” “post-foundationalists, ”postpropositionalists,” and “postevangelicals.”³⁶ I think he would have said, “Our young people in Alexandria die for the truth of propositions about Christ. What do your young people die for?” And if the answer came back, “We die for Christ, not propositions about Christ,” I think he would have said, “That’s what Arius says. So which Christ will you die for?”

Athanasius would have grieved over sentences like “It is Christ who unites us; it is doctrines that divides.” And sentences like: “We should ask, Whom do you trust? rather than what do you believe?”³⁷ He would have grieved because he knew this is the very tactic used by the Arian bishops to cover the councils with fog so that the word “Christ” could mean anything. Those who talk like this—“Christ unites, doctrine divides”—have simply replaced propositions with a word. They think they have done something profound and fresh, when in fact they have done something very old and stale and very deadly.”

(John Piper, Contending For Our All,  Crossway Books, 2006, p. 63-64) [my comment added]

So Athanasius rebukes any fudging on sound doctrine and propositional truth in order to make our message more palatable and non-offensive to those we are seeking to reach.  Dr. Piper will go on to quote other Missions authorities that speak to the balance of a valid Biblical contextualization, and an over-contextualized message, which is syncretism and comes across as deceptive to those we are seeking to win to Christ.  When I first read this, I thought, “Wow, this is what we need to speak to the C-5 level contextualization/ Insider’s Movement/ “common ground” teachings/ emerging church/ emergent church and mis-translations of Bibles to Muslims in order to make the Deity of Christ and the Trinity more acceptable.  ”

We will continue, Lord willing with future posts about this book and the application to missions, apologetics, and contextualization.

Paul Williams, a British convert to Islam, has critiqued Nabeel Qureshi’s video lecture defending the Deity of Christ. “Is Jesus God? 02 The Synoptic Picture”

______________
Paul Williams critique of Nabeel’s video.

The photo above of Codex Sinaiticus of Mark 1:1, is from an article by Trevor J. Major, who has also written a good article defending Mark 1:1 against Bart Ehrman’s attacks. You can see the smaller υυθυ that was added in by the first corrector of the ancient manuscript. υυ = υιου (Son) and θυ = θεου (God), “Son of God”.

I am only focusing on the issue of the textual variant at Mark 1:1 here in this article. There is much more to respond to about Paul William’s critique. Lord willing, I will write more later on other points he has tried to make.

I responded to his first point about Mark 1:1 in Codex Sinaiticus and that the copyist accidentally left out “the Son of God”. According to the photo image above of the Codex Sinaiticus of Mark 1:1, it shows that the first corrector of the manuscript corrected the mistake and added “Son of God” back in. see more below.

I have added a few more comments/details in my article here to my original comment at Paul’s blog.

1. I asked the Lord that I might grow

In faith and love and every grace
Might more of His salvation know
And seek more earnestly His face

2. Twas He who taught me thus to pray
And He I trust has answered prayer
But it has been in such a way
As almost drove me to despair

3. I hoped that in some favored hour
At once He’d answer my request
And by His love’s constraining power
Subdue my sins and give me rest

4. Instead of this He made me feel
The hidden evils of my heart
And let the angry powers of Hell
Assault my soul in every part

5. Yea more with His own hand He seemed
Intent to aggravate my woe
Crossed all the fair designs I schemed,
Cast out my feelings, laid me low

6. Lord why is this, I trembling cried
Wilt Thou pursue thy worm to death?
“Tis in this way” The Lord replied
“I answer prayer for grace and faith”

7. “These inward trials I employ
From self and pride to set thee free
And break thy schemes of earthly joy
That thou mayest seek thy all in me,
That thou mayest seek thy all in me.”

©2004 double v music (ASCAP).
Used by permission. All rights reserved.

The doctrine of the Trinity demonstrates respect for the Bible, rather than trying to make God simple and understandable. The doctrine of the Trinity comes from a respect for Sola Scriptura, that Scripture is the only infallible rule for doctrine, faith and practice.

“If Christianity was something we were making up, of course we could make it easier. But it is not. We cannot compete, in simplicity, with people who are inventing religions. How could we? We are dealing with Fact. Of course anyone can be simple is he has no facts to bother about.”

C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, p. 145. (MacMillan Publishing Company, Inc. New York, 1943, 1945, 1952. (Originally in Beyond Personality: The Christian Idea of God, 1944, p. 19)

“The doctrine of the Trinity was formulated by followers of Jesus Christ to safeguard the good news that in Jesus Christ we encounter God face to face. It was not devised to make God less understandable, or to make God so mysterious that the common people have to depend on clergy and theologians to understand it for them, as the JWs [Jehovah’s Witnesses] charge. Instead, the doctrine of the Trinity was developed out of respect for God’s revelation of Himself. [the Scriptures, OT and NT] The Witnesses’ doctrines about God, Christ, and “holy spirit”, on the other hand, were developed not in order to represent the bible’s teaching more faithfully, but to make God understandable and comprehensible. “

“The choice is therefore between believing in the true God as he has revealed himself, mystery and all, or believing in a God that is relatively simple to understand but bears little resemblance to the true God. Trinitarians are willing to live with a God they cannot fully comprehend. As C. S. Lewis put it:

“If Christianity was something we were making up, of course we could make it easier. But it is not. We cannot compete, in simplicity, with people who are inventing religions. How could we? We are dealing with Fact. Of course anyone can be simple is he has no facts to bother about.” [My explanatory comments in brackets.]

Robert M. Bowman, Why You Should Believe in the Trinity: An Answer to Jehovah’s Witnesses. Baker Books, 1989, p. 138-139.

Jehovah’s Witnesses (Arianism) and Islam are similar in that they reject the doctrine of the Trinity; which demonstrate that they are man made religions, among other problems of many false doctrines.

Remember an earlier post I wrote, on the Incarnation, the Atonement, and the Trinity and how we see the glory of the true God in the relation of God humbling Himself in the Incarnation and the Atonement of Christ.