Part 3 – Divine Simplicity
I must confess—I especially enjoy discussing divine simplicity. It holds a special place in my heart. What a gloriously mysterious and worshipfully fascinating truth! Human expression will always come up wanting when describing God. Yet if we are silent, the very stones themselves may cry out (Luke 19:40).
You won’t find any singular proof text for divine simplicity in the Bible. Rather, it’s largely a matter of allowing Scripture to interpret itself, and reasoning from other essential doctrines concerning God’s nature and character–chiefly, his aseity, infinity, and creation. [1] We’ll spend some time on those shortly. But first, a brief detour. Unfortunately, over the past century or more, evangelicals have struggled to understand their relationship to Scripture and their place in church history. Without going into gross detail, because of these struggles, I’ll need to begin by explaining a few things about the relationship between Scripture and reason. Consequently, this post will be a bit longer than the others. Divine simplicity is indispensable to a proper doctrine of God, and since it can be understandably challenging for those new to the idea, you’ll find plenty of footnotes to assist in further study.
|
Scripture and Reason
Because we live in a time when people are quite tolerant of logical inconsistencies, many construct their theologies more like choosing independent marbles for their doctrinal sack, rather than as a coherent and consistent system of truth. Put this one in…throw that one out…replace this one…set that one aside for later (insert obnoxious and lazy comment about “panmillennialism” here). Each doctrine functions as its own stand-alone truth that doesn’t bear much if any weight upon the rest of the theological marbles in the bag. Never mind centuries of church history; bring on the ill-fitted novelty. Some folks do this because they’ve embraced a kind of relativism that cares more about what feels or seems right to them at the time (Prov. 14:12; 16:25). For others, it’s just the philosophical air they’ve breathed for so long they don’t even know it’s happening.
Still others have a misguided animosity toward “reason” or “philosophy”. That antipathy might be across the board or exclusively in relation to matters of divinity. The irony is that these rejections are themselves (poorly) reasoned philosophies of interpretation and epistemology that apply to theology as much as anything else. [2] The novelty is embraced—knowingly or unknowingly—with heels firmly dug in. These kinds of approaches effectively make the individual their own “pope” of sorts, and eschews the wonderful ways the Holy Spirit has worked in many an incredibly gifted saint across more than two millennia of church history and beyond. [3]
And while there are certainly plenty of philosophies that in fact do contradict Scripture—some more than others—the Bible itself assumes human reasoning and laws of logic as prerequisite for a person to even read, comprehend, or understand its contents. In other words, ontology precedes epistemology; nature precedes ways of knowing.
Additionally, we do not only agree with what is “expressly set down” in Scripture “concerning all things necessary for [God’s] own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life [i.e., spirituality, religious practice, sanctification, etc.]”. We must also agree with what is “necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture.” [4] That is, if something is true in Scripture because of its corpus testimony, regardless of whether there is an explicit statement about that doctrine found anywhere within, it is nonetheless true and must be accepted by way of Spirit-wrought, sanctified reason and necessary inference. [5]
Therefore, by way of Scripture as a whole, in all it’s explicit and implicit truth–and by way of sanctified reason in service of the Scriptures–the doctrine of divine simplicity is in no way illegitimate but instead is quite necessary for our proper worship of God as he has revealed himself in both Scripture and in nature. [6]
|
Defining Divine Simplicity
When speaking of God as “simple” we don’t mean that he’s simplistic or easy to understand. As we’ll discuss in a future post, God is truly knowable though not comprehensively or exhaustively so.
Foundationally, divine simplicity means that nothing not God makes God to be God. Did you catch that? In other words, nothing antecedent of or more essential than God comes together to make him what he is. There’s nothing behind or beneath God. His attributes are not parts of him but more like descriptions of him. He is those things without composite. These “attributes” are him–they are his singular essence.
Moreover, existence and essence are identical in him. Existence refers to the fact that something is. Essence refers to what something is. In God, his is-ness and what-ness are one and the same. You and I derive our existence as human beings from God as our Creator and Sustainer. We exist and we exist as humans because of him. But God’s being and existence are indistinguishable.
In short, the point of simplicity is this–God does not have parts–he is One.
“[W]e worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.”
Athanasian Creed, 3-6
“The Lord our God is…a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, [or] parts…”
Baptist Confession, 2:1
“In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word or Son, and the Holy Spirit, of one substance…”
Baptist Confession, 2:3
“We all believe in our hearts and confess with our mouths that there is a single and simple spiritual being, whom we call God…”
Belgic Confession, Article 1
In contrast, you and I are composite beings made up of two parts—material and immaterial. Our material part has varying organs and systems of functioning like our circulatory system, skeletal system, nervous system, brain, tissue, hormones, etc. Our immaterial part is made up of three faculties—mind, affections (or “heart”), and will (or “volition”). [7] This is what God has decided you are and designed you to be. You didn’t decided this, he did.
But God is the great I AM. He didn’t decide to be. That would mean some things or parts more essential than him had to decide to become him. And he doesn’t become. That would mean he had to add some things or parts to himself that were previously not part of him. But there is no movement in God. He must, therefore, be simple and without parts.
When God gave ancient Israel one thing to pray and contemplate each day, he gave them the Shema—meaning “hear” or “listen”—which is the first Hebrew word in the phrase: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one” (Deut. 6:4; see also Gal. 3:20; James 2:19). The glory of God’s simple being deserves perpetual daily meditation. For God’s Old Covenant people, they were meant to rise in the morning and lay down at night confessing and contemplating God’s unique simplicity. He is the One true God, and in no way is he like the imagined gods of the nations that surround them.
Now, as I previously mentioned, divine simplicity is the imperative consequence of affirming God’s aseity, infinity, and creation. So we’ll consider each of these three in turn.
|
Simplicity and Aseity
His simplicity follows from his aseity because God being absolutely independent and self-sufficient, he can’t be dependent upon or owe his existence to more fundamental things or parts. That would make some things more foundational to God than God–at which point he wouldn’t really be God.
No set of traits, characteristics, or virtues come together to form God. Nothing less than God can be combined to become God. Our “God cannot depend on what is not Himself in order to be Himself.” [8] This isn’t Voltron, Captain Planet, or the Power Rangers we’re talking about here (Did I just date myself?). “Rather, the reality in virtue of which all these things are truly said of God is nothing but His own simple divinity. Properly speaking, God is good by virtue of God, not goodness. He is wise by virtue of God, not wisdom. He is powerful by virtue of God, not power. He is love by virtue of God, not love”. [9] Truly, all that is in God is God. [10] God is not the cause of himself but simply is himself since he can’t give to himself anything he lacks since he lacks nothing. And he can’t receive from himself what is already his.
And so, to posit a complex God made of parts would necessitate that we should in fact be worshiping those more foundational parts rather than what those parts come together to be. The parts would be more essential than that divine Being itself and therefore that Being is not most essential. And what Christian could ever say that God isn’t the most essential Being? When it comes to our a se God, this just cannot be the case. If divine aseity is true, then divine simplicity must also be true.
|
Simplicity and Infinity
His simplicity also follows from his infinity. James Dolezal explains:
“Scripture teaches divine infinity when it speaks of God’s greatness as exalted above creation. God’s glory is above the heavens (Ps. 8:1; 148:13), and even the heaven of heavens cannot contain Him (1 Kings 8:27; 2 Chron. 2:6; 6:18). His greatness is unfathomable (Ps. 145:3), and no one can discover the limit of the Almighty (Job 11:7). Other passages that speak of God’s infinity include those that attest to His fullness of being. God says to Israel in Isaiah 48:12, “I am He, I am the First, I am also the Last” (cf. 41:4; 44:6). This fullness of being sets Him apart from all false gods and indeed all finite beings of any sort. This same truth is conveyed in the parallel expression in Revelation 1:8, ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega’ (cf. 1:11, 17; 2:8; 21:6; 22:13).”
Dolezal, pp. 47-48.
Parts, by definition not being whole, must be finite since they lack completeness. And an infinite God likewise can’t be made up of or dependent upon finite parts. The infinite cannot be composed of the finite. Finite things cannot create infinite things. Any whole must be considered greater than its individual parts. There can be nothing more full, foundational, or greater than God, otherwise what is behind God would be more truly God than God himself–and that’s nonsensical. And so, for God to be infinite he must also necessarily be simple.
|
Simplicity and Creation
And finally, his simplicity must also follow from his status as Creator of all things visible and invisible. He stands alone as the one true God and there is no other (Mark 12:32). God creates from nothing and is totally unique in his ability to create ex nihilo. We, on the other hand, must use what raw materials he’s provided to make anything we attempt to make. God is the Uncaused Cause of all; we’re never really the truest starting point for anything. Everything we are and have is derived from him. If God was made from more foundational parts, then he would not truly be the Creator of all. Why? Because he would himself have been created. The combining of more fundamental uncreated things would create God. And again, those things would be the truest God, and there would be multiple of them. Then we have to ask, “So which is the greatest of these most fundamental parts?” And if we find there to be a greatest thing behind God that makes up God–then that means all the other more foundational uncreated things are inferior…and therefore not most excellent…so…not God. All of this clearly devolves into absurdity. Look at how imperative it is that we always maintain the Creator-creation distinction in our thinking!
But there’s one more thing we can’t forget to say. Not only did God create everything in this old creation, but he is the Creator of the new creation as well. In his letter to the Roman church, Paul tells us that salvation comes to a person only through the instrument of faith in Christ, and not in any way by keeping the law. He makes the point that God is not the God who saves Jews only but Gentiles also. He created both and he saves from both into a new creation–one that is earned, established, ruled, and perpetuated by Christ. And Paul also says we know this to be the case because “God is one” (Rom. 3:30). Huh? How does God’s simplicity relate to his saving a people for himself from both Jews and Gentiles? Where’s the connection? Paul’s point is that God being one simple Being has only one divine will; not two and not three (or more). Only one plan of salvation, according to the purpose of his perfect will, in all wisdom and insight, for all the elect (Eph. 1:5, 9). As he says elsewhere, “there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist” (1 Cor. 8:6). Furthermore, “There is one body and one Spirit–just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call–one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all” (Eph. 4:4-6). In other words, our salvation hinges upon God being simple. If God were complex he might have competing wills or might show favoritism. But “God shows no partiality” (Rom. 2:11). Thankfully, all that come to the Father through Jesus will never be cast out, but will be resurrected on the last Day (John 6:37).
|
Counseling Divine Simplicity
If there’s anything God’s simplicity should assure us of it’s this–God can’t and won’t fall apart. He’ll never go to pieces on you. Being simple and holy, he has perfect integrity. Compare this with Isaiah’s appearance in the throne room of God. In chapter six of his prophecy, Isaiah says he “saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up” (v. 1), and this awesome vision of God compelled these words: “Woe is me! For I am lost…for my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!” (v. 5). That word for “lost” can also be translated as “undone” (see ASV, KJV, NKJV). It carries with it the idea of exposing a lack of integrity. In whatever way Isaiah may have imagined that he was “put together,” to stand before God showed otherwise, and he “fell apart” so to speak. Surely, Isaiah would have recalled Moses’ request to see God’s glory, and God’s response that, “man shall not see me and live” (Exod. 33:20). How, then, can he still live? There is only one reason–his “guilt [was] taken away, and [his] sin atoned for” (v. 7). And we know this is only because of the work of Christ for all of those who are in him by grace through faith–including Old Testament saints like Isaiah who looked forward in faith to the Messiah promised in the Offspring of the woman who would crush the serpent’s head (Gen. 3:15, 20; Gal. 3:16).
Were any of us in Isaiah’s shoes, we would dis-integrate too. And yet, in Christ, we are held together. Not because of our own integrity, but because his integrity is our integrity in our union with him. He was crushed for our iniquities and by his wounds we are healed (Isa. 53:5, 10). He is the one true God and the only man who accomplished sinless, perfect righteousness. Only a simple God, in his absolute unity and immaculate purity, can hold together broken sinners like us.
So then, what is our only hope? What are you giving to those you disciple and counsel? When you minister, point them to this God who won’t give under the weight of fallen, creaturely frailty and failures. Even when we fall apart and break down, he never will. “[I]f we are faithless, he remains faithful–for he cannot deny himself” (2 Tim. 2:13). In him, we are safe (Prov. 29:25).
Additionally, when we are tempted to hide in the darkness and hold on to our sin and shame, we can instead come to the God who is himself Light, who is faithful and just to forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:5, 9). We can stand before him as true confessors of our sin and his gospel (Luke 18:9-14) and have no fear of punishment because he is love (1 John 4:7-21).
It’s a little more difficult to piece together, but one way we see God’s simplicity in Scripture is in his being called “light” in whom there is “no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). Typically, we think of God being light as having more to do with his holiness and his revelation–both true, of course. But his being light also speaks to his oneness. Light is nothing but light. Its absence is darkness. Darkness cannot impose itself upon light. Where there is light, there is no darkness. Even God’s first act of creation is to speak light into existence from nothing, and then separate it from the darkness. The light came first, then the darkness. Before light and darkness, there was nothing; just God. In a similar way, God is first, pure, and simple. And the same God “who said, ‘Let light shine out of darkness'” in this old creation, has in the new creation “shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Cor. 4:6). It is this same Christ in whom we, with unveiled face, behold the glory of the Lord and are “transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another” (3:18). The God whose gaze should disintegrate us, destroy us, doom us, ruin us–instead it changes us to be more like him. In Christ, we can say with confidence, “for me it is good to be near God” (Psa. 73:28). Next time you talk to someone who is discouraged or even hopeless about their same old besetting sins coming back to haunt them, don’t you dare point them back into themselves. You open the Word together and you look to Jesus. The more we look at ourselves, the more we’ll be hopeless and discouraged. The more we look at him, the more we’ll see him and his kindness will lead us to peace and repentance.
The same God for whom we should cower in fear and shame has instead lifted our heads and invited us to confess, be forgiven, and receive cleansing (cf. Psa. 32). When those you counsel are holding back out of fear, invite them not to look to you or themselves, but to this holy God who is their light, salvation, and the stronghold of their life (Psa. 27:1). Rather than hiding from him (Gen. 3:7-8), they can rejoice as the apple of his eye and instead hide in him (Psa. 17:8; 32:7). And rather than hide from the wonderful gift he’s given them in the church, they can confess to and pray with their brothers and sisters and be healed (James 5:16).
I know this was a long post, but I hope it was encouraging. Thanks for hanging in there with me. Our God cannot be anything other than he is–of perfect, simple integrity. Think of him in all these ways, and lead others to do the same. Perhaps you could memorize and pray the Shema twice a day for a while just to remind yourself of God’s simplicity and all the wonderful things it entails. In the meantime…
|
For Further Reflection
What does it mean for you to see God as simple? How does it change the way you think and live that he cannot “go to pieces” on you? How should that change the way you pray, preach, teach, and counsel others?
|
|
Footnotes
[1] Dolezal, James E. All That Is In God: Evangelical Theology and the Challenge of Classical Christian Theism. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2017. pp. 45-50. [2] Moreover, for one to appeal to texts like Col. 2:8 as proof of the sinfulness of all philosophy, is to misunderstand and divorce Paul’s statement from its context. The idea is not that philosophy itself is bad, but that the kind of philosophy we should reject is the kind that is “according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” This means that philosophy, like any other good thing, can be used toward sinful ends with sinful motives. In particular, Paul means the kind of philosophy that is hollow, empty, or vain because it deceives, cheats, spoils, and captures or captivates a person–turning their focus from Christ to their own thoughts. Historically, this would have been a rejection of Sophism and similar ideologies. Sophism includes, to varying degrees, “radical skepticism” that “turn[s its] back on philosophy and practice[s] rhetoric instead.” That is, Sophism attempts to receive rhetoric at the expense of philosophy. Like philosophy, there’s nothing inherently wrong with rhetoric, and it is quite good and necessary for our everyday lives. Where would any of us be without the ability to persuade? But to the Sophists, “The goal of rhetoric was not to proclaim the truth but to achieve practical aims of persuasion”, to the point that some denied the existence of truth altogether and embraced a kind of relativism and so-called “religious tolerance” that anticipated the postmodern ideologies of our day. Sproul, R. C. The Consequence Of Ideas: Understanding the Concepts That Shaped Our World. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2000. pp. 29-30. [3] In many ways, this is because we have been steeped in Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment ways of thinking that previous faithful generations would have found quite illogical and bizarre. For more on this see: Carter, Craig A. Interpreting Scripture With the Great Tradition: Recovering the Genius Of Premodern Exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2018. [4] Baptist Confession, 1:6. [5] For example, we could never arrive at the doctrines of the Trinity or the hypostatic union without piecing together the necessarily inferred biblical facts that tell us these things. There are no explicit proof texts that tell us things like, “God is one being in three persons,” or, “Jesus Christ is fully God and fully human in two natures though one person.” Yet these are true nonetheless. In fact, they are so foundational to the Christian faith that to knowingly deny them is to deny the Christian faith itself and prove oneself to be a heretic. [6] Classically, Christianity has always confessed that God reveals himself to us in two ways or “books”. Those are often termed natural revelation (or “general revelation”) and supernatural revelation (or “special revelation). The Baptist Confession 1:1 explains this differentiation as follows: “The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith and obedience, although the light of nature and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and His will which is necessary unto salvation.” Natural theology would include natural revelation and natural law and the right ways in which it may interpret God’s good creation and know his righteous requirements for mankind as his image-bearers (Rom. 1:19-21; Psa. 19:1-3; Rom. 2:14-15). [7] For more on this see Chapter 2 of Renihan, Samuel. God Without Passions: A Primer: A Practical and Pastoral Study Of Divine Impassibility. Palmdale, CA: RBAP, 2015. [8] Dolezal, p. 44. [9] Ibid., p. 43. [10] Ibid., p. 41.
