By: Jay Dyer

Granted, this is vintage Alpha Omega Ministries, and maybe James White has changed his position since then, and if so, I will gladly retract this post. However, as it stands, it’s pretty bad. White tries to explain the Trinity in this post and says much that is good (even citing St. Gregory of Nazianzus at one point), but due to an incomplete understanding of classical Trinitarian orthodoxy, he makes a fundamental error. White argues as follows:

“One of the characteristics of personal existence is will. Few would argue the point in relationship to the Father, as He obviously has a will. So too, the Son has a will, for he says to the Father in the Garden, “not as I will, but as you will.” (Matthew 26:39) The ascription of will to the Persons indicates the ability to reason, to think, to act, to desire – all those things we associate with self-consciousness. As we shall see later, there is a difference between nature and person, and one of those differences is the will. Inanimate objects do not will; neither do animals. Part of the imago dei is the will itself.”

White has, like all these dudes, confused nature and person. He makes will a distinctive aspect of person. Will is not a characteristic of person, but of nature. This is why classical Trinitarian orthodoxy says there are two wills in Christ, because there are two natures, divine and human, and one will in God, because of one nature. If will were a property of person, there would be three wills in God and one will in the Incarnate Christ. But the first option is polytheism and the second is monothelitism, both of which are clearly false. “Classical” Calvinists tell us they believe in “the Christ of the councils,” but this is a claim that exists largely in their heads, and not in reality. In fact, in that very post, White is arguing that he is faithful to Chalcedon, but Chalcedon taught two natures, which led to the definition of two wills. Constantinople II defined that there were two natural wills and two natural energies in Christ Incarnate, against the monothelites, which Calvinists will ambiguously profess. However, we read in that council as follows:

“And briefly we shall intimate to your divinely instructed Piety, what the strength of our Apostolic faith contains, which we have received through Apostolic tradition and through the tradition of the Apostolical pontiffs, and that of the five holy general synods, through which the foundations of Christ’s Catholic Church have been strengthened and established; this then is the status [and the regular tradition ] of our Evangelical and Apostolic faith, to wit, that as we confess the holy and inseparable Trinity, that is, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, to be of one deity, of one nature and substance or essence, so we will profess also that it has one natural will, power, operation, domination, majesty, potency, and glory. And whatever is said of the same Holy Trinity essentially in singular number we understand to refer to the one nature of the three consubstantial Persons, having been so taught by canonical logic. But when we make a confession concerning one of the same three Persons of that Holy Trinity, of the Son of God, or God the Word, and of the mystery of his adorable dispensation according to the flesh, we assert that all things are double in the one and the same our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ according to the Evangelical tradition, that is to say, we confess his two natures, to wit the divine and the human, of which and in which he, even after the wonderful and inseparable union, subsists. And we confess that each of his natures has its own natural propriety, and that the divine, has all things that are divine, without any sin. And we recognize that each one (of the two natures) of the one and the same incarnated, that is, humanated (humanati) Word of God is in him unconfusedly, inseparably and unchangeably, intelligence alone discerning a unity, to avoid the error of confusion. For we equally detest the blasphemy of division and of commixture. For when we confess two natures and two natural wills, and two natural operations in our one Lord Jesus Christ, we do not assert that they are contrary or opposed one to the other (as those who err from the path of truth and accuse the apostolic tradition of doing. Far be this impiety from the hearts of the faithful!), nor as though separated (per se separated) in two persons or subsistences, but we say that as the same our Lord Jesus Christ has two natures so also he has two natural wills and operations, to wit, the divine and the human: the divine will and operation he has in common with the coessential Father from all eternity: the human, he has received from us, taken with our nature in time. This is the apostolic and evangelic tradition, which the spiritual mother of your most felicitous empire, the Apostolic Church of Christ, holds.”

Once again we see the adherence of Calvinists to classical orthodoxy is a smoke and mirrors ruse. Amazingly, White quotes an orthodox statement from Phillip Schaff which he himself does not accept, as a Calvinist:

“The precise distinction between nature and person. Nature or substance is the totality of powers and qualities which constitute a being; person is the Ego, the self-conscious, self-asserting, and acting subject. There is no person without nature, but there may be nature without person (as in irrational beings). The Church doctrine distinguishes in the Holy Trinity three persons (though not in the ordinary human sense of the word) in one divine nature of substance which they have in common; in its Christology it teaches, conversely, two nature in one person (in the usual sense of person) which pervades both. Therefore it cannot be said: The Logos assumed a human person, or united himself with a definite human individual: for then the God-Man would consist of two persons; but he took upon himself the human nature, which is common to all men; and therefore he redeemed not a particular man, but all men, as partakers of the same nature of substance. The personal Logos did not become an individual anthropos, but sarx, flesh, which includes the whole of human nature, body, soul and spirit.”[17]

White does not believe that all men are assumed in Christ’s Incarnation, for that is the Eastern and Catholic view, which means Christ died for all men and thus all men participate in His resurrection (though some to the resurrection of damnation-John 5:28-29). As a Calvinist, believing in limited atonement, it’s a surprise that White would include this, for Christ did not die for all men (he thinks) and it follows as well that He did not assume all men. But that would make the resurrection of the wicked occur on some other basis than Christ. But resurrections only happen because of Christ–they aren’t a natural phenomena.