AI and Systematic Theology

The following is from the article: AI is Coming for Your Systematic Theology by Tim Challies:

A recent article at The American Scholar asks Who Is Blake Whiting? Whiting appears to be the most prolific scholar of our age, sometimes publishing up to 13 books a week “on a host of complex archaeological and historical subjects, ranging from the collapse of Near Eastern civilizations in 1177 BCE to the recent discovery of a huge Silk Road–era city in Central Asia.” He must be quite the individual!

But as you no doubt guessed, he is not an individual at all. Rather, Blake Whiting is fabricated, and the books under his name have been generated using AI. Andrew Lawler, who wrote the article for The American Scholar, warns that, “His fake persona is harbinger of an alarming trend threatening disaster to academics and journalists alike.” And theologians, I would add, as well as those who read books by them. 

When I read Lawler’s article, I was already working on one of my own that addresses the same phenomenon, but from the perspective of a Christian reader. If you were to visit Amazon today and search for “systematic theology,” it would not take you long to find a host of similar works. Many of them have scads of enthusiastic reviews and feature realistic-sounding author bios that say things like, he “is a Christian author and teacher of systematic theology with a passion for making biblical doctrine clear, accessible, and meaningful for today’s readers.” Yet in reality, he does not exist at all, and the books under his name have been generated through nothing more than clever prompting of a Large Language Model.

I want you to know about these books because I want you to be aware that this is happening. I want you to know it’s happening because it’s likely that things will get far worse before they get any better. I’ll first introduce you to this slop theology, then discuss the threat these books represent, and then tell you how you can identify them.

Read the entire post here.

Book Review: Daily Doctrine by Kevin DeYoung

Systematic Theology is a subject most Christians do not study because they think it is only for those in seminary. Sadly, there are some pastors that think it as well. There have been many great theological books over the centuries yet most of them are not read because of their length. A lot of them are not for just the layperson in the pew.

Kevin DeYoung has written a book designed for anyone to pick and read about theological subjects in a simple, devotional format titled, Daily Doctrine. The subtitle of the book says, "A One-Year Guide to Systematic Theology." One site has it advertised as a 365-day devotional. One thing that must be pointed is this is not a 365-day devotional. It is a 52-week devotional but there are only five entries per week. 

This book brakes down into different theological subjects such as the doctrine of scripture, the works and being of God, the doctrine of man, Christology including His work and the salvation He offers, the doctrine of the church, and eschatology. DeYoung also covers Covenant Theology, which he does from a paedobaptist point of view, which he does briefly address Baptist Covenant Theology in one entry. 

Writing on the subject of Systematic Theology is not an easy take, but to do in a devotional format is quite another. The print for each entry does not take up a lot of pages so that the devotionals are not lengthy so those who are new to Systematic Theology can follow along easily. Granted I think DeYoung could have written more since he did not write 365 entries in what is supposed to be a year-long devotional book. 

As I mentioned earlier, this devotional is from a paedobaptist covenant theological perspective so those who attend a Baptist church and are new believers might be a little confused to when DeYoung discusses infant baptism rather than believer's baptism. There might be some who are not covenantal who might not agree with everything DeYoung has written but might be blessed by the book. 

One thing that might be confusing for former Roman Catholics is why is a Protestant Minister and writer using material from Thomas Aquinas a Roman Catholic theologian and has been called the Angelic Doctor by Rome. Granted some quote Aquinas to critique him, but DeYoung seems to affirm the writings he uses in the devotional. I know DeYoung is part of the Classical Theism movement also known as Scholasticism that seeks to retrieve Aquinas for the Protestant Church, which John Frame has said he those who are part of this movement head to Rome meaning they become Roman Catholic. 

This devotional would be a good introduction to Systematic Theology, but it was lacking in some areas that more could have been written. DeYoung did do a decent job taking Systematic Theology and make into a devotional.

I received this book from Crossway in exchange for an honest review.

Book Review: Great Doctrines of the Bible by Martyn Lloyd-Jones

There have been many great Systematic Theology books that have been written. Granted, I have not read of them and probably never will. There have been many great books written by Martyn Lloyd-Jones and it seems there are many that do not get the attention they do. 

Great Doctrines of the Bible is one of those books from Lloyd-Jones that does not get mentioned a lot. Thankfully, Crossway has produced this wonderful volume for modern readers especially those who have benefitted from the ministry of Martyn Lloyd-Jones.

This book contains three volumes that deals with three areas of systematic theology. The first deals with God, the Father and God, the Son. This volume has chapters addressing how to find doctrine, looking into the Covenant of Grace in the Old and New Testament, and addressing the incarnation of Christ along with His substitutionary atonement.

The next volume deals with God, the Spirit. Lloyd-Jones addresses the doctrine of the Holy Spirit which includes the Person and work of the Spirit. In regard to the work of the Spirit, Lloyd-Jones addresses the sanctifying work of the Spirit along with the gifts and fruit of the Spirit.

Finally, Lloyd-Jones tackles the church and eschatology. He addresses the marks and government of the church along with Baptism and Lord's Supper. Eschatology is the dominate subject in this volume, which deals with different millennial views, the future of the Jews, and the Antichrist.

I am thankful this massive systematic theology from Martyn Lloyd-Jones is available for the church today. If you have been blessed by his ministry, you will definitely benefit from this book even if you do not agree with some of his conclusions.

I received this book from Crossway in exchange for an honest review.

Christ Had To Be Incarnated

Without the incarnation, we could not be saved. It was the incarnate Christ who died on cross, rose from the dead, ascended into Heaven, and is now at God’s right hand making intercession for us... If Christ were not truly and fully man, we could not be saved, for only a second Adam could undo the damage caused by the first.

Adapted from Systematic Theology by Robert Letham

God's First Great Salvation

In God’s last plague against Egypt he slays every firstborn, both of people and of animals (11:4–6; 12:29–32). By displaying the blood of an unblemished lamb on their doorposts, as God had instructed Moses and Aaron, the Israelites save their firstborn children (12:1–13, 23). Because of this final blow, Pharaoh sends Israel away from his people and land (12:31–32).

As God had declared before the plague, the blood on the doorpost is a “sign” of salvation (12:13), and he memorializes the entire event (12:14), giving his instructions so that each successive generation would remember that the Lord had saved Israel out of Egypt (12:17). Their celebration of his delivering them from slavery through the sacrificial lamb is to mark their ongoing identity. After God institutes the Passover meal (12:43–50), the people celebrate it, remembering the strong hand of the Lord, their Deliverer (13:3–10).

The Passover and the exodus mark God’s first great salvation of his people, and he requires them to remember it across generations, as Jesus and his disciples did in the first century a.d. (Matt. 26:17–29). Jesus’ institution of the Lord’s Supper while celebrating the Passover reveals his fulfillment of the original salvation in Egypt. As Paul says, “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor. 5:7).

Just as the nation of Israel looked back to the exodus in the Passover feast, so the church looks back to the full salvation of Jesus Christ in the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:25). This meal marks our identity as God’s people as we eat together in faith (1 Cor. 11:17–22). In this meal we are united to Christ, our great Savior and the Lamb without blemish (1 Pet. 1:19), who strengthens us with his grace as we partake.

Adapted from the ESV Systematic Theology Study Bible

Around The Web-November 22, 2019

Introducing Crossway +

R.C. Sproul's Exegetical Commentaries on sale at WTS Books

Robert Letham discusses his new Systematic Theology book on Equipping You In Grace

The Audio and Video sessions from the Truth in a Truthless Age: 2019 Southern Ontario Conference

Feelings vs. Faith by Jared C Wilson

Steven Lawson on Why Is the Preaching of God’s Word Vital for the Health of the Local Church

Voddie Baucham has a new website which contains his sermons and other resources

Jon English Lee also has a new website

Christ is the Cure on Christianity and Social Media Ethical Principles

Tom Ascol and Jared Longshore discuss the film, "By What Standard"

Justification in the Resurrection of Christ

The idea that sinners are in some sense of the word justified in the resurrection of Christ was stressed by some Antinomians, is taught by those Reformed theologians who believe in a justification from eternity, and is also held by some other Reformed scholars. This view is based on the following grounds:

By His atoning work Christ satisfied all the demands of the law for His people. In the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead the Father publicly declared that all the requirements of the law were met for all the elect and thereby justified them. But here too careful distinction is required. Even though it be true that there was an objective justification of Christ and of the whole body of Christ in His resurrection, this should not be confounded with the justification of the sinner of which Scripture speaks. It is not true that, when Christ rendered full satisfaction to the Father for all His people, their guilt naturally terminated. A penal debt is not like a pecuniary debt in this respect. Even after the payment of a ransom, the removal of guilt may depend on certain conditions, and does not follow as a matter of course. The elect are not personally justified in the Scriptural sense until they accept Christ by faith and thus appropriate His merits.

In Romans 4:25 we read that Christ was "raised up for (dia, causal, on account of) our justification," that is, to effect our justification. Now it is undoubtedly true that dia with the accusative is causal here. At the same time it need not be retrospective, but can also be prospective and therefore mean "with a view to our justification," which is equivalent to saying, "in order that we may be justified." The retrospective interpretation would be in conflict with the immediately following context, which clearly shows (1) that Paul is not thinking of the objective justification of the whole body of Christ, but of the personal justification of sinners; and (2) that he conceives of this as taking place through faith.

In 2 Corinthians 5:19 we read: "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses." From this passage the inference is drawn that the objective reconciliation of the world in Christ involves the non-imputation of sin to the sinner. But this interpretation is not correct. The evident meaning of the apostle is: God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself, as appears from the fact that He does not impute to men their sins, and that He has entrusted to His servants the word of reconciliation. Notice that me logizomenos (present tense) refers to what is constantly going on. This cannot be conceived as a part of the objective reconciliation, for then the following clause, "and having committed to us the word of reconciliation," would also have to be so interpreted, and this is quite impossible.

In connection with this matter it may be said that we can speak of a justification of the body of Christ as a whole in His resurrection, but this is purely objective and should not be confounded with the personal justification of the sinner.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology

The Difference Between Justification and Sanctification

The following points of difference between justification and sanctification should be carefully noted:

Justification removes the guilt of sin and restores the sinner to all the filial rights involved in his state as a child of God, including an eternal inheritance. Sanctification removes the pollution of sin and renews the sinner ever-increasingly in conformity with the image of God.

Justification takes place outside of the sinner in the tribunal of God, and does not change his inner life, though the sentence is brought home to him subjectively. Sanctification, on the other hand, takes place in the inner life of man and gradually affects his whole being.

Justification takes place once for all. It is not repeated, neither is it a process; it is complete at once and for all time. There is no more or less in justification; man is either fully justified, or he is not justified at all. In distinction from it sanctification is a continuous process, which is never completed in this life.

While the meritorious cause of both lies in the merits of Christ, there is a difference in the efficient cause. Speaking economically, God the Father declares the sinner righteous, and God the Holy Spirit sanctifies him.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology

Around The Web-May 15, 2019

WTS Books has a sale on 31-Day Counseling Devotionals

5 Principles for Sexual Sin by Costi Hinn

Joel Beeke– Reformed Systematic Theology: Volume 1: Revelation and God from Equipping You In Grace

What God Gives You to Fight Sin by Michael Horton

You Are Not Special, But You Are His by Scotty Smith

Rugby Player Found Guilty of ‘High Level’ Breach of Contract for Posting Bible Verse on Instagram

Ask Pastor John: Is It Sinful to Want to Die?

Were the First Christians Socialists? by Kevin DeYoung

The Everyday Relevance of Eternal Life by Matt McCullough

The Doctrines of Grace in the Church

The teachings of Scripture respecting the grace of God stress the fact that God distributes His blessings to men in a free and sovereign manner, and not in consideration of any inherent merit of men; that men owe all the blessings of life to a beneficent, forbearing, and longsuffering God; and especially that all the blessings of the work of salvation are freely given of God, and are in no way determined by supposed merits of men. This is clearly expressed by Paul in the following words: "For by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, that no man should glory," Ephesians 2:8, 9. He strongly emphasizes the fact that salvation is not by works, Romans 3:20-28; 4:16; Galatians 2:16.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology

Proof for the Doctrine of Limited Atonement

The following proofs may be given for the doctrine of particular atonement: It may be laid down, first of all, as a general principle, that the designs of God are always surely efficacious and cannot be frustrated by the actions of man. This applies also to the purpose of saving men through the death of our Lord Jesus Christ. If it had been His intention to save all men, this purpose could not have been frustrated by the unbelief of man. It is admitted on all hands that only a limited number is saved. Consequently, they are the only ones whom God has determined to save.

Scripture repeatedly qualifies those for whom Christ laid down His life in such a way as to point to a very definite limitation. Those for whom He suffered and died are variously called "His sheep," John 10:11, 15, "His Church," Acts 20:28; Ephesians 5:25-27, "His people," Matthew 1:21, and "the elect," Romans 8:32-35. The sacrificial work of Christ and His intercessory work are simply two different aspects of His atoning work, and therefore the scope of the one can be no wider than that of the other. Now Christ very definitely limits His intercessory work, when He says: "I pray not for the world, but for those whom thou hast given me." John 17:9. Why should He limit His intercessory prayer, if He had actually paid the price for all? It should also be noted that the doctrine that Christ died for the purpose of saving all men, logically leads to absolute universalism, that is, to the doctrine that all men are actually saved.

It is impossible that they for whom Christ paid the price, whose guilt He removed, should be lost on account of that guilt. The Arminians cannot stop at their half-way station, but must go all the way. If it be said, as some do say, that the atonement was universal, but that the application of it is particular; that He made salvation possible for all, but actually saves only a limited number—it should be pointed out that there is an inseparable connection between the purchase and the actual bestowal of salvation. The Bible clearly teaches that the design and effect of the atoning work of Christ is not merely to make salvation possible, but to reconcile God and man, and to put men in actual possession of eternal salvation, a salvation which many fail to obtain, Matthew 18:11; Romans 5:10; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Galatians 1:4; 3:13; Ephesians 1:7. And if the assertion be made that the design of God and of Christ was evidently conditional, contingent on the faith and obedience of man, attention should be called to the fact that the Bible clearly teaches that Christ by His death purchased faith, repentance, and all the other effects of the work of the Holy Spirit, for His people. Consequently these are no conditions of which the fulfilment is simply dependent on the will of man.

The atonement also secures the fulfilment of the conditions that must be met, in order to obtain salvation, Romans 2:4; Galatians 3:13, 14; Ephesians 1:3, 4; 2:8; Philippians 1:29; 2 Timothy 3:5, 6.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology

Statement of the Reformed Position on the Extent of the Atonement

The Reformed position is that Christ died for the purpose of actually and certainly saving the elect, and the elect only. This is equivalent to saying that He died for the purpose of saving only those to whom He actually applies the benefits of His redemptive work. Various attempts have been made in circles that claimed to be Reformed to modify this position. The Dutch Arminians maintained that Christ died for the purpose of making salvation possible for all men without exception, though they will not all be saved. Salvation is offered to them on lower terms than it was to Adam, namely on condition of faith and evangelical obedience, a condition which they can meet in virtue of God's gift of common or sufficient grace to all men. The Calvinistic Universalists sought to mediate between the Reformed position and that of the Arminians. They distinguished a twofold decree of God:

(a) A decree to send Christ into the world to save all men by His atoning death on condition of faith in Him. However, because God saw that this purpose would fail, since no one would accept Christ by faith, He followed up the first by a second decree.

(b) A decree to give a certain elect number special grace, in order to engender faith in their hearts and to secure their salvation.

This dubious and very unsatisfactory view was held by the school of Saumur (Cameron, Amyraldus, and Testardus), and also by such English scholars as Wardlaw, John Brown, and James Richards. Some New England theologians, such as Emmons, Taylor, Park, and Beman held a somewhat similar view. The Marrow-men of Scotland were perfectly orthodox in maintaining that Christ died for the purpose of saving only the elect, though some of them used expressions which also pointed to a more general reference of the atonement. They said that Christ did not die for all men, but that He is dead, that is, available, for all. God's giving love, which is universal, led Him to make a deed of gift and grant to all men; and this is the foundation for the universal offer of salvation. His electing love, however, which is special, results in the salvation of the elect only.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology

Around The Web-May 1, 2019

Mother's Day Gift Guide from WTS Books

6 Important Differences Between Performance Music And Worship Music by Karl Vaters

Jesus Christ: The Theme of Pastoral Ministry by Tom Ascol

The History and Heresy of Black Liberation Theology by Samuel Sey

How to Fall in Ministry And What to Do if You Do by Jared C Wilson

Six Characteristics of Pastors you need to Avoid by Adriel Sanchez

Why We Need Systematic Theology by Joel R. Beeke and Paul M. Smalley

The Equality Act, Whomever He Wills & Rejoicing in Suffering from The Sword and The Trowel

Berkhof on the Purpose for the Return of Christ

The second coming of Jesus Christ will be for the purpose of judging the world and perfecting the salvation of His people. Men and angels, the living and the dead, will appear before Him to be judged according to the record which was kept of them, Matthew 24:30, 31; 25:31, 32. It will be a coming with terrible judgments upon the wicked, but also with blessings of eternal glory for the saints, Matthew 25:33-46. While He will sentence the wicked to everlasting punishment, He will publicly justify His own and lead them into the perfect joy of His eternal Kingdom. This will signalize the completed victory of Jesus Christ.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology

Around The Web-April 17, 2019

50% off Reformed Systematic Theology by Joel Beeke and Paul Smalley

How to Read the Old Testament in a Christ-Centered Way (Bryan Chapell) from Crossway

Brian Hedges– The Story of His Glory from Equipping You In Grace

Whiteness from Just Thinking

Does Grace Still Amaze You? by Randy Alcorn

Is Justification in the Old Testament? from Credo Magazine

Must women really keep silent in the churches? by Denny Burk

Whiteness, Blackness, Christless by Samuel Sey

The Devil Didn’t Think He Won on Good Friday (Sorry, Preachers) by Jeff Medders

Around The Web-April 12, 2019

Living for Jesus in a Digital World with Dave Jenkins from the Reasonable Theology podcast

Just Thinking podcast on the Resurrection of Jesus

Christ Our Ransom by Jared C Wilson

3 Reasons Christians Cannot Commit the Unforgivable Sin

Commitments of a Great Commission Church by H.B. Charles, Jr

When Churches Can’t Do Everything by Kevin DeYoung

Expiation and Propitiation by Michael Morales

Why We Need Systematic Theology by Joel R. Beeke and Paul M. Smalley

The Necessity of the Two Natures in Christ

Many do not recognize the necessity of assuming two natures in Christ. To them Jesus is but a man; yet at the same time they feel constrained to ascribe to Him the value of a God, or to claim divinity for Him in virtue of the immanence of God in Him, or of the indwelling Spirit. The necessity of the two natures in Christ follows from what is essential to the Scriptural doctrine of the atonement.

The necessity of His manhood.

Since man sinned, it was necessary that the penalty should be borne by man. Moreover, the paying of the penalty involved suffering of body and soul, such as only man is capable of bearing, John 12:27; Acts 3:18; Hebrews 2:14; 9:22. It was necessary that Christ should assume human nature, not only with all its essential properties, but also with all the infirmities to which it is liable after the fall, and should thus descend to the depths of degradation to which man had fallen, Hebrews 2:17, 18. At the same time, He had to be a sinless man, for a man who was himself a sinner and who had forfeited his own life, certainly could not atone for others, Hebrews 7:26. Only such a truly human Mediator, who had experimental knowledge of the woes of mankind and rose superior to all temptations, could enter sympathetically into all the experiences, the trials, and the temptations of man, Hebrews 2:17, 18; 4:15-5:2, and be a perfect human example for His followers, Matthew 11:29; Mark 10:39; John 13:13-15; Philippians 2:5-8; Hebrews 12:2-4; 1 Peter 2:21.

The necessity of His Godhead.

In the divine plan of salvation it was absolutely essential that the Mediator should also be very God. This was necessary, in order that (1) He might bring a sacrifice of infinite value and render perfect obedience to the law of God; (2) He might bear the wrath of God redemptively, that is, so as to free others from the curse of the law; and (3) He might be able to apply the fruits of His accomplished work to those who accepted Him by faith. Man with his bankrupt life can neither pay the penalty of sin, nor render perfect obedience to God. He can bear the wrath of God and, except for the redeeming grace of God, will have to bear it eternally, but he cannot bear it so as to open a way of escape, Psalm 49:7-10; 130:3.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology

Berkhof on Creationism

This view is to the effect that each individual soul is to be regarded as an immediate creation of God, owing its origin to a direct creative act, of which the time cannot be precisely determined. The soul is supposed to be created pure, but united with a depraved body. This need not necessarily mean that the soul is created first in separation from the body, and then polluted by being brought in contact with the body, which would seem to assume that sin is something physical. It may simply mean that the soul, though called into being by a creative act of God, yet is pre-formed in the psychical life of the fœtus, that is, in the life of the parents, and thus acquires its life not above and outside of, but under and in, that complex of sin by which humanity as a whole is burdened.

Arguments in favor of Creationism.

The following are the more important considerations in favor of this theory:

(1) It is more consistent with the prevailing representations of Scripture than Traducianism. The original account of creation points to a marked distinction between the creation of the body and that of the soul. The one is taken from the earth, while the other comes directly from God. This distinction is kept up throughout the Bible, where body and soul are not only represented as different substances, but also as having different origins, Ecclesiastes 12:7; Isaiah 42:5; Zechariah 12:1; Hebrews 12:9. Cf. Numbers 16:22. Of the passage in Hebrews even Delitzsch, though a Traducianist, says, "There can hardly be a more classical proof text for creationism."

(2) It is clearly far more consistent with the nature of the human soul than Traducianism. The immaterial and spiritual, and therefore indivisible nature of the soul of man, generally admitted by all Christians, is clearly recognized by Creationism. The traducian theory on the other hand, posits a derivation of essence, which, as is generally admitted, necessarily implies separation or division of essence.

(3) It avoids the pitfalls of Traducianism in Christology and does greater justice to the Scriptural representation of the person of Christ. He was very man, possessing a true human nature, a real body and a rational soul, was born of a woman, was made in all points like as we are—and yet, without sin. He did not, like all other men, share in the guilt and pollution of Adam's transgression. This was possible, because he did not share the same numerical essence which sinned in Adam.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology

Scriptural Proof for the Doctrine of Creation

The Scriptural proof for the doctrine of creation is not found in a single and limited portion of the Bible, but is found in every part of the Word of God. It does not consist of a few scattered passages of doubtful interpretation, but of a large number of clear and unequivocal statements, which speak of the creation of the world as a historical fact.

We have first of all the extended narrative of creation found in the first two chapters of Genesis, which will be discussed in detail when the creation of the material universe is considered. These chapters certainly appear to the unbiased reader as a historical narrative, and as the record of a historical fact. And the many cross-references scattered throughout the Bible do not regard them in any other light. They all refer to creation as a fact of history. The various passages in which they are found may be classified as follows:

(1) Passages which stress the omnipotence of God in the work of creation, Isaiah 40:26, 28; Amos 4:13.

(2) Passages which point to His exaltation above nature as the great and infinite God, Psalm 90:2; 102:26, 27; Acts 17:24.

(3) Passages which refer to the wisdom of God in the work of creation, Isaiah 40:12-14; Jeremiah 10:12-16; John 1:3.

(4) Passages regarding creation from the point of view of God's sovereignty and purpose in creation, Isaiah 43:7; Romans 1:25.

(5) Passages that speak of creation as a fundamental work of God, 1 Corinthians 11:9; Colossians 1:16. One of the fullest and most beautiful statements is that found in Nehemiah 9:6: "Thou art Jehovah, even thou alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth and all things that are thereon, the seas and all that is in them, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee." This passage is typical of several other, less extensive, passages that are found in the Bible, which emphasize the fact that Jehovah is the Creator of the universe, Isaiah 42:5; 45:18; Colossians 1:16; Revelation 4:11; 10:6.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology

The Deity of the Holy Spirit

The deity of the Holy Spirit may be established from Scripture by a line of proof quite similar to that employed in connection with the Son:

(1) Divine names are given to Him, Exodus 17:7 (Hebrews 3:7-9); Acts 5:3, 4; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 2 Timothy 3:16 (2 Peter 1:21).

(2) Divine perfections are ascribed to Him, such as omnipresence, Psalm 139:7-10, omniscience, Isaiah 40:13, 14 (comp. Romans 11:34); 1 Corinthians 2:10, 11, omnipotence, 1 Corinthians 12:11; Romans 15:19, and eternity, Hebrews 9:14 (?).

(3) Divine works are performed by Him, such as creation, Genesis 1:2; Job 26:13; 33:4, providential renovation, Psalm 104:30, regeneration, John 3:5, 6; Titus 3:5, and the resurrection of the dead, Romans 8:11.

(4) Divine honour is also paid to Him, Matthew 28:19; Romans 9:1; 2 Corinthians 13:13.

Adapted from Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology