# What is God?



## JoelYrick (Jun 8, 2008)

Why does the Westminster Shorter Catechism ask the question, "What is God?" instead of, "Who is God?"

I've had family members press me on this when I started memorizing the catechism, and I didn't have a satisfying answer. If someone could point me towards an answer, it would be much appreciated!


----------



## blhowes (Jun 8, 2008)

JoelYrick said:


> Why does the Westminster Shorter Catechism ask the question, "What is God?" instead of, "Who is God?"
> 
> I've had family members press me on this when I started memorizing the catechism, and I didn't have a satisfying answer. If someone could point me towards an answer, it would be much appreciated!


Here's what I found googling:


> In 325, the Council of Nicaea adopted a term for the relationship between the Son and the Father that from then on was seen as the hallmark of orthodoxy; it declared that the Son is "of the same substance" as the Father. This was further developed into the formula "three persons, one substance". The answer to the question "*What is God?*" indicates the one-ness of the divine nature, while the answer to the question "*Who is God*?" indicates the three-ness of "Father, Son and Holy Spirit". Saint Athanasius, who was a participant in the Council, stated that the bishops were forced to use this terminology, which is not found in Scripture, because the Biblical phrases that they would have preferred to use were claimed by the Arians to be capable of being interpreted in what the bishops considered to be a heretical sense.They therefore "commandeered the non-scriptural term homoousios ('of one substance') in order to safeguard the essential relation of the Son to the Father that had been denied by Arius."


----------



## DTK (Jun 8, 2008)

blhowes said:


> In 325, the Council of Nicaea...Saint Athanasius, who was a participant in the Council, stated that the bishops were forced to use this terminology, which is not found in Scripture, because the Biblical phrases that they would have preferred to use were claimed by the Arians to be capable of being interpreted in what the bishops considered to be a heretical sense.They therefore "commandeered the non-scriptural term homoousios ('of one substance') in order to safeguard the essential relation of the Son to the Father that had been denied by Arius."


If I may offer one correction (and I know this came from a second hand source), Athanasius was not a participant at the Council of Nicaea. I have seen this assumption repeated many times. But he played no part in the deliberations of this council. He was there as an assistant to Alexander of Alexandria (a personal aid of sorts), and did succeed Alexander as bishop of Alexandria in 327 A.D (the year Alexander died), probably largely due to Alexander's commendation of him. What is true is that Athanasius was a staunch defender of the Nicene Creed in the years to come following that council. But he did not play a part in the deliberations and formulations of the Council of Nicaea.

DTK


----------



## blhowes (Jun 8, 2008)

Thanks for the correction.


----------



## non dignus (Jun 8, 2008)

The question should be changed to "Who is God?". Such subtleties do not have place in the shorter catechism, in my opinion. I think it is misleading.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jun 8, 2008)

I did a little (unscientific, incomplete) survey of catechisms on this point and found some that say "What is God?" and some that say "Who is God?"

What is God?
William Gouge's Brief Method of Catechising
Ezekiel Rogers' Chief Grounds of Christian Religion
Samuel Rutherford's Catechism: "Quhot is God in his nature?"
Thomas Wyllie's Catechism: "Quhot is God in himself?"
James Ussher's Principles of the Christian Religion
Abraham Hellenbroek, A Specimen Of Divine Truths

Who is God?
John Cotton's Milk for Babes
L.G.C. Ledeboer's Simple Catechism Questions for Children
Catechism for Young Children: "Q. Who made you? A. God."


----------



## Arch2k (Jun 8, 2008)

The answer to the question "Who is God" would be Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the persons of the Trinity. In distinguishing between essence, and persons, the Westminster Assembly rightly In my humble opinion asks "What is God" (Q. 4)before asking "Who is God" (Q. 6). This maintains the distinction between how God is one and three.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Jun 8, 2008)

Jeff_Bartel said:


> The answer to the question "Who is God" would be Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the persons of the Trinity. In distinguishing between essence, and persons, the Westminster Assembly rightly In my humble opinion asks "What is God" (Q. 4)before asking "Who is God" (Q. 6). This maintains the distinction between how God is one and three.



Since Q.4 is concerned with the attributes of God, then "What is God" seems entirely appropriate in the context.


----------



## staythecourse (Jun 8, 2008)

The Logic of developing the confession would have changed with "who" is God. God is a Person. Then the next logical question is "Tell me about this Person. What's he like" 

So in my view, they skipped a superfluous question and got to the meat quicker by, as Daniel says, getting to the attributes.


----------



## JoelYrick (Jun 9, 2008)

Thanks for all the helpful replies. I guess the concern had been that it made God sound like an object or distant deity.


----------

