m the
Lord. By it the Lord is united with the church, and heaven is present, as
was shown in _Doctrine of the New Jerusalem about Sacred Scripture_ (nn.
62-69). The Lord and heaven are present wherever the Word is read as
sacred. This is the end which divine providence has pursued in the
preservation and in the dispersal of the Jews over much of the world. On
the nature of their lot after death see _Continuation about the Last
Judgment and the Spiritual World_ (nn. 79-82).

261. These then are the objections listed above at n. 238 by which the
natural man confirms himself against divine providence, or may do so.
Still other objections, listed at n. 239, may serve the natural man for
arguments against divine providence; they may occur to the minds of
others, too, and excite doubts. They are the following.

262. _Doubt may be raised against divine providence in that the whole of
Christendom worships one God under three persons, that is, three Gods,
and has not known hitherto that God is one in person and in essence, in
whom is the Trinity, and that this God is the Lord._ One who reasons
about divine providence may ask, Are not three persons three Gods if each
person by himself is God? Who can think of it otherwise? In fact, who
does? Athanasius himself could not; therefore it is said in the Creed
which bears his name:

Although in Christian verity we ought to acknowledge each Person as God
and Lord, yet by Christian faith it is not allowable to affirm or to name
three Gods or three Lords.

This can only mean that we ought to acknowledge three Gods and Lords, but
it is not allowable to affirm or name three Gods and three Lords.

[2] Who can possibly have a perception of one God unless He is one in
person? If it is said that such a concept is possible if one thinks of
the three as having one essence, does one, indeed can one, have any other
idea than that they are thus of one mind and agree, and yet are three
Gods? Thinking more deeply, one asks oneself, How can the divine essence,
which is infinite, be divided? Further, how can divine essence from
eternity beget another and produce still another who proceeds from them
both? It may be said that it is to be believed and not thought about; but
who does not think about what he is told must be believed? How else can
there be any acknowledgment which in its essence is faith? Was it not
because of the concept of God as three persons that Socinianism and
Arianism arose, which