So I finished Morey's book about a week ago (finally) and I was just as unimpressed upon completion as I was initially. Don't get me wrong, it's a great book for beginners. Anyone who is not at all familiar with the doctrine of the Trinity should pick up a copy, but anyone who has studied the subject at length will find themselves less than thrilled with the work.
Some of my major problems with the book were mentioned in my last post about it, but to add to those I would include Morey's treatment of the Granville Sharp rule. He wrongly applies it to many texts and actually makes himself look worse for doing so than had he not mentioned it at all. Another annoyance was the Greek and Hebrew texts that appeared throughout the book. They were completely unecessary and took up space that could have been saved had he simply put the relevant original language words in parenthesis in the Englsih text. I can only speculate that he wanted to make the book seem longer than it actually was.
Morey constantly referred to the Persons of God as "separate" which bothers me to no end. The reason being that if a "separation" exists then it leads to tri-theism whether we want to admit it or not. This is one of the main reasons that the doctrine of the Trinity is misrepresented by those who oppose it, because many times those advocating it use language that undermines the doctrine altogether. Now someone might read this and say, "well, if they aren't 'separate' Persons then you are advocating modalism." -- Not at all... I recognize a DISTINCTION between the Three Persons of God who exist simultaneously and share the nature of deity. But just because all things that are separate are distinct, doesn't mean that all things that are distinct are separate. For instance, a coin and its inscription are distinct from one another, yet they are not separate. They share the same being yet are completely distinguishable from one another. The inscription makes the coin and its value known (hint: study the word 'charakter' as used in Hebrews 1:3 sometime).
Then there's the times when Morey spoke from his view as a Calvinist and represented it as the universal view of Christianity. There were also many typographical errors which are more than likely the fault of the publisher, but still it would be nice to see them corrected. All in all, I'd recommend this book to the newly born again believer or the budding apologist. But I recommend it with the warning that there is more to the Trinity and to defending the doctrine than appears in this volume. I wish someone would have shared those words with me before I purchased the book. Everyone I spoke to told me that it was the best book on the subject that they had ever read. I'm starting to wonder if it is the only book on the subject they have ever read.
If I had to rate this book with thumbs I'd give it 1 up... If I were using stars then it would get 3 out of 5... If at all possible, borrow the book from a friend or check it out at your local library. If you have to purchase it then get the cheapest one you can find.
