The
Christian doctrine of the
Trinity defines
God as three divine persons or
hypostases:
[1]
the
Father,
the
Son (
Jesus Christ),
and the
Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons".
The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".
[2] A nature is
what one is, while a person is
who one is.
[3][4][5]
The Trinity is considered to be a
mystery of
Christian faith.
[6]
According to this
doctrine, there is only one God in three persons.
Each person is God, whole and entire. They are distinct from one another
in their relations of origin: as the
Fourth Lateran Council
declared, "it is the Father who generates, the Son who is begotten, and
the Holy Spirit who proceeds".
While distinct in their relations with
one another, they are one in all else.
The whole work of creation and
grace is a single operation common to all three divine persons, who at
the same time operate according to their unique properties, so that all
things are from the Father, through the Son and in the Holy Spirit.
[6]
The three persons are co-equal, co-eternal and
consubstantial.
Trinitarianism (one deity in three persons) contrasts with
nontrinitarian positions which include
Binitarianism (one deity in two persons, or two deities),
Unitarianism (one deity in one person, analogous to Jewish interpretation of the
Shema and Muslim belief in
Tawhid),
Oneness Pentecostalism or
Modalism (one deity manifested in three separate aspects), and
social trinitarianism (three persons united by mutual love and accord).
Okay, clear so far? lol; Let's get into it??
Contents
Etymology
The English word "Trinity" is derived from
Latin "
Trinitas," meaning "the number three, a triad".
[7] This abstract noun is formed from the adjective "
trinus" (three each, threefold, triple),
[8] as the word "
unitas" is the abstract noun formed from "
unus" (one).
The corresponding word in
Greek is "
Τριάς," meaning "a set of three" or "the number three".
[9]
The first recorded use of this Greek word in Christian theology (though not about the Divine Trinity) was by
Theophilus of Antioch in about 170. He wrote:
[10][11]
"In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity [Τριάδος], of God, and His Word, and His wisdom. And the fourth is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, the Word, wisdom, man."[12]
Tertullian, a Latin theologian who wrote in the early 3rd century, is credited as being the first to use the Latin words "Trinity",
[13] "person" and "substance"
[14] to explain that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are "one in essence—not one in Person."
[15]
History
The
Ante-Nicene Fathers
affirmed Christ's deity and spoke of "Father, Son and Holy Spirit".
even though their language is not that of the traditional doctrine as
formalised in the fourth century. Trinitarians view these as elements of
the codified doctrine.
[16]
Ignatius of Antioch provides early support for the Trinity around 110,
[17] exhorting obedience to "Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit."
[18]
Justin Martyr
(AD 100–ca.165) also writes, "in the name of God, the Father and Lord
of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy
Spirit."
[19]
The first of the early church fathers to be recorded using the word "Trinity" was
Theophilus of Antioch writing in the late 2nd century. He defines the Trinity as God, His Word (
Logos) and His Wisdom (
Sophia)
[20]
in the context of a discussion of the first three days of creation.
The
first defence of the doctrine of the Trinity was in the early 3rd
century by the early church father
Tertullian.
He explicitly defined the Trinity as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and
defended the Trinitarian theology against the "Praxean" heresy.
[21]
Although there is much debate as to whether the beliefs of the
Apostles were merely articulated and explained in the Trinitarian Creeds,
[22] or were corrupted and replaced with new beliefs,
[23][24]
all scholars recognize that the Creeds themselves were created in
reaction to disagreements over the nature of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit. These controversies, however, were great and many, and took some
centuries to be resolved.
Of these controversies, the most significant developments were articulated in the first four centuries by the
Church Fathers[22] in reaction to
Adoptionism,
Sabellianism, and
Arianism.
Adoptionism was the belief that Jesus was an ordinary man, born of
Joseph and Mary, who became the Christ and Son of God at his baptism. In
269, the
Synods of Antioch condemned
Paul of Samosata for his Adoptionist theology, and also condemned the term
homoousios (ὁμοούσιος, "of the same being") in the sense he used it.
[25]
Sabellianism taught that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are
essentially one and the same, the difference being simply verbal,
describing different aspects or roles of a single being.
[26] For this view Sabellius was excommunicated for heresy in Rome c220.
In the fourth century, Arianism, as traditionally understood,
[note 1]
taught that the Father existed prior to Son who was not, by nature, God
but rather a changeable creature who was granted the dignity of
becoming "Son of God".
[27]
In 325, the
Council of Nicaea adopted the
Nicene Creed
which described Christ as "God of God, Light of Light, very God of very
God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father." The
creed used the term
homoousios (of one substance) to define the relationship between the Father and the Son. After more than fifty years of debate,
homoousios was recognised as the hallmark of orthodoxy, and was further developed into the formula of "three persons, one being".
Athanasius,
who was present at the Council as one of the Bishop of Alexandria's
assistants, 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.
[28] Moreover, the meanings of "
ousia" and "
hypostasis" overlapped then, so that "
hypostasis" for some meant "
essence" and for others "
person."
Athanasius of Alexandria (293–373) helped to separate the terms.
[29]
The Confession of the Council of Nicaea said little about the Holy Spirit.
[30] The doctrine of the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit was developed by Athanasius in the last decades of his life.
[31] He defended and refined the Nicene formula.
[30] By the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of
Basil of Caesarea,
Gregory of Nyssa, and
Gregory of Nazianzus (the
Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine had reached substantially its current form.
[30]
Theology
Trinitarian baptismal formula
In the
synoptic Gospels the
baptism of Jesus
is often interpreted as a manifestation of all three persons of the
Trinity: "And when Jesus was baptized, he went up immediately from the
water, and behold, the heavens were opened and he saw the spirit of God
descending like a dove, and alighting on him; and lo, a voice from
heaven, saying, 'This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.
'"
[Mt 3:16–17] Baptism is generally conferred with the Trinitarian formula, "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."[Mt 28:19]
Trinitarians identify this name with the Christian faith into which
baptism is an initiation, as seen for example in the statement of Basil the Great
(330–379): "We are bound to be baptized in the terms we have received,
and to profess faith in the terms in which we have been baptized." The First Council of Constantinople
(381) also says, "This is the Faith of our baptism that teaches us to
believe in the Name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
According to this Faith there is one Godhead, Power, and Being of the
Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." Matthew 28:19 may be taken to indicate that baptism was associated with this formula from the earliest decades of the Church's existence.
Nontrinitarian groups, such as
Oneness Pentecostals,
demur from the Trinitarian view on baptism. For them, the omission of
the formula in Acts outweighs all other considerations, and is a
liturgical guide for their own practice. For this reason, they often
focus on the baptisms in Acts, citing many
[which?] authoritative theological works.
[32] Those who place great emphasis on the baptisms in Acts often likewise question the authenticity of
Matthew 28:19 in its present form. Most scholars of New Testament
textual criticism
accept the authenticity of the passage, since there are no variant
manuscripts regarding the formula, and the extant form of the passage is
attested in the
Didache[33] and other
patristic works of the 1st and 2nd centuries:
Ignatius,
[34] Tertullian,
[35] Hippolytus,
[36] Cyprian,
[37] and
Gregory Thaumaturgus.
[38]
Commenting on
Matthew 28:19, Gerhard Kittel states:
- This threefold relation [of Father, Son and Spirit] soon found fixed expression in the triadic formulae in 2 Cor. 13:14 and in 1 Cor. 12:4–6. The form is first found in the baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19;
Did., 7. 1 and 3....[I]t is self-evident that Father, Son and Spirit
are here linked in an indissoluble threefold relationship.[39]
One God
Christianity, having emerged from
Judaism, is a monotheistic religion. Never in the New Testament does the trinitarian concept become a "
tritheism" (three Gods) nor even two.
[40] God is one, and that the Godhead is a single being is strongly declared in the Bible:
- The Shema of the Hebrew Scriptures: "Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one."[Deut 6:4]
- The first of the Ten Commandments—"Thou shalt have no other gods before me"[5:7].
- and "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel and his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God."[Isa 44:6]
- In the New Testament: "The Lord our God is one."[Mk 12:29]
In the Trinitarian view, the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost
share the one essence, substance or being. The central and crucial
affirmation of Christian faith is that there is one savior, God, and one
salvation, manifest in Jesus Christ, to which there is access only
because of the Holy Spirit. The God of the Old Testament is still the
same as the God of the New. In Christianity, statements about a single
God are intended to distinguish the Hebraic understanding from the
polytheistic view, which see divine power as shared by several beings, beings which can and do disagree and have conflicts with each other.
God in three persons
In Trinitarian doctrine, God exists as three
persons or
hypostases, but is one being, having a single divine nature.
[41] The members of the Trinity are co-equal and co-eternal, one in essence, nature, power, action, and will. As stated in the
Athanasian Creed, the Father is uncreated, the Son is uncreated, and the Holy Spirit is uncreated, and all three are eternal with no beginning.
[42] "The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" are not names for different parts of God, but one name for God
[43] because three persons exist in God as one entity.
[44]
They cannot be separate from one another. Each person is understood as
having the identical essence or nature, not merely similar natures.
[45]
God has always loved, and there has always existed perfectly
harmonious communion between the three persons of the Trinity. One
consequence of this teaching is that God could not have created man to
have someone to talk to or to love: God "already" enjoyed personal
communion; being perfect, he did not create man because of a lack or
inadequacy he had. Another consequence, according to Rev. Fr. Thomas
Hopko, an Eastern Orthodox theologian, is that if God were not a
Trinity, he could not have loved prior to creating other beings on whom
to bestow his love. Thus God says, "Let
us make man in
our
image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and
the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over
all the creatures that move along the ground. So God created man in his
own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he
created them."
[Gen 1:26–7]
For Trinitarians, emphasis in Genesis 1:26 is on the plurality in the
Deity, and in 1:27 on the unity of the divine Essence. A possible
interpretation of Genesis 1:26 is that God's relationships in the
Trinity are mirrored in man by the ideal relationship between husband
and wife, two persons becoming one flesh, as described in Eve's creation later in the next chapter.[2:22]
Perichoresis
Main article:
Perichoresis
from Greek ("going around", "envelopment") is a term used by some
theologians to describe the relationship between the members of the
Trinity. The Latin equivalent for this term is
circumincessio. This concept refers for its basis to
John 14–17,
where Jesus is instructing the disciples concerning the meaning of his
departure. His going to the Father, he says, is for their sake; so that
he might come to them when the "other comforter" is given to them. Then,
he says, his disciples will dwell in him, as he dwells in the Father,
and the Father dwells in him, and the Father will dwell in them. This is
so, according to the theory of perichoresis, because the persons of the
Trinity "reciprocally contain one another, so that one permanently
envelopes and is permanently enveloped by, the other whom he yet
envelopes". (
Hilary of Poitiers,
Concerning the Trinity 3:1).
[46]
Perichoresis effectively excludes the idea that God has parts, but rather is a
simple being.
It also harmonizes well with the doctrine that the Christian's union
with the Son in his humanity brings him into union with one who contains
in himself, in the
Apostle Paul's words, "all the fullness of deity" and not a part. (
See also: Divinization (Christian)).
Perichoresis provides an intuitive figure of what this might mean. The
Son, the eternal Word, is from all eternity the dwelling place of God;
he is the "Father's house," just as the Son dwells in the Father and the
Spirit; so that, when the Spirit is "given", then it happens as Jesus
said, "I will not leave you as orphans; for I will come to you."
[John 14:18]
According to the words of Jesus, married persons are in some sense no longer two but are joined into one.
[Mark 10:7–8] Therefore, Orthodox theologians also see the marriage relationship as an image, or "icon"
of the Trinity, relationships of communion in which, in the words of
St. Paul, participants are "members one of another". As with marriage,
the unity of the church with Christ is similarly considered in some
sense analogous to the unity of the Trinity, following the prayer of
Jesus to the Father, for the church, that "they may be one, even as we
are one".[John 17:22]
Eternal generation and procession
Trinitarianism affirms that the Son is "begotten" (or "generated") of
the Father and that the Spirit "proceeds" from the Father, but the
Father is "neither begotten nor proceeds". The argument over whether the
Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, or from the Father and the Son,
was one of the catalysts of the
Great Schism, in this case concerning the Western addition of the
Filioque clause to the
Nicene Creed. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that, in the sense of the
Latin verb
procedere (which does not have to indicate ultimate origin and is therefore compatible with proceeding
through), but not in that of the Greek verb ἐκπορεύεσθαι (which implies ultimate origin),
[47]
the Spirit "proceeds" from the Father and the Son, and the Eastern
Orthodox Church, which teaches that the Spirit "proceeds" from the
Father alone, has made no statement on the claim of a difference in
meaning between the two words, one Greek and one Latin, both of which
are translated as "proceeds". The
Eastern Orthodox Churches
object to the Filioque clause on ecclesiological and theological
grounds, holding that "from the Father" means "from the Father alone"
This language is often considered difficult because, if used
regarding humans or other created things, it would imply time and
change; when used here, no beginning, change in being, or process within
time is intended and is excluded. The Son is generated ("born" or
"begotten"), and the Spirit proceeds, eternally.
Augustine of Hippo
explains, "Thy years are one day, and Thy day is not daily, but today;
because Thy today yields not to tomorrow, for neither does it follow
yesterday. Thy today is eternity; therefore Thou begat the Co-eternal,
to whom Thou saidst, 'This day have I begotten Thee."
[Ps 2:7]
Most Protestant groups that use the creed also include the Filioque
clause. However, the issue is usually not controversial among them
because their conception is often less exact than is discussed above
[citation needed] (exceptions being the Presbyterian
Westminster Confession 2:3, the
London Baptist Confession 2:3, and the Lutheran
Augsburg Confession 1:1–6, which specifically address those issues).
Economic and ontological Trinity
The economic Trinity refers to the acts of the triune God with
respect to the creation, history, salvation, the formation of the
Church, the daily lives of believers, etc. and describes how the Trinity
operates within history in terms of the roles or functions performed by
each Person of the Trinity—God's relationship with creation. The
ontological (or essential or immanent) Trinity speaks of the interior
life of the Trinity
[John 1:1–2]—the reciprocal relationships of Father, Son, and Spirit to each other without reference to God's relationship with creation.
The ancient Nicene theologians argued that everything the Trinity
does is done by Father, Son, and Spirit working in unity with one will.
The three persons of the Trinity always work inseparably, for their work
is always the work of the one God. Because of this unity of will, the
Trinity cannot involve the eternal subordination of the Son to the
Father. Eternal subordination can only exist if the Son's will is at
least conceivably different from the Father's. But Nicene orthodoxy says
it is not. The Son's will cannot be different from the Father's because
it is the Father's. They have but one will as they have but one being.
Otherwise they would not be one God. If there were relations of command
and obedience between the Father and the Son, there would be no Trinity
at all but rather three gods.
[48]
On this point St. Basil observes "When then He says, 'I have not spoken
of myself,' and again, 'As the Father said unto me, so I speak,' and
'The word which ye hear is not mine, but [the Father's] which sent me,'
and in another place, 'As the Father gave me commandment, even so I do,'
it is not because He lacks deliberate purpose or power of initiation,
nor yet because He has to wait for the preconcerted key-note, that he
employs language of this kind. His object is to make it plain that His
own will is connected in indissoluble union with the Father. Do not then
let us understand by what is called a 'commandment' a peremptory
mandate delivered by organs of speech, and giving orders to the Son, as
to a subordinate, concerning what He ought to do. Let us rather, in a
sense befitting the Godhead, perceive a transmission of will, like the
reflexion of an object in a mirror, passing without note of time from
Father to Son."
[49]
In explaining why the Bible speaks of the Son as being subordinate to
the Father, the great theologian Athanasius argued that scripture gives
a "double account" of the son of God—one of his temporal and voluntary
subordination in the incarnation, and the other of his eternal divine
status.
[50]
For Athanasius, the Son is eternally one in being with the Father,
temporally and voluntarily subordinate in his incarnate ministry. Such
human traits, he argued, were not to be read back into the eternal
Trinity.
Like Athanasius, the Cappadocian Fathers also insisted there was no
economic inequality present within the Trinity. As Basil wrote: "We
perceive the operation of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be one and
the same, in no respect showing differences or variation; from this
identity of operation we necessarily infer the unity of nature."
[51]
Augustine also rejected an economic hierarchy within the Trinity. He
claimed that the three persons of the Trinity "share the inseparable
equality one substance present in divine unity".
[52]
Because the three persons are one in their inner life, this means that
for Augustine their works in the world are one. For this reason, it is
an impossibility for Augustine to speak of the Father commanding and the
Son obeying as if there could be a conflict of wills within the eternal
Trinity.
John Calvin also spoke at length about the doctrine of the Trinity. Like Athanasius and Augustine before him, he concluded that
Philippians 2:4–11
prescribed how scripture was to be read correctly. For him the Son's
obedience is limited to the incarnation and is indicative of his true
humanity assumed for human salvation.
[53]
Much of this work is summed up in the Athanasian Creed. This creed
stresses the unity of the Trinity and the equality of the persons. It
ascribes equal divinity, majesty, and authority to all three persons.
All three are said to be "almighty" and "Lord" (no subordination in
authority; "none is before or after another" (no hierarchical ordering);
and "none is greater, or less than another" (no subordination in being
or nature). Thus, since the divine persons of the Trinity act with one
will, there is no possibility of hierarchy-inequality in the Trinity.
Catholic theologian
Karl Rahner went so far as to say:
"The 'economic' Trinity is the 'immanent' Trinity and the 'immanent' Trinity is the 'economic' Trinity."[54]
Logical coherence
In Christian tradition the Trinity is a mystery of faith revealed in
scripture, beyond human understanding. Theological explanations thus
tend to lack or avoid a logical or philosophical foundation. In his
explanation of the doctrine of the Trinity,
Augustine pointed out that Jesus spoke in similitudes and would later reveal the Father more plainly.
[55]
Despite his lengthy exposition to explain the Trinity in light of
scripture, Augustine states that an explanation is beyond human
language, and that the definition of the Trinity as three persons is but
a similitude needed in order to express it.
[56] Augustine concludes that one must believe before one understands, and that the Trinity must remain unknown.
[57] After this conclusion Augustine then attempted to describe analogies of the Trinity in love itself and in the mind of man.
Hilary of Poitiers
stressed that as God is infinite, eternal and omnipresent, his true
nature is unfathomable, and that "words cannot describe Him." He notes
that scripture states no one knows the Father except the Son.
[58]
As to how the Son could be begotten, and yet not be created, he admits
that it is a mystery, and confesses his ignorance at understanding it,
for the Son had not yet made revelation concerning this matter.
[59]
When Jesus said that He and His Father are one, he interprets it as one
nature, but two persons. Again it is a mystery: "There cannot be one
Person only, for He speaks not of Himself; and, conversely, They cannot
be separate and divided when the One speaks through the voice of the
Other. These words are the revelation of the mystery of Their unity."
[60] Because they share one nature the doctrine is "guiltless of ditheism."
[61]
Beginning around the 12th century, theology began to be influenced by
Scholasticism, which is a method based on
dialectical reasoning. This can be seen in the works of
Thomas Aquinas,
who thought that both faith and reason are necessary in Christian
theology. The names of Father, Son and Holy Spirit signify the
procession or emanation of the Divine. This act of procession is
comparable to how an idea is conceived in the intellect; and this came
forth from God as the Word. This can only be understood via similitudes,
and not literally understood through material bodies.
[62] Moreover, there are two processions in God, one of the intellect (the Word) and one of the will or love.
[63] In regards to the Trinity of persons, Aquinas lists the following objection:
"It would seem that there are not several persons in God. For person is the individual substance of a rational nature. If then there are several persons in God, there must be several substances; which appears to be heretical."[64]
In answer to this objection, he redefines the word "person" as "a relation subsisting in the Divine nature."
[65] Thus properties found in God, such as goodness and wisdom, are distinguishable, but subsist together as one.
[65]
But then Aquinas comes to the question, Why three? And, three what? To
the first question, he answers because scripture says so, and to the
second question, he answers "three persons."
[66]
In contrast to
Joachim of Fiore's
historicization of the Trinity, there have been recent philosophical
attempts to defend the logical coherency of Trinity by men such as
Peter Geach. Regarding the formulation suggested by Geach, not all philosophers would agree with its logical coherency.
[citation needed]
Geach suggested that "a coherent statement of the doctrine is possible
on the assumption that identity is "always relative to a sortal term".
[67]
The Canadian philosopher-theologian,
Bernard Lonergan,
attempted to argue for the logical coherency of the Trinity by analogy
with the operations of the human subject (the psychological analogy).
[citation needed]
It is chiefly in his work "The Triune God: Systematics" that he draws
on his abstract phenomenology to attempt to show this logical inner
coherency in the Trinity doctrine.
[citation needed] He saw himself as doing nothing more than standing in the tradition of
Augustine and
Aquinas on this issue and not based on the Bible.
Biblical background
From the
Old Testament the
early church retained the conviction that
God is one.
[68] The
New Testament does not use the word
Τριάς (Trinity)
[69]
nor explicitly teach the Nicene trinitarian doctrine, but there are
several passages which use twofold and threefold patterns to speak of
God. Binitarian passages include
Rom. 8:11,
2 Cor. 4:14,
Galatians 1:1,
Eph. 1:20,
1 Tim. 1:2,
1 Pet. 1:21, and
2 John 1:13. Passages which refer to the Godhead with a threefold pattern include
Matt. 28:19,
1 Cor. 6:11 and 12:4ff.,
Gal. 3:11–14,
Heb. 10:29, and
1 Pet. 1:2. These passages provided the material with which Christians would develop doctrines of the Trinity.
[68] Reflection by early Christians on passages such as the
Great Commission: "Go therefore and make
disciples of all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"
[Matt 28:19] and Paul the Apostle's blessing: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all,"[2 Cor. 13:14] while at the same time the Jewish Shema Yisrael: "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one."[Deuteronomy 6:4][70]
led the early Christians to question how the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit are "one". Later, the diverse references to God, Jesus, and the
Spirit found in the New Testament were systematized into a Trinity—one
God subsisting in three persons and one substance—to combat heretical
tendencies of how the three are related and to defend the church against
charges of worshiping two or three gods.[71]
Some scholars dispute the idea that support for the Trinity can be
found in the Bible, and argue that the doctrine is the result of
theological interpretations rather than sound
exegesis of scripture.
[72][73]
The concept was expressed in early writings from the beginning of the
2nd century forward, and other scholars hold that the way the New
Testament repeatedly speaks of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit
is such as to require one to accept a trinitarian understanding.
[40]
The
Comma Johanneum,
1 John 5:7,
is a disputed text which states: "For there are three that bear record
in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are
one." However, this passage is not considered to be part of the genuine
text,
[75] and most scholars agree that the phrase was a
gloss.
[76]
Jesus as God
The
Gospel of John has been seen as especially aimed at emphasizing Jesus' divinity, presenting Jesus as the
Logos,
pre-existent and divine, from its first words, "In the beginning was
the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
[John 1:1][77] The Gospel of John ends with Thomas's apparent confession of faith to Jesus, "My Lord and my God!"[John 20:28][71] There is no significant tendency among modern scholars to deny that John 1:1 and John 20:28 identify Jesus with God.[78] John also portrays Jesus as the agent of creation of the universe[79]
There are also a few possible biblical supports for the divinity of Jesus found in the
Synoptic Gospels. The Gospel of Matthew, for example, quotes Jesus as saying, "all things have been handed over to me by my Father".
[Mt 11:27] This is similar to John, who wrote that Jesus said, "All that the Father has is mine".[John 16:15]
These verses have been quoted to defend the omnipotence of Christ,
having all power, as well as the omniscience of Christ, having all
wisdom.
Expressions also in the
Pauline epistles
have been interpreted as attributing divinity to Jesus. They include:
"For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth,
visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or
authorities; all things were created by him and for him"
[Colossians 1:16] and "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form",[Colossians 2:9] and in Paul the Apostle's claim to have been "sent not from men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father".[Galatians 1:1][80]
Some have suggested that John presents a hierarchy when he quotes Jesus as saying, "The Father is greater than I",
[14:28] a statement which was appealed to by non-trinitarian groups such as Arianism.[81]
However, Church Fathers such as Augustine of Hippo argued this statement was to be understood as Jesus speaking in the form of a man.[82]
Holy Spirit as God
As the Arian controversy was dwindling down, the debate moved from
the deity of Jesus Christ to the equality of the Holy Spirit with the
Father and Son. On one hand, the
Pneumatomachi sect declared that the Holy Spirit was an inferior person to the Father and Son. On the other hand, the
Cappadocian Fathers argued that the Holy Spirit was an equal person to the Father and Son.
Although the main text used in defense of the deity of the Holy Spirit was Matthew 28:19, Cappadocian Fathers such as
Basil the Great
argued from other verses such as "But Peter said, 'Ananias, why has
Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back for
yourself part of the proceeds of the land? While it remained unsold, did
it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your
disposal? Why is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You
have not lied to men but to God.'"
[Acts 5:3–4][83]
Another passage the Cappadocian Fathers quoted from was "By the word
of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all
their host."
[Psalm 33:6]
According to their understanding, because "breath" and "spirit" in
Hebrew are both "רוּחַ" ("ruach"), Psalm 33:6 is revealing the roles of
the Son and Holy Spirit as co-creators. And since, according to them,[83] because the holy God can only create holy beings such as the angels, the Son and Holy Spirit must be God.
Yet another argument from the Cappadocian Fathers to prove that the
Holy Spirit is of the same nature as the Father and Son comes from "For
who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is
in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the
Spirit of God."
[1Cor. 2:11] They reasoned that this passage proves that the Holy Spirit has the same relationship to God as the spirit within us has to us.[83]
The Cappadocian Fathers also quoted, "Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you?"
[1Cor. 3:16]
and reasoned that it would be blasphemous for an inferior being to take
up residence in a temple of God, thus proving that the Holy Spirit is
equal with the Father and the Son.[84]
They also combined "the servant does not know what his master is doing"
[John 15:15] with 1 Corinthians 2:11 in an attempt to show that the Holy Spirit is not the slave of God, and therefore his equal.[85]
The Pneumatomachi contradicted the Cappadocian Fathers by quoting,
"Are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of
those who are to inherit salvation?",
[Hebrews 1:14] in effect arguing that the Holy Spirit is no different than other created angelic spirits.[86]
The Church Fathers disagreed, saying that the Holy Spirit is greater
than the angels, since the Holy Spirit is the one who grants the
foreknowledge for prophecy[1Cor. 12:8–10] so that the angels could announce events to come.[83]
Old Testament foreshadowing
In addition, the
Old Testament has also been interpreted as foreshadowing the Trinity,
[87] by referring to God's word,
[Ps 33:6] his spirit,[Isa 61:1] and Wisdom,[Prov 9:1] as well as narratives such as the appearance of the three men to Abraham.[Gen 18][88]
However, it is generally agreed that it would go beyond the intention
and spirit of the Old Testament to correlate these notions directly with
later Trinitarian doctrine.[89][90]
Some Church Fathers believed that a knowledge of the mystery was
granted to the prophets and saints of the Old Testament, and that they
identified the divine messenger of
Genesis 16:7,
21:17,
31:11,
Exodus 3:2 and Wisdom of the sapiential books with the Son, and "the spirit of the Lord" with the Holy Spirit.
[89] Other Church Fathers, such as
Gregory Nazianzen, argued in his
Orations
that the revelation was gradual, claiming that the Father was
proclaimed in the Old Testament openly, but the Son only obscurely,
because "it was not safe, when the Godhead of the Father was not yet
acknowledged, plainly to proclaim the Son."
[91]
Genesis 18–19 has been interpreted by Christians as a Trinitarian text.
[92] The narrative has the Lord appearing to Abraham, who was visited by three men.
[Gen 18:1–2] Then in Genesis 19, "the two angels" visited Lot
at Sodom. The interplay between Abraham on the one hand, and the
Lord/three men/the two angels on the other was an intriguing text for
those who believed in a single God in three persons. Justin Martyr, and John Calvin similarly, interpreted it such that Abraham was visited by God, who was accompanied by two angels.[93]
Justin supposed that the God who visited Abraham was distinguishable
from the God who remains in the heavens, but was nevertheless identified
as the (monotheistic) God. Justin appropriated the God who visited
Abraham to Jesus, the second person of the Trinity.
Augustine, in contrast, held that the three visitors to Abraham were the three persons of the Trinity.
[93] He saw no indication that the visitors were unequal, as would be the case in Justin's reading. Then in
Genesis 19, two of the visitors were addressed by Lot in the singular: "Lot said to them, 'Not so, my lord.
'"
[Gen 19:18 KJV][93] Augustine saw that Lot could address them as one because they had a single substance, despite the plurality of persons.[94] Some Christians see indications in the Old Testament of a plurality and unity in God, an idea that is rejected by Judaism.
According to
Swedenborg,
the three angels which appeared to Abraham do represent the Trinity,
but a Trinity of one being: the Divine Itself, the Divine Human and the
Divine Proceeding. That one being is represented is indicated by the
fact that they are referred to in the singular as Jehovah and Lord.
[95]
The reason why only two of the angels went to visit Sodom and Gomorrah
is that they represent the Divine Human and the Divine Proceeding, and
to those aspects of the Divine belongs judgment, as Jesus declared that
all judgment was entrusted by the Father to the Son
John 5:22.
[96]
The three angels did indeed appear to Abraham as three men, but they
are only a symbolic representation of the Trinity, which should not be
taken literally as three distinct persons. In the Old Testament,
Swedenborg finds the earliest direct reference to a Trine in the
Divinity in the account of Moses' encounter with the Lord in Exodus
which states, "And Jehovah passed by upon his face, and called, Jehovah,
Jehovah, a God merciful and gracious."
Exodus 34:6[97]
Some Christians interpret the
theophanies or appearances of the
Angel of the Lord as revelations of a person distinct from God, who is nonetheless called God.
[98] This interpretation is found in Christianity as early as
Justin Martyr and
Melito of Sardis, and reflects ideas that were already present in
Philo.
[99] The Old Testament theophanies were thus seen as
Christophanies, each a "preincarnate appearance of the Messiah".
[100]
Non-orthodoxy
Non-orthodox views of the Christian trinitarian God have also been suggested by
process theologians like Lewis S. Ford, who endorse the entitative view of God as timeless and eternal
concrescence, but interpret the
Whiteheadian
natures of God (primordial nature, consequent nature, and superjective
nature) in a trinitarian way. Other process theologians like
Joseph A. Bracken consider the three divines persons, each understood in the Neo-Whiteheadian societal view of God sensu
Charles Hartshorne and
David Ray Griffin, as constituting a primordial field of divine activity.
Artistic depictions
Main article:
Trinity in art
Holy Trinity,
fresco by Luca Rossetti da Orta, 1738–9 (St. Gaudenzio Church at
Ivrea).
The Trinity is most commonly seen in Christian art with the Spirit
represented by a dove, as specified in the Gospel accounts of the
Baptism of Christ;
he is nearly always shown with wings outspread. However depictions
using three human figures appear occasionally in most periods of art.
[101]
By the end of the 15th century, larger representations, other than
the Throne of Mercy, became effectively standardised, showing an older
figure in plain robes for the Father, Christ with his torso partly bare
to display the wounds of his Passion, and the dove above or around them.
In earlier representations both Father, especially, and Son often wear
elaborate robes and crowns. Sometimes the Father alone wears a crown, or
even a
papal tiara.
Nontrinitarianism
Nontrinitarianism (or antitrinitarianism) refers to monotheistic
belief systems, primarily within Christianity, which reject the doctrine
of the Trinity. Nontrinitarian views differ widely on the nature of
God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Various nontrinitarian views, such as
Adoptionism, Monarchianism and Arianism existed prior to the formal
definition of the Trinity doctrine in 325, 360, and 431 AD, at the
Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, and Ephesus.
[102] Nontrinitarianism was later renewed in the
Gnosticism of the
Cathars in the 11th through 13th centuries, in the
Age of Enlightenment of the 18th century, and in some groups arising during the
Second Great Awakening of the 19th century.
Modern nontrinitarian groups or
denominations include
Christadelphians,
Christian Scientists,
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons),
Dawn Bible Students,
Friends General Conference,
Iglesia ni Cristo,
Jehovah's Witnesses,
La Luz del Mundo,
Living Church of God,
Oneness Pentecostals,
Members Church of God International,
Unitarian Universalist Christians and the
United Church of God.
Islam, which considers Jesus a
prophet but not divine,
[103] teaches the
absolute indivisibility of a
supremely sovereign and transcendent god (see
God in Islam),
[104] and is distinctly
anti-trinitarian as several verses of the Koran teach that the doctrine of Trinity is blasphemous.
[105]
See also
Extended Notes
- ^ Very
little of Arius' own writings have survived. We depend largely on
quotations made by opponents which reflect what they thought he was
saying. Furthermore, there was no single Arian party or agenda but
rather various critics of the Nicene formula working from distinct
perspectives.(see Williams, Rowan. Arius SPCK (2nd edn, 2001) p.95ff & pp.247ff)
Endnotes and references
- ^ See discussion in
"Person". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.
- ^ Definition of the Fourth Lateran Council quoted in Catechism of the Catholic Church, 253
- ^ Frank Sheed, Theology and Sanity
- ^ Understanding the Trinity
- ^ Baltimore Catechism, No. 1, Lesson 7
- ^ a b "Catechism of the Catholic Church: The Dogma of the Holy Trinity".
- ^ "Lewis and Short: ''trinitas''". Perseus.tufts.edu. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ "Lewis and Short: ''trinus''". Perseus.tufts.edu. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ Liddell & Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon. entry for Τριάς, retrieved December 19, 2006
- ^ Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus, II.XV (retrieved on December 19, 2006).
- ^ W.Fulton in the "Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics"
- ^ Aboud, Ibrahim (Fall 2005). Theandros an online Journal of Orthodox Christian Theology and Philosophy. 3, number 1.
- ^ "Against Praxeas, chapter 3". Ccel.org. 2005-06-01. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ Against Praxeas, chapter 2 and in other chapters
- ^ History of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Accessed September 15, 2007.
- ^ "Orthodox Outlet for Dogmatic Enquiries: On God". Oodegr.com. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ Eusebius of Caesarea, Church History iii.36
- ^ St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Magnesians (Shorter Recension), Roberts-Donaldson translation.
- ^ First Apology, LXI
- ^ Theophilus, Apologia ad Autolycum, Book II, Chapter 15
- ^ Tertullian Against Praxeas
- ^ a b Bingham, Jeffrey, "HT200 Class Notes", Dallas Theological Seminary, (2004).
- ^ The Encyclopedia Americana (1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L
- ^ Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel (Paris, 1865–1870), Vol. 2, p. 1467.
- ^ "Catholic Encyclopedia: article:''Paul of Samosata''". Newadvent.org. 1911-02-01. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ Chadwick, Henry. The Early Church Pelican/Penguin (1967) p.87
- ^ "Arianism" in Cross, F.L. & Livingstone, E.A. (eds) The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (1974)
- ^ "Athanasius: De Decretis or Defence of the Nicene Definition, Introduction, 19". Tertullian.org. 2004-08-06. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ "Athanasius, Bishop of Alexanria, Theologian, Doctor". Justus.anglican.org. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ a b c "Trinity". Britannica Encyclopaedia of World Religions. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006.
- ^ On Athanasius, Oxford Classical Dictionary, Edited by Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth. Third edition. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
- ^ Kittel, 1:540.[full citation needed]
- ^ 7:1, 3 online
- ^ Epistle to the Philippians, 2:13 online
- ^ On Baptism 8:6 online, Against Praxeas, 26:2 online
- ^ Against Noetus, 1:14 online
- ^ Seventh Council of Carthage online
- ^ A Sectional Confession of Faith, 13:2 online
- ^ Kittel, 3:108.
- ^ a b Stagg, Frank. New Testament Theology. Broadman Press, 1962. ISBN 978-0-8054-1613-8, pp. 38 ff.
- ^ Grudem, Wayne A. 1994. Systematic theology an introduction to biblical doctrine. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press. Page 226.
- ^ "Athanasian Creed". Ccel.org. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ Barth, Karl, and Geoffrey William Bromiley. 1975. The doctrine of the word of God prolegomena to church dogmatics, being volume I, 1. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark. Pages 348–9.
- ^ Thomas, and Anton Charles Pegis. 1997. Basic writings of Saint Thomas Aquinas. Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Pub. Pages 307–9.
- ^ For 'person', seeRichard De Smet, A Short History of the Person, available in Brahman and Person: Essays by Richard De Smet, ed. Ivo Coelho (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2010).
- ^ "NPNF2-09. Hilary of Poitiers, John of Damascus | Christian Classics Ethereal Library". Ccel.org. 2005-07-13. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity: The Greek and the Latin Traditions regarding the Procession of the Holy Spirit (scanned image of the English translation on L'Osservatore Romano of 20 September 1995); also text with Greek letters transliterated and text
omitting two sentences at the start of the paragraph that it presents
as beginning with "The Western tradition expresses first ..."
- ^ Phillip Cary, Priscilla Papers Vol. 20, No. 4, Autumn 2006
- ^ "Basil the Great, De Spiritu Sancto, NPNF, Vol 8". Ccel.org. 2005-07-13. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ Athanasius, 3.29 (p. 409)
- ^ Basil "Letters", NPNF, Vol 8, 189.7 (p. 32)
- ^ Hill, De Trinitate, 2.15
- ^ P. van Buren, Christ in Our Place (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), p. 38
- ^ K. Rahner, The Trinity (Herder & Herder:1970) p.22
- ^ Augustine, On the Trinity, book I, ch. 10.
- ^ op. cit., book IV, ch. 21; book V, ch. 9; book VII, ch. 4.
- ^ op. cit., book VIII, ch. 5.
- ^ Hilary, On the Trinity, book II, n. 6.
- ^ op. cit., book II, n. 8-9.
- ^ op. cit., book VII, n. 40.
- ^ op. cit., book VII, n. 41.
- ^ Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Q. 27, Art. 1.
- ^ op. cit., Q. 27, Art. 5.
- ^ op. cit., Q. 30, Art. 1.
- ^ a b Ibid.
- ^ op. cit., Q. 30, Art. 2.
- ^ Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy Online, on Trinity, Link
- ^ a b Rusch, William G. (1980). "Introduction". In Rusch, William G. The Trinitarian Controversy. Minneapolis: Fortress Press(subscription required). p. 2.
- ^ "Neither
the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament
... the New Testament established the basis for the doctrine of the
Trinity"(Encyclopædia Britannica Online: article Trinity).
- ^ "Trinity". Britannica.com. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ a b The Oxford Companion to the Bible (ed. Bruce Metzger and Michael Coogan) 1993, p. 782–3.
- ^ McGrath, Alister E.Understanding the Trinity. Zondervan, 9789 ISBN 0-310-29681-1
- ^ Harris, Stephen L. Understanding the Bible. Mayfield Publishing: 2000. pp. 427–428
- ^ See Elizabeth Lev, "Dimming the Pauline Spotlight; Jubilee Fruits", 2009
- ^ See, for instance, the note in 1 Jn 5:7-8.
- ^ Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, 2d ed. Oxford University, 1968 p.101
- ^ "The Presentation of Jesus in John's Gospel". Bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ Brown, Raymond E. The Anchor Bible: The Gospel According to John (XIII–XXI), pp. 1026, 1032
- ^ Hoskyns, Edwyn Clement (ed Davey F.N.) The Fourth Gospel Faber & Faber, 1947 p.142 commenting on "without him was not any thing made that was made."[John 1:3]
- ^ Paul helps us understand truths about Jesus[dead link]
- ^ Simonetti, Manlio. "Matthew 14–28." New Testament Volume 1b, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Intervarsity Press, 2002. ISBN 978-0-8308-1469-5
- ^ St. Augustine of Hippo,De Trinitate, Book I, Chapter 3.
- ^ a b c d St. Basil the Great,On the Holy Spirit Chapter 16.
- ^ St. Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit Chapter 19.
- ^ St. Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit Chapter 21.
- ^ "Catholic Encyclopedia: article ''Pneumatomachi''". Newadvent.org. 1911-06-01. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ See Book of Wisdom#Messianic interpretation by Christians
- ^ The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press, 2005 ISBN 978-0-19-280290-3), article Trinity, doctrine of the
- ^ a b "Catholic Encyclopedia: article ''The Blessed Trinity''". Newadvent.org. 1912-10-01. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ "Encyclopedia of Religion", Vol. 14, p.9360, on Trinity
- ^ Gregory Nazianzen, Orations, 31.26
- ^ For the two chapters as a single text, see Robert. Day in Mamre, night in Sodom: Abraham and Lot in Genesis 18 and 19. Brill Publishers: 1995.ISBN 978-90-04-10250-7 pp.37ff. Web: 9 January 2010
- ^ a b c "Francis Watson, Abraham's Visitors (The Journal of Scriptural Reasoning, Number 2.3, September 2002". Etext.lib.virginia.edu. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ Augustine
had poor knowledge of the Greek language, and no knowledge of Hebrew.
So he trusted the LXX Septuagint, which differentiates between κύριοι[Gen 19:2] ('lords', vocative plural) andκύριε[Gen 19:18] ('lord', vocative singular), even if the Hebrew verbal form,נא-אדני (na-adoni), is exactly the same in both cases.
- ^ Swedenborg, Emanuel. Heavenly Arcana, 1749-58. Rotch Edition. New York: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 1907, in the Divine Revelation of the New Jerusalem (2012), n. 2149, 2156, 2218.
- ^ Swedenborg, n. 2319-2320.
- ^ Swedenborg, n. 10617.
- ^ The Trinity in the Old Testament
- ^ Larry
W. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest
Christianity. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005 ISBN 0-8028-3167-2 pp. 573–578
- ^ "Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology: ''Angel of the Lord''". Studylight.org. Retrieved 2012-01-02.
- ^ See below and G Schiller,Iconography of Christian Art, Vol. I, 1971, Vol II, 1972, (English trans from German), Lund Humphries, London, figs I;5–16 & passim, ISBN 0-85331-270-2 and ISBN 0-85331-324-5
- ^ von Harnack, Adolf (1894-03-01). "History of Dogma". Retrieved 2007-06-15.
"[In the 2nd century,] Jesus was either regarded as the man whom God
hath chosen, in whom the Deity or the Spirit of God dwelt, and who,
after being tested, was adopted by God and invested with dominion,
(Adoptionist Christology); or Jesus was regarded as a heavenly spiritual
being (the highest after God) who took flesh, and again returned to
heaven after the completion of his work on earth (pneumatic
Christology)"
- ^ Glassé, Cyril; Smith, Huston (2003). The New Encyclopedia of Islam. Rowman Altamira. pp. 239–241. ISBN 0759101906.
- ^ Encyclopedia of the Qur'an. Thomas, David. 2006. Volume V: Trinity.
- ^ Qur'an 3:79-80, 112:1-4, etc.
Further reading
- Emery, Gilles, O.P.; Levering, Matthew, eds. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of the Trinity. ISBN 978-0199557813.
- Fiddes, Paul, Participating in God : a pastoral doctrine of the Trinity (London: Darton, Longman, & Todd, 2000)
- Holmes, Stephen R. (2012). The Quest for the Trinity: The Doctrine of God in Scripture, History and Modernity. ISBN 9780830839865.
- Johnson, Thomas K., "What Difference Does the Trinity Make?" (Bonn: Culture and Science Publ., 2009)
- Letham, Robert (2004). The Holy Trinity : In Scripture, History, Theology, and Worship. ISBN 9780875520001.
External links
Still with me? How about on the other hand:? Four fingers and a thumb!
Coming next...The Bereans...hey if you love this stuff and have read so far, why not let us know?? Comments Please!
