Chapter 05 - The Trinity
The Trinity
"O Lord, one God, God the Trinity, whatsoever I have said in these Books that comes of thy prompting, may thy people acknowledge it: for what I have said that comes only of myself, I ask of thee and of thy people pardon."
Augustine, The Trinity To know Christ is to know His benefits, not as the Schoolmen teach, to know His natures and the modes of His incarnation. . . . There is no reason why we should spend much labour over these supreme topics of God, His Unity and Trinity, the mysteries of creation and the modes of the Incarnation. I ask you, what the scholastic theologians have achieved in so many ages by occupying themselves with these questions alone? Philip Melanchthon, Loci Theologici The doctrine of the Trinity is a key article of the Christian faith, even though it is one of the most difficult to comprehend. The word "trinity," however, is not used in the Bible. Tertullian (ca. A.D. 160-240) was the first to use the Latin word trinitas. In a discussion of the doctrine of the Trinity, there are certain preliminary things that need to be clarified.
First, we must admit the concept of mystery. This must not be the admission of the Trinitarian only. Even the Unitarian must acknowledge that he professes only a skimpy knowledge of the essential being of God. But mystery does not negate inquiry or revelation. We admit with Augustine that "enquiry concerning the incomprehensible is justified, and the enquirer has found something, if he has succeeded in finding out how far what he sought passes comprehension." 1 If the Trinity is a mystery, it is yet important, for it explains other mysteries. The doctrines of the Incarnation and indwelling of the Spirit would have little significance without a knowledge of the Trinity. Rather than being a burden to the intellect, the Trinitarian concept of God "illuminates, enriches, and elevates all our thought of God." 2
Second, we must, in a discussion of the Trinity, continue to remind ourselves that man is created in the image of God, and not God in the image of man. Man is thus only a faint image. Therefore, when dealing with the data of the biblical revelation we must remember that God is not the peculiarity, but man is. Man has a tendency to view God as suprapersonal, that is, to compare God with man by using man as the standard of being. In reality man is infra-personal, that is, God is the standard of comparison in relation to man, and man is the peculiar creature. If we wish to do justice to the person of God as far as we can understand him, we must not denounce God because of the simple, single personality of man. God cannot be reckoned a monstrosity because he is different from man.
Third, the doctrine of the Trinity is the expressed result of formulating the biblical information concerning the relation of the Father to the Son and the Spirit. If one asks, "How are the three persons related to one another?" the answer one receives is some doctrine of the Trinity. The doctrine is not idle philosophy and metaphysics to which we may be indifferent. In the early centuries of the church, when the issue of the Trinity was debated, the issue centered around the nature of Christ. Was he of the same nature as God, or was he of a like nature? In other words, was he God, or was he a great and majestic, but created, being? The difference was summed up by two very similar words. Was Christ homoiousion, that is, of a like nature to God, or was he homoousion, that is, of the same nature? The difference in the two words cannot be exaggerated even though a single letter, the iota or "i," makes the difference. Carlyle and Gibbon have epigrammed that the fate of the world hung on a single letter. In reality the difference is that significant. It is a question of tremendous importance.
Positively put, the Trinity means that God is incarnate in Jesus Christ. God has come himself to redeem man; he has not sent a second-rate envoy. Love gives personal attention to important matters.
Long ago, Anselm attempted to answer the question of why a lesser being than God could not have redeemed man. He reasoned that man would of necessity be the servant of whoever redeemed him. Thus anything less than God would involve man in idolatry. Although this is reasonable, it is preferable to answer the question from the standpoint of love’s personal involvement.
Fourth, we must distinguish between the facts of the Trinity and the doctrine of the Trinity. The traditional formulation of the Trinity is a product of debate upon the meaning of the scriptural statements. The church must reflect upon the scriptural statements, but this does not elevate the doctrine to the level of the Scriptures. Indeed, we must not accept an ancient doctrine merely because it is ancient but because it is true. The formulation that has been traditionally accepted as orthodox from the Nicene Council on must stand or fall on the basis of the Scriptures. With these observations in mind, we will turn to study the data of the Trinity in the Scriptures.
Biblical Evidence for the Trinity
Although older theologians were accustomed to speak of the Trinity anticipated in the plural name for God (Elohim), the Trisagion of Isa 6:1-13, the Suffering Servant passages in Isaiah, and the personification of wisdom in the Old Testament, we are bound to base the doctrine on the New Testament. Gregory of Nazianzus (A.D. 329-89) posited that the Old Testament revelation established in the people of God the foundational fact of the unity of the Godhead. Thus the Trinity is not a certain fact of revelation until the Incarnation takes place.
One passing observation about the Shema, or the monotheistic statement of Deuteronomy is of interest. When the pious Jew recited, "Here, O Israel : The Lord our God is one Lord" (6:4), he used a word in that confession that can be understood in a latent Trinitarian sense. The phrase "our God is one" can be understood in the sense of unity, or community. The word "one" involves more than numerical meaning. It designates oneness-in accord, togetherness in the same place, or unity of mind. Centuries after the writing of Deuteronomy, the Dead Sea community designated itself as "the community" or the "oneness" with the same meaning of the word in the confession of Deu 6:4. As interesting as this may be, we must still confine ourselves to understanding it as latent anticipation of the New Testament. The New Testament gives to us a unique set of data concerning the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There have been some, however, who have felt that the doctrine of the Trinity was imposed on, or imported to the New Testament. Adolph Harnack, for instance, deprecated the doctrine of the Trinity as the "Hellenizing of Christianity." Others have sought the source of the doctrine in Babylonian or Hindu ideology in which there are triads of gods. Such similarities are superficial. The Jews of the New Testament were rigidly monotheistic and held such polytheism in contempt. The data of the doctrine of the Trinity did not evolve over centuries but is a fixed possession of the New Testament from the very beginning. The doctrine expresses the experience of the first eyewitnesses. The disciples had worshiped God the Father as Jews; in the man Jesus they came to know one who was the Son of God and to whom they accorded the title "Lord." Their experience on the day of Pentecost was the fulfillment of the promise of the Son before his ascension and that of the Father through the prophets.3
The data for the doctrine of the Trinity are of two types. First, there are statements that relate the three names together. The Great Commission (Mat 28:18-20 ) is an example of this. The Father, Son, and Spirit are mentioned together in the annunciation account in Luk 1:35 . The Holy Spirit is the power of the Most High, and the fruit of Mary’s womb was to be the Son of God. In the baptismal scene of the Gospels (Luk 3:21-22; Mat 3:16-17; Mark 1:10-11; John 1:32-33), the Spirit descended on the Son with the pronouncement of the Father’s good pleasure in him. The Fourth Gospel sets forth the promise of the Son concerning the indwelling Comforter sent from the Father (John 15:26). There are other statements4 in which a composite witness to the Father, Son, and Spirit are mentioned, but our attention must now be given to the second type of evidence. The second type of evidence is that which speaks solely of the Deity of the Son or the Spirit without reference to the other two. For example, in John l:l reference is made to the divine nature of the Word, the Son, without mention of the Spirit. Thus evidence for the deity of Christ is evidence for the Trinity. The same principle holds true for the statements concerning the Spirit.
In considering this type of evidence it must be remembered that the first Christians were converted Jews with a strict monotheistic background. They had no bent toward polytheism, and it was not easy to ascribe deity to a human being. In addressing Jesus as Lord, they recognized in him the attribute of divinity. The simple statement that "Christ is Lord" (Rom 10:9) points up the early belief in the Trinity. In Christ the fulness of deity dwells bodily (Col 2:9) . The doubting heart of Thomas confessed Jesus as "Lord and God" (John 20:28), a confession that would be blasphemy concerning any other person. In the book of Titus, word is given concerning our hope and the appearing of the "great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" (Tit 2:13 ) . The early confession of Peter was that Jesus is the Son of God (Mat 16:16 . In John’s Gospel Jesus was accused of blasphemy (John 10:36) for making himself equal with God. In chapter 8, Jesus made an equation that the Pharisees could not overlook. He said, "Before Abraham was, I am" (v. 58 ) . He equated himself with the name of God in the Old Testament, "I am" (Exo 3:14).
Before concluding reference to the Son, we can note that the attributes or qualities that are generally designated to the Father are also attributed to the Son: holiness (2Co 5:21), omnipotence (Mat 28:18), eternity (John 1:1; John 17:5), life (John 1:4), immutability (Heb 1:11-12) , omniscience (Mat 9:4) , omnipresence (Mat 28:20), creation (John 1:3), judgment of all men (Mat 25:31-46), prayer and worship (John 14:12-14 ) . The New Testament word on the Holy Spirit is not as prolific as that on the Son. The divine nature of the Holy Spirit is set forth in the Scriptures in a personal way. The Holy Spirit is not an impersonal "it" but a personal "he." In the apostolic rebuke of Peter to Ananias, the lie was told not to men but to God the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4). Philip was directed by the Holy Spirit to the eunuch (Acts 8:29). The Holy Spirit directed the early church in its missionary activity (Acts 10:19-20Acts 13:2) . The Spirit is the promise of the Son proceeding from the Father (John 14:16-17) . The Spirit helps the believer in prayer (Rom 8:26 , and we are warned against grieving the Holy Spirit of God (Eph 4:30) . Furthermore, the Spirit gives gifts for the service of God (1Co 12:4-11), he regenerates (Tit 3:5; John 3:5), teaches (John 16:13), and sanctifies the believer ( 1Pe 1:2 ). To conclude our thoughts about the Spirit, the so-called unpardonable sin emphasizes that the Spirit is holy and that sin cannot be committed against a more August person. In discussing the biblical statements relating to the Trinity, there are certain principles that will help clear up some of the difficulties.
First, the principle of subordination in action. The principle of subordination in action must be clearly and carefully distinguished from subordination of nature. One form of false doctrine in the early church made the Son a subordinated creature in nature. The New Testament does not warrant such an assumption. There is, however, a subordination in action. This means that in order of activity and mode of action the Father is first, the Son is second, and the Spirit is third. B. B. Warfield has declared, "Whatever the Father does, he does through the Son, by the Spirit."5
Second, Augustine, following Athanasius, declared that texts implying subordination of the Son to the Father must refer to the Son as incarnate in the form of a servant and not in the form of God. The Son is inferior to the Father in his human nature only (cf.John 14:28 and John 10:30).
Third, the New Testament is primarily concerned with the work and action of the persons of the Trinity and not with their metaphysical relationship. Consequently a detailed doctrine is not elaborated in the Bible.
Fourth, we must not divide the Triune God into three Gods as though the Son alone has the work of redemption apart from the Father and the Spirit. The love of God the Father gives the motive for redemption; God the Son is the Redeemer; and God the Spirit inhabits the believer in application of redemption. Thus certain actions are attributed to one or another of the persons but that action involves no less than the entire being of God. To conclude our remarks on the scriptural data and the Trinity, we must observe that the doctrine of the Trinity sums up a great deal of the gospel. Concerning God the Father, it embodies his promise of a "Christ to us." Of the Son, it is a word of "Christ for us." Of the Holy Spirit, it is a word of "Christ in us." The Dogma of the Trinity The distinction has been made between the facts and the doctrine or dogma of the Trinity. The doctrine involves the real problem of relating the facts. Does not a father imply a son and a son a father? From where and how does the Spirit proceed? The answers to these questions give us a doctrine or dogma.
Many were the problems and controversies in working out the doctrine of the Trinity. One of the great problems centered around language. The same terms were often used in totally different relations. After much debate, the doctrine was expressed in these orthodox terms :
"The Catholic Faith is this : that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons nor dividing the Substance; for there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one; the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so we are forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, There are Three Gods or three Lords." 6 The creed is misleading for our generation in terms of language. The word "person" does not have the same meaning for us that it had for the writers of the creed. Its use in the creed indicated "a permanent, individual mode or manner of Divine existence."7 The meaning of the Latin persona (English person) was "mask," as used by an actor to portray different characters on the stage. On the other hand, the early Greek Christians used the word "hypostasis," which meant subsistence or substance, or referred to "something which has substantial existence in its own right and not as a mere quality or adjective of something else."8 The Greek fathers spoke of "three persons in one substance."
It becomes apparent that terminology was a real problem in the early church. It is not less a problem for the modern mind. If we do not speak of the Trinity in terms of "person" with the idea of self-consciousness, we run the danger of destroying the clear-cut personal distinctions spoken about in the biblical references to God, Christ, and the Spirit. If we speak of God in terms of person, with all its contemporary implications, then the Trinitarian concept seems to border on the side of tritheism. But if we do not use the term "person," we use less than our highest term and run the danger of speaking of God in impersonal terms, and if we do we stand to lose what is unique to the Christian concept of God.
Some theologians discarded the phrase "three distinct persons.” John of Damascus described the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as "being immanent in one another though there is no confusion or mixture." 9 Basil declared, "Everything that the Father is, is seen in the Son, and everything that the Son is belongs to the Father. The Son in his entirety abides in the Father, and in return possesses the Father in Himself. Thus, the hypostasis subsistence of the Son is, so to speak, the form and presentation by which the Father is known, and the Father’s hypostasis (subsistence) is recognized in the form of the Son."10
Emil Brunner remarks that a problem arises when we place the Son alongside the Father rather than to see the Son in the Father and the Father in the Song of Solomon11 The Son is not separate from the Father, but distinct in the Father. Likewise, the Spirit is through the Son and not, alongside the Son. This accords with the phraseology of John’s Gospel "Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me" (John 14:11; cf. John 14:20, John 17:21 ) .
Whatever objection one may have about the creedal statements of the doctrine of the Trinity, the doctrine itself must be seen against the attempt to guard against certain serious heresies. The formulators of the creedal statement were intent on rejecting the ideas : that God is too far removed to be concerned for man, that the creation is evil and only spirit is good, that man’s redemption took place by a creature less than God.
Augustine presents his plea concerning the Trinity: "As for our present enquiry, let us believe that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one God, maker and ruler of the whole creation: that Father is not Son, nor Holy Spirit, Father or Son; but a Trinity of mutually related Persons, and a unity of equal essence." 12 Analogies of the Trinity The doctrine of the Trinity presents such a deep mystery to the mind that it gropes for some analogy to increase its understanding. We shall catalog a number of analogies but not without the principle that analogies at best are quite inadequate.
Physical: Water has a trinity of three forms: liquid, vapor, and solid. In a drink of wine, water, and honey each element permeates the whole. An egg has the yolk, white, and shell. A rope has three strands, but they are woven together to form a unity. A triangle has three sides to show that the Father is not the Son or the Spirit, and vice versa, but one triangle. Relationships involve one man who is at the same time father, husband, and son. Humanity gives a picture of three persons: Peter, Paul, and John, but a single humanity. A tree has its root (Father), stem (Son), and fruit (Holy Spirit). The early Church Fathers used the sun, the ray and the point of the ray. Sonship offers an analogy suggesting the Trinity. If God has a Son, his Son would have the same nature as he. God was always a Father; other wise, he would be changeable and evolving. The Son is of an eternal nature as the Father. He was one with the Father from eternity. This analogy does not refer to the Spirit but does point up the relationship to the Father by the Son.
Psychological: The most profound psychological analogies come from Augustine who completed his work De Trinitate in AD. 417. If man is made in the image of God, said Augustine, then the best analogies should be found in man. There is, first, the analogy of love. If God is love, then a lover must have a beloved. The spirit of love unites the two together. Thus we have God the Father as lover, God the Son as beloved, and God the Spirit as the spirit of Love. The analogy of Augustine is incomplete after the first two steps. Later writers attempted to improve on the analogy by explaining how the third person is a necessity. Perfect love is without jealousy and requires a third with whom to share love. In the trinity of mind, knowledge, and love, Augustine began with the mind, proceeded to its knowledge of itself as mind, and then the mind’s love of itself. Of these he wrote, "These three are one, and if perfect they are equal."13 A third analogy set forth by Augustine is the trinity of memory, understanding, and will in the single life of a person. The value of the last two analogies lies in their presenting three functions from a single essence. They also set forth a coexistent or coinherent factor. However, the analogies are weak in that they are in one person while God is three-personal. In attempting to set forth helpful analogies on the Trinity and the problem centering around the word "person," we sympathize with the statement of Augustine that we say three persons, not to express the Trinity, but in order not to keep silent. The Trinity and Other Doctrines
The doctrine of the Trinity does have an important bearing on other doctrines. Consider first the doctrine of revelation. Where do we obtain our knowledge of God? The Bible declares that Christ is the final and most complete expression of God’s revelation to us (Heb 1:1-13) . In the final analysis God only can reveal God. In the fourth century Athanasius rightly argued that if Jesus was not the true Son of God and God incarnate, then he could not communicate a "true knowledge of God, since He can neither see nor know His own Father accurately." Without the revelation of Jesus Christ, we are thrown back upon our own resources for obtaining a knowledge of God. In all honesty we must confess that a god that can be discovered by human effort is hardly worth discovering. If my idea of God is really mine, then I could attach little significance to it at all. If Jesus Christ is not God incarnate, I must confess that I know nothing of God and am thrown back upon a theology based on nature and the nebulous God of reason. When the Trinity is rejected, the alternatives are generally Unitarianism or some form of vague pantheism. Unitarianism rejects the incarnate self-revelation of God in Jesus Christ. While Jesus may have been a man of significant religious insight, he cannot be regarded as the God-man in the traditional sense of the term. Thus the Unitarian only knows of God by reason and not by revelation.
Pantheism obscures the distinctions between God and man, and in some senses all men are manifestations of the divine. This fusion of the divine and the human wipes out the unique significance of Jesus Christ. His cross and its meaning become transformed into a principle that is an example for all people. Self-sacrifice becomes the principle for men to live by and therein lies their salvation-not in Christ’s death! At the same time the pantheist’s god is not yet made, because the world, being a part of God, is always changing and progressing. Pantheism tends to break up into polytheism where, in its more refined form, the beautiful in nature, genius in man, and truth in the mind become objects of worship. Thus facts of the Trinity are intimately related to a thoroughgoing doctrine of revelation.The doctrine is important also for its relation to salvation. Among other things implied is that God, the Creator, is also Redeemer. God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself. If Jesus Christ was not incarnate deity, then our salvation rests upon a creature little higher than ourselves. Redemption would not rest in the nature of God. There is no room for Christian joy over the firm foundation of redemption if salvation does not rest in God alone. The concept of the Trinity is important for the believer’s orientation toward an understanding of God. If we disparage the facts relating to God’s self-disclosure we are disparaging God himself. One should not show a kind of callousness to God’s love wherein he seeks to reveal to man his inner nature and essence. He was not under obligation to reveal himself, but the fact that he did sets forth the truth that the lover seeks to communicate to the beloved. Calvary is not the only expression of his love: the revelation of himself as Father, Son, and Spirit is another expression of love. To be indifferent to it is a kind of insensitiveness that is difficult to conceive in men who profess to love God. God has spoken, and if we would know his love we must seek to understand his nature. The implication for doctrine can be carried further in its relation to almost any Christian doctrine. Without the implications of the Trinity, the church becomes transformed into a lecture club or mutual aid society without a definite kergyma for declaration. The Christian hope, the return of Christ, is watered down to a kingdom of man, and the range of doctrine beginning with justification by faith, regeneration, sanctification, the indwelling of the Spirit, and Christian life receive a totally different but humanistic treatment.
Chapter V. The Trinity
1 A. Augustine, The Trinity, trans. John Burnaby ("’The Library of Christian Classics,"(Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1955), VIII, 129.
2 B. B. Warfield, Biblical Foundations (Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing Colossians, 1958), p. 84.
3 Compare Charles W. Lowry, The Trinity and Christian Devotion (New York: Harper & Bros., 1946), p. 67; and John Mackintosh Shaw, Christian Doctrine (London: Lutterworth Press, 1953), pp. 90-91; and Warfield, op. cit., p. 89.
4 Cf. 1Co 12:4-6; Rom 8:9; 2Co 13:14; Eph 4:4-6; 1Pe 1:2; Jude 1:20-21.
5 Op. cit., p. 110; compare Rom 2:16; Rom 3:22; Rom 5:1; Eph 1:5; 1Th 5:18-19Tit 3:5.
6 The Athanasian Creed. It is one of the later creeds but one of the fullest in expression. Its date and origin are uncertain.
7 Lowry, op. cit., pp. 80-81.
8 Shaw, op. cit., p. 95.
9 R. S. Franks, The Doctrine of the Trinity (London: Gerald Duckworth & Colossians, 1953), p. 120.
10 J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (New York: Harper & Bros., 1958), p. 264.
11 Christian Doctrine of God, pp. 229-30.
12 op, cit., p. 58.
13 ibid., p. 60