Trinity
Quick Study: Reformers on the Trinity
**Part of the Thoroughly Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity series.**
The basic doctrine of the Trinity–one nature and three persons–survived the middle ages and the break with the Roman Catholic Church during the Protestant Reformation in the 16th Century.
In fact, the doctrine’s been the same since the controversy was settled in the early church.
So, what did the Reformation add to the discussion about God’s Trinity? Let me show you.
Martin Luther on the Trinity
Martin Luther, the Father of Protestantism, said, “Christ shows forcefully that the Holy Spirit is an actual Being in the Godhead and separate, distinct Person by Himself, one who is not the father or the Son.”
For example, Luther points out what Jesus said about the Holy Spirit in John 16:13:
But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.
Luther said this is the equivalent to saying the Holy Spirit is a distinct person with a particular responsibility. This jives with Augustine’s idea of economy of salvation.
John Calvin on the Trinity
All you need to know: Martin Luther’s contemporary, John Calvin, agreed with Luther.
Calvin said:
The same holds in the case of the Holy Spirit; for we will immediately prove both that he is God and that he has a separate subsistence from the Father. This, moreover, is not a distinction of essence, which it would be impious to multiply.
Same essence. Different person.
Your Turn
All the Reformation did to the discussion on the Trinity is add a focus to the Holy Spirit. But despite the vigorous activity of people like Luther and Calvin, who devoted and endangered their lives to the defense of the orthodox view of the Trinity, deviant doctrines on the Trinity still emerged…most recently seen in William P. Young’s The Shack.
What ancient heresies do you recognize in today’s ideas about God, the Trinity or Christianity in general? Drop your thoughts in the comments.
A Thoroughly Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity
**Part of The Nature of God: A Quick and Dirty Guide series.**
Yes. . .yet another post on the Trinity.
But this time I’m compiling all my previous posts for a simple, growing, definitive guide.
Here’s why I’m doing this.
The Reason Why You Must
Study God’s Trinity
Listen: The Trinity is not some pointless piece of theological speculation.
It’s a doctrine that demands attention. Study. Understanding.
Why? Because the Trinity is grounded in the complex human experience of redemption in Christ.
And for more than 1600 years this doctrine has stood as the final test of orthodoxy. It shapes how we understand who God is.
So, let’s explore this often-neglected, beautiful doctrine because if you’re a Christian, you’ll mature in your faith. If you’re not, well….
4 Approaches to the Doctrine of the Trinity
Early Church Fathers, Girl Talk and the Seamless Doctrine of the Trinity
How Ancient Creeds and Dead Men Define Our Beliefs
Medieval Scholars on the Trinity
3 Critical Characteristics of the Trinity You Must Know
**Part of the Thoroughly Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity series.**
What do you think: Does the doctrine of the Trinity even matter to your every day life?
I mean, is it just some theological abstraction men in university auditoriums bicker about?
Or does it have a concrete, practical application to your personal and private world?
In a nuthsell, does an understanding of the Trinity even matter?
I’m here to tell you that it does. Especially if you want to live a vivid, meaningful life. Let me explain.
Tim’s Excellent Question
I owe Tim Wilson a huge thanks for raising his hand yesterday during my headlong rush through the history of the doctrine of the Trinity and asking me to slow down and explain how knowledge of the Trinity even made a difference in his everyday life.
So, let me take a pause and explore the historical, personal and relational characteristics of the Trinity and how it, indeed, can make a difference to you.
Historical: Your Flesh and Bones God
As I pointed out yesterday, Augustine was the scholar who originated the idea of the economy of salvation. Yet, Karl Rahner was the scholar who actually articulated it in those words.
The economy of salvation basically says this:
In the three persons of the Trinity, you have God who created people, Christ who redeemed people and the Holy Spirit who sanctifies people.
Let me say it another way: God created us, died for us and dwells in us. That, in three over-simplified stages, is the history of redemption.
Therefore, if God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is a historical being, then that means he’s also a personal being. And if He’s a personal being, then He’s perilously close to getting into our business. Just watch.
Personal: Your Private God
So, if this Trinitarian being is a historical being, then we can say three things about Him:
1. He’s unlike other gods who have zero basis in human history.
2. If He was an actual historical figure (Christ–the God man–walked on the Earth), then we can know him.
3. And if we can know Him, then it’s possible to trust in Him and the things He says.
In fact, as Robert Jensen pointed out, and as our creeds try to do, defining God as the three persons creates theological precision in which we then are very clear about which God we are talking about. The doctrine of the Trinity separates the Christian God from the mob of gods competing in our culture.
And with this precision, we no longer have a fuzzy, speculative being we worship. We have a personal, very private, very clear understanding of God. And if we are seriously personal, private and have a clear understanding about this God, then we can have a relationship with Him.
A relationship that sometimes brings personal risk.
Relational: A Passionate Affair
How do you know if you have a good relationship? A good marriage? Believe it or not, but you have a good marriage when you have conflict. I call it passion.
Sound absurd? Well let me say this: Conflict in a marriage isn’t a sign of trouble. Conflict is a sign of contradictions. Differences, yes. But it’s also a sign of struggles two people are working through to create something more beautiful than if they left them alone.
On the other hand, a lack of conflict or contradiction in a marriage is a sign that someone is withdrawn, isolated and independent. The same is true in your relationship with God.
Here’s why. If you are independent and individualistic and carry on thinking God loves you just the way you are and that He’d never conflict or contradict you…you don’t have a relationship with a person…
You have a fawning, submissive, impossibly agreeable robot. [Think Steppford Wives here.]
When I say God is historical and personal, I’m also saying He’s relational. I’m saying He cares about us. And he cares enough to want to help us grow into better people. He wants to set us apart from the profane and make us holy. He’s passionate about redeeming His people.
And so the Holy Spirit fits into the Trinity and the history of redemption this way: God created us. Jesus redeemed us. The Holy Spirit changes us.
Over to You
So, without a clear understanding of the Trinity, I do not think you can live a vivid, meaningful life. . .because if we insist on a hollow, distant knowledge of the three persons of God. . .we end up with a diluted, weak association heavily weighted in our favor. Not a relationship.
What would you rather have: a meaningful relationship with a historical being who wants to give you a glorious life that rests in Him? Or would you rather live a paper-thin, solitary existence forever threatening to combust?
I’d love to hear what you think. [Tim, did I answer your question?]
Refining the Concept: Medieval Scholars on the Trinity
**Part of the Thoroughly Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity series.**
From the early 4th Century to the end of the 13th, the Fathers of the Middle Ages wrote some of the greatest documents on the doctrine of the Trinity.
Augustine: Planting the
Economy-of-Salvation Seed
In his book On the Trinity, philosopher and theologian Augustine said “Three are equal and co-eternal, and absolutely of one nature.”
He said this in the context that no one is saved by the Father without the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Thus, initiating the talk of the economy of salvation.
Anselm: Creation and Redemption
the Work of Trinity
Towards the end of the 11th Century, the Italian philosopher and theologian Anselm said:
First, all three together are one supreme essence (even though each, perfectly, is the supreme essence). Anselm of Canterbury: Major Works
Anselm was simply making the point that all the work of creation and redemption…although performed functionally by different beings of the Trinity…was the work of one single being.
In other words, Father, Son and Spirit exist in each other and with such equality that none is great than the others. As you’ll remember, this was to safeguard against emerging heresies.
Aquinas: Equality Essential in the Trinity
In like manner, the Scholastic scholar Thomas Aquinas said that although the persons are multiplied in the Godhead, the essence was not multiplied.
Writing in his Summa Theologica:
We speak of one essence of the three persons and three persons of the one essence, provided these.
In other words, no inequality in the persons. If inequality existed, then they would have a different essence, which is unorthodox.
There’s a real distinction between the divine relations or roles he says, but we’ll get more into that tomorrow when I explain the role Reformers played in sculpting the doctrine of the Trinity.
Conclusion
Birth of the economy of salvation model. Equality of the persons. Inequality of the roles. The medieval fathers are simply refining what early councils and creeds and early fathers started to shape.
So, tell me, is your vision and appreciation of the Trinity getting any better?
God’s Trinity: How Ancient Creeds and Dead Men Define Our Belief
**Part of the Thoroughly Painless Guide to the Doctrine of God’s Trinity series.**
If you haven’t figured it out yet, we are building a head of steam towards a definitive guide to the doctrine of the Trinity.
I know you so care.
Regardless, far from being a rather pointless piece of theological speculation…the doctrine of the Trinity is grounded directly in the complex human experience of redemption in Christ.
That’s why I saw it as of paramount importance to explore 10 inadequate views, 4 historical approaches and early Church fathers idea of the Trinity.
Today were going take a quick journey back to the 3rd and 4th centuries where the universal church affirmed–through creeds and councils–that the doctrine of the Trinity was normative for all believers.
Then let’s discuss the prickly problem of ancient dead men defining our modern mode of worship. Let’s go.
Apostle’s Creed: Odd Origins
The Apostle’s Creed–one of the earliest creeds–pointed to the Trinity in its three “I believe” statements: I believe in God the Father, Jesus His Son and the Holy Spirit.
The basic point behind the creed was to defend the Gospel of Christ and refute Gnosticism.
The creeds name comes from the 5th Century legend that after Pentecost, the 12 Apostles dictated part of it. That’s why it’s traditionally divided into twelve sections.
Athanasian Creed: Visualizing the Obscure
The Athanasian Creed, appearing possibly after the first Council of Nicaea in 325, is the first creed to establish equality in the Trinity:
Nothing is before or after, nothing is greater or less: but all three persons coeternal, together and equal.
Early experiments–were talkin’ 12th Century here– in symbolizing the Trinity as a visual device produced the Shield of the Trinity. You can see the diagram on the knight’s shield in the image above.
The Shield of the Trinity was used as a device from which the Athanasian Creed can be read. Kind of like a rosary. But not really.
Council of Constantinople: Condemning and Confirming
And the great ecumenical Council of Constantinople in A. D. 381 declared this statement as a norm for orthodoxy.
It did this by:
1. Confirming the original Nicene Creed.
2. Developing a statement to combat the heresy Pneumatomachi.
3. Expanding the 3rd article of the Nicene creed to establish that the Holy Spirit must be of the same being as God the Father.
4. Condemning Arianism.
What Do You Think?
Do creeds even matter? Are they too formal? Too limiting? Too stifling?
Besides, “Why should we suppose that early churchmen,” quoting Andrew Perriman, “who had their own presuppositions and prejudices, were in a position to provide a definitive summary of the faith for all time?”
Or are they important because they define the boundaries within which Christians operate?
I’d love to hear your thoughts. Drop them in the comments. Brutal and all.
Search
Recent Posts
Get Updates | Subscribe
Somewhat Essential
Categories
Archives
