Difference between revisions of "Trinity"

<p> That nearly all the [[Pagan]] nations of antiquity, says [[Bishop]] Tomline, in their various theological systems, acknowledged a kind of Trinity, has been fully evinced by those learned men who have made the [[Heathen]] mythology the subject of their elaborate inquiries. The almost universal prevalence of this doctrine in the [[Gentile]] kingdoms must be considered as a strong argument in favour of its truth. The doctrine itself bears such striking internal marks of a divine original, and is so very unlikely to have been the invention of mere human reason that there is no way of accounting for the general adoption of so singular a belief, but by supposing that it was revealed by God to the early patriarchs, and that it was transmitted by them to their posterity. In its progress, indeed, to remote countries, and to distant generations, this belief became depraved and corrupted in the highest degree; and he alone who brought "life and immortality to light," could restore it to its original simplicity and purity. The discovery of the existence of this doctrine in the early ages, among the nations whose records have been the best preserved, has been of great service to the cause of Christianity, and completely refutes the assertion of infidels and skeptics, that the sublime and mysterious doctrine of the [[Trinity]] owes its origin to the philosophers of Greece. "If we extend," says Mr. Maurice, "our eye through the remote region of antiquity, we shall find this very doctrine, which the primitive [[Christians]] are said to have borrowed from the Platonic school, universally and immemorially flourishing in all those countries where history and tradition have united to fix those virtuous ancestors of the human race, who, for their distinguished attainments in piety, were admitted to a familiar intercourse with [[Jehovah]] and the angels, the divine heralds of his commands." The same learned author justly considers the first two verses of the Old [[Testament]] as containing very strong, if not decisive, evidence in support of the truth of this doctrine: Elohim, a noun substantive of the plural number, by which the [[Creator]] is expressed, appears as evidently to point toward a plurality of persons in the divine nature, as the verb in the singular, with which it is joined, does to the unity of that nature: "In the beginning God created;" with strict attention to grammatical propriety, the passage should be rendered, "In the beginning Gods created," but our belief in the unity of God forbids us thus to translate the word Elohim. Since, therefore, [[Elohim]] is plural, and no plural can consist of less than two in number, and since creation can alone be the work of Deity, we are to understand by this term so particularly used in this place, God the Father, and the eternal Logos, or Word of God; that [[Logos]] whom St. John, supplying us with an excellent comment upon this passage, says, was in the beginning with God, and who also was God. As the Father and the Son are expressly pointed out in the first verse of this chapter, so is the Third Person in the blessed Trinity not less decisively revealed to us in [[Genesis]] 1:2 : "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters:" "brooded upon" the water, <em> incubavit, </em> as a hen broods over her eggs. Thus we see the Spirit exerted upon this occasion an active effectual energy, by that energy agitating the vast abyss, and infusing into it a powerful vital principle. </p> <p> Elohim seems to be the general appellation by which the Triune [[Godhead]] is collectively distinguished in Scripture; and in the concise history of the creation only, the expression, <em> bara Elohim, </em> "the Gods created," is used above thirty times. The combining this plural noun with a verb in the singular would not appear so remarkable, if [[Moses]] had uniformly adhered to that mode of expression; for then it would be evident that he adopted the mode used by the [[Gentiles]] in speaking of their false gods in the plural number, but by joining with it a singular verb or adjective, rectified a phrase that might appear to give a direct sanction to the error of polytheism. But, in reality, the reverse is the fact; for in Deuteronomy 32:15; Deuteronomy 32:17 , and other places, he uses the singular number of this very noun to express the Deity, though not employed in the August work of creation: "He forsook God," <em> Eloah; </em> "they sacrificed to devils, not to God," <em> Eloah. </em> But farther, Moses himself uses this very word Elohim with verbs and adjectives in the plural. Of this usage Dr. Allix enumerates many other striking instances that might be brought from the Pentateuch; and other inspired writers use it in the same manner in various parts of the Old Testament, Job 35:10; Joshua 24:19; Psalms 109:1; Ecclesiastes 12:3; 2 Samuel 7:23 . It must appear, therefore, to every reader of reflection, exceedingly singular, that when Moses was endeavouring to establish a theological system, of which the unity of the Godhead was the leading principle, and in which it differed from all other systems, he should make use of terms directly implicative of a plurality in it; yet so deeply was the awful truth under consideration impressed upon the mind of the [[Hebrew]] legislator, that this is constantly done by him; and, indeed, as Allix has observed, there is scarcely any method of speaking from which a plurality in [[Deity]] may be inferred, that is not used either by himself in the Pentateuch, or by the other inspired writers in various parts of the Old Testament. A plural is joined with a verb singular, as in the passage cited before from Genesis 1:1; a plural is joined with a verb plural, as in Genesis 35:7 , "And [[Jacob]] called the name of the place El- beth-el, because the Gods there appeared to him;" a plural is joined with an adjective plural, Joshua 24:19 , "You cannot serve the Lord; for he is the holy Gods." To these passages, if we add that remarkable one from Ecclesiastes, "Remember thy Creators in the days of thy youth," and the predominant use of the terms, Jehovah Elohim, or, the "Lord thy Gods," which occur a hundred times in the law, (the word Jehovah implying the unity of the essence, and Elohim a plurality in that unity,) we must allow that nothing can be more plainly marked than this doctrine in the ancient Scriptures. </p> <p> Though the August name of Jehovah in a more peculiar manner belongs to God the Father, yet is that name, in various parts of Scripture, applied to each person in the holy Trinity. The Hebrews considered that name in so sacred a light, that they never pronounced it, and used the word [[Adonai]] instead of it. It was, indeed a name that ranked first among their profoundest cabbala; a mystery, sublime, ineffable, incommunicable. It was called tetragrammaton, or the name of four letters, and these letters are <em> jod, he, vau, he, </em> the proper pronunciation of which, from long disuse, is said to be no longer known to the [[Jews]] themselves. This awful name was first revealed by God to Moses from the centre of the burning bush; and Josephus, who, as well as Scripture, relates this circumstance, evinces his veneration for it, by calling it the name which his religion did not permit him to mention. From this word the Pagan title of Iao and Jove is, with the greatest probability, supposed to have been originally formed; and in the [[Golden]] Verses of Pythagoras, there is an oath still extant to this purpose, "By Him who has the four letters." As the name Jehovah, however, in some instances applied to the Son and the [[Holy]] Spirit, was the proper name of God the Father, so is Logos in as peculiar a manner the appropriated name of God the Son. The [[Chaldee]] Paraphrasts translate the original Hebrew text by <em> Mimra da Jehovah, </em> literally, "the word of Jehovah," a term totally different, as Bishop Kidder has incontestably proved, in its signification, and in its general application among the Jews, from the Hebrew <em> dabar, </em> which simply means a discourse or decree, and is properly rendered by <em> pithgam. </em> In the [[Septuagint]] translation of the Bible, a work supposed by the Jews to have been undertaken by men immediately inspired from above, the former term is universally rendered Λογος , and it is so rendered and so understood by [[Philo]] and all the more ancient rabbins. The name of the third person in the ever blessed Trinity has descended unaltered from the days of Moses to our own time; for, as well in the sacred writings as by the Targumists, and by the modern doctors of the [[Jewish]] church, he is styled Ruach Hakhodesh, the Holy Spirit. He is sometimes, however, in the rabbinical books, denominated by Shechinah, or glory of Jehovah; in some places he is called Sephirah, or Wisdom; and in others the Binah, or Understanding. From the enumeration of these circumstances, it must be sufficiently evident to the mind which unites piety and reflection, that so far from being silent upon the subject, the ancient [[Scriptures]] commence with an avowal of this doctrine, and that, in fact, the creation was the result of the joint operations of the Trinity. </p> <p> If the argument above offered should still appear inconclusive, the twenty- sixth verse of the first chapter of Genesis contains so pointed an attestation to the truth of it, that, when duly considered, it must stagger the most hardened skeptic; for in that text not only the plurality is unequivocally expressed, but the act which is the peculiar prerogative of Deity is mentioned together with that plurality, the one circumstance illustrating the other, and both being highly elucidatory of this doctrine: "And God (Elohim) said, Let <em> us </em> make man in our image, after our likeness." Why the Deity should speak of himself in the plural number, unless that Deity consisted of more than one person, it is difficult to conceive; for the answer given by the modern Jews, that this is only a figurative mode of expression, implying the high dignity of the speaker, and that it is usual for earthly sovereigns to use this language by way of distinction, is futile, for two reasons. In the first place it is highly degrading to the [[Supreme]] [[Majesty]] to suppose he would take his model of speaking and thinking from man, though it is highly consistent with the vanity of man to arrogate to himself, as doubtless was the case in the licentiousness of succeeding ages, the style and imagined conceptions of Deity; and it will be remembered, that these solemn words were spoken before the creation of any of those mortals, whose false notions of greatness and sublimity the [[Almighty]] is thus impiously supposed to adopt. In truth, there does not seem to be any real dignity in an expression, which, when used by a human sovereign in relation to himself, approaches very near to absurdity. The genuine fact, however, appears to be this. When the tyrants of the east first began to assume divine honours, they assumed likewise the majestic language appropriated to, and highly becoming, the Deity, but totally inapplicable to man. The error was propagated from age to age through a long succession of despots, and at length Judaic apostasy arrived at such a pitch of profane absurdity, as to affirm that very phraseology to be borrowed from man which was the original and peculiar language of the Divinity. It was, indeed, remarkably pertinent when applied to Deity; for in a succeeding chapter, we have more decisive authority for what is thus asserted, where the Lord God himself says. "Behold, the man is become as one of us;" a very singular expression, which some Jewish commentators, with equal effrontery, contend was spoken by the Deity to the council of angels, that, according to their assertions, attended him at the creation. From the name of the Lord God being used in so emphatical a manner, it evidently appears to be addressed to those sacred persons to whom it was before said, "Let us make man;" for would indeed the omnipotent Jehovah, presiding in a less dignified council, use words that have such an evident tendency to place the Deity on a level with created beings? </p> <p> The first passage to be adduced from the New Testament in proof of this important doctrine of the Trinity, is, the charge and commission which our [[Saviour]] gave to his apostles, to "go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," </p> <p> Matthew 28:19 . The [[Gospel]] is every where in [[Scripture]] represented as a covenant or conditional offer of eternal salvation from God to man; and baptism was the appointed ordinance by which men were to be admitted into that covenant, by which that offer was made and accepted. This covenant being to be made with God himself, the ordinance must of course be performed in his name; but Christ directed that it should be performed in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; and therefore we conclude that God is the same as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Since baptism is to be performed in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, they must be all three persons; and since no superiority or difference whatever is mentioned in this solemn form of baptism, we conclude that these three persons are all of one substance, power, and eternity. Are we to be baptized in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and is it possible that the Father should be self-existent, eternal, the Lord God Omnipotent; and that the Son, in whose name we are equally baptized, should be a mere man, born of a woman, and subject to all the frailties and imperfections of human nature? or, is it possible that the Holy Ghost, in whose name also we are equally baptized, should be a bare energy or operation, a quality or power, without even personal existence? Our feelings, as well as our reason, revolt from the idea of such disparity. </p> <p> This argument will derive great strength from the practice of the early ages, and from the observations which we meet with in several of the ancient fathers relative to it. We learn from Ambrose, that persons at the time of their baptism, declared their belief in the three persons of the Holy Trinity, and that they were dipped in the water three times. In his [[Treatise]] upon the [[Sacraments]] he says, "Thou wast asked at thy baptism, [[Dost]] thou believe in God the Father Almighty? and thou didst reply, I believe, and thou wast dipped; and a second time thou wast asked, Dost thou believe in Jesus Christ the Lord? thou didst answer again, I believe, and thou wast dipped; a third time the question was repeated, Dost thou believe in the Holy Ghost? and the answer was, I believe, then thou wast dipped a third time." It is to be noticed, that the belief, here expressed separately, in the three persons of the Trinity, is precisely the same in all. Tertullian, Basil, and Jerom, all mention this practice of trine immersion as ancient; and Jerom says, "We are thrice dipped in the water, that the mystery of the Trinity may appear to be but one. We are not baptized in the names of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but in one name, which is God's; and, therefore, though we be thrice put under water to represent the mystery of the Trinity, yet it is reputed but one baptism." Thus the mysterious union of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, as one God, was, in the opinion of the purer ages of the [[Christian]] church, clearly expressed in this form of baptism. By it the primitive Christians understood the Father's gracious acceptance of the atonement offered by the Messiah; the peculiar protection of the Son, our great High [[Priest]] and Intercessor; and the readiness of the Holy [[Ghost]] to sanctify, to assist, and to comfort all the obedient followers of Christ, confirmed by the visible gift of tongues, of prophecy, and divers other gifts to the first disciples. And as their great Master's instructions evidently distinguished these persons from each other, without any difference in their authority or power, all standing forth as equally dispensing the benefits of Christianity, as equally the objects of the faith required in converts upon admission into the church, they clearly understood that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, were likewise equally the objects of their grateful worship: this fully appears from their prayers, doxologies, hymns, and creeds, which are still extant. </p> <p> The second passage to be produced in support of the doctrine now under consideration, is, the doxology at the conclusion of St. Paul's Second [[Epistle]] to the Corinthians, "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost, be with you." The manner in which Christ and the Holy Ghost are here mentioned, implies that they are persons, for none but persons can confer grace or fellowship; and these three great blessings of grace, love, and fellowship, being respectively prayed for by the inspired apostle from Jesus Christ, God the Father, and the Holy Ghost, without any intimation of disparity, we conclude that these three persons are equal and Divine. This solemn benediction may therefore be considered as another proof of the Trinity, since it acknowledges the divinity of Jesus Christ and of the Holy Ghost. The third passage is the following salutation or benediction in the beginning of the Revelation of St. John: "Grace and peace from Him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven spirits which are before his throne, and from Jesus Christ." Here the Father is described by a periphrasis taken from his attribute of eternity; and "the seven spirits" is a mystical expression for the Holy Ghost, used upon this occasion either because the salutation is addressed to seven churches, every one of which had partaken of the Spirit. or because seven was a sacred number among the Jews, denoting both variety and perfection, and in this case alluding to the various gifts, administrations, and operations of the Holy Ghost. Since grace and peace are prayed for from these three persons jointly and without discrimination, we infer an equality in their power to dispense those blessings; and we farther conclude that these three persons together constitute the Supreme Being, who is alone the object of prayer, and is alone the [[Giver]] of every good and of every perfect gift. It might be right to remark, that the seven spirits cannot mean angels, since prayers are never in Scripture addressed to angels, nor are blessings ever pronounced in their name. It is unnecessary to quote any of the numerous passages in which the Father is singly called God, as some of them must be recollected by every one, and the divinity of the Father is not called in question by any sect of Christians; and those passages which prove the divinity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost separately, will be more properly, considered under those heads. In the mean time we may observe, that if it shall appear from Scripture, that Christ is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, it will follow, since we are assured that there is but one God, that the three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, by a mysterious union, constitute the one God, or, as it is expressed in the first article of the church of England: "There is a Trinity in Unity; and in the unity of this Godhead there be three [[Persons]] of one substance, power, and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." </p> <p> The word Trinity does not occur in Scripture, nor do we find it in any of the early confessions of faith; but this is no argument against the doctrine itself, since we learn from the fathers of the first three centuries, that the divinity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost was, from the days of the Apostles, acknowledged by the catholic church, and that those who maintained a contrary opinion were considered as heretics; and as every one knows that neither the divinity of the Father, nor the unity of the Godhead, was ever called in question at any period, it follows that the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity has been in substance, in all its constituent parts, always known among Christians. In the fourth century it became the subject of eager and general controversy; and it was not till then that this doctrine was particularly discussed. While there was no denial or dispute, proof and defence were unnecessary: <em> Nunquid enim perfecte de Trinitate tractatum est, antequam oblatrarent Ariani? </em> But this doctrine is positively mentioned as being admitted among catholic Christians, by writers who lived long before that age of controversy. Justin Martyr, in refuting the charge of atheism urged against Christians, because they did not believe in the gods of the Heathen, expressly says, "We worship and adore the Father, and the Son who came from him and taught us these things, and the prophetic Spirit;" and soon after, in the same apology, he undertakes to show the reasonableness of the honour paid by Christians to the Father in the first place, to the Son in the second, and to the Holy Ghost in the third; and says, that their assigning the second place to a crucified man, was, by unbelievers, denominated madness, because they were ignorant of the mystery, which he then proceeds to explain. Athenagoras, in replying to the same charge of atheism urged against Christians, because they refused to worship the false gods of the Heathen, says "Who would not wonder, when he knows that we, who call upon God the Father, and God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, showing their power in the unity, and their distinction in order, should be called atheists?" [[Clement]] of [[Alexandria]] not only mentions three divine persons, but invokes them as one only God. Praxeas, Sabellius, and other Unitarians, accused the orthodox Christians of tritheism, which is of itself a clear proof that the orthodox worshipped the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and though in reality they considered these three persons as constituting the one true God, it is obvious that their enemies might easily represent that worship as an acknowledgment of three Gods. Tertullian, in writing against Praxeas, maintains, that a Trinity rationally conceived is consistent with truth, and that unity irrationally conceived forms heresy. He had before said, in speaking of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, that "there are three of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, because there is one God:" and he afterward adds, "The connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Comforter, makes three united together, the one with the other; which three are one thing, not one person; as it is said, I and the Father are one thing, with regard to the unity of substance, not to the singularity of number:" and he also expressly says, "The Father is God, and the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God;" and again, "The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, believed to be three, constitute one God." And in another part of his works he says, "There is a Trinity of one Divinity, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost." And Tertullian not only maintains these doctrines, but asserts that they were prior to any heresy, and had, indeed, been the faith of Christians from the first promulgation of the Gospel. To these writers of the second century, we may add [[Origen]] and [[Cyprian]] in the third; the former of whom mentions baptism (alluding to its appointed form) as "the source and fountain of graces to him who dedicates himself to the divinity of the adorable Trinity." And the latter, after reciting the same form of baptism, says that "by it Christ delivered the doctrine of the Trinity, unto which mystery or sacrament the nations were to be baptized." It would be easy to multiply quotations upon this subject; but these are amply sufficient to show the opinions of the early fathers, and to refute the assertion that the doctrine of the Trinity was an invention of the fourth century. To these positive testimonies may be subjoined a negative argument: those who acknowledged the divinity of Christ and of the Holy Ghost, are never called heretics by any writer of the first three centuries; and this circumstance is surely a strong proof that the doctrine of the Trinity was the doctrine of the primitive church; more especially, since the names of those who first denied the divinity of Christ and of the Holy Ghost, are transmitted to us as of persons who dissented from the common faith of Christians. </p> <p> But while we contend that the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity is founded in Scripture, and supported by the authority of the early Christians, we must acknowledge that it is not given to man to understand in what manner the three persons are united, or how, separately and jointly, they are God. It would, perhaps, have been well, if divines, in treating this awful and mysterious subject, had confined themselves to the expressions of Scripture; for the moment we begin to explain it beyond the written word of God, we plunge ourselves into inextricable difficulties. And how can it be otherwise? Is it to be expected that our finite understandings should be competent to the full comprehension of the nature and properties of an infinite Being? "Can we find out the Almighty to perfection," Job 11:7; or penetrate into the essence of the Most High? "God is a Spirit," John 4:24 , and our gross conceptions are but ill-adapted to the contemplation of a pure and spiritual Being. We know not the essence of our own mind, nor the precise distinction of its several faculties; and why then should we hope to comprehend the personal characters which exist in the Godhead? "If I tell you earthly things, and you understand them not, how shall ye understand if I tell you heavenly things?" When we attempt to investigate the nature of the Deity, whose existence is commensurate with eternity, by whose power the universe was created, and by whose wisdom it is governed; whose presence fills all space, and whose knowledge extends to the thoughts of every man in every age, and to the events of all places, past, present, and to come, the mind is quickly lost in the vastness of these ideas, and, unable to find any sure guide to direct its progress, it becomes, at every step, more bewildered and entangled in the endless mazes of metaphysical abstraction. "God is a God that hideth himself." "We cannot by searching find out God." "Behold, God is great, and we know him not," </p> <p> Job 23:9; Job 11:7; Job 36:26 . "Such knowledge is too wonderful and excellent for us; it is high; we cannot attain unto it," Psalms 139:6 . It is for us, simply and in that docile spirit which becomes us, to receive the testimony of God as to himself, and to fix ourselves upon that firmest of all foundations, and most rational of all evidence, "Thus saith the Lord." </p>

<p> <strong> TRINITY </strong> </p> <p> 1. The doctrine approached . It is sometimes asked why we are not given a definite statement that there are three Persons in the Godhead. One reason for the absence of any such categorical and dogmatic teaching is probably to be found in the fact that the earliest hearers of the gospel were Jews, and that any such pronouncement might (and probably would) have seemed a contradiction of their own great truth of the unity of the Godhead. Consequently, instead of giving an intellectual statement of doctrine, which might have led to theological and philosophic discussion, and ended only in more Intense opposition to Christianity, the [[Apostles]] preached Jesus of [[Nazareth]] as a personal [[Redeemer]] from sin, and urged on every one the acceptance of Him and His claims. Then, in due course, would come the inevitable process of thought and meditation upon this personal experience, and this would in turn lead to the inference that Jesus, from whom, and in whom, these experiences were being enjoyed, must be more than man, must be none other than Divine, ‘for who can forgive sins but God only?’ Through such a personal impression and inference based on experience, a distinction in the Godhead would at once be realized. Then, in the course of their Christian life, and through fuller instruction, would be added the personal knowledge and experience of the Holy Spirit, and once again a similar inference would in due course follow, making another distinction in their thought of the Godhead. The intellectual conception and expression of these distinctions probably concerned only comparatively few of the early believers, but nevertheless all of them had in their lives an experience of definite action and blessing which could only have been from above, and which no difficulty of intellectual correlation or of theological co-ordination with former teachings could invalidate and destroy. </p> <p> <strong> 2. The doctrine derived </strong> . The doctrine of the Trinity is an expansion of the doctrine of the Incarnation, and emerges out of the personal claim of our Lord. We believe this position can be made good from the NT. We take first the Gospels, and note that our Lord’s method of revealing Himself to His disciples was by means of personal impression and influence. His character, teaching, and claim formed the centre and core of everything, and His one object was, as it were, to stamp Himself on His disciples, knowing that in the light of fuller experience His true nature and relations would become clear to them. We see the culmination of this impression and experience in the confession of the Apostle, ‘My Lord and my God.’ Then, as we turn to the Acts of the Apostles, we find St. Peter preaching to Jews, and emphasizing two associated truths: (1) the Sonship and Messiahship of Jesus, as proved by the Resurrection, and (2) the consequent relation of the hearers to Him as to a Saviour and Master. The emphasis is laid on the personal experience of forgiveness and grace, without any attempt to state our Lord’s position in relation to God. Indeed, the references to Jesus Christ as the ‘Servant [wrongly rendered in AV [Note: Authorized Version.] ‘Son’] of God’ in Acts 3:13; Acts 3:26; Acts 4:27 , seem to show that the Christian thought regarding our Lord was still immature, so far as there was any purely Intellectual consideration of it. It is worthy of note that this phrase, which is doubtless the NT counterpart of Isaiah’s teaching on the ‘Servant of the Lord,’ is not found in the NT later than these earlier chapters of the Acts. Yet in the preaching of St. Peter the claim made for Jesus of Nazareth as the Source of healing ( Acts 3:6; Acts 3:16 ), the Prince-Leader of Life ( Acts 3:15 ), the Head Stone of the corner ( Acts 4:11 ), and the one and only Way of [[Salvation]] ( Acts 4:12 ), was an unmistakable assumption of the position and power of Godhead. </p> <p> In the same way the doctrine of the Godhead of the <strong> Holy Spirit </strong> arises directly out of our Lord’s revelation. Once grant a real personal distinction between the Father and the Son, and it is easy to believe it also of the Spirit as revealed by the Son. As long as Christ was present on earth there was no room and no need for the specific work of the Holy Spirit, but as Christ was departing from the world He revealed a doctrine which clearly associated the Holy Spirit with Himself and the Father in a new and unique way ( John 14:16-17; John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:7-15 ). [[Arising]] immediately out of this, and consonant with it, is the place given to the Holy Spirit in the Book of the Acts. From ch. 5, where lying against the Holy Spirit is equivalent to lying against God ( John 5:3-4; John 5:9 ), we see throughout the book the essential Deity of the Holy Spirit in the work attributed to Him of superintending and controlling the life of the [[Apostolic]] Church ( John 2:4 , John 8:29 , John 10:19 , John 13:2; John 13:4 , John 16:6-7 , John 20:25 ). </p> <p> Then, as we pass to the Epistles, we find references to our Lord Jesus and to the Holy Spirit which imply unmistakably the functions of Godhead. In the opening salutations our Lord is associated with God as the Source of grace and peace (1 Thessalonians 1:1 f., 1 Peter 1:2 ), and in the closing benedictions as the [[Divine]] Source of blessing ( Romans 15:30 , 2 Thessalonians 3:16; 2 Thessalonians 3:18 ). In the doctrinal statements He is referred to in practical relation to us and to our spiritual life in terms that can be predicated of God only, and in the revelations concerning things to come He is stated to be about to occupy a position which can refer to God only. In like manner, the correlation of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son in matters essentially Divine is clear ( 1 Corinthians 2:4-6 , 2 Corinthians 13:14 , 1 Peter 1:2 ). </p> <p> In all these assertions and implications of the Godhead of Jesus Christ, it is to be noted very carefully that St. Paul has not the faintest idea of contradicting his Jewish monotheism. Though he and others thus proclaimed the Godhead of Christ, it is of great moment to remember that [[Christianity]] was never accused of polytheism. The NT doctrine of God is essentially a form of monotheism, and stands in no relation to polytheism. There can be no doubt that, however and whenever the Trinitarian idea was formulated, it arose in immediateconnexion with the monotheism of Judæa; and the Apostles, Jews though they were, in stating so unmistakably the Godhead of Jesus Christ, are never once conscious of teaching anything inconsistent with their most cherished ideas about the unity of God. </p> <p> <strong> 3. The doctrine confirmed </strong> . When we have approached the doctrine by means of the personal experience of redemption, we are prepared to give full consideration to the two lines of teaching found in the NT. ( <em> a </em> ) One line of teaching insists on <em> the unity of the Godhead </em> ( 1 Corinthians 8:4 , James 2:19 ); and ( <em> b </em> ) the other line reveals <em> distinctions within the Godhead </em> ( Matthew 3:16-17; Matthew 28:19 , 2 Corinthians 13:14 ). We see clearly that (1) the Father is God ( Matthew 11:25 , Romans 15:6 , Ephesians 4:6 ); (2) the Son is God ( John 1:1; John 1:18; John 20:28 , Acts 20:26 , Romans 9:5 , Hebrews 1:8 , Colossians 2:9 , Philippians 2:6 , 2 Peter 1:1 ); (3) the Holy Spirit is God ( Acts 5:3-4 , 1 Corinthians 2:10-11 , Ephesians 2:22 ); (4) the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct from one another, sending and being sent, honouring and being honoured. The Father honours the Son, the Son honours the Father, and the Holy Spirit honours the Son ( John 15:26; John 16:13-14; John 17:1; John 17:8; John 17:18; John 17:23 ). (5) Nevertheless, whatever relations of subordination there may be between the Persons in working out redemption, the three are alike regarded as God. The doctrine of the Trinity is the correlation, co-ordination, and synthesis of the teaching of these passages. In the Unity of the Godhead there is a Trinity of Persons working out redemption. God the Father is the Creator and Ruler of man and the Provider of redemption through His love ( John 3:16 ). God the Son is the Redeemer, who became man for the purpose of our redemption. God the Holy Spirit is the ‘Executive of the Godhead,’ who applies to each believing soul the benefits of redemption. The elements of the plan of redemption thus find their root, foundation, and spring in the nature of the Godhead; and the obvious reason why these distinctions which we express by the terms ‘Person’ and ‘Trinity’ were not revealed earlier than NT times is that not until then was redemption accomplished. </p> <p> <strong> 4. The doctrine stated </strong> . By the Trinity, therefore, we mean the specific and unique Christian idea of the Godhead. The foundation of the Christian idea of the Godhead is that of the One Supreme Almighty Spirit whom we worship, to whom we pray, from whom we receive grace, and whom we serve. But the specific Christian thought of God is that of a Spirit, in the unity of whose being is revealed a distinction of Persons whom we call Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; the God from whom, through whom, and by whom all things come the Father as the primal Source, the Son as the redemptive Mediator, and the Holy Spirit as the personal Applier of life and grace. The Christian idea of the Trinity may be summed up in the familiar words: ‘The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. The Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the [[Glory]] equal, the Majesty coeternal. And in this Trinity none is afore or after other: none is greater or less than another, but the whole three Persons are co-eternal together and co-equal.’ </p> <p> The term ‘Trinity’ dates from the second century, being found in Greek in [[Theophilus]] of [[Antioch]] (a.d. 181); and the actual Latin word, from which we derive our English term, in Tertullian (a.d. 200). Its use is sometimes criticised because it is not found in the Bible, but this is no valid objection to it. Like other words. <em> e.g </em> . ‘Incarnation,’ it expresses in technical language the truth about the Godhead which is found implicitly in the NT. The real question is whether it is true, and whether it is fairly expressive of the [[Bible]] truth. It is intended to express and safeguard that real and essential unity of the Godhead which is at the root of the distinctions of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The term ‘Person’ is also sometimes objected to. Like all human language, it is liable to be accused of inadequacy and even positive error. It certainly must not be pressed too far, or it will lead to Tritheism. While we use the term to denote distinctions in the Godhead, we do not imply distinctions which amount to separateness, but distinctions which are associated with essential mutual coinherence or inclusiveness. We intend by the term ‘Person’ to express those real distinctions of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit which are found amid the oneness of the Godhead, distinctions which are no mere temporary manifestations of Deity, but essential and permanent elements within the Divine unity. </p> <p> <strong> 5. The doctrine supported </strong> . When all this is granted and so far settled, we may find a second line of teaching to support the foregoing in the revelation of God as Love. Following the suggestion of St. Augustine, most modern theologians have rightly seen in this a safe ground for our belief. It transcends, and perhaps renders unnecessary, all arguments drawn from human and natural analogies of the doctrine. ‘God is love’ means, as some one has well said, ‘God as the [[Infinite]] home of all moral emotions, the fullest and most highly differentiated life.’ Love must imply relationships, and, as He is eternally perfect in Himself, He can realize Himself as Love only through relationships within His own Being. We may go so far as to say that this is the only way of obtaining a living thought about God. Belief in [[Theism]] postulates a self-existent God, and yet it is impossible to think of a God without relationships. These relationships must be eternal and prior to His temporal relationships to the universe of His own creation. He must have relationships eternally adequate, and worthy, and when once we realize that love must have an object in God as well as in ourselves, we have the germ of that distinction in the Godhead which is theologically known as the Trinity. </p> <p> <strong> 6. The doctrine anticipated </strong> . At this stage, and only here, we may seek another support for the doctrine. In the light of the facts of the NT we cannot refrain from asking whether there may not have been some adumbrations of it in the OT. As the doctrine arises directly out of the facts of the NT, we do not for an instant look for any full discovery of it in the OT. But if the doctrine be true, we might expect that Christian Jews, at any rate, would seek for some anticipation of it in the OT. We believe we find it there. ( <em> a </em> ) The references to the ‘ <em> Angel of Jehovah </em> ’ prepare the way for the Christian doctrine of a distinction in the Godhead ( Genesis 18:2; Genesis 18:16; Genesis 17:22 with Genesis 19:1 , Joshua 5:13-15 with Joshua 6:1 , Judges 13:8-21 , Zechariah 13:7 ). ( <em> b </em> ) Allusions to the ‘ <em> Spirit of Jehovah </em> ’ form another line of OT teaching. In Genesis 1:2 the Spirit is an energy only, but in subsequent books an agent ( Isaiah 40:13; Isaiah 48:16; Isaiah 59:19; Isaiah 63:10 f.). ( <em> c </em> ) <em> The personification of Divine Wisdom </em> is also to be observed, for the connexion between the personification of Wisdom in Proverbs 8:1-36 , the Logos of John 1:1-18 , and the ‘wisdom’ of 1 Corinthians 1:24 can hardly be accidental. ( <em> d </em> ) There are also other hints, such as the triplicity of the Divine [[Names]] ( Numbers 6:24-27 , Psalms 29:3-5 , Isaiah 6:3 ), which may not be pressed, but can hardly be overlooked. Hints are all that were to be expected or desired until the fulness of time should have come. The function of [[Israel]] was to guard God’s transcendence and omnipresence; it was for Christianity to develop the doctrine of the Godhead into the fulness, depth, and richness that we find in the revelation of the Incarnate Son of God. </p> <p> <strong> 7. The doctrine justified </strong> . ( <em> a </em> ) <em> From the facts of Scripture </em> . It emerges clearly from the claim of Christ; it is an extension of the doctrine of the Incarnation. If the [[Incarnation]] was real, the Trinity is true. ( <em> b </em> ) <em> From the facts of Christian experience </em> . It is a simple fact that Christians of all periods of history claim to have personal direct fellowship with Christ. This claim must be accounted for. It is possible only by predicating Deity of our Lord, for such fellowship would be impossible with one who is not God. ( <em> c </em> ) <em> From the facts of history </em> . [[Compared]] with other religions, Christianity makes God a reality in a way in which no other system does. The doctrine of the Trinity has several positive theological and philosophical advantages over the Unitarian conception of God, but especially is this so in reference to the relation of God to the world. There are two conceivable relations of God to the world as transcendent (in Mohammedanism), or as immanent (in Buddhism). The first alone means Deism, the second alone Pantheism. But the Christian idea is of God as at once transcendent and immanent. It is therefore the true protection of a living Theism, which otherwise oscillates uncertainly between these two extremes of [[Deism]] and Pantheism, either of which is false to It. It is only in Christianity that the Semitic and Aryan conceptions of God are united, blended, correlated, balanced, and preserved. ( <em> d </em> ) <em> From reason </em> . It is simple truth to say that, if Jesus be not God, Christians are idolaters, for they worship One who is not God. There is no other alternative. But when once the truth of the doctrine of the Trinity is regarded as arising out of Christ’s claim to Godhead as Divine Redeemer, reason soon finds its warrant for the doctrine. The doctrine of the Trinity comes to us by revelation and not by nature, though it is soon seen to have points of contact with thought and reason. </p> <p> The doctrine ‘started in the concrete, with the baptismal formula … emanating from Jesus Christ. And throughout the history of its dogmatic formulation, we are confronted with this fact. It was regarded as a revelation by the men who shaped its intellectual expression; and it was only in the process … of that expression that its congruity with human psychology came out; that psychology in fact being distinctly developed in the effort to give it utterance.… They did not accommodate Christian religion to their philosophy, but philosophy to their Christian religion.’ This doctrine appealed ‘first to unsophisticated men, far removed from Alexandria or Athens; yet the very words in which it does so, turn out, upon analysis, to involve a view of personality which the world had not attained, but which, once stated, is seen to be profoundly, philosophically true’ (Illingworth, <em> Personality </em> , p. 212f.). </p> <p> W. H. Griffith Thomas. </p>

<p> God is one, but he exists as a Trinity. Any attempt to define the Trinity is difficult and dangerous, as it is an attempt to do what the Bible does not do. However, by a study of the biblical teaching about God, we understand that although God is one, the form in which his godhead exists is that of three persons – Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Each of the three persons is fully God, yet there is only one God, not three. </p> <p> One God, three persons </p> <p> The Old Testament gives little clear teaching about the Trinity, for the emphasis there is on the oneness of God. Israel lived among nations that had many gods. The important truth impressed upon Israel was that there is only one God, and he is a unity (Deuteronomy 6:4). </p> <p> Our understanding of the Trinity comes largely from the New Testament. This does not mean that the God of Old Testament times differed from the God of New Testament times, or that a God who was previously ‘one’ branched out into three. God has always existed in a Trinity. What is new in the New Testament is the revelation of the Trinity, not the Trinity itself. </p> <p> The reason why the revelation of the Trinity is new in the New Testament is that it was related to the great acts of God in bringing his plan of salvation to completion in Christ. God did not reveal his truth in the form of abstract truths unrelated to the situation in which the people of the time lived. Rather he revealed his truth step by step as he brought his people closer to the full salvation he had planned. </p> <p> Nevertheless, with the fuller knowledge that Christians gain from the New Testament, they may see suggestions of the Trinity in the Old Testament. Such suggestions are there, even though believers of Old Testament times may not have seen them (cf. 1 Peter 1:10-12). </p> <p> For example, in the Old Testament references to the creation there was an inseparable connection between God, the creative power of God’s Word, and the life-giving power of God’s Spirit (Genesis 1:1-3; Job 33:4; Psalms 33:6). But with the coming of Jesus, people gained a clearer understanding of the work of the Trinity in all the activity of God, including the creation (John 1:1-4). This understanding increased further as Jesus taught his followers and left with them the gift of the Holy Spirit, who would interpret his teaching and continue to enlighten them (John 16:13-15). </p> <p> The revelation through Jesus Christ </p> <p> When God took human form in the person of Jesus Christ, much that was previously secret and hidden became open. Jesus revealed God to the world (John 1:1; John 1:14; John 1:18). </p> <p> Through Jesus Christ, God was now physically present in the world. But in another sense he was not physically present. Jesus made it plain that when people saw him they saw God (John 8:58-59), but he also made it plain that God existed elsewhere; for he himself came from God, and during his earthly life he spoke to God (John 6:38; John 11:41-42). </p> <p> Jesus explained this apparent contradiction by pointing out that he was God the Son, and that the one from whom he came and to whom he spoke was God the Father. Although these two persons were distinct, they were uniquely united (John 5:18; John 5:37; John 8:42; John 10:30; John 11:41; John 14:9; John 16:26-28; see FATHER; SON OF GOD). </p> <p> Having become a human being, God the Son now gave the additional revelation that there was a third person in the Godhead, the Holy Spirit. All three persons were involved in the miraculous coming of the Son into the world (Luke 1:35), and the life and ministry of Jesus that followed should have shown people that God existed as a Trinity – Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:16-17; Matthew 12:28; Luke 4:18; John 3:34-35). Just before he completed his ministry, Jesus explained about the Holy Spirit more fully. He promised that after he returned to his Father, he and the Father would send the Holy Spirit to be with his disciples, as he himself had been previously (John 14:16-17; John 14:26; John 15:26). </p> <p> The Holy Spirit, though a separate person from the Father and the Son, is inseparably united with both (Acts 2:32-33). He comes from the Father as the bearer of the Father’s power and presence (John 15:26; John 16:7-11), and he comes from the Son as the bearer of the Son’s power and presence (John 14:18; John 16:7; Romans 8:9; see HOLY SPIRIT). Although there is a distinction between the three persons of the Godhead, there is no division. Each has his own personality and will, but he never acts independently of the others (John 14:26; Acts 16:6-7; Galatians 4:6). </p> <p> No change in God </p> <p> This three-in-one and one-in-three unity of the Godhead is well illustrated in the command that Jesus gave to his disciples to baptize their converts ‘in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit’ (Matthew 28:19). In Jewish thought the name represented the person (see NAME). Jesus here spoke of the name (singular), indicating one God, but at the same time he showed that this God existed in three persons. And these three persons were distinct from each other, yet uniquely and inseparably united. </p> <p> As a God-fearing Jew, Jesus gave his complete allegiance to the one and only true God, and he taught others to do likewise (Deuteronomy 6:4; Matthew 22:37). Jesus’ statement therefore indicated that this God whom [[Israelites]] of former times worshipped under the name of [[Yahweh]] (Jehovah) was the same God as Christians worshipped under the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The God who is ‘one’ is at the same time a Trinity. </p> <p> Faith of the New Testament writers </p> <p> The early disciples reached a fuller understanding of the Trinity through the life, teaching, death and triumph of Jesus Christ. They then passed on their insights through the writings of the New Testament. They never tried to define the Trinity, nor did they try to ‘prove’ it in a theoretical sense. Since they knew God as the one who gave his Son to die for them and gave his Spirit to indwell them, they thought of God in no other way than as a Trinity. The New Testament writings therefore assume the fact of the Trinity at all times (Ephesians 4:4-6; Ephesians 5:18-20; 1 Thessalonians 1:3-5; 1 Peter 1:2). Yet they also assume the oneness of God (Romans 3:30; 1 Corinthians 8:4). </p> <p> In keeping with the teachings of Jesus, the teachings of the New Testament writers show that the three persons of the Trinity are fully and equally God. No one person is inferior to, or superior to, any other. [[Concerning]] their operations, however, there is a difference. The Son is willingly subject to the Father (John 5:30; John 7:16; John 12:49; Philippians 2:5-8; Hebrews 10:5-7), and the Spirit is willingly subject to both the Father and the Son (John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:13-15; Romans 8:26-27; Galatians 4:6; Philippians 1:19). </p> <p> Because of the unity between the persons of the Trinity, all three are active in all the work of God. This work is not, as it were, divided among three persons. In a sense, what one does they all do. But the Bible story shows that there is also a sense in which their activities differ. </p> <p> The name ‘Father’ speaks of one who has to do with the origin of things, and this is seen in the great works of creation, history and redemption (Malachi 2:10; Ephesians 1:3-10; Hebrews 12:9; James 1:17). The Son is the one who reveals the Father, the one through whom the Father does these works (John 10:25; John 10:38; John 14:10; 2 Corinthians 5:19; Ephesians 1:3-10; Colossians 1:15-16). The Spirit is the one by whom God’s power operates in the world, the one who applies the truth of God’s works to people’s lives (John 14:17; John 16:7-13; Acts 1:8; Romans 8:2-4; Galatians 5:16-18; 1 Peter 1:2). God’s salvation comes from the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit (Titus 3:4-6), and people’s approach to God is by the Spirit, through the Son, to the Father (Ephesians 2:18). </p> <p> Relationship with the triune God </p> <p> In making statements about the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, the New Testament writers were not attempting a theoretical analysis of God. Their concern was not to set out in systematic form the character and activities of the persons of the Trinity, but to express the relationship that Christians have with God. Christians cannot fully understand the mysteries of the Godhead, but they should try to learn all they can about God; for the life they have in Christ depends on God being the sort of God he is – a Trinity. </p> <p> Jesus Christ, for example, could not be humankind’s Saviour if he were not the unique person that he is. The fact of the Trinity was essential to his birth (Luke 1:35), his life (John 3:34; John 5:36-37; Hebrews 2:3-4; 1 John 5:6-9), his death (Romans 8:32; Galatians 2:20; Hebrews 9:14), his resurrection (Acts 2:42; John 10:18; Romans 8:11) and his exaltation (Acts 5:30-32). </p> <p> The fact of the Trinity is essential also for the life of believers: their indwelling by God (Ephesians 4:6; Colossians 1:27; 1 Corinthians 6:19); their sanctification (John 17:17; Hebrews 2:11; 1 Corinthians 6:11), their enjoyment of salvation (2 Corinthians 13:14), their exercise of prayer (Romans 8:26-27; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 2:18), their eternal security (John 10:28-29; Ephesians 4:30) and their ultimate victory over death (John 5:21; Romans 8:11). </p> <p> Likewise the Trinity is involved in the life of the church (1 Corinthians 12:4-6) and in Christian service (2 Corinthians 3:5-6; 1 Timothy 1:12; Acts 20:28). The Scriptures that Christians possess are a provision from the triune God (2 Timothy 3:16-17; 1 Peter 1:10-11; 2 Peter 1:21). They are one of the means by which the same God wants to work in and through his people, as they build themselves up in their faith and prepare themselves for fellowship with him in the age to come (Judges 1:20-21). </p>

<i> trinity </i> <p> A proper biblical view of the Trinity balances the concepts of unity and distinctiveness. Two errors that appear in the history of the consideration of the doctrine are tritheism and unitarianism. In tritheism, error is made in emphasizing the distinctiveness of the Godhead to the point that the Trinity is seen as three separate Gods, or a Christian polytheism. On the other hand, unitarianism excludes the concept of distinctiveness while focusing solely on the aspect of God the Father. In this way, Christ and the Holy Spirit are placed in lower categories and made less than divine. Both errors compromise the effectiveness and contribution of the activity of God in redemptive history. </p> <p> The biblical concept of the Trinity developed through progressive revelation. See Revelation. The Old Testament consistently affirms the unity of God through such statements as, “Hear, [[O]] Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4 ). See [[Shema]] . God's oneness is stressed to caution the Israelites against the polytheism and practical atheism of their heathen neighbors. </p> <p> The Old Testament does feature implications of the trinitarian idea. This does not mean that the Trinity was fully knowable from the Old Testament, but that a vocabulary was established through the events of God's nearness and creativity; both receive developed meaning from New Testament writers. For example, the word of God is recognized as the agent of creation (Psalm 33:6 ,Psalms 33:6,33:9; compare Proverbs 3:19; Proverbs 8:27 ), revelation, and salvation (Psalm 107:20 ). This same vocabulary is given distinct personality in John's prologue (John 1:1-4 ) in the person of Jesus Christ. Other vocabulary categories include the wisdom of God (Proverbs 8:1 ) and the Spirit of God (Genesis 1:2; Psalm 104:30; Zechariah 4:6 ). </p> <p> A distinguishing feature of the New Testament is the doctrine of the Trinity. It is remarkable that New Testament writers present the doctrine in such a manner that it does not violate the Old Testament concept of the oneness of God. In fact, they unanimously affirm the Hebrew monothestic faith, but they extend it to include the coming of Jesus and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The early Christian church experienced the God of [[Abraham]] in a new and dramatic way without abandoning the oneness of God that permeates the Old Testament. As a fresh expression of God, the concept of the Trinity—rooted in the God of the past and consistent with the God of the past—absorbs the idea of the God of the past, but goes beyond the God of the past in a more personal encounter. </p> <p> The New Testament does not present a systematic presentation of the Trinity. The scattered segments from various writers that appear throughout the New Testament reflect a seemingly accepted understanding that exists without a full-length discussion. It is embedded in the framework of the Christian experience and simply assumed as true. The New Testament writers focus on statements drawn from the obvious existence of the trinitarian experience as opposed to a detailed exposition. </p> <p> The New Testament evidence for the Trinity can be grouped into four types of passages. The first is the trinitarian formula of Matthew 28:19; 2 Corinthians 13:14; 1 Peter 1:2; Revelation 1:4 . In each passage a trinitarian formula, repeated in summation fashion, registers a distinctive contribution of each person of the Godhead. Matthew 28:19 , for example, follows the triple formula of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that distinguishes Christian baptism. The risen Lord commissioned the disciples to baptize converts with a trinitarian emphasis that carries the distinctiveness of each person of the Godhead while associating their inner relationship. This passage is the clearest scriptural reference to a systematic presentation of the doctrine of the Trinity. </p> <p> Paul, in 2 Corinthians 13:14 , finalized his thoughts to the [[Corinthian]] church with a pastoral appeal that is grounded in “the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit” (NIV). The formulation is designed to have the practical impact of bringing that divided church together through their personal experinece of the Trinity in their daily lives. Significantly, in the trinitarian order Christ is mentioned first. This reflects the actual process of Christian salvation, since Christ is the key to opening insight into the work of the Godhead. Paul was calling attention to the trinitarian consciousness, not in the initial work of salvation which has already been accomplished at Corinth, but in the sustaining work that enables divisive Christians to achieve unity. </p> <p> In 1 Peter 1:2 , the trinitarian formula is followed with reference to each person of the Godhead. The scattered Christians are reminded through reference to the Trinity that their election (foreknowledge of the Father) and redemption (the sanctifying work of the Spirit) should lead to holy living obedience to the Son). </p> <p> John addressed the readers of Revelation with an expanded trinitarian formula that includes references to the persons of the Godhead (Revelation 1:4-6 ). The focus on the triumph of Christianity crystallizes the trinitarian greeting into a doxology that acknowledges the accomplished work and the future return of Christ. This elongated presentation serves as an encouragement to churches facing persecution. </p> <p> A second type of New Testament passage is the triadic form. Two passages cast in this structure are Ephesians 4:4-6 and 1 Corinthians 12:3-6 . Both passages refer to the three Persons, but not in the definitive formula of the previous passage. Each Scripture balances the unity of the church. Emphasis is placed on the administration of gifts by the Godhead. </p> <p> A third category of passages mentions the three persons of the Godhead, but without a clear triadic structure. In the accounts of the baptism of Jesus (Matthew 3:3-17; Mark 1:9-11; and Luke 3:21-22 ), the three synoptic writers recorded the presence of the Trinity when the Son was baptized, the Spirit descended, and the Father spoke with approval. Paul, in Galatians 4:4-6 , outlined the work of the Trinity in the aspect of the sending Father. Other representative passages in this category (2 Thessalonians 2:13-15; Titus 3:4-6; and Jude 1:20-21 ) portray each member of the Trinity in relation to a particular redemptive function. </p> <p> The fourth category of trinitarian passages includes those presented in the farewell discourse of Jesus to His disciples (John 14:16; John 15:26; John 16:13-15 ). In the context of these passages, Jesus expounded the work and ministry of the third person of the Godhead as the [[Agent]] of God in the continuing ministry of the Son. The Spirit is a Teacher who facilitates understanding on the disciples' part and, in being sent from the Father and the Son, is one in nature with the other Persons of the Trinity. He makes known the Son and “at the same time makes known the Father who is revealed in the Son” (John 16:15 ). The discourse emphasizes the interrelatedness of the Trinity in equality and operational significance. </p> <p> All of these passages are embryonic efforts by the early church to express its awareness of the Trinity. The New Testament is Christological in its approach, but it involves the fullness of God being made available to the individual believer through Jesus and by the Spirit. The consistent trinitarian expression is not a formulation of the doctrine, as such, but reveals an experiencing of God's persistent self-revelation. </p> <p> In the postbiblical era, the Christian church tried to express its doctrine in terms that were philosophically acceptable and logically coherent. Greek categories of understanding began to appear in explanation efforts. Discussion shifted from the New Testament emphasis on the function of the Trinity in redemptive history to an analysis of the unity of essence of the Godhead. </p> <p> A major question during those early centuries focused on the oneness of God. The <i> Sabelians </i> described the Godhead in terms of modes that existed only one at a time. This theory upheld the unity of God, but excluded His permanent distinctiveness. The <i> Docetists </i> understood Christ as an appearance of God in human form, while <i> Ebonites </i> described Jesus as an ordinary man indwelt with God's power at baptism. <i> [[Arius]] </i> was also an influential theologian who viewed Jesus as subordinate to God. To Arius, Jesus was a being created by God, higher than man, but less than God. This idea, as well as the others, was challenged by [[Athanasius]] at Nicea (A.D. 325), and the council decided for the position of Jesus as “of the exact same substance as the Father.” </p> <p> Probably the most outstanding thinker of the early centuries was [[Augustine]] of [[Hippo]] (A.D. 354-430). He began with the idea of God as one substance and sought explanation of the Godhead in psychological analogy: a person exists as one being with three dimensions of memory, understanding, and will; so also the Godhead exists as a unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. While this explanation is helpful and contains the concept of three persons in one, it does not resolve the complex nature of God. </p> <p> Perhaps four statements can summarize and clarify this study. </p> <p> 1. God is One. The God of the Old Testament is the same God of the New Testament. His offer of salvation in the Old Testament receives a fuller revelation in the New Testament in a way that is not different, but more complete. The doctrine of the Trinity does not abandon the monotheistic faith of Israel. </p> <p> 2. God has three distinct ways of being in the redemptive event, yet He remains an undivided unity. That God the Father imparts Himself to mankind through Son and Spirit without ceasing to be Himself is at the very heart of the Christian faith. A compromise in either the absolute sameness of the Godhead or the true diversity reduces the reality of salvation. </p> <p> 3. The primary way of grasping the concept of the Trinity is through the threefold participation in salvation. The approach of the New Testament is not to discuss the essence of the Godhead, but the particular aspects of the revelatory event that includes the definitive presence of the Father in the person of Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit. </p> <p> 4. The doctrine of the Trinity is an absolute mystery. It is primarily known, not through speculation, but through experiencing the act of grace through personal faith. See [[God]]; [[Jesus Christ]]; [[Holy Spirit]] . </p> <p> Jerry M. Henry </p>

<p> The union of three in one; generally applied to the ineffable mystery of three persons in one God, </p> <p> Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This doctrine is rejected by many because it is incomprehensible; but, as Mr. Scott observes, if distinct personality, agency, and divine perfections, be in Scripture ascribed to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, no words can more exactly express the doctrine, which must unavoidably be thence inferred, than those commonly used on this subject, viz. that there are three distinct Persons in the Unity of the Godhead. The sacred oracles most assuredly teach us, that the One living and true God is, in some inexplicable manner, Triune, for he is spoken of, as One in some respects, and as Three in others, Genesis 1:26 , Genesis 2:6-7 . Is. 48: 16. Is. 34: 16. 2 Corinthians 13:14 . John 14:23 . Matthew 28:19 . 2 Thessalonians 3:3 . 1 John 5:7 . Acts 5:3-4 . The Trinity of Persons in the Diety consists with the Unity of the Divine Essence; though we pretend not to explain the modus of it, and deem those reprehensible who have attempted it; as the modus in which any being subsists, according to its distinct nature and known properties, is a secret to the most learned naturalists to this present day, and probably will always continue so. But if the most common of God's works, with which we are the most conversant, be in this respect incomprehensible, how can men think that the modus existetendi (or manner of existence) of the infinite Creator can be level to their capacities? </p> <p> The doctrine of the Trinity is indeed a mystery, but no man hath yet shown that it involves in it a real contradiction. Many have ventured to say, that it ought to be ranked with transubstantiation, as equally absurd. But [[Archbishop]] Tillotson has shown, by the most convincing arguments imaginable, that transubstantiation includes, the most palpable contradictions; and that we have the evidence of our eyes, feeling, and taste, that what we receive in the Lord's supper is bread, and not the body of a man; whereas we have the testimony of our eyes alone, that the words "This is my body, " are at all in the Scriptures. Now this in intelligible to the meanest capacity: it is fairly made out, and perfectly unanswerable: but who ever attempted thus to prove the doctrine of the Trinity to be self-contradictory? What testimony of our senses, or what demonstrated truth, does it contradict? Yet till this be shown, it is neither fair nor convincing, to exclaim against it as contradictory, absurd, and irrational." </p> <p> See articles JESUS CHRIST and HOLY GHOST; also Owen, Watts, Jones, S. Browne, Fawcett, A. Taylor, J. Scott, Sampson, and Wesley's [[Pieces]] on the Subject; Bull's Defensio Fidei Nicaenae; Dr. Allix's [[Testimonies]] of the Jewish Church; Display of the Trinity by a Layman; Scott's Essays. </p>

<p> A word only used to convey the thought of a plurality of Persons in the Godhead. This was revealed at the baptism of the Lord Jesus. The Holy Spirit descended 'like a dove' and abode upon Him; and God the Father declared "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." That the Father is a distinct Person and is God is plainly stated, as in John 20:17 . Many passages prove that the Lord Jesus is God: one will suffice: ". . . . in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." 1 John 5:20 . That the Holy Spirit is a Person and is God the following passages clearly prove: Genesis 1:2; Matthew 4:1; John 16:13; Acts 10:19; Acts 13:2,4; Acts 20:28; Romans 15:30; 1 Corinthians 2:10 . The three Persons are also named in the formula instituted by Christ in baptism. Matthew 28:19 . Yet there is but one God. 1 Timothy 2:5 . [[Satan]] will have an imitation of the Trinity in the [[Roman]] beast, the false prophet, and himself. Revelation 13:4,11; Revelation 20:10 . </p>

<p> Trinity. This word does not occur in Scripture. As a fact the Scripture reveals the doctrine of the Trinity in two ways: first in passages in which the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are mentioned together as God; and secondly, in passages which speak of each as divine. In the New Testament clear evidence is given. See Matthew 3:16-17; Matthew 28:19; 1 Corinthians 12:3-6; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Ephesians 4:4-6; Titus 3:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2; Judges 1:20-21. These passages, carefully read, are sufficient to prove that "the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal; such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost; the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet they are not three Gods, but one God." </p>

<p> (1): (n.) Any union of three in one; three units treated as one; a triad, as the Hindu trinity, or Trimurti. </p> <p> (2): (n.) Any symbol of the Trinity employed in Christian art, especially the triangle. </p> <p> (3): (n.) The union of three persons (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost) in one Godhead, so that all the three are one God as to substance, but three persons as to individuality. </p>

Deuteronomy 6:41 Kings 8:60Isaiah 44:6Mark 12:29,32John 10:302