Trinitas Propter Quid: The Trinity in a Nutshell
WHAT THE TRINITY IS NOT
- The Trinity is not one God who is three Gods
- The Trinity is not one divine Person who is three divine persons.
- The Trinity is not three Gods who function as one God.
- The Trinity is not one God changing into three different personalities.
(1) and (2) lead to contradictions. (3) is tri-theism (three substantially distinct beings). (4) is the heresy of Modalism. Modalism was rejected because, like the other options, it did not have the explanatory power in dealing with the testimony of scripture regarding the nature of God. Think of the occasions in the New Testament where two or more members or the Godhead are simultaneously present and interacting with one another (ex., at the baptism of Jesus recorded in Matthew you find God speaking about the Son while the Holy Spirit descended like a dove. Also, think of the numerous occasions when Jesus prays to the Father). Clearly, there are distinct, divine persons who exist simultaneously.
WHAT THE TRINITY IS
The Trinity is one God who is tri-personal, wherein three persons "subsist" in or share the same divine nature. Trinitarian theology could be interpreted as affirming the following triad (there are some thinkers in the history of Christian thought who would undoubtedly take issue with how some of this is formulated):
It is important to note that philosophically robust formulations of the Trinity emerged as a result of reflection on the scriptural witness to the divinity of Christ (see forthcoming post on scriptural support for a trinitarian notion of God). Craig and Moreland write, "This startling rethinking of Jewish monotheism doubtless grew out of a reflection on the radical self-understanding of Jesus of Nazareth himself..." [2]. Oxford theologian, Alister McGrath, agrees: "The development of the doctrine of the Trinity is best seen as organically related to the evolution of Christology" [3]. The Nicean creed (324 A.D -- the earliest doctrinal formulation elucidating the shared nature between the Father and the Son, but by no means the first Christian articulation of a triune notion of God [4]) states the following: "We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ...God from God, light of light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one being with the Father..." In Koine greek, one being is "homoousia." This is so important! Ousia was a philosophical word for "being" or "substance." Far from meaning a beaker full of chemicals, substance (ousia), in the philosophical world, is that which grounds or stands under a thing -- it is an ontologically basic thing. Thus, based on what they thought scripture was implicitly affirming, and in an attempt to articulate what Christians had believed about Jesus from the very beginning, Christian thinkers in the fourth century were saying that Jesus and the Father shared the very same substance (and later they would touch on the Holy Spirit). The members of the Trinity were "consubstantial" -- homoousia [5]. Hence, they are, together, the very same being.
While Jesus' divinity had been affirmed from the very get go (see forthcoming blog), the council of Nicea represented an attempt to clarify this nature by using greek philosophical language (in particular, they used categories of Aristotelian metaphysics) [6]. Regarding Jesus' consubstantial relationship with the Father, an excerpt from Michael Green's book, The Truth of God Incarnate, is insightful: "The word was unscriptural, but the Council accepted it as a correct interpretation of the meaning of the New Testament. Not only was the word unscriptural; it was philosophic. The official Church thus took the first step towards genuine dialogue with philosophy" [7]. Some would see this is problematic, arguing that we should not speak of God using terms that are not explicitly found in scripture. This is not the place to tackle such a concern, but a brief remark from Thomas Aquinas is helpful: "If we could speak of God only in the very terms themselves of Scripture, it would follow that no one could speak about God in any but the original language of the Old or New Testament. The urgency of confuting heretics made it necessary to find new words to express the ancient faith about God. Nor is such a kind of novelty to be shunned; since it is by no means profane, for it does not lead us astray from the sense of Scripture" [8].
APOLOGETICAL EXCURSUS
Why doesn't the New Testament explicitly state that God is Triune, or that Jesus is "of the same being" with the Father? A few considerations are in order. First, the the N.T. is not a philosophical theology text; it is intended to be a book of salvation. The authors, being primarily Jewish, were communicating things about the kingdom of God and the identity of Christ with language that was relevant to their audience (and remember, the Identity of Jesus pushes us to think of God in a triune way). Secondly, while the Trinity is not explicitly stated, it is implicitly affirmed. As McGrath notes, "Scripture bears witness to a God who demands to be understood in a Trinitarian manner" [9] (see forthcoming post). In fact, it can be shown that the N.T. affirms that Jesus was indeed God. Implicit and explicit Christological statements are obvious when you step into a first-century Jewish mindset. Thus, it is irrelevant that the word "Trinity" is not in scripture, so long as scripture supports such a notion of God.
CONCLUSION
The Trinity is an affirmation of God's tri-personal nature. There is one individual substance (ousia) that supports three persons. This ousia is God, but it is a tri-personal God -- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This may sound strange, but it is not illogical (I will further defend this thesis in another blog). It helps us understand that Jesus is not a creature. He is God (in terms of predication; not that Jesus is the Trinity. Remember, three persons equally constitute God). What's more, it shows us that God has eternally existed in a love-relationship. God is essentially relational. He did not create creatures in order to experience relationship. No. He has had it all along, and He has invited you and I to participate in that dynamic, eternal love-fellowship with Him.
________________________________________________________
Footnotes:
[1] Garrett J. DeWeese, Doing Philosophy as a Christian.
[2] Craig and Moreland, Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview.
[3] McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction.
[4] Logos Christology was developed early on by the Greek Apologists (Just Martyr, Tatian, Theophilus and Athenagoras). See Craig and Moreland.
[5] See my blog post, "Substantia Propter Quid -- Why the Trinity is Not Tri-Theism," for a fuller discussion on the metaphysical notion of substance as it relates to the Trinity.
[6] See Aristotles The Categories. Its amazing how helpful Aristotle's conceptual categories were for the Church's attempts to coherently articulate doctrines about Christ and the Trinity.
[7] Michael Green, The Truth of God Incarnate.
[8] Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica.
[9] McGrath, Ibid.
- There is one God
- God is tri-personal; God consists of three persons who "subsist" in the same being; alternatively put, there is a being who is endowed with three centers of consciousness.
- Hence, God is personal, but not a person.
- The persons are eternal and simultaneously existent.
(1) affirms that there is only one divine entity (one individual substance. See below), not three. (2) affirms that there are three persons (centers of consciousness) who equally share in and subsist in the same divine essence (or substance). Sometimes we talk about God like He is a single person. If by 'God' we mean 'the Trinity', then, technically speaking, we should say that He is personal, not a person. The members are persons, but God (the Trinity) is not a fourth instance of a person. (3) affirms that these persons exist eternally together, contra Modalism. As Christian philosopher, Garrett DeWeese, puts it, "...the Godhead is a single spiritual substance 'within' which there are three divine Persons" [1].
HISTORICAL EXCURSUS
It is important to note that philosophically robust formulations of the Trinity emerged as a result of reflection on the scriptural witness to the divinity of Christ (see forthcoming post on scriptural support for a trinitarian notion of God). Craig and Moreland write, "This startling rethinking of Jewish monotheism doubtless grew out of a reflection on the radical self-understanding of Jesus of Nazareth himself..." [2]. Oxford theologian, Alister McGrath, agrees: "The development of the doctrine of the Trinity is best seen as organically related to the evolution of Christology" [3]. The Nicean creed (324 A.D -- the earliest doctrinal formulation elucidating the shared nature between the Father and the Son, but by no means the first Christian articulation of a triune notion of God [4]) states the following: "We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ...God from God, light of light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one being with the Father..." In Koine greek, one being is "homoousia." This is so important! Ousia was a philosophical word for "being" or "substance." Far from meaning a beaker full of chemicals, substance (ousia), in the philosophical world, is that which grounds or stands under a thing -- it is an ontologically basic thing. Thus, based on what they thought scripture was implicitly affirming, and in an attempt to articulate what Christians had believed about Jesus from the very beginning, Christian thinkers in the fourth century were saying that Jesus and the Father shared the very same substance (and later they would touch on the Holy Spirit). The members of the Trinity were "consubstantial" -- homoousia [5]. Hence, they are, together, the very same being.
While Jesus' divinity had been affirmed from the very get go (see forthcoming blog), the council of Nicea represented an attempt to clarify this nature by using greek philosophical language (in particular, they used categories of Aristotelian metaphysics) [6]. Regarding Jesus' consubstantial relationship with the Father, an excerpt from Michael Green's book, The Truth of God Incarnate, is insightful: "The word was unscriptural, but the Council accepted it as a correct interpretation of the meaning of the New Testament. Not only was the word unscriptural; it was philosophic. The official Church thus took the first step towards genuine dialogue with philosophy" [7]. Some would see this is problematic, arguing that we should not speak of God using terms that are not explicitly found in scripture. This is not the place to tackle such a concern, but a brief remark from Thomas Aquinas is helpful: "If we could speak of God only in the very terms themselves of Scripture, it would follow that no one could speak about God in any but the original language of the Old or New Testament. The urgency of confuting heretics made it necessary to find new words to express the ancient faith about God. Nor is such a kind of novelty to be shunned; since it is by no means profane, for it does not lead us astray from the sense of Scripture" [8].
APOLOGETICAL EXCURSUS
Why doesn't the New Testament explicitly state that God is Triune, or that Jesus is "of the same being" with the Father? A few considerations are in order. First, the the N.T. is not a philosophical theology text; it is intended to be a book of salvation. The authors, being primarily Jewish, were communicating things about the kingdom of God and the identity of Christ with language that was relevant to their audience (and remember, the Identity of Jesus pushes us to think of God in a triune way). Secondly, while the Trinity is not explicitly stated, it is implicitly affirmed. As McGrath notes, "Scripture bears witness to a God who demands to be understood in a Trinitarian manner" [9] (see forthcoming post). In fact, it can be shown that the N.T. affirms that Jesus was indeed God. Implicit and explicit Christological statements are obvious when you step into a first-century Jewish mindset. Thus, it is irrelevant that the word "Trinity" is not in scripture, so long as scripture supports such a notion of God.
CONCLUSION
The Trinity is an affirmation of God's tri-personal nature. There is one individual substance (ousia) that supports three persons. This ousia is God, but it is a tri-personal God -- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This may sound strange, but it is not illogical (I will further defend this thesis in another blog). It helps us understand that Jesus is not a creature. He is God (in terms of predication; not that Jesus is the Trinity. Remember, three persons equally constitute God). What's more, it shows us that God has eternally existed in a love-relationship. God is essentially relational. He did not create creatures in order to experience relationship. No. He has had it all along, and He has invited you and I to participate in that dynamic, eternal love-fellowship with Him.
________________________________________________________
Footnotes:
[1] Garrett J. DeWeese, Doing Philosophy as a Christian.
[2] Craig and Moreland, Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview.
[3] McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction.
[4] Logos Christology was developed early on by the Greek Apologists (Just Martyr, Tatian, Theophilus and Athenagoras). See Craig and Moreland.
[5] See my blog post, "Substantia Propter Quid -- Why the Trinity is Not Tri-Theism," for a fuller discussion on the metaphysical notion of substance as it relates to the Trinity.
[6] See Aristotles The Categories. Its amazing how helpful Aristotle's conceptual categories were for the Church's attempts to coherently articulate doctrines about Christ and the Trinity.
[7] Michael Green, The Truth of God Incarnate.
[8] Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica.
[9] McGrath, Ibid.
Comments
Post a Comment