click here to tweet this post
click here to share with your friends
subscribe to this feed
The Doctrine of the Trinity in a Nutshell
by C Michael PattonJanuary 26th, 2012
24 Comments
The doctrine of the Trinity is a foundational cardinal truth in Christianity. All three major Christian traditions – Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox – throughout the history of the Church, have been united on this doctrine. A denial of it constitutes a serious departure from the Christian faith and a rejection of the biblical witness to God as he has introduced himself to us. Sadly, many go astray from the faith due to their refusal to accept these truths. It is my purpose to give a brief overview of the doctrine.
Basic Definition: Christians worship one God who eternally exists in three persons, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, all of whom are fully God, all of whom are equal.
Now let’s break each of these down.
One God:
Christians are monotheists. This doesn’t merely mean we worship only one God, but that we believe there exists only one God. This is a basic teaching throughout the Bible (Deut. 6:4; Isa. 44:6; Isa. 45:5; Mark 12:29; 1Tim. 2:5; 1Cor. 8:4).
While this finds support in the Bible, the very definition of God demands that there only be one. In other words, “God” is not just a being to whom you pray or ascribe great worth and value, but the transcendent creator of all things (Heb. 11:3). Romans 1:18-20 informs us that natural theology and rational thinking necessarily demand there be a singular source for all things. Polytheism (which is the belief in many gods) must redefine the term “god” to mean simply “really powerful beings,” since there cannot be many ultimate creators of all things. There can be only one Uncaused Cause, only one Unmoved Mover, and only one Uncreated Creator. God is the only non-contingent (not dependent) being in the universe. Therefore, his essence is necessarily one.
Eternally exists as three persons:
Christians do not believe in contradictions or logical fallacies. Rational thinking and harmony of truth are found in the essence of God’s being; therefore, God cannot exist as a contradiction. Christians do not believe in three Gods for the reasons listed above. However, we do believe Scripture has revealed that God, while one in essence, is three in person. We often talk about this as “one what, three whos.” While this is a great mystery in the Christian faith, there are many mysteries that we are compelled to believe due to necessity and what has been revealed in Scripture. For example, we believe that God created all things out of nothing (Heb. 11:3; doctrine of creation ex nihilo). We believe that God is the sovereign first cause of all things, yet man is morally responsible for his actions. We believe that while Christ was complete in his humanity, he also remained complete in his deity (often called the “hypostatic union”). We believe that the Bible is the product of humans and the product of God. None of these, including the doctrine of the Trinity, are contradictions, but they are great mysteries. 
While the Bible does not use the word “Trinity,” we believe that it is an accurate description of what the Bible teaches concerning God. After all, the Bible does not use the word “Bible,” but we can legitimately use the word to describe a collection of books we believe to be inspired. The Bible does not use the word “aseity,” yet we believe that it accurately represents a Biblical attribute of God. God is “of himself,” in no way dependent upon humans for his livelihood (Ps. 50:7-12).
While there are many passages in the Bible which necessitate a Trinitarian understanding of God, there are a few that stand out more than others:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God.” (NET)
Here we encounter two subjects, “the Word” (Jesus; John 1:14), and “God.” We see in this one verse the unity and plurality in what we call the “Godhead.” The Word “was fully God,” yet we also see that they were “with” each other. The Greek word for “with,” pros, implies not merely proximity, but is used to describe the context of relationship in which they exist. Jesus and God (in this case God is “the Father”) are both sharing in the same essence of deity, yet are distinct in relationship (person).
“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.”
This is often referred to as the “Great Commission.” Here Christ tells his disciples that they are to make disciples by baptizing them (as a sign of identification) in the name (a singular term describing God’s unity) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Notice that all three members of the Trinity are united, yet distinct in this baptismal creed.
“Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father, and we will be content.” Jesus replied, “Have I been with you for so long, and you have not known me, Philip? The person who has seen me has seen the Father! How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?”
This again speaks of the unity the members of the Trinity share with each other. To know Jesus is to know the Father. To know the Holy Spirit is to know Jesus and the Father. And to know the Father is to know Jesus and the Holy Spirit. They are all one. Yet in the very same section of Scripture, Jesus demonstrates that He and the Father are distinct persons by praying to the Father (John 17:1-26). They have been united and distinct for all eternity.
All of whom are fully God:
Don’t see the sharing of the divine essence as some sort of sharing in a type of nature. For example, my daughter Kylee and I share in a similar nature in two ways: 1) we are both humans and 2) we are both blood related as part of the “Patton” family. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit do not merely have similar natures. It is not that they are from the same species called “God” or “Divine.” It is not like a pie that has been cut into three pieces, or a three-leaf clover that can be divided into three parts. It is that they all have the exact same nature. Kylee and I are of the human species, but we do not share in the exact same essence. God’s essence is one and indivisible. All the members of the Trinity are all fully God since they share in the exact same nature..
All of whom are equal:
Christ’s essence is not lesser than the Father’s, nor the Spirit’s lesser than Christ’s. They are co-equal, co-powerful, and co-eternal since the essence of who they are is the same. While their persons may have distinction in function and thus evidence a willing hierarchy in time (John 14:28) and in eternity (1 Cor. 15:23-28), this does not mean that one is greater than the other in essence. Just as a king may have authority over his subject, this does not mean the king’s nature is greater than the subject’s. And just as a wife is to submit to her husband (Eph. 5:22), or as a pastor has authority over the congregation (Heb. 13:7), this does not mean in either case that the husband or pastor has more essential greatness or value than the wife or congregation. It simply means that in function, there is a hierarchy. Some Christians believe that the hierarchy in the Trinity was a temporal arrangement for the purpose of redemption and some believe that the subordination of the Son to the Father and the Spirit to the Father (and Son) is eternal. This is a valid debate in Christianity. However, all Christians have always believed that all three members of the Trinity are essentially equal.
Concerning the use of the word “Trinity”
Concerning the use of the name “Trinity” and other technical terms we often employ such as essence, ontos, ousia, substantia, persona, or hypostasis, the great theologian of the sixteenth century John Calvin writes:
“Where names have not been invented rashly, we must beware lest we become chargeable with arrogance and rashness in rejecting them. I wish, indeed, that such names were buried, provided all would concur in the belief that the Father, Son, and Spirit, are one God, and yet that the Son is not the Father, nor the Spirit the Son, but that each has his particular subsistence. I am not so minutely precise as to fight furiously for mere words. For I observe, that the writers of the ancient Church, while they uniformly spoke with great reverence on these matters, neither agreed with each other, nor were always consistent with themselves” (Institutes, 1.13.5).
No Christian understands the doctrine of the Trinity fully. In fact, if people are not confused to some degree by this doctrine, if someone says, “Ohhhh, now I understand,” it probably means they have slipped into heresy in their thinking. If we think about it too long, try to solve it, or nuance it according to our desire to comprehend things, we will find ourselves refusing the hand of God who has given the mysterious Trinity to us as a description of Himself. While it is impossible that finite beings can fully comprehend an infinite God, we can understand him truly. The doctrine of the Trinity does not give us the full understanding of God, but it does give us a true understanding of God.
Similar Posts:
- Heresies: Subordinationalism – A Lesser Christ
- "The Trinity is Like 3-in-1 Shampoo". . . And Other Stupid Statements
- The Five Great Mysteries of the Christian Faith
- In What Sense Are Jesus and the Father One? Part III: One in Purpose? C: John 17:21-23
- T.D. Jakes Not Modalist? An Update from the Elephant Room
24 Comments
Like or Dislike:
1
[...] Michael Patton recently outlined the basics of the doctrine of the Trinity. Give it a read if you’re looking for a brief [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
Thanks for the great post. You did a great job elucidating the doctrine of the trinity, as well as showing how social trinitarianism fails.
I’m curious, though: I’m not certain how well your arguments work against modalism. The way you describe it, as one “what” with three “whos”, could be loosely interpreted to be modalist. Have you written on, or do you have any recommendations for dealing with, modalism?
Thanks so much!
Like or Dislike:
2
I guess this will all get sorted out when he the man who is the man between men and God and King comes back and straitens it all out.
I am constantly trying to make this ‘mystery’ of yours work when, all the rest of God’s Word is so plain and simple and easy to understand; to hide from it or refuse to look it is both dangerous and arrogant. But the one thing that it has against it, no matter how you twist the verses; the multitude of clear and plainly spoken verses stating otherwise, and the fact that when presented excellent opportunities to explain, Jesus who is called the messiah, son of man, king and son of God never spoke of any such tripe. And the places where the word god is that can be grammatically connected to him:
Exodus 22:28
Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.
Here, the rulers of the people are connected with gods. Their power over others gives them a position similar to that of gods.
Psalm 82:6
I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
?
It required a couple generations of murder by the Roman Catholics to get this doctrine lodged into our consciousness and because it is such a wonderful ‘mystery’ the deceiver pushes it hard. This same doctrine is found in the very first world religion by way of Nimrod, Semiramis and Tammuz and can be traced through nearly every pagan religion since; culminating in the great whore of Babylon who wears the mystery emblems of every pagan religion on his sleeve and the fish hat of Dagon and has murdered the saints for the last 1800 years.
__________~__________
God forgive my insolence and arrogance and grant me sight that I may see and not fall. Teach me humility that I may learn and understand and have mercy on my enemies.
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] 6. The Doctrine of the Trinity in a Nutshell [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
Indeed the Trinity of God is one of Christianity’s most profound mystery’s and doctrines & dogma’s: thankfully we have been given much help here in the Ecumenical Councils, certainly the definitions of Nicaea and Constantinople I are very helpful here, with Ephesus and Chalcedon. It is here that the EO have perhaps given the Church historical the very best thoughts and thinking on this subject! And also even Augustine believed in the “monarcha” of the Father. This subject is really everything “theological” in and of Christ, who reveals the Father, note: Eph. 2:18, “So that through him (Christ) we both (Jew & Gentile) have access in one Spirit to the Father.”
Like or Dislike:
0
To Thomas Mears:
History over-simplified can be dangerous.
Remember that Roman Catholicism were not yet in existence when Trinitarianism took prominence in the Church.
Remember also that when Western Roman Empire was destroyed by the Germans, the invaders were largely Arians.
Like or Dislike:
0
Btw, at the First Council of Nicaea (325), in which the Trinitarian doctrine was first finalized, this was on Eastern ground at Alexandria, and the Roman pope sent several papal legates. So it is incorrect that the Church of Rome was not yet Trinitarian! And the Church in reality both East and West have been Trinitarian even before this also. “Trinity” is first a neologism that was first used in its Greek form, “trias”, by Theophilus of Antioch (c.180) and Tertullian (d.220).
Like or Dislike:
0
Is this a Mormon question methinks? In reality as Col. 1: 15, Christ, “He is the image of the invisible God”, also Hebrews 1:3. And we can see something of this in Genesis 18:1-3. Here is a pre-incarnate appearance of the Son of God, HE is always the “image of the invisible God”! The Theophany of God!
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] Theology 1: The Doctrine of the Trinity in a Nutshell [...]
Like or Dislike:
1
That’s what you call “in a nutshell”?
Double-talk is hard to fit into a nutshell. And even more so for triple-talk.
Like or Dislike:
0
CMP,
“In a nutshell” necessarily means oversimplification. I wish you would addresses the crucial matter of the Trinity in more depth. It is far too easy to rely on safe “one what, three who’s” formulations without exploration of what that means. I am not in disagreement with your post but long for more than a ‘nutshell.’
A parable: There once was a man who purchased shoes too small for his feet. To solve the problem, he cut off his toes to fit the shoes. Fitting the Triune God into a nutshell may leave some divine “toes” on the floor.
I firmly believe, as an earlier reply stated, that the Trinity is both One and Three, that is, One God, one divine essence in Three (persons, hypostases, etc.– the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) who are personal, co-eternal, co-existent, co-inherent, who share the same numeric essence yet are distinct, but never separate. However, behind each of these descriptors there is a deep aspect of the truth of the Triune God. Please, Michael, go further.
Like or Dislike:
0
Sorry, this post reply of mine belonged to another CMP blog. But it was a Trinitarian question.
Like or Dislike:
1
Another one of those things that christians can not agree upon!
Like or Dislike:
0
Many get confused on this doctrine – good post – thanks
I came to your blog from the church relevant site top 200 list. They have created a tremendous forum for finding new blogs that impact people.
I hope my blog can be an encouragement to you also.
I write it for encouragement and motivation daily.
http://i-never-fail.blogspot.com
Thanks for sharing. Looking forward to watching the connections grow!
Like or Dislike:
2
Mary,
Yours is yet another reason that neither you nor I nor anyone should be looking to Christians for answers. We should be looking to Christ. There – in Him – we will find answers.
Like or Dislike:
1
I’ll admit that I get confused by the concept of Trinity fairly often. Every time I think I finally get it, I get confused again…
I’ve tried to understand it through 3 mental exercises:
1. how Christian Trinity is NOT the trinity gods of other religions (and by extension, how Christ is NOT “incarnates of gods” in other religions);
2. what is different between Trinitarianism and other, heretical views;
3. How Philo described Logos in relation to YHWH, and how John describe Christ in reference to Philo.
It sometimes helps….
I think another challenge of Trinitarianism is in explaining the concept of Trinity to non-Christians, where I often give the analogy of fire (Father being the visual form of fire, Son the light, and Holy Spirit the heat) while understanding that this could very well be heterodox in itself…
In the end I suppose I’m just “seeing through a glass, darkly”.
Like or Dislike:
0
Great, informative article. But a couple of grammar corrections would make it much more readable. In the “All of whom are fully God” section-
“me and my daughter Kylee” should be “my daughter Kylee and I”
and “Kylee and myself” should be “Kylee and I”.
Here is a good resource that explains this: http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/myself-grammar.aspx
Like or Dislike:
3
The reason you can’t understand it, Craig and Francis (and many others I suspect) is not because it’s a “great mystery”. Its because it doesn’t make sense.
How could Jesus pray: “..not my will, but yours be done” if he and God the father were the same essence? How could his will conflict with that of the rest of the Godhead?
Like or Dislike:
2
Frances
Spot on!!!
(i) In 1712 Rev. Samuel Clark published his book “Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity.
He concluded that the Father alone is God
(ii) Peter Paul and Christ himself said the same thing
In John 20v17 Christ said ” I go to my Father and
your Father, to my God and your God”
In other words Christ has a God who is also his
Father -and the same being is also our God and
Father.
Peter make the same point “blessed bethe God
and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ
In 1 Cor 8v6 Paul says “for there is one God the
Father…and one Lord Jesus Christ”
(iii) Is Matthew 16 verses 16 & 17 not clear enough?
(iv) Who did Christ tell us to pray to? -Our Father.!!
(v) When something is said to be the same as another
this can normally be validated by a process of word
substitution. Just try substituting God for the word
“Christ’ in any verse. We get nonsense!
God is a prophet Mt 21v 11
Mary is the mother of God, so God has a mother-
a father -& he had a God.
Time to tell it like it is -the Trinity is GOBBLEDYGOOK!
There is ONE GOD THE FATHER and Christ is his Son.
Blessings
John
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] that our God is too small. Ken Schenck on why we need theology. C. Michael Patton looks at the doctrine of the Trinity. Brian LePort asks whether Oneness Pentecostalism is the same as [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] friends over at Credo house put this together, it is the most eloquently and best written post on the subject I have seen [...]
Like or Dislike:
1
I’m still CONFUSED about the Trinity!
Like or Dislike:
1
“Christ now and forever’
I have just re-read “The Trinity in a nutshell” and must
commend MIchael Patton and the team on a very well written paper! It’s about as good as I have seen on the subject and I’m saddened by the fact that I have to disagree with many of its conclusions.
Over the years I was happy to go along with the idea of a ‘Godhead’ – united in one Holy spirit.
I was rudely awakened which I was told (in more recent years’) that I must believe that Christ is God, and my salvation depends on it!
Those of you who understand the principles of ‘numerical identity’ will readily appreciate my problem.
If A=B and
If B=C then
A =C.
Or If God is the Father and
The Father is NOT the Son then
The Son is NOT the Father
The above paper submits several scriptures in support of a Trinity.
First of all there are NO Trinitarian proof-verses – not a single one!
Before proceeding further, Tinitarians have got to prove that their ‘proof verses’ ‘over-ride’ Christs own clear words expressed in John 17:5 and Matthew 16vs 15-17.
Trinitarians have also to show that their ‘proof texts’ ‘over-ride dozens of explicit scriptures by other authors
For example in Luke 2: 52 we have ” Jesus grew in wisdom and stature …”
In fact Luke is full of such material.. Christ is described as ..a man….accredited by God to you… a servant of God …God raised him from the dead…he was exalted by God. etc etc.
Trinitarians will point to the Doctrine of the Double Nature of Christ, which is man-made and without scriptural support.
Trinitarians will argue that statements in which Christ denies his Omnipotence, Omniscience, and infinite goodness were only made in his ‘human nature’.
Problem is that everything Christ said was made in his ‘human nature’ – are we therefore to ignore all of his sayings?
I think I am running short of space and should continue in another post…
Like or Dislike:
1
Christ now and forever,
You will have noted my ‘blunder’ in the previous post!
I should have said “The Son is NOT God’!! So sorry!
John 1:1 is a challenge to all of us!
One paper guides us to a web-site which purports to show a total of 81 possible translations of the first verses of John’s Gospel.!!!
The problem is to determine the meaning of ‘The Word”.
We are told that ‘The Word was WITH God and that it WAS god.
I would argue that this means that the Word was NOT a person – and the lack of definite article in the Greek suggests that it is used qualitatively.
Certainly the scriptures do NOT say “In the beginning was Christ”
Footnotes to the NAB Bible are interesting. They note that “The Logos’ combines-
God’s creative and dynamic Word
In Genesis 7 verses begin with “And God said..”
Suggesting that it was by His spoken Word that
the heavens and the earth were created
AND
Personnified Word Wisdom as the instrument of
Gods creative activity (see Proverbs/ Wisdom)
“Word Wisdom’ is therefore NOT a person or a being dependent on God, but the way God ‘acts’ in his creation… Gods self- manifestation.
Some would argue that this equates to God’s Holy Spirit.
So when we are told in John :14 that the ‘Word became flesh’ we are talking of the incarnation of Gods Word/Wisdom/Spirit.
To ensure that Christianswould not mistake this for God , we are given John 1:18.!
Some writers have stated their belief that in John 1 John made creative use of the double meaning of the word “Logos” to communicate to both Jews and Hellenists in the audience.
I personally believe that John was very precise in his use of ‘Logos’ – he could have easily have used the words which Trinitarians insert in its place… but he did not!
Every Blessing
John B
More Comments: