The following lesson by Norman Geisler teaches about the Biblical doctrine
of the Holy Trinity.
May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
---
Trinity
by Norman L. Geisler
Trinity simply means "triunity." God is not a simple unity; there is
plurality in his unity. The Trinity is one of the great mysteries (see
Mystery) of the Christian Faith. Unlike an antinomy (see Kant) or paradox,
which is a logical contradiction (see Logic), the Trinity goes beyond reason
but not against reason. It is known only by divine revelation, so the
Trinity is not the subject of natural theology but of revelation (see
Revelation, Special).
The Basis for the Trinity. While the word Trinity does not occur there, the
concept is clearly taught in the Bible. The logic of the doctrine of the
Trinity is simple. Two biblical truths are evident in Scripture, the logical
conclusion of which is the Trinity:
1. There is one God.
2. There are three distinct persons who are God: Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit.
One God. The central teaching of Judaism called the Shema proclaims: "Hear,
O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deut. 6:4). When Jesus was
asked the question, "What is the greatest commandment?" he prefaced the
answer by quoting the Shema (Mark 12:29). In spite of his strong teaching on
the deity of Christ (cf. Col. 2:9), the apostle Paul said emphatically,
"there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we
live" (1 Cor. 8:6a). From beginning to end, the Scriptures speak of one God
and label all other gods as false (Exod. 20:3; 1 Cor. 8:5-6).
The Bible also recognizes a plurality of persons in God. Although the
doctrine of the Trinity is not as explicit in the Old Testament as the New
Testament, nonetheless, there are passages where members of the Godhead are
distinguished. At times they even speak to one another (see Ps. 110:1).
The Father Is God. Throughout Scripture God is said to be a Father. Jesus
taught his disciples to pray, "Our Father in heaven" (Matt. 6:9). God is not
only "our heavenly Father" (Matt. 6:32) but the "Father of our spirits"
(Heb. 12:9). As God, he is the object of worship. Jesus told the woman of
Samaria, "Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshippers
will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of
worshippers the Father seeks" (John 4:23). God is not only called "our
Father" (Rom. 1:7) many times but also "the Father" (John 5:45; 6:27). He is
also called "God and Father" (2 Cor. 1:3). Paul proclaimed that "there is
but one God, the Father" (1 Cor. 8:6). Additionally, God is referred to as
the "Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 15:6). Indeed, the Father and
the Son are often related by these very names in the same verse (Matt.
11:27; 1 John 2:22).
The Son Is God. The deity of Christ is treated below in the section on
attacks on the Trinity and most extensively in the article Christ, Deity of.
As a broad overview it should be noted that:
Jesus claimed to be Yahweh God. YHWH; translated in some versions Jehovah,
was the special name of God revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14, when God said,
"I am who I am." In John 8:58, Jesus declares: "Before Abraham was, I am."
This statement claims not only existence before Abraham, but equality with
the "I am" of Exodus 3:14. The Jews around him clearly understood his
meaning and picked up stones to kill him for blaspheming (see Mark 14:62;
John 8:58; 10:31-33; 18:5-6). Jesus also said, "I am the first and the last
(Rev. 2:8).
Jesus took the glory of God. Isaiah wrote, "I am the Lord [Yahweh], that is
my name; I will not give to another, or my praise to idols" (42:8) and,
"This is what the Lord [Yahweh] says . . . I am the first, and I am the
last; apart from me there is no God" (44:6). Likewise, Jesus prayed,
"Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before
the world began" (John 17:5). But Yahweh had said he would not give his
glory to another.
While the Old Testament forbids giving worship to anyone other than God
(Exod. 20:1-4; Deut. 5:6-9), Jesus accepted worship (Matt. 8:2; 14:33;
15:25; 20:20; 28:17; Mark 5:6). The disciples attributed to him titles the
Old Testament reserved for God, such as, "the first and the last" (Rev.
1:17; 2:8; 22:13), "the true light" (John 1:9), the "rock" or "stone" (1
Cor. 10:4; 1 Peter 2:6-8; cf. Ps. 18:2; 95:1), the "bridegroom" (Eph.
5:28-33; Rev. 21:2), "the chief Shepherd" (1 Peter 5:40), and "the great
shepherd" (Heb. 13:20). They attributed to Jesus the divine activities of
creating (John 1:3; Col. 1:15-16), redeeming (Hosea 13:14; Ps. 130:7),
forgiving (Acts 5:31; Col. 3:13; cf. Ps. 130:4; Jer. 31:34), and judging
(John 5:26). They used titles of deity for Jesus. Thomas declared: "My Lord
and my God!" (John 20:28). Paul calls Jesus, "the one in whom the fullness
of deity dwells bodily" (Col. 2:9). In Titus, Jesus is called, "our great
God and savior" (2:13), and the writer to the Hebrews says of him, "Thy
throne, O God, is forever" (Heb. 1:8). Paul says that, before Christ existed
as a human being, he existed as God" (Phil. 2:5-8). Hebrews 1:5 says that
Christ reflects God's glory of God, bears the stamp of his nature, and
upholds the universe. The prologue to John's Gospel also minces no words,
stating, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word [Jesus] was God' (John 1:1).
Jesus claimed equality with God in other ways. He claimed the prerogatives
of God. He claimed to be Judge of all (Matt. 25:31-46; John 5:27-30), but
Joel quotes Yahweh as saying, "for there I will sit to judge all the nations
on every side" (Joel 3:12). He said to a paralytic, "Son, your sins are
forgiven" (Mark 2:5b). The scribes correctly responded, "Who can forgive
sins but God alone?" (vs. 7b). Jesus claimed the power to raise and judge
the dead, a power which only God possesses (John 5:21, 29). But the Old
Testament clearly taught that only God was the giver of life (Deut. 32:39; 1
Sam. 2:6) and the one to raise the dead (Ps. 2:7).
Jesus claimed the honor due God, saying, "He who does not honor the Son does
not honor the father, who sent him" (John 5:23b). The Jews listening knew
that no one should claim to be equal with God in this way and again they
reached for stones (John 5:18). When asked at his Jewish trial, "Are you the
Christ (Messiah), the Son of the Blessed One?" Jesus responded, "I am, and
you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and
coming on the clouds of heaven" (Mark 14:61b-62).
The Holy Spirit Is God. The same revelation from God that declares Christ to
be the Son of God also mentions another member of the triunity of God called
the Spirit of God, or Holy Spirit. He too is equally God with the Father and
the Son, and he too is a distinct person.
The Holy Spirit is called "God" (Acts 5:3-4). He possesses the attributes of
deity, such as omnipresence (cf. Ps. 139:7-12) and omniscience (1 Cor. 2:10,
11). He is associated with God the Father in creation (Gen. 1:2). He is
involved with other members of the Godhead in the work of redemption (John
3:5-6; Rom. 8:9-17, 27-27; Titus 3:5-7). He is associated with other members
of the Trinity under the "name" of God (Matt. 28:18-20). Finally, the Holy
Spirit appears, along with the Father and Son, in New Testament benedictions
(for example, 2 Cor. 13:14).
Not only does the Holy Spirit possess deity but he also has a differentiated
personality. That he is a distinct person is clear in that Scripture refers
to "him" with personal pronouns (John 14:26; 16:13). Second, he does things
only persons can do, such as teach (John 14:26; 1 John 2:27), convict of sin
(John 16:7-7), and be grieved by sin (Eph. 4:30). Finally, the Holy Spirit
has intellect (1 Cor. 2:10, 11), will (1 Cor. 12:11), and feeling (Eph.
4:30).
That the three members of the Trinity are distinct persons is clear in that
each is mentioned in distinction form the others. The Son prayed to the
Father (cf. John 17). The Father spoke from heaven about the Son at his
baptism (Matt. 3:15-17). Indeed, the Holy Spirit was present at the same
time, revealing that they coexist. Further, the fact that they have separate
titles (Father, Son, and Spirit) indicate they are not one person. Also,
each member of the Trinity has special functions that help us to identify
them. For example, the Father planned salvation (John 3:16; Eph. 1:4); the
Son accomplished it on the cross (John 17:4; 19:30; Heb. 1:1-2) and at the
resurrection (Rom. 4:25; 1 Cor. 15:1-6), and the Holy Spirit applies it to
the lives of the believers (John 3:5; Eph. 4:30; Titus 3:5-7). The Son
submits to the Father (1 Cor. 11:3; 15:28), and the Holy Spirit glorifies
the Son (John 16:14).
A Philosophical Defense of the Trinity. The doctrine of the Trinity cannot
be proven by human reason; it is only known because it is revealed by
special revelation (in the Bible). However, just because it is beyond reason
does not mean that it goes against reason (see Mystery). It is not
irrational or contradictory, as many critics believe.
The Logic of the Trinity. The philosophical law of non-contradiction informs
us that something cannot be both true and false at the same time and in the
same sense. This is the fundamental law of all rational thought. And the
doctrine of the Trinity does not violate it. This can be shown by stating
first of all what the Trinity is not. The Trinity is not the belief that God
is three persons and only one person at the same time and in the same sense.
That would be a contradiction. Rather, it is the belief that there are three
persons in one nature. This may be a mystery, but it is not a contradiction.
That is, it may go beyond reason's ability to comprehend completely, but it
does not go against reason's ability to apprehend consistently.
Further, the Trinity is not the belief that there are three natures in one
nature or three essences in one essence. That would be a contradiction.
Rather, Christians affirm that there are three persons in one essence. This
is not contradictory because it makes a distinction between person and
essence. Or, to put it in terms of the law of non-contradiction, while God
is one and many at the same time, he is not one and many in the same sense.
He is one in the sense of his essence but many in the sense of his persons.
So there is no violation of the law of non-contradiction in the doctrine of
the Trinity.
A Model of the Trinity. By saying God has one essence and three persons it
is meant that he has one "What" and three "Whos." The three Whos (persons)
each share the same What (essence). So God is a unity of essence with a
plurality of persons. Each person is different, yet they share a common
nature.
God is one in his substance. The unity is in his essence (what God is), and
the plurality is in God's persons (how he relates within himself). This
plurality of relationships is both internal and external. Within the Trinity
each member relates to the others in certain ways. These are somewhat
analogous to human relationships. The Bible's descriptions of Yahweh as
Father and Jesus as Son says something of how the Son relates to the Father.
Also, the Father sends the Spirit as a Messenger, and the Spirit is a
Witness of the Son (John 14:26). These descriptions help us understand the
functions within the unity of the Godhead. Each is fully God, and each has
his own work and interrelational theme with the other two. But it is vital
to remember that the three share the same essence, so that they unify as one
Being..
Some Illustrations of the Trinity. No analogy of the Trinity is perfect, but
some are better than others. First, some bad illustrations should be
repudiated. The Trinity is not like a chain with three links. For these are
three separate and separable parts. But God is neither separated nor
separable. Neither is God like the same actor playing three different parts
in a play. For God is simultaneously three persons, not one person playing
three successive roles. Nor is God like the three states of water: solid,
liquid, and gaseous. For normally water is not in all three of these states
at the same time, but God is always three persons at the same time. Unlike
other bad analogies, this one does not imply tritheism. However, it does
reflect another heresy known as modalism.
Most erroneous illustration of the Trinity tend to support the charge that
trinitarianism is really tritheism, since they contain separable parts. The
more helpful analogies retain the unity of God while they show a
simultaneous plurality. There are several that fit this description.
A Mathematical Illustration. One aspect of the problem can be expressed in
mathematical terms. Critics make a point of computing the mathematical
impossibility of believing there is a Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the
Godhead, without holding that there are three gods. Does not 1 + 1 + 1 = 3?
It certainly does if you add them, but Christians insist that the triunity
of God is more like 1 x 1 x 1 = 1. God is triune, not triplex. His one
essence has multiple centers of personhood. Thus, there is no more
mathematical problem in conceiving the Trinity than there is in
understanding 1 cubed (13).
A Geometric Illustration. Perhaps the most widely used illustration of the
Trinity is the triangle. One triangle has three corners, which are
inseparable from, and simultaneous to, one another. In this sense it is a
good illustration of the Trinity. Of course, the triangle is finite and God
is infinite, so it is not an imperfect illustration.
Another aspect of the Godhead is that Christ is one person (shown as one
corner of the triangle), yet he has two natures, a divine nature and a human
nature. Some show this aspect graphically by symbolizing Christ's divinity
by the corner of the triangle and using another geometric figure, a circle
for instance, to illustrate the human nature. At the point of the person of
Jesus Christ, the circle is welded onto the triangle, human nature touching,
but not mixed with, divine. Human and divine natures exist side-by-side
without confusion in the Son. His two natures are conjoined in one person.
Or, in Christ there are two Whats and one Who, whereas, in God there are
three Whos and one What.
A Moral Illustration. Augustine suggested an illustration of how God is both
three and one at the same time. The Bible informs us that "God is love" (1
John 4:16). Love involves a lover, a beloved, and a spirit of love between
lover and loved. The Father might be likened to the Lover; the Son to the
One loved, and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of love. Yet love does not
exist unless these three are united as one. This illustration has the
advantage of being personal, since it involves love, a characteristic that
flows only from persons.
An Anthropological Illustration. Since humankind is made in the image of God
(Gen. 1:27), it would seem reasonable that men and women bear some snapshot
of the Trinity within their being. One that causes more problems than it
solves is to visualize the human being as a "trichotomy" of body, soul, and
spirit. Whether the trichotomist position is accurate, this is not a helpful
illustration. Body and soul are not an indivisible unity. They can be (and
are) separated at death (cf. 2 Cor. 5:8; Phil 1:23; Rev. 6:9). The nature
and persons of the Trinity cannot be separated.
A better illustration based in human nature is the relation between the
human mind, to its ideas, and the expression of these ideas in words. There
is obviously a unity among all three of these without there being an
identity. In this sense, they illustrate the Trinity.
An Islamic Illustration of Plurality in God. When talking with Muslims, the
best illustration of a plurality is the relation between the Islamic
conception of the Qur'an and God. Yusuf K. Ibish in an article entitled,
"The Muslim Lives by the Qur'an," cited by Charis Waddy, The Muslim Mind,
described it this way: The Qur'an "is an expression of Divine Will. If you
want to compare it with anything in Christianity, you must compare it with
Christ himself. Christ was the expression of the Divine among men, the
revelation of the Divine Will. That is what the Qur'an is."
Orthodox Muslims believe the Qur'an is eternal and uncreated. It is not the
same as God but is an expression of God's mind as imperishable as God
himself. Surely, there is here a plurality within unity, something that is
other than God but is nonetheless one with God in essential characteristics.
Attacks on the Trinity. The Trinity is at the heart of orthodox
Christianity. But many critics-Jews and Muslims in particular-contend that
it is incoherent and contradictory. Orthodox Christians insist that the
teaching that God is one in essence but three in personhood is complex, but
not contradictory.
The central issue is the deity of Christ (see Christ, Deity of), a doctrine
inseparable from the Trinity. If one accepts the biblical teaching about the
deity of Christ, then a plurality in the Godhead has been acknowledged.
Conversely, if the doctrine of the Trinity is received, the deity of Christ
is part of the package. Of course, strict monotheists (see Islam), such as
Muslims and Orthodox Jews, reject both the deity of Christ and the Trinity
as a denial of the absolute unity of God.
Muslim Misunderstanding. Obstacles in the Muslim mind hinder acceptance of
the triunity of God. Some are philosophical; some biblical. Islamic scholars
often engage in an arbitrary and selective use of the biblical texts as it
suits their purposes (see Bible, Islamic View of). However, even the texts
they pronounce "authentic" are twisted or misinterpreted to support their
teachings (see New Testament, Historicity of).
Christ as "begotten" of God. Perhaps no Christian concept draws so violent a
reaction among Muslims than that of Jesus as the "only begotten Son of God."
This raises red flags immediately, because Muslims understand the words in a
grossly anthropomorphic way. Evangelical Christians likewise would be
offended to hear what Muslims think they hear in this term. Clearing away
this misunderstanding is necessary.
The King James Version Bible refers to Christ as the "only begotten" Son of
God (John 1:18; cf. 3:16). However, Muslim scholars often misconstrue this
in a fleshly, carnal sense of someone who literally begets children. To
"beget" implies the physical act of sexual intercourse. This they believe,
and Christians agree, is absurd. God is a Spirit with no body. As the
Islamic scholar Anis Shorrosh contents, "He [God] does not beget because
begetting is an animal act. It belongs to the lower animal act of sex. We do
not attribute such an act to God" (Shorrosh, 254). But only a few cults,
notably the Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) have a teaching that approaches this
view of "begetting."
Further, to the Islamic mind, begetting is "creating." "God cannot create
another God. . . . He cannot create another uncreated" (ibid., 259). Once
again, Christians would agree fully. The foregoing statements reveal the
degree to which the biblical concept of Christ's Sonship is misunderstood by
Muslim scholars. For no orthodox Christian equates the King James Version
translation of "begat" with "made" or "create." Arianism taught that and was
strenuously fought wherever it has appeared in church history. Its primary
adherents today belong to another cult, the Jehovah's Witnesses. No wonder
'Abdu 'L-Ahad Dawud concludes that from a "Muslim point of belief the
Christian dogma concerning the eternal birth or generation of the Son is
blasphemy" (205).
New, more accurate English translations have been more careful to say in
English what was originally meant in Greek. Only begotten does not refer to
any physical generation but to a special relationship between the Son and
the Father. It means a unique relationship, or could be translated, as the
New International Version, "one and only Son." It does not imply creation by
the Father or any other sort of generation. Just as an earthly father and
son have a special filial relationship, so the eternal Father and his
eternal Son are uniquely and intimately working in concert with one another.
It does not refer to physical generation but to an eternal procession from
the Father. Just as for Muslims the Word of God (Qur'an) is not identical to
God but eternally proceeds from him, even so for Christians, Christ, God's
"Word" (sura 4:171) eternally proceeds from him (see Qur'an, Alleged Divine
Origin of). Words like generation and procession are used of Christ in a
filial and relational sense, not in a carnal and physical sense.
Some Muslim scholars confuse Christ's Sonship with his virgin birth. Michael
Nazir-Ali noted that "in the Muslim mind the generation of the Son often
means his birth of the Virgin Mary" (Nazir-Ali, 29). As Shorrosh notes, many
Muslims believe Christians have made Mary a goddess, Jesus her son, and God
the Father her husband (114). With such a carnal misrepresentation of a
spiritual reality, there is little wonder Muslims reject the Christian
concept of eternal Father and Son.
Islamic misunderstanding of the Trinity is encouraged by the
misunderstanding of Muhammad, who said, "O Jesus, son of Mary! didst thou
say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah?" (sura
5:119). Hundreds of years before Muhammad Christians condemned such a gross
misunderstanding of the sonship of Christ. The Christian writer Lactantius
(240-320), writing in about 306, said, "He who hears the words 'Son of God'
spoken must not conceive in his mind such great wickedness as to fancy that
God procreated through marriage and union with any female,-a thing which is
not done except by an animal possessed of a body and subject to death."
Furthermore, "since God is alone, with whom could he unite? or [sic], since
He was of such great might as to be able to accomplish whatever He wished,
He certainly had no need of the comradeship of another for the purpose of
creating" (Pfander, 164).
Distortion of John 1:1. If rejection of the eternal Sonship of Christ is
based on a serious misunderstanding of the Christian concept of Christ as
God's Son, another text proclaiming Christ's deity is often distorted: "In
the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"
(John 1:1). Without textual support from even one of the 5300 plus Greek
manuscripts, Muslims render the last phrase, "and the Word was God's." Dawud
declares, without any warrant, "the Greek form of the genitive case 'Theou,'
i.e., 'God's' was corrupted into 'Theos'; that is, 'God,' in the nominative
form of the name!" (16-17).
This translation is not only arbitrary, but it is contrary to the rest of
the message of John's Gospel where the claims that Christ is God are made
multiple times (cf. John 8:59; 10:30; 12:41; John 20:28).
Misconstruing Thomas's confession. When Jesus challenged Thomas to believe
after seeing him in his physical resurrection body (see Resurrection,
Evidence for), Thomas confessed Jesus' deity, declaring, "My Lord and My
God" (John 20:28). Many Muslim writers diminish this proclamation of Christ's
deity by reducing it to an ejaculatory exclamation, "My God!" Deedat
declares, "What? He was calling Jesus his Lord and his God? No. This is an
exclamation people call out. . . . This is a particular expression"
(Shorrosh, 278).
Deedat's alternative reading is not viable. First, in an obvious reference
to the content of Thomas's confession of Jesus as "my Lord and my God,"
Jesus blessed him for what he had correctly "seen" and "believed" (John
20:29). Thomas's confession of Christ's deity comes in the context of a
miraculous appearance by the risen Christ, not to mention at the climax of
the post-resurrection ministry, when Jesus' disciples were gaining
increasing belief in Christ, based on his miraculous signs (cf. John 2:11;
12:37). Thomas's confession of Christ's deity fits with the stated theme of
the Gospel of John "that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son
of God, and that believing you may have life in his Name" (John 20:31). Even
putting all this aside, Thomas was a devout Jew who revered the name of God.
He simply would not have used God's name in so profane an ejaculation.
No doubt there was an amazed note in Thomas's voice as he pronounced Christ's
deity, but to reduce it to an emotional ejaculation is to claim that Jesus
blessed Thomas for breaking the commandment against using God's name in
vain.
David's Son and David's Lord. In Matthew 22:43, citing Psalm 110, Jesus
said, "How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him 'Lord'
[Messiah]?" According to Dawud, "By his expression that the 'Lord,' or the
'Adon,' could not be a son of David, Jesus excludes himself from that title"
(89).
However, a careful look at the context shows that Jesus is saying just the
opposite. Jesus stumped his skeptical Jewish questioners by presenting them
with a dilemma that blew their own neat calculations about the Messiah out
of the sky. How could David call the Messiah "Lord" (as he did in Ps.
110:1), when the Scriptures also say the Messiah would be the "Son of David"
(which they do in 2 Sam. 7:12f.)? The only answer is that the Messiah must
be both a man (David's son or offspring) and God (David's Lord.) Jesus is
claiming to be both God and human. The Islamic mind should have no more
difficulty understanding how Jesus can unite in one person both divine and
human natures than their own belief that human beings combine both spirit
and flesh, the enduring and the transient in one person (sura 89:27-30; cf.
3:185). Even according to Muslim belief, whatever Almighty God, the Creator
and Ruler of all things, wills in his infinite wisdom he is also able to
accomplish for "He is the irresistible" (sura 6:61).
God only good. Many Islamic scholars claim that Jesus denied being God when
he rebuked the rich young ruler, saying, "Why do you call me good? No one is
good-except God alone" (Mark 10:18). A careful look at this text in its
context reveals that Jesus was not denying his deity. He was rather warning
the young man to consider the implications of his careless appellation.
Jesus does not say, "I am not God, as you claim" or "I am not good." Indeed,
both the Bible and Qur'an teach that Jesus is sinless (cf. John 8:46; Heb.
4:14). Rather, Jesus challenged him to examine what he was really saying
when he called Jesus "Good Master." In essence, Jesus was saying, "Do you
realize what you are saying when you call Me 'Good Master'? Only God is
good. Are you calling me God?" The fact that the young ruler refused to do
what Jesus said, proves that he did not really consider Jesus his Master.
But nowhere did Jesus deny that he was either the Master or God of the rich
young ruler. Indeed, elsewhere Jesus freely claimed to be both Lord and
Master of all (Matt. 7:21-27; 28:18; John 12:40).
The greater Father. Jesus' assertion that "My Father is greater than I"
(John 14:28) is also misunderstood by Muslims. It is taken out of its actual
context to mean that the Father is greater in nature, but Jesus meant only
that the Father is greater in office. This is evident from the fact that in
this same Gospel (of John) Jesus claimed to be the "I Am" or Yahweh of the
Old Testament (Exod. 3:14). He also claimed to be "equal with God" (John
10:30, 33). In addition, he received worship on numerous occasions (John
9:38; cf. Matt. 2:11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 28:9, 17; Luke 24:52). He
also said, "He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent
him" (John 5:23).
Further, when Jesus spoke of the Father being "greater" it was in the
context of his "going to the Father" (John 14:28). Only a few chapters later
Jesus speaks to the Father, saying, "I have completed the work you gave me
to do" (John 17:4). But this functional difference of his role as Son in the
very next verse reveals that it was not to be used to diminish the fact that
Jesus was equal to the Father in nature and glory. For Jesus said, "And now,
Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory which I had with you
before the world began" (John 17:5).
Misunderstood Philosophical Concepts. Islamic scholars also offer
philosophical objections to the doctrine of the Trinity. These too must be
cleared away before they will be able to understand the biblical teaching
about a plurality of persons within the unity of God.
Emphasis on the Oneness of God is fundamental to Islam. One Muslim scholar
said, "In fact, Islam, like other religions before it in their original
clarity and purity, is nothing other than the declaration of the Unity of
God, and its message is a call to testify to this Unity" (Mahud, 20).
Another author adds, "The Unity of Allah is the distinguishing
characteristic of Islam. This is the purest form of monotheism, i.e., the
worship of Allah Who was neither begotten nor beget nor had any associates
with Him in his Godhead. Islam teaches this in the most unequivocal terms"
(Ajijola, 55).
Because of this uncompromising emphasis on God's absolute unity, in Islam
the greatest of all sins is the sin of shirk, or assigning partners to God.
The Qur'an sternly declares "God forgiveth not (The sin of) joining other
gods With Him; but He forgiveth Whom He pleaseth other sins Than this: one
who joins Other gods with God, Hath strayed far, far away (From the Right)"
(sura 4:116). However, this misunderstands the unity of God.
The Trinity and heresy. There are two primary heresies from which the
Trinity is to be distinguished: modalism and tritheism. The heresy of
modalism, also called Sabellianism, denies there are three distinct eternal
persons in the Godhead. It believes that the so-called "persons"of the
Trinity are modes of God substance, not distinct persons. Like water with
its three states (liquid, solid, and gaseous), the Trinity is said to be
only three different modes of the same essence. Unlike modalists,
trinitarians believe there are three distinct persons (not just modes) in
the one substance of God.
Both Islam and Christianity proclaim that God is one in essence. What is in
dispute is whether there can be any plurality of persons in this unity of
nature. The inadequacies in the Muslims' view of God arise in part out of
their misunderstanding of Christian monotheism (see Theism). Many Muslims
misconstrue the Christian view of God as tritheism rather than as
monotheism. The opposite error of tritheism affirms that there are three
separate gods. Few, if any, Christian theologians or philosophers have held
this view, but it often has been attributed to trinitarians. Unlike
tritheists, trinitarians do not affirm a god with three different
substances; they confess that God is three distinct persons in one
substance.
The Bible declares emphatically: "The Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deut.
6:4). Both Jesus (Mark 12:29) and the apostles repeat this formula in the
New Testament (1 Cor. 8:4, 6). And early Christian creeds speak of Christ
being one in "substance" or "essence" with God. The Athanasian Creed, reads:
"We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding
the Persons; nor divining the Substance (Essence)." So Christianity is a
form of monotheism, believing in one and only one God.
The Trinity and complexity. Many Muslims complain that the Christian concept
of the Trinity is too complex. They forget, however, that truth is not
always simple. As C. S. Lewis aptly puts it, "If Christianity was something
we were making up, of course we could make it easier. But it is not. We
cannot compete, in simplicity, with people who are inventing religions. How
could we? We are dealing with fact. Of course anyone can be simple if he has
no facts to bother about" (Lewis, 145).
The fact confronting Christians which led to their formulating this complex
truth was, of course, the claims and credentials of Jesus of Nazareth to be
God (see Christ, Deity of). This led them of necessity to posit a plurality
within deity and thus the doctrine of the Trinity, since this Jesus was not
the same as the one whom he addressed as Father. So Christians believe and
Muslims deny that there are three persons in this one God. At this point the
problem gets philosophical.
The Neoplatonic concept of unity. At the heart of the Muslim inability to
understand the Trinity is the neoplatonic concept of oneness. The
second-century a.d. philosopher Plotinus, who heavily influenced the
thinking of the middle ages, viewed God (the Ultimate) as the One, an
absolute unity in which is no multiplicity at all. This One was so
absolutely simple that it could not even know itself, since self-knowledge
implies a distinction between knower and known. It was not until it emanated
one level down, in the Nous or Mind, that it could reflect back on itself
and therefore know itself. For Plotinus, the One itself was beyond knowing,
beyond consciousness, and even beyond being. It was so undividedly simple
that in itself it had no mind, thoughts, personality, or consciousness. It
was void of everything, even being. Thus, it could not be known, except by
its effects which, however, did not resemble itself (Plotinus, 1.6; 3.8-9;
5.1, 8; 6.8, 18).
It is not difficult to see strong similarities between the Plotinian and
Muslim views of God. Nor is it hard to see the difficulty with this view. It
preserves a rigid unity in God at the expense of real personality. It clings
to a rigid simplicity by sacrificing relationship. It leaves us with an
empty and barren concept of deity. By reducing God to a bare unity, they are
left with a barren unity. As Joseph Ratsinger insightfully noted,
The unrelated, unrelatable, absolutely one could not be a person. There is
no such thing as a person in the categorical singular. This is already
apparent in the words in which the concept of person grew up; the Greek word
"prosopon" means literally "(a) look towards"; with the prefix 'pros'
(toward). It includes the notion of relatedness as an integral part of
itself. . . . To this extent the overstepping of the singular is implicit in
the concept of person. [Ratsinger, 128-29]
Confusion Regarding the Trinity. Confusing unity with singularity. The
Muslim God has unity and singularity. But these are not the same. It is
possible to have unity without singularity. For there could be plurality
within the unity. Indeed, the Trinity is precisely a plurality of persons
within the unity of one essence. Human analogies help to illustrate the
point in a superficial way. My mind, my thoughts, and my words have a unity,
but they are not a singularity, since they are all different. Likewise,
Christ can express the same nature as God without being the same person as
the Father.
In this connection, Muslim monotheism sacrifices plurality in an attempt to
avoid duality. In avoiding the extreme of admitting any partners to God,
Islam goes to the other extreme and denies any personal plurality in God.
But, as Joseph Ratsinger observed, "belief in the Trinity, which recognizes
the plurality in the unity of God, is the only way to the final elimination
of dualism as a means of expanding plurality alongside unity; only through
this belief is the positive validation of plurality given a definite base.
God stands above singular and plural. He bursts both categories" (Ratsinger,
128).
Confusing person (who) and nature (what). That Christ "bursts the
categories" explains why Christian and non-Christian alike, have struggled
to understand the two natures of Christ. One of the better explanations of
what Christians believe, though it doesn't go far toward explaining it, is
found in one of the sixteenth-century Reformation statements of faith, the
Belgic Confession, chapter 19:
We believe that by this conception [of two natures], the person of the Son
is inseparably united and connected with the human nature; so that there are
not two Sons of God, nor two persons, but two natures united in one single
person; yet each nature retains its own distinct properties. As, then, the
divine nature has always remained uncreated, without beginning of days or
end of life, filling heaven and earth, so also has the human nature not lost
its properties but remained a creature, having beginning of days, being a
finite nature, and retaining all the properties of a real body . . . . But
these two natures are so closely united in one person that they were not
separated even by his death. . . . Wherefore we confess that he is very God
and very man: very God by His power to conquer death; and very man that He
might die for us according to the infirmity of His flesh.
Orthodox Christianity does not believe Jesus Christ was like a milkshake,
the two natures blended together in an indistinguishable mass. Neither do
Christians believe Jesus had a schizophrenically split identity in which
divine and human natures were so distinct they would have had to call one
another long-distance. These views and other equally wrong ideas have
muddied Christian theology throughout its history. A popular modern theory,
which misses the whole point of Philippians 2 and the reason God had to take
on a human nature states that Jesus emptied himself of all his divine
attributes of power and authority and kept only his moral perfection.
So how is it conceivable? The orthodox view is that God the Son took off
nothing of his godhood, but rather added to it the human nature. He accepted
limitations. As a human being, Jesus had to grow up and learn. He felt want
and sorrow and there were things the human nature of Jesus did not know,
such as the date of his return (Matt. 24:36).
One theologian, Charles *Hodge, wondered if God did not draw the clearest
analogy of the two natures in the design of Israel's temple at Jerusalem.
The inner court where the daily work of worship and the sacrifice happened
was the court of Israel or the holy place. But within this space was another
room that represented the presence of God in the midst of his people. This
central room, the "holy of holies" was only entered by the high priest once
a year. A curtain separated the two sections of the sanctuary so that the
room was hidden. But symbolically it empowered the priests in their daily
life in temple worship. The two were unmixed but united and inseparable.
The orthodox view of the two natures of Christ is that one person is both
God and human. The two natures commune intimately but do not overlap. Christ
possesses two natures united. Hence, when Jesus died on the cross for our
sin he died as the God-man. It is not going too far, said John Calvin, to
say that at the moment Jesus was hanging on the cross his power as Creator
God was holding together the hill on which the cross stood. Unless Jesus is
God and human he cannot reconcile God and humanity. But the Bible says
clearly, "there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man
Christ Jesus" (1 Tim. 2:5).
Since Christ is one Who (person) with two Whats (natures), whenever one
question is asked about him it must be separated into two questions, one
applying to each nature. For example, did he get tired? As God, no; as
human, yes. Did Christ get hungry? In his divine nature, no; in his human
nature, yes. Did Christ die? In his human nature, he did die. His divine
nature is eternally alive. He died as the God-man, but his Godness did not
die.
When this same logic is applied to other theological questions raised by
Muslims it yields the same kind of answer. Did Jesus know everything? As God
he did, since God is omniscient. But as man Jesus did not know the time of
his second coming (Matt. 24:36), and as a child he "increased in wisdom"
(Luke 2:52).
Could Jesus sin? The answer is the same: as God, no; as man yes (but he didn't).
God cannot sin. For example, the Bible says "it is impossible for God to
lie" (Heb. 6:18; cf. Titus 1:2). Yet Jesus was "in all points tempted as we
are, yet without sin" (Heb. 4:15). While he never sinned (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21; 1
Peter 1:19; 1 John 3:3), he was really tempted and it was possible for him
to sin. Otherwise, his temptation would have been a charade. Jesus possessed
the power of free choice which means that when he chose not to sin it was a
meaningful choice. He could have done otherwise.
Dividing every question of Christ into two and referring them to each nature
unlocks a lot of theological puzzles that otherwise remain shrouded in
ambiguity. And it makes it possible to avoid logical contradictions which
are urged upon Christians by Muslims and by other nonbelievers.
Conclusion. The doctrine of the Trinity is one of the great mysteries of the
Christian Faith. That is, it transcends reason without being contrary to
reason (see Faith and Reason). It is not known by reason (see Revelation,
General) but only by special revelation (see Revelation, Special). God is
one in essence but three in persons. He is a plurality within unity. God is
a triunity, not a rigid singularity.
Once those conceptions are understood, many of the barriers that separate
even such radical monotheists as Orthodox Jews and Muslims fall.
Sources
A. Ajijola, The Essence of Faith in Islam
Augustine, On the Trinity
S. Balic, "The Image of Jesus in Contemporary Islamic Theology," in A.
Shimmel and A. Falaturi, eds., We Believe in One God
C. Beisner, God in Three Persons
A. Dawud, Muhammad in the Bible
J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
A. H. Mahud, The Creed of Islam
M. Nazir-Ali, Frontiers in Muslim-Christian Encounter
C. G. Pfander, The Mizanu'l Haqq (The Balance of Truth)
Plotinus. The Enneads
G. L. Prestige, God in Patristic Thought.
J. Ratsinger, Introduction to Christianity, J. R. Foster, trans.
A. Shorrosh, Islam Revealed
Thomas Aquinas, On the Trinity
Received on Wed Jul 09 2008 - 20:03:32 PDT