Thesis
Statement:
The Trinity is God’s deity; the Father, the Son and
the Holy Spirit are mutual indwelling in one as divine Trinity. Jesus
explicitly states, “In that day you will know (ἐν
ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ γνώσεσθε ὑμεῖς) that I am in My Father (‘ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί μου) and you in
Me and I in you (καὶ ὑμεῖς
ἐν ἐμοὶ κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν) (Jh.14:20). The repetition statement that
Jesus emphasis is “ I am in the Father “έγώ έν τῷ πατρί μου” and Father is in
me“ό πτήρ έν έμοί” (Jh.14:9, 11, 20; 17:21). Jesus unveils the truth that the Son is the
incarnation, manifestation and expression of the Father (vv.7-11) and the
Spirit is the existence, reality and realization of the Son (vv.17-20). In the
Son (the Son is even called the Father in Isa.9:6) the Father is expressed and seen,
and as the Spirit (2Cor.3:17) the Son is revealed and realized. John the
Baptizer claimed that “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and
remain on him.”(Jh.1:32). God the Father is hidden, God the Son is manifested
among men, and God the Spirit enters into man to be his life. Hence, God is
triune; one God, one “essence” (úποστάσεως) (本筫),
yet, three are mutual “dwell in” (μένων έν)(住裡面) and
“sustain”(φέρων)(維持) each other as divine
Trinity. The Father in the Son, and the Son manifested among men, and the
Spirit dispenses Himself into us to be our portion that we may enjoy Him as our
life and everything in His divine Trinity.
Introduction
In O.T. the Son is called the Father in
Isa.9:6. “For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given, and the
government will be on his shoulders. And He will be called Wonderful
Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting
Father, prince of Peace.”(Isa.9:6).
In N.T. Father vindicated the Son by the evidences, first, the John Baptizer,
who claimed that “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain
on him.”(Jh.1:32). Second, in Matt.17:5, Father vindicated the Son again among
the disciples by said, “This is my Son “οὗτός έστιν ό υίός μου”, the beloved;
in whom I am well pleased “ό άγαπητός έν ὧ εύδόκησα”. Listen to Him “άκούτε αύτοῦ”.
(Matt.17:5). Christ didn’t glorify himself in becoming a high priest, but was
appointed by the one who said to him, “ϒίός μου εἶ σύ”(you are my Son), “έγώ σήμερον
γεγέννηκά σε” (today, I have begotten you). By Christ’s resurrection, Father
has declared him as Messiah. Linguistic study in the Greek Lexicon interpret “μόνος”
as alone (Mk4:10), as singly existing only, lone (Jh17:3), ό μ .he alone
(1Tim6:16). Greek “μονογενής” used of God’s Son Jesus only, only begotten,
substantively (Jh.1:14). One “essence” (úποστάσεως) (本筫), yet, three are mutual “dwell in” (μένων έν)(住裡面) and “sustaining”(φέρων)(維持) each other as divine
Trinity.
Jesus explicitly stated who He was, is and is to come throughout the His
mission. He disclosed himself to His disciples by saying “in that day you will
know “ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ γνώσεσθε ὑμεῖς” that I
am in My Father “ὅτι ἐγὼ
ἐν τῷ πατρί μου” and you in
Me “καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν ἐμο” and I in you “κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν”. When comes the “οταν ἔλθη ό” encourager “παράκλητος”
whom ὄν I will send to you “έγώ πέμψω ύμῖν” from the father “παρά τοῦ πατρός” the Spirit of truth τό πνεῦμα τῆς άληθείας…
will testify about me “μαρτυρήσει περί έμοῦ”. (Jh.14: 20; 15:26). Jesus unveils
the truth that God is one, yet manifested in three that πνεῦμα τῆς άληθείας
Spirit of truth will testify about Son. The Son is the incarnation,
manifestation and expression of the Father (vv.7-11) and the Spirit is the
existence, reality and realization of the Son (vv.17-20). In the Son the Father
is expressed and seen, and as the Spirit (2Cor.3:17) the Son is revealed and
realized. God the Father is hidden, God the Son is manifested among men, and
God the Spirit enters into man to be his life. Hence, God is triune, the Father
in the Son, and the Son as the Spirit dispenses Himself into us to be our
portion that we may enjoy Him as our life and everything in His divine Trinity.
This
research papers intend to discover God’s divine Trinity explicitly and
implicitly stated by Jesus in the New Testament, and the Son was vindicated by
Father and witnessed by His disciples. And outlook the historical
perspectives of the doctrine of Trinity from early Trinitarianism, Arianism,
Athanasius, Origen, John Calvin, Augustine, Tertullian, Dynamic and Modalistic
Monarchianism, and the agreement of Councils of Nicea and Constantinople, each
perspective and interpretation sum up the biblical truth of divine Trinity. Through
Linguistic study in the Greek, English, and Chinese Bible integrates with theologians and
scholars’ perspectives such as Feinberg, Bray, McCormack, Letham,, Ryrie, Charles
Stanley, and Watchman Nee to intensify the doctrine of Trinity.
Outlook
the Doctrine of the Trinity in New Testimony
1). Jesus’
perspective of Himself
Jesus explicitly stated who He was, is and is
to come throughout the His mission. He disclosed himself to His disciples by
saying “I am the Father are one”( έγὠ και ό πατήρ
έν ἐσμεν) (Jh.10:30), “before Abraham was born, I am,” (Jh.8:58) “the Father
is in me and I in the Father” (Math28:19). “In that day you will know that I am
in My Father and you in Me and I in you.” (ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ γνώσεσθε ὑμεῖς ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί μου καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν ἐμο κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν)
(Jh.14:20). “The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own; but
the Father who dwells in me (πτήρ έν έμοί μένων) does his works”
(Jh.14:10). “When comes
the encourager whom I will send to you from the father the Spirit of truth will testify about me. (οταν ἔλθη ό παράκλητος
ὄν έγώ πέμψω ύμῖν παρά τοῦ πατρός τό πνεῦμα τῆς άληθείας… μαρτυρήσει
περί έμοῦ.)”(Jh.15:26). After Jesus raised from death, he came to disciples
and said, “Peace be with you, as the Father has
sent me I am sending you and with that He breathed on them and said,
“ receive the Holy Spirit” (Johm19:21-22). All these passages explicate and unveil the truth that
God is one, yet manifested in three that Spirit of truth (πνεῦμα τῆς άληθείας) will testify about Son.
The Son is the incarnation, manifestation and expression of the Father
(vv.7-11) and the Spirit is the existence, reality and realization of the Son
(vv.17-20). In the Son the Father is expressed and seen, and as the Spirit
(2Cor.3:17) the Son is revealed and realized.
2). Father’s vindication of the Son
Father vindicated the Son in two scenarios
first, while Jesus baptized by the John, the Spirit of God
descending like a dove and lighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son whom I love, with him I am well please.”(Matt.3:16-17). Second,
while Jesus led Peter, James and John up a high mountain; they saw the Moses
an Elijah talking to Jesus. While Peter said, Lore, it is good for us to be
here, if you wish I will make three dwellings here, one for you, one for Moses,
and one for Elijah. While Peter still speaking, suddenly a bright cloud
overshadowed them, and from the cloud a voice said, “This is my Son, the beloved; in whom I am well pleased
Listen to Him”“οὗτός έστιν ό υίός μου, ό άγαπητός έν ὧ εύδόκησα. άκούτε αύτοῦ”.
(Matt.17:1-5). Both scenarios indicate that God the Father is hidden, God the
Son is manifested among men, and God the Spirit enters into man to be his life.
Hence, God is triune, the Father in the Son, and the Son as the Spirit
dispenses Himself into us to be our portion that we may enjoy Him as our life
and everything in His divine Trinity. Moreover, Christ didn’t glorify himself
in becoming a high priest, but was appointed by the one who said to him, “ϒίός μου εἶ σύ”(you
are my Son), “έγώ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε” (today, I have begotten
you). By Christ’s resurrection, Father has declared him as Messiah.
3). Four Gospel’s narrators as Disciples witnessed of Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit
In New Testament four Gospel’s
narrators who grew up in different culture and education background, yet, four
of them gave the testimony and jot down the some historical cultural context of
the biblical concept of Trinity. First, In Matthew’s narrative of Jesus and
witnessed of Trinity, he wrote,
“As soon as
Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water, at that moment heaven was
opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting
on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son whom I love, with him
I am well please.”(Matt.3:16-17).
Second, Luke’s
narrative of Jesus and witnessed of Trinity, he wrote, “When all
the people were being baptized, Jesus was baptized too. And as he was praying, heaven was opened and the Holy Spirit
descended on him in bodily form like a dove.
And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love, with you I am well pleased.” (Luke 3:21-22)
Third, Mark’s narrative of Jesus and
witnessed of Trinity, he wrote, “At that time Jesus came from
Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being
torn open and the Spirit descending
on him like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”
(Mark1:9-11).
Fourth, John gave this testimony,
“I
saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. I would
not have known him, except that
the one who sent me to baptize with water told me. The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and
remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.
I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God.”(Jh.1:32-34.)
Four narrators had provided clear expression of biblical
truth, and elaborated the sense of Trinity. “The descent of the Spirit upon
Christ was for special power at the beginning of His public ministry.”[1]
And “all persons of the Trinity were present at Christ’s baptism.”[2]
Outlook Linguistic interpretation –Greek
Lexical, English and Chinese literary
1)
Linguistic style: repetition and
parallelism in Jhon14
The literary forms in John’s narrative
about Jesus in Chapter 14, the context appears to use repetition and
parallelism to signal an important truth that the Father, the Son and the
Holy Spirit are mutual dwells in one.
For example, when Philip asked Jesus, “Show us the Father, and we will
be satisfied.” (Jn.14:4). Jesus answered,
“Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you
still do not know me? Whoever has
seem me has seem the Father; How can you say, show us the Father?” (v.9)
Do
you not believe that I am in the Father “έγώ έν τῷ πατρί μου” and the Father is in me “ό πτήρ έν έμοί”?
The word that I say to you I do not speak on my own, but the Father who dwells
in me “ό πτήρ έν έμοί” does his works.(v.10).
Then, Jesus repeatedly
stated in verse 11, verse 20, and Jh.17:21,
“Believe
me that I am in the Father “έγώ έν τῷ πατρί
μου” and the Father is in me “ό πτήρ έν έμοί”, but if
you do not, then believe me because of the works themselves.” (Jh.14:11)
“On that day you will know that I am in the my Father
“έγώ έν τῷ πατρί μου” and you in me,
and I in you.”(Jh14:20).
“That they may all be one, As you, Father,
are in me “πτήρ έν έμοί” and I am in you” (Jh.17:21)
The context in verse 10 and verse 11 describe a
relationship between two lines of text. It’s kind of parallelism which reminds
us to read the lines together as a unit of thought and never separating one
line from the other. Jesus urged “believe me…but if you do not …” The second
line contrastive the first line. These verses basically states the same thing
in a similar way that Jesus repeatedly emphasized, I am in the Father “έγώ έν τῷ
πατρί μου” and Father is in me“ό πτήρ έν έμοί” (Jh.14:9, 11, 20; 17:21). According
to Lexicon of the Greek interprets “έν” “as preposition with the dative.
The primary idea is “within”, “in” or with a plural noun,
denoting close relationship “among”, “within” (Ga.1:16b).”[3]
Therefore, the context explicitly stated the Son is “in” the divine
glory of the Father’s expression.
2) Greek, English
and Chinese literary- “μένων”
“dwell” “住”and “έν” “in”裡面”
In
John 14: 10 Jesus indicated that “the words that I say to you I do not speak on
my own; but the Father who dwells in me (πτήρ έν έμοί μένων) does his
works”. In Greek “μένων” as personal pronouns genitive plural form,
means “abide”, “remain” or “dwell” (in a more permanent sense). The
Greek “μένων” in Chinese means “住”(zu′), English interpret as “dwell” or “abide” And Greek “έν” in Chinese
means “裡面”(lee-men′), English interpret as “ in” or
“ inside”. Therefore, “夂 住子 裡面 ” “πτήρ έν έμοί μένων” can be interpreted as “Father dwells
in the Son” or “they indwell one another. “The
relationship is inseparable coinherence between Father and Son, though the three are distinct in their
eternal coexistence, they are by no means three separate Gods. Rather, they
coinhere mutually and inseparably.”[4]
3) Greek,
English and Chinese literary- “úποστάσεως” “essence” “神本筫(shen beng zhi)”and “φέρων” “sustaining” “維持(wei-chi)”
In Heb.1:1-3
indicates the word, “úποστάσεως” in Chinese interpreted as “神本筫”(shen beng zhi); in
Greek Lexicon interpret “as the
objective aspect and underlying reality behind anything, with the specific
meaning derived from the context: as God’s substantial nature “real being”,
“essence””[5].
The Word “φέρων” in Chinese as “維持”(wei-chi); in Greek
lexicon interprets as “literally bring, bear carry; of Christ’s sustaining the
universe bear along, carry forward.” [6] therefore,
the interpretation of this context as “God has spoken to us by a Son, whom he
appointed heir of all things… the Son is the reflection of God’s glory and the
exact imprint of God’s every being and he sustains all things by his powerful
word.”(Heb.1:2-3).
Feinberg’s Evidences of Plurality in the Godhead in O.T. and N.T.
According to Feinberg’s textbook provides many scriptures
as evidences to observe that there is plurality in the Godhead. For Feinberg
“the typical OT word for Israel’s God is “elohim,” and it is plural…even
more significant is that there are biblical passages where Israel’s God is
referred to as eloah, the singular of elohim (Deut32:15;Ps.18:32).
And In Gen20:13 elohim is used with a plural verb for “caused to
wander,” and in Gen35:7 God is spoken of as having “revealed” (plural in the
Hebrew) himself to Jacob. In 2 Sam7:23 we are told that Israel’s God (elohim)
went (halecu-third person plural) to redeem Israel.”[7] Feinberg
expresses linguistic view as evidences of plurality in the Godhead. He says,
“A
third linguistic phenomenon is the use of plural pronouns to refer to God in
various passages. Since pronouns are
supposed to agree with their noun in number, case, and gender, we would expect to see plural pronouns referring to
“elohim”. However, since that
noun was understood in biblical Hebrew (When used of Israel’s God) to refer to
one God, it was most typical to use
singular pronouns to refer to “elohim”. Hence, in instances where plural pronouns
appear (grammatically correct but contrary to typical usage), those cases seem to suggest plurality of some sort in
the Godhead.”
Feinberg applies several passages as hint at plurality in the Godhead.
Such as “God says, “Let us make man in our image” (Gen.1:26); “the verb “mark” naaseh
is plural and so is “our””.[8] And “the plural pronoun used to refer to God
occurs in Isa.6:8. “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?” Calvin sees in it a reference to the Trinity.
Feinberg “inclined to agree that it does hint at plurality in the Godhead.”[9] In N.T. Feinberg raise a question in Matt: 3:16-17,
“If Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not distinct persons, this is quite a feat
of ventriloquism and optical illusion! And it isn’t clear, then, whether it is
the voice from heaven, the dove or Jesus performing these feats. Therefore, He
concludes, “The most sensible way to understand this incident is that the three
are distinct persons.”[10]
Outlook Historical perspective of divine Trinity
Trinitarianism –
According to the author Robert Letham, Trinitarianism empaisis on the idea of
the divine Word or Logos and Christ as the Father’s thoughts, expressed in
creation and revelation. Two things were stressed his eternal oneness with
Father. He says,
“Trinitarianism
in the second century, the apologist (Justin, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus
of Antioch) began to explore the relation of the preexistent Christ to the
Father. They used the idea of the divine Word or Logos, from the Jewish
philosopher Philo. By this, they saw Christ as the Father’s thoughts, expressed
in creation and revelation. Two things were stressed- his eternal oneness with
the Father, as the Word immanent in God, and also his appearance in human
history, as the Word emitted or expressed- but without reference to a distinct
personal identity.”[11]
Arianism-
Arius is a bishop of
Alexandria in the east, and he was greatly influenced by Origen’s view.
According to Watchman Nee, Arianism underscores the Son is an inferior deity created
by the Father. The Son is not consubstantial with the Father and do not share
the same divine essence. More detail of perspective as follows,
“Arianism, bears some semblance to adoptionism,
likewise denies both the eternality and
the absolute Deity of the Son. This notion holds that the Son is not
consubstantial with the Father; that
is, they do not share the same divine essence. Arianism teaches that since the Son is the Father’s Only
Begotten, the Son had to have been begotten at some point in time. Hence, by extension, as a common Arian
expression asserts, “there was a time
when He [the Son] was not.” The fact that Christ was begotten therefore implies
that He was created. Though He
be the first, or even the chief of God’s creation
based upon Colossians 1:15, He is
nevertheless merely a creature and therefore
temporal; at the most, He exists
as an inferior deity.”[12]
Origen
The
view of Origen of Alexandria (A.D.185-254) contrast to Tertullian, he is an
Eastern theologian. He writes in Greek, not Latin. Origen was committed to
middle Platonism, and it is reflected in his view of the Trinity. Father (autotheos);
Son (Logos); Spirit (Pneuma). Feinberg points out the Origen
views God the Father is at the top of Origen’s system, and he transcends all
being. The Father begets the Son is an
eternal act. He states,
“The Holy Spirit, Origen referred to as the most honorable
of all the beings brought into existence through the Word, the chief in rank of
all the being originated by the Father through Christ. All of this meant for
Origen that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three persons, and they were so
eternally.”[13]
“These three “persons” he referred to as hypostaseis. Hypostasis and ousia
had been used synonymously to refer to the real existence or essence of a
thing. Origen’s emphasis on distinct hypostaseis, separate persons,
surely seems to combat the error of modalism. Origen reasoned that Jesus
Christ, though distinct from the Father, was an inferior being, a secondary
God, since his deity was derived from the Father. The Spirit was also a deity
to a lesser degree, deriving his divinity from the Father through the Son.”[14] “Origen believed the Son and Spirit truly to
be divine, even if of a lesser deity than the Father.”[15]
John Calvin
According to Bray, Gerald’s article, it shows that
Calvin held to a doctrine which stated that “the three persons were co-equal in
their divinity and united with each other. It leads to the principle of Reformation
theology, that knowledge of one of the person involves knowledge of the other
two at the same time.”[16] For Calvin, “Trinity as a whole; not each of
the persons separately, was the Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier, and they
attributed a specific function to the Fathers, Son and Holy Spirit in each of
the great works of God.”[17] Bray
expresses more as follows,
“Calvin
explains this distinction by saying: To the Father is attributed the beginning
of action, the fountain and source of all things; to the Son, wisdom, counsel,
and arrangement in action, while the energy and efficacy of action is assigned
to the Spirit. (Institutes1,13, 18). The three persons of the Trinity can be
distinguished as Father: beginning; Son: arrangement; Spirit: efficacy.”[18] Calvin
argued that “not only the Father, but also the Son and the Holy Spirit,
manifest essence in its fullness and must therefore be regarded as autotheos.
”[19]
Augustine
Feinberg expresses that according to Augustine, “there
is only one God. The one divine essence (ousia) is distributed or manifested in
three distinct persons (hypostaseis or prosopoi).”[20]
“The three persons (hypostaseis/prosopoi) coinbering in the one divine
nature (ousia) exist simultaneously with one another as distinct
subsistences or persons. From the preceding points we can also say that Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit are equal ontologically.
There is a distinction between the “ontological” or “immanent” Trinity,
on the one hand, and the “economic” Trinity on the other. ”[21] Bray
also points out that Augustine preferred the vocabulary, “essential
(essence) to substantia (substance) as a translation of ousia,
because substantia is the etymological equivalent of hypostasis, with
the result that Tertullian’s use of it to mean ousia had caused some
confusion. The Latin equivalent of hypostasis was substantia. For
Augustine, ousia (= essential) was the same thing. ”[22] “Augustine knew that Greek used hypostasis
to mean what the Latins meant by persona, but he also knew that hypostasis
and persona were not synonymous. He knew that in Latin persona
did not have the objective quality associated with substantia,
which made him uneasy in using it to describe the three persons of the
Trinity.”[23]
In addition, Bray explores Augustine’s emphasis is
that “the Father is the one who loves (Lover); the Son is the one who is loved
(Beloved); the Spirit is love.”[24] “The
Father loves the Son, and the Son returns his love to the Father, The Son’s
love is thus secondary to that of the Father in purely. Logical terms though it
must be equal to the Father’s love if the two are to meet and united in God.”[25] More Augustine’s percepts as follows,
“If the Holy Spirit is the unity
of the divine love, then it follows that he proceeds first from the Father, but also-and equally-from
the Son. This was the basis of
Augustine’s doctrine of the double
procession of the Holy Spirit, which became a subject of controversy after the sixth century.” [26] For
Augustine, “The Father is Father because he has
a Son; The Son is Son because he has a Father; The Holy Spirit is the bound of
unity between the Father and
the Son, and therefore he proceeds from both. The Holy Spirit is a person of the Trinity equal in rank
to the other two.”[27]
Tertullian
According to the author Letham, “Tertullian
(ca.160-220) is a layman who was once thought to be a lawyer and a convert to
the Montanist sect, opposes this latter error in his treatise Against Prazeas. And
Tertullian stressed that God is one –the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit
being identical, not eternally distinct. ”[28]
“Tertullian is the first to use the term persona, meaning by it a
concrete individual, rather than an actor’s mask, as in prior secular usage of
first, second, and third. ”[29]
Tertullian argues that “God didn’t have his Word (sermo) at the time,
only reason (ratio).God came into existence only at creation and so had
no preexistence. And he insists on the real personal distinctions of the
three and that they all share fully in the one being of God.”[30]
“Tertullian’s conclusion can best be
summed up in his own words, when he expounds the saying of Jesus, “I and my
Father are one” in John10:30. Letham,
Robert says, Tertullian’s
contributions as follows,
Tertullian’s
contributions are important. The first to use Trinitas and persona, he sets the
agenda for the Western church and is not superseded until Augustine. He is
clear, ahead of his time. In writing of the Son as from the substance of the
Father and of the Holy Spirit as sent from the Father through the Son,”[31]
“he coins phraseology later developed to consider the relations between the
three. In particular, by demonstrating the real personal distinctions in the
Trinity, he sets up a barrier to modalism.” [32]
Dynamic and Modalistic Monarchianism
According
to the Feinberg’s articles, “The Term “monarchianism” comes from two Greek
words, “monos” and “arche”. The former means “one” or “sole” , and the latter
can mean “beginning,” “origin, “ “first cause,” “ authority” or “ ruler”. As
monarchianism is applied to God, in its two forms (dynamic and modalistic), it
means that the Godhead is limited to a single origin or first cause.” [33] and “ the basic idea of this form of
monarchianism is that Jesus was not of the same nature as the Father, but
rather was a mere man who was adopted to be God’s Son.”[34]
According to Theodotus, “Jesus lived as an ordinary man until his baptism. The
Spirit or Christ descended upon him, and he began to work various miracles.
Nonetheless, Jesus never became divine.”[35]
Feinberg says,
“According to Paul of Samosota, Jesus was not the Word
of God, but only a mere man. “The Word”
referred to God’s commandment and ordinance, so that in calling Jesus the Word, the meaning is that God ordered
and accomplished his will through Jesus. But none
of that means Jesus was divine; only the Father who created all things was God.
As to the Spirit, Paul of Samosota saw
“spirit” as nothing more than a term for the grace that God poured out on the apostles.”[36]
Monarchianism main foundation of view was that “there
is only one God who is the Father. As to Son and Spirit, if they were fully God
as Scripture taught and Christians
believed, they must, then, be identical with the Father.”[37]
And Modalists “don’t stand for real
distinctions within the Godhead, but instead are names applicable to God at different times.”[38]
Councils of Nicea and Constantinople
Through the Feinberg’s article, it provides the
Council of Constantinople’s final conclusion
of doctrine of Trinity that is “God is one substance (ousia) and three
persons (hypostases)”. It says,
“The Nicene Creed agreed that Christ was
begotten, but denied that he was made that
he was a created being. The
decree of the Council reads: “we believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible
and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of his Father, of the substance of the
Father, God of God, Light of Light every
God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance (homoousion, consubstantialem) with the Father…” the
crucial word or phrase is “being of one substance”, the translation of the
Greek word homoousios.” [39]
At the Council of Constantinople, then, the doctrine
of the Trinity was finally established in its definitive formulation: God is one substance (ousia)
and three persons (hypostases).[40]
Outlook Twenty First central scholars’ perspective of divine Trinity
John S. Feinberg
Feinberg asks a question, does
Scripture reach the doctrine of the Trinity? He said, “The answer is negative.”
He assumes the Bible teaches the doctrine by implication. He says,
“The formula “God is one as to essence, three as to
persons” is nowhere found in Scripture. Some will reply that 1 John5:7 comes as
close to a formulaic statement as we can get, for it reads, “For there are
three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost and
these three are one.” Unfortunately, this reading is supported by a weak
textual tradition, and hence, is likely spurious. Scripture doesn’t say that
God is one is essence and three as to person, but it requires the theologian
and exegete to do a lot of explaining.”[41]
Bruce L. McCormack
McCormack
points out that “no ecumenical consensus exists on the doctrine of God, and
there is no single creed or confession
recognized across denominational boundaries that defines orthodoxy in this area
for the great majority of Christian in the same way that the Nicene Creed does
for the does not clearly collide with the Nicene Creed might conceivably be
“orthodox”
and would have to be regarded as a serious
possibility by doctors of all the churches. ” [42]
Jonathan Edward’s Trinity
Edwards emphasis on the Son is the eternally
begotten idea of the Father and the Holy Spirit is spirated and proceeds from
both the Father and the Son. And “since the Father and the Son subsist in a
relationship of infinite love and delight in each
other; there must be an act that is distinct from either, namely this act of
loving and delighting
between distinct from either; namely,
this act of loving and delighting between Father and Son. And this love and
delight are eternal as well as distinct from the Father and the Son; hence the
Holy Spirit is spirated (by the Father) and proceeds from both the Father and
the Son.”[43]
Geralkd Bray’s one God in Trinity-
For Bray’s perspective, one God in whom we all believe is known to us
not as one, but as three distinct persons. He says,
Our belief in
the saving work of Christ the Son of God and in the indwelling presence of God
the Holy Spirit demands that we worship God in that way. The big difference
between Christian faith and any kind of philosophical theology is that
Christians claim to know God, the ultimate reality, personally. The belief that
God is a personal being is one which is shared with other monotheistic
religions, especially Judaism and Islam, but Christianity is fundamentally
different form them in that it claims that the one God in whom we all believe
is known to us not as one, but as three distinct person. To a Jew or to a
Muslim, this appears to be a denial of monotheism, and it must be admitted that
many Christians also find it difficult to hold the Trinity of persons together
I the unity of a single divine being. Yet without the Trinity there would be no
Christianity.”[44]
Charles Stanley
For Stanley “the doctrine of the
Trinity means that there is one God who eternally exists as three distinct
Persons--the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Stated differently, God is one in
essence and three in person. These definitions express three crucial truths:
(1) The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, (2) each Person is
fully God, (3) there is only one God.”[45]
Watchman Nee
According to Watchman Nee, God is three, Father,
Son and the Spirit are God, (Isa.45:5; Gen1:26; Matt.28:19) three are eternal
and inseparable, three are coexist and coinhere. (John 14:10-11;8:29; 16:32;
14:26;15:26). The Son and the Spirit are inseparable. (John 14:16-18; 2 Cor.
3:17).The Father and the Spirit are inseparable. (John15:26; Matt.10:20). Though
the Three are distinct in their eternal coexistence, they are by no means three
separate Gods. Rather, they coinhere mutually and inseparably; that is, they
indwell one another. More details as follows,
“The Bible reveals emphatically and repeatedly that
God is one. First Corinthians 8:4 proclaims that “there is no God but one.” God
Himself declares in Isaiah 45:5, “I am Jehovah, and there is no one else;
Besides Me there is no God.” Yet throughout Scripture this unique, singular God
also attests to His own plurality. He said in Genesis 1:26, “Let Us make
man in Our image, according to Our likeness” (italics added).
Isaiah 6:8 testifies to the same plurality: “Whom shall I send? Who will go for
Us?” Though this plural aspect is alluded to in the Old Testament, not
until the New Testament is God explicitly revealed in His Trinity. The clearest
proclamation appears in Matthew 28:19, where the Lord Jesus charged the eleven
apostles to disciple and baptize the nations “into the name of the Father and
of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” On one hand, the use of the singular noun
“name” in this verse, rather than the plural “names,” denotes that the Three
are the one unique God into whom the discipled nations are baptized. The
specific enumeration of all three–the Father, the Son, and the Spirit– underscores
their mutual distinction. Throughout the Gospels, the Lord Jesus took many
opportunities to reveal to the disciples His mysterious coinherent relationship
with the Father. The Greek preposition para, translated “from” in this
verse, literally means “from with.” Hence, the Son sent from God was
simultaneously sent with God. The Lord testified of this intimate
inseparability: “He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone” (John
8:29).”[46]
Conclusion
God is triune, one God, one “essence” (úποστάσεως) (本筫), yet, three (Father,
Son and the Holy Spirit) are mutual dwell in (μένων έν) (住裡面) and sustain (φέρων)(維持) each other as divine Trinity. In O.T. the Son is
called the Father in Isa.9:6. “For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders. And He will be called Wonderful
Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, prince of Peace.”(Isa.9:6). In N.T.
Father vindicated the Son by the evidences, first, the John Baptizer, who
claimed that “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on
him.”(Jh.1:32). Second, in Matt.17:5, Father vindicated the Son again among the
disciples by said, “This is my Son “οὗτός έστιν ό υίός μου”, the beloved; in whom I am
well pleased “ό άγαπητός έν ὧ εύδόκησα”. Listen to Him “άκούτε αύτοῦ”. (Matt.17:5). Four Gospel narrators in N.T. witnessed
Christ’s baptism, the Spirit of God descended upon Him as a dove and the Father
testified from the heavens of His beloved Son. Four Gospel of narrators’ scene
clearly portrays the existence of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Further,
in John 14:16-17 indicates the Son ask the Father to send the Spirit of truth as
Comforter; Father answered the Son’s prayer by sending the Spirit (John 14:26)
after Jesus rose from death, Jesus came to disciples and said, “Peace be with
you, as the Father has sent me I am sending you and with that he breathed on
them and said, “receive the Holy Spirit” (Johm19:21-22). Linguistic style and
the literary forms in John’s narrative about Jesus in Chapter 14, the context
appears to use repetition and parallel to signal an important truth that the
Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are mutual dwells in one. In Greek “μένων” as personal pronouns
genitive plural form, means “abide”, “remain” or “dwell” (in a more
permanent sense). The Greek “μένων” in Chinese means “住”(zu′), English interpret as “dwell” or “abide” And Greek “έν” in Chinese
means “裡面”(lee-men′), English interpret as “ in” or
“ inside”. Therefore, “夂 住子 裡面 ” “πτήρ έν έμοί μένων” can be interpreted
as “Father dwells in the Son” or “they
indwell one another. The word, “úποστάσεως” in Chinese
interpreted as “神本筫”(shen beng zhi); in Greek Lexicon
interpret “as the objective aspect and
underlying reality behind anything, with the specific meaning derived from the
context: as God’s substantial nature “real being”, “essence””[47].
The historical Theologians and Scholars’
perspectives of the doctrine of Trinity, Trinitarianism emphasis on the idea of
the divine Word or Logos and Christ as the Father’s thoughts, expressed in
creation and revelation. Two things were stressed his eternal oneness with
Father. Arianism underscores the Son is an inferior deity created by the
Father. The Son is not consubstantial with the Father and do not share the same
divine essence. Origen was committed to middle Platonism, and it is reflected
in his view of the Trinity. Father (autotheos); Son (Logos);
Spirit (Pneuma). Origen’s emphasis on distinct hypostaseis,
separate persons, surely seems to combat the error of modalism. Origen reasoned
that Jesus Christ, though distinct from the Father, was an inferior being, a
secondary God, since his deity was derived from the Father. Calvin held to a doctrine which stated that
“the three persons were co-equal in their divinity and united with each other.
For Calvin, “Trinity as a whole; not each of the persons separately, was the
Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier, and they attributed a specific function to
the Fathers, Son and Holy Spirit in each of the great works of God.”[48]
“The three persons of the Trinity can be distinguished as Father: beginning;
Son: arrangement; Spirit: efficacy.”[49]
Calvin argued that “not only the Father, but also the Son and the Holy Spirit,
manifest essence in its fullness and must therefore be regarded as autotheos.
”[50]
According to Augustine, “there is only one God. The one divine essence (ousia)
is distributed or manifested in three distinct persons (hypostaseis or
prosopoi).”[51]
“The three persons (hypostaseis/prosopoi) coinbering in the one divine
nature (ousia) exist simultaneously with one another as distinct
subsistences or persons. From the preceding points we can also say that Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit are equal ontologically. ”[52]
Tertullian stressed that God is one –the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit
being identical, not eternally distinct. And “he insists on the real personal
distinctions of the three and that they all share fully in the one being of
God.”[53] “Tertullian’s conclusion can best be summed
up in his own words, when he expounds the saying of Jesus, “I and my Father are
one” in John10:30. Monarchianism main foundation of view was that “there is
only one God who is the Father. As to Son and Spirit, if they were fully God as
Scripture taught and Christians believed, they must, then, be identical with
the Father.”[54]
Modalists “don’t stand for real distinctions within the Godhead, but instead
are names applicable to God at different times.”[55]
For Charles Stanley “the
doctrine of the Trinity means that there is one God who eternally exists as
three distinct Persons--the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Stated differently,
God is one in essence and three in person. ”[56] According to Watchman Nee, God is three,
Father, Son and the Spirit are God, three are eternal, three are inseparable,
three are coexist and coinhere. Though the Three are distinct in their eternal
coexistence, they are by no means three separate Gods. Rather, they coinhere
mutually and inseparably; that is, they indwell one another.
Generation
to generation each Theologians and Scholars run the same circle of debating the
doctrine of Trinity and each one has their own unique perspectives. However, we
should focus what Jesus said rather than men say. Jesus’ repetition statement
to His disciples clearly emphasized that “I am in the Father “έγώ έν τῷ πατρί μου” and Father is in me“ό πτήρ έν έμοί” (Jh.14:9, 11, 20; 17:21). “I and my
Father are one”(Jn.10:30) and “In that day you will know that I am in My Father
and you in Me and I in you (ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ γνώσεσθε ὑμεῖς) (‘ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί μου) (καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν ἐμοὶ κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν) (Jh.14:20). The Father in the
Son, and the Son manifested among men, and the Spirit dispenses Himself into us
to be our portion that we may enjoy Him as our life and everything in His
divine Trinity. In another word, God is one, one “essence” (úποστάσεως) (本筫), yet, three are
mutual “dwell in” (μένων έν)(住裡面) and “sustain”(φέρων)(維持) each other as oneness of the Divine Trinity.
Application
As we
learn doctrine of God from early century to twenty-first century, among the
Christianity, Muslim, Jehovah Witnesses, and Buddhism, the doctrine “Trinity”
is most debatable issue. Christians must affirm the doctrine in unity,
acknowledge, honor and adopt each other’s experiment and perspective. “God is
all-powerful”[57]
and “God is all-loving”[58],
He delights to build up a Body of Christ as Bride to be an over-comer. “Through Christ’s death and resurrection, the Triune God now dwells in His
believers (Eph. 4:6) to be their oneness with Him and with one another (John
14:20; 17:21). Ultimately, God desires that all His believers be built up into
the one Body of Christ as the house of God to express the oneness of the Triune
God.”[59] To be an
over-comer, this Bride must grow in unity and maturity, pray for each other,
support and sustain each other. Each
Christian Gospel ministry engaging, there are three factors “faith”, “hope”,
and “love”, the greatest is “love”. We shall nurture each other in love. For
this love of Triune God can powerfully reconcile each sinner and restores the
hope, joy and unity.
Bibliography,
Bray, Gerald. L. The Doctrine of God. Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1993.
Brown,
Robert, Philip W. Comfort and J.D. Douglas, ed. The New Greek English
Interlinear New Testament. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers,
Inc.1990.
Bauer,
Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature. 3rd Chicago: The University of Chicago
press,2000.
Feinberg, John. S. No One Like Him. Wheaton: Crossway
Books, 2001.
Friberg,Timothy,
Barbara Friberg, and Neva F. Miller et al., eds. Analytical Lexicon of the
Greek New Testament.1st ed. Victoria BC: Trafford Publishing,
2005.
Froese, Paul., and Christopher Bader. America’s Four Gods. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press, 2010.
Goodrick, Edward W. and John R. Kohlenberger III. The
Strongest :NIV Exhaustive concordance. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,1999.
Letham, Robert. The Holy Trinity: In Scripture,
history, theology, and worship. Phillipsburg, NJ:P&R publishing
Ccompany,2001.
Lee, Witness. The New Testament (R.V)
“Anaheim: Living stream Ministry, 1985.
McCormack,
Bruce L., ed. Engaging the Doctrine of
God: Contemporary Protestant Perspectives. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic,
2008.
Nee,Watchman.
“Triune God”, Anaheim: Living Stream Ministry, 2000. http://www.triunegod.org/relationships/index.html
(accessed Nov.30,2013)
Ryrie, Charles
C. The Ryrie study Bible(NIV). Chicage:Zondervan.1984.
Stanley,
Charles “The Doctrine of the Trinity” Atlanta: In touch ministry,2007. http://www.crosswalk.com/who-is-jesus/is-jesus-christ-god/the-doctrine-of-the-trinity-11531192.html (accessed Nov.30, 2013).
The ESV study
Bible (ESV)Wheaton: Crossway,2008.
Thayer
and Smith. Greek Lexicon entry for Ammos: the KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon,
1999. http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kiv/ammos.html. (accessed November 14,2013).
[1] Charles
C. Ryrie. The Ryrie study Bible (NIV). (Chicage: Zondervan.1984), 1319.
[2] Ibid., 1407.
[3] Timothy
Friberg, Barbara Friberg, and Neva F. Miller et al., eds. Analytical Lexicon
of the Greek New Testament.1st ed. (Victoria BC: Trafford
Publishing, 2005),147.
[4] Watchman Nee. “Triune God”, Anaheim: Living Stream
Ministry, 2000 http://www.triunegod.org/relationships/index.html
(accessed,Nov.30,2013).
[5] Friberg, and Miller,
393.
[6] Ibid.,398.
[10] Ibid.,466.
[11] Robert Letham. The Holy Trinity: In Scripture, history, theology, and
worship. (Phillipsburg, NJ:P&R publishing Ccompany,2001),90.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Ibid.,223.
[20] Feinberg,487.
[21] Ibid.,488.
[22] Bray,167.
[24] Ibid.,172.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Bray.,173.
[27] Ibid.,174.
[28] Robert
Letham. The Holy Trinity: In Scripture, history, theology, and worship.
(Phillipsburg, NJ:P&R publishing Ccompany,2001),97.
[29] Ibid.,99.
[31] Ibid.,100.
[32] Letham.,101.
[33] Feinberg.,
474.
[34] Ibid.,475.
[35] Ibid.
[36] Ibid.
[38] Ibid.
[42] Bruce L. McCormack. ed.
Engaging the Doctrine of God:
Contemporary Protestant Perspectives. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic,
2008),9.
[43] Ibid.,92-93.
[45] Charles Stanley, “The Doctrine of the Trinity”
Atlanta: In touch ministry,2007. http://www.crosswalk.com/who-is-jesus/is-jesus-christ-god/the-doctrine-of-the-trinity-11531192.html (accessed Nov.30, 2013).
[48] Bray.,203.
[50] Ibid.,223.
[58] Ibid.
[59] Nee,Watchman. “Triune
God”, Anaheim: Living Stream Ministry, 2000. http://www.triunegod.org/relationships/index.html
(accessed Nov.30,2013)
