Is the "Trinity" Biblical?

In some theological discussions on social media, it's becoming commonplace to say that the doctrine of the Trinity is nowhere found in Scripture. To answer any question about whether that view is accurate, though, we need to define the doctrine of the Trinity as historically taught by the Christian church. Then we can evaluate to what extent that view is or isn't in the Christian Bible or whether it can be considered in any sense Biblical.



Statement of the Doctrine

There are many ways we can describe the doctrine of the Trinity. It has been formulated in several different ways, often because of the chosen language for theological terminology (whether you prefer using Greek terminology or Latin terminology), but a formulation that we can all agree is an accurate representation of the doctrine in English is this: "There is one God who is manifested eternally in three persons—Father, Son and Holy Spirit." We can further refine this definition with the following:

  • God is one in divine essence, but three in person. Formulations sometimes vary:
    • Tertullian (Latin): una substantia et tres personae
    • Cappadocian (Greek): One ousia (essence) and three hypostases (persons).
  • A “person” as someone with knowledge, feelings, and a will.
  • The persons of the Trinity may be distinguished from each other, but these persons may never be divided, separated, confused, or mixed.
  • Each person in the Godhead is fully and eternally God, having all the attributes of God (holiness, righteousness, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, eternity, infinity, etc).
  • The three persons are related to each other eternally as Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
It should be completely obvious that this formulation of the doctrine is never found in Scripture. In fact, the Scriptures never approach the level of sophistication needed to define the doctrine as precisely as I have done above. This is a big part of the reason why some people say that the doctrine isn't in the Bible. The formulation I described above was hammered out over a couple centuries of discussion and debate. Pastors and theologians discussed (and fought) amongst themselves to try to work out what formulation best represents the diverse teachings of Scripture about the Godhead, including the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. So in this qualified sense, we can agree with critics that the Trinity isn't "in the Bible." It's a human invention designed to summarize teachings of Scripture by synthesizing the diverse teachings of Scripture into one (somewhat) coherent package. On this particular point, I can agree with critics of Christianity. But then again, I don't know of any Christian theologian who would deny this particular point either. Nobody says the word "trinity" appears in Scripture or that any passage of Scripture contains the precise language of the doctrine of the Trinity as it has been historically taught by the Church. 

A more interesting question is whether the the Doctrine of the Trinity is biblical. That is, even though the doctrine isn't "in the Bible," does the doctrine of the Trinity succeed in synthesizing the diverse teaching of Scripture into a single, coherent statement? I want to argue here that we can defend a "yes" answer to the question, with the caveat that no one can fully understand an infinite God, and so even though there are aspects of the doctrine that may remain mysterious to us, the doctrine is faithful to Scripture. I think it would be best to say it this way: the Doctrine of the Trinity is the best way we have to summarize the teachings of Scripture on the godhead. However, it is not a complete description of the Godhead and it does not answer any and all questions we may have about the Godhead.

Here is a summary of the teachings of Scripture that is relevant to the Doctrine of the Trinity. Some may object that this is not complete, but I see no reason to be complete here. My goal here is simply to show that there are good, Biblical reasons to believe that God is One and that the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit are properly called God in Scripture.

The Oneness of God

In another post, I went into a lot more detail about what I mean when I say that God is One. I'm not denying that there are passages that refer to other preternatural creatures as gods. What I think the Scriptures are clear on, though, is that the the Scriptures consistently affirm both that God is the only supernatural, uncreated being.
  • Deut 6:4-5—“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.”
  • Deut 32:39—“See now that I myself am He! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand.”
  • Is 44:6—“I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.”
  • Mark 12:29—“Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one” (quoting Deut. 6:4).
  • James 2:19—“You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.”
Now to be clear, let me reaffirm here that the Bible speaks of other “gods” or elohim, but the semantic range of elohim appears to be more broad than our use of “god.” It's used of preternatural creatures that we don't call gods in English. False gods, angels and other heavenly creatures can be called elohim in the Bible.
  • Ex. 15:11—“Who is like you among the gods?” Yet, we can understand this to mean, even though people worship idols as other gods, in reality, there is none like you.
  • 1 Kings 19:17-18—“It is true, O Lord, that the Assyrian kings have laid waste these nations and their lands. They have thrown their gods into the fire and destroyed them, for they were not gods but only wood and stone, fashioned by men’s hands.”
  • Judges 11:24—Jephthah asks the Ammonites, “Will you not take what your god Chemosh gives you? Likewise, whatever the LORD our God has given us, we will possess.” Jephthah acknowledged that the Ammonites believe Chemosh gave them their land, but wasn’t teaching us that Chemosh actually exists.
  • 1 Cor. 8:4-6—“We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is but one God, the Father.” If we read vv. 5-6 without v. 4, we may be tempted to think Paul taught henotheism. But v. 4 acknowledges that there is only one God, showing that in vv. 5-6 he is only acknowledging that people worship other gods and lords, not that they exist.

The Divinity of Each Person of the Trinity

The plurality of the one God in general from the Old Testament:

  • Gen. 1 speaks of the Creator God, but also of “the Spirit of God” hovering over the waters, and the “word” of God, through which the world was created.  This was used by John in the prologue of his gospel to explain how the Word can be with God as well as God at the same time (see Ps. 33:6).
  • Mark 12:35-37 records that Jesus quote Ps. 110 to show that for David to say, “The Lord says to my Lord,” there must have been a Lord above David other than God the father.
  •  Isaiah 63:9-10 speaks of Yahweh, the angel of His presence and the Holy Spirit.
  • Daniel 7:13-14 refers to the Son of Man approaching the Ancient of days and receiving worship from the nations.
  • Haggai 2:5-7 speaks of Yahweh, His Spirit, and “the desired of the nations”—that is, the Messiah.

These do not prove the Trinity from the OT. Each of these passages are easily interpreted in a manner consistent with Judaism. In hindsight, though, we can say that they do anticipate further revelation in the NT. When seen from the perspective of the New Testament, we can see the divinity of the Spirit of God and the Word of God alongside God the Father.

  •  God the Father
    • Ephesians 5:20—“…always giving thanks to God the Father for everything.”
    • Romans 1:7—“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ” (the same wording is in 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Eph. 1:2).
    •  See also: John 6:27, 45-46; 8:41-42, 54; 20:17; 1 Cor. 15:24; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 5:20.
  • God the Son
    • In Matt. 21:16 Jesus quotes Ps. 8:2, which refers to the praise of Yahweh, and applies it to Himself. Jesus quotes Psalm 8 to show why it is that the crowds are praising him.  In Psalm 8, they are praising God.
    • Mark 1:2 claims that Isaiah wrote about Christ, “prepare Your way,” quoting Mal. 3:1.  Yeet in Mal. 3, it is a clear reference to Yahweh—the way of the Lord.
    • John 1:1-3—In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.”
    • John 8:58—“Before Abraham was, I AM!”
    • John 20:28—“Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God’”
    • Phil. 2:6, 11— “being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.”  The Poem ends with the confession, “Jesus Christ is Lord.”
    • Heb. 1:2-3—“but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.  The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.”
    • Tit. 2:13—“…while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”
    • 2 Pet. 1:1—“…To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours.”
    • 1 Jn 5:20—“And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God.”

  • God the Holy Spirit
    • Mark 3:28-29 speaks of “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit;” by definition, blasphemy can only be against God.
    • 1 Cor. 3:16-176:19-20 identifies God’s temple with the temple of the Holy Spirit.  “Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you?  If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him; for God’s temple is sacred, and you are that temple.”
    • 1 Corinthians 6:19-20: “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.”
    • Acts 5:3-4—“Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land?  Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.” 
    • The Holy Spirit is referred to with the Divine Name (Yahweh or Jehovah):
      • In Ex. 17:7, Numb. 14:20-23, and Ps. 95, Yahweh (or Jehovah) spoke to the Israelites and condemned them for their disobedience, saying that they will not enter his rest in Canaan.
      • In Heb. 3:7-11, the “the Holy Spirit says: ‘Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts…”  The words of Yahweh are put on the lips of the Holy Spirit.
    • The Spirit has divine attributes and performs actions that can only be done by God. He’s
      • Eternal (Heb. 9:14)—“How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences…”
      • Omniscient (1 Cor. 2:11)—“The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man’s spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.”
      • Omnipresent (Ps. 139:7-10)—“Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?”
      • Agent in Creation (Gen. 1:2)—The Spirit hovered over the waters at creation as a creative agent, not as a thing created.
    • The Spirit is not an impersonal force, but has personality as a person. 
      • The word pneuma is neuter, but on occasion, Biblical writers give the word masculine pronouns.  John 16:14, Eph. 1:14 both use masculine pronouns to refer to the neuter word spirit.  They are referring to the “natural gender” of the word, rather than grammatical.
      • In John 14:26, 15:26 and 16:7, the Spirit is referred to with titles that assume personally; he’s called a Counselor, Advocate, Comforter.
      • He has the characteristics of personality. In Rom. 8:16 the Spirit testifies intelligently that we’re his children.  In Acts 16:7, He has will to prevent people’s actions.  He speaks in Heb. 3:7.
      • We are also told to treat the Spirit as a person.  For instance, we’re told not to “grieve” him (Is. 63:10; Eph. 4:30), and we are told we should “lie to” or “test” him (Acts 5:4, 9).

God’s “Three-in-Oneness”

Not only do the Scriptures refer to God as One and also affirm that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are divine, the Scriptures also sometimes group all three persons in the same divine category.

  • Matt. 28:19-20—“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
  • 2 Cor. 13:14—“May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”
  •  In Acts 2:33, Jesus is exalted to the right hand of God and the Holy Spirit is
    poured out what the observers see and hear.

Summary of Trinitarian Theology

We cannot say that the Doctrine of the Trinity is "in the Bible" in that the traditional formulation for the doctrine does not appear in Scripture. The doctrine of the Trinity is a human invention designed to explain the diverse ways that the Scriptures speak of the Godhead as being both "one" and "three." In that sense, though, I think it's fair to say that the Trinity is "biblical." I know of no better way to summarize the teachings of Scripture on the godhead. 

I think for some the objection to what I just said comes from the fact that the writers of the New Testament never actually taught the doctrine as currently formulated. Instead, they had their own diverse ways of describing God and his oneness and three-ness. And we cannot assume univocality in the way the Scriptures talk about the Godhead. For instance, some Biblical writers use the language of adoptionism in their letters while others do not. You can see some passages referring to Jesus as an eternal Son of God and you can see passages describing Jesus as being adopted by God the Father at his baptism. But this diversity and lack of univocality is not an argument that the doctrine of the Trinity doesn't do justice to the teachings of Scripture. 

As an example, nature behaves as it does, but there are many diverse ways scientists can articulate the behavior of nature, and these are not always equally useful in all contexts. The best understanding of gravity is that it refers to the curvature of space time. But formulations of gravity as a force that obeys F = ma (as W = mg) remain useful. Calculus works whether we use the terminology of Newton or Leibniz. Specific formulations of the Trinity are at least partly contextual, and so it's not a problem to see that some Biblical authors speak of God and Jesus in one way and other authors speak in different terminology. It's also not a problem that believers today formulate the doctrine as a way to make sense of all the diversity in Scripture.

And to be clear, the doctrine is not a complete description of the Godhead, and it does not answer any and all questions we may have about the Godhead. Not every passage in Scripture is equally well understood given the doctrine of the Trinity. People still challenge the doctrine using passages in Scripture that are thought to undermine the credibility of the doctrine as representing the broad teaching of Scripture (John 17:3) or as creating irreconcilable difficulties between Jesus' human and divine nature (Matthew 24:36). These are fair discussions, and I can't get into all of these in this post. Here I want to make two more simple points:
  • A doctrine can be considered "Biblical" even if the formulation of the doctrine isn't "found in Scripture."
  • The diversity of language about the Godhead in the New Testament (the lack of univocality) does not mean that we cannot come up with a fair summary of the teachings of the New Testament, given that diversity.
Perhaps in later posts, I'll address some passages that are used to challenge whether the doctrine is Biblical, but that's outside the scope of the point I'm making today.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Metaphorical Imperative

Image
From the time I was child I've been fascinated by the natural world, and since I was in high school I've been very concerned about developing good ways of bridging the perceived gap between Geology and the Bible. I majored in Geology in college with the intention of going to the Institute for Creation Research after graduation. While in college I became disenchanted with that enterprise (for reasons I'll discuss later), and I've focused since then on developing what I hope are faithful ways of interpreting Scripture as a theological text rather than a scientific text. Over the last few years, I've become progressively more concerned with our need to respond to global environmental problems such as climate change and land use issues that are unsustainable for our planet. In the process, it's become increasingly clear to me that the evangelical church does not have a meaningful way to engage in these types of issues in a way that is both Biblically grounded and re...
Read more

Autism and Tylenol: Should We Be Concerned?

Image
AI Tylenol Bottle with Gibberish Text A couple days ago we were told by Trump and RFK jr that we should be concerned about a potential causal link between Tylenol use during pregnancy and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Given that Tylenol is pretty much the only over-the-counter medication that is considered safe to take for fevers and pain during pregnancy, I can only imagine the confusion being generated right now about how to cope with pain and fever during pregnancy . Now I'm not a medical doctor, so please don't just take my word for it. I'll supply a series of links below to resources written by those qualified to give medical advice. I think, however, we should be able to see through a lot of the current rhetoric if we understand how both cherry picking and ignoring confounding variables can lead to very misleading conclusions that can result in needless fears and even false guilt among moms with autistic children who took Tylenol during pregnancy.  The backgrou...
Read more

The Proper Translation of Exodus 21:22-25

Image
Recently I came across a video by Dan McClellan responding to a criticism of his view of Exodus 21:22-25. I agree with many of McClellan's criticisms of that content creator, who seems to be in over his head addressing the translation of Exodus 21. However, I also think that McClellan overstates his case, and I believe he's assigning more certainty to his view than is warranted by the evidence. McClellan's position is that these verses treat causing a miscarriage to be punishable only by a fine, while harm to the mother is punishable according to the principle of lex talionis . However, this is not clear in the text, and I consider this to be a less likely understanding of its meaning. Let's look at the text that expresses his view as it appears in the NRSVue: 22 “When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman’s husband demands, paying as much as the ...
Read more