 |  | | | |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
[Previous: Biblical Teaching on the Trinity] II. The Historical Development of TrinityA. Heretical Understandings of the TrinityThe scriptures teach that there is only one God. Yet they also teach that the Father, the Son and the Spirit are unique and divine. This dichotomy was accepted by the church without much development for the first three centuries. This doctrine, along with many others, was not fully developed in the mind of the church because the church faced rampant persecution, and survival was more important than a thorough development of theological ideas. However, by the late third century AD, persecution began to wane, and by AD 318 the Roman emperor Constantine issued an edict of toleration towards Christianity. By AD 325 Christianity was made the state religion, and by AD 338, Christianity was the only legal religion and paganism was persecuted just as the Christians had been. After Christianity became tolerated by the government, the church now began to explore many of the important doctrines, not the least of which was this dichotomy between God's oneness and His three-ness. There were several viewpoints that arose at this time to try to reconcile this dichotomy [1]. 1. EbionismIn last first century there were many Jews who denied the deity of Christ all together. Christ was accepted as a prophet in fulfillment of Deuteronomy 18:15, but they saw Christ only as human, not as divine. 2. DocetismIn the second century, there arose a Greek religion known as Gnosticism. This religion extended early Platonic ideas of spirituality which believed that the physical world was evil, while the spiritual world was good. This idea called on people to transcend the physical and seek instead the diving spirituality within. Ultimate hope then was found in transcending the physical body and living as pure spirit. Gnosticism was blended with Christianity by Marcion in the second century to crate Docetism. This taught that Christ was indeed truly God, but that He was not truly human. Christ only appeared to have a body. But because the physical is evil, God could not have actually had a real physical body. 3. AdoptionalismIn the third century idea, it was suggested that Jesus was “adopted” as God's son. In this viewpoint, the logos indwelled the person Jesus as His baptism, and then departed while He was on the cross (“into your hands I commit my Spirit.”). Jesus was indwelled by this “spirit of Christ,” but was not equal to God. 4. Modalism (aka Sabellianism)In the third century, Sabellius proposed that the Father, the Son and the Spirit were all different roles or manifestations of the one God. There was only one entity, God, but three different names assigned to God. For example, one individual person takes on many different roles. I can be a husband to my wife, a father to my children and a son to my parents. But I remain only one person. There is no distinction in my essence, only in my role. This viewpoint was condemned by the synod of Antioch in AD 286. 5. ArianismArius was an elder in Alexandria in the early fourth century. In contrast to Sabellius, Arius proposed that that Christ was not just another name for God, but that He was a distinct creation of God. Using Colossians 1:15, Arius taught that before the creation of the world, God created Christ as His firstborn, and was therefore subordinate to God. Christ was still very important and had a unique relationship with the Father, but He did not have the fullness of deity that the Father did. B. The Nicene Creed1. The Council of NicaeaIn opposition to Arius was Alexander, the Patriarch of Alexandria. Alexander held firmly to an eternally existent Christ and condemned Arius as a heretic in 318. However, Arius continued to teach his viewpoint, creating great dissent within the church in Alexandria. To address the disagreement, Emperor Constantine called a conference of bishops in AD 325 in the city of Nicaea. This was the first ecumenical council of the church and established a precedent for how the church would decide theological issues. The Council agreed with Alexander and issued a statement of faith known as the Nicene Creed, in which it declared Arianism to be anathema. 2. The Council of ConstantinopleThe Nicene Council did not end the Arian controversy. After the death of Alexander, Athanasius, who had accompanied Alexander to Nicaea, became the patriarch of Alexandria, and he began actively persecuting the heretic, Arius. However, soon the Emperor intervened in this persecution and reinstated Arius and exiled Athanasius. With that, it appeared for a time that the Arian theology would become the orthodox teaching of the church. However, Athanasius continued to defend the Nicene Creed from exile and along with three Greek philosopher-theologians known as the Cappadocian Fathers, they slowly regained the theological upper hand within the church. In AD 381, the Emperor Theodosius I called the second ecumenical council of the church in Constantinople to settle the matter once and for all. The council sided with Athanasius, reaffirming and clarifying the original Nicene Creed. 3. The Nicene Creed (AD 325, 381)The following is the Nicene Creed, as amended in Constantinople: We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, creator of all that is seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of the same essence with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. 4. The Orthodox Definition of the Trinitya. Heretical Understandings of the Trinity
Nearly all the major Christian heresies are based on a corruption of the orthodox understanding of the Trinity. Mormonism, for example, teaches an extreme form of Arianism, where Christ was born to the Father. The Jehovah's Witnesses also believe Jesus to be a creation of God. The “Oneness Pentecostals” are modalists, believing Father, Son and Spirit to be one person revealed in three separate ways. Liberal Christians deny Christ's divinity all together. b. Failure of AnalogiesThere a numerous illustrations of the Trinity which Christians have developed through the years to try to explain the doctrine of the Trinity. All of the most popular analogies fail to capture the unique relationship of Oneness and Three-ness. • Egg – There is only one egg, but there are three parts to it: the shell, the white and the yoke. However the analogy does not show the equal nature of the three parts. In the Trinity, Father, Son and Spirit are of the same substance (i.e. divinity). • Water – Water can exist in one of three states: ice, liquid or steam. This is a Modalist view of the Trinity; for it shows God as being revealed in three separate forms, but denies the distinction between them. God exists simultaneously and distinctly as Father, Son and Spirit and the three are not merely different states or manifestations of the one God. • Person – A person has body, soul and spirit, but there is only one person. However, there is no distinction to these three. Within my consciousness I can not distinguish between my soul and my spirit. My body does not have awareness apart from my non-corporal forms. My spirit does not commune and have relationship with my soul. Father, Son and Spirit are distinct and have awareness of and relationship with each other. • Crowd – There are many people within the crowd, but a crowd is considered a singular word. However, this is a Tri-theistic analogy as it denies the oneness of God. c. The Trinity DefinedWith the failure of analogies, it is best to just state the doctrine for what it is and acknowledge that it is impossible for us to fully fathom the doctrine. The doctrine of the Trinity can be summarized as follows: There is One God who eternally exists in three distinct persons – the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit- all of whom are fully God, all of whom are equal [2]. D. Eastern and Western Views [3]This creed defines the orthodox view of the Trinity accepted by all branches of Christianity today, including Protestant, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox. However, there has been great misunderstanding between the Western and Eastern viewpoints of Christianity. Both sides have accused the other of departing from the orthodox Nicene understanding. However, these two viewpoints are not contradictory but complementary. In western Christianity (which consists of both Catholic and Protestant viewpoints), the emphasis has been on defining the terms of the essence of each person and entity within the Trinity. Western theologians have attempted to define the Trinity in almost psychological and ontological terms in an attempt to understand the nature and essence of the Godhead. In eastern Christianity (which consists of the Eastern Orthodox and Coptic traditions), the emphasis has been on the social and communal aspects of the Trinity. Rather than define the nature of the essence of God, Eastern theologians have concentrated on the nature of the relations between Father, Son and Spirit. The trinity is left a mystery with the exception of the understanding of the mutual indwelling of the Trinity (i.e. the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, etc.). This difference can be seen in the predominant illustrations of the Trinity developed by the two viewpoints. In the west, the Shield of the Trinity Trinitarian shield was developed in thirteenth century. It defines the essence of the Godhead, showing all three to be one God with three distinct persons. In the east, the Borromean rings were the dominant illustration (developed also as early as the 13 th century and named after an Italian family in whose coat of arms the symbol is found). This symbol illustrates more of the inter-relationship between the members of the Trinity.
Because the west has emphasized that each member of the Trinity is of the same substance, the east has accused the west of modalism. Because the east has emphasized the distinction between the members of the Trinity, the west has accused the east of Arianism and Tri-theism. However, both viewpoints are valid orthodox understandings which help us to see a fuller glimpse of the Trinity. Footnotes
[Next: Practical Ramifications of the Trinity]
|
This creed defines the orthodox view of the Trinity. It brings a delicate balance between the scriptural teaching that God is one and that God is three. If God's oneness is ignored, it becomes Tri-theism (i.e. three gods). If the three persons of the Trinity are not considered distinct, it becomes Modalism. If the three persons are not considered equal, it becomes Arianism. It is only when these three characteristics are held together can the orthodox view of the Trinity be affirmed. 
