Return To Home

<< Heresy

Series Index

Part 2 >>

It was a time in the history of the Church, when Christian theology was still considerably primitive. Several divergent views on the nature of God began to emerge. Many of the controversies involved the relationship between God the Father and Jesus Christ. Was Jesus also God? were they two Gods, or one? Was Jesus divine, a man, ... or both? Even those who held to the "pretrinitarian" view couldn't agree on the precise language to express their view. Needless to say, the theological situation during this time was quite chaotic.

In order to address this, the Church had brought together a few councils over the forth and fifth centuries. What resulted was a well formulated, though concise, theology of the Trinity.

Unfortunately, even today the Trinity is a hot topic among many who profess to be disciples of Jesus Christ. The Jehovah's Witnesses, popular from their door to door ministry, believe that Jesus is not God, but the first created being. The Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter Day Saints (an organization which is more popularly known as the Mormons) believe that Jesus is God, but is a separate god from the Father.

As is evident, it is important to address the doctrines that make up Trinitarian theology. While the theology in general is important, the nature of Jesus Christ, Son of God and God the Son, is a specific topic that many people stumble over, and thus will get extra attention here. One critical question must also be answered: is blatant dissent against Trinitarianism sufficient to be considered heresy? Also, can one be saved apart from knowledge of the Trinity? What is especially challenging here is that one could easily write more on the Trinity than what I've written on this site combined; however, this article will not go terribly indepth.

We shall start by looking at a few early Christian creeds. During the first few centuries, many movements emerged which diverged on their view of the nature of God and the nature of Jesus, causing divisions in the church. However, when the Roman persecution of Christians subsided under Constantine, the early church had a chance to get together, and create creeds for the sake of bringing about unity in the Church and to respond to what was seen at the time as bad teachings. From this backdrop, there resulted 3 creeds which are noteworthy regarding Trinitarian doctrines: the Nicene Creed, the Chalcedonian Creed, and the Athanasian Creed.¹ Understand, though, that I refer to these for the sake of presenting definitions as understood by orthodox Christians for ages. The doctrines themselves, however, I do believe come from the Bible itself.

The Nicene Creed is the earliest of the three creeds, and here we find a few important statements to Trinitarianism. The first line reads, "We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen." The Father is God; so far so good. Generally, this is not debated between Trinitarians and nontrinitarian theists. But, the next section speaks of Jesus: "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 one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made." Here, we see that Jesus is also called God. In fact, the creed ties this back to the first statement by calling Jesus "God from God." Christ is also said to be "eternally begotten" and "begotten, not made." This may seem to be cognative dissonance, but I believe the gist that the Creed is trying to get at is that The Son is eternal, and yet comes forth from the Father. The Son is also "of one Being with the Father."

This creed was amended later to give more detail on the doctrine regarding the Holy Spirit. "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." While the Nicene Creed doesn't explicitly call the Spirit God, that is implied by the use of title "Lord" and He being worshipped and glorified (two things that God alone rightfully deserves). It is also implied that the Spirit is a person, not an "impersonal force," as some divergent groups believe.

In addition to what we see from the Nicene Creed, we also have the Chalcedonian Creed. For the sake of brevity, I will quote the most significant parts:

We... teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [co-essential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; ... one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons ...

This is the first creed, that I'm aware of, that talks about the two natures of Christ. The doctrine here is called the Hypostatic Union, though sometimes you may hear it called Hypostasis. The point here is that Jesus Christ has two natures -- divine and human -- and yet is not two persons, but one. Furthermore, He is not part of each, but is fully God and fully man. Finally, it is noteworthy that while the Creed describes them as indivisible/inseparate, they are nevertheless distinct. Some nontrinitarian theists and skeptics suppose that this is an incoherency and thus cannot be true; I propose that it is a paradox: something that seems contradictory, but nevertheless both are indeed true. I'll talk more about this later on.

The Anathasian Creed is the latest of the three creeds here, and thus is more detailed. There isn't much to say here, as much of what is covered by this creed is also covered by the Nicene Creed. What is noteworthy about this one in contrast to the earlier creeds is the use of the word Trinity, as well as the emphasis on neither "confounding the persons nor dividing the substance." The Creed clearly articulates God's unity, while also articulating the distinction of the three persons.

From these, we can derive a cogant, accurate definition of the Trinity as Christians have believed in within orthodoxy. The Trinity is One God, one being and one substance, which exists as three distinct persons, the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, the Son is one person, and yet He is fully God and fully man.

But is this formulation biblical? Granted this is the traditional view, but some may suggest that perhaps they got it wrong. There were dissenters to the orthodox view, and in fact they are the reason the creeds were needed. So now, it's time to turn to the Scriptural case.

The deity of the Father has not been denied among Christians and heretics, except perhaps among the most extreme and senseless heretics. There are clear passages to this affect, like for instance, Jesus prays to the Father: Now this is eternal life-that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you sent. John 17:3. Of course, some will find it strange that I started off with a verse that has often been interpreted against the Trinitarian position. However, in context this is best interpreted as contrasting the Father (the source of salvation) from the false gods of the pagans, which cannot save. There is indeed a hint here that this does not negate Christ's or the Spirit's divinity: the verse doesn't say that only the Father is the true God, but the Father is the only true God. If it said the former, then indeed this passage would be conclusively antitrinitarian; however as we discussed, the Trinitarian view is that the Son is in one being with the Father, and thus need not be excluded from the category "one true God." If the Son is indeed eternally begotten from the Father, one could say the Son derives His deity from the Father. (This should not be construed to say, however, that Jesus is a lesser deity or something to that effect. If that were the case, He would be included in the category of false gods, which he excludes in the comment from being the source of eternal life.)

Trinity doctrine also holds that the Holy Spirit is God. While there is a great deal of Biblical material about the Spirit, there isn't much that speaks of His nature. It seems that for the writers of the NT, His functional role in the life of the believer took priority. Nevertheless, we read: But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back for yourself part of the proceeds from the sale of the land? Before it was sold, did it not belong to you? And when it was sold, was the money not at your disposal? How have you thought up this deed in your heart? You have not lied to people but to God!" Acts 5:3-4. Peter first said that Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit, and then he says that Ananias didn't lie to man but to God. The implication here is that Peter equates the Holy Spirit as being God. Of course, it is possible to interpret this in other ways, but this is the most straightforward understanding, and one would have to stretch to find a way to say Peter is not referencing the Spirit as God.

A common view of the Holy Spirit among some nontrinitarian theists is that He is not so much a person, but rather the Holy Spirit is an impersonal force. Some argue that the Spirit is actually just God's power. However, again we find the Scriptures leaning in the Trinitarian's favor. It is one and the same Spirit, distributing as he decides to each person, who produces all these things. 1 Corinthians 12:11. Notice that the Spirit here is the one who decides how His gifts are to be distributed among believers. Can something that is impersonal make any decisions? And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Ephesians 4:30. Paul warns not to grieve the Holy Spirit. However, how can someone cause the Holy Spirit any grief if the Spirit isn't even a person? So clearly, the orthodox Christians are warrented in claiming that the Spirit is a person, not some sort of force or essense.

Having looked at the Father and the Holy Spirit, some may notice something missing that should stick out like a sore thumb. Since the deity of Jesus Christ (and related issues) is such a hot topic, it will be covered at great length in the next part of this article.

<< Heresy

Series Index

Part 2 >>

Notes and Citations:

1. For reference, these creeds are available online:
The Nicene Creed: <http://www.carm.org/creeds/nicene.htm>
The Chalcedonian Creed: <http://www.carm.org/creeds/chalcedonian.htm>
The Athanasian Creed: <http://www.carm.org/creeds/athanasian.htm>