This is very interesting, but none of these responses talked about why the idea of the Trinity should be there in the first place. I think that’s what we really need to address the OP.
It is basic Christian concept, based on John 1 and other passages, that Christ shows us God. But if that’s true, it should affect our concept of God. We can’t take some abstract philosophical prime mover, or even a Jewish or Muslim pure monotheistic concept. If Jesus shows us God, what kind of God does he show? He shows us not just an omnipotent creator, but an obedient Son. If we assume that the mortal human, the Son who is obedient to his Father, is actually an image of God (Col 1:15), then our concept of God is forced to include both Father and Son.
Historically, the earliest Christian concepts were in fact “binitarian.” However it’s pretty clear from both OT and NT that the Holy Spirit is the personal presence of God, but is always spoken of as distinct, as something sent by God to us. For that reason, once we have an image of God with Father and Son, it’s natural to include the Holy Spirit as well.
I don't think the right place to start is the standard analogies, or explanations of what the difference between person and essence is. The exact way the Trinity is explained developed later, and that language isn't, after all, Scriptural. I think the place to start is to make sure that people understand why it is that having Jesus as the image of God commits us a different understanding of God than we would otherwise have.
It is basic Christian concept, based on John 1 and other passages, that Christ shows us God. But if that’s true, it should affect our concept of God. We can’t take some abstract philosophical prime mover, or even a Jewish or Muslim pure monotheistic concept. If Jesus shows us God, what kind of God does he show? He shows us not just an omnipotent creator, but an obedient Son. If we assume that the mortal human, the Son who is obedient to his Father, is actually an image of God (Col 1:15), then our concept of God is forced to include both Father and Son.
Historically, the earliest Christian concepts were in fact “binitarian.” However it’s pretty clear from both OT and NT that the Holy Spirit is the personal presence of God, but is always spoken of as distinct, as something sent by God to us. For that reason, once we have an image of God with Father and Son, it’s natural to include the Holy Spirit as well.
I don't think the right place to start is the standard analogies, or explanations of what the difference between person and essence is. The exact way the Trinity is explained developed later, and that language isn't, after all, Scriptural. I think the place to start is to make sure that people understand why it is that having Jesus as the image of God commits us a different understanding of God than we would otherwise have.
Last edited:
Upvote
0