chistory_trinity

 

THE PROBLEM OF THE TRINITY

by Ray Shelton


In the early centuries of Christianity, the problem of the Trinity went through three phases.

1.  The problem of the Trinity arose in the second and third century A.D. as Christianity spread through the Roman Empire. It encountered the monotheism of the Greek philosophers. This created the first phase of the problem of the Trinity:  How can God be one being and at the same time Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?  Let us examine this phase of the problem and the attempts to solve it in the theology of the trinity of the early church. The Trinitarianism of Origen at the end of the third century marked the close of the first great phase of trinitarian doctrinal development.


2.  The second phase of the problem of Trinity begins with the flaring up of Arianism and culminates in the formulation of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity at The Council of Nicaea.  This phase of the problem of the Trinity deals with the relationship of the Father to the Son and led to its solution at Nicaea. Athanasius was the champion of Nicaean orthodoxy against Arianism.


3.  This Nicaean solution led to the third phase of the problem of Trinity and its solution:  the problem of the relationship of the Father and the Son to the Holy Spirit.  The solution to this problem of the Trinity is summarized in the “Nicene” Creed.

 

MONOTHEISM

As Christianity spread through the Roman Empire during the late first century A.D. and early second century A.D., it encountered paganism with its belief in many gods (polytheism). The Christian belief in the one God (monotheism), that it inherited and shared with Judaism, stood in marked contrast to this paganism. Early Christian writers stressed this difference. For example, according to Hermas (The Shepherd of Hermas, Mand., I.1), the first commandment is to “believe that God is one, Who created and established all things, bring them into existence out of non-existence”. In the second century when Christianity began to infiltrate the educated levels of Roman society, the Christian Apologists wrote in defense of the Christian faith. They found in Greek and Roman philosophy, particularly Platonism, the view of one God. The Apologists emphasized this similarity with their view of God.

Justin Martyr (c,105-c,165 A.D.) asserted the Christian belief in the oneness, transcendence, and creative function of God in language strongly colored by the Platonizing Stoicism of the middle of the second century. It was Justin’s sincere belief that the Greek thinkers had had access to the writings of Moses. So Apologists viewed God as everlasting, ineffable and without name, changeless and impassible, and “ingenerate” (agennetos; a technical term that expressed God’s unique unorignateness in contrast to the rest of reality). But in spite of these similarities, the Christian belief in the one God involved aspects that they did not share. In the Christian view of the one God, He is “the creator of the universe”, the maker and Father of all things; Himself above being, God is the cause of all being. Justin says, “We have learned that, being good, He created all things in the beginning out of formless matter.” [1] Here he is referring to the teaching of Plato’s Timaeus, which Justin supposed to be akin to, and borrowed from, Genesis. Of course, Plato regarded pre-existence matter as eternal, but Justin regarded the heaven and earth which had been created first as the material out of which God formed the cosmos. Other Apologists agreed with Justin, although they were more definite as regards creation ex nihilo.

Tatian (late 2nd century) points out that the matter out of which the universe was made was itself created by “the sole artificer of the cosmos”, and He created it through His Word.  When Theophilus of Antioch (late 2nd century) declared:  “From nothing God created whatever He willed, as He willed it” [2], he was particularly critical of the Platonic notion of the eternity of matter, arguing that, if it were true, God could not be creator of all things, and therefore His “monarchy”, that is, His position as the sole first principle, must be discarded. As Theophilus expressed it, “The power of God is manifested in this, that out of things that are not He makes whatever He pleases”. [3] Athenagoras (2nd century) also spoke of “all things having been made through His Word”. In reply to the charge of atheism, he argues,

“Is it not absurd to level the charge of atheism against us, who distinguish God from matter, and teach that God is one thing and matter is another, and that they are separated by a vast chasm?  For the Deity is unoriginate and eternal, to be apprehended by understanding and reason alone, whereas matter is originate and perishable.” [4]



Irenaeus
(c.125-202 A.D.) was also a firm believer in creation ex nihilo [out of nothing], pointing out that

“men indeed cannot make anything out of nothing, but only out of material already before them;  God is superior to men in this prime respect, that He Himself furnishes the material for His creation although it had no previous existence”. [5]


Irenaeus also argued that the very notion of Godhead excludes a plurality of gods.

“Either there must be one God Who contains all things and has made every creature according to His will; or there must be many indeternimate creators or gods, each beginning and ending at his place in the series … But in this case we shall have to acknowledge that none of them is God. For each of them … will be defective in comparison with the rest, and the title ‘Almighty’ will be reduced to nought.” [6]


Thus the Demiurge of Gnosticism cannot be God since Demiurge has another superior to Himself.  These Christian writers all express this doctrine of the one God, the Father and Creator of all things; it formed the background and indisputable premise of the Christian faith. Inherited from Judaism, it was the bulwark against pagan polytheism, Gnostic emanationism and Marcionite dualism.

 

THE DIVINE TRIAD

The problem for Christian theology was to integrate with this monotheism, intellectually, the new data of the specifically Christian revelation. In its simplest terms, these were the convictions that God had made Himself known in the Person of Jesus, the Messiah, raising Him from the dead and offering salvation to men through Him, and that He had poured out His Holy Spirit upon the Church. The writings of the Apostles expressed the view of God as a plurality of divine Persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. By the second century these writings, not yet canonized into the New Testament, were exerting a powerful influence and this triadic pattern of God as three persons was imprinted on the expressions of the popular Christian faith. This was clearly visible in Church’s liturgy and catechetical practice. In this primitive period, there were no stereotyped creeds of the kind that became common after The Council of Nicaea (A.D. 325), but there was in the preaching, liturgy, and teaching of the Church the message that God had sent His Son, the Messiah Jesus, Who had died and God had raised Him from the dead on the third day, ascended into heaven, from whence He sent the Holy Spirit, and He will return in glory. As the second century advanced, we find more detailed affirmations of the rule of faith, that is, the teaching inherited from the apostles and set forth in freely worded summaries. As an illustration, the following is quoted from Irenaeus’ The Demonstrations of the Apostolic Preaching (Dem. 6.).

“This, then, is the order of the rule of our faith …. God the Father, not made, not material, invisible, one God, the creator of all things: this is the first point of our faith.  The second point is this: the Word of God, Son of God, Christ Jesus our Lord, Who was manifested to the prophets according to the form of their prophesying and according to the method of the Father’s dispensation; through Whom (i.e., the Word) all things are made; Who also, at the end of the age, to complete and gather up all things, was made man among men, visible and tangible, in order to abolish death and show forth life and produce perfect reconciliation between God and man.  And the third point is: The Holy Spirit, through Whom the prophets prophesied, and the fathers learned the things of God, and the righteous were led into the way of righteousness; Who at the end of the age was poured out in a new way upon mankind in all the earth, renewing man to God.” [7]


The liturgy of baptism is in harmony with this threefold division; as prescribed by the Lord’s command recorded in Matt. 28:19, baptism is to be administered in the threefold name. Justin Martyr relates that those who are to be baptized “are conducted by us to a place where there is water, and there, in the same manner as we ourselves were regenerated, they are regenerated in turn. In the name of God the Father and master of all things, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, they are washed in the water”. [8] Later he adds that baptism is “in the name of God the Father and master of all things”, of “Jesus Christ, Who was crucified under Pontius Pilate”, and “of the Holy Spirit, Who foretold by the prophets the whole story of Jesus”. [9]  Irenaeus reports,

“We received baptism for the remission of sins in the name of God the Father, and in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Who was incarnate and died and rose again, and in the Holy Spirit of God”. [10]


The idea implicit in these early catechetical and liturgical formulae, as in the New Testament writers’ use of the same triadic pattern, represent the early, pre-theological phase of Christian belief. This statement is in no way intended to diminish their significance or importance. It was only intended to point out that they are the raw material out which the theologians constructed their more sophisticated statements of the Christian doctrine of the Godhead. [11] 

 

EARLY THEOLOGY OF THE TRINITY

Before the Council of Nicaea (A.D. 325), the early theologians of the second and third centuries attempted to solve the problem of the Trinity. The following are the main developments:

 

ENDNOTES


[1] J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrine, 2nd Edition,
Harper & Row, Publishers (New York, Evanston and London, 1958, 1960).,
p. 84.

[2] Ibid., p. 85.

[3] Ibid., p. 86.

[4] Ibid., p. 85.

[5] Ibid., p. 86.

[6] Ibid., p. 87.

[7] Ibid., p. 89.

[8] Ibid., p. 89.

[9] Ibid., pp. 89-90.

[10] Ibid., p. 90.

[11] Ibid., p. 90.


In writing this paper, I have relied very heavily upon J. N. D. Kelly’s book,
Early Christian Doctrine, 2nd edition
[New York, Evanston, and London: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1958, 1960]
so that maybe I should put quotation marks around the whole paper.
Thank you, Dr. Kelly.