Trinity - Summary of the chapter PDF

Preview

Summary

Summary of the chapter...

Description

Introduction: The opening paragraph discusses the idea of the doctrine of the trinity by questioning the implications of complex theology and discussing the controversy surrounding it, with Islamic critics saying it severs the unity of God and Karl Rahner noting how Christians speak of believing in it but often do not transfer that belief into practice. Nonetheless, Trinitarian ideals were revived and popularized thanks to Karl Barth before seeping into many sects of Christianity. British theologian Colin Gunton advocated for the importance of the distinction that Trinitarian beliefs provide by stressing that everything “ i sdi ffer enti nt hel i f eoft heT r i ni t y , ” andt her es toft hechapt eri sdev ot edt oex pl ai ni nghow. This concept is something that I’ v estruggled to fully comprehend since I began formally practicing Baptist Christianity, and thus I anticipate the unpacking of it in order to achieve a more in-depth perception. Belief in the Trinity: Belief in the Trinity stems from observation and understanding of divine activity as supported and expressed in both scripture and the Christian experience. It is best understood by first accepting it as the inevitable truth, then proceeding to seek its truth in scripture and in life. Matthew 28:19 and Corinthians 13:14 give a nod to the notion of the Trinity, both in the baptismal tradition and in Christian devotion, but belief in the Trinity does not rest in those scriptures alone. Much of the New Testament lends itself to presenting and supporting the thought of God, Christ and the Spirit operating as an indivisible whole. Although the complex nature of God is very difficult to grasp without condensing Him into a form that compromises His full essence, the text says that the Orthodox Christianity has always been devoted to the attempt rather than simplifying Him for the purpose of greater understanding. Still, Irenaeus found that God’ sor der i ngofs al v at i onbor es ubs t ant i alwi t nes st ot heex i s t enc eoft he T r i ni t ynotonl yi ni t sr ej ec t i onoft henot i onoft wo separate creation and redeemer Gods, but also in the act of the three entities working together to redeem the creation and restore/renew the fellowship between God and humanity. This idea of each entity of the Trinity having a distinct role in salvation and redemption is supported by LaCugna, who elaborated that “ ev er y t hi ng c omesf r om God,i smadek nownandr edeemedt hr oughJ es usChr i s t ,andi s c ons ummat edbyt hepoweroft heHol ySpi r i t . ”T er t ul l i anf ur t herdet ai l st hatt heuni t yl i es i nt hes ubs t anc eof the Trinity, while the individual “ per s on”t hateachi sdi s t i ngui s hes t hem.Buti ti st hedoct r i neoft heT r i ni t yt hatout l i nest het hr eemai nel ement soft he Chr i s t i anv i s i onofGod:c r eat oroft hewor l dwi t hor derandf or m,r edeemeroft hewor l d i nJ esus Christ, and guider and encourager of believers (present in the world here and now) through the Spirit. The absence of any of these roles for simplification misrepresents God and fails to do justice to the all-encompassing role that He plays in the lives of Christians. Even in all it does to lay out the Trinity, the doctrine also admits the failure of language to adequately express God. It came about only after the recognition of both Christ and the Spirit as divine and the resulting formulation of ideas, which expressed those insights and the relationships of the entities with each other. The doctrine of Trinity that emerged from this, as noted by Gregory of Nazianzus, allowed for better clarification of the Trinity over time.

I think that this section was fantastic in regard to its elaboration on how the doctrine of the Trinity, which has been heavily referenced throughout the book until now, came to be and what its role in the current practice of Christianity is. A Trinitarian heresy: modalism: Not everyone was a fan of the Trinitarian view, and modalism, a heresy that sought to defend the unity and oneness of the Godhead and refute the supposed tritheism that it feared would emerge from the Trinity, stood as a major counterargument of the Trinity. This idea holds, at its root, the notion that God does not consist of three different entities working as one but instead, God reveals himself to us in three different ways: one God reveals Himself as the creator/lawgiver, the savior in the person of Jesus Christ, and the sanctifier who gives eternal life. The theory of modalism then breaks down into those who understand the occurrences of these persons chronologically versus functionally, the former assuming that God has transitioned from Father to Son then to Spirit at different points in history while the latter assumes that God presently assumes each of the roles as different modes of Himself. In more detail, a form of modalism called Sabellianism follows up the chronological view of the theory by adding that God emitted Christ like the Sun emits a ray until His task was accomplished and that God now emits the Spirit as it is needed in the lives of Christians. Meanwhile, an approach to the doctrine of the Trinity can be seen as a variation of functional modalism, with each modes existing as its own entity in the Trinity. What I found most interesting in this section were the forms of modalism because they were the only theories mentioned so far this semester, in my opinion, that actually seemed like they could be true and that I could understand how they emerged and developed a following. Visualizing the Trinity: For many people, understanding the Trinity requires the ability to match a visual representation to the concept, as St. Patrick did with his analogy of a three-leaf shamrock for visualizing the idea of three beings existing as one. Gregory of Nysa offered many such analogies for visualizing the Trinity, three of which included: a spring consisting of the same water that distinguishes itself in some respects but can’ tbes epar at ed,achai ni nwhi c heac h l i nki si ndi v i dualbuts t i l l i nt er c onnec t edort her es t ,and a rainbow that has distinctly different colors but which all stem from the same one beam of light. These analogies were useful in that they did provide a visual to match the concept to. I found the rainbow analogy to be most helpful but it is indeed both distinct in its colors but one in its nature. The Trinity and the naming of God: In beginning our understanding of Jenson’ sappr oac ht ot heTr i ni t y ,i ti sfir s ti mpor t ant t onar r owi nonwhi c hgodf r om t hepol y t hei s t i cer aofAnci entI s r aeli sthe God of Abraham who we speak of today, which we do by telling the story of God. His actions and multitude of other titles (Yahweh, Lord) as told in the Old Testament help us to do this. In the

same way, we narrow in on who the God that Christians today worship is by reading the New Testament’ st el l i ngofGod’ sac t i onsandi dent i f y i ngHi m ast heoneWhor ai s edJ es us Chr i s tf r om t hedead,t hes ameGodoft heOl dT est ament .Li k ewi s e,t heTr i ni t ar i ant i t l e ofFat her ,SonandHol ySpi r i tac t sasani dent i fierfor which God we speak of. The doctrine of the Trinity works for us in this way to tell of the major public displays of God’ spr es enc e andt oaffir mt hati ti soneGodwhoconnec t sal loft hos eev ent s.I tal s opr es ent st he r es ul t sofourunder s t andi ngofGod’ ssel f r ev el at i onandal l owsusat ex tt hat di s t i ngui s hest heGodofChr i s t i ani t yf r om ot hermi sc onc ept i onsorper c ept i onsofGod. Although this section does a lot of restating, it does so in order to affirm the importance of understanding the ways in which we are witnesses to the distinction of our God from other beliefs. Communicating the Trinity: hymns: This section covers one of the ways that we incorporate the teachings of the doctrine of the Trinity into our real, everyday lives which is through the use of hymns. Charles Wesley published 24 short hymns on the Trinity, one of which discusses the economy of salvation and the roles of each person of the Trinity all without using technical jargon. Hymns such as these help to affirm the Trinity and teach congregations about God’ sr edempt i onofust hr ough s ong. I always admired the way that songs in any culture or religion seemed to sum up major ideas and instill them in the mind through the melody. Likewise, here Wesley appreciates hymns for their ability to do just that. The “social Trinity”: Jürgen Moltmann Social approaches to the Trinity, unlike the shamrock and spring examples, refer to the Trinity not as a person or thing split into three aspects but rather a collective of divine beings who all share the same love of their believers. Similarly, Moltmann attempts in his The Trinity and the Kingdom of God to separate the understanding of the Trinity from understandings of metaphysical beings and instead focus on the distinct unity of the Trinity which exists in no fixed order except in the circulation of divinity. This is echoed is the origins of Moltmann’ s popul ar i z edt heor yt hatl i ei nt henot i onofperichoresis, which states that the individuality of each person in the Trinity coexists with the shared community of all three. This idea of the three persons living in one another and sharing in eternal love and empathy is contrary to all notions of pure monotheism which deny or reduce the individuality of each person. Moltmann then applies this idea to an understanding of human society which sees people as coexisting on an equal level with no fixed order, able to share in the lives of one another while maintaining our own individuality. However, opposing ideas such as that of Kilby offer that these social perceptions of the Trinity project an idealistic view of community onto God. I think this section is important for a look at the ways that our vision of God and the Trinity can be applied to our own relationships, a practice that traditional marriage is built on and seeks to reflect.

Engaging with the text: This section explored Barth’ sv i ewsonGod’ ss el f r ev el at i onandourr ecept i onof t hatr ev el at i on,under s t andi ngt hepar adoxt hatl i esi nouri nabi l i t yt ohearGodduet o ours i nfulness and His effect in willing our reception of His revelation in light of our sinfulness. Revelation of God, by this accord, exists in the Son and works through the Holy Spirit, who makes it possible for us to hear God and receive His revelation, to reveal over time what God is in eternity. In this way, Barth demonstrates that revelation affirms the Trinity and the Trinity affirms revelation in an indivisible relationship. His ability to do so further solidifies his importance to the theology and the understanding of theology. Karl Barth’ swa yoft hi nk i ngande x pl ai ni nghi sper cept i onofGodandt heTr i ni t y r emai n,t ome,adr i vi ngf or c eofmanyoft hei deal sputf or t ht odayi nt heol ogy .Thi s ex c er pti smer el yane x ampl eoft hat .

Conclusion: This chapter tied together a lot of loose ends that had been introduced and visited in previous chapters but never elaborated on. It also gives a well-rounded explanation for the emergence of the prominence of the notion of the Trinity in modern Christianity. Content question: What ideas does the notion of perichoresis hold and who used those ideas in formulating their own theory? Discussion question: Which visualization of the Trinity did you find to be most useful in your understanding of the dynamic?...