Etymology
The "Shield of the Trinity" or "Scutum Fidei" diagram of traditional Western Christian symbolism.
The English word Trinity is derived from Latin Trinitas, meaning "the number three, a triad".[8] This abstract noun
is formed from the adjective trinus (three each, threefold, triple),[9] as the word unitas is the abstract noun formed
from unus (one).
The corresponding word in Greek is Τριάς, meaning "a set of three" or "the number three".[10]
The first recorded use of this Greek word in Christian theology (though not about the Divine Trinity) was by
Theophilus of Antioch in about 170. He wrote:[11][12]
"In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity [Τριάδος], of God,
and His Word, and His wisdom. And the fourth is the type of man, who needs light, that so there may be God, the
Word, wisdom, man."[13]
Tertullian, a Latin theologian who wrote in the early 3rd century, is credited with using the words "Trinity",[14]
"person" and "substance"[15] to explain that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are "one in essence—not one in
Person".[16]
About a century later, in 325, the First Council of Nicaea established the doctrine of the Trinity as orthodoxy and
adopted the Nicene Creed, which described Christ as "God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God,
begotten, not made, being of one substance (homoousios) with the Father".
[edit] Personhood
Personhood in the Trinity does not match the common Western understanding of "person" as used in the English
language—it does not imply an "individual, self-actualized center of free will and conscious activity."[17]
To the ancients, personhood "was in some sense individual, but always in community as well."[17]:p.186 In the
Trinity doctrine, each person is understood as having the same identical essence or nature, not merely similar
natures. The being of Christ can be said to have dominated theological discussions and councils of the church
through the 7th century, and resulted in the Nicene and Constantinopolitan creeds, the Ephesine Formula of 431
AD, and the Christological statement of the Epistola Dogmatica of Leo I to Flavianus. From these councils, the
following christological doctrines were condemned as heresies: Ebionism, Docetism, Basilidianism, Alogism or
Artemonism, Patripassianism, Sabellianism, Arianism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, Eutychianism,
Monophysitism, and Monothelitism.[18] Since the beginning of the third century[19] the doctrine of the Trinity has
been stated as "the one God exists in three Persons and one substance, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."[4]
Trinitarianism, belief in the Trinity, is a mark of Roman Catholicism, Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy as well as of
the "mainstream traditions" arising from the Protestant Reformation, such as Anglicanism, Baptist, Methodism,
Lutheranism and Presbyterianism. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church describes the Trinity as "the
central dogma of Christian theology".[4]
[edit] References used from Scripture
Although the New Testament does not use the word "Τριάς" (Trinity) nor explicitly teach it, it has provided the
material upon which the doctrine of the Trinity was formulated.[20] Reflection by early Christians on passages such
as the Great Commission: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father
and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"[Matt 28:19] and Paul the Apostle's blessing: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ
and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all,"[2 Cor. 13:14] while at the same time the
Jewish Shema Yisrael: "Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one."[Deuteronomy 6:4][2] led the early Christians
to question which way the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are in unity. Later, the diverse references to God, Jesus,
and the Spirit found in the New Testament were systematized into a Trinity—one God subsisting in three persons
and one substance—to combat heretical tendencies of how the three are related and to defend the church against
charges of worshiping two or three gods.[21]
In addition, the Old Testament has also been interpreted as foreshadowing the Trinity,[22] by referring to God's
word,[Ps 33:6] his spirit,[Isa 61:1] and Wisdom,[Prov 9:1] as well as narratives such as the appearance of the three men to
Abraham.[Gen 18][4] However, it is generally agreed that it would go beyond the intention and spirit of the Old
Testament to correlate these notions directly with later Trinitarian doctrine.[23][24]
Some Church Fathers believed that a knowledge of the mystery was granted to the prophets and saints of the "Old
Dispensation", and that they identified the divine messenger of Genesis 16:7, 21:17, 31:11, Exodus 3:2 and
Wisdom of the sapiential books with the Son, and "the spirit of the Lord" with the Holy Spirit.[23] Other Church
Fathers, such as Gregory Nazianzen, argued in his Orations that the revelation was gradual:
The Old Testament proclaimed the Father openly, and the Son more obscurely. The New manifested the
Son, and suggested the deity of the Spirit. Now the Spirit himself dwells among us, and supplies us with a
clearer demonstration of himself. For it was not safe, when the Godhead of the Father was not yet
acknowledged, plainly to proclaim the Son; nor when that of the Son was not yet received to burden us
further.[25]
Some scholars dispute the authenticity of the Trinity and argue that the doctrine is the result of "later theological
interpretations of Christ's nature and function."[26][27] The concept was expressed in early writings from the
beginning of the 2nd century forward.
Southern Baptist theologian Frank Stagg emphasizes that the New Testament does repeatedly speak of the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Spirit to "compel a trinitarian understanding of God."[28]
[edit] References to Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
A few verses directly reference the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit at the same time:




"As soon as Jesus Christ was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened,
and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and landing on him. And a voice from heaven said,
'This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.'"[Mt 3:16–17] [Mk 1:10–11] [Luke 3:22] [John 1:32]
"The angel answered and said to her, 'The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High
will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.'"[Luke 1:35]
"How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself
unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living
God!"[Heb 9:14]
"But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at
the right hand of God." [Acts 7:55]

This passage contains many complex formulations of the relationship between God, Christ, and Spirit,
including "the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead,"[Rom 8:11] "all who are led by the Spirit of God
are sons of God,"[8:14-17] and "the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God."[8:26-27]
Some even reference these as part of a single formula:


"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son
and of the Holy Spirit"[Mt 28:19] (see Trinitarian formula). It has been claimed that writings of Eusebius show
the mention of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to have displaced a request by Jesus that his disciples baptize
people in his name.[30] However, all extant manuscripts of the Gospel of Matthew unanimously contain the
trinitarian baptismal formula without variation at 28:19.[31]
"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with all of
you."[2 Cor. 13:14]
[edit] Comma Johanneum
Main article: Comma Johanneum
In addition to these, 1 John 5:7, which is found in the King James Version but not in modern English translations
nor in the official Latin text (a revision of the Vulgate) of the Roman Catholic Church,[32] states: "For there are
three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." However, this
Comma Johanneum is not considered to be part of the genuine text.[33] It is commonly found in Latin manuscripts,
but is absent from the Greek manuscripts, except for a few late examples, where the passage appears to have been
back-translated from the Latin. Erasmus, the compiler of the Textus Receptus, on which the King James Version
was based, noticed that the passage was not found in any of the Greek manuscripts at his disposal and refused to
include it until presented with a manuscript containing it, while still suspecting, as is now agreed, that the phrase
was a gloss.[34] Although the Latin Church Father, Saint Cyprian, alone among early writers, is thought to have
referred to the passage,[35] it is now considered not to be part of the original text.
Jesus as God
The Gospel of John has been seen as aimed at emphasizing Jesus' divinity, presenting Jesus as the Logos, preexistent and divine, from its first words, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God".[John 1:1][36] John also portrays Jesus Christ as the Creator of the universe, such that "without him
nothing was made that has been made."[John 1:3] Some render John 1:1 as "the Word was a god", "the word was
godlike", "the word was divine", and deny that the doctrine of the Trinity is supported by the verse.
The Gospel of John ends with Thomas's apparent confession of faith to Jesus, "My Lord and my God!"[John 20:28][21]
There is no significant tendency among modern scholars to deny that John 1:1 and John 20:28 identify Jesus with
God.[37]
Other passages of John's Gospel interpreted in this sense include "before Abraham was born, I am!",[8:58] "I and the
Father are one",[10:30] "The Father is in me, and I in the Father",[10:38][38] and "he was even calling God his own
Father, making himself equal with God".[John 5:18] John is also seen to identify Jesus as the Lord whom Isaiah
saw,[Jn 12:34-45] [Isa 6:1-10] while other texts[Heb 1:1-12] are also understood as referring to Jesus as God.[39][40][41]
There are also a few possible biblical supports for the Trinity found in the Synoptic Gospels. The Gospel of
Matthew, for example, quotes Jesus as saying "all things have been handed over to me by my Father".[Mt 11:27] This
is similar to John, who wrote that Jesus said "All that the Father has is mine".[John 16:15] These verses have been
quoted to defend the omnipotence of Christ, having all power, as well as the omniscience of Christ, having all
wisdom.
Expressions also in the Pauline epistles have been interpreted as attributing divinity to Jesus. They include: "For by
him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or
rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him"[Colossians 1:16] and "For in Christ all the fullness of
the Deity lives in bodily form",[Colossians 2:9] and in Paul the Apostle's claim to have been "sent not from men nor by
man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father".[Galatians 1:1][42]
In Daniel 7 the prophet records his vision of "one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven", who "was
given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him" (v.
14). Christians believe that worship is only properly given to God, and that considering other Bible passages this
"son of man" can be identified as the second person of the Trinity. Parallels may be drawn between Daniel's vision
and Jesus' words to the Jewish high priest that in the future those assembled would see "the son of Man sitting at
the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."[Mt 26:64-65] Jesus was immediately accused
of blasphemy, as at other times when he had identified his unity with the Father.[John 10:33] Christians also believe
that John saw the resurrected, gloried Jesus and described him as "One like the Son of Man."[Rev 1:13]
Some believe the Trinity was also introduced in the Old Testament book of Isaiah written around 700 years before
Jesus, copies of which were preserved from 300 years before Jesus in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Isaiah 9:6 prophesies
"For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon his shoulder. And his name
will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." Thus a son who will be
born at a particular point in history who is called "Mighty God". Some non-Trinitarians argue that this passage
would also imply that Jesus is the Father, the first person in the Trinity. However, Trinitarians contend that Jesus is
the second person in the Trinity, and he is called "Everlasting Father" because of his role as Creator of men.
Another possible biblical demonstration of the deity of Jesus comes from the biblical scholar[43] Granville Sharp
who noted the construction of a particular Greek idiom, which is now called Granville Sharp's rule.[44] According
to the rule, when two nouns that are personal, singular, and not proper names are connected in a TSKS pattern
(The—Substantive—Kai—Substantive, where 'kai' is Greek for 'and') then the two nouns refer to the same
person.[45] Passages like Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1 fit this pattern. Therefore, when Paul says:[Titus 2:13] "The great
God and savior, Jesus Christ" he is grammatically identifying Jesus Christ as the great God. Proper nouns are not
used in this phrase.[46] In his review of over 1,000 years of Greek literature, Christopher Wordsworth confirmed
that early church Fathers had this same understanding of the text.[47]
An opposing view of the Granville Sharp rule, however, argues that in Matthew 21:12 Jesus ‘cast out all those that
were selling and buying in the temple,’ (τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ ἀγοράζοντας). So too, in Mark 11:15 the two classes
are made distinct by the insertion of τούς before ἀγοράζοντας. Because of this, they argue that no one can
reasonably suppose that the same persons are here described as both selling and buying, yet they fit within the
Granville Sharp rule's construction. Therefore, according to this view, there is biblical evidence to distinguish
between "the great God" and "our Saviour, Jesus Christ" in Titus 2:13, and by extension, 2 Peter 1:1.[48] However,
unlike 2 Peter 1:1 and Titus 2:13, Matthew 21:12 and Mark 11:15 do not fit Sharp's rule, since they use plural
participles, not singular personal nouns.
Some have suggested that John presents a hierarchy when he quotes Jesus as saying, "The Father is greater than
I",[14:28] a statement which was appealed to by non-trinitarian groups such as Arianism.[49][50] However, Church
Fathers such as Augustine of Hippo argued this statement was to be understood as Jesus speaking in the form of a
man.[51]
Others have suggested that passages in the Synoptic Gospels contradict the Trinity. For example, the Agnoetae sect
argued that Jesus himself denied omniscience, when he said "but of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not
the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father".[Mark 13:32][Matthew 24:36] However, the Church Fathers
reasoned that, in the Bible, "to know" can sometimes mean "to reveal". For example, Augustine of Hippo argued
that when Deuteronomy 13:3 said "the LORD your God is testing you, to know whether you love the LORD your
God with all your heart", "to know" here meant "to reveal".[52] So too, Mark 13:32 could be saying that the Father
alone reveals that day, but Jesus himself could know the day as well. This is supported by passages that seem to
argue that Jesus did know all things, such as "He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?"
Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know
everything; you know that I love you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep.""[John 21:17]
Holy Spirit as God
As the Arian controversy was dwindling down, the debate moved from the deity of Jesus Christ to the equality of
the Holy Spirit with the Father and Son. On one hand, the Pneumatomachi sect declared that the Holy Spirit was an
inferior person to the Father and Son. On the other hand, the Cappadocian Fathers argued that the Holy Spirit was
an equal person to the Father and Son.
Although the main text used in defense of the deity of the Holy Spirit was Matthew 28:19, Cappadocian Fathers
such as Basil the Great argued from other verses such as "But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart
to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back for yourself part of the proceeds of the land? While it remained unsold,
did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? Why is it that you have contrived
this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."[Acts 5:3-4][53]
Another passage the Cappadocian Fathers quoted from was "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and
by the breath of his mouth all their host."[Psalm 33:6] According to their understanding, because "breath" and "spirit"
in Hebrew are both " ‫"( "ַ חּו‬ruach"), Psalm 33:6 is revealing the roles of the Son and Holy Spirit as co-creators.
And since, according to them,[53] because the holy God can only create holy beings such as the angels, the Son and
Holy Spirit must be God.
Yet another argument from the Cappadocian Fathers to prove that the Holy Spirit is of the same nature as the
Father and Son comes from "For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him?
So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God."[1Cor. 2:11] They reasoned that this
passage proves that the Holy Spirit has the same relationship to God as the spirit within us has to us.[53]
The Cappadocian Fathers also quoted "Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in
you?"[1Cor. 3:16] and reasoned that it would be blasphemous for an inferior being to take up residence in a temple of
God, thus proving that the Holy Spirit is equal with the Father and the Son.[54]
They also combined "the servant does not know what his master is doing"[John 15:15] with 1 Corinthians 2:11 in an
attempt to show that the Holy Spirit is not the slave of God, and therefore his equal.[55]
The Pneumatomachi contradicted the Cappadocian Fathers by quoting "Are they not all ministering spirits sent out
to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?",[Hebrews 1:14] in effect arguing that the Holy Spirit is no
different than other created angelic spirits.[56] The Church Fathers disagreed, saying that the Holy Spirit is greater
than the angels, since the Holy Spirit is the one who grants the foreknowledge for prophesy[1Cor. 12:8-10] so that the
angels could announce events to come.[53]
Claims of Old Testament prefigurations
Genesis 18–19 have been interpreted by Christians as a Trinitarian text.[57] The narrative has the Lord appearing to
Abraham, who was visited by three men.[Gen 18:1-2] Then in Genesis 19, "the two angels" visited Lot at Sodom. The
interplay between Abraham on the one hand, and the Lord/three men/the two angels on the other was an intriguing
text for those who believed in a single God in three persons. Justin Martyr, and John Calvin similarly, interpreted it
such that Abraham was visited by God, who was accompanied by two angels.[58] Justin supposed that the god who
visited Abraham was distinguishable from the god who remains in the heavens, but was nevertheless identified as
the (monotheistic) god. Justin appropriated the god who visited Abraham to Jesus, the second person of the Trinity.
Augustine, in contrast, held that the three visitors to Abraham were the three persons of the Trinity.[58] He saw no
indication that the visitors were unequal, as would be the case in Justin's reading. Then in Genesis 19, two of the
visitors were addressed by Lot in the singular: "Lot said to them, 'Not so, my lord.'"[Gen 19:18 KJV][58] Augustine saw
that Lot could address them as one because they had a single substance, despite the plurality of persons.[59] Some
Christians see indications in the Old Testament of a plurality and unity in God, an idea that is rejected by Judaism.
Some Christians interpret the theophanies or appearances of the Angel of the Lord as revelations of a person
distinct from God, who is nonetheless called God.[60] This interpretation is found in Christianity as early as Justin
Martyr and Melito of Sardis, and reflects ideas that were already present in Philo.[61] The Old Testament
theophanies were thus seen as Christophanies, each a "preincarnate appearance of the Messiah".[62]
Theophanies:











Genesis 12:7 and Genesis 18:1—God appeared to Abraham
Genesis 26:2 and Genesis 26:24—God appeared to Isaac
Genesis 35:1, Genesis 35:9 and Genesis 48:3—God appeared to Jacob
Exodus 3:16 and Exodus 4:5—God appeared to Moses
Exodus 6:3—God appeared to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob
Leviticus 9:4 and Leviticus 6:2—God appeared to Aaron
Deuteronomy 31:15—God appeared to Moses and Joshua
1 Samuel 3:21—God appeared to Samuel
1 Kings 3:5, 1 Kings 9:2 and 1 Kings 11:9—God appeared to Solomon
2 Chronicles 1—God appeared to David
2 Chronicles 7:12—God appeared to Solomon
The angel (messenger) of the Lord:








Genesis 16:7–14
Genesis 22:9–14
Exodus 3:2
Exodus 23:20,21
Numbers 22:21–35
Judges 2:1–5
Judges 6:11–22
Judges 13:3
Possible references in the Deuterocanonical books
In the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, and Baruch, the personifications of wisdom have been seen in the
Christian traditions as prefigures for Christ. The most explicit reference to the Trinity is in Wisdom of Solomon:
Who has learned your counsel, unless you have given wisdom and sent your holy spirit from on high? And thus the
paths of those on earth were set right, and people were taught what pleases you, and were saved by wisdom
—Wisdom of Solomon 9:17-18
History
Pope Clement I prays to the Trinity, in a typical post-Renaissance depiction by Gianbattista Tiepolo.
Main article: Trinity of the Church Fathers
Although there is much debate as to whether the beliefs of the Apostles were merely articulated and explained in
the Trinitarian Creeds,[63] or were corrupted and replaced with new beliefs,[64][65] all scholars recognize that the
Creeds themselves were created in reaction to disagreements over the nature of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
These controversies, however, were great and many, and took many centuries to be resolved.
Of these controversies, the most significant developments were articulated in the first four centuries by the Church
Fathers[63] in reaction to Adoptionism, Sabellianism, and Arianism. Adoptionism was the belief that Jesus was an
ordinary man, born of Joseph and Mary, who became the Christ and Son of God at his baptism. In 269, the Synods
of Antioch condemned Paul of Samosata for his Adoptionist theology, and also condemned the term "homoousios"
in the sense he used it.[66]
Sabellianism taught that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are aspects of how humanity has interacted with or
experienced God. In the role of the Father, God is the provider and creator of all. In the role of the Son, God is
manifested in the flesh as a human, in order to bring about the salvation of mankind. In the role of the Holy Spirit,
God manifests himself from heaven through his actions on the earth and within the lives of Christians. This view
was rejected as heresy by the Ecumenical Councils.[which?]
Arianism, which was coming into prominence during the 4th century, taught that the Father was a superior and
distinct being from the Son, and that the Son was a superior and distinct being from the Holy Spirit. In 325, the
Council of Nicaea adopted a term for the relationship between the Father and the Son that from then on was seen
as the hallmark of orthodoxy; it declared that the Son is "of the same being" (ὁμοούσιος) as the Father. This was
further developed into the formula "three persons, one being".
Saint Athanasius, who was a participant in the Council, stated that the bishops were forced to use this terminology,
which is not found in Scripture, because the Biblical phrases that they would have preferred to use were claimed
by the Arians to be capable of being interpreted in what the bishops considered to be a heretical sense.[67] They
therefore "commandeered the non-scriptural[68] term homoousios ('of the same being') to safeguard the essential
relation of the Son to the Father that had been denied by Arius."[69]
Moreover, the meanings of "ousia" and "hypostasis" overlapped then, so that the latter term for some meant
essence and for others person. Athanasius of Alexandria (293–373) helped to clarify the terms.[70]
The Confession of the Council of Nicaea said little about the Holy Spirit.[71] The doctrine of the divinity and
personality of the Holy Spirit was developed by Athanasius in the last decades of his life.[72] He defended and
refined the Nicene formula.[71] By the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of
Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine had reached substantially its current
form.[71]
The Ante-Nicene Fathers, although likely foreign to the specifics of Trinitarian theology because they were not
defined until the 4th century, nevertheless affirmed Christ's deity and referenced "Father, Son and Holy Spirit".
Trinitarians view these as elements of the codified doctrine.[73]
Theology
Baptism as the beginning lesson
Baptism of Christ, by Piero della Francesca, 15th century
Baptism is generally conferred with the Trinitarian formula, "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Spirit."[Mt 28:19] Trinitarians identify this name with the Christian faith into which baptism is an initiation, as
seen for example in the statement of Basil the Great (330–379): "We are bound to be baptized in the terms we have
received, and to profess faith in the terms in which we have been baptized." "This is the Faith of our baptism", the
First Council of Constantinople also says (382), "that teaches us to believe in the Name of the Father, of the Son
and of the Holy Spirit. According to this Faith there is one Godhead, Power, and Being of the Father, of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit."
Matthew 28:19 may be taken to indicate that baptism was associated with this formula from the earliest decades of
the Church's existence.
Some groups, such as Oneness Pentecostals, demur from the Trinitarian view on baptism. For them, the omission
of the formula in Acts outweighs all other considerations, and is a liturgical guide for their own practice. For this
reason, they often focus on the baptisms in Acts, citing many authoritative theological works. For example, Kittel
is cited where he is speaking of the phrase "in the name" (Greek: εἰς τὸ ὄνομα) as used in the baptisms recorded in
Acts:
The distinctive feature of Christian baptism is that it is administered in Christ (εἰς Χριστόν), or in the name
of Christ (εἰς τὸ ὄνομα Χριστοῦ). (Gerhard Kittel, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 1:539.)
The formula (εἰς τὸ ὄνομα) seems to have been a tech. term in Hellenistic commerce ("to the account"). In
both cases the use of the phrase is understandable, since the account bears the name of the one who owns it,
and in baptism the name of Christ is pronounced, invoked and confessed by the one who baptises or the one
baptised[Acts 22:16] or both. (Kittel, 1:540.)
Those who place great emphasis on the baptisms in Acts often likewise question the authenticity of Matthew 28:19
in its present form. A. Ploughman, apparently following F. C. Conybeare, has questioned the authenticity of
Matthew 28:19, but most scholars of New Testament textual criticism accept the authenticity of the passage, since
there are no variant manuscripts regarding the formula, and the extant form of the passage is attested in the
Didache[74] and other patristic works of the 1st and 2nd centuries: Ignatius,[75] Tertullian,[76] Hippolytus,[77]
Cyprian,[78] and Gregory Thaumaturgus.[79] The Acts of the Apostles only mentions believers being baptized "in
the name of Jesus Christ"[Acts 2:38] [10:48] and "in the name of the Lord Jesus."[8:16] [19:5] There are no biblical
references to baptism in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit outside of Matthew 28:19,
nor references, biblical or patristic, to baptism in the name of (the Lord) Jesus (Christ) outside the Acts of the
Apostles.[80]
Commenting on Matthew 28:19, Gerhard Kittel states:
This threefold relation [of Father, Son and Spirit] soon found fixed expression in the triadic formulae in 2
Cor. 13:14 and in 1 Cor. 12:4-6. The form is first found in the baptismal formula in Matthew 28:19; Did., 7.
1 and 3....[I]t is self-evident that Father, Son and Spirit are here linked in an indissoluble threefold
relationship.[81]
In the synoptic Gospels the baptism of Jesus is often interpreted as a manifestation of all three persons of the
Trinity: "And when Jesus was baptized, he went up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were
opened and he saw the spirit of God descending like a dove, and alighting on him; and lo, a voice from heaven,
saying, 'This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.'"[Mt 3:16–17]
One God
Main article: Monotheism
Christianity, having emerged from Judaism, is a monotheistic religion. Never in the New Testament does the
trinitarian concept become a "tritheism" (three Gods) nor even two.[28] God is one, and that the Godhead is a single
being is strongly declared in the Bible:




The Shema of the Hebrew Scriptures: "Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one."[Deut 6:4]
The first of the Ten Commandments—"Thou shalt have no other gods before me"[5:7].
and "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel and his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the
last; and beside me there is no God."[Isa 44:6]
In the New Testament: "The Lord our God is one."[Mk 12:29]
In the Trinitarian view, the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost share the one essence, substance or being. The
central and crucial affirmation of Christian faith is that there is one savior, God, and one salvation, manifest in
Jesus Christ, to which there is access only because of the Holy Spirit. The God of the Old Testament is still the
same as the God of the New. In Christianity, statements about a solitary God are intended to distinguish the
Hebraic understanding from the polytheistic view, which see divine power as shared by several beings, beings
which can and do disagree and have conflicts with each other.
God in three persons
According to the Trinity doctrine, God exists as three persons, or hypostases, but is one being, that is, has but a
single divine nature.[82] Chalcedonians—Roman Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and Protestants—hold that, in
addition, the second person of the Trinity—God the Son, Jesus—assumed human nature, so that he has two natures
(and hence two wills), and is really and fully both true God and true human. In the Oriental Orthodox theology, the
Chalcedonian formulation is rejected in favor of the position that the union of the two natures, though unconfused,
births a third nature: redeemed humanity, the new creation.
The members of the Trinity are said to be co-equal and co-eternal, one in essence, nature, power, action, and will.
As stated in the Athanasian Creed, the Father is uncreated, the Son is uncreated, and the Holy Spirit is uncreated,
and all three are eternal with no beginning.[83] The Roman Catholic Church teaches that, in the sense of the Latin
verb procedere (which does not have to indicate ultimate origin and is therefore compatible with proceeding
through), but not in that of the Greek verb ἐκπορεύεσθαι (which implies ultimate origin),[84] the Spirit "proceeds"
from the Father and the Son (see Filioque), and the Eastern Orthodox Church, which teaches that the Spirit
"proceeds" from the Father alone, has made no statement on the claim of a difference in meaning between the two
words, one Greek and one Latin, both of which are translated as "proceeds". There is no dispute on the statement in
the Nicene Creed that the Holy Spirit is worshipped together with the Father and the Son.
It has been stated that because three persons exist in God as one unity,[85] "The Father and the Son and the Holy
Spirit" are not three different names for different parts of God but one name for God,[86] because the Father can not
be divided from the Son or the Holy Spirit from the Son. God has always loved, and there has always existed
perfectly harmonious communion between the three persons of the Trinity. One consequence of this teaching is
that God could not have created man to have someone to talk to or to love: God "already" enjoyed personal
communion; being perfect, he did not create man because of a lack or inadequacy he had. Another consequence,
according to Rev. Fr. Thomas Hopko, an Eastern Orthodox theologian, is that if God were not a Trinity, he could
not have loved prior to creating other beings on whom to bestow his love. Thus God says, "Let us make man in our
image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all
the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. So God created man in his own image, in the
image of God he created him; male and female he created them."[Gen 1:26-27] For Trinitarians, emphasis in Genesis
1:26 is on the plurality in the Deity, and in 1:27 on the unity of the divine Essence. A possible interpretation of
Genesis 1:26 is that God's relationships in the Trinity are mirrored in man by the ideal relationship between
husband and wife, two persons becoming one flesh, as described in Eve's creation later in the next chapter.[2:22]
Mutually indwelling
A useful explanation of the relationship of the distinct divine persons is called "perichoresis", from Greek going
around, envelopment. This concept refers for its basis to John 14–17, where Jesus is instructing the disciples
concerning the meaning of his departure. His going to the Father, he says, is for their sake; so that he might come
to them when the "other comforter" is given to them. Then, he says, his disciples will dwell in him, as he dwells in
the Father, and the Father dwells in him, and the Father will dwell in them. This is so, according to the theory of
perichoresis, because the persons of the Trinity "reciprocally contain one another, so that one permanently
envelopes and is permanently enveloped by, the other whom he yet envelopes". (Hilary of Poitiers, Concerning the
Trinity 3:1). [1]
This co-indwelling may also be helpful in illustrating the Trinitarian conception of salvation. The first doctrinal
benefit is that it effectively excludes the idea that God has parts. Trinitarians assert that God is a simple, not an
aggregate, being. The second doctrinal benefit is that it harmonizes well with the doctrine that the Christian's union
with the Son in his humanity brings him into union with one who contains in himself, in St. Paul's words, "all the
fullness of deity" and not a part. (See also: Theosis). Perichoresis provides an intuitive figure of what this might
mean. The Son, the eternal Word, is from all eternity the dwelling place of God; he is the "Father's house", just as
the Son dwells in the Father and the Spirit; so that, when the Spirit is "given", then it happens as Jesus said, "I will
not leave you as orphans; for I will come to you."[John 14:18]
Some forms of human union are considered to be not identical but analogous to the Trinitarian concept, as found
for example in Jesus' words about marriage: "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to
his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh."[Mark 10:7–8] According to
the words of Jesus, married persons are in some sense no longer two, but joined into one. Therefore, Orthodox
theologians also see the marriage relationship as an image, or "icon" of the Trinity, relationships of communion in
which, in the words of St. Paul, participants are "members one of another". As with marriage, the unity of the
church with Christ is similarly considered in some sense analogous to the unity of the Trinity, following the prayer
of Jesus to the Father, for the church, that "they may be one, even as we are one".[John 17:22]
Eternal generation and procession
Trinitarianism affirms that the Son is "begotten" (or "generated") of the Father and that the Spirit "proceeds" from
the Father, but the Father is "neither begotten nor proceeds". The argument over whether the Spirit proceeds from
the Father alone, or from the Father and the Son, was one of the catalysts of the Great Schism, in this case
concerning the Western addition of the Filioque clause to the Nicene Creed.
This language is often considered difficult because, if used regarding humans or other created things, it would
imply time and change; when used here, no beginning, change in being, or process within time is intended and is
excluded. The Son is generated ("born" or "begotten"), and the Spirit proceeds, eternally. Augustine of Hippo
explains, "Thy years are one day, and Thy day is not daily, but today; because Thy today yields not to tomorrow,
for neither does it follow yesterday. Thy today is eternity; therefore Thou begat the Co-eternal, to whom Thou
saidst, 'This day have I begotten Thee."[Ps 2:7]
Son begotten, not created
Because the Son is begotten, not made, the substance of his person is that of the deity. The creation is brought into
being through the Son, but the Son himself is not part of it except through his incarnation.
The church fathers used several analogies to express this thought. St. Irenaeus of Lyons was the final major
theologian of the 2nd century. He writes "the Father is God, and the Son is God, for whatever is begotten of God is
God." (Compare Spinoza's philosophy of God)
Extending the analogy, it might be said, similarly, that whatever is generated (procreated) of humans is human.
Thus, given that humanity is, in the words of the Bible, "created in the image and likeness of God", an analogy can
be drawn between the Divine Essence and human nature, between the Divine Persons and human persons.
However, given the fall, this analogy is far from perfect, even though, like the Divine Persons, human persons are
characterized by being "loci of relationship". For Trinitarian Christians, this analogy is important with regard to the
Church, which St. Paul calls "the body of Christ" and whose members are, because they are "members of Christ",
also "members one of another".
However, an attempt to explain the mystery to some extent must break down, and has limited usefulness, being
designed, not so much to fully explain the Trinity, but to point to the experience of communion with the Triune
God within the Church as the Body of Christ. The difference between those who believe in the Trinity and those
who do not, is not an issue of understanding the mystery. The difference is primarily one of belief concerning the
personal identity of Christ. It is a difference in conception of the salvation connected with Christ that drives all
reactions, either favorable or unfavorable, to the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. As it is, the doctrine of the Trinity is
directly tied up with Christology.
Economic and ontological Trinity
Depiction of Trinity from Saint Denis Basilica in Paris.

Economic Trinity: This refers to the acts of the triune God with respect to the creation, history, salvation,
the formation of the Church, the daily lives of believers, etc. and describes how the Trinity operates within

history in terms of the roles or functions performed by each Person of the Trinity—God's relationship with
creation.
Ontological (or essential or immanent) Trinity: This speaks of the interior life of the Trinity[John 1:1–2]—the
reciprocal relationships of Father, Son and Spirit to each other without reference to God's relationship with
creation.
Or more simply—the ontological Trinity (who God is) and the economic Trinity (what God does). Most Christians
believe the economic reflects and reveals the ontological. Catholic theologian Karl Rahner went so far as to say
"The 'economic' Trinity is the 'immanent' Trinity, and vice versa."[87]
The ancient Nicene theologians argued that everything the Trinity does is done by Father, Son, and Spirit working
together with one will. The three persons of the Trinity always work inseparably, for their work is always the work
of the one God. Because of this unity of will, the Trinity cannot involve the eternal subordination of the Son to the
Father. Eternal subordination can only exist if the Son's will is at least conceivably different from the Father's. But
Nicene orthodoxy says it is not. The Son's will cannot be different from the Father's because it is the Father's. They
have but one will as they have but one being. Otherwise they would not be one God. If there were relations of
command and obedience between the Father and the Son, there would be no Trinity at all but rather three gods.[88]
On this point St. Basil observes "When then He says, 'I have not spoken of myself,' and again, 'As the Father said
unto me, so I speak,' and 'The word which ye hear is not mine, but [the Father’s] which sent me,' and in another
place, 'As the Father gave me commandment, even so I do,' it is not because He lacks deliberate purpose or power
of initiation, nor yet because He has to wait for the preconcerted key-note, that he employs language of this kind.
His object is to make it plain that His own will is connected in indissoluble union with the Father. Do not then let
us understand by what is called a 'commandment' a peremptory mandate delivered by organs of speech, and giving
orders to the Son, as to a subordinate, concerning what He ought to do. Let us rather, in a sense befitting the
Godhead, perceive a transmission of will, like the reflexion of an object in a mirror, passing without note of time
from Father to Son.."[89]
In explaining why the Bible speaks of the Son as being subordinate to the Father, the great theologian Athanasius
argued that scripture gives a "double account" of the son of God—one of his temporal and voluntary subordination
in the incarnation, and the other of his eternal divine status.[90] For Athanasius, the Son is eternally one in being
with the Father, temporally and voluntarily subordinate in his incarnate ministry. Such human traits, he argued,
were not to be read back into the eternal Trinity.
Like Athanasius, the Cappadocian Fathers also insisted there was no economic inequality present within the
Trinity. As Basil wrote: "We perceive the operation of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to be one and the same, in
no respect showing differences or variation; from this identity of operation we necessarily infer the unity of
nature."[91]
Augustine also rejected an economic hierarchy within the Trinity. He claimed that the three persons of the Trinity
"share the inseparable equality one substance present in divine unity".[92] Because the three persons are one in their
inner life, this means that for Augustine their works in the world are one. For this reason, it is an impossibility for
Augustine to speak of the Father commanding and the Son obeying as if there could be a conflict of wills within
the eternal Trinity.
John Calvin also spoke at length about the doctrine of the Trinity. Like Athanasius and Augustine before him, he
concluded that Philippians 2:4-11 prescribed how scripture was to be read correctly. For him the Son's obedience is
limited to the incarnation and is indicative of his true humanity assumed for human salvation.[93]
Much of this work is summed up in the Athanasian Creed. This creed stresses the unity of the Trinity and the
equality of the persons. It ascribes equal divinity, majesty, and authority to all three persons. All three are said to
be "almighty" and "Lord" (no subordination in authority; "none is before or after another" (no hierarchical
ordering); and "none is greater, or less than another" (no subordination in being or nature). Thus, since the divine
persons of the Trinity act with one will, there is no possibility of hierarchy-inequality in the Trinity.
Since the 1980s, some evangelical theologians have come to the conclusion that the members of the Trinity may be
economically unequal while remaining ontologically equal. This theory was put forward by George W. Knight III
in his 1977 book The New Testament Teaching on the Role Relationship of Men and Women, states that the Son
of God is eternally subordinated in authority to God the Father.[94] This conclusion was used to support the main
thesis of his book: that women are permanently subordinated in authority to their husbands in the home and to
male leaders in the church, despite being ontologically equal. Subscribers to this theory insist that the Father has
the role of giving commands and the Son has the role of obeying them.
Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Protestant distinctions
The Western (Roman Catholic) tradition is more prone to make positive statements concerning the relationship of
persons in the Trinity. Explanations of the Trinity are not the same thing as the doctrine; nevertheless, the
Augustinian West is inclined to think in philosophical terms concerning the rationality of God's being, and is prone
on this basis to be more open than the East to seek philosophical formulations which make the doctrine more
intelligible, while recognizing that these formulations are only analogies.
Eastern Christianity, for its part, correlates ecclesiology and Trinitarian doctrine, and seeks to understand the
doctrine of the Trinity via the experience of the Church, which it understands to be "an icon of the Trinity".
Therefore, when St. Paul writes concerning Christians that all are "members one of another", Eastern Christians in
turn understand this as also applying to the Divine Persons.
The principal disagreement between Western and Eastern Christianity on the Trinity has been the relationship of
the Holy Spirit with the other two hypostases. The original credal formulation of the Council of Constantinople
was that the Holy Spirit proceeds "from the Father". While this phrase is still used unaltered both in the Eastern
Churches, including the Eastern Catholic Churches, and, when the Nicene Creed is recited in Greek, in the Latin
Church, it became customary in the Latin-speaking Church, beginning with the provincial Third Council of Toledo
in 589, to add "and the Son" (Latin Filioque). Although this insertion into the Creed was explicitly vetoed by Pope
Leo III,[95] it was finally used in a Papal Mass by Pope Benedict VIII in 1014, thus completing its spread
throughout Western Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox Churches object to it on ecclesiological and theological
grounds, holding that "from the Father" means "from the Father alone", while in the West belief that the Holy
Spirit "proceeds", in the Latin (and English) meaning of this word, "from the Father and the Son" had already been
dogmatically declared to be orthodox faith in 447 by Pope Leo I, the Pope whose Tome was approved at the
Council of Chalcedon,[96] and Pope Leo III, who opposed insertion of the phrase into the Nicene Creed, "affirmed
the orthodoxy of the term Filioque, and approved its use in catechesis and personal professions of faith".[95]
The 1978 Anglican Lambeth Conference requested:
that all member Churches of the Anglican Communion should consider omitting the Filioque from the Nicene
Creed, and that the Anglican-Orthodox Joint Doctrinal Commission through the Anglican Consultative Council
should assist them in presenting the theological issues to their appropriate synodical bodies and should be
responsible for any necessary consultation with other Churches of the Western tradition.[97]
None of the member Churches has implemented this request; but the Church of England, while keeping the phrase
in the Creed recited in its own services, presents in its Common Worship series of service books a text of the creed
without it for use "on suitable ecumenical occasions".[98]
Most Protestant groups that use the creed also include the Filioque clause. However, the issue is usually not
controversial among them because their conception is often less exact than is discussed above (exceptions being
the Presbyterian Westminster Confession 2:3, the London Baptist Confession 2:3, and the Lutheran Augsburg
Confession 1:1–6, which specifically address those issues). The clause is often understood by Protestants to mean
that the Spirit is sent from the Father, by the Son,[citation needed] a conception which is not controversial in either
Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy. A representative view of Protestant Trinitarian theology is more difficult to
provide, given the diverse and decentralized nature of the various Protestant churches.
Questions of logical coherency
An editor has expressed a concern that this article lends undue weight to certain ideas, incidents,
controversies or matters relative to the article subject as a whole. Please help to create a more balanced
presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message. (February 2010)
Recently, there have been philosophical attempts to defend the logical coherency of Trinity by men such as Peter
Geach. Regarding the formulation suggested by Geach, not all philosophers would agree with its logical
coherency. Geach suggested that "a coherent statement of the doctrine is possible on the assumption that identity is
"always relative to a sortal term".[99]
The Canadian philosopher-theologian, Bernard Lonergan (who Time referred to as one of the finest philosophic
minds of the 20th century), has demonstrated by analogy with the operations of the human subject (the
psychological analogy) the logical coherency of the Trinity. It is chiefly in his work "The Triune God:
Systematics" that he draws on his noetic phenomenology to show this logical coherency. He sees himself as doing
nothing more than standing in the tradition of Augustine and Aquinas on this issue.
Most Christians, and probably the wide ecumenical consensus, first and foremost uphold the belief that God is
One. "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one" (Deuteronomy 6:4). But how to reconcile the Trinity
with a monotheistic faith? The wider ecumenical consensus has viewed God's unity "not as a unity of separable
parts, but of distinguishable persons."[100] The Trinity is formed by three distinct persons, yet of one and the same
essence. Three persons, one God. To distinguish in what way God is One, and in what way God is Three, helps
remove the logical contradiction. This has been upheld as the correct interpretation of the Apostolic teachings since
the writings of Athanasius and the Council of Nicaea in AD 325.
An historical gender-shift for the term "spirit", from the feminine ruakh in Hebrew, through the neuter pneuma in
Greek, to the masculine spiritus in Latin, effectively obscured the original idea of the Holy Trinity, wherein the
One Divinity was thought to have three inter-related aspects: Paternal, Maternal and Filial; God as Father and
Creator, God as Mother Spirit, and God as Incarnate Son.[101][102] Thus, regarding the vexed filioque controversy, it
is precisely a third possibility—and neither the Oriental nor the Occidental doctrine—that resolves the issue: the
Holy Spirit does not proceed from the Father, either with or without the Son; rather the Son proceeds (is born)
from the Father joined with the Sacred Spirit:
The Holy Trinity
Art
See also: God the Father in Western art
The Trinity is most commonly seen in Christian art with the Spirit represented by a dove, as specified in the
Gospel accounts of the Baptism of Christ; it is nearly always shown with wings outspread. However depictions
using three human figures appear occasionally in most periods of art.[103]
The Father and the Son are usually differentiated by age, and later by dress, but this too is not always the case. The
usual depiction of the Father as an older man with a white beard may derive from the biblical Ancient of Days,
which is often cited in defense of this sometimes controversial representation. However, in Eastern Orthodoxy the
Ancient of Days is usually understood to be God the Son, not God the Father (see below)—early Byzantine images
show Christ as the Ancient of Days,[104] but this iconography became rare. When the Father is depicted in art, he is
sometimes shown with a halo shaped like an equilateral triangle, instead of a circle. The Son is often shown at the
Father's right hand.[Acts 7:56] He may be represented by a symbol—typically the Lamb or a cross—or on a crucifix,
so that the Father is the only human figure shown at full size. In early medieval art, the Father may be represented
by a hand appearing from a cloud in a blessing gesture, for example in scenes of the Baptism of Christ. Later, in
the West, the Throne of Mercy (or "Throne of Grace") became a common depiction. In this style, the Father
(sometimes seated on a throne) is shown supporting either a crucifix[105] or, later, a slumped crucified Son, similar
to the Pieta (this type is distinguished in German as the Not Gottes)[106] in his outstretched arms, whilst the Dove
hovers above or in between them. This subject continued to be popular until the 18th century at least.
By the end of the 15th century, larger representations, other than the Throne of Mercy, became effectively
standardised, showing an older figure in plain robes for the Father, Christ with his torso partly bare to display the
wounds of his Passion, and the dove above or around them. In earlier representations both Father, especially, and
Son often wear elaborate robes and crowns. Sometimes the Father alone wears a crown, or even a papal tiara.
Eastern Orthodox tradition
Direct representations of the Trinity are much rarer in Eastern Orthodox art of any period—reservations about
depicting the Father remain fairly strong, as they were in the West until the high Middle Ages. The Second Council
of Nicea in 787 confirmed that the depiction of Christ was allowed because he became man; the situation regarding
the Father was less clear. The usual Orthodox representation of the Trinity was through the "Old Testament
Trinity" of the three angels visiting Abraham—said in the text to be "the Lord"[Genesis 18:1-15]. However scholars
generally agree that the direct representation of the Trinity began in Greek works from the 11th century onwards,
where Christ is shown as an infant sitting on the Father's lap, with the Dove of the Holy Spirit also present. Such
depictions spread to the West and became the standard type there, though with an adult Christ, as described above.
This type later spread back to the Orthodox world where post-Byzantine representations similar to those in the
West are not uncommon outside Russia.[107] The subject long remained sensitive, and the Russian Orthodox
Church at the Great Synod of Moscow in 1667 finally forbade depictions of the Father in human form. The canon
is quoted in full here because it explains the Russian Orthodox theology on the subject:
Chapter 2, §44: It is most absurd and improper to depict in icons the Lord Sabaoth (that is to say, God the Father)
with a grey beard and the Only-Begotten Son in His bosom with a dove between them, because no-one has seen
the Father according to His Divinity, and the Father has no flesh, nor was the Son born in the flesh from the Father
before the ages. And though David the prophet says, "From the womb before the morning star have I begotten
Thee"[Psalm 109:3], that birth was not fleshly, but unspeakable and incomprehensible. For Christ Himself says in the
holy Gospel, "No man hath seen the Father, save the Son".cf.[John 6:46] And Isaiah the prophet says in his fortieth
chapter: "To whom have ye likened the Lord? and with what likeness have ye made a similitude of Him? Has not
the artificier of wood made an image, or the goldsmiths, having melted gold, gilt it over, and made it a
similitude?"[Isa 40:18-19] In like manner the Apostle Paul says in Acts[Acts 17:29] "Forasmuch then as we are the
offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver or stone, graven by art of man's
imagination." And John Damascene says: "But furthermore, who can make a similitude of the invisible,
incorporeal, uncircumscribed and undepictable God? It is, then, uttermost insanity and impiety to give a form to
the Godhead" (Orthodox Faith, 4:16). In like manner St. Gregory the Dialogist prohibits this. For this reason we
should only form an understanding in the mind of Sabaoth, which is the Godhead, and of that birth before the ages
of the Only-Begotten-Son from the Father, but we should never, in any wise depict these in icons, for this, indeed,
is impossible. And the Holy Spirit is not in essence a dove, but in essence he is God, and "No man hath seen God",
as John the Theologian and Evangelist bears witness[John 1:18] and this is so even though, at the Jordan at Christ's
holy Baptism the Holy Spirit appeared in the likeness of a dove. For this reason, it is fitting on this occasion only
to depict the Holy Spirit in the likeness of a dove. But in any other place those who have intelligence will not
depict the Holy Spirit in the likeness of a dove. For on Mount Tabor, He appeared as a cloud and, at another time,
in other ways. Furthermore, Sabaoth is the name not only of the Father, but of the Holy Trinity. According to
Dionysios the Areopagite, Lord Sabaoth, translated from the Jewish tongue, means "Lord of Hosts". This Lord of
Hosts is the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And although Daniel the prophet says that he beheld the
Ancient of Days sitting on a throne, this should not be understood to refer to the Father, but to the Son, Who at His
second coming will judge every nation at the dreadful Judgment.[108]
Oriental Orthodox traditions
The Coptic Orthodox Church never depicts God the Father in art although he may be identified by an area of
brightness within art such as the heavenly glow at the top of some icons of the baptism of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The Syrian, Armenian, Indian and British Orthodox Churches appear to follow the same practice[citation needed].
In contrast, the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church has many ancient icons depicting the Holy Trinity as three
distinct Persons.[109][110] These icons often depict all Three Persons sitting upon a single throne to signify unity. The
Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church follows the same practice.
[edit] Scenes
Trefoil and triangle interlaced.
Only a few of the standard scenes in Christian art normally included a representation of the Trinity. The accounts
in the Gospels of the Baptism of Christ were considered to show all three persons as present with a separate role.
Sometimes the other two persons are shown at the top of a crucifixion. The Coronation of the Virgin, a popular
subject in the West, often included the whole Trinity. But many subjects, such as Christ in Majesty or the Last
Judgement, which might be thought to require depiction of the deity in the most amplified form, only show Christ.
There is a rare subject where the persons of the Trinity make the decision to incarnate Christ, or God sending out
the Son. Even more rarely, the Angel of the Annunciation is shown being given the mission.[111]
Less common types of depiction
Especially in the 15th century, and in the less public form of illuminated manuscripts, there was experimentation
with many solutions to the issues of depicting the three persons of the Trinity. The depiction of the Trinity as three
identical persons is rare, because each Person of the Trinity is considered to have distinct attributes. Nonetheless,
the earliest known depiction of God the Father as a human figure, on the 4th century Dogmatic Sarcophagus,
shows the Trinity as three similar bearded men creating Eve from Adam, probably with the intention of affirming
the consubstantiality recently made dogma in the Nicene Creed. There are many similar sarcophagi, and occasional
images at intervals until a revival of the iconography in the 15th century.[112] Even rarer is the depiction of the
Trinity as a single anthropoid figure with three faces (Latin "Vultus Trifrons"), because the Trinity is defined as
three persons in one Godhead, not one Person with three attributes (this would imply Modalism, which is defined
as heresy in traditional Christian orthodoxy). Such "Cerberus" depictions of the Trinity as three faces on one head
were mainly made among Catholics during the 15th to 17th centuries, but were condemned after the Catholic
Council of Trent, and again by Pope Urban VIII in 1628,[113] and many existing images were destroyed.
The Trinity may also be represented abstractly by symbols, such as the triangle (or three triangles joined together),
trefoil or the triquetra—or a combination of these. Sometimes a halo is incorporated into these symbols. The use of
such symbols are often found not only in painting but also in needlework on tapestries, vestments and antependia,
in metalwork and in architectural details.
[edit] Non-orthodoxy
See also: Godhead (Latter Day Saints)
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) identify the Trinity (or Godhead) as the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Ghost, but with a different intention than the Nicene faith. They regard these three as individual
members of a heavenly triumvirate, completely united with one another in purpose—each member of the Godhead
being a distinct being of physical form (God the Father, Jesus Christ) or spiritual form (The Holy Ghost.)[114]
Both leaders and scriptural texts of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints affirm a belief in the Trinity but
apparently use the word "Godhead" (a term used by the Apostle Paul in Acts 17:29; Romans 1:20, and Colossians
2:9) perhaps as a means to set apart their belief that the unity of the three persons of the Trinity includes unity in all
ways other than a physical unity of Beings. The Latter-day Saints believe that "The Father has a body of flesh and
bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage
of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us."[115] According to Daniel C. Peterson of Brigham
Young University, "Brigham Young, speaking of the Father of us all, and the God and Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ' at the Salt Lake Tabernacle in 1871, asked: 'Is he one? Yes. Is his trinity one? Yes.' Similarly, Peterson
continues, the second chapter of Elder James E. Talmage's authoritative 1890 book on "The Articles of Faith" is
titled "God and the Holy Trinity." Furthermore, says Peterson, "uniquely Mormon scriptural texts assert the unity
of Father, Son and Holy Ghost at least as strongly as the Bible does (John 17:11, 20-21). An April 1830 revelation
to Joseph Smith, for instance, affirms that they 'are one God, infinite and eternal, without end' (Doctrine and
Covenants 20:28).
Mormons ultimately validate their understanding of the Godhead with the First Vision of Joseph Smith, Jr., who
claimed to have seen God the Father and Jesus Christ and recounted seeing "two personages," one of which
referred to the other as His "Beloved Son." Mormons also cite Biblical script to support their position that God the
Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are three distinct beings (John 17:11, 20-21).
[edit] Nontrinitarianism
Main article: Nontrinitarianism
Some Christian traditions either reject the doctrine of the Trinity or consider it unimportant. Persons and groups
espousing this position generally do not refer to themselves as "Nontrinitarians". They can vary in both their
reasons for rejecting traditional teaching on the Trinity, and in the way they describe God.
[edit] Groups
[edit] History
Since Trinitarianism is central to so much of Catholic and Orthodox church doctrine, Christian nontrinitarians were
mostly groups that existed before the Nicene Creed was codified in 325 or are groups that developed after the
Protestant Reformation, when many church doctrines came into question.[116]
In the early centuries of Christian history Adoptionists, Arians, Ebionites, some Gnostics, Marcionites, and others
held nontrinitarian beliefs. The Council of Nicaea professed the divinity of Jesus, and the Council of Chalcedon
made a declaration on the issue of the relationship between Jesus' divine and human natures, against
Monophysitism ("one nature only"), a belief that did not deny his divinity. Miaphysitism ("one nature") and
monothelitism ("one will") were other attempts to explain this relationship, while upholding Trinitarianism.
During more than a thousand years of Trinitarian orthodoxy, formal nontrinitarianism, i.e., a doctrine held by a
church, group, or movement, was rare, existing, for example, as a belief among the Cathars, a Christian dualist
heresy in W. Europe in the 13th–14th centuries.[117] The Cathars were a serious threat to the authority of the
Catholic Church especially in southern France Albigenses and northern Italy, until they were suppressed.[118] They
were forced into secrecy by a war between the nobles of the north and south of France, the northern nobles were
supported by a crusade authorized by the Catholic Church.[119]
The Protestant Reformation of the 16th century also brought tradition into question. At first, nontrinitarians were
executed (such as Servetus), or forced to keep their beliefs secret (such as Isaac Newton). The eventual
establishment of religious freedom, however, allowed nontrinitarians to more easily preach their beliefs, and the
19th century saw the establishment of several nontrinitarian groups in North America and elsewhere. These
include Christadelphians, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Unitarians. Some Messianic groups are also nontrinitarian.
Servetus heavily influenced the theology of Emanuel Swedenborg; the church founded on his writings is a small
but influential nontrinitarian movement. Some groups espousing Binitarianism such as the Living Church of God
claim that Binitarianism was the majority view of those that professed Christ in the 2nd century.
20th century nontrinitarian movements include Iglesia ni Cristo, Most Holy Church of God in Christ Jesus, and the
Unification Church. Nontrinitarian groups differ from one another in their views of Jesus Christ, depicting him
variously as a divine being second only to God the Father (e.g., Jehovah's Witnesses), as Yahweh of the Old
Testament in human form (Modalism), as God (but not eternally God), as Son of God but inferior to the Father
(versus co-equal), as a prophet, or simply as a holy man.
[edit] Modalism
Main article: Modalism
“Origen introduced the phrase ‘the Son’s eternal generation’”-Robert Isaac Wilberforce[120]
Modalism teaches that the Heavenly Father, Resurrected Son and Holy Spirit identified by the Trinity Doctrine are
different modes or aspects of the One God, as perceived by the believer, rather than three coeternal persons in God
Himself. In passages of scripture such as Matthew 3:16-17 where the Son, Father, and Holy Spirit are separated in
the text, they view this phenomena as confirming God's omnipresence, and His ability to manifest himself as he
pleases. Oneness Pentecostals and Modalists dispute the traditional Trinitarian doctrine, while affirming the
Christian doctrine of God taking on flesh as Jesus Christ. Like Trinitarians, Oneness adherents believe that Jesus
Christ is fully God and fully man. However, whereas Trinitarians believe that "God the Son", the eternal second
person of the Trinity, became man, Oneness adherents hold that the one and only true God—who manifests
himself in any way he chooses, including as Father, Son and Holy Spirit—became man. Oneness Pentecostals and
other modalists are regarded by Catholic, Orthodox, and some other mainstream Christians as heretical for
rejecting the Trinity Doctrine, which they regard as equivalent to Unitarianism. Modalists differentiate themselves
from Unitarians by affirming Christ's Deity.[121] Oneness teaches that there is only one being, revealing himself in
different ways.[122] Modalists cite passages in the New Testament that refer to God in the singular, and note the
lack of the word "Trinity" in any canonical scripture.[120] They claim that Colossians 1:15-20 refers to Christ's
relationship with the Father in a similar sense:
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in
heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were
created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the
body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have
the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself
all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. [123]
They also cite Christ's response to Philip's query on who the Father was in John 14:10:
Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has
seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
A notable modern adherent of Modalism is T.D. Jakes[124]
[edit] Baptismal Formula Controversy
When criticized by Trinitarian believers who cite the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19 as being the biblical
affirmation of "in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" baptismal formula, Oneness adherents point to the
singular sense of that phrase,[125] and argue that if the passage was really supporting what the Trinitarians propose,
it would have said the "Names" in the plural instead of "Name".[125] Oneness Scholars then state that the passage is
referring to the The Name, in other words, Jesus,[125] and they point to passages like Acts 2:38 NIV as being the
correct baptismal formula.[125] Oneness believers view "Father", "Son" and "Holy Spirit" as titles or forms,
reflecting different manifestations of the one true God.[125] Apostolic Christians also point out that there is no
passage that appears to confirm Matthew 28:19 as being the correct baptismal formula (going against the scriptural
requirement of "two witnesses" to establish a verdict),[126] while all the other passages in the Gospels and Acts
point to "in the Name of Jesus" as the correct form.[126] They also state that Jesus was not referencing Water
Baptism, but the long term "baptism in thought, word, and deed" (2 Corinthians 10:5 and Romans 15:18 NIV) that
all believers undergo as they mature in the Word.[126]
[edit] Unitarianism
Main article: Unitarianism
Unitarianism is a form of Christian theology holding that God is only one person, in contrast to the doctrine of the
Trinity (God as three persons in one), and that God is a separate being from Jesus Christ.[127] It is a specific type of
nontrinitarian theology, and resembles strictly monotheistic conceptions of God upheld in Judaism and Islam.
Some confusion has resulted because the term "unitarianism" (uncapitalized) has sometimes been used informally
to describe any Christology (i.e. understanding of Jesus Christ) that denies the Trinity or believes that only the
Father of Jesus (and not Jesus himself) is God. Mere denial of the Trinity, however, is more commonly called
nontrinitarianism. Recently some religious groups have adopted the term "biblical unitarianism" to describe their
theology, but they hold to a conservative form of nontrinitarianism, which rejects many of the teachings of liberal
Unitarianism.[128]
So, too, Unitarianism does not accept the Godhood of Jesus, and therefore does not include Modalist belief
systems which do—for example, Oneness Pentecostalism, United Pentecostal Church International and the True
Jesus Church—that maintain that Jesus is God as a single person.
[edit] Binitarianism
George Johnson, a proponent of Binitarianism, argues that Jesus is the God of the Old Testament, distinct from the
God who is called the Ancient of Days in Daniel 7:13, and that the Holy Spirit is not a person.[129]
[edit] Islam
Zia H. Shah, a Muslim, interprets the Christian doctrine of the Trinity as saying that "the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit are three complete and separate Gods and are yet one at the same time", a thought that he describes as absurd
and incompatible with monotheism.[130]
[edit] Judaism
Cher-El L. Hagensick says that the Trinity doctrine owes more of its Triune philosphy to pagan Egyptian and Stoic
sources, and that the word Trinity was formulated 100 years after the crucifixion by Tertullian: "The word ‘trinity’
was not coined until Tertullian, more than 100 years after Christ’s death, and the key words (meaning substance)
from the Nicene debate, homousis and ousis, are not biblical, but from Stoic thought. Nowhere in the Bible is the
Trinity mentioned." [131] In other words, the writer says, the early church began to slowly include pagan Greek
philosophy that was not taught in the Bible.[131] Scholars also criticize efforts to introduce plurality into God's
names in the Old Testament:
“Enough has been said to show that a great majority of the most learned authors in the ‘orthodox’ body who have
treated of the subject acknowledge that the argument drawn from the plural forms of Hebrew nouns applied to
Deity are totally invalid, in support either of a Trinity or any plurality of Persons in the Godhead. To deduce a
plurality in God from a Hebrew idiom is impossible. The argument for plurality in God seems never to have been
thought of before the time of Peter Lombard, a puerile writer who lived in the twelfth century”-John Wilson[120]
[edit] Christian Science
Christian Science explicitly denies the deity of Jesus and has therefore always been non-Trinitarian, for which
reason the term is of little significance within its core texts, though Mary Baker Eddy did adopt it on occasion for
discussion of a wider spiritual unity with God which characterized all mankind rather than Jesus alone, as in her
statement that "The Trinity in Christian Science is found in the unity of God, Christ, and the Holy Ghost or—"God
the Father-Mother; Christ the spiritual idea of sonship; divine Science or the Holy Comforter." Its elements thus
united but distinct in essential identity, this Trinity indicated "the intelligent relation of God to man and the
universe".[132]
[edit] See also
Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Holy Trinity











Ahura, the Zoroastrian Trinity
Avatara
Ayyavazhi Trinity
Binitarianism
Christ
Godhead (Christianity)
God the Father in Western art
Holy Trinity Icon
Holy Trinity columns
Nontrinitarianism
Oneness Pentecostal











Order of the Holy Trinity
Shituf
Social Trinity
Subordinationist
Trikaya, the three Buddha bodies
Trimurti (Hindu Trinity)
Trinitarian Universalism
Trinity in Islam
Triple deity
Tritheism
Unitarianism
[edit] Endnotes and references
1.
2.
3.
^ See discussion in
"Person". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. 1913.
^ a b Encyclopaedia Britannica Online, article Trinity
^ a b c Grudem, Wayne A. 1994. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity
Press; Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. Pages 226, 236.
4. ^ a b c d The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press, 2005 ISBN 978-0-19-280290-3), article Trinity,
doctrine of the
5. ^ Encyclopaedia Britannica
6. ^ John L. McKenzie, S.J., Dictionary of the Bible (New York), p. 899
7. ^ New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299
8. ^ Lewis and Short: trinitas
9. ^ Lewis and Short: trinus
10. ^ Liddell & Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon. entry for Τριάς, retrieved December 19, 2006
11. ^ Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus, II.XV (retrieved on December 19, 2006).
12. ^ W.Fulton in the "Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics"
13. ^ Aboud, Ibrahim (Fall 2005). Theandros an online Journal of Orthodox Christian Theology and Philosophy. 3, number 1.
http://www.theandros.com/htrinity.html.
14. ^ Against Praxeas, chapter 3
15. ^ Against Praxeas, chapter 2 and in other chapters
16. ^ History of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Accessed September 15, 2007.
17. ^ a b Olson, Roger E. The Story of Christian Theology: Twenty Centuries of Tradition & Reform. Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 1999. ISBN 139780830815050. :pp. 185-6.
18. ^ Reese, William L. Dictionary of Philosophy and Religion: Eastern and Western Thought. 1980. Atlantic Highlands, New
Jersey: Humanities Press, 1994
19. ^ Tertullian, Against Praxeas, chapter II
20. ^ "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament ... the New Testament established the basis
for the doctrine of the Trinity" (Encyclopaedia Britannica Online: article Trinity).
21. ^ a b The Oxford Companion to the Bible (ed. Bruce Metzger and Michael Coogan) 1993, p. 782-3.
22. ^ See Book of Wisdom#Messianic interpretation by Christians
23. ^ a b Catholic Encyclopedia: article The Blessed Trinity
24. ^ "Encyclopedia of Religion", Vol. 14, p.9360, on Trinity
25. ^ Gregory Nazianzen, Orations, 31.26
26. ^ McGrath, Alister E. Understanding the Trinity. Zondervan, 9789 ISBN 0310296811
27. ^ Harris, Stephen L. Understanding the Bible. Mayfield Publishing: 2000.pp.427-428
28. ^ a b Stagg, Frank. New Testament Theology. Broadman Press, 1962. ISBN 978-0805416138, pp. 38 ff.
29. ^ See Elizabeth Lev, "Dimming the Pauline Spotlight; Jubilee Fruits", 2009
30. ^ Allen, Willoughby. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to S. Matthew. Edinburgh: T. and T.
Clark 1907, p. 307-308
31. ^ United Bible Societies: The Greek New Testament ISBN 3-438-05110-9
32. ^ Nova Vulgata
33. ^ See, for instance, the note in 1 Jn 5:7-8.
34. ^ Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, 2d ed. Oxford University'",
1968 p.101
35. ^ "It is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 'And these three are one.'" (Cyprian, On the Unity of the
Church)
36. ^ The Presentation of Jesus in John's Gospel
37. ^ Brown, Raymond E. The Anchor Bible: The Gospel According to John (XIII-XXI), pp. 1026, 1032
38. ^ The Scriptures on Jesus
39. ^ John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible, John 12:41, Heb 1:8,10
40. ^ Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible, John 12:41, Heb 1:8,10
41. ^ Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible, John 12:41, Heb 1:8,10
42. ^ St. Paul helps us understand truths about Jesus
43. ^ See Sharp's article
44. ^ Bruce A. Baker, Granville Sharp's Rule
45. ^ Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996. p. 270-271.
46. ^ Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996. p276.
47. ^ Wordsworth, Christopher. Six Letters to Granville Sharp Esq. Respecting his Remarks on the Use of the Definitive Article in
the Greek Text of the New Testament. London: F. and C. Rivington, 1802. p132]
48. ^ The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays, Ezra Abbot, Boston, 1888, pp. 439–457
49. ^ "Christology". MB-soft.com. May 31, 2010. http://mb-soft.com/believe/text/christol.htm.
50. ^ Simonetti, Manlio. "Matthew 14-28." New Testament Volume 1b, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture. Intervarsity
Press, 2002. ISBN 978-0-8308-1469-5
51. ^ St. Augustine of Hippo, De Trinitate, Book I, Chapter 3.
52. ^ Augustine of Hippo, On Eighty-Three Diverse Questions, Question 60.
53. ^ a b c d St. Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit Chapter 16.
54. ^ St. Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit Chapter 19.
55. ^ St. Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit Chapter 21.
56. ^ Catholic Encyclopedia: article Pneumatomachi
57. ^ For the two chapters as a single text, see Letellier, Robert. Day in Mamre, night in Sodom: Abraham and Lot in Genesis 18 and
19. Brill Publishers: 1995. ISBN 9789004102507 pp.37ff. Web: 9 January 2010
58. ^ a b c Francis Watson, Abraham's Visitors (The Journal of Scriptural Reasoning, Number 2.3, September 2002
59. ^ Augustine had poor knowledge of the Greek language, and no knowledge of Hebrew. So he trusted the LXX Septuagint, which
differentiates between κύριοι[Gen 19:2] ('lords', vocative plural) and κύριε[Gen 19:18] ('lord', vocative singular), even if the Hebrew
verbal form, ‫אדני‬-‫( נא‬na-adoni) , is exactly the same in both cases.
60. ^ The Trinity in the Old Testament
61. ^ Larry W. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2005 ISBN
0802831672 pp. 573-578
62. ^ Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology: Angel of the Lord
63. ^ a b Bingham, Jeffrey, "HT200 Class Notes", Dallas Theological Seminary, (2004).
64. ^ The Encyclopedia Americana (1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L
65. ^ Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel (Paris, 1865-1870), Vol. 2, p. 1467.
66. ^ Catholic Encyclopedia: article:Paul of Samosata
67. ^ Athanasius: De Decretis or Defence of the Nicene Definition, Introduction, 19
68. ^ "The bishops were forced to use 'non-Scriptural' terminology (not 'un-Scriptural') to protect and preserve the Scriptural
meaning" (The Arian Controversy).
69. ^ Encyclopaedia Britannica Online
70. ^ Athanasius, Bishop of Alexanria, Theologian, Doctor
71. ^ a b c "Trinity". Britannica Encyclopaedia of World Religions. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica. 2006.
72. ^ On Athanasius, Oxford Classical Dictionary, Edited by Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth. Third edition. Oxford;
New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
73. ^ Orthodox Outlet for Dogmatic Enquiries: On God
74. ^ 7:1, 3 online
75. ^ Epistle to the Philippians, 2:13 online
76. ^ On Baptism 8:6 online, Against Praxeas, 26:2 online
77. ^ Against Noetus, 1:14 online
78. ^ Seventh Council of Carthage online
79. ^ A Sectional Confession of Faith, 13:2 online
80. ^ Baptism "in the name of" need not be taken as referring to a formula used in the ceremony in either Matthew or Acts; it may
merely indicate the establishment of a relationship, corresponding to the phrases "baptized into Christ Jesus" [Rom 6:3] and
"baptized into Christ."[Gal 3:27] Compare "baptized ... into John's baptism," [Acts 19:3] "baptized in the name of Paul,"[1 Cor. 1:13]
"baptized into Moses."1 Cor. 10:2
81. ^ Kittel, 3:108.
82. ^ Grudem, Wayne A. 1994. Systematic theology an introduction to biblical doctrine. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press.
Page 226.
83. ^ Athanasian Creed
84. ^ Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity: The Greek and the Latin Traditions regarding the Procession of the Holy
Spirit (scanned image of the English translation on L'Osservatore Romano of 20 September 1995); also text with Greek letters
transliterated and text omitting two sentences at the start of the paragraph that it presents as beginning with "The Western
tradition expresses first …"
85. ^ Thomas, and Anton Charles Pegis. 1997. Basic writings of Saint Thomas Aquinas. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. Pages 30709.
86. ^ Barth, Karl, and Geoffrey William Bromiley. 1975. The doctrine of the word of God prolegomena to church dogmatics, being
volume I, 1. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark. Pages 348-49.
87. ^ K Rahner, The Trinity (Herder & Herder:1970) p22
88. ^ Phillip Cary, Priscilla Papers Vol. 20, No. 4, Autumn 2006
89. ^ CCEL.org Basil the Great, De Spiritu Sancto, NPNF, Vol 8
90. ^ Athanasius, 3.29 (p. 409)
91. ^ Basil "Letters", NPNF, Vol 8, 189.7 (p. 32)
92. ^ Hill, De Trinitate, 2.15
93. ^ P. van Buren, Christ in Our Place (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957), p. 38
94. ^ George Knight III, New Testament Teaching on the Role Relationship of Men and Women (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1977)
95. ^ a b An Agreed Statement of the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation
96. ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church, 247
97. ^ Lambeth Conference Resolutions from 1978. Accessed May 24th, 2009.
98. ^ Creeds and Authorized Affirmations of Faith from the 'Common Worship' service books. Accessed May 24th, 2009.
99. ^ Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy Online, on Trinity, Link
100. ^ Oden, Thomas (2006). Systematic Theology: Volume One: The Living God. Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.. pp. 181–224.
ISBN 0060663634.
101. ^ 'The Maternal Spirit'
102. ^ The requisite Hebrew font: SPTiberi.ttf.
103. ^ See below and G Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art, Vol. I, 1971, Vol II, 1972, (English trans from German), Lund
Humphries, London, figs I;5-16 & passim, ISBN 0853312702 and ISBN 0853313245
104. ^ Cartlidge, David R., and Elliott, J.K.. Art and the Christian Apocrypha, pp. 69-72 (illustrating examples), Routledge, 2001,
ISBN 0415233925, 9780415233927, Google books
105. ^ G Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art, Vol. II, 1972, (English trans from German), Lund Humphries, London, figs I;5-16 &
passim, ISBN 0853312702 and ISBN 0853313245, p.122-124 and figs 409-414
106. ^ G Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art, Vol. II, 1972, (English trans from German), Lund Humphries, London, figs I;5-16 &
passim, ISBN 0853312702 and ISBN 0853313245, pp. 219-224 and figs 768-804
107. ^ Bigham, 89-98
108. ^ The Tome of the Great Council of Moscow (1666-1667 A.D.), Ch. 2, 43-45; tr. Hierodeacon Lev Puhalo, Canadian Orthodox
Missionary Journal
109. ^ The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church Icons
110. ^ An Ethiopian Iconostasis
111. ^ for both, G Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art, Vol. I,1971, Vol II, 1972, (English trans from German), Lund Humphries,
London, ISBN 0853312702 and ISBN 0853313245, pp. 6-12 and figs 10-16
112. ^ Schiller, I, figs 7, 10, 11
113. ^ Guss, David M. (2006). "The Gran Poder and the Reconquest of La Paz". Journal of Latin American Anthropology 11 (2):
294–328. ISSN 1085-7025. http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/wallace/ANT325%20Guss%20on%20La%20Paz%20festivals.pdf.
114. ^ Jeffry R Holland, Ensign. 2007 November
115. ^ Doctrine and Covenants 130:22
116. ^ See indulgences, particular judgment, primacy of the Pope, purgatory, transubstantiation, etc.
117. ^ Bowker, John. "Cathars." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. 1997. Online: Encyclopedia.com. (October 18,
2010). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O101-Cathars.html
118. ^ John M. Riddle (28 March 2008). A history of the Middle Ages, 300-1500. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 411–.
ISBN 9780742554092. http://books.google.com/books?id=rhWpPr93KjMC&pg=PA411. Retrieved 19 October 2010.
119. ^ M. D. Costen (1997). The Cathars and the Albigensian Crusade. Manchester University Press. pp. 201–.
ISBN 9780719043321. http://books.google.com/books?id=2Rol-mcRCbAC&pg=PA201. Retrieved 19 October 2010.
120. ^ a b c Anthony Buzzard (July 2003). "Trinity, or not?". Elohim and Other Terms. focusonthekingdom.org.
http://www.focusonthekingdom.org/articles/elohim.htm. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
121. ^ Eddie Snipes. "Modalists are not Unitarians". Heresies and Heretics in the Early Church. Exchanged Life Outreach.
http://www.exchangedlife.com/Sermons/topical/trinity/heresies1.shtml#Monarchianism. Retrieved 8 March 2011.
122. ^ The Oneness of God by David K. Bernard. Explains the Oneness view of God, as opposed to the Trinitarian viewpoint.
123. ^ Colossians 1:15-20 (NIV)
124. ^ T.C.R (9-02-08). "T.D. Jakes is a Modalist". John MacArthur Considers TD Jakes A Heretic. newleaven.com.
http://newleaven.com/2008/09/03/john-macarthur-considers-td-jakes-a-heretic/. Retrieved 8 March 2011.
125. ^ a b c d e William Arnold III. "Baptismal Formula-In Jesus Name?". Baptism in Jesus' Name. IBS.
http://www.onenesspentecostal.com/name.htm. Retrieved 5 March 2011.
126. ^ a b c "Matthew 28:19 refers to Baptism in the Spirit". RP108 #3. BAPTISM IN THE NAME OF "THE FATHER, AND OF THE
SON, AND OF THE HOLY SPIRIT". logosapostolic.org.
http://www.logosapostolic.org/baptism_bible_study/B3_Baptism_Father_Son_Holy_Spirit.htm#3.4. Retrieved 5 March 2011.
127. ^ Knight, Kevin, ed., "The dogma of the Trinity", Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent,
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm
128. ^ Tuggy, Dale, (2009). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
129. ^ George Johnson. "Problems with The Trinity". Is God really a MYSTERIOUS Trinity?. biblestudy.org.
http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/is-god-a-mysterious-trinity-no-one-can-understand.html. Retrieved 28 February 2011.
130. ^ Zia Shah. "Trinity Doctrine and Muslims". aliislam.org. http://www.alislam.org/library/articles/Trinity-in-the-Holy-Quran-andBible-20080226MN.pdf. Retrieved 1 March 2011.
131. ^ a b Cher-El L. Hagensick. "Problems with the Trinity Doctrine". The Origin of the Trinity: From Paganism to Constantine.
Herald Magazine. http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/doctrine/the%20origin%20of%20the%20trinity.htm. Retrieved 1
March 2011.
132. ^ Eddy, Mary Baker; Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures
[edit] Further reading





Bigham, Steven, Image of God the Father in Orthodox Theology and Iconography, Studies in Orthodox
iconography, St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1995, ISBN 1879038153, 97818790381, Google books
Paul Fiddes, The Trinity in worship and preaching (London: London Baptist Preachers' Association, 1991)
Paul Fiddes, Participating in God : a pastoral doctrine of the Trinity (London: Darton, Longman, & Todd,
2000)
Roger E. Olson, The Story of Christian Theology : Twenty Centuries of Tradition & Reform (Downers
Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1999)
William J. La Due, The Trinity guide to the Trinity (Continuum International Publishing Group, 2003
ISBN 1563383950, 9781563383953)
[edit] External links






Doctrine of the Trinity Reading Room: extensive collection of on-line sources on the Trinity (Tyndale
Seminary)
Trinity entry at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Doctrine of the Trinity
The Unveiling of the Trinity—A Biblical Account of the Mystery Revealed
Trinity article at Theopedia
Eastern Orthodox Trinitarian Theology
[show]v · d · eChristian theology
Scripture Inspiration · Canonics · Biblical studies · Exegesis · Law and Gospel · Hermeneutics
Attributes · Christology · Pneumatology · Trinity · Father · Son (Hypostatic union ·
Of God Incarnation · Jesus · Logos · Christocentric) · Holy Spirit · Theocentricism · Immutability ·
Impassibility
Cosmology Creation · Angels · Angelic hierarchy · Humanity · Fallen angels · Satan · Theodicy
Absolution · Adoption · Assurance · Atonement · Baptism · Conversion · Faith ·
Forgiveness · Glorification · Grace · Irresistible grace · Imputation · Justification ·
Soteriology Lapsarianism · Means of grace · Mortification · Ordo Salutis · Predestination ·
Reconciliation · Redemption · Regeneration · Repentance · Resurrection · Salvation ·
Sanctification · Theosis · Union with Christ
Hamartiology
Ecclesiology
Adam · Anthropology · The Fall · Incurvatus in se · Original sin · Sin · Theodicy · Total
depravity
Sacrament · Missiology · Polity (Congregational · Episcopal · Presbyterian) · Synod ·
Conciliarity
Summary of differences · Historicism · Idealism · Dispensationalism · Futurism · Preterism ·
Millenarianism (Pre-/ Post-/ A-) · Adventism · Antichrist · Apocalypse · Apocalypticism ·
Eschatology Covenant/New Covenant theology · End times · Heaven · Hell · Last Judgment ·
Millennialism · New Jerusalem · Rapture · Second Coming · Soul sleep · Tribulation · War in
Heaven
[show]Eastern Orthodox theology
[show]Roman Catholic theology
[show]Protestant theology
[show]v · d · ePart of a series on Christianity
[show]v · d · eTheology
General List of apologetic works · Polemic · Positive Deconstruction · More...
Bahá'í Bahá'í apologetics
Christian apologetics · Christian apologists · List of Christian apologetic works · Ecumenical
Christian Apologetics · Presuppositional apologetics · Epistle to Diognetus · Trilemma · Urmonotheismus ·
More...
Muslim Muslim apologists
Divine presence Divine presence
God as the Devil · Sustainer · Time
God in
Abrahamic religions · Bahá'í Faith · Buddhism · Christianity · Hinduism · Islam · Jainism ·
Judaism · Sikhism · Zoroastrianism · More...
Names of God in Christianity · Hinduism · Islam · Judaism · More...
Singular God God · Absolute (philosophy) · Brahman · Emanationism · Logos · Supreme Being · More...
Binitarianism Binitarianism
Trinity · Trinitarian formula · Athanasian Creed · Comma Johanneum · Consubstantiality ·
Trinitarianism Homoousian · Hypostasis · Perichoresis · Shield of the Trinity · Trinity of the Church
Fathers · Trinitarian Universalism · More...
Aristotelian view of God · Attributes · Demiurge · Divine simplicity · Egotheism ·
Godhead (Christianity) · Godhead (Latter Day Saints) · Great Architect of the Universe ·
Other Great Spirit · Apophatic theology · Olelbis · Open theism · Personal god ·
Phenomenological definition of God · Philo's view of God · Sarav viāpak ·
Taryenyawagon · The All · Tian · Unmoved mover · More...
from Free will · Inconsistent revelations · Nonbelief · Poor design
arguments against
God of the gaps · Incompatible-properties argument · Omnipotence paradox ·
other
Problem of evil · Problem of Hell · Theological noncognitivism · More...
from
A proper basis · Beauty · Consciousness · Degree · Desire · Love · Miracles ·
Morality · Reason · Religious experience
other
Christological · Cosmological · Ontological · Pascal's wager · Teleological ·
Trademark · Transcendental · Witness · More...
arguments for
Buddhism (Criticism · Persecution) · Catholicism · Christianity · Gnosticism · Hinduism ·
Anti- Islam (Criticism · Islamophobia · Persecution) · Judaism · Protestantism · cult movement ·
Zoroastrianism · More...
Other Disengagement from religion · Secularism · Separation of church and state
History of · Outline · of the Bible · Terms · Christology · Cosmology · Ecclesiology · Ethics ·
Christian Hamartiology · Law · Messianism · Movements · Nestorianism · New testament · Old testament ·
Philosophy · Practical · Sophiology · Soteriology · More...
Feminist Buddhism · Christianity · Hinduism · Islam · Judaism · Mormonism · Goddesses · More...
Hindu Ayyavazhi theology · Hindu philosophical concepts · Krishnology · More...
Islamic Aqidah · Mutazilites · Shi'a theology · More...
Jewish Abrahamic prophecy · Angels in Judaism · Jewish mysticism
Other Death of God · Exotheology · Holocaust · Pope Pius XII · Process · Zoroastrian · More...
Seminaries and Anglican · Buddhist · Eastern Orthodox · Evangelical · Islamic · Jewish ·
theological colleges Lutheran · Madrassas · Methodist · Reformed Church · Roman Catholic ·
More...
Bahá'í · Buddhist · Anglican · Assemblies of God · Baptist · Eastern
Orthodox · Hindu · Islamic · Jewish · Latter Day Saints · Lutheran ·
Schools by religious affiliation
Mennonite · Methodist · Nondenominational Christian · Presbyterian ·
Quaker · Roman Catholic · Seventh-Day Adventist
[show]v · d · eTheological thought
Religion
portal
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity"
Categories: Ancient Christian controversies | Conceptions of God | Christian iconography | Trinitarianism | Triple
deities | Theology | Christian terms | Names of God | Attributes of God in Christian theology
Hidden categories: Articles containing Ancient Greek language text | All articles with specifically marked weaselworded phrases | Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from December 2010 | All articles with
unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements from May 2008 | NPOV disputes from February 2010 |
All NPOV disputes | Articles with unsourced statements from December 2008
Personal tools

Log in / create account
Namespaces


Article
Discussion
Variants
Views



Read
Edit
View history
Actions
Search
Special:Search
Search
Navigation






Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction





Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia
Toolbox






What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Cite this page
Print/export



Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages





















‫ال عرب ية‬
‫ܐܪܡܝܐ‬
Azərbaycanca
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Bosanski
Brezhoneg
Български
Català
Česky
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
‫ف ار سی‬
Føroyskt
Français
Frysk
Furlan
Gaeilge
Gàidhlig
Galego

한국어

हिन्दी
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Íslenska
Italiano










































‫עבַית‬
ქართული
Kiswahili
Latina
Latviešu
Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuvių
Lumbaart
Magyar
Македонски
മലയാളം
Bahasa Melayu
Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk (bokmål)
Norsk (nynorsk)
Олык Марий
Polski
Português
Română
Runa Simi
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / Srpski
Srpskohrvatski / Српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
తెలుగు





ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
Walon


粵語
中文

This page was last modified on 14 March 2011 at 06:37.