The Trinity is perhaps the distinctive doctrine of Christianity.[1] Trinitarianism has been a test of orthodoxy throughout most of Church history.[2] Despite the average Evangelical not very much understanding the Trinity, he knows that non-Trinitarians are caught by the clutches of heresy. Often, non-Christians, whether they be Muslims, theological liberals, secularists, Mormons, or some other group, seek to deny the doctrine of the Trinity as spurious, pagan, or unnecessary.[3] The Trinity, they say, is a fourth century invention. If the Trinity is a hallmark of orthodoxy, surely there must be scriptural support for the doctrine.

This article seeks to defend the Trinity using sound exegesis. First, various theological works and creeds are examined to define the Trinity as something cannot be defended if it is not defined. Second, some non-Trinitarian views are defined briefly. Third, several key scriptural passages are examined in context, which suggest orthodox Trinitarianism (and therefore, disprove non-Trinitarian views). While the writer acknowledges the importance of an inductive study, the doctrine of the Trinity is assumed. Therefore, this paper is primarily apologetic instead of primarily exegetical.[4]

Explaining the Trinity

Definitions

While the Trinity is not explicit in the Bible, “the doctrine grows out of the Scriptures.”[5] Ryrie defines explicit as “characterized by full, clear, expression.”[6] Warfield reminds that the Trinity and terms used to define the Trinity are not terms directly from Scripture. Rather, the terms are scriptural “on the principal that the sense of Scripture is Scripture.”[7] Warfield goes on to argue that the Trinity is presupposed in Scripture.[8] This is similar to Durst’s claim that the New Testament authors (and, therefore, many in the New Testament Church) possessed a Trinitarian consciousness.[9] This Trinitarian awareness is not fully developed in the creedal sense although it is present.

Theologian’s Definitions

The Trinity is a complex and technical doctrine. Therefore, a definition is not easy. Warfield defines the Trinity as “the doctrine that there is one only and true God, but in unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistence.”[10] Ryrie adopts Warfield’s definition and expounds on it. He aptly points out that differing words may be used in different definitions of the Trinity.[11] He says, “the whole undivided essence of God belongs equally to each of the three persons.”[12] Grudem presents the Trinity as a series of statements:

1) God is three persons.

2) Each person is fully God.

3) There is one God.[13]

Barring the possibility that each author means something completely different, these different presentations of the Trinity provide an adequate definition.[14] The doctrine of the Trinity describes the threeness-yet-onenesss of God. Every Divine Person is fully God. However, each Divine Person is in some sense different from the other two Persons.

The Creeds

The great early Christian creeds all demonstrate Trinitarian (or proto-Trinitarian) thinking. The ancient Apostle’s Creed, while not explicitly (using Ryrie’s definition of explicit) Trinitarian, seems to fit best in a Trinitarian context. The creed illustrates that Jesus, the only begotten Son, is the Lord of believers. Jesus is said to be the judge of the world, which is a divine attribute. Christ is also said to be conceived by the Holy Spirit, which implies the Spirit’s personhood in action.[15] The Nicene and Chalcedonian Creeds further develop the doctrine of the Trinity using more explicit language.[16] Much later, the Westminster Larger Catechism reiterates the orthodox understanding of the Trinity.[17]

Non-Trinitarian Positions

 What follows is a brief description of various non-Trinitarian views of God. 1) Modalism. Modalism is the view that God, being one person, acts in three different modes. This view asserts the unity of God while denying the plurality.[18] 2) Arianism. Arianism is the view that denies the divinity of Jesus (and usually the Spirit).[19] 3) Tri-theism. Tri-theism the belief that each person of the Godhead is a god, so that three gods exist. 4) Binitarianism. Binitarianism is the belief that the Son and the Father are God while the Holy Spirit is an impersonal force. Each error or heresy regarding the Trinity denies one or more of the statements in Grudem’s definition of the Trinity.[20]

Trinitarian Passages

As established by the definitions above, there are three major statements that need to be demonstrated biblically if the doctrine of the Trinity is to be believed. Passages will be examined that demonstrate that there is one God; that God is three persons; and that each person is fully God. More attention will be given to the latter two statements, which are grouped under one heading. This study can by no means be considered exhaustive. However, since all Scripture is breathed by God and infallible, at least one passage that demonstrates each statement is a sufficient start.[21]

There is One God

This statement is perhaps the easiest to show from Scripture as it is taught explicitly and clearly throughout the entire Bible. “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”[22] The first verse of the Bible shows that there are two classes of being: God and not-God. God did not seek counsel from any preexistent creature or other deity.[23] Therefore, there is only one God.

Israel’s sacred Shema states that, “The Lord our God, the LORD is one.”[24] The first and second commandments of the Decalogue assume that there is only one true God.[25] In Psalm 18, David asks the rhetorical question, “Who is God, but the LORD? / And who is a rock except our God?”[26] The context assures that the answer is, “No one!” Just prior, David writes, “This God—his way is perfect…”[27] David also describes God’s dominion as one day filling the whole earth. “All the ends of the earth shall…turn to the LORD.”[28] From these texts, the reader knows that God is the sole god. He is the creator and one day all the world will worship him. No other being can bare the title ‘God’ in the same sense that the LORD can. In fact, every so-called god or idol is a demon.[29]

There are Three Equally Divine Persons of the Godhead

Divinity and Personhood of the Father and the Son

The prologue of John’s Gospel articulates the relationship between God (the Father) and the Word (the Son). The opening phrase intentionally parallels Genesis 1:1. “In the beginning was the Word…” draws the reader’s mind back to “In the beginning God created…”[30]  As such, the fullness of deity of the Word is established in this one phrase. The Word is God, and everything that is deduced about God from Genesis 1:1 is true of the Word. The rest of the first verse of John fleshes out the logical consequence of the initial phrase. “[A]nd the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.”[31] John expectedly claims that the Word is God.  Perhaps less expectedly, he differentiates the Word from God in some sense.

The thirtieth verse of the tenth chapter of John further illustrates the unity of the Father and the Son (who is the Word). The context of the passage is Jesus rebuking the Jews for their demand. They asked, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.”[32] Christ tells them, “I told you, and you do not believe me.”[33] He then states, “The works I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me.”[34] Jesus goes on to explain that the Jews who were questioning him did not believe because they were not his “sheep.”[35] He explains that his Father gives Jesus his sheep. Then he says, “I and my father are one.”[36]

In this passage, Christ claims his divinity and unity with God the Father. This is demonstrated by the reaction of his listeners who wanted to stone him for blasphemy.[37] Additionally, this passage shows the differentiation between God the Father and God the Son. In this passage each person acts with agency. The Father gives the sheep. The Son calls them and gives them eternal life. Furthermore, performing “works in [his] Father’s name” suggests a plurality. In other words, views such as Modalism are refuted by the differentiation. Views like Arianism are refuted by the unity. Trinitarianism as defined above fits the context of this passage well. [38] As Ryrie says, “[John 10:10] beautifully states this balance between oneness and threeness.”[39] He notes that the word translated “one” in John 10:10 is neuter word which implies a unity of essence.[40] To imply a unity of personhood, the word would need to be masculine.[41]

Divinity and Personhood of the Holy Spirit

With the divinity and personhood of the Father and the Son established, only the divinity and personhood of the Spirit need to be demonstrated for orthodox Trinitarianism to be a sufficient explanation of the biblical data. Spirit is the translation of the Greek word, pneuma. Pneuma is a neuter word, meaning the corresponding pronouns referring to pneuma should be neuter in Koine Greek grammar. However, multiple times, the Holy Spirit/Pneuma is referred to with masculine pronouns.[42] This grammatical change, which is not easily noticeable in translations, seems to imply the personhood of the Spirit.[43]

The Spirit possess characteristics of personality that preclude the possibility of the Spirit being an impersonal force. In John chapter sixteen, Christ is informing his followers of his departure.[44] Although this causes his follows grief, he promises that the Helper, who is the Spirit of Truth, comes soon after Jesus’s ascension.[45] The Spirit is said to “convict the world concerning sin” and to “guide [the followers of Jesus] into all truth.”[46] Regarding the Spirit’s guidance, Jesus states that the Spirit “will not speak on his own authority.”[47] Additionally, Jesus says that the Holy Spirit will glorify him.[48] To convict, to guide, to speak, and to glorify are actions. Only agents/persons act.[49] An impersonal force does not and cannot actively convict, guide, speak, nor guide.

In 1 Corinthians 6:19, Paul teaches that the bodies of believers are the temple of Holy Spirit.[50] The Spirit indwelling the Church is the grounding Paul gives for the command against sexual promiscuity.[51] An impersonal force cannot have a temple. In Ephesians chapter four, Paul discusses the implications of being a new self and a new creation in Christ.[52] In the middle of listing several activities from which one must refrain, Paul exhorts believers to “not grieve the Holy Spirit, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.”[53] An impersonal force cannot be grieved.

One could argue that all instances of apparent Holy Spirit personality are personifications of a force or of an attribute of the Father. It would be odd for every description of the Spirit, especially those which include discussion regarding the Father and Spirit, to be personification when the other two are persons. Furthermore, the Great Commission places the Holy Spirit as coequal with the Father and the Son.[54] It would be odd for believers to baptized in the name of two persons and an impersonal force. Furthermore, the word for “name” in the baptismal formula is singular. Following the singular “name,” Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all listed. Therefore, all persons of the Godhead share the name of God.[55]

Conclusion

Although this article barely scratches the surface of the Trinitarian evidence, it is sufficient to make a case for the validity of the doctrine of the Trinity. As evidenced above, the Holy Spirit is a unique person and is God; the Son is a unique person and is God; and the Father is a unique person and is God. All three bare the name of the one God and partake in one essence. This means God can be accurately described by the doctrine of the Trinity as defined by people like Warfield, Ryrie, Enns, and Grudem.[56] Therefore, the Trinity is true and biblical.

Mitchell D. Cochran is a family life educator, a financial coach, and a biblical counselor. He is the cofounder of Hope Initiative Consulting, LLC. and is currently attending Calvary University for his M.A. in biblical counseling. Mitchell is active in local politics in Lubbock, TX, where he lives with his wife, Katherine.

Endnotes:

[1] The deity of Christ, which allows for the Atonement to be effective, is included in the Trinity, which is why the Trinity is dubbed the distinctive doctrine.

[2] Paul Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 2014), 205.

[3] See Matt Slick, “Doctrine Table,” accessed February 15, 2021, https://carm.org/doctrine-and-theology/doctrine-table/ for a discussion on essential Christian doctrine.

[4] This is not to say that exegesis and apology are radically divorced. However, the purpose of the paper is primarily apologetic.

[5] Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1999), 58.

[6] Ibid., 58. 

[7] B.B. Warfield, “Trinity,” The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. James Orr (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1930), accessed February 15, 2021, https://bbwarfield.com/works/trinity/.

[8] Ibid. 

[9] Rodrick Durst, Reordering the Trinity: The Six Movements of God in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Kregal Academic, 2015). Due to inclement weather, the writer does not have access to Durst’s book. The writer left the book at his office to where it is unsafe to drive at the time of this writing. This is why page numbers are not included in citations.

[10] Warfield, “Trinity,” accessed February 15, 2021.

[11] Ryrie, Basic Theology, 61. Ryrie clarifies that the word “Persons” may be difficult to understand and is not to imply tri-theism. He also claims that the word “essence” may be substituted for “substance.” Additionally, in his definition given in p. 632, he substitutes “subsistence” with “experience.” See the definition of Trinity in Enns, Moody Handbook of Theology, 205.

[12] Ibid, 61.

[13] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (n.p.: Zondervan, 1994), 231.

[14] The slightly different technical definitions serve to allow the student to know the doctrine of the Trinity while still acknowledging its mystery and transcendence.

[15] The Apostle’s Creed in R. C. Sproul, The Reformation Study Bible ESV (Sanford, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2015), 2388.

[16] The Nicene Creed and The Chalcedonian Confession of the Faith in Sproul, The Reformation Study Bible ESV, 2389–2392.

 [17] The Westminster Larger Catechism in Sproul, The Reformation Study Bible ESV, 2450. The definitions of Trinity given above fall in line with the Nicene Creed, Chalcedonian Creed, and the Westminster Catechism, which demonstrates the historic orthodoxy of the Trinity from the early days of Christendom to the present, regardless of sect or domination.

[18] Enns, Moody Handbook of Theology, 206.

[19] Grudem, Systematic Theology, 240, 243.

[20] Ibid., 241. Also note that tri-theism and binitarianism are less common.

[21] 2 Tim 3:16–17 ESV.

[22] Gen 1:1.

[23] The “us” in Genesis 1:26 may either be the plural of majesty or a hint of plurality in the Godhead.

[24] Deut 6:4 ESV. There are a few ways to translate this verse. However, all viable options teach the oneness and unity of God.

[25] Exod 20:1–6; Deut 5:6–10.

[26] Psalm 18:31.

[27] Psalm 18:30.

[28] Psalm 22:27.

[29] Deut 32:17; 1 Cor 10:20.

[30] John 1:1; Gen 1:1.

[31] John 1:1–2.

[32] John 10:24

[33] John 10:25

[34] Ibid.

[35] John 10:26

[36] John 10:30

[37] John 10:31

[38] This passage would also seemingly fit under a binitarian framework that denies the personality of the Holy Spirit as the Holy Spirit is not mentioned here.

[39] Ryrie, Basic Theology, 61.

[40] Ibid., 61. Greek words are gendered. A word may either be masculine, feminine, or neuter.

[41] Ibid., 61.

[42] Enns, Moody Handbook of Theology, 262. Examples include John 15:26 and 16:13–14.

[43] Ibid., 262.

[44] John 16:4–5.

[45] John 16:7, 13. 

[46] John 16:8, 13.

[47] John 16:13.

[48] John 16:14.

[49] While some may speak of forces or concepts such as weather love as acting, this is personification. For example, the forces of nature have such power that personification is an attempt to describe them. Additionally, a concept such as glory, grace, or love may be personified as an extension of a person.

[50] 1 Cor 6:19.

[51] 1 Cor 6:18

[52] Eph 4:17, 24.

[53] Eph 4:30.

[54] Matt 28:19.

[55] Durst, Reordering the Trinity.

[56] See discussion on the definition of the Trinity above.