Contents
Introduction
God in three persons
n
Trinitarian doctrine, God exists as three persons or hypostases, but is one
being, that is, has but a single divine nature. The members of the Trinity are
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.
"The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" are not three different
names for different parts of God but one name for God, because three persons
exist in God as one unity and the Father cannot be divided from the Son nor the
Holy Spirit from the Son. Each person is understood as having the identical
essence or nature, not merely similar natures. 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.
bmjmR¶ t#RNt# wYM C®s_ ìlT
MN ìlTAndÒnANmLkT¥¥ C®s_ yMlˆ šLmnሠyGRKšL SÒN TRg&mƒMaND mlת§# SL½N ¶lˆ
ÔST ngÅ{ ìlT nˆ¥¥ btlYM YU TRg&Mytseˆ laNDaM®KlÒnˆ AGZaBh_RBê nˆ¥¥
Sl C®s_ mìR ¶SflgbTM MKN¶T
yKRST³ AMnTmsrT (DOCTERINE) msrtAMnTSlÒn nˆ¥¥ YU ìl_T yKRST³ AMnTtmsrtˆ
baB ¥ bwLD ¥ A³ bmNfSQë&S ®Y nˆ¥¥ SÒnMSlaB ¥ SlwLD ¥ A³ ¥ SlmNfSQë&S
aNDnT³ Ly„nT ¥ mlת§# ²UR¶[ˆN ìwQ³ yMg²[ˆN KBR lmSeT nˆ¥¥
The Trinity
By EyasuFitamo
|
”T
|
oo many Christians,
living as functional Unitarians, fail to recognize the Trinity’s relevance to
their Christian faith and life. The Trinity doctrine is crucial because it
reveals what and Who God is (one God in three persons), and this insight allows
Christians, though in an obviously limited way, to view the inner working of
God’s nature and personhood.
Redemption,
therefore, in historic Christianity is initiated by the Father (Galatians 4:4),
accomplished through the Son (1 Peter 3:18), and is applied by the Holy Spirit
(Titus 3:5). The doctrine of the Trinity is important because there is no
salvation apart from the Triune God. And the more we reflect upon God’s Triune
nature, the more we can learn to love and appreciate God for Who and What he
truly has revealed himself to be.”( Kenneth R. Samples )
“But
when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of
truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of me.” (John
15:26)
God is a trinity of persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Spirit. The Father is not the same
person as the Son; the Son is not the same person as the Holy Spirit; and the
Holy Spirit is not the same person as Father. They are not three gods and
not three beings. They are three distinct persons; yet, they are all the
one God. Each has a will, can speak, can love, etc., and these are
demonstrations of personhood. They are in absolute perfect harmony
consisting of one substance. They are coeternal, coequal, and copowerful.
If any one of the three were removed, there would be no God.
Jesus, the Son, is one person with two natures: Divine and
Human. This is called the Hypostatic
Union. The Holy
Spirit is also divine in nature and is
self aware, the third person of the Trinity.
There is, though, an apparent separation of some functions
among the members of the Godhead. For example, the Father chooses who
will be saved (Eph. 1:4); the Son redeems them (Eph. 1:7); and the Holy Spirit seals them, (Eph. 1:13).
A further point of clarification is that God is not one
person, the Father, with Jesus as a creation and the Holy Spirit as a force (Jehovah's
Witnesses). Neither is He one person who took
three consecutive forms, i.e., the Father, became the Son, who became the Holy
Spirit. Nor is God the divine nature of the Son (where Jesus had a human
nature perceived as the Son and a divine nature perceived as the Father (Oneness
theology). Nor is the Trinity an
office held by three separate Gods (Mormonism).
The word "person" is used to describe the three
members of the Godhead because the word "person" is appropriate.
A person is self-aware, can speak, love, hate, say "you,"
"yours," "me," "mine," etc. Each of the three
persons in the Trinity demonstrates these qualities.
The chart below should help you to see how the doctrine of
the Trinity is systematically derived from Scripture. The list is not
exhaustive, only illustrative.
The
first step is to establish the biblical doctrine that there is only one God.
Then, you find that each of the persons is called God, each creates, each
was involved in Jesus' resurrection, each indwells, etc. Therefore, God
is one, but the one God is in three simultaneous persons. Please note
that the idea of a composite unity is not a foreign concept to the Bible; after
all, man and wife are said to be one flesh. The idea of a composite unity
of persons is spoken of by God in Genesis (Gen. 2:24)
Scriptures used to support the Trinity Doctrine
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of
his disciples, which are not written in this book
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus
is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life
through his name. "
So John
wrote this gospel so that we may come to the conclusion that Jesus is truly the
Christ and the Son of God. In addition to this important truth we are also
told that we may receive life through his name. The Trinity Doctrine is not the
conclusion that one should draw from this writing. Belief that Jesus is the
Christ and the Son is the foundation of true faith and Jesus built his Church on this truth.
The New
Testament actually goes much further than merely distinguishing and separating
the two; Jesus and his Father as well as Jesus and God. In John 17:3 Jesus, in prayer to his Father, refers to him as "the only true God". In John 20:17 the resurrected Jesus refers to his Father as "my Father, and your Father; and... my
God, and your God." In 1 Corinthians 8:6 the Apostle Paul says of Christians, "to us there is but one God, the Father." In 1 Timothy 2:5Paul states, "For
there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ
Jesus." In Ephesians 1:17 Paul refers to the Father as "the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory."
And in Revelation 3:12 the resurrected and glorified Jesus says, "Him that over cometh will I make a
pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write
upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new
Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon
him my new name."
34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law,
I have said you are gods" (theos).
35 If he called them gods (theos), to whom the word of God (ho theos) came, and the Scripture cannot be broken,
35 If he called them gods (theos), to whom the word of God (ho theos) came, and the Scripture cannot be broken,
Through these he has given us his very great and precious
promises, so that through them you may
participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world
caused by evil desires.
Also Jesus
said that he was one with his Father and he also prayed that we would be one
with them.
That all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me
and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you
have sent me.
Jesus
Christ is the Word of God, Jesus wasn't created, rather the Word was born from
God in eternity and that is why Jesus is called the Only Begotten of the
Father. (John 1:14) (John 1:18) (John 3:16 ) (John 3:18 ) (1 John 4:9). The word begotten means (only child, single of its kind).
Notice that our spirits are born from God, but through his Word, and our
spirits will go back to God who gave it (Ecclesiastes 12:7). But Jesus was not begotten through the Word because he is
the Word, this is why Jesus is unique because he is the only one begotten of
the Father and therefore he is the image of his Father. That is why he is
called the Image of God and the Firstborn of all creation (Colossians 1:15) and it is also why the Bible says in Hebrews
1:5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my
Son; today I have become your Father" Or again, "I will be his
Father, and he will be my Son" Unlike his Father who is the
invisible Spirit, Jesus does have a body and is visible. Jesus was born from
God. But we must remember that although his Father is greater than himself, he
is also not a created being like us. Rather he is the Word and he resides
between God and Man and is our mediator to God. It was the Word that became
flesh, not God who became flesh as some say and all things that were created
were created by God though his Word.
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was
made that has been made. This verse proves that Jesus was begotten not created
and again, this is why he is called Gods only begotten Son and this
is why he is unique. He is seated at the right hand of God and situated between
God & Man. This is also why he is the only mediator between God & Man
and the only name under heaven whereby Man can be saved. God made creation
through him and for him and God redeemed creation through him. God cannot
fellowship with sin that is why he sent his Son into the world, so he could
bring us back to himself through his mediator. So Jesus came from God and
he was in the beginning with God.
It must
also be pointed out that the word beginning doesn't mean that the Word has
always existed with God as some say. The Greek word for beginning, in
John
1:1 "In the beginning was
The
Word" is "arche" and this word means the following:
1)
Beginning, origin
2) The
person or thing that commences the first person or thing in a series, the
leader
3) That by
which anything begins to be, the origin, the active cause
4) The
extremity of a thing of the corners of a sail
5) The
first place, principality, rule, magistracy of angels and demons
Below I
will show you a verse where the word "beginning"
or "arche" is also mentioned and I think you will
agree that it is rather obvious from this verse that it does not mean
eternity or eternal.
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry
out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him
There is only one God
The first step is to establish how many Gods exist: one! Isaiah
43:10; 44:6,8; 45:5,14,18,21,22;46:9; 47:8; John
17:3; 1
Cor. 8:5-6; Gal.
4:8-9
- "I am the LORD, and there is no other; besides Me there is no God," (Isaiah 45:5).
- “Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me," (Isaiah 44:6).
|
|
||||||||
|
|
FATHER
|
SON
|
HOLY SPIRIT
|
|||||
|
Called God
|
||||||||
|
Creator
|
||||||||
|
Resurrects
|
||||||||
|
Indwells
|
||||||||
|
Everywhere
|
||||||||
|
All knowing
|
||||||||
|
Sanctifies
|
||||||||
|
Life giver
|
||||||||
|
Fellowship
|
||||||||
|
Eternal
|
||||||||
|
A Will
|
||||||||
|
Speaks
|
||||||||
|
Love
|
||||||||
|
Searches
the heart |
||||||||
|
We belong to
|
. . .
|
|||||||
|
Savior
|
. . .
|
|||||||
|
We serve
|
. . .
|
|||||||
|
Believe in
|
. . .
|
|||||||
|
Gives joy
|
. . .
|
|||||||
|
Judges
|
. . .
|
|||||||
Therefore, the doctrine of the
Trinity is arrived at by looking at the whole of scripture, not in a single
verse. It is the doctrine that there is only one God, not three, and that
the one God exists in three persons: Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. An
analogy would be time. Time is past, present, and future. But,
there are not three times, only one.
The dogma of the Trinity
|
T
|
he
Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of
the Christian
religion the truth
that in the unity of the Godhead
there are Three Persons,
the Father, the Son,
and the Holy
Spirit, these Three Persons
being truly distinct one from another.
Thus,
in the words of the Athanasian
Creed: "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the
Holy Spirit
is God, and yet
there are not three Gods
but one God."
In this Trinity of Persons
the Son
is begotten of the Father by an eternal
generation, and the Holy
Spirit proceeds by an eternal
procession from the Father and the Son. Yet,
notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the Persons are
co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent.
This, the Church
teaches, is the revelation
regarding God's
nature which Jesus
Christ, the Son
of God, came upon earth to deliver to the world: and which she
proposes to man
as the foundation of her whole dogmatic
system.
In
Scripture
there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are
denoted together. The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a
translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch
about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the
Father], His Word
and His Wisdom (To Autolycus II.15). The
term may, of course, have been in use before his time.
Afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian (On
Pudicity 21).
There
is therefore nothing created,
nothing subject to another in the Trinity: nor is there anything that has been
added as though it once had not existed, but had entered afterwards: therefore
the Father has never been without the Son, nor the
Son without
the Spirit:
and this same Trinity is immutable and unalterable forever.
Proof of doctrine from Scripture
New Testament
Lord Jesus
The
evidence from the Gospels
culminates in the baptismal
commission of Matthew
28:20. It is manifest from the narratives of the Evangelists
that Christ
only made the great truthknown to the
Twelve step
by step.
First
He taught them to recognize in Himself the Eternal Son of God.
When His ministry was drawing to a close, He promised that the Father would
send another Divine Person,
the Holy
Spirit, in His place. Finally after His resurrection,
He revealed the doctrine
in explicit terms, bidding them "go and teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy
Ghost" (Matthew 28:18). The force of this passage is
decisive. That "the Father" and "the Son"
are distinct Persons
follows from the terms themselves, which are mutually exclusive. The mention of
the Holy
Spirit in the same series, the names being connected one with the
other by the conjunctions "and . . . and" is evidence that we have
here a Third Person
co-ordinate with the Father and the Son, and
excludes altogether the supposition that the Apostles
understood the Holy
Spirit not as a distinct Person, but
as God viewed
in His action on creatures.
The
phrase "in the name" (eis to onoma) affirms alike the Godhead of
the Persons
and their unity of nature.
Among the Jews
and in the Apostolic
Church the Divine name was representative of God. He who
had a right
to use it was invested with vast authority: for he wielded the supernatural
powers of Him whose name he employed. It is incredible that the phrase "in
the name" should be here employed, were not all the Persons
mentioned equally Divine. Moreover, the use of the singular, "name,"
and not the plural, shows that these Three Persons are
that One
Omnipotent God in whom the Apostlesbelieved.
Indeed the unity of God
is so fundamental a tenet alike of the Hebrew and
of the Christian
religion, and is affirmed in such countless passages of the Old and New Testaments,
that any explanation inconsistent with this doctrine
would be altogether inadmissible.
The
supernatural
appearance at the baptism
of Christ is
often cited as an explicit revelation
of Trinitarian doctrine,
given at the very commencement of the Ministry. This, it seems to us, is a
mistake. The Evangelists,
it is true,
see in it a manifestation of the Three Divine Persons.
Yet, apart from Christ's
subsequent teaching, the dogmatic
meaning of the scene would hardly have been understood. Moreover, the Gospel
narratives appear to signify that none but Christ and
the Baptist were privileged to see the Mystic Dove,
and hear the words attesting the Divine son ship of the Messiahs.
Besides
these passages there are many others in the Gospels
which refer to one or other of the Three Persons in
particular and clearly express the separate personality
and Divinity of each. In regard to the First Person it
will not be necessary
to give special citations: those which declare that Jesus Christ
is God the Son,
affirm
thereby also the separate personality
of the Father. The Divinity of Christ is
amply attested not merely by St. John, but by the Synoptists.
As this point is treated elsewhere, it will be sufficient here to enumerate a
few of the more important messages
·
He
declares that He will come to be the judge of all menMatthew 25:31(ysˆ LJ bKBÝ bMm½bT Gz_
kARs&M ¬R Që&±Nm®AKt>uƒlƒbZ¶Ng^z_ bKBÝ z&¨N Yqm½L፡፡).In Jewishtheology the judgment of
the world was a distinctively divine, and not a Messianic, prerogative.
·
In
the parable of the wicked
husbandmen, He describes Himself as the son of the householder, while the Prophets, one and all,
are represented as the servants (Matthew 21:33).
·
He
is the Lord of Angels, who execute
His command Matthew 24:31
(m®AKt>NM kª®Q mlkT DMN: ¬R YL·[§L ksì¶TMlARs&ytmre&TN
YsbsS²lƒ¥¥bl_® an¬gRym®KT g_ª nˆ Ans&MYªzz&lªL).
·
He
approves the confession of Peter when he recognizes Him, not as Messiasa
step long since taken by all the Apostlesbut
explicitly as the Son of God: and He declares the knowledge
due to a special revelation from the Father.
(Matthew 16:16-17SÀÁN
/_EÅSM aNt KRSÄS yH¶ˆ yAGZaBh_R LJ nU al¥¥ a^ys&SMmLÎ ANDU alˆ ydz LJ SÀŠN
ÒY bsì¶T ¶lˆ a²t† ANé@ C¬³ dM YUN aLgleUM³ B;&O nU¥¥)
·
Finally,
before Caiaphas He not merely
declares Himself to be the Messiahs, but in reply
to a second and distinct question affirms His claim to be the Son of God. He is
instantly declared by the high priest to be guilty of
blasphemy, an offense
which could not have been attached to the claim to be simply the Messiahs(Luke 22:66-71).bn¬Mg^z_ yHZb& }ìGl¿{³
y·U³T alÖ{ ©Â{M tsBSbˆ wd ]NÆa[†ˆ wsë&T³ KRSÄS aNtnUNNgrNalƒT ARs& GN
ANDU a®[ˆ BnG™{uƒaªMn&MBeYQMaTmLs&LIMaTft>IMM¥¥ ngR GN kauƒNjMÅysˆ
LJ bAGZaBh_RuYLqI Yqm½L¥¥ uƒ®[ˆM ANGD¶S aNt yAGZaB¾…R LJ nUNalƒTARs&M An…
ANdÒNuƒ A³Nt T®®{uƒ a®[ˆ¥¥
St. John's testimony is yet more explicit than that of the Synoptists.
He expressly asserts that the very purpose of his Gospel is to establish the
Divinity of Jesus
Christ(John 20:31). In the prologue he identifies Him
with the Word,
the only-begotten of the Father, Who from all eternity
exists with God,
Who is God
(John
1:1-18). The immanence
of the Son
in the Father and of the Father in the Son is
declared in Christ's
words to St. Philip: "Do you not believe,
that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" (John14:10), and in
other passages no less explicit (John14:7; 16:15; 17:21). The oneness of Their
power and Their action is affirmed: "Whatever he [the Father] does, the Son also
does in like manner" (John 5:19, &10:38); and to the
Son no less
than to the Father belongs the Divine attribute
of conferring life
on whom He will (John5:21).
In John10:29, Christ
expressly teaches His unity
of essence with the Father: "That which my Father hath given
me, is greater than all . . . I and the Father are one." The words,
"That which my Father hath given me," can, having regard to the
context, have no other meaning than the Divine Name, possessed in its fullness
by the Son
as by the Father.
Rationalist
critics lay great stress upon the text: "The Father is greater than
I" (John14:28).
They argue that this suffices to establish that the author of the Gospel held subordinationist
views, and they expound in this sense certain texts in which the Son declares
His dependence on the Father (John5:19; 8:28). In
point of fact the doctrine
of the Incarnation
involves that, in regard of His Human Nature, the Son should
be less than the Father. No argument against Catholic doctrine
can, therefore, be drawn from this text. So too, the passages referring to the
dependence of the Son
upon the Father do but express what is essential to Trinitarian dogma,
namely, that the Father is the supreme source from Whom the Divine Nature and
perfections flow to the Son.
Holly sprit
|
I
|
n
regard to the Third
Person of the Blessed Trinity, the passages which can be cited from
the Synoptists
as attesting His distinct personality
are few. The words of Gabriel(Luke 1:35),
having regard to the use of the term, "the Spirit," in the Old Testament,
to signify God
as operative in His creatures, can hardly be said to contain a definite revelation
of the doctrine.
For the same reason it is dubious whether Christ's
warning to the Pharisees
as regards blasphemy
against the Holy
Spirit (Matthew
12:31) can be brought forward as proof. But
inLuke
12:12, "The Holy
Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what you must say" (Matthew 10:20, and Luke 24:49), His personality
is clearly implied. These passages, taken in connection with Matthew 28:19,
postulate the existence
of such teaching as we find in the discourses in the Cenacle reported by St.
John (14,
15, 16). We have
in these chapters the necessary
preparation for the baptismal
commission. In them the Apostles
are instructed not only as the personality
of the Spirit,
but as to His office towards the Church. His
work is to teach whatsoever He shall hear (16:13) to
bring back their minds
the teaching of Christ
(14:26),
to convince the world of sin
(16:8).
It is evident that, were the Spirit not a
Person, Christ could
not have spoken of His presence with the Apostles as
comparable to His own presence with them (14:16).
Again, were He not a Divine Person
it could not have been expedient for the Apostles
that Christ
should leave them, and the Paraclete
take His place (16:7).
Moreover, notwithstanding the neuter form of the word (pneuma),
the pronoun used in His regard is the masculine ekeinos. The distinction of the Holy Spirit
from the Father and from the Son is
involved in the express statements that He proceeds from the Father and is sent
by the Son
(15:26;14:16, 14:26).
Nevertheless, He is one with Them: His presence with the Disciples is at the
same time the presence of the Son (14:17-18),
while the presence of the Son
is the presence of the Father (14:23).
In
the remaining New
Testament writings numerous passages attest how clear and definite
was the belief
of the Apostolic
Church in the three Divine Persons. In
certain texts the coordination of Father, Son, and Spirit
leaves no possible doubt
as to the meaning of the writer. Thus in 2 Corinthians 13:13,
St. Paul
writes: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ,
and the charity of God,
and the communication of the Holy Ghostbe
with you all." Here the construction shows that the Apostle is
speaking of three distinct Persons.
Moreover, since the names God and Holy
Ghost are alike Divine names, it follows that Jesus Christ
is also regarded as a Divine Person. So
also, in 1
Corinthians 12:4-11: "There are diversities of graces, but
the same Spirit;
and there are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord: and there are
diversities of operations, but the same God, who
worketh all [of them] in all [persons]."
(alsoEphesians 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2-3)
But
apart from passages such as these, where there is express mention of the Three Persons, the
teaching of the New
Testament regarding Christ and the
Holy Spirit
is free from all ambiguity. In regard to Christ, the Apostles
employ modes of speech which, to men brought up in the Hebrew faith,
necessarily signified belief
in His Divinity. Such, for instance, is the use of the Doxology in
reference to Him. The Doxology,
"To Him be glory
for ever and ever" (1 Chronicles 16:38; 29:11; Psalm 103:31; 28:2),
is an expression of praise offered to God alone.
In the New
Testament we find it addressed not alone to God the Father,
but to Jesus
Christ (2
Timothy 4:18; 2 Peter 3:18; Revelation 1:6; Hebrews 13:20-21), and to God the
Father and Christ
in conjunction (Revelations
5:13, 7:10).
The
doctrine as
to the Holy
Spirit is equally clear. That His distinct personality was fully
recognized is shown by many passages. Thus He reveals His commands to the Church'sministers:
"As they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the
Holy Ghost
said to them: Separate me Saul
and Barnabas . . ." (Acts 13:2). He directs the missionary journey of
the Apostles:
"They attempted to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus suffered them
not" (Acts 16:7; Acts 5:3; 15:28; Romans 15:30).Divine attributes
are affirmed of Him.
·
He
possesses omniscience and reveals to the Churchmysteriesknown only to God (1 Corinthians 2:10);
·
He
dwells in the Church and in the souls of individual men, as in His
temple (Romans 8:9-11; 1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19).
·
The
work of justification and
sanctification is attributed to Him (1 Corinthians 6:11; Romans 15:16), just as in other passages the same
operations are attributed to Christ (1 Corinthians 1:2; Galatians 2:17).
Holly father
Not
less convincing is the use of the title Lord (Kyrios). This term represents the HebrewAdonai, just as God
(Theos) represents Elohim. The
two are equally Divine names (1 Corinthians 8:4).
In the Apostolic
writings Theos
may almost be said to be treated as a proper name of God the Father,
and Kyrios
of the Son
(see, for example, 1
Corinthians 12:5-6); in only a few passages do we find Kyrios
used of the Father (1
Corinthians 3:5; 7:17) or Theosof Christ. The Apostles
from time to time apply to Christ
passages of the Old
Testament in which Kyrios is used, for example, (1 Corinthians 10:9 (Numbers 21:7), Hebrews 1:10-12 (Psalm 101:26-28); and they use such expressions as
"the fear of the Lord" (Acts 9:31; 2 Corinthians 5:11; Ephesians 5:21),
"call upon the name of the Lord," indifferently of God the Father
and of Christ
(Acts
2:21; 9:14; Romans 10:13).
The profession that "Jesus
is the Lord" (KyrionIesoun,
Romans
10:9; KyriosIesous,1 Corinthians 12:3) is the acknowledgment of Jesus as Yahweh.
The texts in which St.
Paul affirms that in Christ
dwells the plenitude of the Godhead(Colossians 2:9),
that before His Incarnation
He possessed the essential
nature of God(Philippians 2:6), that He "is over all things, Godblessedfor
ever" (Romans 9:5) tell us nothing that is not implied
in many other passages of his Epistles.
|
zFErT 1¥1-3
Ø AGZaBh_R sìYN³ MDRN fer
Ø
šLt³gr šLMAys&SKRsÄSÒnyÇh 1¥1
Ø mNfSQë&S bˆ¾ˆ ®Y
sÂnbr¥¥
lƒšS 4¥18
Ø AGZaBh_RaB ®kˆ
Ø
mNFSQë&SdGÀ q²ˆ
Ø tL× ym½ˆ Ays&S KRSÄS
wLD nˆ¥¥
OB
9¥14AGZaBh_RNLªmLk&kÀtUL³{uƒL¶n©
Ø bz®lMbmNfSQë&S
Ø lAGZaBh_R ¶qrb
Ø Ays&S KRSÄS nˆ¥¥
a_f 2¥18
Ø uƒ®{N bARs& C™
bAys&S KRSÄS C™
Ø band mNfSbmNfSQë&S
Ø wdaB mG²T alN³¥¥
|
2
ÖÅ 13¥14
Ø yAGZaBh_R FQR
Ø
ymNfSQë&SUBrT
Ø yaySs KRSÄS ;¬¥¥
ÇhNS w. 3¥5
Ø ays&S KRSÄS t³gr
Ø
sˆ kˆ¾³ kmNfSQë&S
·LtwldbStqr
Ø wdAGZBh_RmNGST Lg² aY{LM
al¥¥
Åì… 8¥9 - 11
Ø Ays&S KRSÄSN kmƒªN
¶Sn±ˆ
Ø
yARs&yAGZaBh_RaBmNfS
Ø mNfSmNfSQë&S¥¥
h§. C. 5¥3 - 9
Ø mNfSQë&SN ªªLL zND
Ø
AGZaBh_RNANé@ sˆNaL§vUM
Yg_ªNmNfSTfTn&zND
¥ yAys&SNmNfS
|
To sum up: the various
elements of the Trinitarian doctrine are all
expressly taught in the New Testament. The Divinity
of the Three Persons is asserted or
implied in passages too numerous to count. The unity of essence is not merely
postulated by he strict monotheism of men nurtured
in the religion of
Israel,
to whom "subordinate deities" would have been unthinkable; but it is,
as we have seen, involved in the baptismal commission of Matthew 28:19, and, in regard to the Father and the Son, expressly asserted in John 10:38.That the Persons are co-eternal
and coequal is a mere corollary from this. In regard to the Divine processions,
the doctrine of the first
procession is contained in the very terms Father and Son: the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father
and Son is taught in
the discourse of the Lord reported by St. John
(14-17)
Old Testament
Holly father
|
T
|
he
early Fathers were persuaded that indications of the doctrine of
the Trinity must exist in the Old Testament
and they found such indications in not a few passages. Many of them not merely believed
that the Prophets
had testified of it, they held that it had been made known even
to the Patriarchs.
They regarded it as certain
that the Divine messenger of Genesis 16:7, 16:18, 21:17, 31:11; Exodus 3:2,
was God
the Son; for reasons to be mentioned below, they considered it
evident that God the Father could not have thus manifested Himself. They held
that, when the inspired
writers speak of "the Spirit of the Lord", the reference was to the
Third Person of the Trinity; and one or two interpret the hypostatic Wisdom of
the Sapiential books, not, with St. Paul, of
the Son(Hebrews 1:3;), but of the Holy Spirit.
But in others of the Fathers is found what would appear to be the sounder view,
that no distinct intimation of the doctrine was
given under the Old Covenant. Some of these, however, admitted that a knowledge of
the mystery
was granted to the Prophets
and saints
of the Old
Dispensation. It may be readily conceded that the way is prepared
for the revelation
in some of the prophecies.
The names Emmanuel
(Isaiah
7:14) and God the Mighty(Isaiah 9:6)
affirmed of the Messias
make mention of the DivineNature of
the promised deliverer. Yet it seems that the Gospel revelation
was needed to render the full meaning of the passages clear. Even these exalted
titles did not lead the Jews
to recognize that the Saviour
to come was to be none other than God Himself.
The Septuagint
translators do not even venture to render the words God the Mighty literally,
but give us, in their place, "the angel of
great counsel."
A
still higher stage of preparation is found in the doctrine of
the Sapiential books regarding the Divine Wisdom. In Proverbs 8,
Wisdom appears personified, and in a manner which suggests that the sacred
author was not employing a mere metaphor, but had before his mind a real person (verses 22, 23).
Similar teaching occurs in Ecclesiasticus
24, in a discourse which Wisdom is declared to utter in "the
assembly of the Most High", i.e. in the presence of the angels. This
phrase certainly supposes Wisdom to be conceived as person. The nature of
the personality
is left obscure; but we are told that the whole earth is Wisdom's Kingdom, that
she finds her delight in all the works of God, but
that Israel
is in a special manner her portion and her inheritance (Ecclesiasticus 24:8-13).
In
the Book of the Wisdom of
Solomon we find a still further advance. Here Wisdom is clearly
distinguished from Jehovah:
"She is . . . a certain pure emanation of the glory of the
almighty God.
. .the brightness of eternal
light, and the unspotted mirror of God's
majesty, and the image of his goodness".(Hebrews 1:3).
She is, moreover, described as "the worker of all things" an
expression indicating that the creation is
in some manner attributable to her. Yet in later Judaism this
exalted doctrine
suffered eclipse, and seems to have passed into oblivion. Nor indeed can it be
said that the passage, even though it manifests some knowledge of
a second personality
in the Godhead,
constitutes a revelation
of the Trinity. For nowhere in the Old Testament
do we find any clear indication of a Third Person.
Mention is often made of the Spirit of the Lord,
but there is nothing to show that the Spirit was
viewed as distinct from Jahweh Himself. The term is always employed to signify God
considered in His working, whether in the universe or
in the soul
of man. The
matter seems to be correctly summed up by Epiphanius, when he says:
"The One Godhead
is above all declared by Moses,
and the twofold personality
(of Father and Son)
is strenuously asserted by the Prophets.
The Trinity is made known
by the Gospel.
(1) Baptismal formulas
We
may notice first the baptismal
formula, which all acknowledge to be primitive. It has already been shown that
the words as prescribed by Christ
(Matthew
28:19) clearly express the Godhead of
the Three Persons
as well as their distinction, but another consideration may here be added. Baptism,
with its formal renunciation of Satan and
his works, was understood to be the rejection of the idolatry of paganism and
the solemnconsecration
of the baptized
to the one
true God. The act of consecration
was the invocation over them of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
The supposition that they regarded the Second and Third Persons as created
beings, and were in fact consecrating themselves to the service of creatures,
is manifestly absurd. St.
Hippolytus has expressed the faith of the
Church in
the clearest terms: "He who descends into this laver of regeneration
with faith
forsakes the Evil
One and engages himself to Christ,
renounces the enemy and confesses that Christ is God . . . he
returns from the font a son
of God and a coheir of Christ. To
Whom with the all holy,
the good
and life-givingSpiritbeglory now and
always, forever and ever. Amen".
(2) The doxologies
The
witness of
the doxologies
is no less striking. The form now universal, "Glory be to
the Father, and to the Son,
and to the Holy
Ghost," so clearly expresses the Trinitarian dogma that
the Arians
found it necessary
to deny that it had been in use previous to the time of
Flavian of Antioch.
It
is true that up
to the period of the Arian
controversy another form, "Glory to the
Father, through the Son,
in the Holy
Spirit," had been more common. This latter form is indeed
perfectly consistent with Trinitarian belief: it,
however, expresses not the coequality of the Three Persons, but
their operation in regard to man. We live
in the Spirit,
and through Him we are made partakers in Christ (Galatians 5:25; Romans 8:9);
and it is through Christ,
as His members, that we are worthy to offer praise to God(Hebrews 13:15).
Trinity & Baptism
In What Name(s) Should We Baptize?
There is
some unfortunate disagreement among Christians today as to whether people
should be baptized in the name of Jesus only or in the name of the Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost. We believe the scriptures teach the latter, and hope to defend
this conclusion in what follows.
The Lord
Jesus gave a detailed specification of baptism with the following words:
Go ye therefore, and teach all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded
you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.– Matt 28:19,20
This
command is very easy to understand. It clearly states we should baptize in the
name of all persons in the Godhead. But some will claim we should baptize only
in the name of the Jesus because certain baptisms described in Acts mention
only His name (2:38, 8:36, 10:48, 19:5). We believe this conclusion proves
invalid on several points:
1) It is
commonly understood that when a command is stated twice, with one statement
being specific and the other being general, the general command is to be
interpreted in light of the specific one. For example, suppose a father were to
instruct his son to go to the store and buy a gallon of paint and a brush.
Suppose the son were to procrastinate so that the father had to command him a
second time, but suppose with the second command the father were to say,
"Go to the store and buy the paint." Even though the father did not
specify purchasing a brush in the second command, we all understand that the
general statement is to be interpreted in light of the earlier specific one.
Accordingly, we should understand that the general statements in Acts are to be
interpreted in light of the specific statement in Matt 28:19,20.
2) Since
many of the persons baptized in Acts had been either Jews or Proselytes, they
had long before acknowledged the Divine Trinity. This being the case, it would
be natural for the scriptural writer to emphasize that aspect of their baptism
which denoted the point upon which they had recently been converted; namely,
the fact that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God. Therefore, even if these
converts had been baptized in all three names, it would be natural for the
scriptural writer to characterize the event as baptism in the name of Jesus.
3) But
even had they been baptized expressly in the name of Jesus only, the name of
the Father and Holy Ghost would have definitely been implied, as is shown by
the following scriptures:
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same
hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. - 1Jo 2:23
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth
not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of
Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. - 2Jo 9
Wherefore I give you to understand,
that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no
man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. - 1Cor 12:3
But to
baptize in the name of Jesus with the name of the Father and Holy Ghost being
implied is a very different thing from baptizing in the name of Jesus with the
premeditated and deliberate omission of the Father and Holy Ghost.
Ø And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to
the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. - Rom 1:4
Ø But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead
dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your
mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. - Rom 8:11
Therefore,
when we perform this ordinance, we should give honor to all persons in the
Trinity even as Jesus commanded. We should baptize in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
Should
We Baptize Only in Jesus' Name?
"Go ye therefore, and teach all
nations,
baptizing them in the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
—The Lord Jesus Christ
Matthew 28:19
baptizing them in the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
—The Lord Jesus Christ
Matthew 28:19
There
is a group of people who call themselves "Jesus Only" who say that it
is wrong to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Ghost. They say that the only correct baptism is to baptize in Jesus' name
ALONE--not the Father and the Holy Ghost. Please look at Matthew 28:19 one more
time and see how JESUS said to baptize.
Ummm...
how can anybody that professes to be a Christian, a follower of Jesus Christ,
say that it is wicked evil to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son
and of the Holy Ghost? Ain't that what Jesus just said to do?
I've
heard from more than one of these Jesus Only people trying to peddle their
error here. "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one
of you IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST for the remission of sins, and ye shall
receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." Acts 2:38
This
is probably their main proof text. But they do err not knowing the scriptures.
Since they vehemently reject Jesus' words in Matthew 28:19 they don't
even think about looking for the real meaning of Acts 2:38. Jesus gave
very explicit instructions on how to baptize in Matthew 28:19 but that
ain't good enough for these people. They have to come up with "some new
thing" in order to draw converts. But why did Peter tell those people to
be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in Acts 2:38? Let's head off to the
scriptures for our answer.
Peter was making distinction
A distinction between what and
what?A distinction between the baptism of John and the baptism of Jesus Christ!
How do I know? The scriptures say so unequivocally! Look at this scripture in Acts
19
19:2 He said unto them, Have ye
received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not
so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
19:3 And he said unto them, Unto
what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto JOHN'S BAPTISM.
19:4 Then said Paul, John verily
baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they
should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
19:5 When they heard this, they
were baptized IN THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS.
This
scripture makes it very plain that the baptism of John and the baptism of Jesus
were two separate baptisms. The people had received John's baptism (v.
3). Their knowledge was not complete. John only told the people to
believe on the one who would come after him. These people didn't know Jesus
yet. Therefore Paul preached Jesus to them, the one of whom John spoke. After
they heard this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus (v.
4-5). Knowing the ministry of John the Baptist was not complete
knowledge. We see the same thing with Apollos. Apollos only knew John's baptism
so that's what he preached. When Aquila and Priscilla heard him preaching
John's baptism, they pulled him to the side and told him about Jesus.
Acts
18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and
mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
18:25
This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the
spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
18:26
And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquilla and Priscilla
had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more
perfectly.
18:27
And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the
disciples to receive him: who, when he was come, helped them much which had
believed through grace:
18:28
For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, showing by the
scriptures that Jesus was Christ.
So what was peter talking about in acts 2:38
In
Acts
2:38 Peter was making the distinction between the baptism of Jesus
versus the baptism of John. He was not giving the mode of baptism.
One additional note:-In the book
of Acts a transition was taking place. You still had folks who only knew about
John the Baptist, a righteous man and forerunner of Jesus Christ. These people
had only been baptized with the baptism of John. They were ignorant of Jesus'
ministry but in the book of Acts while the gospel was going out in Jerusalem,
Judea and Samaria, these people were witnessed to and believed on the Lord
Jesus. They therefore had to be baptized in Jesus' name. The Jesus Only people
don't understand this. They take one scripture and say it deletes Matthew
28:19 when in actuality it does no such thing. It only confirms that
Jesus was greater than John and that we are to "hear ye Him".
If
you will simply believe what the Scriptures say, then the Holy Ghost will open
up your understanding so that you can see how they all fit together. Don't ever
let a man take away the scriptures from you or tell you they don't mean what
they say. People say "Matthew is only for the Jews" but that is a
story for another day. Suffice it to say, I won't let anyone take away the
scriptures from me.
...I
do send thee unto them; and thou shalt say unto them, Thussaith the Lord GOD.
And thou, son of man, be not afraid of them, neither be afraid of their words,
though briers and thorns be with thee, and thou dost dwell among scorpions: be
not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, though they be a
rebellious house. Ezekiel 2:4, 6(4
ህZb#M XL,¾Â ;NgtdNÄÂnW¿ Xn@
wdXnRs# XLK¦lh#¿ xNtM ‘g@¬ XGz!xB/@R XNÄ!H Y§L b§cWÝÝXnRs# ;m]¾ b@TSlçn#¿ b!sÑMÆYsÑMbmµk§cWnb!YXNdnbRÃW”l#ÝÝxNtysW
LJ çY¿ XnRs#NwYM ”§cWNxTF‰¿ kºRNCTÂXë<bz#¶ÃH b!ñ„M½
bg!NõCmµkLBTqm_MxTF‰ÝÝXnRs# ;m]¾ b@T b!çn#M½ xNtb¸l#HngRxTF‰¿ XnRs#MxÃSdNG-#H፡፡
Later controversy
Notwithstanding
the force of the arguments we have just summarised, a vigorous controversy has
been carried on from the end of the seventeenth century to the present day
regarding the Trinitarian doctrine
of the ante-Nicene Fathers. The Socinian
writers of the seventeenth century (e.g. Sand, "Nucleus historiae
ecclesiastic", Amsterdam, 1668) asserted that the language of the early
Fathers in many passages of their works shows that they agreed not with Athanasius,
but with Arius.
Petavius,
who was at that period engaged on his great theological
work, was convinced by their arguments, and allowed that at least some of these
Fathers had fallen into grave errors. On
the other hand, their orthodoxy
was vigorously defended by the Anglican
divine Dr. George Bull ("DefensioFideiNicaean", Oxford, 1685) and
subsequently by Bossuet,
Thomassinus,
and other Catholictheologians.
Those who take the less favorable view assert that they teach the following
points inconsistent with the post-Nicene belief of
the Church:
·
that
the Son alone appeared
in the theophanies of the Old Testament, inasmuchas the
Father is essentially invisible, the Son, however, not so;
We shall examine these four points
in order.
1.
In regard to these passages it must be borne in
mind that there are two ways of considering the Trinity. We may view the Three Persons insofar as they
are equally possessed of the Divine Nature or we may consider
the Son
and the Spirit
as deriving from the Father, Who is the sole source of Godhead, and from Whom
They receive all They have and are. The former mode of considering them has
been the more common since the Arian heresy. The latter,
however, was more frequent previously to that period. Under this aspect, the
Father, as being the sole source of all, may be termed greater than the Son.
2.
Revelation
teaches us that in the work of the creation and
redemption
of the world the Father affects His purpose through the Son. Through
Him He made
the world; through Him He redeemed
it; through Him He will judge it. Hence it was believed by
these writers that, having regard to the present disposition of Providence, the
theophanies could only have been the work of the Son.
Moreover, in Colossians
1:15, the Son
is expressly termed "the image of the invisible God" (eikontouTheourouaoratou).
This expression they seem to have taken with strict literalness. The function
of an eikon
is to manifest what is itself hidden (cf. St. John Damascene,
"De imagin.", III, n. 17). Hence they held that the work of revealing
the Father belongs by nature
to the Second Person of the Trinity, and concluded that the theophanies were
His work.
3. Yet
the meaning of these authors is clear. In Colossians 1:16,ARs&MyìYªYaM®KM±l_ nˆ yMªy„T³
yìYªy„TMz&¨³T b^Òn&wYMg_TnTwYMalq#nTwYM SL½³T bsìY³ bMDR
¶lƒTuƒlƒbRs& tfEr§L³ kFErTuƒlƒbFTbk&R nˆ¥ St. Paul
says that all things were created
in the Son.
This was understood to signify that creation
took place according to exemplar ideas
predetermined by God
and existing in the Word.
In view of this, it might be said that the Father created
the Word,
this term being used in place of the more accurate generated, inasmuch as the
exemplar ideas
of creation
were communicated by the Father to the Son. Or,
again, the actual Creation
of the world might be termed the creation of
the Word,
since it takes place according to the ideas which
exist in the Word.
The context invariably shows that the passage is to be understood in one or
another of these senses.
The expression is
undoubtedly very harsh, and it certainly would never have been employed but for
the verse, Proverbs
8:22, which is rendered in the Septuagint
and the old Latin
versions, "The Lordcreated (ektise) me,
who am the beginning of His ways." As the passage was understood as having
reference to the Son,
it gave rise to the question how it could be said that Wisdom was created. It
is further to be remembered that accurate terminology in regard to the
relations between the Three Persons
was the fruit of the controversies which sprang up in the fourth century. The
writers of an earlier period were not concerned with Arianism,
and employed expressions which in the light of subsequent errors are
seen to be not merely inaccurate, but dangerous.
4. This
temporal
generation they conceived to be none other than the act of creation.
They viewed this as the complement of the eternal
generation, inasmuch as it is the external manifestation of those creative ideas which
from all eternity
the Father has communicated to the Eternal Word.
Since, in the very same works which contain these perplexing expressions, other
passages are found teaching explicitly the eternity of
the Son,
it appears most natural to interpret them in this sense.
It
should further be remembered
that throughout this period theologians,
when treating of the relation of the Divine Persons to
each other, invariably regard them in connection with the cosmogony.
Only later, in the Nicene epoch, did they learn to prescient from the question
of creation and
deal with the threefold Personality
exclusively from the point of view of the Divine life of the Godhead.
When that stage was reached expressions such as these became impossible.
Divine mission
It has been seen
that every action of God
in regard of the created
world proceeds from the Three Persons
indifferently. In what sense, then, are we to understand such texts as "God sent . .
. his Son
into the world" (John
3:17), and "the Paraclete
cometh, whom I will send you from the Father" (John 15:26)?
What is meant by the mission of the Son and of
the Holy
Spirit? To this it is answered that mission supposes two conditions:
The procession,
however, may take place in various ways by command, or counsel, or even
origination. Thus we say that a king sends a messenger, and that a tree sends
forth buds. The second condition, too, is
satisfied either if the person sent comes to be somewhere where
previously he was not, or if, although he was already there, he comes to be
there in a new manner. Though God the Son was already
present in the world by reason of His Godhead, His Incarnation made Him
present there in a new way. In virtue of this new presence and of His
procession from the Father, He is rightly said to have been sent into the
world. So, too, in regard to the mission of the Holy Spirit. The gift of
grace renders the Blessed Trinity present to the soul in a new manner: that is, as the
object of direct, though inchoative, knowledge and as the
object of experimental love. By reason of this new mode of
presence common to the whole Trinity, the Second and the Third Persons, inasmuch
as each receives the Divine Nature by means of a procession, may be said to
be sent into the soul.
Bible study tips
To understand the role of Holy Ghost here I have some tips that might help you to understand it
Kz^UqEÉ ¶lƒTNym:hFq#ë&S KFÉ{N
bb&DNÒnNaND ®Y aBrN A³E³
E³T
1
mNfSQë&SኃYL ±YÒN ml×T (aM®K)
mÒn&NìyT
lƒš 1¥34¤4¥14¤Çh 4¥24 ¤h§ 5¥3-4 1¼ ÖÅ 2¥10-13
¤ 3¥16-17 ¤6¥19-20
E³T
2
mNfSQë&Sy™s&ìNnT ¤ fšD ¤ AˆqTANëlˆ ìyT
lƒš. 3¥22 1¼ ÖÅ 12¥11 h§ 15¥28-29 1¼ ÖÅ
2¥10-16 a_f_ 4¥30
E³T
3
mNfSQë&S bml×T¤bKBR¤bULˆ³ kaB³ kwLD ¬R
Ak&LAndÒn&ìyT
ìt† 28¥19 2¼ ÖÅ 13¥14 Çh 14¥26¤15¥26 1¼ /_E
1¥2
E³T
4
References:
1.
Canney Encyclopedia of Religion,
2.
Catholic Encyclopedia, vol 2
3.
Dr. George Bull ,"DefensioFideiNicaean", Oxford, 1685
4.
Encyclopedia Britannia, the 11th
edition vol 3, page 365-366
7.
Hastings Encyclopedia of Religion,
Volume2
11.
Kenneth R. Samples, Why
is the Doctrine of the Trinity Important?
13.
Philostorgius, "Hist. eccl.", III, xiii,
14.
Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia, Volume 1
15.
St. John Damascene, "De imagin.", III, n. 17
17.
Tertullian, Clement's
Epistle to the Corinthians;
20.
Ì.R A]t> a²t, TMHRt† C®s_ aDS ab² 1987
