SATURDAY CONTROVERSIES: IS THE TRINITY AN ESSENTIAL OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH? - PART 1

 

The Plains of Heaven by John Martin

In introducing this series, I tried to say that I'm dealing with issues that are second and third tier issues, not those of utmost importance. But is the Trinity a first tier issue? 

One thing that made me feel good about my thinking is to hear something I had thought about in dealing with a theological issue stated by a respected theologian. In this case, I'm referring to a concept that James White, author of the excellent "The Forgotten Trinity" mentioned. This thought is represented by a triangle, but not what you think it stands for. One of the sides is labeled "Only one God." The second side is labeled "Jesus Is God." Finally, the third is "Three Persons, One God". 

Allow me to say that the Trinity is a simple concept to say but difficult to comprehend. Any attempt to illustrate it - such as H20 being ice, water, steam, or an egg being yolk, white, and shell - fails in at least one point  Does that weaken this doctrine? I. Don't. Think. So. We are talking about God. Of course, dealing with God and His nature should be expected beyond our fallible mortal paygrade. To be able to comprehend God is lowering Him to our level.

Anybody disagree that the Bible teaches Monotheism as an essential belief? If you're not a Trinitarian, let me give a fact that some are either unconsciously or consciously ignoring: All Trinitarians believe Monotheism is an essential belief. Trinitarians do not believe in three Gods, but one God in three persons. Any other "god" deserves the quotation marks. 

Most Trinity deniers have one target they attack - the Deity of Christ. Some say He was just a man, while others say He was a spiritual being such as an archangel. But the deity of Christ is not only taught throughout the New Testament (Jesus forgiving the sins of the paralytic, which only God could do in Matthew 9:1-7; saying "Before Abraham was I Am" in John 8:58; Jesus accepting worship which the disciples and angels didn't and Herod did and died as a result), but in the Old Testament there are appearances of God to Jacob, Samson's parents, and Gideon; since no one saw God (John 1:18) and God is Spirit, it is logical that these were pre-incarnate appearances of Jesus Christ.

There is another group of Trinity rejecters that affirm that Jesus is God. But they don't believe in three persons to the one God. Rather, they believe Jesus is God and that He sometimes take the role of the Father, sometimes that of the Son, and yet other times as the Spirit; this belief is called Modalism or Sabellianism. Now, while Scripture makes the case of Monotheism and Christ's Deity are essential, does it state that believing one God in three Persons is a salvation requirement? While most Trinitarians believe it is, others are open to Modalists being considered believers. One problem, though, is that most Modalists also believe their view is an essential tenet of faith.

I do believe the Bible clearly teaches the Trinity (see Matthew 3:5-7; 28:19). Main reason - it's a uniquely Christian doctrine. There are triads, but no other religion teaches in a Trinity, or maybe better called a Tri-Unity. There are religions, though, that are Monotheistic but not Christian.  

Some claim that the pope originated Trinitarianism. Uh, at that time there was not an official pope - that happed a couple of centuries later with Leo the Great. More often, Constantine is blamed for starting a new religion to control the people, but why then did he not hold on to emperor worship? Plus, the originator of the term "Trinity" was Tertullian, a century before Nicea. 

One other point - Under Trinitarianism, God had fellowship between the Three Persons before man was created. God didn't need us for fellowship, nor were the created angels sufficient for fellowship. To me, the Trinity makes perfect sense.

ONE OF THE MOST INFLUENTIAL CHRISTIANS, YET NOT A SAINT? A LOOK AT TERTULLIAN

 

When I first read Bryan Litfin's Getting To Know The Church Fathers: An Evangelical Introduction, I was able to describe nine of the twelve church leaders with one sentence... or less! (There were three I knew nothing about.) Two of the three were men I consider heroes of the faith, and the third was Augustine. 

In a previous installment, I mentioned doing a term paper on six early church movements, and Tertullian had connection with two of them - a positive connection with Montanism (some believe he joined the group, others thought he just accepted them), and an advesarial relationship with Marcionism. 

As my title stated, Tertullian was not canonized as a saint - more about this later. Regardless of that, he is an important figure in church history. Pope Benedict XVI lists this non-saint in his book on church fathers. While Irenaeus was the first to mention a collection of Christian Scripture, Tertullian was the first use the term "New Testament." Another term he was the first to use is "Trinity" relating to the relationship of the Father, Christ, and the Holy Spirit (he was also the first Church Father to write primarily in Latin). You may have heard Tertullian's question "What does Athens have to do with Jerusalem" and more likely to be familiar with the line "The blood of Christians is seed" (more commonly rephrased as "The blood of martyrs is the seed of the church").

In this series I've mentioned the seven letters of Ignatius, the three writings of Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus' two classics. Tertullian's bibliography consists of more than twice the listings of the other trio combined - a total of thirty one in the original Latin.  His biggest is a five volume set titled Against Marcionism.

Who is Marcion? He was a wealthy shipmaker, and had enough money to spread his heretical doctrine. Marcion is included in lists of Gnostic teachers because his theology is similar (especially in a non-physical Jesus who came to forgive sins but didn't pay for them on the cross). However, most Gnostics used their own writings as well as Scripture. 100% of Marcion's Bible is contained in our Bible.

Marcion was the first to give a canon of New Testament books, which consisted of Luke and ten of Paul's letters (excluding the Pastoral Epistles). He believed there were two different gods - the Creator who the Jews worshipped, and the true God who sent Jesus. Thus, Marcion rejected the Old Testament and anything "corrupted" with Jewish thought in our New Testament.

One reason I'm a Tertullian fan is because of how he dealt with Marcion. Two of the five books against Marcion refuted the shipmaker's teachings from Scripture - Volume 3 using Marcion's edited version of Luke, and the next one using Paul's letters. In other words, even Marcion's limited Scripture was enough to disprove him.

When I did my term paper, Tertullian was considered to have joined the Montanists. His version differed from the movement's founder Montanus version, and the authors I read gave three possible reasons: 1) Montantism mellowed between Montanus' time and Tertullian's; 2) North African Montanism which influenced Tertullian was more orthodox than the Middle Eastern Montanism of Montanus; and what I consider the most likely theory, 3) Montanus was Montanus and Tertullian was Tertullian.

If Tertullian was a conservationist, he'd probably be another Crocodile Hunter. Then, maybe you might call him the Rush Limbaugh of Church Fathers. Tertullian could be very harsh and legalistic. He wrote a list of what women could and could not wear, for example.  His crusty personality may be why he wasn't canonized as a saint. Of course, if you use the NT definition of saints as being all of Christ's followers, then Tertullian would definitely be a saint.

One last comment. In dealing with heretical movements, Tertullian said they had no authority to use Scripture. Scripture belongs to the church, and it is ours to use, not those who twist it.

Do you have any heroes of the faith that, while orthodox, can be controversial?