Not One or Three but Two?

[Guest]

Does the idea that Trinitarianism wasn't invented until the 4th century entail that Jesus was not worshipped as God (in the same way Trinitarians today worship him) until then?

There is no doubt that Jesus' Deity was recognized right from the beginning, and that He was worshipped. When Thomas realized that Jesus had been raised from the dead, he exclaimed, "My Lord and my God!". I don't believe he was merely exclaiming in the sense that a modern person might exclaim in astonishment "My God!". Rather Thomas was recognizing Jesus as his Lord and God, and cried out in worship.

I'm not sure what you mean by "in the same way Trinirarians worship him". Do Trinitarians worship him in a unique way? I was once a Trinitarian, and I don't remember worshipping Him in any way that differs from the way I worship Him now.

Chriscarni, it is true that from the writings ascribed to Tertullian, that one could understand him as a sort of proto-Trinitarian. Indeed if he was the author of Adversus Praxean, then he was the first to use the word "Trinity".

Whether Tertullian had indeed written the "Trinitarian" words of that writing, and had gotten this understanding from the Montanist sect that he joined around the year 200, or whether some other Tertullian of a later period was the author, or whether the Trinitarian parts were inserted by later writers, I do not know. What I do know, is that I have not encountered any other second century writer who mentioned the Trinity. If it were the prevalent teaching from the beginning, surely many others would have taught it.

Rae, in my next post, I will share with you how I first arrived at my present understanding of the Deity from reading Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho.

[Guest]

Whether Tertullian had indeed written the "Trinitarian" words of that writing, and had gotten this understanding from the Montanist sect that he joined around the year 200, or whether some other Tertullian of a later period was the author, or whether the Trinitarian parts were inserted by later writers, I do not know. What I do know, is that I have not encountered any other second century writer who mentioned the Trinity. If it were the prevalent teaching from the beginning, surely many others would have taught it.

So what exactly was uniformly taught about Christ and the relationship of the Son with/and the Father and Holy Spirit from the second century Christians?

[Guest]

How I Came to Learn About the Deity from
The Dialogue With Trypho
by Justin Martyr (A.D. 110-165)

The Begetting of the Son before Creation:

When, as a young man, I read in the New Testament the expression, “The only-begotten Son”, I assumed that the expression denoted the conception of Jesus in the womb of Mary. Having been taught that God is a Trinity of three divine Persons, whose existence is from “eternity past” to “eternity future”, it never occurred to me that the begetting of the Son was an event at the beginning of time, before all creation and before all ages.

I used to wonder how it was possible to determine what Jesus and His apostles really meant. For there are hundreds of sects and denominations of Christendom, those in each claiming to believe the Bible in its entirety, and yet interpreting what they read in various, and even contradictory ways. How could I ever know who, if anybody, was right? I began to think that if I could read some of the early Christian writings after the days of the apostles, they would be in a better position, culturally, linguistically, and spiritually, to understand what Christ and His apostles meant, than individuals and groups who came into existence two millennia later.

In The Dialogue With Trypho, Justin describes his talks with Trypho, a Jew, and a number of Trypho’s companions. Justin explained that Jesus was the Messiah, that He had appeared to Abraham and others, that his birth and death had been predicted by the prophets, that Jesus had been generated (or “begotten”) by the Father as an event before creation, and as He was the only one who had been begotten in that way, He was in fact divine as was His Father. Justin also taught that Jesus shared the name “Yahweh” with His Father, quoting Genesis 19:24 which speaks of two “Yahwehs”, one on earth who rained fire and brimstone upon Sodom and Gomorrah from the other one in heaven.

Justin used the analogy of lighting a small fire from a larger one. The smaller one is of the same substance as the larger one, and the larger one is in no way diminished from having lit the smaller one. Thus the Son of God, having been begotten by God, is of the same “substance” as God, and the Father is in no way diminished from having begotten Him.

Justin spent a great deal of his time trying to convince Trypho and the other Jews that Jesus the Messiah, was another divine Individual just like the Father, and that He had frequently appeared to the saints of old. For example, Justin stated that of the three angels who appeared to Abraham, Christ was the one who remained behind and was addressed by Abraham as “Yahweh”.

The Holy Spirit:

Both Justin and Trypho spoke of the Holy Spirit. Certainly Trypho, a Jew, when using the term “Holy Spirit” did not have in mind another divine Person. For He believed in a single divine Person only, namely “Yahweh”. At no time did Justin suggest that the Holy Spirit was a third divine Individual. Indeed, at one point, he asked Trypho an amazing question:

“Do you think that any other one is said to be worthy of worship and called Lord and God in the scriptures, except the Maker of all, and Messiah, who by so many scriptures was proved to you to have become man?”

And Trypho replied, “How can we admit this, when we have instituted so great an inquiry as to whether there is any other than the Father alone?”

Here would have been the perfect occasion for Justin to have introduced the Holy Spirit as a third divine Individual. But he didn’t. He just said the following:

“I must ask you this also, that I may know whether or not you are of a different opinion from that which you admitted some time ago.”

Justin sometimes referred to the Holy Spirit “speaking from the Person of the Father” or “speaking from the Person of the Son.” This caused me to wonder whether the Holy Spirit was the very Persons of the Father and the Son, extending throughout the world, and speaking to people.

After I realized that Justin Martyr taught that Jesus was begotten as a single act “before all created things”, and that he didn’t teach that the Holy Spirit was a third divine Individual, I began to look at the scriptures to see whether they said the same thing. Justin and other second century Christian writers taught that Proverbs 8:22-31 was a record of the begetting of the Son and His activities in the beginning. He is called “Wisdom” in that record, and it was believed that Christ was the personification of wisdom, and that “Wisdom” was actually one of His names. Paul stated in 1 Corinthians 1:30 that “Christ has been made wisdom to us from God”, a statement which could refer to his generation in the beginning as recorded in Proverbs 8.

The apostle John records Jesus as having said, “I emerged out of the Father and have come into the cosmos…” That sounds a lot like a statement about his having been generated (begotten) from the Father ---- the little fire that came out from the greater one.

Concerning the Holy Spirit, I notice that Jesus said to His disciples:

Jesus answered him, "If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. John 14:23

If Jesus and His Father make their home within us, is that not the Holy Spirit?

In John 14:16, 14:18, 15:26, and 16:7, John refers to the Holy Spirit as “The Paraclete” [advocate, encourager (literally “one who is called to one’s side”)]. For example John 14:18

John 14:26 But the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

The same apostle states that Jesus is the Paraclete:

1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have a Paraclete with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.

The Spirit of God is not a mere “force” as some claim. Rather the Spirit is personal ---- the very Persons of the Father and the Son. Indeed, Paul states in 2 Corinthians 3:17 that the Lord [Jesus] is the Spirit! So why is a third divine Individual supposed?

Even the Nicene Creed in its original form as set out in 325 A.D. did not assign the Holy Spirit as “the Third Person of the Trinity”. All that was stated in that creed was, “We believe in the Holy Spirit.”

John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Paraclete will not come to you; but if I go, I will send it to you.

If the Spirit is a Third Divine Person, why could He not come to the apostles until Jesus departed from this life? But if Jesus was sending His very Person to them, it was necessary for Him to die first. For while He lived as a human being, His person was confined to His body. But after His death, His spirit could be extended anywhere in the Universe!


You will point out to me, perhaps, that John 16:7 says, “I will send him to you” not “it”. Yes, the word has been so translated perhaps because the Spirit is assumed to be a Third Divine Person. The Greek pronoun is the masculine accusative singular, but that doesn’t necessarily mean “him”.
In Greek, a pronoun’s number and gender must agree with that of its antecedent. In this case, its antecedent is “Counselor”, a word which is masculine singular in Greek. So whether or not “it” or “him” is meant, the pronoun must be masculine singular. Actually, the word in question is not a personal pronoun but the demonstrative pronoun “ekeinos” [that one].

Augustus Strong points out in his volume Systematic Theology that in John 16:14, the masculine pronoun “ekeinos” is used in John 16:14 with the neuter antecedent “pneuma” [spirit]. For Strong, this is proof the Holy Spirit is a person. It is possible that John, was not careful in making the pronoun agree in gender with its antecedent according to the rules of Greek grammar. Yet, even if Strong is right, the “he” does not prove that the Holy Spirit is a third Person. I have no difficulty with the idea of referring to the Spirit as “he”. If my personality were not limited to my body, and I could extend it to you and speak with you, would you not say “he” [Paidion] spoke with me today even though I was not bodily present? So the writers of the New Testament may be using “he” for the spirit of the Father, or the spirit of the Son. The Father and the Son share the same spirit, just as they share the same name “Yahweh”. They share all things. So even thoug the Father and the Son both dwell within us, they share One Spirit, which we may call either “it” or “he.”