閱讀中文版：神是「三位一體」（Trinity）是什麼意思？知道這個對門徒生命有什麼幫助？
Q: I often hear that God is “Trinity” — what does this mean? This word doesn’t even appear in Scripture — why should I accept it? How does knowing this “doctrine of the Trinity” help my walk as a disciple?
Many believers have heard that God is “Triune,” but how many have deeply considered what that actually means? Why does it matter that God is triune? What does it open up for our life as disciples?
This article hopes to briefly outline the concept of the Trinity, and through a deeper knowledge of God, help us live more faithfully as disciples.
I. Scripture Doesn’t Have the Word “Trinity”?
The word “Trinity” first appears in Christian literature in the writings of the second-century theologian Theophilus (c. 116–181 AD), who used the Greek word τριάς (trias). The Latin trinitas was first used systematically by the third-century Tertullian (c. 145–240 AD).
So it’s true — Scripture indeed does not contain this word.
But: a concept being named late does not mean the concept itself was invented later.
The word “gravity” only came after Newton, but apples had been falling before Newton ever existed. The question isn’t “when did this word appear,” but “does the reality this concept refers to already exist within the New Testament.”
The same logic applies to the key term of the Nicene Creed, “of the same substance” (homoousios) — this word isn’t in Scripture, but the concept it expresses is already clearly present in John 1:1, Thomas’s declaration (John 20:28), and Paul’s letters. Using new language to express the truth of Scripture is only for the sake of more precise description.
II. The Face Presented by the New Testament
The New Testament never once states “God is Trinity” — but the face of God it presents forces us to confront three questions.
First: Is there only one God?
Without a doubt. The New Testament thoroughly inherits Judaism’s core belief — monotheism: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” (Deut 6:4, ESV) Paul says directly in 1 Corinthians 8:6: “for us there is one God, the Father.” (ESV)
Second: Is Jesus God?
This is the heart of the controversy. Opponents often say this was a later theological development added onto John’s Gospel, and that Paul’s early letters had no such concept at all.
Is that true? Of course not.
Paul calls Christ “God over all, blessed forever” in Romans 9:5. In Philippians 2:6 he says Christ is “in the form of God” (morphē theou, the very form/nature of God). In Colossians 1:15–17 he says all things were created through him, and he is before all things. These are all universally recognized early Pauline letters, earlier than John’s writing.
Worth noting is a phenomenon pointed out by scholar C. F. D. Moule: in Paul’s greeting formulas, “God” and “Christ” are placed together within the same formula. For first-century Jewish Christians, this would have been nearly shocking — this wasn’t a casual way of writing, but reflected a deep theological presupposition.
John’s Gospel is even more direct: “In the beginning was the Word… and the Word was God” (John 1:1); Thomas, seeing the risen Christ, exclaims “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28); Jesus himself says “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30), and the religious leaders of that time understood clearly this was claiming equality with God (John 5:18).
Every book of the New Testament, every author — Paul, John, Peter, the author of Hebrews — bears consistent witness to the deity of Christ.
Third: Is the Spirit God, or merely some kind of power or force?
Opponents of the Trinity often say the Spirit is only a “power” of God, not a Person.
Acts 5:3–4 directly dismantles this view: Peter says to Ananias, “Why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit?” then immediately says, “You have not lied to man but to God.” A person cannot “lie to” a power that has no personhood.
Acts 13:2 records the Holy Spirit himself actively speaking: “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” This is a willed, active Person speaking.
Hebrews 9:14 calls him “the eternal Spirit” — in Scripture’s conceptual framework, true eternity is an attribute uniquely belonging to God.
III. Three Facts, One Conclusion
Put the three facts together:
- There is only one God1 (monotheism)
- The Father is God, the Son is God, the Spirit is God
- The Father, Son, and Spirit are distinct from one another, not the same person
All three propositions are simultaneously true, and logically only one conclusion follows: within the essence of God, there are three distinct Persons, sharing one divine essence.
This is the doctrine of the Trinity. It is not a doctrine imposed later, but a theological conclusion that the New Testament data itself naturally leads to.
As theologian Benjamin Warfield put it, the Trinity’s mode of existence in the New Testament is far more directly taught than merely presupposed everywhere — it is not openly proclaimed, but assumed throughout.
IV. The History of the Trinity’s Discovery
Since the Trinity is a conclusion forced out from Scripture, anyone who earnestly reads Scripture, in any era, in any place, should arrive at the same conclusion. And that’s exactly what the historical record shows.
Opponents of the Trinity’s standard claim is: “The Trinity was a political decision of the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.”
This claim confuses two separate things: why the council was convened, and what the council decided.
The council was convened because Arius put forward a new claim — that the Son was created, that there was a time when the Son did not exist, that the Son was inferior in essence to the Father. This claim sparked fierce controversy within the church.
The task of the Council of Nicaea was not to invent the Trinity, but to rule on whether Arius’s teaching conformed to the faith the church had always held.
The ruling’s result: it did not conform. The Son is “of the same substance” (homoousios, of the same substance) as the Father.
And before Nicaea, patristic writings spanning more than two centuries had already left clear records.
Ignatius of Antioch (c. 107 AD), a disciple of the apostle John, before his martyrdom called Jesus “both of Mary and of God” — human nature and divine nature coexisting — over two hundred years before Nicaea.
Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 180 AD), whose teacher was Polycarp, the direct disciple of the apostle John, recorded the faith held universally by the whole church at that time: belief in “the one God, the Father Almighty… the one Christ Jesus, the Son of God… the Holy Spirit” — this threefold structure of Father, Son, Spirit was already the framework of all subsequent creeds.
Gregory Thaumaturgus (c. 270 AD), writing fifty-five years before Nicaea: “There is one God… one Lord… one Holy Spirit… a perfect Trinity, not divided nor differing in glory, eternity, and dominion.” Anyone claiming the Trinity was fabricated out of thin air at Nicaea must first explain the existence of this passage.
From Ignatius in 107 AD, to Irenaeus in 180 AD, to Gregory in 270 AD — spanning over a century and a half, across churches throughout the Mediterranean world, all saying the same thing.
Nicaea was not the starting point of the Trinity, but the point at which the controversy formally surfaced.
There is another historical fact worth further illustrating this point:
If the Trinity really were a political product of Constantine, it would have already died at Constantine’s own hands.
After the Council of Nicaea, Constantine himself gradually shifted toward the Arian side, and was baptized before his death by an Arian bishop. His successor, Constantius II, was an even more fervent supporter of the Arian faction, using imperial power to gradually exile orthodox bishops one after another. Athanasius, Nicene orthodoxy’s most important defender, was exiled five times during this period.
In other words: for the decades following Nicaea, political power stood entirely on the Arian side — yet the Trinity survived.
From Nicaea to the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD, orthodox Trinitarianism was politically at a disadvantage the whole time, yet it continued to hold firm in theological debate. The Arian faction needed to rely on imperial power from beginning to end; the orthodox side, even repeatedly exiled, saw its argumentative persuasiveness continue to grow, eventually winning the consensus of the whole church.
A doctrine born out of politics cannot survive under political suppression.
V. The Existence of Heresies Is Itself Reverse Proof of the Trinity
History leaves us another piece of corroborating evidence, from a completely opposite angle.
If the Trinity really were only a concept that emerged in the fourth century, then how did opposition to the Trinity arise before that?
The church of the second and third centuries had already been dealing with two opposite errors:
Modalism / Sabellianism — believing the Father, Son, and Spirit are merely three “modes” of the same God, not truly distinct Persons.
The forerunner of Arianism — believing the Son and Spirit “flowed out” from the Father as lesser, subordinate beings, inferior to the Father.
Both heresies existed at the same time, pointing in completely opposite directions — one saying “there are too many Persons, really there’s only one,” the other saying “the three Persons are real, but unequal in rank.” This precisely shows that the orthodox position being defended already existed beforehand: neither three Gods (Tritheism), nor one God playing three roles, but one God, three real, distinct, fully divine Persons.
If there hadn’t already been a pre-existing position, no one would have attacked it from two opposite directions.
VI. The Trinity Was Discovered, Not Invented
The New Testament carries a peculiar tension running throughout: on one hand, it holds unwaveringly to monotheism — “there is only one God” has never wavered. On the other hand, what it presents is genuine, distinct interaction between the three Persons — the Father sends the Son, the Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit bears witness to the Son, the Son prays to the Father.
Both things are true at the same time, put together, only one conclusion follows.
It’s not that we designed the Trinity to reconcile this tension. Rather, when we earnestly read these texts, tracing the premises on which they stand, we discover the structure of the Trinity was already there — it was only waiting to be seen.
Below are three examples, each a process of this “seeing at the same time.”
“God is love” — but love needs an object.
1 John 4:8 says “God is love.” But love needs an object. If God, before creation, had only one Person, whom did he love before creation? The only logically coherent answer is: God needed created beings before he could begin to love — that God’s love is something that only came about after creation, not a reality that already existed within God’s own nature from the start.
But John 17:24 already answers this ahead of time: “You loved me before the foundation of the world.” The Father already loved the Son before creation, the Son already loved the Father before creation. What allows “God is love” to hold true is the premise that within himself, God already possesses a real, personal relationship of love. We’re not inventing the Trinity to explain this sentence — we’re discovering, in earnestly pursuing the meaning of this sentence, that the Trinity was already there.
The Spirit intercedes for us — but to whom?
Romans 8:26 says the Spirit intercedes for us; John 14:6 says it’s through the Son that we come to the Father; Matthew 6:9 says we pray to the Father. Three actions, three distinct Persons, appearing simultaneously in the New Testament.
Early Christians didn’t first develop the Trinity before starting to pray this way. Rather, they had always prayed this way, had always experienced God this way — the Father, Son, and Spirit each having a real place in their experience — and only then did theologians trace the structure behind this experience, discovering the Trinity was already hidden within it. If God had only one Person, this entire structure of prayer would make no sense.
“As you are in me” — this statement presupposes more than we assume.
In John 17:21, Jesus prays: “that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you.” The word “just as” is often glossed over. But the oneness Jesus speaks of, the original pattern, is a real, personal oneness between the Father and the Son. If the Father and Son were merely two names for the same Person, “just as you are in me, and I in you” would become a meaningless statement — one person cannot be “in himself.”
Jesus wasn’t giving a theology lecture when he said this — he was praying. What he spoke of was the relationship he himself had lived out — and the structure of that relationship is the Trinity.
The Trinity is not a designed answer. It is what emerges when we earnestly hold to the New Testament’s insistence on one God, while also earnestly attending to the witness of real interaction between the three Persons, forced to acknowledge the reality being pressed upon us. It’s like a map — the map doesn’t create the terrain; the terrain was already there; the map only helps you clearly see the reality you’ve been standing within all along.2
VII. The Cost of Departing From It
The Trinity, forced out from Scripture, at the same time draws a line — it tells us who the one Jesus the New Testament bears witness to actually is. Once we depart from this discovery, what we come to believe in could become “a different Jesus.”
Paul says in 2 Corinthians 11:4: “if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed… you put up with it readily enough.” Paul’s tone is one of rebuke — the implication is: this should not be tolerated!
John, in his letters, states this warning even more concretely: “every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God” (1 John 4:2); “whoever denies the Father and the Son… this is the antichrist” (1 John 2:22). Scripture says directly: “no one who denies the Son has the Father” (1 John 2:23) — the Father and Son cannot be separated; you cannot bypass the Son to find the Father, just as you cannot bypass a parent who’s already spoken for to go find another one.3
Paul takes the reality of the resurrection all the way to its foundation: “if Christ has not been raised… you are still in your sins” (1 Cor 15:17).
Put these declarations together, and they trace the outline of the one Jesus the New Testament bears witness to: truly God, truly man, truly died, truly rose.
Departing from the direction of the Trinity means replacing this true identity of Jesus with something else:
- Gnosticism / Docetism claims Jesus only existed spiritually, without a real physical body — this strips away Christ’s humanity, and along with it makes his death an illusion.
- Arianism claims the Son was created, inferior to the Father — this strips away Christ’s full divinity.
- Modalism claims the Father, Son, and Spirit are merely three names for the same Person — but the Jesus of the New Testament, in Gethsemane, prays to the Father: “not as I will, but as you will” (Matt 26:39). If Father and Son were the same Person, this prayer would become God talking to himself.
- Modern liberal theology reduces the resurrection to a subjective experience for disciples — this strips away the reality of Christ’s actual rising from the dead.
A Common Misunderstanding
Some think of the Father as a strict judge, Jesus as the merciful defense attorney, and the cross as Jesus “persuading” the Father to change his mind. Others think Jesus’ prayer at Gethsemane shows the Father and Son’s wills were opposed — the Father wanted the Son to die, and the Son didn’t want to.
But the Trinity tells us: the will of the Father, Son, and Spirit is completely unified. As Ephesians 1:3–14 clearly presents, salvation is the shared action of the Triune God — the Father chose us before creation (vv. 3–6), the Son gave up his life to redeem us (vv. 7–12), the Spirit seals and secures our inheritance (vv. 13–14). Each section concludes with “to the praise of his glorious grace.” The cross was not Jesus changing the Father’s heart, but the high point of a plan of salvation the Triune God had already determined from eternity.
Not Understanding and Denying Are Two Different Things
A new believer who hasn’t yet fully grasped the theology of the Trinity, and a person who actively insists “the Father, Son, and Spirit are just three names for the same person,” though both might not “hold to the complete Trinity,” are in fundamentally different situations:
- The former is a lack of knowledge — he believes in the New Testament’s Jesus, he simply hasn’t yet learned the full theological vocabulary.
- The latter is an error of object — the “Jesus” he believes in has already fundamentally diverged from what the New Testament describes.
No one fails to be saved because they don’t understand the Trinity. But if someone actively denies what the New Testament bears witness to about Jesus — denying his divinity, denying his incarnation, denying his death and resurrection, denying his real distinction from the Father — then what he believes has already become the “different Jesus” Paul warned about.
VIII. This Discovery Changes How We Know God and How We Live
The Trinity is not a concept only useful in theological debate. What it changes is who you understand God to be, what prayer is, human nature itself, and our basic understanding of community.
These four levels are not separate points, but four facets of the same core: God is a relational Triune God, so everything he created — love, prayer, humanity, the church — all bear the mark of relationship.
God’s nature is love, because he has always been the Triune God.
C.S. Lewis put it precisely: unless God contains at least two Persons, the statement “God is love” has no meaning, since love is one person’s relation to another — if God were a single person before the world was made, he would not have been love.4
The Trinity tells us that love was never a trait God only had after there were created beings, but a reality that has always existed within his eternal nature. God didn’t need us to be able to love — he already had complete love within the relationship of the Trinity before creation.
Prayer enters an already-existing relationship of the Triune God, not building a connection from scratch.
Paul says in Ephesians 2:18: “through him (the Son) we… have access in one Spirit to the Father.” Every act of prayer is an act of the Trinity — through the Spirit, by the Son, to the Father.
This means prayer isn’t us laboring to build a relationship with a distant God. God doesn’t just wait to receive at one end of prayer; he’s also present at this end at the same time — the Spirit helps us pray within us, the Son intercedes on our behalf, the Father waits for us to come to him. God is involved at every end of prayer. No feeble prayer is ever a wasted prayer.
We are made in God’s image, so we are relational beings in our very essence.
God is Triune, his nature is relational. We are made in his image (Gen 1:27), which means relationship is not an optional add-on to human life, but the very essence of our existence.
Tim Chester put it clearly: the Trinity tells us that relationship is the essence of personhood — the word “mother” has no meaning apart from relationship, neither does “son,” neither does “person”; you cannot become a person without relationship.5
This explains a reality we all feel but may not fully articulate: loneliness wounds us so deeply not just because we enjoy companionship, but because without relationship, we cannot become complete persons. This isn’t a psychological observation, but a theological fact — we are made in the image of a relational God.
The church is the earthly manifestation of the Triune God’s relational essence.
This is also why the church is not merely a group of like-minded people gathering together — it is the concrete embodiment of the Trinity within community life.
Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12:4–6: “there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God.” Three Persons, each with different work, yet completely unified — the church’s diversity-in-unity is precisely the earthly reflection of the Trinity. Each member has different gifts, yet belongs to one body; diversity does not break unity, and unity does not eliminate diversity. The root of this structure lies in the very nature of the Triune God.
Moreover, the church is Christ’s body (1 Cor 12:27). This isn’t a metaphor — it’s a theological fact: how you treat the brothers and sisters within the church is how you treat Christ himself. Jesus said to Saul not “why do you persecute my people,” but “why do you persecute me” (Acts 9:4).
Choosing to pursue faith alone, keeping a distance from the community of the church, is not merely a matter of personal preference. It runs contrary to the very nature of the Triune God — the God who created us, who redeemed us, whose own nature has never been solitary.
Conclusion
The word “Trinity” is not in Scripture — this is true.
But the reality of the Trinity is in Scripture — this is also true.
The Council of Nicaea did not invent the Trinity. What it did was, in the midst of a severe theological crisis, draw a clear line for the faith the church had always held, using precise language to state clearly a discovery that had already existed for two or three centuries.
That discovery, traced all the way back, is rooted in every corner of the New Testament — in Paul’s greeting formulas, in John’s opening prologue, in Peter’s preaching, in the prayers Jesus prayed for his disciples.
Knowing the Triune God is not about passing a theology exam. It’s about knowing that one true Jesus — the one the New Testament bears witness to, God incarnate, died and risen — and from that knowledge, more fully understanding who the God we believe in is, and that we are called to live within his love.
Further Reading
- God in Three Persons by E. Calvin Beisner
- Delighting in the Trinity: An Introduction to the Christian Faith by Michael Reeves
- The Trinity by Roger E. Olson & Christopher A. Hall
- Understanding the Trinity by Alister E. McGrath
- Sam Allberry, Connected: Living in the Light of the Trinity (IVP)
Appendix: New Testament Scripture on the Trinity
The Scriptures below are grouped by topic, for readers’ own further study.
I. The Foundation of Monotheism
| Scripture | Key Point |
|---|---|
| Deut 6:4 | “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one” — the root of New Testament monotheism |
| Mark 12:29 | Jesus quotes Deut 6:4, personally affirming monotheism |
| Luke 4:8 | Jesus: “You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only shall you serve” |
| John 17:3 | Jesus calls the Father “the only true God” |
| 1 Cor 8:4–6 | Paul: “there is no God but one… yet for us there is one God, the Father” |
| 1 Tim 2:5 | “There is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men” |
II. The Son Is God (Deity of Christ)
| Scripture | Key Point |
|---|---|
| Rom 9:5 | “Christ… who is God over all, blessed forever” |
| Phil 2:6–11 | “in the form of God” (morphē theou); every knee bows to Jesus, echoing Isa 45:23’s original oracle about the Lord |
| Col 1:15–18 | “the image of the invisible God… all things were created through him… he is before all things” |
| Titus 2:13 | “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” |
| 2 Peter 1:1 | “our God and Savior Jesus Christ” |
| John 1:1–3 | “the Word was God… all things were made through him” |
| John 8:58 | “before Abraham was, I am” — using the Lord’s own self-designation from the Old Testament (egō eimi); the Jews picked up stones, showing they clearly understood this as a claim to deity |
| John 10:30 | “I and the Father are one” — the Jews immediately understood this as a claim to deity (John 10:33) |
| John 20:28 | Thomas: “My Lord and my God!” |
| 1 John 5:20 | “He is the true God and eternal life” — Jesus directly called the true God |
| Heb 1:3–12 | The Father to the Son: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever”; the Son is “the exact imprint of his nature” |
III. The Spirit Is God, and Is a Person
| Scripture | Key Point |
|---|---|
| Acts 5:3–4 | To lie to the Spirit is to lie to God; the Spirit has personhood, and can be lied to |
| Acts 13:2 | The Spirit himself speaks and issues a call — a mere force could not do this |
| 2 Cor 3:17 | “the Lord is the Spirit” — the Spirit is given the title “Lord,” the Old Testament designation for the Lord |
| Heb 9:14 | “the eternal Spirit” — eternity is a property uniquely belonging to God |
| John 14:16 | The Spirit is called “another Helper” (allos paraklētos) — “another” indicates personhood |
IV. Father, Son, and Spirit Named Together in Parallel
| Scripture | Key Point |
|---|---|
| Matt 28:19 | “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” — the three share one singular “name,” pointing to one essence |
| 2 Cor 13:14 | “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit” — the three named together |
| 1 Cor 12:4–6 | “the Spirit… the Lord… God” named together, each with different work but the same source; the church’s diversity-in-unity is rooted here |
| Eph 1:3–14 | The Father chooses (vv. 3–6), the Son redeems (vv. 7–12), the Spirit seals (vv. 13–14) — the Triune God shares together in salvation, each section concluding “to the praise of his glory” |
| Eph 2:18 | “through him (the Son)… we… have access in one Spirit to the Father” — the Trinitarian structure of prayer |
| Heb 9:14 | Christ offers himself to “God” through “the eternal Spirit” — the three share together in the work of redemption |
| John 14:26 | The Father sends the Spirit — the three are distinct from one another and each acts |
| John 15:26 | The Son sends the Spirit — further confirming the distinction and relationship among the three |
| John 17:21–24 | The Father sends the Son; the Father and Son’s love precedes creation; the disciples’ unity is patterned on the Father-Son relationship |
V. The Son’s Eternity and the Father-Son Relationship Before Creation
| Scripture | Key Point |
|---|---|
| John 1:1–2 | The Word was already “in the beginning,” and “was with God” — the relationship already existed before creation |
| John 17:5 | Jesus asks the Father to restore the glory he shared with the Father “before the world existed” |
| John 17:24 | “You loved me before the foundation of the world” — the Father-Son love precedes creation |
| Col 1:17 | “He is before all things” |
| Heb 1:10–12 | The Father to the Son: “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning… but you remain” |
VI. Real Distinction Among the Three (Against Modalism)
Modalism claims the Father, Son, and Spirit are merely three “masks” of the same God taking turns on stage. Every passage below presupposes that the three exist simultaneously, address one another, and each has his own agency — no one can pray to himself, send himself, or bear witness for himself.
| Scripture | Key Point |
|---|---|
| John 1:1–2 | “the Word was with God” — “with” itself presupposes two distinct beings, not one being alone |
| John 3:35 | “The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand” — love’s two parties are distinct from each other, not self-love |
| John 16:13–14 | The Spirit “will not speak on his own authority,” but speaks only what he hears — the Spirit has his own personhood, yet submits to the Son |
| John 17:4–5 | The Son glorifies the Father; the Son asks the Father to restore the glory shared before creation — two distinct Persons in real dialogue |
| John 17:24 | “You loved me before the foundation of the world” — the Father-Son love precedes creation, not one Person loving himself |
| Matt 26:39 | Gethsemane: “not as I will, but as you will” — if Father and Son were the same Person, this prayer would be meaningless |
| Matt 27:46 | “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” — the Son cries out to the Father, presupposing two real, distinct Persons existing simultaneously; if Father and Son were the same Person, this cry would be meaningless |
| John 15:26 | The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit bears witness to the Son — each of the three has his own agency, each distinct from the others |
| Rom 8:26–27 | The Spirit intercedes for believers before the Father — each of the three plays a different role in prayer, not different faces of the same Person |
Key Terms Glossary
| Term | Notes |
|---|---|
| Trinity | From the Latin trinitas, first used by Tertullian |
| Person | One of the three distinct “Who”s within the Godhead |
| Essence / Substance | The one divine nature shared by Father, Son, and Spirit |
| Homoousios | Key term of the Nicene Creed: the Son is “of the same substance” as the Father |
| Monotheism | Belief in only one God |
| Incarnation | The Son of God taking on human nature |
| Redemption | Christ’s atoning work on the cross |
| Modalism | Heresy: the three Persons are merely three “modes” of God |
| Arianism | Heresy: the Son was created, inferior to the Father |
| Orthodoxy | From the Greek, “right belief” |
- Or: only the Lord (YHWH) is the true God. ↩
- The map analogy is borrowed from Alister McGrath’s Understanding the Trinity, chapter 10. ↩
- The parent analogy is borrowed from Sam Allberry, Connected: Living in the Light of the Trinity (IVP). ↩
- C.S. Lewis, paraphrased from his discussion in Mere Christianity, Book IV, on why love requires personal plurality within the Godhead. ↩
- Tim Chester, quoted in Sam Allberry, Connected: Living in the Light of the Trinity (IVP). ↩