MCGRATH READING REPORT 2

MCGRATH READING REPORT 1

MCGRATH READING REPORT 2

CHAPTER 3

3.3 Irenaeus on the Trinity- Patristic

Irenaeus’ statement in about A.D. 180 was about the triune nature of God. He explained the elements of the trinity and role of each in his Trinitarian theology. The first element of the trinity as per Irenaeus is God the Father who is the creator, is invisible, and solitary. The second element is the Son of God, Jesus Christ who became a human being in order to restore fellowship between God and us humans. The third element is the Holy Spirit. Through the Holy Spirit, forbearers were able to learn of God and act righteously. One question that I would pose on Irenaeus Trinitarian theology is his insistence that God the Father alone is the one and only true God. This is quite untrue according to the present Trinitarian theology because God the Father is true God as is God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. According to Irenaeus, Jesus is a deity of the Supreme God, an argument which I question to the core. He argued that Jesus derives his power and immortality from God the father. Irenaeus’ Trinitarian theology is significant in Christianity since it formed the basis of other trinity theories including the one we use at the moment.

3.13 Augustine on the Trinity- Medieval

Before Augustine’s theory on the trinity, the prevailing school of thought was based on the trinity as formulated by Arius which emphasized on the authority of God the Father. As such God the Son was lesser than God the Father. Augustine argued out that the formulation of the trinity by Arius was incorrect. Instead, he argued out that each member of the trinity has the same essential nature. According to Augustine’s trinity, the Father is theinitiator, the Son is the mediator, and the Holy Spirit is the mediator. Augustine’s doctrine of the trinity is important since it mirrors the modern doctrine of the trinity. This goes to illustrate just how important his work was to Christianity as a whole. Despite the contribution to Christianity as a whole, I am always skeptical about Augustine’s explanation on how we can know God. Since man is made in the image of God, Augustine believed that since we are made in the image of God, by turning inward our intellect, we could know who God really is. This to me, is a questionable claim and is not substantial.

3.16 Epiphanius of Constantia on Sabellianism- Byzantine

Epiphanius is considered as orthodox defender mainly due to his stances that were regarded by some as arrogant and ignorant. Epiphanius was of the school of thought that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are different aspects of the solitary God unlike the classic Trinitarian school of thought. He taught of the three different hypostases in the trinity insisting that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. This doctrine actually came to prevail later in the Greek Church. In my opinion, this form of the trinity was wrong since it adopted a hierarchical system.

3.20 The Eleventh Council of Toledo on the Trinity- Roman Catholic

This was a council of 17 bishops. The document of the particular sitting of the council is regarded highly since it is considered as a genuine expression of the Trinitarian faith. The creed confesses belief in the holy trinity- Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. The emphasis is that the trinity is one God by nature and is also of one substance. The council also insisted that the trinity cannot be separated. I fully concur with the creed by the eleventh council of Toledo since it is precise and authoritative which is quite commendable considering the history of trinity theology by the time.

3.36 Robert Jenson on the Trinity- Protestant

Robert Jenson is a very influential figure in modern Christianity because he is credited with rethinking the Christian doctrine of God during a period when the interest in Trinitarian studies was enjoying a resurgence. Jenson essentially challenged the concept of the trinity as per the Western- Augustinian theological tradition. He claimed that God is entirely incapable of being acted upon unlike the triune doctrine of God existing dynamically. In my opinion, his opinion of avoiding abstract theology is unfounded.