Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
This begins a series of Monday video posts on the Trinity:
Very clear commentary Brett!
I wonder what you think about Fred Sander’s post on the Trinity today: http://is.gd/ezO0v
He contends we often bog ourselves down defining the Trinity, and thus people decide it is only an academic exercise.
His solution is to show Christians they already live in, and hold to, a Trinitarian reality. Thus, they will quickly understand how it affects their life.
I can’t wait to read his book: The Deep Things of God. How the Trinity Changes Everything, when it comes out in a couple weeks.
Gabriel, thanks for pointing me to Sanders piece. I’m not quite sure I know what he means in regards to methodology (“begin with an immersion in the reality of the triune God”). What does this look like? I’m sure he explains more in his book but I’ll have to withhold judgment until I can read a full explanation. But I’m definitely intrigued.
This is a little OT… but I couldn’t help notice the 5 volume set of Francis Schaeffer books on the upper right of the shelf. Good stuff there too.
Thanks for the definition of the trinity. I saw your vids where you pretended to be an atheist for the Lutheran high school class. It was interesting to hear them trying to defend the trinity. It’s scary how many people can’t articulate it well, myself included. I’m going to commit this to memory.
You should add a definition for “being” and a definition for “person,” because it isn’t obvious from what you said why we shouldn’t think that persons are just particular kinds of beings. If a being is anything that exists, and if persons exist, then persons ARE beings. In which case, the Trinity WOULD be a contradiction since you’d be saying three beings are one being.
Hey Brett. I was directed to your post by my friend Gabriel.
My gut reaction to the definition and elaboration went from attentiveness to disenchantment to resolution. All in less than four minutes!
It caught my attention because I typically assume that any attempt to explain the Trinity that goes beyond God is 3 but 1 at the same time is going to end up in heresy. The best explanation I had heard up to this point was 1+1+1=1.
I was disenchanted, because I have a habit of taking out my mind that grew up within the Christian tradition and temporarily replacing it with an outsider’s mind to try to find a second naivete. At this point in the video I began to think, “This all sounds like a bunch of crazy talk!” Then I wondered if the early church would have even considered putting this much detail into their understanding of this 3 but 1 God and wondered if a clear understandable description of the trinity is even all that important in our relationship with God and creation. Maybe their beautiful dancing wind metaphors were good enough.
Then I stuck my Christian brain back in and realized in a modern era where the scientific method and clear reason sit high on their thrones over human ideals, a clear and reasonable explanation of the trinity is definitely necessary.
All that to say, in a round about way, good video and nice insight!