What is the best analogy to explain the Trinity?

You know, to talk about Trinity analogies, we have to start with a couple of minutes thinking about

what

the Trinity is and how we should think about it. And I think the simplest way to say this is that we should really think of the doctrine of the Trinity as being supported by two pillars. One of them, one of those pillars that supports the doctrine, could be called the pillar of distinction, where Father, Son and Spirit are different from each other. So it is not the case that Father, Son and Spirit are three names for the same person.

I'm Bruce, I'm Mr. Ware, and I'm Jody's husband. So those are three names for the same person. But in reality, the Father is a different person from the Son. And Son a person distinct from the Holy Spirit. So distinction is one of the pillars. The other pillar is the pillar of unity or equality in which the Father, the Son and the Spirit share together the one identical divine nature. Then they are equally God because each fully possesses the one divine nature. So keep in mind that this means that you do not possess, Father, Son and Spirit, you do not possess just one third of the divine nature, but the entire divine nature is possessed by the Father, the entire divine nature by the Son, the entire divine nature divine by the Spirit.

A divine nature that is the collection, so to speak, of all the essential attributes of God that the Father, the Son and the Spirit fully possess. And yet, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are distinct personal expressions of that one God. So God is one and three in the doctrine of the Trinity. One of the ways the church has expressed this visually is a chart that really helps because of

what

it is and what it is not. As you look at it, you will notice that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, and yet the Father is God.

The Son is God. The Holy Spirit is God. So distinction, Father, Son and Spirit distinct from each other. But unity and equality. The Father, the Son and the Spirit constitute the only God. And by the way, you can hear that in John 1:1, in the beginning was the word. The word was with God. Distinction. So the Father and the Son are different from each other. But the word was God, equality. So both pillars have to be in place for the doctrine of the Trinity. Well. Now, having said that, there are some famous and repeated illustrations of the Trinity that don't really ultimately work, even if they are useful to begin with.

One is a triangle, for example, which can only be a triangle because it has three sides. And then you think, well, it takes three, it takes one. Isn't that a great example of a Trinity

analogy

? Well, the problem is this. That true triangle, when you think about it, is not a suitable

analogy

because side A of the triangle is not a triangularity. Good? While the Father is God. Side B is not a triangle, but the Son is God. So, really what the triangle represents is a tripartite vision of God. That God is made up of three parts, only when they are properly combined do you have a single God.

But that is not what the doctrine of the Trinity proposes. So that's where it fails. It really is a tripartite view of God, not a trinitarian one. Another phrase that is often used is to say three men: Peter, James and John. You know, I think the time I grew up in, Peter, Paul and Mary, you think you could have it either way, but you think about these three people and you have three people who share in common a human being. nature. Is not the same? And the answer is no, it is not the same. Because in reality Peter's human nature is a distinct and different human nature, even though it is the same kind of nature.

It is a different nature from that of James and John. So if something happens to Peter, James and John are fine now, they may be sad, but they still live and are fine. So that's actually an example of tritheism. Peter, James and John, each with their own nature distinct from him. They are not only different people, but also different natures. So it doesn't really represent the Trinity where the nature of the Father is identical to the nature of the Son and the Spirit. And here's a third one just in the time we have, we'll probably just do these three.

A third example that is often used is H2O. What we consider water which can be in the form of H2O can be in the form of solid frozen liquid, plain water and steam. So you have three different expressions of a molecular compound H2O. But note that you cannot have the same H2O molecules that are simultaneously solid, liquid, and vaporous. Rather, what you have are those H2O molecules that at one point are solid. Then at another moment, even if the ice melts, it is liquid and at another moment it is vapor. So really, what that H2O

best

illustrates is the heresy in the early church called modalism, that a God presents himself as the Father, and then comes to Earth as the Son, and then comes to Earth at Pentecost as the spirit. .

And then the modalist view would understand: Yes, there is Father, Son and Spirit, but in reality there are expressions of the same person who simply represent themselves in different ways. An illustration that I have used over the years and find useful in a broad way of thinking about the Trinity. It is not perfect and I will

explain

its imperfection in a moment, but it is to imagine in your mind. , three exactly overlapping circles. So I imagine a white board and I take a blue marker and draw on the board a blue circle. So you have on the board a circle that is surrounded by a line, a blue line.

Now I take a green marker and overlap it exactly with the blue line, which is hard to do nowadays, it's easier to do it as a mental project, right? You take a green marker and overlap it exactly with the blue one. This way you will have a circle on the board. The blue circle is the green circle. The green circle is the blue circle. And yet the green line is not the blue line, right? Then you take one more red marker and exactly overlap the blue and green. Then you have a circle on the board where the green circle, the blue circle and the red circle are identical.

And yet, the red line is a different expression of that circle. The blue line is a different expression and the green line is a different expression of that same identical circle. So something like this is true in the case of the Trinity, where the nature of God is fully possessed by the Father, fully by the Son, and fully by the Spirit. And yet, the Father is a different expression. Now, this is where the illustration fails, is that the geometric figure of a circle is not personal, but with the Father, the Son and the Spirit these are people.

They are people who act, speak and function fully as people. And so these are different personal expressions. The Father is a distinct personal expression, the Son a distinct personal expression, the Spirit a distinct personal expression of that undivided divine nature commonly possessed by the one God, and the three persons of the Trinity possess in common that one personal expression. . nature. Thanks for watching. If you enjoyed this content, visit sbts.edu/sample to access free theology lectures from Southern Seminary.