What do you think?
Rate this book
Rethinking the Trinity and Religious Pluralism (Strategic Initiatives in Evangelical Theology Strategic Init) by Keith E. Johnson
Increased interest in the doctrine of the Trinity has led to its use in formulating new, pluralistic approaches to the theology of religions. But theologian Keith Johnson is convinced that many of these forays are not salutary for Christian faith.Here Johnson critically engages the diverse proposals of Mark Heim, Amos Yong, Jacques Dupuis and Raimundo Panikkar. Johnson grounds his evaluation in an extended study of St. Augustine's trinitarian theology. Not only has this doctor of the church provided an ecumenical theological standard down through the ages, but, Johnson argues, one that should continue to serve as a criterion for faithful trinitarian thinking now. Locating the points at which the four proposals diverge from the Augustinian norm, Johnson delves into essential aspects of the trinitarian doctrine including immanence and economy, the relations of the divine Persons, and the proper use of the vestigia trinitatis in creation. Johnson's critique of these intriguing experiments draws attention to the methodological errors that plague attempts to apply the doctrine of the Trinity to a wide range of topics.
- GenresTheologyChurch History
Paperback
First published September 12, 2011
2 people are currently reading
28 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
January 30, 2012
“Trinity” is the current buzzword of theology. That, along with its related words and phrases like “perichoresis,” “mutual-indwelling” and “social-Trinity,” function in de facto manner as the shibboleth of legitimate theological enterprise. Unless one sprinkles in some sort of Trinitarian reference every page or so, the project is not to be taken seriously. So the doctrine of the Trinity is used to bolster or justify theological proposals on a wide range of topics including gender, marriage, the church, social justice, and the environment. This “turn to the Trinity” has not gone unnoticed by Keith Johnson, national director of theological education for Cru (formerly Campus Crusade for Christ) and an Augustine scholar. Of particular interest to Johnson are those proposals in the area of theology of religions that seek to justify, by appeal to the Trinity, either pluralism (many paths lead to God) and inclusivism (one is saved by Christ’s work alone, but one does not have to hear and believe the gospel in order to be saved on the basis of that work).
In Rethinking the Trinity and Religious Pluralism, Johnson evaluates the work of pluralists and inclusivists who appeal to the Trinity to justify optimism for the hope that more will ultimately be saved beyond those who hear and believe the gospel. Because the doctrine of the Trinity is a non-negotiable of the Christian faith, and because it describes the person of God from whom his works flow, surely one would be on solid ground by building a theology of religions upon Trinitarian foundations. Not so fast, Johnson says. Naked appeal to the Trinity does not an orthodox Christian truth claim make. One must be orthodox in one’s Trinitarian theology in order to do so, and this is exactly where Johnson waves the flag of caution.
Johnson evaluates the work of S. Mark Heim (protestant pluralist who argues for different religious ends because of the complexity of the Trinity), Amos Yong (protestant inclusivist who argues for a distinct economy of the Spirit from the Son in relating to religious others), Jacques Dupuis (Roman Catholic inclusivist who argues that other religions can be direct channels of salvation on the basis of subordination in the immanent Trinity), and Raimundo Panikkar (Roman Catholic pluralist who substitutes emptiness, relationality, and immanence for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). Each of these four theologians have put forward proposals for a Christian theology of religions that are justified by an appeal to the Trinity, something in the very person of God, that allows for their conclusions. After summarizing the theological proposal of each and the Trinitarian theology that grounds it, Johnson challenges their Trinitarian theology using the work of Augustine in the process. With careful, yet readable detail, Johnson demonstrates that Augustine’s teaching on the Trinity does not allow for their Trinitarian speculations. In fact, Johnson makes the case, via Augustine, that each theologian’s proposal fails precisely because their understanding of the Trinity, which in each case plays an essential part, is heterodox.
The last chapter brings the project to a close with some very helpful cautions for those who would appeal to the immanent Trinity to justify their theological proposals. Such appeals are almost always speculative, usually sever the doctrine of the Trinity from scriptural moorings, and can only be used to support the most general claims.
Quickly, what I liked about Rethinking the Trinity and Religious Pluralism:
Keith Johnson defends the biblical presentation of the gospel and the call for conscious faith in Christ to be saved. We need more people writing, speaking, and preaching on this topic, not less. Johnson is to be commended for his faithfulness.
Johnson’s summaries of those with whom he disagrees (Heim, Yong, Dupuis, and Panikkar) are fair, accurate, and remarkably easy to understand. As one who has spent a fair bit of time writing on the topic, I can testify that developing such clear summaries is no mean feat.
Johnson’s summary of Augustine’s doctrine of the Trinity is likewise clear and concise, which demonstrates a familiarity with the subject material that is noteworthy. Anyone who has tried to wade through Augustine’s De Trinitate can bear witness that such mastery is difficult.
Johnson’s appeal to church history to make his claim is especially apropos because so many today are seeking to justify their pluralist and inclusivist theologies of religions by claiming the support of church history. Evaluation of competing Trinitarian proposals by comparison to Augustine effectively undercuts such proposals and makes for a gorilla of a critique from an historical theology perspective. But that leads me to . . . .
My only concern with Rethinking the Trinity and Religious Pluralism:
By critiquing speculative Trinitarian formulations through comparison with Augustine’s presentation of the doctrine, all you have really done is to prove that inclusivist and pluralist theologies of religions fail on Augustinian grounds. But that is not the same thing as proving that they fail on biblical grounds. What if someone were not impressed by Augustine’s theology or refused to grant it pride of place? (Hardly a hypothetical question given that Johnson devotes an appendix to interacting with Colin Gunton’s objections to Augustine’s doctrine of the Trinity.)
To be fair, Johnson recognizes this when he writes, “Although theologians like Heim, Dupuis, Yong and Panikkar may agree that the Trinity offers the key to understanding religious diversity, no consensus currently exists among them as to whose doctrine of the Trinity holds the key. Each offers a different account of this doctrine as constitutive ground for a particular understanding of religious diversity. By appealing to the Trinitarian theology of Augustine . . . this study offers a potential answer” (195).
“Whose doctrine?” indeed. What if Augustine’s Trinitarian theology is not correct? I think it is. I dare say that I am convinced it is. But that is a different sort of statement than, “I know the Bible is correct.” For the Bible-believing Christian, a critique based on historical theology is going to be far less compelling than a critique based on biblical exegesis. That does not make it a bad or ineffective critique; just something less than a defeater, something less than devastating or ultimate. Despite that concern, I do think that Johnson’s book is a welcome and valuable contribution to the theology of religions discussion for all the reasons stated above.
In Rethinking the Trinity and Religious Pluralism, Johnson evaluates the work of pluralists and inclusivists who appeal to the Trinity to justify optimism for the hope that more will ultimately be saved beyond those who hear and believe the gospel. Because the doctrine of the Trinity is a non-negotiable of the Christian faith, and because it describes the person of God from whom his works flow, surely one would be on solid ground by building a theology of religions upon Trinitarian foundations. Not so fast, Johnson says. Naked appeal to the Trinity does not an orthodox Christian truth claim make. One must be orthodox in one’s Trinitarian theology in order to do so, and this is exactly where Johnson waves the flag of caution.
Johnson evaluates the work of S. Mark Heim (protestant pluralist who argues for different religious ends because of the complexity of the Trinity), Amos Yong (protestant inclusivist who argues for a distinct economy of the Spirit from the Son in relating to religious others), Jacques Dupuis (Roman Catholic inclusivist who argues that other religions can be direct channels of salvation on the basis of subordination in the immanent Trinity), and Raimundo Panikkar (Roman Catholic pluralist who substitutes emptiness, relationality, and immanence for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). Each of these four theologians have put forward proposals for a Christian theology of religions that are justified by an appeal to the Trinity, something in the very person of God, that allows for their conclusions. After summarizing the theological proposal of each and the Trinitarian theology that grounds it, Johnson challenges their Trinitarian theology using the work of Augustine in the process. With careful, yet readable detail, Johnson demonstrates that Augustine’s teaching on the Trinity does not allow for their Trinitarian speculations. In fact, Johnson makes the case, via Augustine, that each theologian’s proposal fails precisely because their understanding of the Trinity, which in each case plays an essential part, is heterodox.
The last chapter brings the project to a close with some very helpful cautions for those who would appeal to the immanent Trinity to justify their theological proposals. Such appeals are almost always speculative, usually sever the doctrine of the Trinity from scriptural moorings, and can only be used to support the most general claims.
Quickly, what I liked about Rethinking the Trinity and Religious Pluralism:
Keith Johnson defends the biblical presentation of the gospel and the call for conscious faith in Christ to be saved. We need more people writing, speaking, and preaching on this topic, not less. Johnson is to be commended for his faithfulness.
Johnson’s summaries of those with whom he disagrees (Heim, Yong, Dupuis, and Panikkar) are fair, accurate, and remarkably easy to understand. As one who has spent a fair bit of time writing on the topic, I can testify that developing such clear summaries is no mean feat.
Johnson’s summary of Augustine’s doctrine of the Trinity is likewise clear and concise, which demonstrates a familiarity with the subject material that is noteworthy. Anyone who has tried to wade through Augustine’s De Trinitate can bear witness that such mastery is difficult.
Johnson’s appeal to church history to make his claim is especially apropos because so many today are seeking to justify their pluralist and inclusivist theologies of religions by claiming the support of church history. Evaluation of competing Trinitarian proposals by comparison to Augustine effectively undercuts such proposals and makes for a gorilla of a critique from an historical theology perspective. But that leads me to . . . .
My only concern with Rethinking the Trinity and Religious Pluralism:
By critiquing speculative Trinitarian formulations through comparison with Augustine’s presentation of the doctrine, all you have really done is to prove that inclusivist and pluralist theologies of religions fail on Augustinian grounds. But that is not the same thing as proving that they fail on biblical grounds. What if someone were not impressed by Augustine’s theology or refused to grant it pride of place? (Hardly a hypothetical question given that Johnson devotes an appendix to interacting with Colin Gunton’s objections to Augustine’s doctrine of the Trinity.)
To be fair, Johnson recognizes this when he writes, “Although theologians like Heim, Dupuis, Yong and Panikkar may agree that the Trinity offers the key to understanding religious diversity, no consensus currently exists among them as to whose doctrine of the Trinity holds the key. Each offers a different account of this doctrine as constitutive ground for a particular understanding of religious diversity. By appealing to the Trinitarian theology of Augustine . . . this study offers a potential answer” (195).
“Whose doctrine?” indeed. What if Augustine’s Trinitarian theology is not correct? I think it is. I dare say that I am convinced it is. But that is a different sort of statement than, “I know the Bible is correct.” For the Bible-believing Christian, a critique based on historical theology is going to be far less compelling than a critique based on biblical exegesis. That does not make it a bad or ineffective critique; just something less than a defeater, something less than devastating or ultimate. Despite that concern, I do think that Johnson’s book is a welcome and valuable contribution to the theology of religions discussion for all the reasons stated above.
February 27, 2012
Throughout much of the enlightenment, Christian theologians began to move away from a Trinitarian theology of the Godhead. Instead of embracing the Trinity, they often tried to reduce Christianity to an ethic for living modeled by the person of Jesus (see Schliermacher and Kant). In the 20th century, with the magisterial works of the Protestant Karl Barth, and the Catholic Theologian Karl Rahner, embrace and study of the Trinity experience a revival in Western Christian theology. This is a good thing.
What has been a negative consequence of a revival of interest in Trinitarian theology is people who use the Trinitarian language of God for their own ends. One of the ways this has been happening in recent decades is to use the language of the Trinity to promote some sort of semi-universalist Christian doctrine of salvation.
This kind of pluralism cannot be justified by any honest reading of Scripture and church tradition. Keith Johnson, in his book Rethinking the Trinity and Religious Pluralism, attempts to use logic, the teachings of Augustine, and orthodox Christian doctrine to show how a broad-based embrace of religious pluralism and the Christian doctrine of salvation are incompatable.
I think Johnson does an admirable job taking on a very tedious task. He methodically lays out his point of view, he addresses the theology of four theologians who embrace the Trinity as a tool for bringing an unbiblical theology of Christian pluralism into the church, and then he plots a future for articulating a Trinitarian evangelical theology of salvation in the context of interfaith dialogue.
This book was a challenge for me, but in a good way. The author is smart. His audience is definitely among those in academic and intellectual circles. His subject matter is tedious. To really understand what is happening in the context of this book, you need to take time to digest it and process it. It is a well-written book, but it is not for the average lay person in the pews.
This book is an excellent text for Christian pastors seeking to develop an intellectually grounded Christian apologetic. Not only will this book get its reader to get thinking about challenging issues relating to the Trinity, it will help them think more deeply about to communicate their faith in general. Which is, by the way, never a bad thing.
What has been a negative consequence of a revival of interest in Trinitarian theology is people who use the Trinitarian language of God for their own ends. One of the ways this has been happening in recent decades is to use the language of the Trinity to promote some sort of semi-universalist Christian doctrine of salvation.
This kind of pluralism cannot be justified by any honest reading of Scripture and church tradition. Keith Johnson, in his book Rethinking the Trinity and Religious Pluralism, attempts to use logic, the teachings of Augustine, and orthodox Christian doctrine to show how a broad-based embrace of religious pluralism and the Christian doctrine of salvation are incompatable.
I think Johnson does an admirable job taking on a very tedious task. He methodically lays out his point of view, he addresses the theology of four theologians who embrace the Trinity as a tool for bringing an unbiblical theology of Christian pluralism into the church, and then he plots a future for articulating a Trinitarian evangelical theology of salvation in the context of interfaith dialogue.
This book was a challenge for me, but in a good way. The author is smart. His audience is definitely among those in academic and intellectual circles. His subject matter is tedious. To really understand what is happening in the context of this book, you need to take time to digest it and process it. It is a well-written book, but it is not for the average lay person in the pews.
This book is an excellent text for Christian pastors seeking to develop an intellectually grounded Christian apologetic. Not only will this book get its reader to get thinking about challenging issues relating to the Trinity, it will help them think more deeply about to communicate their faith in general. Which is, by the way, never a bad thing.
August 13, 2016
This book can be a little challenging, especially if its your first bit of exposure to the topic of religious pluralism. That said, this book is excellent and timely - particularly as far as pluralistic views are concerned by those under the banner Christianity. Keith Johnson shows how many of these views which utilize elements of Trinitarianism to espouse their views actually comprise the Biblical and historical foundations of Trinitarianism. This book also doubles as an excellent (though selective) introduction to Augustine's Trinitarian thought. On a personal note, I took two classes under Dr. Johnson's teaching at Reformed Theological Seminary and they were a couple of the best (and most demanding) courses that I took.
October 28, 2011
Johnson does a fantastic job of addressing the misuse of the Trinity in contemporary scholarship by wielding the insights of Augustine against modern failures to truly retrieve a robust and orthodox trinitarianism.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews