The Quest for the Trinity: The Doctrine of God in Scripture, History and Modernity

by Stephen R. Holmes

The doctrine of the Trinity was settled in the fourth century, and maintained, with only very minor disagreement or development, by all strands of the church--Western and Eastern, Protestant and Catholic--until the modern period. In the twentieth century, there arose a sense that the doctrine had been neglected and stood in need of recovery. In The Quest for the Trinity, Holmes takes us on a remarkable journey through 2,000 years of the Christian doctrine of God. We witness the church's discovery of the Trinity from the biblical testimony, its crucial patristic developments, and medieval and Reformation continuity. We are also confronted with the questioning of traditional dogma during the Enlightenment, and asked to consider anew the character of the modern Trinitarian revival. Holmes's controversial conclusion is that the explosion of theological work in recent decades claiming to recapture the heart of Christian theology in fact deeply misunderstands and misappropriates the traditional doctrine of the Trinity. Yet his aim is constructive: to grasp the wisdom of the past and, ultimately, to bring a clearer understanding of the meaning of the present.

Genres: Theology, Christian, Church History, Christianity, Religion, Christian History, Philosophy

231 pages, Paperback

First published October 29, 2012

Reviews

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

The bee's knees with regard to the history of the doctrine of the Trinity for Dummies. Holmes was a social Trinitarian at one point, but somehow got into the original sources (in a refreshing bit of humility he does not describe this experience and is completely penitent without being egotistically flagelistic). He walks through the modern "revival" of Trinitarian theology, shows that it really began in the 20th century, and then goes back to show how the church fathers reasoned about it, in particular emphasizing how language can and cannot speak about God, and the need for divine simplicity (God has no parts) to really understand the church fathers. If you want a guide to the gist of such figures as Irenaeus, Origen, Athanasius, the Cappadocians, and Augustine. He also has some very helpful material on modern theologians, most notably Schleiermacher and Hegel.

Holmes is not solid on all issues facing the church today, but on this one, he is right on and much needed in our currently material Tritheistic Evangelicalism. I highly commend it to anyone interested in this rather arcane and difficult to understand field.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the twentieth century there was a flowering of Trinitarian theology from such luminaries as Karl Barth, Karl Rahner, John Zizioulas, Jurgen Moltmann, Wolfhart Pannenberg, Robert Jenson, Miroslav Volf, Leonardo Boff, Cornelius Plantinga, Michael Rea, Brian Leftow and others. While this so-called Trinitarian revival begins with Barth and best intentions (to rescue the doctrine of the Trinity from Liberal theology’s refuse pile) those that followed him took avenues which broke with the tradition. Sometimes this was because scholars willfully lay aside earlier theological reflection, other times it is because they fail to appreciate the meaning and nuances of earlier theological discussions.

In The Quest for the Trinity Stephen R. Holmes, senior lecturer in theology at St. Andrews, has written a short book which gives an overview of the contemporary approaches to the Trinity, and sets it against the backdrop of the theological tradition. Holmes basic premise is that the contemporary quest to recapture the doctrine of the Trinity, misunderstands and distorts the tradition (xv). In his first chapter, Holmes sketches the contours of the ‘Trinitarian revival.’ In the chapters which follow, he walks chronologically through the history of the church, demonstrating the broad consensus of Trinitarian theology from the 4th Century councils until the Nineteenth Century. Holmes presents and summarizes the writings of many of the theologians and thinkers who reflected on the nature of the Triune God.

This is a short book (232 pages) and therefore cannot necessarily give a detailed analysis of all twenty centuries of theological reflection. Yet Holmes demonstrates his thesis and illuminates significant details along the way. Holmes is able to shows that the method and understanding of the Trinity had significantly changed in the modern period from what it was in the patristic, medieval or Reformation eras. For instance, when Holmes looks back on the Biblical texts which formed the basis of patristic reflection on the Trinity, he observes that many of the go-to-texts were from the Old Testament. In the modern period, the Old Testament is treated as though it had nothing significant to teach us about the Christian doctrine of the Trinity because historical critical approaches trained us to read the Bible, solely through the lens of authorial intent. Patristic exegetes were committed to reading the Old Testament Christologically and mined it for theological treasures.

Beyond method, Holmes demonstrates that contemporary approaches to the Trinity employ language differently than earlier approaches. In the fourth century debates, which culminated in the councils of Nicea and Constantinople, the language of personhood (hypostasis, persona) was employed to refer to the members of the Trinity. In contemporary theology, personhood is understood as fully personal, possessing will, intellect, personality. In the patrisitic period, personhood denotes a self-consciousness but the individual distinctions between persons is not stressed (there are not three I-centers). Rather the Cappadocian formulation affirms that the Triune God exists as one substance, trice over. Likewise traditional theologians were committed to the ineffability of God, where modern theologians sometimes claim a fuller understanding of God’s nature.

One conclusion which Holmes makes that is controversial in some quarters is his assertion that Greek and Latin conception of the Trinity are in substantial agreement. My own theological training taught me that the model of the Trinity in the East was a ‘Social Trinity model’ which stressed the inter-relation of the persons but in the West, the Trinity was understood in more psychological terms. Often the blame for the difference is assigned to Augustine for his ubiquitous influence on the West and his failure to understand the Cappadocians. Against this Holmes asserts that Augustine was the greatest interpreter of Cappadocian Theology (122). Holmes observes that, ” Augustine is held not to have understood the Cappadocian achievement, and to have stumbled through some metaphysical arguments which are best sub-Trinitarian when compared to the glories of the two Gregories. (130)” Holmes finds unlikely that Augustine would present a radically different Trinity from the Cappadocians without knowing that he did. He asserts to the contrary:

If any explanation is offered to account for this extraordinarily unlikely state of affairs, it usually turns on a suggestion that Augustine’s grasp of Greek was at best partial, and therefore that he did not understand the texts that led to the Constantinopolitian settlement. Against this, we might note: that Augustine’s grasp of Greek was actually rather good, at least by the time he wrote De Trinitate, that there are several earlier Latin interpreters of Nicene theology whom he could have read, some whom we know he stood in close relationship to (e.g. Ambrose of Milan), and that no writer of the day accuses Augustine of misunderstanding Constantinopolitian Trintarianism. Further, my discussion of Hilary, above, has indicated just how dependent on Eastern categories his developed Trinitarianism theoloogy was. (130-1).

Nevertheless, differences in Eastern and Western Trinitarianism develop with the controversy over the filioque clause in the Nicene Creed (In the original creed, ‘the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father’, in the West the word’s ‘and the Son’ were added to the Creed. However this difference did not threaten the Church’s orthodoxy or catholicity; there was full communion for centuries between Christians on both sides of the debate(164).

Without going into the details of every thinker Holmes profiled, I think he demonstrates well that Christians were united in their understanding of the Trinity until the 19th Century (when the ferment of the Reformation and enlightenment style rationalism prompted a decisive break with tradition). You do not need to be an expert of the Trinity to read this book; however I think those who have followed the Trinitarian conversation will find this book most valuable.

Thank you to Intervarsity Press for providing me a copy of this book in exchange for this review.

[Andrzej Stelmasiak · Rating 5 out of 5]

Possibly the best book on the Trinity that came from modern day Protestant. I certainly rate it higher than Letham and others. The Paternoster in the UK released it under the title 'The Holy Trinity', that is the same book.

[Seth Cusson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic look at the consistency of orthodox Trinitarian theology throughout the history of the church.

[Jeremy Fritz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent, engaging, and surprisingly thorough for 200 pages.

Textbook for God and Humanity at CTS.

[Gabi Scherer · Rating 4 out of 5]

In a nutshell: The main goal of this book is to show you how the modern "trinitarian revival" is not actually a revival at all because it creates the same problems as those in antiquity. Holmes argues, and I agree, that this book is important because it shows the need to know the history of trinitarian theology because classical theology defends against the same problems that modern theology has.
For an academic book, it is really great, relatively succinct (mostly), and accomplishes its goal.

[Adam Shields · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short Review: (Read the long review this is a technical book). Holmes focus is showing that modern trinitarian theology is fundamentally different than the Trinitarian doctrine developed by the Patristic fathers of the first several centuries of Christianity. This is historical theology and I think we need more historical theology, especially in the Evangelical church world. I think he makes his point well in most areas. Modern language has altered the idea of personhood and substance so the patristic understanding of their language is very different than the way that modern readers understand the trinitarian descriptions of the Nicene Creed and other creedal statements.

What I was not convinced of is that Augustine and the Eastern trinitarian writers were in fundamental agreement. If it is true, then Holmes is right and modern work on the trinity focusing on its social aspects if fundamentally different. If Holmes is wrong, and the East were more focused on social interaction of the trinity then his thesis breaks down and modern trinitarian theology is an expansion of eastern Patristics, not a fundamentally different theology.

This is a book well worth reading if you are looking into the historical theology of the Trinity. It is technical. I have never used my Kindle dictionary and wikipedia look up function so much as with this book. Holmes clearly is familiar with the subject and far smarter than I am.

My full review is on my blog at http://bookwi.se/the-quest-for-the-tr...

[Noah R Hill · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Quest for the Trinity: The Doctrine of God in Scripture, History and Modernity is a cogent and concise work of historic theology that surveys the development of Trinitarian doctrine in the Christian tradition. The author, Stephen R. Holmes (Ph.D. King’s College London), contributed this book as part of Christian Doctrines in Historical Perspective, a series addressing the history of major theological reflections in Christian doctrine. This contribution focuses on historic Trinitarian doctrine compared to recent theological efforts claiming to “recapture the doctrine of the Trinity”(2). Holmes’ thesis in the book is historic, contending that these 20th century “renewals” of Trinitarian doctrine depend on ideas “that cannot be found in patristic, medieval, or Reformation accounts of the doctrine of the Trinity”(2). Despite the massive task of tracing Trinitarian doctrine across 2,000 years, Holmes accomplishes this with clarity, maintaining a critical yet charitable approach to the historical witnesses on their own terms.

In the introduction, Holmes offers his thesis and methodology for concluding that modern renewal efforts of Trinitarian doctrine depart from the orthodox-historic doctrine, which was universally affirmed by the church and largely unchallenged from the 4th through 18th centuries. Holmes begins in Chapter 1 by surveying the progenitors of the 20th century revival who, while zealous to “take back the Trinity,” unknowingly opened the door for others to go further in “reinterpreting technical Trinitarianism” for various agendas (12). Chapters 2 and 3 pivot to explore the extent to which Trinitarian doctrine can be found in Scripture and the early development of the doctrine during the 2nd and 3rd centuries (33). Here, Holmes helpfully highlights the hermeneutical principles employed by pre-Nicene theologians which differ significantly from modern-critical exegetical standards. Chapters 4 and 5 survey the pivotal 4th century debates and pro-Nicene theologians that settled Trinitarian doctrine for centuries. Chapter 6 and 7 compare Augustine’s Trinitarianism with the Eastern fathers to argue that the two largely agreed on Trinitarian doctrine (138), and how the filioque debates drew deeper fault lines between the Eastern and Western church as time passed (164). The harvest of this orthodox Trinitarianism was the affirmation of all Scripture in revealing the Trinity, divine unknowability, divine simplicity, and one divine personality. Chapter 8 chronicles the growth of two prominent anti-trinitarian movements during the 16th to 18th centuries, namely, the biblical and rational anti-trinitarians (170-176). The final chapter traces these influences on the dawn of revival efforts in the 20th century and beyond. Holmes concludes by re-stating the Trinitarianism of the 4th-18th centuries and contrasting it with the quite different formulation of the 20th century, which focused exclusively on the New Testament texts and the theologian's ability to reason adequately about the divine essence while rejecting divine simplicity and one divine personality (200).

While the claims in this book are historical, they are not without dogmatic and doxological imports for the church today. As disconcerting as these claims are, they are also useful as a cautionary tale for the church, especially ministers and academics. After all, if such a central doctrine of the Christian faith as the Trinity can undergo a large departure as this book documents, no doctrine is safe. Considering this, it is prudent to ask what factors inform, motivate, or even change our categories, conceptions, and belief about God and His Trinitarian nature today. Awareness of these influences on our dogmatics can help counter the tendency to domesticate the Triune God in our image to justify our social priorities or ecclesiology (21). The doxological import of these claims, equally, cannot be ignored. As Holmes demonstrates, the starting point for the earliest Christian worship was a commitment to worshipping Jesus as God, but never apart from the Father and Holy Spirit, as the Scripture commanded (54). The doctrine of God was formulated to make sense of these exegetical and doxological commitments afterwards. Underlying these efforts was the conviction that God can be known but cannot be comprehended. The church must recover and be shaped by these commitments like the church before us to faithfully retrieve Trinitarian doctrine.

There are two additions that would strengthen Holmes’ contribution further. First, in the opening chapter, he states that he is not “particularly devoted to arguing his thesis” because the argument arises “naturally” from the historic survey of the readings (2). While the assumption is understandable, a concluding chapter explicitly contrasting the orthodox Trinitarian doctrine and modern “revivals” in more detail would have been constructive and helpful to modern readers. To be fair, Holmes performs a “contrast” at the end of the book (200); however, the comparison is one paragraph in length, leaving the reader with much interpretive work to do. Second, while Holmes highlights the fruit of recent historic Trinitarian scholarship for his own historical analysis (84), there is no mention of the fruits of this scholarship for orthodox Trinitarian retrieval efforts in the 20th and 21st centuries. Without a nod to any positive efforts, readers are left with the impression that orthodox-historic Trinitarianism is lost, and no one is actively retrieving it. The reasoning for both inclusions appeals to the General Editor’s preface, which states “an appraisal of the doctrine in current debate” as an objective of the series, including the “current intellectual environment” in the conversation (xiii). While “current” is polysemous, readers may contend that Holmes is not current enough in his appraisal of Trinitarian doctrine. The inclusion of a more substantive final comparison between current and orthodox Trinitarian doctrine and a brief nod to modern yet orthodox Trinitarian retrieval efforts would situate readers to their most current context, offering a constructive capstone to the already robust historical survey.

Holmes’ book proves to be a helpful resource on the development of the doctrine of the Trinity for a wide readership. While Holmes’ says that the work is intended primarily for upper-level undergraduate students with a basic familiarity of technical theological language and central historical debates, the import of his arguments and supportive historical survey can be beneficial to a wider readership. In addition to upper-level undergraduates, this work can be useful for lay-Christians and pastors who grew up in the very context that Holmes’ critiques and want an accessible historical survey of the doctrine of God to contextualize and refine their own understanding. While a thorough reading is beneficial, it is not required and could be used minimally as a point of reference for specific debates or periods of interest. Holmes himself acknowledges that this work is not purposed to be comprehensive, but a bird's-eye vantage of the historic development of the central topic of Christian devotion, the doctrine of the Triune God.

[Lee Irons · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very good introductory book tracing the history of the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. But I was a tad disappointed – his opening chapter hooked me and set me up for certain expectations that were not met in the way I had expected. In his first chapter Holmes surveyed the central ideas of contemporary Trinitarian theology (e.g., Barth, Rahner, Zizioulas, Pannenberg, Moltmann, Jenson, Plantinga, and others). Having set forth their ideas, he then made a daring and exciting proposition: “These are the ideas which I claimed at the start were absent from, or even formally condemned by, all earlier accounts of the Trinity” (p. 32). This sets the stage, then, for Holmes to provide a reading of those earlier accounts, which he does in the remaining chapters of the book, following a historical scheme. But then I felt that the book ended abruptly and he never returned to his claim at the outset, to show the differences between the contemporary Trinitarian theology and the historic doctrine. I think Holmes believed the point had been made implicitly merely by setting the two side-by-side, leaving it to the reader to note the differences. But I would have liked it if Holmes had written one more concluding chapter in which he showed point-by-point the ways in which contemporary Trinitarian theologies depart from the church’s historic understanding. Perhaps Holmes felt constrained to avoid being too polemical because this book is the first of a projected series titled Christian Doctrines in Historical Perspective, edited by Alan P. F. Sell. The goal of the series is “to trace the biblical roots and defining moments in history of major Christian doctrines” (General Editor’s Preface). I hope that someday Holmes writes that final chapter in some form.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book reviews the modern move in Trinitarian theology, notably in Barth, Rahner and Zizioulas etc., placing personhood and relationality at center stage of Trinitarian thought. By summarising the historical development of the doctrine of the Trinity, from Scripture, through the Patristics, Medievals and finally modern 19th century theologians, Holmes comes to the more recent discussions, which Holmes questions.

Summary of the Classical doctrine:

"1. Divine nature is simple, incomposite, and ineffable. It is also unrepeatable, and so, in crude and inexact terms, “one”.
2. Language referring to the divine nature is always inexact and trophic; nonetheless, if formulated with much care and more prayer, it's might adequately, if not fully, refer.
3. There are three divine hypostases that are instantiations of the divine nature: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
4. The three divine hypostases exist really, eternally, and necessarily, and there is nothing divine that exists beyond or outside their existence.
5. The three divine hypostases are distinguished by internal relations of origin - begetting and proceeding - and not otherwise.
6. All that is spoken of God, with a single and very limited exception of that language which refers to the relations of origin of the three hypostases, is spoken of the one life the three share, and so is indivisibly spoken of all three.
7. The relationships of origin express/establish relational distinctions between the three existent hypostases; no other distinctions are permissible. "(146)

[Emma Whear · Rating 4 out of 5]

So above my paygrade. It took outlining each individual page to understand what was going on. When I did that, I saw just what a Trinitarian genius Holmes was.

So, readability: 1/10
analysis: 9/10
dryness: 9/10

[Laurabeth · Rating 4 out of 5]

wowzers it's like walking into a shallow area of a lake then suddenly dropping off the edge into the of the deep unknown.

[David deBruyn · Rating 5 out of 5]

Perhaps the best and clearest historical theology of the classical doctrine of the Trinity I have read. Would have liked a reference to Edwards, but that might have derailed the conversation.

[Jake Stone · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent overview of the history of Trinitarian thought in church history and where we need recovery today!

[Bailey C]

I read this but make no promises regarding understanding! 🫠

[Marc Cortez · Rating 5 out of 5]

For a complete evaluation, check out my full review.

In The Quest for the Trinity, Steve Holmes offers an invaluable study of the Trinity, its historic development, and its use in modern theology. Any student of theology would be well advised to spend some time assimilating the book and its arguments.

The strengths of the book clearly lie in Holmes obvious familiarity with a tremendous range of historical and theological data. And he does a fine job keeping the wealth of research from obscuring the basic argument of the book by shifting much of the detail to the footnotes. What could have easily become an overwhelmingly technical book instead remains accessible to the non-specialist, while still providing a wealth of information for those who want to dig deeper.

I particularly appreciated Holmes’ discussions of Augustine and the filioque controversy. I still hear people critiquing both of these as though they represent a way of approaching the Trinity that is fundamentally different from that represented by Greek theologians. The two chapters that Holmes devotes to these topics does a fine job summarizing the widespread consensus among historians that this simply is not the case.

Some might identify as a weakness the fact that the book does not offer its own constructive proposal for how we should understand the Trinity today. That, of course, is because Holmes has no intention of doing so, as he makes clear in the introduction. Nonetheless, those reading the book for that purpose will walk away disappointed.

The only other weakness for some is that this isn’t a book for beginners. Even though Holmes writes clearly and carefully, the book assumes considerable familiarity with theology and church history. Without that, I’m sure you’ll find the book heavy going in places.

[Grace Catherine Beckham · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book’s series—Christian Doctrines in Historical Perspective—seeks to trace biblical and historical roots of particular doctrines, assess their current debates, and hold together doctrines often separated. Holmes is contributing to an effort to supply “biblical-historical grounding of current theological reflection,” seeking to make systematic theology more appropriately understood. Stephen Holmes received his Ph.D. from King’s College London and lectures in systematic theology at St. Mary’s College in St. Andrews. The preface indicates that Holmes intends to assess the modern “revival” of Trinitarian theological concern, positing that such work is not indeed a revival of the classical fourth-century doctrine but an utter departure from it. Holmes asserts that a bigger-picture view of Trinitarian historical development is necessary to evaluate the quality of modern thought. Holmes argues that his sweeping scope allows for an argument that “could not have been convincingly with any less breadth of focus.” Ultimately, Holmes’s purpose is to paint a historical argument displaying the exegetical strength of traditional Trinitarianism, and equip the reader to ask why we needed “a transformation which will go back to [the doctrine of the Trinity’s] very beginnings.”
Before diving into a chronological explication of the key waves of Trinitarian doctrine, Holmes begins his work with the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The theological work of this era led to a redefinition of God’s relationship with history, a major theme in modern scholarship, affecting ontology, ecclesiology, and ethics. According to Holmes, this is where modern Christians find themselves, surrounded by Trinitarian theologies that entangle God in the world in ways that would have been “formally condemned by all earlier accounts of the Trinity.” One throughline argument is that the patristic Trinitarian tradition was univocal between the communities of the East (Greek) and West (Latin). Rather than agreeing with the ‘de Regnon thesis,’ Holmes insists that “The one who claims an East-West divide on any issue other than the narrow one of the filioque, is claiming something that the tradition never saw.” In both the interlude chapter and final subheading, Holmes succinctly breaks down the major claims of classical Trinitarianism, outlining the basis from which modern Trinitarian ideas have departed. Beyond providing an overview of the doctrine throughout history, Holmes works to dispel misconceptions about the original doctrine without wholeheartedly committing to its defense. While Holmes claims no agenda to fully endorse patristic Trinitarianism, he nonetheless glaringly highlights throughout the work the detriment of modern theologians’ abandonment of both tradition and Scripture.
In chapter 2, Holmes does a deep dive into Old Testament theology and the importance of biblical monotheism in shaping Trinitarian debates. If we are to worship Yahweh alone, it is essential to determine whether God as Trinity makes for three separate beings, three “masks” of one, or one God—Yahweh, the LORD—unified in three persons. A fundamental tenet of our course is that “Christian monotheism is Trinitarian monotheism.” Pulling from McDonald, Holmes explores “the repeated call to the difficult task of exclusive loyalty to God alone,” seen in places such as the Shema. A major question behind all Trinitarian theology is simply: Who is the God we worship? The divine oneness of the Trinity is unique, and Sanders attests that its theological explanation is meant to be doxology; the doctrine of the Trinity predicates on faith and points to praise. Holmes develops two ideas here: 1) “belief in only one God is… as much or more about fiducia… as nolitia… or assensus” and 2) the Old Testament can be appropriately viewed as ‘monotheizing literature.’ The Quest for the Trinity—historically, in our course, and for Holmes —must itself be a quest for appropriate relationship and worship of the God of the Bible. As Holmes writes later, “the tale of the development of Trinitarian theology is an account of how they came to find a satisfying way of speaking of the one they worshipped.”
The main critique I would offer Holmes is terminological. Particularly in Holmes’s chapter on divine simplicity in fourth-century debates, his writing could have been enhanced by including previous terms to more directly compare the various positions to modern departures. An example of how ‘signpost language’ could have benefited Chapter 5 would be employing the framework of immanent and economic Trinity from Chapter 1 as a lens for evaluating fourth-century work. Take Eunomius and his insistence that the ‘Ingenerate’ God cannot ‘divide himself’ in the begetting of the Son and so begets from His will rather than His essence—Holmes sums this up as “unlike in essence, but united in activity.” Holmes’s assessment could be furthered using Chapter 1’s language: Eunomius seems to assume a divine unity in the economic Trinity, but not in the immanent Trinity. While this book is intentionally developmental and broad in nature, the lack of linguistic continuity can obscure Holmes’s major argument, leaving the close reader grasping. To strengthen his thesis about the relationship between modern and historic views, he could include a brief subsection in each chapter’s conclusion that points the reader back to his first argument and forward to the next perspective.
My recommendation for this book is threefold, with varying levels of technicality. First, I would recommend this book to the person who longs to know the Triune God more deeply, though He cannot be fathomed. The reader who will persist—curious and critical—unto greater knowledge and humble worship of God, will thrive in its pages. Second, this book’s ideal reader has some interest (and background) in church history. As Holmes mentioned himself, this book serves as a critical overview of a few thousand years of Trinitarian thought, not a deepening or defense of a particular strand. Holmes moves quickly on the assumption that major theological terms, historical church figures, and major controversies are not new to the reader. Thus, for a reader like me humility, time, and tenacity are required to engage this book well. Finally, this book is for the student or scholar who is grounded in conviction but keeps an open mind, one who accepts glimmers of truth from all sorts of places. There are theologians in this book whose conclusions about the Trinity are heretical but reveal important doctrinal gaps or questions. A good reader of this book will listen to the Spirit’s challenge throughout history without forsaking orthodoxy.

[Lukas Mason · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very impressive work of trinitarian scholarship, worthy of much more study than I was able to devote to it. Will have to revisit more slowly next time.

Read a 2nd time in August of 2021. Incredibly clarifying book regarding the historical conversation (and controversy) surrounding the doctrine of God and his triune nature. Our "recovery" of the doctrine of the trinity is often no more than a recapitulation of Hegelian and social trinitarian confusions of the patristic doctrine and position of the early church.

[Jaden A · Rating 4 out of 5]

Westminster, Pennsylvania does not have a course with its core focus being Trinitarian theology. About 54% of Gerald Bray's 'The Doctrine of God' is focused on a discussion of the Trinity, however. Nonetheless, I thought I would read this book which is featured in ST6100 Trinitarian Theology, taught by Dr. D. Blair Smith as an RTS Global course.

Chapter 1: ‘The History that is’: Studying the Doctrine of the Trinity in the Twenty-First Century
This chapter gives a general overview of where we stand in terms of this doctrine in light of church history. Discussion is given of liberal protestantism, Barth’s influence on the doctrine, and the three chief views of the Trinity belonging to 21st century analytic theology.

Chapter 2: ‘In your light, we see light’: The Trinity in the Bible
The second chapter explicates how the patristic fathers approached the Bible hermeneutically, with a special emphasis given to their focus on Christology. This chapter was interesting as it revealed how the patristics took many Old Testament passages to be teaching the trinity. Some of these ideas were inchoate, but important to the historical development of the Doctrine of the Trinity.

Chapter 3: ‘Always with him are his Word and Wisdom’: Early Patristic Developments in the Doctrine of the Trinity
In this chapter Holmes speaks to how the Doctrine of the Trinity was long supposed prior to the 4th century, albeit groping attempts to create a coherent statement doctrinally. Discussion is given to Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Modalistic Monarchianism, and Origen. Tertullian was largely responsible for the move from the Logos Christology of the Greek apologists to discussion of God as triune in his work ‘Against Praxeas.’

Chapter 4: ‘From the ousia of the Father’: The Fourth-Century Debates 1
This chapter is a discussion of Arius and the Council of Nicaea. The historical background provided here was invaluable in terms of understanding how Arius arrived at the heretical belief he proposed. The topic of God’s essence crops up in discussion of how God can be three persons of one substance in the thought of Athanasius. Athanasius’ solution was one of divine simplicity.

Chapter 5: ‘The Godhead is by nature simple’: The fourth-Century Debates 2
This chapter explains the continuing development of the Doctrine of the Trinity among the Cappadocian fathers. These pro-nicene theologians gave attention to ineffability, simplicity, and the non-univocal (hence, imprecision) of our language in reference to God. This discussion was all in relation to how there are three persons in the Godhead, yet one undivided essence.

Chapter 6: ‘Understood by a few saints and holy persons’: The West and Augustine
This chapter demonstrates the unfolding of the Doctrine of the Trinity in the western church, especially with Augustine’s ‘De Trinitate.’ The doctrine in the western church is largely indebted to Augustine—how there are no accidental qualities in God, and the three relations of the Godhead, and one divine operation. Most important, however, is Augustine’s understanding of the three ‘hypostases’ in terms of the personalist account that he offers.

*An interlude on pages 144-146 features an invaluable summary of the DoctrineTrinity from the fourth century.

Chapter 7: ‘Distinction in the persons but unity in the nature’: The Medieval Doctrine of the Trinity
This chapter gives discussion to the topic of the ‘Filioque’ schism between the east and west. Historical figures mentioned include Anselm, Richard of St Victor, Thomas Aquinas, Phontius and Palamas. Richard of St. Victor has a very interesting argument concerning the perfection of love within the Godhead, thereby rendering God a plurality. I found this interesting. It doesn’t reach the conclusion of course, that God is three-in-one, but it does demonstrate that there is a plurality within the Godhead. Palamas is a pivotal figure in Greek orthodoxy, believing there to be a distinction between ‘essence’ and ‘energy.’ This helped me to understand what leads the eastern church to have a more mystical understanding of the Holy Spirit and their account of ‘theosis.’

Chapter 8: ‘By testimonies of the Scriptures or by manifest reason’: Anti-Trinitarianism from the Reformation to the Eighteenth Century
This chapter provides an account of how John Calvin held to the orthodox account of the Trinity, yet placed special emphasis on how each person of the Trinity is ‘autotheotic,’ i.e., God in themselves. The rest of the chapter places its focus squarely on how the Enlightenment subsequently effected the Doctrine of the Trinity.

Chapter 9: ‘A transformation which will go back to its very beginnings’: The Doctrine of the Trinity since 1800
In this chapter more discussion is offered in how the theologians have both continued to provide their work in service of the 4th century doctrine of the Trinity, or detracted from it. An interesting finding here is that Charles Hodge of Old Princeton and his definition of ‘person’ was critical in shaping modern Trinitarian theology. Finally, Holmes offers a concluding summary of how some modern understandings of the Trinity depart from the Patristic understanding of the doctrine.

Overall, this book helped me to faithfully articulate the orthodox understanding of the Doctrine of the Trinity and its placement in the context of church history.

[Cameron Coombe · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well-researched and accessible (at least compared to more specialist studies) exposition of patristic trinitarian theology, with brief notes on medieval and Reformation developments, and a criticism of the transformations the doctrine has undergone since Kant. Holmes forwards an almost either-or between the received patristic-medieval-Reformation doctrine and these modern innovations. He argues his case forcefully, though I feel like I need to look at the primary texts myself before I can decide whether I agree with him or not! He readily downplays the modern thesis (though it might not be so modern, and traces of it can be found in Reformation thought) that early trinitarian theology was driven by Greek philosophical concerns. Of course, this isn't entirely the truth (the patristics drew widely on Scripture and did not uncritically accept philosophical assumptions), but I'm not sure it's entirely not the truth either. Holmes concedes that patristic theology is not perfect here; whether it convincingly conveys the underlying logics of New Testament proto-trinitarianism is another question--a question that moderns rightly ask and continue to do so.

[Tyler Collins · Rating 5 out of 5]

Holmes' "The Quest for the Trinity" was an excellent read. He takes 2,000 years of development in the Doctrine of the Trinity and condenses it into a well researched and accessible 200-page book. I really enjoyed his writing style and fair--but critical--treatment of the material. His main thesis is that the Trinitarian revival of the past 50 years, whether rightly so or not, has departed greatly from the classical Christian doctrine which took shape in the fourth century (and which, he demonstrates, was held to with little deviation by the church even though the Reformation). He is very good at telling the essentials of the historical development in an engaging manner while staying concise. I used this paper as one of the primary sources for a paper I wrote for my Systematic Theology I course under Dr. Jacob Lett at MidAmerica Nazarene University.

[Brian Maula · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good historical account of the development of Trinitarian theology. Holmes spares no expense accounting for the way the doctrine has developed culminating in the patristic accounts. Holmes makes a solid conclusion that the dogma of the Trinity is lost in the 20the century. The revival was more or less a revising of the core doctrines. From Hegel and Schleiermacher, to Barth and Rahner…Holmes’ conclusion is correct. They fundamentally changed the language of the Trinity relegating God to abstruse abstractions rather than making God close.

Why four stars? I think Holmes glossed over much of the 20th century. He touches on Barth and Rahner but doesn’t show how the doctrine developed in the later parts. I would love if Holmes followed up this book with the effects of Barth especially through Pannenberg and Volf.

[Grace Lawrence · Rating 3 out of 5]

Clearly an excellent historical work that spans over two thousand years of Christian debate. Would have liked it more if it wasn't so dense. I also wish Holmes unpacked his thesis more. He does a thorough job of explaining the history of the doctrine of the trinity but his conclusion is a bit lack luster. Holmes' thesis is that the Trinitarian Modern Revivalists don't recover Trinitarian values but rather deconstruct them. He has a few concluding sentences in the final chapter but really needs at least 15 more pages (or an entire chapter) dedicated to tying his thesis into the rest of his book. Because he fails to do this, it feels a bit disjointed and the end drops off rather abruptly.

[Tyler Brown · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a wonderfully helpful read. The argument of the book is that 1) the earliest Christians were functionally Trinitarian because they were worshippers of Jesus, and that "in Jesus they had met the God of Israel face to face" (51). 2) The "grammar" of this confession developed in the 2nd-3rd centuries and was "settled in the fourth century, and was then maintained, with only very minor disagreement or development, by all strands of the church" (xv). But 3) the 20th century "revival" of Trinitarian reflections were "thoroughgoing departures from the older tradition" (xvi).

In short, well researched, and clearly written form, it seems that Holmes has proved his thesis correct.

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpful work on the historic development of Trinidadian doctrine. Particularly as it relates to the 19th/20th c. MISunderstanding of the fourth c. settlement of Nicene Orthodoxy.

Namely, there is the misunderstanding that the fourth century theologians shoehorned biblical teaching into Greek metaphysical categories. If anything, it is the other way around. They used Greek terminology (“hypostases”/“ousia”) to describe what the Bible teaches about the Triune God.

The historical development was chiefly exegetical!

[Christian Cunningham · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent resource for a one volume historical survey of the doctrine of the Trinity from the patristics to the 20th century. Helpfully and rightly put together many issues (like a redefinition of person from ancient to modern) albeit somewhat simplistically. However, this was necessary because of the size of the book. I wish more detail was given to the Reformers and Post-Reformed acceptance of the Trinity rather than novel expositions of it in the Socinian tradition, but that would’ve made the book somewhat repetitive and redundant.

[Josiah Kottman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Exceptional book!

Stephen Holmes does a remarkable job at writing a book that is full of the intricacies of the Trinity while still making it possible for the laymen to read.

He has a clear depth of knowledge when it comes to the history of Trinitarian doctrine and he communicates it well by refuting the modernists who abuse the Trinitarian doctrines.

This book could answer most questions regarding the Trinity that a person would want to know. I believe that every pastor should take up this book because it will shape their theology and the theology of their church.

[William Horton · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was really helpful for understanding how the doctrine of the Trinity was developed and understood over time while debunking a lot of the common myths about the doctrine, like the idea that the Trinity was a later addition to Christianity that wasn’t originally present. My only complaint about the book was that it was often pretty difficult to track which views the author was presenting as correct and which he was only presenting as a possible, but incorrect, understanding of the Trinity. A good historical theology book, but a little hard to follow at times.

[Peter Kiss · Rating 3 out of 5]

I thoroughly enjoyed the final three chapters, but I found the author's writing to be downright unreadable at very many times. It came off as borderline pretentious when he'd use words that absolutely no one uses, and it makes many statements simply impenetrable. Also, some chapters seemed to lack coherence in where the text was going, making it even more unreadable. The content is good, but I really wish this could've been rewritten.

[Stephen Nolin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Excellent overview of the historical development of Trinitarian theology, particularly if you are seeking a polemic of 20th century Trinitarianism and the Trinitarian revival. Language is a bit inaccessible and pedantic. At times, Holmes' argument is a bit too simplistic/ignores particular nuances of the 20th century as well as other theologians of the 4th to the 19th centuries. Definitely will return to this text in the future for Trinitarian apologetics.