What do you think?
Rate this book
The Quest for the Trinity: The Doctrine of God in Scripture, History and Modernity by Stephen R. Holmes
Excellent Book
Paperback
First published October 29, 2012
38 people are currently reading
208 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 - 30 of 47 reviews
July 24, 2018
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.
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.
November 9, 2012
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.
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.
September 5, 2020
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.
September 18, 2024
Fantastic look at the consistency of orthodox Trinitarian theology throughout the history of the church.
August 4, 2023
Excellent, engaging, and surprisingly thorough for 200 pages.
Textbook for God and Humanity at CTS.
Textbook for God and Humanity at CTS.
March 21, 2013
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...
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...
September 21, 2019
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.
August 19, 2019
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)
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)
September 3, 2020
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
So, readability: 1/10
analysis: 9/10
dryness: 9/10
September 2, 2020
wowzers it's like walking into a shallow area of a lake then suddenly dropping off the edge into the of the deep unknown.
June 30, 2021
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.
August 21, 2021
Excellent overview of the history of Trinitarian thought in church history and where we need recovery today!
Read
June 13, 2025I read this but make no promises regarding understanding! 🫠
August 31, 2021
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.
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.
November 2, 2024
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.
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.
April 14, 2021
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.
November 22, 2019
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.
March 3, 2024
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.
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.
October 26, 2021
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.
July 26, 2025
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.
In short, well researched, and clearly written form, it seems that Holmes has proved his thesis correct.
February 16, 2023
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!
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!
September 27, 2024
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.
November 16, 2024
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.
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.
June 13, 2025
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.
September 23, 2024
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.
March 5, 2025
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.
August 30, 2020
twas fine I suppose. under different reading circumstances I'd probably have gleaned more.
September 4, 2020
I might have given this 5 stars if I was smart enough to really understand it.
October 28, 2020
This book was incredibly difficult to sludge through, but it was worth it. I have a much fuller grasp of the doctrine of the trinity and the history of that doctrine.
November 14, 2020
A lucid (albeit technical) exposition of the doctrine of the Trinity in historical context.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 47 reviews