الايمان بالثالوث

by Thomas F. Torrance

الفكر اللاهونى الكتابى للكنيسة الجامعة فى القرون الاولى

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

390 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1988

About the author

Thomas Forsyth Torrance, MBE FRSE (30 August 1913 – 2 December 2007), commonly referred to as T. F. Torrance, was a Scottish Protestant theologian. Torrance served for 27 years as Professor of Christian Dogmatics at New College, Edinburgh in the University of Edinburgh. He is best known for his pioneering work in the study of science and theology, but he is equally respected for his work in systematic theology. While he wrote many books and articles advancing his own study of theology, he also edited the translation of several hundred theological writings into English from other languages, including the English translation of the thirteen-volume, six-million-word Church Dogmatics of Swiss theologian Karl Barth, as well as John Calvin's New Testament Commentaries. He was also a member of the famed Torrance family of theologians.
Torrance has been acknowledged as one of the most significant English-speaking theologians of the twentieth century, and in 1978, he received the prestigious Templeton Foundation Prize for Progress in Religion.[1] Torrance remained a dedicated churchman throughout his life, serving as an ordained minister in the Church of Scotland. He was instrumental in the development of the historic agreement between the Reformed and Eastern Orthodox Churches on the doctrine of the Trinity when a joint statement of agreement on that doctrine was issued between the World Alliance of Reformed Churches and the Orthodox Church on 13 March 1991.[2] He retired from the University of Edinburgh in 1979, but continued to lecture and to publish extensively. Several influential books on the Trinity were published after his retirement: The Trinitarian Faith: The Evangelical Theology of the Ancient Catholic Church (1988); Trinitarian Perspectives: Toward Doctrinal Agreement (1994); and The Christian Doctrine of God, One Being Three Persons (1996).

Reviews

[Sameh Maher · Rating 5 out of 5]

ﻣﻦ ﺍﺭﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺐ ﺍﻟﺘﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺗﻬﺎ
ﻫﺬﺍ ﺍﻟﻜﺘﺎﺏ ﻣﺮﺟﻊ ﺍﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻭﺿﺮﻭﺭﻯ ﻟﻜﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻳﺮﻳﺪ ﺍﻥ ﻳﻔﻬﻢ ﻓﻜﺮ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﻧﻴﻘﻴﻪ ﻭﻓﻬﻢ ﻓﻜﺮ ﺍﻟﻜﻨﻴﺴﻪ ﻓﻰ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻉ ﺍﻟﺜﺎﻟﻮﺙ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻭﺱ ﻳﻘﺪﻡ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻜﺎﺗﺐ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﻪ ﻏﺎﻳﻪ ﻓﻰ ﺍﻟﺮﻭﻋﻪ و ﺍﻟﺪﻗﻪ
ﻭﻣﺎ ﻫﻮ ﺍﻟﺎﺧﺘﻠﺎﻑ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺪﺧﻞ ﺍﻟﻘﺪﻳﺲ ﺍﺛﻨﺎﺳﻴﻮﺱ ﻭﺍﻟﺎﺑﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻜﺒﺎﺩﻭﻙ
ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻧﺼﺢ ﺑﻪ ﻭﻳﺤﺘﺎﺝ ﺍﻟﻰ ﻗﺮﺍﺋﻪ ﻋﺪﻩ مرات

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this unofficial commentary on the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, Thomas Torrance uses Athanasius's theology, particularly the concept of homoousion, to demonstrate God's self-revelation in Jesus Christ as the foundation of the Gospel and our knowledge of God.

Rather than giving a chapter by chapter commentary, I will focus on some of Torrance's key points.

Knowledge and God's Self-Communication

We know the Father through his Son. The Nicene theology moved from in-turned human reason (epinoia) to a centre in god’s revealing activity in the incarnation of the Logos (Torrance 19). In the Incarnation God does not tell us some fact about himself, but he gives us his very self. By Jesus’s coming to us as man, his humanity reveals the very nature of God (56). The father and the son have a mutual relation of knowing. Only the Son can know the Father and reveal him. Therefore, a mutual relation of knowing entails a mutual relation of being. This gives us direct access to the closed circle of divine knowing. Our knowledge of God is rooted in the eternal being of God himself (59).

Vicarious Humanity

The humanity of Christ is the arche of all of God’s works. It is a vicarious humanity: the controlling principle by which all of our knowledge of God is tested. The mediation of Christ involved a twofold movement: man to God::God to man. Only God can save, but he saves as man. Christ ministers the things of God to man and the things of man to God.

Ousia and Being

Since there is no likeness between God’s being and the created being, God can only be known from himself. Word and activity are intrinsic to the very being of God (enousios logos and enousios energia).The Logos is not an abstract cosmological principle. The Logos inheres in the very being of God. The inner being of God is always an eloquent, speaking being.

Homoousios safeguards God’s Revelation. If Christ were not homoousios toi patri, then he could not reveal God to us. There is no interval of time, being, or knowledge in the Godhead. The Father/Son relationship falls within the one being of God (Torrance 119). What God is toward us and in the midst of us is what God really is in himself (130). “ousia” now means more than simply “being.” It means “being” in its inward reference. hupastasis means being in its outward reference (or at least it did for Athanasius). The Being of God is never static. The doctrine of enousios energeia means that being is dynamic.

Conclusion

This is dense reading and each page is heavily footnoted with the fathers. The above review is only a fraction of what the book contains (I left out the best chapter of the book--The Eternal Spirit). The heavy repetition of some ideas is my only criticism.

[Michi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very edifying. I appreciate the exclusive focus on the early church fathers without any recourse to later theologians. A good blend of church history and systematic theology even though the lines get blurred so much that one does not always know if Torrance simply restates a source or tries to makes his own point. A bit repetitive at times.

“The Nicene theologians thought of Jesus Christ as one with God the Father in act as well as in being, for he incarnated the active presence of God himself in human history, and constituted in all he was and did the free outgoing movement of the divine being in condescension and love toward mankind. This saving philanthropia - God's active love toward us - was the very antithesis of the Aristotelian eros, the immanent desire for itself by which the unmoved Mover timelessly affects the world.”

[David Goetz · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent and worthwhile book of "commentarial theology," the late T.F. Torrance here unpacks the theology of the Nicene Creed through careful exposition of early saints like Irenaeus, Origen, Hilary, Athanasius, the Cappadocians, Epiphanius, and Cyril of Alexandria. The book doubles as a revelation of Torrance's man-crush on St. Athanasius.

Much of the material originally was delivered as the Warfield Lectures at Princeton in 1981, the 1600-year "anniversary" of the formulation of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. The first and last chapters were added in preparation for the publication of the lectures. Chapters are as follows:

Faith and Godliness
Access to the Father
The Almighty Creator
God of God, Light of Light
The Incarnate Savior
The Eternal Spirit
The One Church
The Triunity of God

There's quite a bit of repetition, even of quotations, but Torrance says he considered this "convenient as well as inevitable ..., for in the coherent character of Nicene theology each doctrine is implicated in and deeply affects the others" (1). It did make the reading dull on occasion, but the repetition ultimately was useful in getting Nicene theology in general and the teachings of particular early pastor-theologians into my head and, I hope, into my heart and preaching.

Chapter 1, "Faith and Godliness," explained faith as a true apprehension of an incomprehensible God: we truly know the triune God in Christ by the Spirit, but this God-given apprehension "is constantly being expanded under the power of God to make himself known" (25)--it is "faith expanded by worship" (43). Torrance also demonstrates that, according to Nicene theology, "godliness is ... an essential ingredient in ... the evangelical structure of the faith once for all delivered to the saints" (28). This is an often-lost aspect of our evangelical catholic heritage: godliness is not incidental to our faith but essential to it. This has profound pastoral significance.

Chapters 2, 4, and 5 all deal with basically the same topic--namely, that God has genuinely revealed himself in the face of Jesus Christ. As Torrance says elsewhere, there is no God behind the back of Jesus. In a discussion of Irenaeus, Torrance discusses how, "strictly speaking ..., only God can know himself, so it is only through God that God may be known.... Hence if we are really to know God it can be only through sharing in some incredible way in the knowledge which God has of himself" (54). So how can we know God in this way? Relying here on the language of Hilary, Torrance says this: "under the impact of God's self-revelation in Jesus Christ and the creative operation of his Holy Spirit our minds and capacities are opened and our thoughts are expanded far beyond their finite limits until they are made appropriate, in some measure at least, to their divine object" (56). But why can Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit mediate this access to the Father, this real knowledge of God. Because of the homoousion, of course! With respect to the Son in particular, Torrance stresses that he is of the same substance as the Father (from the being of the Father, not from the Person of the Father, as the Cappadocians infelicitously put it) and also of the same substance as humanity. Both must be the case if the work of Christ is to have any soteriological effect. Torrance emphasizes the Athanasian point that the atonement is grounded in the ontology of the incarnation; i.e., the pre-existent Son of God comes not in man but as man and, in his incarnation, redeems and exalts the nature of humanity. So "atoning salvation ... takes place within ... the incarnate constitute of his Person as Mediator" (155). This is the "unifying centre ... of the saving work of Christ" (159) for Nicene theology. Torrance points out that forgetfulness of this unifying center leads to wrong-headed debates about "theories of the atonement." In short, atonement is reconciliation to God our Father through union with Christ effected by the Spirit.

In Chapter 3, "The Almighty Creator," we read about the importance of understanding God as the Almighty Creator in light of our knowledge of him through the Son. We must not attempt to understand God as Creator on the ground of inferences drawn from observation of the created world. Rather, we must understand the created world in the light of the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, for the consubstantial Son reveals the Father; again, only in the Son by the Spirit do we have access to the Father, only in the Son do we see the Father in order to understand him rightly as Creator. Torrance proceeds to speak, then, of the nature of creation itself: as possessing a "contingent intelligibility." The created world is not God, of course, but "creaturely rationality, or creaturely light, derives from God himself and is what it is through a created participation in his uncreated rationality and light, and thus, far from being overwhelmed by it, it is upheld by God in its contingent reality" (103). This chapter contains quite a bit more on the nature of God: he didn't need to create and hasn't always been Creator, but he chose to create because he doesn't "will to exist for himself alone" (89). Much of this material can be found in fuller form in Torrance's works on the relationship of theology and science.

In Chapter 6, "The Eternal Spirit," Torrance presses the point, drawing heavily on Athanasius and Epiphanius, that "for us to be in the Spirit or to have the Spirit dwelling in us means that we are made partakers of God beyond ourselves, and even share in the inwardness of God himself" (208). As mentioned earlier in this review, the Spirit actualizes our knowledge of the Son in the divine self-communication. There is one divine activity, not three, for the Spirit himself is consubstantial with the Father and the Son, the bond of the triune God, 'the Lord and Giver of Life," as the Nicene Creed has it. And because all who look to Christ for salvation receive the Holy Spirit, who himself proceeds from the being of the Father and receives from the Son, we must say that the Giver of grace and the Gift of grace itself are one and the same: the Father gives the Spirit through the Son. The Holy Spirit "personalizes" us. Torrance puts it this way: "The personalising incorporating activity of the Spirit creates, not only reciprocity between Christ and ourselves, but a community of reciprocity among ourselves, which through the Spirit is rooted in and reflects the trinitarian relations in God himself. It is thus that the Church comes into being and is constantly maintained in its union with Christ as his Body" (250-251).

In Chapter 7, "The One Church," we read that "the Church is constituted by the Holy Spirit as the empirical counterpart of his sanctifying presence and activity in our midst, for in the Spirit we are made members of Christ the incarnate Son and through him we have access to the Father" (257). And the gospel is, in the words of Irenaeus, the "rejuvenating deposit" of the church. This rejuvenating deposit, the gospel itself, is our "God-given source of ... renewal and the inner secret of [our] identity" (261). And what is the activity of the one Church? "The Church really is the Church of Christ," Torrance says in an Athanasian vein, "when it looks away from itself to its objective source and ground in the Godhead, and dwells in the Holy Trinity" (268). In other words, the Church is "the doxological correlate of the Triunity of God" (269). Torrance stresses that the one Church is understood in Nicene theology as an empirical body. In Hilary's theology, descended from Origen, we see "the beginning of a distinction between the Church as an external fellowship of believers, an the Church as a mystical body, ... which was to become characteristic of the Roman doctrine of the Church" (270). Torrance quotes Barth at this point: "the reality of the Church is the earthly-historical form of the existence of Jesus Christ, the one holy catholic and apostolic church" (276). Torrance then proceeds to examine the Church's oneness, holiness, catholicity, and apostolicity. He helpfully notes that apostolicity points us to Holy Scripture: "the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church is the church continuously occupied with the interpretation, exposition, and application of Holy Scripture, for it is in that way that the Church opens its mind and life to the direction and correction of the Word of God" (288). He also explains the closing lines of the Nicene Creed: "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins" (which he takes to denote Christ's vicarious baptism in the Jordan River, not the rite of baptism); "we look for the resurrection of the dead" (grounded on Christ's resurrection and promising that "all who believe in Christ trample over [death]" (299)); "and the life of the world to come" (where we will "enjoy to the full the sanctity and eternal life of God himself" (300)).

The final chapter, "The Triunity of God," presents the respective understandings of the Holy Trinity of (1) Athanasius; (2) Basil, the Gregories, and Didymus; and (3) Epiphanius and the Council of Constantinople. Basically, Athanasius' and Epiphanius' respective understandings of the Trinity were instantiated in the Nicene Creed, which Torrance presents as differing in theology from both the West (with its filioque) and the East (with its teaching that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Person of Father, who is in his Person the Monarch of the Godhead). Torrance suggests that Nicene theology rightly identifies "the Monarchia with the Triunity of God" (340). God is "One Being of Godhead in Trinity and ... Consubstantial Trinity in Unity" (ibid.).

Strengths

Much in every way! Torrance possessed an apparently encyclopedic knowledge of the patristic era. I know some recent books, including Lewis Ayres's volume on Nicaea and its Legacy, take issue with Torrance's understanding of the historical development of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, but it's noteworthy that Torrance doesn't intend here to lay out a precise timeline. He's concerned, rather, with the theology of those who shaped the Creed and with the theology of the Creed itself. I appreciate his focus on salvation as union with Christ, which forestalls the debates over theories of the atonement. I appreciate his exceptionally rich wrestling with the doctrine of creation. I appreciate his Barthian point that the Holy Spirit is the knowing subject within us whereby we enter into knowledge of the triune God through communion with him. I appreciate his persistence in talking about the Church by talking about God. And, last, I appreciated his willingness to let Nicene theology stand over against the theologies of both the West and the East; he implicitly argues against the filioque of the West but also criticizes the confusing subordinationism of the East. Both, he says, would do better to follow the theology of the Nicene Creed.

Weaknesses

In some places he makes it sound like salvation cannot occur outside the Church. For example: "people throughout history are enabled to grasp and appropriate the doctrinal substance of the faith ... only within the structured integration of truth, faith, and godliness in the living tradition of the empirical Church as the Body of Christ or the earthly-historical form of his existence in the world" (30-31). I don't intend to accuse Torrance of being a crypto-Catholic, or of otherwise elevating the Church beyond its proper dogmatic location (sort of like Stanley Hauerwas has been accused of doing); in fact, I can think of ways of reading the above quotation that render it perfectly acceptable to me (by which I mean, perfectly in line with my understanding of Scripture on this point). Nonetheless, I think his language here, perhaps out of a desire to accommodate all parties, actually obfuscates the issue. Additionally, Torrance makes quite a bit of the ontology of the incarnation as the ground of the atoning salvation wrought by Christ on our behalf. But at times he seems, like Irenaeus, to leave it open to question whether the cross was necessary. He objects to those who decry the so-called "physical theory" of the atonement, but he never responds to them adequately. For example, he says that "the whole incarnational assumption of our human nature was at the same time a reconciling, healing, sanctifying, and recreating activity" (162). In the margin I wrote, "but does it reconcile, heal, sanctify, and recreate any actual persons? Or is [the incarnational assumption of our human nature] a sign of what's to come?" This question receives no answer. In a similar vein, Torrance suggests with Athanasius in response to fourth-century Arians that "in [Christ's] self-abasement in the form of a servant he had condescended, for our sakes, really to make our ignorance along with other human limitations his own, precisely in order to save us from them" (186). But do we need salvation from "human limitations"? This seems like a just-so story constructed to explain why Jesus grew in wisdom and knowledge like any other human person. The problem, as I think Torrance knew, is not our limitations (those, in most cases, are God-given) but our rebellion and consequent guilt before the holy triune God. This explanation offered of Jesus' childhood ignorance smacks of Tillich's existential yearning against finitude. My last criticism is of Torrance's and the Creed's claim that the "kingdom of Christ" will have no end. This seems clearly to fly in the face of 1 Cor. 15. Torrance says that the Council of Constantinople "felt that [Marcellus' teaching that Christ will hand the kingdom over to his Father] would call in question the coeternity and coequality of the three divine Persons, but would also strike at the very root of belief in the Church as the Body of Christ" (274). This latter concern seems to be to ignore the consubstantiality and mutual indwelling of the three Persons of the Godhead. This entire question of course raises the issue of whether the relations of the divine being--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--are in fact eternal (Torrance seems clearly to think that they are) and, if so, whether these eternal relations entail any sort of functional subordinationism. Questions for another time.

The weaknesses listed above might lead you to wonder why I give this book 5 stars. I do so because these relatively few weaknesses (as I see them) occur in a book of richly dense theology. The number of weaknesses (again, as I see them) listed above would drop the rating of a book by a lesser theologian. But Torrance packs more substance into single sentences than many theologians pack into whole chapters. There is so much richness here that any weaknesses are relatively minor.

In short, read this book if you want to understand Nicene theology, if you want to get at the theology of T.F. Torrance himself, or if you want to behold more of the triune God we worship and confess with lips and lives.

[Paula]

" إن كلمة الرب التى جاءت عن طريق مجمع نيقية المسكونى باقية إلى الأبد " ، ولم يكن يعنى بهذا أن الله قد أعطى لأساقفة نيقية كشفاً جديداً ، بل إنهم كانوا فقط أداة فى يد الله ، وذلك بتسليمهم (لمن بعدهم) - بشكل صادق وأمين ـ كلمة الله ذاتها ، وهى عينها التى كانوا قد تسلموها بأنفسهم من تعاليم الرسل فى الكتب المقدسة فيما يتعلق بالله الآب والابن والروح القدس .
" طبقاً للإيمان الرسولى المُسلم لنا من الآباء بواسطة التقليد ، فإنى قد سلمت التقليد بدون ابتكار أى شىء خارجاً عنه. وما تعلمته هذا قد سجلته وفقاً للكتب المقدسة ".
(القديس أثناسيوس الرسولى)
بالنسبة لعيد القيامة ، كتب الآباء : " يبدو حسناً ما يلى " ، ولكن بالنسبة للإيمان فإنهم لم يكتبوا " يبدو حسناً " ، بل كتبوا : " هكذا تؤمن الكنيسة الجامعة ".
نظرة الآباء إلى الإيمان تمثل التحول الجذرى فى فهم شعب الكنيسة ، وهى تحول من أن يكون مركز الفكر فى داخل المنطق البشرى الشخصى (الغريب عن الله) ، إلى أن يكون هذا المركز هو فى إعلان الله (عن ذاته) . هذه الاستنارة بحقيقة الله كانت هى السبب وراء الثقة الراسخة فى إيمان الكنيسة بالله .
الايمان اقتناع للعقل لا يقوم على أساس منظور شخصى ، بل على أساس موضوعى ، وهذا الاقتناع تسنده الحقيقة الموضوعية أو الأقنومية التى لله ذاته ، كما أعلن لنا عن نفسه فى يسوع المسيح .
" فى الإيمان يتخذ الانسان موقفه على أساس كيان الله ذاته ". (القديس هيلارى)
بالايمان تتلامس عقولنا مباشرة مع الحقيقة مستقلة عن ذواتنا ، لأنه من خلال الإيمان تتقبل عقولنا الإدراك الباطنى (البديهى) للأشياء وتخضع لقوتها الشاهدة لذاتها ، كما تتكيف وتتهيأ لتعرف هذه الأشياء فى طبيعتها الذاتية (الخاصة بها)
" نحن لا نسعى لفهم ما نؤمن به ، ولكننا نؤمن لكى يمكننا أن نفهم " (القديس أغسطينوس)
الايمان حسب الفكر اللاهوتى النيقى ، لم يكن نوعاً من علاقة غير مدركة أو غير مفهومة مع الله ، بل كان إيماناً يتضمن عمليات المعرفة والفهم والإدراك ، إيماناً له طابع فطرى بديهى للغاية فى تقبل العقل للحق الكامن فى إعلان الله لذاته للجنس البشرى .
لأن الله لا يمكن أن يُفهم إلا من خلاله هو ذاته
يتميز الايمان باليقين الثابت الذى يستمد قوته من حقيقة الله ذاته الكامنة فى هذا الإيمان ، ولكن من الجانب الآخر هذا الإيمان يتميز بوجود مجال مفتوح دائم الاتساع ليستجيب مع سر الله غير المدرك وطبيعته التى لا تحد .
لو لم تكن هناك علاقة الوحدة فى الجوهر والعمل ، بين ما هو الله الآب – فى ذاته – وبين ما هو نحونا فى نعمة ربنا يسوع المسيح ، لصارت الكرازة بالإنجيل مفرغة من مضمونها الخلاصى .
الايمان المسيحى فى صميم طبيعته يحاول باستمرار استقصاء الأعماق السحيقة التى لا تستقصى للحق
الايمان عليه أن يمتد باستمرار ليكون تحت سلطان قدرة الله عن إعلان ذاته

[Kyle · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a quick review: An excellent look at 1) the writings of the early Church in regards to themes surrounding issues raised precededing and following the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed. This means especially the writings of Iranaeus, Athanasius, the Cappadocians, and Cyril of Alexanderia. 2) An excellent commentary on the Nicene Creed. It is a good choice to read in concert with Barth's and Pannenberg's exposition of the Apostle's Creed. 3) An excellent overview of Torrance's own Dogmatic thinking. Because he never wrote his own Dogmatics, the Torrance scholar is forced to piece together his own Dogmatic thinking. Because I would argue Torrance's own flavor of theology is entirely indebted to Nicean theology, this volume serves as an excellent overview to the breadth and depth of Torrance's own conclusions concerning Dogmatic thinking.

[Shep · Rating 5 out of 5]

Few can grapple with the doctrine of the Trinity and all its tensions as well as Torrance can. This book is a tremendously helpful resource both on the doctrine of the Trinity and the Nicene Creed. Torrance puts more meaningful content in a sentence than many Christian writers today put in a book. This book is highly academic and probably not to be of interest to the layman. It is a feast that requires much chewing. Nevertheless, it is one that I highly recommend, and will no doubt be returning to again and again and again.

[Seumas Macdonald · Rating 5 out of 5]

T.F. Torrance's book is an enduring testimony to the importance of the Fathers for understanding the Trinity. It's a complex book, and I've read it thrice to understand it. Probably he misrepresents the historical situation somewhat, (cf. Lewis Ayres), but his thought must be wrestled with nonetheless.

[George Maher · Rating 5 out of 5]

مرجع غنى بفكر الأباء عن الثالوث
صعب استيعاب الكتاب كله من مرة واحدة
اى حد عايز يدرس عن الثالوث او يتعمق فيه لازم يمر على الكتاب دا

[Austin Mathews · Rating 5 out of 5]

A masterpiece of theological scholarship, Torrance thoroughly analyzes the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed through the early church fathers’ frames of mind. He traces the evolution of specific thoughts, shows how dangerous the early heresies were against the Church’s faith, and makes several bold theses, including the argument that the economic and immanent Trinities are indissolubly united, that the problem of Filioque that would later add to schism the Church began as a theological error in the Cappadocian Fathers’ rebuttals against Sabellianism, and that the work of theology should always be done in conjunction with prayer and worship. It is a lofty but fully immersive look into the ecumenical creed that could unite the Church again write large, why we believe in Trinity, and what that means for our worship and thought. Something to come back to in theory and faith.

[Vanjr · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is not a book on the Trinity, rather a discussion of the Trinitarian Faith Nicene creed and the early church fathers development and understanding of this creed. Thus it is not a primary scriptural approach to developing the doctrine of the Trinity. Scripture is used as quoted by the fathers in regards to this doctrine.
There is much to consider and challenge oneself in understanding the implications of this doctrine. For example Torrance makes clear that the church fathers believed that God the Father pre-exists God as the creator-despite the order presented in the Bible. Greek is used and mostly translated, but if you read or have had Greek that will help you with this book.

[Jacob Villa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpful, edifying, and strangely inspiring.

[Spencer · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book is an exposition of theology from the primary thinkers of Nicaea. It moved through the members of the Trinity to give an extended argument that Jesus is the true revelation of the Father as Jesus is fully one with the Father. Humanity has salvation because the Son is one with sinful humanity at the cross. The Spirit continues this work of being one with humanity as one fully at one with the Father and Son. Finally, the church is to be one as it is one in the Spirit, saved into a communion of the Trinity. Undoubtedly, this is one of the great expositions of Nicene theology.

Some consider this Torrance's magnum opus. It definitely is one of his greats. I personally have some criticisms. Other than being a bit long, the book also gets repetitive. There are a lot of fine points that Torrance did not get into about the historical circumstances of Nicene theology, the various heresies of the time, what theologians thought before and after Nicaea, etc. For that reason, John Behr's The Nicene Faith is better for the historical work or Robert Jenson's first volume of Systematic Theology offers a more ambitious constructive proposal. Or if you want a really deep account of the history around Nicaea, Jesus Wars by Philip Jenkins was really good.

I often caught him citing the early church theologians as in agreement with his own thinking. For instance, he argues here and there that the method of scriptural interpretation was one that was solidly realistic but not literalistic. That is basically the case, but that seems like asserting the early church was in agreement with his insights. I could say similar things about how one understands the incarnation or the cross

[James Horgan · Rating 4 out of 5]

I expected something very dry and Barthian. I got the interactions of a Reformed theologian with the Church Fathers and the Trinity full of wonderful, pithy sentences, and doxological writing. Not a book for beginners but not to be left to academes either. If you are a mature Christian and want to reflect seriously on God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, do give this a read.

The last two chapters on the Filioque were not as helpful as the previous five. I've never managed to summon up the energy to get worked up over this dispute and, to be fair, nor does Torrance which is probably why the earlier chapters, where more was at stake, are the better read.

[VJ · Rating 5 out of 5]

Packed Heavy But Immensely Enlightening

Such a good book.!! Others complain of its repetitive tendencies but if you still don't get the idea after all those repetitions then maybe your heart's been hardened. I just love how Torrance was able to rephrase the same thoughts so beautifully that each page of the book ends up being highlighted. I learned so much about the Mia Theotes Tres Hypostaseis to the point that it encouraged me to read the writings of the Patristic Fathers.

[G Walker · Rating 4 out of 5]

I believe this to be Torrance's best work... deeply edifying!!! One of the few books when I was done left me genuinely wanting more to read... His theological and historical overview of the Trinity from a Nicene perspective is a theological and ecumenical masterpiece in the truest sense of the word... I only wish more Orthodox peoples would read Torrance and I wish the West could look past his "Barthianism" to what he actually said... HANDS DOWN ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS THAT I HAVE EVER READ!

[Phillip R Neal · Rating 5 out of 5]

Must Read Book on Trinity

Step by step Dr. Torrance guides you through the early Father's thinking and choice of words to describe what Holy Scriptures put for as truth. He describes the heresies and how their thoughts and meanings came about. He also shows how the early church fathers denounced such false teachings. A must read book on recapturing the Trinity in this day and age.

[Anthony Rodriguez · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars. Long, slow read. Torrance’s work with the primary sources is really impressive. This is certainly a more technical work. In many ways, very few people would find this beneficial. But there’s so much discussion of questions people have about the Trinity, that they would profit from the content. Tough read. Worth it.

[Kenny · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is simply one of the best theological books I have read. A profound explication of the Nicene Creed and of the work of the Nicene fathers in 4th century. A rich systematic developed along the lines of the doctrine of the Trinity-Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

[Anna Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good, but man alive, a lot of Greek vocabulary. And a thick swim.

[Douglas Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great.

[Ryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really good.

[Sandy Talaat · Rating 5 out of 5]

كتاب مينفعش يتقري مرة واحدة :)

[Emily · Rating 5 out of 5]

Densely academic but fascinating and edifying.

[Gregory Strong · Rating 4 out of 5]

Challenging to read quickly and lightly; must be read slowly and reflectively. That being said, an excellent treatment of trinitarian doctrine and belief, grounded in the ancient catholic church.

[Matthew Molloy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A heavily detailed book which certainly is not an easy read but worth slogging through. Interesting seeing the thoughts of the church fathers so fully laid out by Torrance.