What do you think?
Rate this book
The Holy Trinity: In Scripture, History, Theology And Worship
2005 ECPA Gold Medallion Book Award Winner!
When it comes to the doctrine of the Trinity, evangelicals have underachieved. In The Holy Trinity Robert Letham helps to redress this shortcoming. He offers a well-researched volume about "the One who is utterly transcendent and incomprehensible." After examining the doctrine’s biblical foundations, the author traces its historical development through the twentieth century, and engages four critical the Trinity and (1) the incarnation, (2) worship and prayer, (3) creation and missions, and (4) persons.
When it comes to the doctrine of the Trinity, evangelicals have underachieved. In The Holy Trinity Robert Letham helps to redress this shortcoming. He offers a well-researched volume about "the One who is utterly transcendent and incomprehensible." After examining the doctrine’s biblical foundations, the author traces its historical development through the twentieth century, and engages four critical the Trinity and (1) the incarnation, (2) worship and prayer, (3) creation and missions, and (4) persons.
551 pages, Paperback
First published December 10, 2004
116 people are currently reading
776 people want to read
About the author
Robert Letham
30 books24 followersRobert Letham (MAR, ThM, Westminster Theological Seminary; PhD, Aberdeen University) is professor of systematic and historical theology at Union School of Theology in Bridgend, Wales, and the author of a number of books, including The Lord's Supper and Union with Christ.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 73 reviews
July 11, 2023
4.5 Stars - Top Read of 2020
A thorough, enlightening, and incredibly engaging book. Letham's The Holy Trinity is a survey of the doctrine of the Trinity in Scripture, History, Theology, and Worship with a heavy emphasis on history. The Holy Trinity is separated into these three areas of focus, the majority of his book focuses on the historical development of this doctrine.
Of noteworthy is Letham's historical analysis, particularly his engagement with the Eastern Church, and his discussion of triadic patterns in the Scriptures and creation. As well his engagement with postmodern and Islamic theology rightly highlights the importance of Trinitarian theology in apologetics.
There are quite a few takeaways I have from this book. First, is the danger of imposing our understanding of the economic trinity back onto the immanent trinity. Even though the economic trinity gives us an understanding of the Triune God as He is, it is dangerous to read back human ideas back onto the immortal and invisible God. Second, is the importance of emphasizing the distinction of persons according to the Nicene formula; the Son generates from the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father. But we cannot emphasize any substantial or essential differences in Trinity. In their essences, they are all God, one God in fact, but they are distinct in their personhood. Lastly, is the importance of emphasizing the similarities of the persons of the Trinity. Father, Son, and Spirit indwell one another (perichoresis), are of the same substance (homoousios) and their works cannot be separated. Yet the works of the Father, Son, and Spirit are still distinct, and we must emphasize that in our theology, lest we revert to Modalism or Sabellianism. The Father is the one who sends, it is the Son who accomplishes salvation, and the Holy Spirit that applies salvation.
Letham's book is an essential read for anyone who wants to jump from popular-level books on the Trinity to some more scholarly works. Letham's work is dense and it takes some work to go through, but it is worth the time. Those who have chosen to diligently work through this book will find that their view of the Triune God has greatly expanded. This book is near the top of my list for books on the Doctrine of God and I highly recommend it.
A thorough, enlightening, and incredibly engaging book. Letham's The Holy Trinity is a survey of the doctrine of the Trinity in Scripture, History, Theology, and Worship with a heavy emphasis on history. The Holy Trinity is separated into these three areas of focus, the majority of his book focuses on the historical development of this doctrine.
Of noteworthy is Letham's historical analysis, particularly his engagement with the Eastern Church, and his discussion of triadic patterns in the Scriptures and creation. As well his engagement with postmodern and Islamic theology rightly highlights the importance of Trinitarian theology in apologetics.
There are quite a few takeaways I have from this book. First, is the danger of imposing our understanding of the economic trinity back onto the immanent trinity. Even though the economic trinity gives us an understanding of the Triune God as He is, it is dangerous to read back human ideas back onto the immortal and invisible God. Second, is the importance of emphasizing the distinction of persons according to the Nicene formula; the Son generates from the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father. But we cannot emphasize any substantial or essential differences in Trinity. In their essences, they are all God, one God in fact, but they are distinct in their personhood. Lastly, is the importance of emphasizing the similarities of the persons of the Trinity. Father, Son, and Spirit indwell one another (perichoresis), are of the same substance (homoousios) and their works cannot be separated. Yet the works of the Father, Son, and Spirit are still distinct, and we must emphasize that in our theology, lest we revert to Modalism or Sabellianism. The Father is the one who sends, it is the Son who accomplishes salvation, and the Holy Spirit that applies salvation.
Letham's book is an essential read for anyone who wants to jump from popular-level books on the Trinity to some more scholarly works. Letham's work is dense and it takes some work to go through, but it is worth the time. Those who have chosen to diligently work through this book will find that their view of the Triune God has greatly expanded. This book is near the top of my list for books on the Doctrine of God and I highly recommend it.
March 2, 2016
I predict the 17th 18th and 19th chapters will be reread by me in the future, excellent stuff. The first part is exhaustive revision of the history of Christology and thought around the trinitarian formulae as it evolves - absorbing, but for my limited brain a little exhausting too if I'm honest.
January 6, 2011
This book should be read by all Christians.
December 16, 2025
Took me nearly two years. 5 stars for both breadth and depth, as well as fair and thoughtful engagement with every thinker covered.
April 4, 2025
A truly excellent book on the Trinity from Robert Letham. I read the first 300 pages several years ago, but came back this year and read it cover to cover. I read Augustine's De Trinitate shortly before reading this, which was a delightful pairing. Three things I love about this book:
1) Letham is surprisingly readable and engaging in addressing a really difficult subject in long form.
2) This book is wonderfully doxological in addition to its deep and penetrating theological treatment of the Trinity.
3) All throughout there are helpful treatments of various Trinitarian heresies, both from history and in recent discourse.
An immensely helpful book.
1) Letham is surprisingly readable and engaging in addressing a really difficult subject in long form.
2) This book is wonderfully doxological in addition to its deep and penetrating theological treatment of the Trinity.
3) All throughout there are helpful treatments of various Trinitarian heresies, both from history and in recent discourse.
An immensely helpful book.
August 4, 2011
Letham attempts to correct Evangelicalism’s underachievement on the doctrine of the Trinity. He does so by giving us a historical-theological reconstruction of Trinitarian discussions. He examines how different crises in the Church forced theologians to rethink their categories in light of the challenges, sometimes using new and dangerous language. He then discusses the major differences between East and West and a number of major theologians including Calvin, Barth, Thomas Torrance, and the modern Russians.
Biblical and Historical Reconstruction
Letham gives a thorough survey of proto- and Trinitarian thought from the Old Testament to current times. He is particularly sensitive to the nuances different thinkers made. He rightly sees that one must do more than say “Three Persons in One Essence.” This is true and the anchor of all Christian thought, but it needs unpacking and it needs unpacking in the face of many biblical and philosophical challenges, challenges which change every generation. I found this very refreshing. It gives many students the justification to study traditions and perspectives different from their own confessional allegiances.
Of particular importance were the chapters on the Cappadocians, Filioque, Barth, and the Russian masters. The chapters on the Filioque were interesting because he advances questions about East-West concerns that few Confessional Westerners are allowed to ask. He gives some outstanding reflection on the implications of each position, both positive and negative.
The Russian Masters
This was my favorite section. He introduced the great Russian theologians to confessional Protestants. He gives a thorough (if in my opinion flawed) analysis of Sergei Bulgakov’s Sophiology, Vladimir Lossky’s criticisms of the Filioque, and the work of Dmtri Staniloae. For example, Staniloae argues that the three persons of the Trinity compenetrate and are perfectly interior to the other (353). This has profound implications for a personalist, communal ontology.
Of Interest
I wonder how valid Letham’s critique of Vladimir Lossky’s essence/energies distinction is. Lossky (and most of Eastern thought) say we can’t know God in his essence but we can know him by his energies. In commenting on that I will use Letham’s critique of Lossky on apophaticism and assume that the critique of apophaticism, if valid, would also apply to the essence/energies distinction. Eastern apophaticism says that God is “unknowable in his essence and transcends revelation” (339). We know by negation. Therefore, if Lossky is correct, “it affirms that either God is nothing since we cannot know him, or that he is totally knowable, in which case we are masters of his revelation. In both instances, God is reduced to nothing and we are everything” (346). A bold claim because if true, Letham in one move has dismantled most of Eastern theology. But is this really to what apophaticism reduces? Maybe not. Consider it this way: the more I know of something, the more I realize I do not know it. When a man first meets the woman who will be his wife, and talks with her for a couple of months, he comes to know a lot of things about her. Indeed, he could say he really *knows* her. However, after a while of marriage and the intimate knowledge that entails, he suddenly realizes there is a lot about his wife that he doesn’t know. So who is correct: Lossky or Letham? I maintain that both apophatic knowledge and cataphatic (way of affirmation) are necessary. Indeed, in the above illustration both cataphatic and apophatic knowings were used.
Criticism
Letham’s book is far from perfect, however. There are some simple mistakes in the book (which the editor could have fixed easily) and some more profound conceptual mistakes (and for what it’s worth, Letham’s books on Orthodoxy, Christ, and Trinity have been a feast for me over the past few years). First of all, Letham repeats himself a number of times, almost paragraph for paragraph (cf. Gregory of Nazianzus’ quote on the Trinity). Secondly, while Letham is to be commended for wanting to use the Trinity in inter-faith, inter-philosophical discussions, and while his Trinitarian critique of Islam is superb, I found his critique of postmodernism wanting. He accepted caricatures of postmodernism and then critiqued those caricatures. There was no actual interaction with the “original postmodernists” (Derrida et al).
Biblical and Historical Reconstruction
Letham gives a thorough survey of proto- and Trinitarian thought from the Old Testament to current times. He is particularly sensitive to the nuances different thinkers made. He rightly sees that one must do more than say “Three Persons in One Essence.” This is true and the anchor of all Christian thought, but it needs unpacking and it needs unpacking in the face of many biblical and philosophical challenges, challenges which change every generation. I found this very refreshing. It gives many students the justification to study traditions and perspectives different from their own confessional allegiances.
Of particular importance were the chapters on the Cappadocians, Filioque, Barth, and the Russian masters. The chapters on the Filioque were interesting because he advances questions about East-West concerns that few Confessional Westerners are allowed to ask. He gives some outstanding reflection on the implications of each position, both positive and negative.
The Russian Masters
This was my favorite section. He introduced the great Russian theologians to confessional Protestants. He gives a thorough (if in my opinion flawed) analysis of Sergei Bulgakov’s Sophiology, Vladimir Lossky’s criticisms of the Filioque, and the work of Dmtri Staniloae. For example, Staniloae argues that the three persons of the Trinity compenetrate and are perfectly interior to the other (353). This has profound implications for a personalist, communal ontology.
Of Interest
I wonder how valid Letham’s critique of Vladimir Lossky’s essence/energies distinction is. Lossky (and most of Eastern thought) say we can’t know God in his essence but we can know him by his energies. In commenting on that I will use Letham’s critique of Lossky on apophaticism and assume that the critique of apophaticism, if valid, would also apply to the essence/energies distinction. Eastern apophaticism says that God is “unknowable in his essence and transcends revelation” (339). We know by negation. Therefore, if Lossky is correct, “it affirms that either God is nothing since we cannot know him, or that he is totally knowable, in which case we are masters of his revelation. In both instances, God is reduced to nothing and we are everything” (346). A bold claim because if true, Letham in one move has dismantled most of Eastern theology. But is this really to what apophaticism reduces? Maybe not. Consider it this way: the more I know of something, the more I realize I do not know it. When a man first meets the woman who will be his wife, and talks with her for a couple of months, he comes to know a lot of things about her. Indeed, he could say he really *knows* her. However, after a while of marriage and the intimate knowledge that entails, he suddenly realizes there is a lot about his wife that he doesn’t know. So who is correct: Lossky or Letham? I maintain that both apophatic knowledge and cataphatic (way of affirmation) are necessary. Indeed, in the above illustration both cataphatic and apophatic knowings were used.
Criticism
Letham’s book is far from perfect, however. There are some simple mistakes in the book (which the editor could have fixed easily) and some more profound conceptual mistakes (and for what it’s worth, Letham’s books on Orthodoxy, Christ, and Trinity have been a feast for me over the past few years). First of all, Letham repeats himself a number of times, almost paragraph for paragraph (cf. Gregory of Nazianzus’ quote on the Trinity). Secondly, while Letham is to be commended for wanting to use the Trinity in inter-faith, inter-philosophical discussions, and while his Trinitarian critique of Islam is superb, I found his critique of postmodernism wanting. He accepted caricatures of postmodernism and then critiqued those caricatures. There was no actual interaction with the “original postmodernists” (Derrida et al).
April 9, 2021
4.5 stars: The subtitle explains the scope and thrust of the book, which has been expanded to include a chapter on the ESS/EFS/ERAS controversy. I thought the chapters exploring patristics as well as Eastern Orthodox views were especially helpful and not frequently covered by American/western popular level texts. This is probably the best book for the layman to read after an introductory book on trinitarian grammar/lexicon (for which I'd point that reader to Scott Swain's *The Trinity* in the Short Systematics series).
September 6, 2021
This theological treatise on the Trinity is a fascinating and compelling read. Letham walks through and critiques historic understandings of the Trinity and teachings surrounding the matter that have been presented throughout the eastern and western churches. By working from early church creeds, Letham is able to argue for a biblical teaching of the Trinity that challenges some modern evangelical notions and teachings amidst the Reformed tradition by pointing to Calvin who in turn relies on the Scriptures to influence his understanding of the creeds of the early church. Letham also articulates the differences in the East and West regarding the Holy Spirit, different heresies associated with the Trinity, and how analogies have consistently fallen short of providing an orthodox teaching of the Trinity. The closing sections of the book are most valuable as he points out how western evangelical worship for much of the 20 and 21 centuries have failed to worship the full Trinity. The list of hymns to argue this case speaks for itself. Like Letham, I recommend “Communion with the Triune God” by John Owen for what worship of the Trinity is to look like and for a clearer understanding of how orthodox Christian worship is Trinitarian.
May 14, 2020
I really enjoyed this book. Starting with the Biblical foundations of the Trinity was very helpful as Letham traces the development of the Trinity through history to modern times. He also makes it very clear throughout why the Trinity is at the core of Christianity and how it impacts worship and every other realm of life.
April 30, 2021
I have greatly mixed feelings about this one.
The content, for the most part, is great. The teaching on the doctrine is sound and I've learned and refined some of my own thinking about the doctrine of the Trinity after reading this. I especially appreciated the call to recover the Trinity in our worship (preaching, singing, liturgy) and the highlighting of how unique and central the Trinity is (and should increasingly be!) in our lives as followers of Christ. If this was it, I'd give this one 4 stars.
But that's not it. There's copious amount of historical theology in this. And that's not necessarily bad. I love Church History! But I'm puzzled by the balance of it: 80 pages to look at the Trinity from the Scriptures and more than 400 to look at Church History? That, in my opinion, should have been the other way around! Also, Letham appears to argue that the doctrine of the Trinity is not explicit in Scriptures but only became explicit as the early Church started to develop its thinking about it. I disagree with that notion (but props to Letham for showing how the early Church struggled to find the right language, I appreciated the honesty of those chapters). Also, this book has some real technical terminology at times so do watch out for that. Thankfully, there is a glossary at the end.
Also, no chapter on the Puritans but then Letham considers John Owen a very important theologian on the Trinity. Well, if that is true, then why not address him in the book? What about Jonathan Edwards, arguably one of the best writers in Church History? (maybe I'm showing my bias here for the Puritans but I did think it was a pity not to address them).
Finally, the style of writing is not always the most captivating . There is lots of repetition (can't remember how many times he uses the same quote from Gregory!) and re-stating of points.
Overall, an edifying read that was really painful at times. I'd give it 3.5 out of 5. But because it was somewhat disappointing in its balance, I'll finish with 3 which to me means "It's okay".
The content, for the most part, is great. The teaching on the doctrine is sound and I've learned and refined some of my own thinking about the doctrine of the Trinity after reading this. I especially appreciated the call to recover the Trinity in our worship (preaching, singing, liturgy) and the highlighting of how unique and central the Trinity is (and should increasingly be!) in our lives as followers of Christ. If this was it, I'd give this one 4 stars.
But that's not it. There's copious amount of historical theology in this. And that's not necessarily bad. I love Church History! But I'm puzzled by the balance of it: 80 pages to look at the Trinity from the Scriptures and more than 400 to look at Church History? That, in my opinion, should have been the other way around! Also, Letham appears to argue that the doctrine of the Trinity is not explicit in Scriptures but only became explicit as the early Church started to develop its thinking about it. I disagree with that notion (but props to Letham for showing how the early Church struggled to find the right language, I appreciated the honesty of those chapters). Also, this book has some real technical terminology at times so do watch out for that. Thankfully, there is a glossary at the end.
Also, no chapter on the Puritans but then Letham considers John Owen a very important theologian on the Trinity. Well, if that is true, then why not address him in the book? What about Jonathan Edwards, arguably one of the best writers in Church History? (maybe I'm showing my bias here for the Puritans but I did think it was a pity not to address them).
Finally, the style of writing is not always the most captivating . There is lots of repetition (can't remember how many times he uses the same quote from Gregory!) and re-stating of points.
Overall, an edifying read that was really painful at times. I'd give it 3.5 out of 5. But because it was somewhat disappointing in its balance, I'll finish with 3 which to me means "It's okay".
October 28, 2010
Great stuff. Letham is quite readable, and offers a good survey of the biblical texts. He is scholarly, but also believes some things. His historical overviews are concise and helpful, and his concluding thoughts model careful ecumenism. He has given the East far more attention than anyone else I've seen, and while he remains quite western and reformed, he is charitable and humble. He has clearly learned from the Eastern tradition, and values it highly.
A couple things - he quotes or references LaCugna repeatedly, but never explains why she deserves so many footnotes. The appendices, while displaying Letham's trinitarianism in scholarly action, have a tinge of score-settling about them.
A truly helpful and beneficial volume.
A couple things - he quotes or references LaCugna repeatedly, but never explains why she deserves so many footnotes. The appendices, while displaying Letham's trinitarianism in scholarly action, have a tinge of score-settling about them.
A truly helpful and beneficial volume.
March 27, 2020
Simply excellent, one of the best books that I have ever read. Incredibly difficult at points, the historical theology chapters in this book were invaluable at coming to better apprehend the church’s historic teaching on the trinity. However, I found myself having to reread and reread to understand exactly what he was saying at times, but that should be expected when reading a book on the most complex doctrine in Christian theology.
If you are looking for a book to help you better understand the trinity in Biblical, historical, theological, and practical perspective, I cannot imagine anything much better than this.
My favorite aspect of this book was how charitable he was when it came to traditions other than his own. To everyone other than Moltmann, whom he continuously and rightfully demolishes, Letham is incredibly gracious. Letham almost made me become Eastern Orthodox in his chapter critiquing Eastern Orthodoxy.
If you are looking for a book to help you better understand the trinity in Biblical, historical, theological, and practical perspective, I cannot imagine anything much better than this.
My favorite aspect of this book was how charitable he was when it came to traditions other than his own. To everyone other than Moltmann, whom he continuously and rightfully demolishes, Letham is incredibly gracious. Letham almost made me become Eastern Orthodox in his chapter critiquing Eastern Orthodoxy.
May 22, 2022
This is one to read, re-read, and reference often. So helpful, and encouraging. He covers all the history that helps the reader understand why we must know what the Scriptures teach concerning the Trinity; and lays out so well what we must cling to. He thoroughly covers the difference between the Eastern and Western views, and all the historic and modern heresies.
April 10, 2023
Fantastic!
The most accessible yet thorough treatment of the Trinity I’ve read yet. It covers all the bases. I would highly recommend this to anyone who is looking for a book that goes beyond the basics but not yet ready to dive into the deep end. It’s not necessarily the easiest book to read — and there are certainly places I will be rereading to understand better — but it is worth it.
The most accessible yet thorough treatment of the Trinity I’ve read yet. It covers all the bases. I would highly recommend this to anyone who is looking for a book that goes beyond the basics but not yet ready to dive into the deep end. It’s not necessarily the easiest book to read — and there are certainly places I will be rereading to understand better — but it is worth it.
June 3, 2021
The new 2019 edition of Robert Letham’s The Holy Trinity expands his teaching on Augustine, Barth, East-West relations, and most intriguingly, the 2016 blog dispute as it concerns the relation of the Son to the Father. As Paul Helm’s endorsement reads, “The ancient doctrine of the Trinity has stirred up new discussion since Letham’s acclaimed first edition, but the author has kept up with what has been going on.” This is made clear by his erudite critiques of both sides of the debate. As Letham writes, “I have been cited in support of both sides, and of no side...I will attempt to depersonalize the matter and discuss the arguments.” I found his doctrine on this topic, and advice toward the two main parties in the debate, to be balanced and very helpful, and was happy to see endorsements from Sinclair Ferguson (who writes the foreword), Joel Beeke, and Derek Thomas, among others.
While the entire book deserves its own review, I wish to only provide a synopsis for Letham’s mediating position on the Trinity in regards to the ongoing debate between Classical Theism and EFS (eternal functional subordinationism) found in Chapter 17. As I have not seen this aspect of the Revised Version discussed or treated in-depth yet, I hope this review of Letham’s thoughts and theology of the matter adds additional clarity to this controversial discussion.
In summary, while unfolding his doctrine of the Trinity, Letham simultaneously discloses cautions and corrections towards both sides of the trinitarian debate. He emphasizes the primary danger of ‘one side,’ (He never refers to Classical Theism directly) having the tendency toward Nestorianism, while emphasizing the main danger on the other side is de-emphasizing the importance of eternal generation, and making the Persons out to have separate autonomous wills, which would indicate tritheism, another untenable option. To expand upon this summary, I hope to briefly explain six main points I found Letham raises, either explicitly or implicitly in regards to Classical Theism. Then, I will conclude with summarizing six main points he raises against claims made from the other side, to in the end arrive at a more holistic doctrine of the Trinity.
Oneness and Threeness as Equally Ultimate
First, Letham begins by emphasizing the importance that we not view God’s oneness as pre-eminent over His threeness. After quoting Gregory of Nazianzus, Letham writes “Gregory points to the danger of building our doctrine of the Trinity either on the one being of God in isolation, or on the three persons (or any one of them) in isolation (452)...Distinctness and particularity, union and communion—both are equally ultimate and equally necessary” (453). This balance serves as the foundation out of which the rest of the chapter is built, a foundation that unfortunately is lacking in Classical Theism. Classical Theism believes in the pre-eminence of God’s singularity and simplicity and thus interprets any distinction or perceived movement be it in His personhood and love from eternity past, to his affections and actions as He relates to mankind, as purely appropriative or analogical. This “baby talk” revelation they argue, unveils not who God truly is in Himself, but an imitation or reduced version that our minds can grasp. In essence, God isn’t who he reveals Himself to be. But by beginning with a proper balance between singularity and distinction, Letham guards against this deceptive revelation, and maintains the mystery of our Tri-une God.
Congruity between the Human and the Divine
Second, in defending against the error of Nestorianism, Letham emphasizes the importance of congruity between the humanity of Christ and Christ ad intra, writing, “the relations of the Persons ad extra in creation, providence and grace, reflect the order and relations of the persons ad intra” (470), and that “The missions of the Son and the Spirit in history, in which all three hypostases are inseparably involved, mirror these eternal relations; the Father sends the Son, never vice versa, and so on” (460). He further asserts, “The claim that Christ’s human obedience is connected to, and congruous with, the eternal hypostatic relations is no novelty” (483). In this, he references Berkouwer, Bavinck, Bromiley, Barth, Ranger, Thompson, and Lossky in citation. Furthermore, he points out how “Barth castigates this refusal to see Christ’s obedience as grounded in his being as the Son as modalism” (482). He also states, “it was appropriate, indeed necessary, that it be the Son who became incarnate,” which further lends to his argument of congruity (474). Such congruity between his humanity, his personhood, and God, means “All the actions of Jesus of Nazareth were actions of the incarnate Son, whether according to his deity or humanity” (474). This emphasis on Christ’s personhood conjoining both his human and divine nature, and providing congruity between God ad intra and Christ’s works ad extra, is important to balance the over-emphasis on the Creator-creature distinction in Classical Theism.
Inseparable Operations & Real Personal Works
Third, Letham writes, “The three persons of the Trinity are not simply subsistent relations is demonstrated by the incarnation” (459). And in the same vein he says, “the incarnation is more than the appropriation of a particular work to a particular person. It is a personal work of the Son, who remains forever in union with his humanity, in a way that the Father and the Spirit are not” (472). Letham is aiming to show how the Persons of God are deeply personal and uniquely characterized beyond just their relation of origin, and how the doctrine of inseparable operations does not negate the presence of real personal works, specifically that of Christ and his Cross-work. This helps balance Classical Theism’s doctrine of uniqueness which states that the Persons’ uniqueness extends solely to their relations of origin, and that in every other way the Persons of God are fully and completely identical one to another, without movement, and without any further distinction in the Divine Godhead.
Dynamic Ad Intra Communion
Fourth, he repeatedly notes the importance that we view the imminent life and love of God as that of a dynamic and living communion with movement. In support of this “dynamic Perichoresis,” he references Epiphanius, Cyril of Alexandria, Athanasius, and Gregory of Nazianzus (439), and appeals to how, “Jesus’ prayers to the Father reveal a living, dynamic relation, a vital Union and communion” (472). This dynamic communion is vital, as the philosophical notion of God as a static or “pure act” is foundational teaching in Classical Theism.
The True and Personal Revelation of God’s Genuine Being in Christ
Fifth, he underlines the genuineness of God’s revelation. He writes, “We can trust that the way he has made himself known in history corresponds with who he is eternally (470)...there is no surplus, no hidden element lurking behind his revelation in Christ...We must assert that God’s revelation is utterly true; if that were not so, we could have no sure knowledge of him, and there would be no gospel” (471). Summarizing Barth, Letham writes, “In stark contrast, this modalistic view, as Barth says, presents us with a Christ whose proper being remains hidden behind an improper being, an “as if”” (482). Letham thus concludes the true and genuine revelation of Jesus Christ must be safeguarded. An important point when analogical language, anthropomorphic language, and “baby talk” revelation, is taken to an extreme in modern proponents of Classical Theism.
No One Side has Claim to Orthodoxy
Last, Letham points out the quickness of both sides to accuse heresy, and how no side can claim sole orthodox rights. He helpfully writes, “Whereas Arius and Eunomius held that the Son was of a different being from the Father, and was created, this recent proposal entails that he is inferior in status or function, so the argument runs. The opponents consider that it amounts to the same thing as the Arian heresy. In their eyes, all forms of subordination are to be condemned. Both sides miss the point that the fourth-century situation was muddled, with a range of proposals on the table, much misunderstanding, and constantly shifting alliances” (462). Furthermore, the use of the term subordination to describe eternal realities is not a new invention. In fact, Letham notes an eternal submissiveness of the Son suggested by Berkouwer as “deriving from the depth of the Trinitarian being of God” (483), Berkouwer citing Bavinck in support. Letham also interacts with Charles Hodge’s positive statements on the Son’s subordination, and refers to how Muller notes that “Calvin and many of the reformed wrote of a certain subordination of hypostases” (466). To this end, Letham says the historic use of subordination language in connection with the eternal generation of the Son and relations of the Persons is unfortunate, yet a present reality. He last admonishes, “While they have shown Barth’s proposal that the Son is obedient in eternity to be highly suspect, it is noteworthy that neither Torrance nor Molnar accuses him of being a heretic. Both looked to Barth as a great thinker who had huge influence over them. This is something for lesser men and women to bear in mind” (484).
Indivisible Essence and Inseparable Operations
Now, in order to balance the other side (eternal functional subordination advocates), Letham maintains the necessity of God’s indivisible essence and inseparable operations. This is an important point to Letham, and an emphasis he says is found in Augustine as well. Letham writes, “the indivisible will of God is expressed in hypostatically distinct ways” (457), while at the same time, “The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit determine all of God’s decrees and purposes indivisibly” (457). Thus, “it follows that God has but one will, or else, with three volitional centers, there would be three Gods. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit determine all of God’s decrees and purposes indivisibly” (457). This is an important historical doctrine, and one that is often neglected or undermined by EFS advocates. If God’s Essence is indivisible, his works must in some sense, be inseparable too.
The Father as Source—Order, not Hierarchy
Second, Letham’s main problem with subordinationism, or submission in the immanent Trinity, is the language portrays a rank, hierarchy, or chain of command in the being of God. It construes the idea of one submitting to the will of another that is not one’s own, which on its surface denies the doctrine of God’s one indivisible will. “Subordination proper,” Letham writes, “posits the erroneous belief that the Son is somehow less than the Father” (485). Furthermore, much of the logic used to arrive at their conclusion “has run from human realities to divine, which was the method used by the Eunomians in the fourth century and rejected by the church” (462). Rather, Letham argues, we ought to follow Calvin in this matter, who without using the term subordination or implying it, “writes of a clear hypostatic order in which the Father is the source...the beginning and fountainhead of the whole divinity” (465). Saying the Father is source, rather than superior, lays the emphasis on order instead of rank, for “The Pro-Nicenes used the word (taxis) in the sense of a fitting and suitable disposition, not a hierarchy” (484). Letham argues the language of the Father as source can readily replace the language of subordination and retain the orthodox meaning with no problem (466).
Emphasis on Eternal Generation
Third, Letham notes how Orthodox theologians “have generally been careful to restrict subordination to the hypostatic relations, while strongly affirming the indivisible will, eternal generation, and procession.” This de-emphasis of eternal generation is dangerous, and Letham shows disagreement with John Frame’s perspective that eternal generation should not be made a test of orthodoxy (462).
Not Three Separate Wills, but One Will Hypostatically Manifested Three Distinct Ways
Fourth, “the talk of separate wills implies tritheism” (463). Letham emphasizes how our language regarding will should not be that of separate autonomous wills working together like a family, but should be articulated, with John Owen’s help, as the one will of God, distinctly or particularly expressed/manifested amongst the three Persons (457, 463).
Scripture-deduced Inference vs. Proof-text
Fifth, the rebutting cry for proof texts is eerily familiar. Letham writes, “the requirement of explicit proof-texts from Scripture has been the cry of heretics down through the years. This is what the Eunomians and pneumatomachii required” (464). It might be beneficial thus, to keep the debate more centered along what’s good and necessary consequence deduced from Scripture (WCF 1.6), rather than demanding explicit proof texts.
A Love Inspired Kenosis
Lastly, if the Son’s human obedience is the fruit of some eternal condition in His Person, Letham posits it be the Son’s uniquely ready and receptive Love for the Father. “His obedience as man reflected his eternal love for the Father in the unity of the indivisible Trinity, a love expressed in readiness” (487). This way, The Son’s eternal Love, not subordination, serves as the eternal ground for the Son’s kenosis (487). When the main reason for Christ being sent by the Father is equated to his already subordinated nature, instead of his unique readiness as Son to submit to the Father out of Love, it diminishes the sacrifice and cost of the Son’s kenosis. Letham summarizes, “As Calvin observed, with the Father is the beginning of activity. And, so we may say, with the Son is the loving, joyful, faithful acceptance of the Father’s initiating plan, which is also his plan, in the unity of the indivisible will of the Trinity” (489).
Much like how Elihu comes in at the end of the debacle between Job and his friends, and gives a more balanced critique after he could not listen any longer, Robert Letham‘s response is impactful and reminiscent of such wisdom. His treatment on the Trinity I believe to be wise, balanced, and helpful to this otherwise heated, and narrow-sighted controversy. Letham finishes his chapter with questions for reflection, the first being “Why is subordinationism dangerous?” And the second, “Consider problems associated with isolating the incarnate Christ from the eternal Son?” Very good questions to ask to prevent us all from serious error, and to instead strike that middle chord of truth as we search for the proper language and theological constructs to define and glorify our great Triune God.
While the entire book deserves its own review, I wish to only provide a synopsis for Letham’s mediating position on the Trinity in regards to the ongoing debate between Classical Theism and EFS (eternal functional subordinationism) found in Chapter 17. As I have not seen this aspect of the Revised Version discussed or treated in-depth yet, I hope this review of Letham’s thoughts and theology of the matter adds additional clarity to this controversial discussion.
In summary, while unfolding his doctrine of the Trinity, Letham simultaneously discloses cautions and corrections towards both sides of the trinitarian debate. He emphasizes the primary danger of ‘one side,’ (He never refers to Classical Theism directly) having the tendency toward Nestorianism, while emphasizing the main danger on the other side is de-emphasizing the importance of eternal generation, and making the Persons out to have separate autonomous wills, which would indicate tritheism, another untenable option. To expand upon this summary, I hope to briefly explain six main points I found Letham raises, either explicitly or implicitly in regards to Classical Theism. Then, I will conclude with summarizing six main points he raises against claims made from the other side, to in the end arrive at a more holistic doctrine of the Trinity.
Oneness and Threeness as Equally Ultimate
First, Letham begins by emphasizing the importance that we not view God’s oneness as pre-eminent over His threeness. After quoting Gregory of Nazianzus, Letham writes “Gregory points to the danger of building our doctrine of the Trinity either on the one being of God in isolation, or on the three persons (or any one of them) in isolation (452)...Distinctness and particularity, union and communion—both are equally ultimate and equally necessary” (453). This balance serves as the foundation out of which the rest of the chapter is built, a foundation that unfortunately is lacking in Classical Theism. Classical Theism believes in the pre-eminence of God’s singularity and simplicity and thus interprets any distinction or perceived movement be it in His personhood and love from eternity past, to his affections and actions as He relates to mankind, as purely appropriative or analogical. This “baby talk” revelation they argue, unveils not who God truly is in Himself, but an imitation or reduced version that our minds can grasp. In essence, God isn’t who he reveals Himself to be. But by beginning with a proper balance between singularity and distinction, Letham guards against this deceptive revelation, and maintains the mystery of our Tri-une God.
Congruity between the Human and the Divine
Second, in defending against the error of Nestorianism, Letham emphasizes the importance of congruity between the humanity of Christ and Christ ad intra, writing, “the relations of the Persons ad extra in creation, providence and grace, reflect the order and relations of the persons ad intra” (470), and that “The missions of the Son and the Spirit in history, in which all three hypostases are inseparably involved, mirror these eternal relations; the Father sends the Son, never vice versa, and so on” (460). He further asserts, “The claim that Christ’s human obedience is connected to, and congruous with, the eternal hypostatic relations is no novelty” (483). In this, he references Berkouwer, Bavinck, Bromiley, Barth, Ranger, Thompson, and Lossky in citation. Furthermore, he points out how “Barth castigates this refusal to see Christ’s obedience as grounded in his being as the Son as modalism” (482). He also states, “it was appropriate, indeed necessary, that it be the Son who became incarnate,” which further lends to his argument of congruity (474). Such congruity between his humanity, his personhood, and God, means “All the actions of Jesus of Nazareth were actions of the incarnate Son, whether according to his deity or humanity” (474). This emphasis on Christ’s personhood conjoining both his human and divine nature, and providing congruity between God ad intra and Christ’s works ad extra, is important to balance the over-emphasis on the Creator-creature distinction in Classical Theism.
Inseparable Operations & Real Personal Works
Third, Letham writes, “The three persons of the Trinity are not simply subsistent relations is demonstrated by the incarnation” (459). And in the same vein he says, “the incarnation is more than the appropriation of a particular work to a particular person. It is a personal work of the Son, who remains forever in union with his humanity, in a way that the Father and the Spirit are not” (472). Letham is aiming to show how the Persons of God are deeply personal and uniquely characterized beyond just their relation of origin, and how the doctrine of inseparable operations does not negate the presence of real personal works, specifically that of Christ and his Cross-work. This helps balance Classical Theism’s doctrine of uniqueness which states that the Persons’ uniqueness extends solely to their relations of origin, and that in every other way the Persons of God are fully and completely identical one to another, without movement, and without any further distinction in the Divine Godhead.
Dynamic Ad Intra Communion
Fourth, he repeatedly notes the importance that we view the imminent life and love of God as that of a dynamic and living communion with movement. In support of this “dynamic Perichoresis,” he references Epiphanius, Cyril of Alexandria, Athanasius, and Gregory of Nazianzus (439), and appeals to how, “Jesus’ prayers to the Father reveal a living, dynamic relation, a vital Union and communion” (472). This dynamic communion is vital, as the philosophical notion of God as a static or “pure act” is foundational teaching in Classical Theism.
The True and Personal Revelation of God’s Genuine Being in Christ
Fifth, he underlines the genuineness of God’s revelation. He writes, “We can trust that the way he has made himself known in history corresponds with who he is eternally (470)...there is no surplus, no hidden element lurking behind his revelation in Christ...We must assert that God’s revelation is utterly true; if that were not so, we could have no sure knowledge of him, and there would be no gospel” (471). Summarizing Barth, Letham writes, “In stark contrast, this modalistic view, as Barth says, presents us with a Christ whose proper being remains hidden behind an improper being, an “as if”” (482). Letham thus concludes the true and genuine revelation of Jesus Christ must be safeguarded. An important point when analogical language, anthropomorphic language, and “baby talk” revelation, is taken to an extreme in modern proponents of Classical Theism.
No One Side has Claim to Orthodoxy
Last, Letham points out the quickness of both sides to accuse heresy, and how no side can claim sole orthodox rights. He helpfully writes, “Whereas Arius and Eunomius held that the Son was of a different being from the Father, and was created, this recent proposal entails that he is inferior in status or function, so the argument runs. The opponents consider that it amounts to the same thing as the Arian heresy. In their eyes, all forms of subordination are to be condemned. Both sides miss the point that the fourth-century situation was muddled, with a range of proposals on the table, much misunderstanding, and constantly shifting alliances” (462). Furthermore, the use of the term subordination to describe eternal realities is not a new invention. In fact, Letham notes an eternal submissiveness of the Son suggested by Berkouwer as “deriving from the depth of the Trinitarian being of God” (483), Berkouwer citing Bavinck in support. Letham also interacts with Charles Hodge’s positive statements on the Son’s subordination, and refers to how Muller notes that “Calvin and many of the reformed wrote of a certain subordination of hypostases” (466). To this end, Letham says the historic use of subordination language in connection with the eternal generation of the Son and relations of the Persons is unfortunate, yet a present reality. He last admonishes, “While they have shown Barth’s proposal that the Son is obedient in eternity to be highly suspect, it is noteworthy that neither Torrance nor Molnar accuses him of being a heretic. Both looked to Barth as a great thinker who had huge influence over them. This is something for lesser men and women to bear in mind” (484).
Indivisible Essence and Inseparable Operations
Now, in order to balance the other side (eternal functional subordination advocates), Letham maintains the necessity of God’s indivisible essence and inseparable operations. This is an important point to Letham, and an emphasis he says is found in Augustine as well. Letham writes, “the indivisible will of God is expressed in hypostatically distinct ways” (457), while at the same time, “The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit determine all of God’s decrees and purposes indivisibly” (457). Thus, “it follows that God has but one will, or else, with three volitional centers, there would be three Gods. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit determine all of God’s decrees and purposes indivisibly” (457). This is an important historical doctrine, and one that is often neglected or undermined by EFS advocates. If God’s Essence is indivisible, his works must in some sense, be inseparable too.
The Father as Source—Order, not Hierarchy
Second, Letham’s main problem with subordinationism, or submission in the immanent Trinity, is the language portrays a rank, hierarchy, or chain of command in the being of God. It construes the idea of one submitting to the will of another that is not one’s own, which on its surface denies the doctrine of God’s one indivisible will. “Subordination proper,” Letham writes, “posits the erroneous belief that the Son is somehow less than the Father” (485). Furthermore, much of the logic used to arrive at their conclusion “has run from human realities to divine, which was the method used by the Eunomians in the fourth century and rejected by the church” (462). Rather, Letham argues, we ought to follow Calvin in this matter, who without using the term subordination or implying it, “writes of a clear hypostatic order in which the Father is the source...the beginning and fountainhead of the whole divinity” (465). Saying the Father is source, rather than superior, lays the emphasis on order instead of rank, for “The Pro-Nicenes used the word (taxis) in the sense of a fitting and suitable disposition, not a hierarchy” (484). Letham argues the language of the Father as source can readily replace the language of subordination and retain the orthodox meaning with no problem (466).
Emphasis on Eternal Generation
Third, Letham notes how Orthodox theologians “have generally been careful to restrict subordination to the hypostatic relations, while strongly affirming the indivisible will, eternal generation, and procession.” This de-emphasis of eternal generation is dangerous, and Letham shows disagreement with John Frame’s perspective that eternal generation should not be made a test of orthodoxy (462).
Not Three Separate Wills, but One Will Hypostatically Manifested Three Distinct Ways
Fourth, “the talk of separate wills implies tritheism” (463). Letham emphasizes how our language regarding will should not be that of separate autonomous wills working together like a family, but should be articulated, with John Owen’s help, as the one will of God, distinctly or particularly expressed/manifested amongst the three Persons (457, 463).
Scripture-deduced Inference vs. Proof-text
Fifth, the rebutting cry for proof texts is eerily familiar. Letham writes, “the requirement of explicit proof-texts from Scripture has been the cry of heretics down through the years. This is what the Eunomians and pneumatomachii required” (464). It might be beneficial thus, to keep the debate more centered along what’s good and necessary consequence deduced from Scripture (WCF 1.6), rather than demanding explicit proof texts.
A Love Inspired Kenosis
Lastly, if the Son’s human obedience is the fruit of some eternal condition in His Person, Letham posits it be the Son’s uniquely ready and receptive Love for the Father. “His obedience as man reflected his eternal love for the Father in the unity of the indivisible Trinity, a love expressed in readiness” (487). This way, The Son’s eternal Love, not subordination, serves as the eternal ground for the Son’s kenosis (487). When the main reason for Christ being sent by the Father is equated to his already subordinated nature, instead of his unique readiness as Son to submit to the Father out of Love, it diminishes the sacrifice and cost of the Son’s kenosis. Letham summarizes, “As Calvin observed, with the Father is the beginning of activity. And, so we may say, with the Son is the loving, joyful, faithful acceptance of the Father’s initiating plan, which is also his plan, in the unity of the indivisible will of the Trinity” (489).
Much like how Elihu comes in at the end of the debacle between Job and his friends, and gives a more balanced critique after he could not listen any longer, Robert Letham‘s response is impactful and reminiscent of such wisdom. His treatment on the Trinity I believe to be wise, balanced, and helpful to this otherwise heated, and narrow-sighted controversy. Letham finishes his chapter with questions for reflection, the first being “Why is subordinationism dangerous?” And the second, “Consider problems associated with isolating the incarnate Christ from the eternal Son?” Very good questions to ask to prevent us all from serious error, and to instead strike that middle chord of truth as we search for the proper language and theological constructs to define and glorify our great Triune God.
November 10, 2021
Letham expanded his award-winning volume on the doctrine of the Trinity a couple of years back. In Sinclair Ferguson's foreword, he likens Letham's initial volume published in 2004 with Barth's commentary on Romans, like an "atomic bomb dropping on a children's (evangelical) playground," which begins to spark more Trinitarian conversations in the reformed and evangelical world since 2004. I have not read the first volume, but it seems like Letham only expanded it with a couple of chapters that treat the development and discussion of Trinitarian theology, mainly on the pactum salutis, new readings of Karl Barth, and of course, on the EFS controversies that had blown up the Reformed online platforms in 2016.
Without a doubt, Letham's treatment of the doctrine of Trinity is the tour de force volume in the historical theology arena. The book is divided into four sections, the first on a light biblical-exegetical survey of the Trinitarian grammar and framework in the OT, in the Synoptics and especially in the Johannine gospel, and in the Pauline Epistles, with a chapter diving mainly into the Trinitarian grammar/framework that undergirds Ephesians. The next two sections are really the main feast, the historical treatment and the modern discussion up to the point of the late 20th century, both sections together totalling up to 400 pages out of 570+ pages of actual content. Beginning from the Apostolic Fathers writing, to the Arian controversy, to Athanasius and the Cappadocians, Constantinople, Augustine, the filioque controversy that divided the East and the West, to Calvin and post-reformation developments, to modern (liberal-leaning) theologians such as Barth, Rahner, Moltmann, Pannenberg, and even post-medieval theologians in the East, to Torrance, Letham invites the readers to a thrilling historical survey of the development and discussion on the doctrine of the Trinity. All this displays a manner of a competent, humble, and biblical systematician that read the Scriptures and do theology alongside the historical church. Insofar that Christianity is an Apostolic faith that is built upon the Scripture, it remains a historical faith that should be in constant conversation with those that went before us, and even much more so with the discussion of a sine qua non, historical dogma as the doctrine of the Trinity.
What was rewarding personally for me in this volume was tracing the Trinitarian development in the East (Eastern Orthodox, Greek, and later Russian church), and comparing it with the development in the West and observing how the difference in emphasis has led to variation in the development of theology and doxology. The West, because of Neoplatonism and Aristotelianism, has always veered towards the "one-ness" of God and therefore always betrays the danger of closing in on modalism. While the East veered towards the "three-ness" of God (hence the filioque controversy between the East and the West, the East was desperate to maintain the distinction between the Son and the Spirit, though it is not entirely fair to say that the West conflate the two divine Persons), and therefore closes into Tritheism. For the West, the development of the doctrine of God tended towards transcendental categories, on doctrines such as God's essence, simplicity, impassibility, and so on, seen most evident in Aquinas' Summas, which treats the Trinity far latter and far less in comparison with his doctrine of God (oneness, essence, attributes, simplicity, impassibility). For the East, the development of the doctrine of God tended towards Tritheism and agnosticism, because it became harder and harder to delineate a "knowable" essence of God while maintaining the Three Persons, as well as Panentheism. For the West, the Trinity became increasingly a matter of logical conundrum, devoid of doxological implication. This is evident as between Calvin and the early post-reformation development up to the point of 20th century (Karl Barth), Letham remarks that there was no significant contribution on the doctrine of the Trinity from the West, and in the life of the 21st-century evangelical church, the doctrine of the Trinity now remains enshrined in an ivory tower with most evangelical churchgoers only confessing verbal acknowledge without knowing how Trinitarian theology fuels all of church life, personal and corporate piety and worship. For the East, Trinitarian theology remains closely aligned to piety and worship but tended towards mysticism as Eastern theologians tend to maintain the Three Divine Persons while confessing agnosticism to the essence and knowability of God, or closing in on Panentheism. Hence, in the West, soteriology is built upon the atonement and resurrection because of judicial elements, while in the East, upon the incarnation and deification, because of mysticism. Letham notes that Calvin was a rare exception, being a Western theologian, Calvin's Institutes opens his doctrine of God with the Trinity, as Calvin doctrine of God is precisely his doctrine of the Trinity. Letham adds that we do not have to choose between the "one" or the "three" -ness of God, and demonstrates that as with Calvin (and other great Trinitarian theologians), we must uphold and maintain the "Triune," that is, the unity of God in the diversity of His Tri-Persons. More on that later.
An implication and great value of this tracing of historical development is the fact that Letham is also able to synthesis the positive contributions of both the East and West, taking from both historical development and building a more comprehensive doctrine of Trinity, and by implications, a more comprehensive soteriology that encompasses both incarnation and atonement, resurrection and deification. From the West, a doctrine of God that is describable in theological language and truly knowable, and from the East, a Trinitarian theology that fuels worship and doxology. Letham's survey of all the historical development is then demonstrating how we can be learning from the historical church and preceding giants the theological and biblical grammar to describe and worship our Triune God (eternal relations of origin, perichoresis, order of taxis, consubstantiality) at the same time avoiding/not closing in towards modalism or tritheism that lurks in each theologian. With appreciations for the contributions from more modern, yet tending liberal development with Barth, Moltmann, and Pannenberg (arguably, I find Barth extremely orthodox in comparison to Moltmann), Letham is unabashedly critical towards the social Trinitarianism of Moltmann and Pannenberg, warning his readers to stay well clear of them. I benefitted greatly from reading the development of Eastern theology, where Letham introduced to me theologians such as Staniloeo, as well as more modern Trinitarian theologians like Paul Molnar (Roman Catholic), Colin Gunton and TF Torrance (Reformed/Presby).
I wanted to give this book 4 stars because it was really quite dense and hard to read. Because Letham is essentially presenting a historical, complex and multifaceted theological conversation between theologians of church history. It is a good place to jump off to reading historical primary sources and other secondary sources in the academic discussion of the Trinity, but it was quite hard to read because of the prose. Sometimes it is hard to tell whether Letham is citing directly or rewording someone, or whether he was citing someone in response to someone else (for example, Gunton and Molnar are often brought in as conversation partners with Barth). However, the final section, which treats the intersection of the doctrine of Trinity, with worship, prayer, creation, mission, and ethics comes in as a climactic and fitting closure of the book and compel it to a perfect 5 stars. You can hear Letham literally singing the praises of the Triune God when he looked upon classical music (he cites his enjoyment of Beethoven's Archduke) and quantum physics that reflects the Chrisitan worldview of diversity-in-unity. It is in this development of the "diversity-in-unity" worldview that Letham applies to the issue of mission, creation, worship, devotion and ethics (love is the heart of Christian ethics because of Triune communion). I first read of this "diversity-in-unity" worldview from Van Til (Letham agrees that many have misunderstood Van Til's formulation of "absolute Tripersonality" but charges that Van Til's language is carelessly misleading) and his students (Frame, Poythress), but it is also found in Bavinck's organic worldview, and Letham also traces hints of it in Augustine and Gregory of Nazanzius. This worldview Letham set against the monadic worldview of other monotheistic religions, where there is unity without diversity, and against postmodernism, where there is diversity without unity. In the former worldview true love and communion are impossible, if the Father is not able to communicate love to the Son, how far less so is it possible towards creation or for love to exist in creation. In the latter worldview, everything exists for itself and is in a constant state of opposition and flux since reality is as relative as diversity. Finally, Letham, along with other more recent books on the Trinity (I've recently read Barrett's Simply Trinity), urges the church to return to a rich articulation and grasp of the doctrine of Trinity, because Christianity is essentially a Triune faith. Insofar as we lose the grasp on the doctrine of the Trinity, we lose the heart of communion with God, the full enjoyment of all salvific benefit, and true, loving, pious devotion and worship unto the Trice-holy God.
Without a doubt, Letham's treatment of the doctrine of Trinity is the tour de force volume in the historical theology arena. The book is divided into four sections, the first on a light biblical-exegetical survey of the Trinitarian grammar and framework in the OT, in the Synoptics and especially in the Johannine gospel, and in the Pauline Epistles, with a chapter diving mainly into the Trinitarian grammar/framework that undergirds Ephesians. The next two sections are really the main feast, the historical treatment and the modern discussion up to the point of the late 20th century, both sections together totalling up to 400 pages out of 570+ pages of actual content. Beginning from the Apostolic Fathers writing, to the Arian controversy, to Athanasius and the Cappadocians, Constantinople, Augustine, the filioque controversy that divided the East and the West, to Calvin and post-reformation developments, to modern (liberal-leaning) theologians such as Barth, Rahner, Moltmann, Pannenberg, and even post-medieval theologians in the East, to Torrance, Letham invites the readers to a thrilling historical survey of the development and discussion on the doctrine of the Trinity. All this displays a manner of a competent, humble, and biblical systematician that read the Scriptures and do theology alongside the historical church. Insofar that Christianity is an Apostolic faith that is built upon the Scripture, it remains a historical faith that should be in constant conversation with those that went before us, and even much more so with the discussion of a sine qua non, historical dogma as the doctrine of the Trinity.
What was rewarding personally for me in this volume was tracing the Trinitarian development in the East (Eastern Orthodox, Greek, and later Russian church), and comparing it with the development in the West and observing how the difference in emphasis has led to variation in the development of theology and doxology. The West, because of Neoplatonism and Aristotelianism, has always veered towards the "one-ness" of God and therefore always betrays the danger of closing in on modalism. While the East veered towards the "three-ness" of God (hence the filioque controversy between the East and the West, the East was desperate to maintain the distinction between the Son and the Spirit, though it is not entirely fair to say that the West conflate the two divine Persons), and therefore closes into Tritheism. For the West, the development of the doctrine of God tended towards transcendental categories, on doctrines such as God's essence, simplicity, impassibility, and so on, seen most evident in Aquinas' Summas, which treats the Trinity far latter and far less in comparison with his doctrine of God (oneness, essence, attributes, simplicity, impassibility). For the East, the development of the doctrine of God tended towards Tritheism and agnosticism, because it became harder and harder to delineate a "knowable" essence of God while maintaining the Three Persons, as well as Panentheism. For the West, the Trinity became increasingly a matter of logical conundrum, devoid of doxological implication. This is evident as between Calvin and the early post-reformation development up to the point of 20th century (Karl Barth), Letham remarks that there was no significant contribution on the doctrine of the Trinity from the West, and in the life of the 21st-century evangelical church, the doctrine of the Trinity now remains enshrined in an ivory tower with most evangelical churchgoers only confessing verbal acknowledge without knowing how Trinitarian theology fuels all of church life, personal and corporate piety and worship. For the East, Trinitarian theology remains closely aligned to piety and worship but tended towards mysticism as Eastern theologians tend to maintain the Three Divine Persons while confessing agnosticism to the essence and knowability of God, or closing in on Panentheism. Hence, in the West, soteriology is built upon the atonement and resurrection because of judicial elements, while in the East, upon the incarnation and deification, because of mysticism. Letham notes that Calvin was a rare exception, being a Western theologian, Calvin's Institutes opens his doctrine of God with the Trinity, as Calvin doctrine of God is precisely his doctrine of the Trinity. Letham adds that we do not have to choose between the "one" or the "three" -ness of God, and demonstrates that as with Calvin (and other great Trinitarian theologians), we must uphold and maintain the "Triune," that is, the unity of God in the diversity of His Tri-Persons. More on that later.
An implication and great value of this tracing of historical development is the fact that Letham is also able to synthesis the positive contributions of both the East and West, taking from both historical development and building a more comprehensive doctrine of Trinity, and by implications, a more comprehensive soteriology that encompasses both incarnation and atonement, resurrection and deification. From the West, a doctrine of God that is describable in theological language and truly knowable, and from the East, a Trinitarian theology that fuels worship and doxology. Letham's survey of all the historical development is then demonstrating how we can be learning from the historical church and preceding giants the theological and biblical grammar to describe and worship our Triune God (eternal relations of origin, perichoresis, order of taxis, consubstantiality) at the same time avoiding/not closing in towards modalism or tritheism that lurks in each theologian. With appreciations for the contributions from more modern, yet tending liberal development with Barth, Moltmann, and Pannenberg (arguably, I find Barth extremely orthodox in comparison to Moltmann), Letham is unabashedly critical towards the social Trinitarianism of Moltmann and Pannenberg, warning his readers to stay well clear of them. I benefitted greatly from reading the development of Eastern theology, where Letham introduced to me theologians such as Staniloeo, as well as more modern Trinitarian theologians like Paul Molnar (Roman Catholic), Colin Gunton and TF Torrance (Reformed/Presby).
I wanted to give this book 4 stars because it was really quite dense and hard to read. Because Letham is essentially presenting a historical, complex and multifaceted theological conversation between theologians of church history. It is a good place to jump off to reading historical primary sources and other secondary sources in the academic discussion of the Trinity, but it was quite hard to read because of the prose. Sometimes it is hard to tell whether Letham is citing directly or rewording someone, or whether he was citing someone in response to someone else (for example, Gunton and Molnar are often brought in as conversation partners with Barth). However, the final section, which treats the intersection of the doctrine of Trinity, with worship, prayer, creation, mission, and ethics comes in as a climactic and fitting closure of the book and compel it to a perfect 5 stars. You can hear Letham literally singing the praises of the Triune God when he looked upon classical music (he cites his enjoyment of Beethoven's Archduke) and quantum physics that reflects the Chrisitan worldview of diversity-in-unity. It is in this development of the "diversity-in-unity" worldview that Letham applies to the issue of mission, creation, worship, devotion and ethics (love is the heart of Christian ethics because of Triune communion). I first read of this "diversity-in-unity" worldview from Van Til (Letham agrees that many have misunderstood Van Til's formulation of "absolute Tripersonality" but charges that Van Til's language is carelessly misleading) and his students (Frame, Poythress), but it is also found in Bavinck's organic worldview, and Letham also traces hints of it in Augustine and Gregory of Nazanzius. This worldview Letham set against the monadic worldview of other monotheistic religions, where there is unity without diversity, and against postmodernism, where there is diversity without unity. In the former worldview true love and communion are impossible, if the Father is not able to communicate love to the Son, how far less so is it possible towards creation or for love to exist in creation. In the latter worldview, everything exists for itself and is in a constant state of opposition and flux since reality is as relative as diversity. Finally, Letham, along with other more recent books on the Trinity (I've recently read Barrett's Simply Trinity), urges the church to return to a rich articulation and grasp of the doctrine of Trinity, because Christianity is essentially a Triune faith. Insofar as we lose the grasp on the doctrine of the Trinity, we lose the heart of communion with God, the full enjoyment of all salvific benefit, and true, loving, pious devotion and worship unto the Trice-holy God.
June 26, 2014
One being—three persons, three persons—one being.
Prior to reading this book, I felt that I already possessed a good understanding of the Trinity; but after completing it, I realized that the knowledge of the Trinity which I did possess was only minuscule to the many aspects of it. Such an incredible book. After a thorough examination of the doctrine's biblical foundations, Robert Letham traces it’s historical development through the 20th century. Very informative and highly recommended!
The following are some of my favorite quotes from the book:
“[W]hile the plan of salvation is brought about from the Father through the Son by the Holy Spirit, from our side we experience a reverse movement by the Holy Spirit through the Son to the Father. The Spirit gives faith (Ephesians 2:8-9) and is the source of all the ways in which we respond to the grace of God. He enables us to trust Christ, and through him and his mediation we have fellowship with the Father. Christian experience is therefore Trinitarian through and through.” Page 81
“Not only is our salvation a work of God, not only is it Trinitarian through and through, but it is initiated by the Father, accomplished by the Son, and applied by the Holy Spirit.”
Page 413
John Calvin famously cites this passage from Gregory Nazianzen’s Oration on Holy Baptism, saying it “vastly delights me" :
This I give you to share, and to defend all your life, the one Godhead and power, found in the three in unity, and comprising the three separately; not unequal, in substances or natures, neither increased nor diminished by superiorities or inferiorities; in every respect equal, in every respect the same; just as the beauty and the greatness of the heavens is one; the infinite conjunction of three infinite ones, each God when considered in himself; as the Father, so the Son; as the Son, so the Holy Spirit; the three one God when contemplated together; each God because consubstantial; one God because of the monarchia. No sooner do I conceive of the one than I am illumined by the splendor of the three; no sooner do I distinguish them than I am carried back to the one. When I think of any one of the three I think of him as the whole, and my eyes are filled, and the greater part of what I am thinking escapes me. I cannot grasp the greatness of that one as as to attribute a greater greatness to the rest. When I contemplate the three together, I see but one torch, and cannot divide or measure out the undivided light.
Page 378
“As we consider this [all aspects of the Trinity], we are struck by our ignorance. These are matters beyond us. It is like the old illustration of dipping a teacup into the ocean. Beside the vastness of the Atlantic, the water in our teacup is infinitesimal. But yet, the water in the teacup is the Atlantic ocean, insofar as it is a true sample. It is true that we don’t know the inner workings of the Trinity and can never know them beyond what is revealed.”
Page 420
Prior to reading this book, I felt that I already possessed a good understanding of the Trinity; but after completing it, I realized that the knowledge of the Trinity which I did possess was only minuscule to the many aspects of it. Such an incredible book. After a thorough examination of the doctrine's biblical foundations, Robert Letham traces it’s historical development through the 20th century. Very informative and highly recommended!
The following are some of my favorite quotes from the book:
“[W]hile the plan of salvation is brought about from the Father through the Son by the Holy Spirit, from our side we experience a reverse movement by the Holy Spirit through the Son to the Father. The Spirit gives faith (Ephesians 2:8-9) and is the source of all the ways in which we respond to the grace of God. He enables us to trust Christ, and through him and his mediation we have fellowship with the Father. Christian experience is therefore Trinitarian through and through.” Page 81
“Not only is our salvation a work of God, not only is it Trinitarian through and through, but it is initiated by the Father, accomplished by the Son, and applied by the Holy Spirit.”
Page 413
John Calvin famously cites this passage from Gregory Nazianzen’s Oration on Holy Baptism, saying it “vastly delights me" :
This I give you to share, and to defend all your life, the one Godhead and power, found in the three in unity, and comprising the three separately; not unequal, in substances or natures, neither increased nor diminished by superiorities or inferiorities; in every respect equal, in every respect the same; just as the beauty and the greatness of the heavens is one; the infinite conjunction of three infinite ones, each God when considered in himself; as the Father, so the Son; as the Son, so the Holy Spirit; the three one God when contemplated together; each God because consubstantial; one God because of the monarchia. No sooner do I conceive of the one than I am illumined by the splendor of the three; no sooner do I distinguish them than I am carried back to the one. When I think of any one of the three I think of him as the whole, and my eyes are filled, and the greater part of what I am thinking escapes me. I cannot grasp the greatness of that one as as to attribute a greater greatness to the rest. When I contemplate the three together, I see but one torch, and cannot divide or measure out the undivided light.
Page 378
“As we consider this [all aspects of the Trinity], we are struck by our ignorance. These are matters beyond us. It is like the old illustration of dipping a teacup into the ocean. Beside the vastness of the Atlantic, the water in our teacup is infinitesimal. But yet, the water in the teacup is the Atlantic ocean, insofar as it is a true sample. It is true that we don’t know the inner workings of the Trinity and can never know them beyond what is revealed.”
Page 420
March 17, 2024
A great book! Surveys the history of the development of the doctrine of the Trinity from its alluded beginnings in the Old Testament, to early glimpses in Paul's and John's epistles, through the early Christian era, down through the centuries as the one body of the church split into the eastern church (now known as the Eastern or Greek Orthodox Church) and the western church (now known as the Roman Catholic Church). Letham traces its further development under the RCC and the Protestant churches (now comprising all other churches that do not call themselves Roman Catholic, whether denominational or non-denominational)--from the Reformation to the present day. He does touch on briefly on its development in the Eastern Orthodox Church in the 20th century through 2 or 3 of its more famous theologians, but his present-day concentration focuses on Karl Barth's role and his influence on later Trinitarian theologians. It is obvious that Letham thinks very highly of Karl Barth because for all the other theologians he has written about (whether it was the early church fathers or contemporary theologicans like T. F. Torrance), he had at least one point of criticism regarding their development of Trinitarian theology. With Karl Barth, however, he doesn't find anything wrong with how Barth developed Trinitarian theology, even though Barth is sometimes criticized for being universalist (because of his focus on salvation for all) and monotheistic instead of Trinitarian (because of his focus on the Oneness of God vs. His Trinitarian Nature).
November 29, 2012
This was a very good book. Very helpful, surprisingly practical and pastoral for its size. Very much enjoyed reading it. He has some great ideas in there for missiological efforts, good emphasis on the worship aspects too. I do take issue with some of his criticism of the East, yet I do think he is one of the more generous in this regard coming from the reformed camp. Also, I think this volume should be read in concert with the works of Kevin Giles, not that Giles is someone I would sign off on, but rather I think he helps balance out some of Lethams errors especially as they relate to his leaning(s) toward subordinationism and also his aqueousing to the West in the filoque controversy. All that said, this is a very important book in the conservative reformed world and is written by a very competent communicator and theologian who in turn does have a pastor's heart and writes for the people of God, not the academy.
March 31, 2014
To paraphrase the simple yet incredibly deep statement of Gregory of Nazianzus, no sooner do I think of the One than I am driven to think of the Three, No sooner do I consider the Three than I am drawn to the One.
Robert Letham does a superb job laying out the different writers and perspectives which have predominated in the many debates surrounding the doctrine of the Trinity. Before I read Letham's The Holy Trinity I felt comfortable in my understanding of the Trinity, after reading Letham I have a new appreciation and understanding of what the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity is and how it should be properly explained and defended. In truth, the very doctrine of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is the foundation of all that separates Christianity from other monotheistic religions. Anyone hoping to begin to grasp the depth of the Scripture's doctrine of the Trinity must read Letham's significant work.
Robert Letham does a superb job laying out the different writers and perspectives which have predominated in the many debates surrounding the doctrine of the Trinity. Before I read Letham's The Holy Trinity I felt comfortable in my understanding of the Trinity, after reading Letham I have a new appreciation and understanding of what the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity is and how it should be properly explained and defended. In truth, the very doctrine of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is the foundation of all that separates Christianity from other monotheistic religions. Anyone hoping to begin to grasp the depth of the Scripture's doctrine of the Trinity must read Letham's significant work.
April 13, 2017
I highly recommend this book for all pastors or theology students. It gives a great introduction to the history of the doctrine of the Trinity, especially the differences between Eastern and Western articulations of it. He gives a critical and fair assessment of the filioque, and offers insight into the doctrine's pertinence to several areas of church life and worship. I would have liked to have seen interaction with modern conceptions of the Trinity from outside of Europe and the U.S. One more minor criticism: he makes several references to Gregory of Nazianzus' view of the monarchy of God which ignore contemporary scholarship on the issue. Still a must-read for persons in Christian ministry who don't want to ignore the central doctrine of the Christian faith.
November 20, 2012
I was a little disappointed by this book. He had such a well rounded and fresh take on the WCF in his work "The Westminster Assembly." I was expecting that kind of fresh and deep approach to this subject.
Its a standard text that summarizes the typical view and historical development of the Doctrine of God. But it doesn't expand on the knowledge or application of the Trinity to life or theology any more than other standard texts. Also it was a lot longer than many standard texts.
Sproul's "What is the Trinity," and "The Mystery of the Holy Spirit" are much more concise introductory books.
For a fresher look at the Trinity, I suggest "Trinity and Reality" by R.A. Smith or "Our Triune God" by Ryken.
Its a standard text that summarizes the typical view and historical development of the Doctrine of God. But it doesn't expand on the knowledge or application of the Trinity to life or theology any more than other standard texts. Also it was a lot longer than many standard texts.
Sproul's "What is the Trinity," and "The Mystery of the Holy Spirit" are much more concise introductory books.
For a fresher look at the Trinity, I suggest "Trinity and Reality" by R.A. Smith or "Our Triune God" by Ryken.
June 18, 2012
This made for a wonderful read. Repetitive at times, so for the advanced this will be annoying, but for the not so advanced this only makes it all the more better for the information to stick. The breadth the book covers is wide. I have a few criticisms but to properly justify those I think I would need to go on at a length that I don't feel like doing! This is a great book to really get into the current theological conversation over the Trinity because of his interaction with so many sources from Patristics to Modern theology. Again, this a great start to have a great foundation, but only the start I feel.
February 5, 2017
In many ways I found this a very helpful read. But in other ways I was disappointed. It did not read as well as some of Letham's other books. But more disappointing was the limited space gaven to Augustine, Aquinas and Anselm, for example (and non at all to Edwards). The space was filled rather with very much more on Barth, Torrence and Eastern writers.
This, of course, was deliberate, for Letham is highly critical of the traditional Western approach to the Trinity. Or at least to its major emphasis on the Simplicity of God.
Still, this is a good book and covers considerable of theological ground.
Liked it.
This, of course, was deliberate, for Letham is highly critical of the traditional Western approach to the Trinity. Or at least to its major emphasis on the Simplicity of God.
Still, this is a good book and covers considerable of theological ground.
Liked it.
January 21, 2014
I loved this book. Letham presents a thorough overview of thought, from the early East and West, to modern Eastern and Western views. He writes at length on the implications of an orthodox trinitarian view, particularly as related to worship.
I would consider this necessary reading for any christian serious about understanding the significance of the trinity and as a bridge to properly understanding other words (contemporary or from antiquity).
I would consider this necessary reading for any christian serious about understanding the significance of the trinity and as a bridge to properly understanding other words (contemporary or from antiquity).
February 29, 2012
Good stuff. Clear, to the point, my only quarrel was (as with many books of this ilk) there was far too much time spent on the liberals and why they are wrong. I know they're wrong, I don't need 200 pages to tell me so.
August 21, 2015
Doesn't do all that much in the way of constructive thinking; for the most part, he adopts T.F. Torrance's understanding of the Trinity. Worth reading, though, for his good readings of Holy Scripture and for his careful engagement with historical theology.
October 21, 2016
This is a helpful overview of and intro to the doctrine of the Trinity. A good chunk is devoted to historical theology, which is helpful given the topic. It especially filled a void for me in explaining Eastern Orthodoxy's approach to the Trinity.
January 24, 2016
Excellent in depth look at the Biblical and historical roots for the trinity.
March 8, 2022
https://missiologytoday.com/2022/03/0...
Letham, Robert. The Holy Trinity: In Scripture, History, Theology, and Worship. Phillipsburg, NJ: P and R Publishing, 2004.
Matters of the Trinity are weighty, nuanced, and practical. As a local church pastor, I want to read books that promote theological accuracy and practical application The Holy Trinity is such a book. I found this book helpful and useful in my understanding of the Trinity and have used various parts in sermons as illustrations.
The book has four parts. The book begins with the biblical case for the Trinity beginning in the Old Testament. A chapter is dedicated to each person of the Trinity. While I believe these chapters could have been longer and functioned more like a biblical theology, they accomplish the goal to identify the person of the Trinity in the New Testament. These chapters serve to set up the historical and theological expression of the Trinity which serves as the meat of the book.
The historical and theological sections of the book are divided into two sections. Part Two: The Historical Development and Part Three: Modern Discussion is almost three hundred pages of the book. For my use, interest, and enjoyment, Part Two was more interesting and enjoyable than Part Three, and it is probably my fault.
The chapters covering the early trinitarian issues, Nicaea, and Athanasius are enlightening. Letham shows a deft hand in paring down mass amounts of information into a few paragraphs and in some instances, pages. He covers various church fathers and deduces their writings to various paragraphs highlighting the aspects of the Trinity where they are strong, weak, and issues they write against. His sources and footnotes allow one to study any of the information further. He is kind to those early writers but makes connections to subsequent historical heresies that help tie the parts of the book together.
Did you know Arius’ heresy gained popularity through the many songs he composed? Neither did I. Little nuggets like that exist all throughout the book. It is easy to use the information contained in the book and bridge it to modern-day application. Letham does a masterful job highlighting the early adopters and later disciples and how these various groups impact the church as a whole in different times.
In full disclosure, I found Part Three less profitable than the first two sections. I believe this is entirely my fault. As an evangelical pastor, I am not inclined to read much from Eastern theological perspectives. I learned much from this section but most of it was relatively newer material to me whereas the early church fathers were more familiar. I have read some of Barth and Moltmann. I see more relevance in Barth for modern-day scholarship but in my reading, I have never encountered Sergius Bulgakov. The Eastern-focused aspects of the modern conversation were not as applicable to me.
Everything comes together in the final section where Letham shows the interconnectedness of Trinitarian thinking as it pertains to worship. This chapter would have sufficed as a conclusion for me. Thinking and reading about the Trinity is good but it is better to express worship to our Triune God. How the Spirit enables and encourages us to worship is something I will continue to think about. What Letham has begun in this book as it pertains to a Trinitarian view of worship will be helpful for years to come for me.
You should read this book. It is helpful. It is edifying, even if you learn some new names along the way. There is a great payout in the concluding chapters where you will see the glorious Triune God in how we love and how we worship.
Letham, Robert. The Holy Trinity: In Scripture, History, Theology, and Worship. Phillipsburg, NJ: P and R Publishing, 2004.
Matters of the Trinity are weighty, nuanced, and practical. As a local church pastor, I want to read books that promote theological accuracy and practical application The Holy Trinity is such a book. I found this book helpful and useful in my understanding of the Trinity and have used various parts in sermons as illustrations.
The book has four parts. The book begins with the biblical case for the Trinity beginning in the Old Testament. A chapter is dedicated to each person of the Trinity. While I believe these chapters could have been longer and functioned more like a biblical theology, they accomplish the goal to identify the person of the Trinity in the New Testament. These chapters serve to set up the historical and theological expression of the Trinity which serves as the meat of the book.
The historical and theological sections of the book are divided into two sections. Part Two: The Historical Development and Part Three: Modern Discussion is almost three hundred pages of the book. For my use, interest, and enjoyment, Part Two was more interesting and enjoyable than Part Three, and it is probably my fault.
The chapters covering the early trinitarian issues, Nicaea, and Athanasius are enlightening. Letham shows a deft hand in paring down mass amounts of information into a few paragraphs and in some instances, pages. He covers various church fathers and deduces their writings to various paragraphs highlighting the aspects of the Trinity where they are strong, weak, and issues they write against. His sources and footnotes allow one to study any of the information further. He is kind to those early writers but makes connections to subsequent historical heresies that help tie the parts of the book together.
Did you know Arius’ heresy gained popularity through the many songs he composed? Neither did I. Little nuggets like that exist all throughout the book. It is easy to use the information contained in the book and bridge it to modern-day application. Letham does a masterful job highlighting the early adopters and later disciples and how these various groups impact the church as a whole in different times.
In full disclosure, I found Part Three less profitable than the first two sections. I believe this is entirely my fault. As an evangelical pastor, I am not inclined to read much from Eastern theological perspectives. I learned much from this section but most of it was relatively newer material to me whereas the early church fathers were more familiar. I have read some of Barth and Moltmann. I see more relevance in Barth for modern-day scholarship but in my reading, I have never encountered Sergius Bulgakov. The Eastern-focused aspects of the modern conversation were not as applicable to me.
Everything comes together in the final section where Letham shows the interconnectedness of Trinitarian thinking as it pertains to worship. This chapter would have sufficed as a conclusion for me. Thinking and reading about the Trinity is good but it is better to express worship to our Triune God. How the Spirit enables and encourages us to worship is something I will continue to think about. What Letham has begun in this book as it pertains to a Trinitarian view of worship will be helpful for years to come for me.
You should read this book. It is helpful. It is edifying, even if you learn some new names along the way. There is a great payout in the concluding chapters where you will see the glorious Triune God in how we love and how we worship.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 73 reviews