The Trinity: The Historical Development
The Trinity, one of the foundational and essential doctrines of Christianity, yet the word is not even found in the Bible (Grudem, 2004). There are thousands of books, articles, lectures, and sermons on the topic of the Trinity. However, one of the most helpful studies one can endeavor is the historical development of the Trinity. Studying the historical development of an essential doctrine of the church will help Christians become more familiar with Biblical doctrine. Also, it will encourage and equip them to defend their faith; it will shape them more into the image of Christ, and help them become better ministers of the Gospel (“Grand Canyon University,” 2019). Historical theology explores the development of doctrine from the beginning of the church through the modern era (McGrath, 2013). As one moves through historical theology, the formation, belief, and doctrine of the Trinity will be discovered. Moving forward, the Trinity will be evaluated as presented in the Old Testament (O.T.) and New Testament (N.T.), a survey of the patristic period will be evaluated to establish the origins of this doctrine, specific councils and creeds will be referenced, and Medieval/Post-Reformer church fathers will bring the historical development to a close. Lastly, an emphasis on why this doctrine matters will be discussed.
Biblical Theology of the Trinity
Even though the Bible never uses the word Trinity, the doctrine is beautifully woven throughout Scripture. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth (Gen. 1:1). Looking at the original Hebrew language of this passage shows that the morphology of the word Elohim is actually in the plural sense (Aaron, 2012; Mangum, Brown, Klippenstein, & Hurst, 2014; Grudem, 2004). Also, in the same chapter in Genesis, God says, “let Us make man in Our own image” (Gen. 1:26). It can be pointed out that this is a conversation amongst the Godhead. Other plural nouns can be cited in the O.T. to further this point (Gen. 3:22; 11:7; Isa. 6:8). Another example in the O.T. that even shows distinctions in persons is Isaiah 61:1, which says, “The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is on me because the Lord has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor.” Notice how the Spirit here in this verse is the Holy Spirit, the Sovereign Lord is God the Father, and the last person describing who is receiving these persons upon Him is none other than the Son of God/Messiah, Jesus Christ (cf., Hos. 1:7; Isa. 48:16; 63:9–10; Mal. 3:1-2; Ps. 45:6-7; 110:1).
When it comes to the New Testament (N.T.), there are several instances of the Godhead being presented as three separate and distinct persons. Who can forget the announcement of the long-awaited Messiah by John the Baptist as he baptizes his Lord, as he does, the Father speaks from heaven, and a dove representing the Holy Spirit comes upon Jesus (Grudem, 2004; cf. Matt. 3:16-17)? Again, all three members are present during the great commission given to believers when Jesus says, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). One other prominent passage that displays the Triunity of God is John 14. Jesus prays to the Father and asks God to send the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17; cf. 16:7). Other passages can be cross-referenced in the N.T. that prove invaluable in displaying the distinct separation of the Godhead (1 Thess. 1:3-6; 1 Cor. 2:1-4; 6:11; 2 Cor. 1:21-22; 13:14; 1 Peter 1:2; Acts 10:38; Eph. 4:4-6; Rom. 1:1-4; 15:16, 30). This brief survey of the Scriptures can easily identify why the Church in the patristic period needed to solidify God’s particular presentation of Himself throughout the Scriptures.
The Patristic Trinity
After the disciple’s writings were completed, the Church continued to form, and many leaders rose to the call of God to lead in the Church. Scholars date the patristic period from c. 100 – c. 451, with the Council of Chalcedon being the critical ending point (McGrath, 2013). The doctrine of the Trinity was codified out of the patristic period. During this age, the Church was combating several different heresies that were making their way into the Church. It was the early church fathers of the patristic period that had to defend and further develop specific doctrines of the true faith. Two of the primary heresies that were formulating around the Church were Gnosticism and Arianism (McGrath, 2013).
Gnosticism was the idea that certain people had a secret knowledge that was only revealed to them when it came to matters of doctrine. One of the earliest church fathers, Irenaeus, was a defender of the pure form of Christianity against Gnosticism, and due to his defenses, ideas of the Trinity were codified. Irenaeus c. 130 - c. 200, writing in Against Heresies, talks about the idea of the economy of salvation (Irenaeus of Lyons, 1885). His concept regarding this statement can be defined as “how God has ordered the salvation of humanity in history” (McGrath, 2013, p. 61). The Gnostics had an idea that the creator god was distinct and inferior to the God of the N.T. Instead, Irenaeus demonstrated how the God of the O.T. and N.T. are one and the same, both creator, redeemer, and sanctifier (Irenaeus of Lyons, 1885). Irenaeus further develops the economy of salvation and the roles each member of the Godhead had when he said,
God the Father uncreated, who is uncontained, invisible one God, creator of the universe … and the Word of God, the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who … in the fulness of time, to gather all things to himself, became a human among humans, to … destroy death, bring life, and achieve fellowship between God and humanity. … And the Holy Spirit … was poured out in a new way on our humanity to make us new throughout the world in the sight of God. (McGrath, 2013, p. 62)
What a beautiful avenue that Irenaeus paints for other theologians to develop from and further carry this concept of Trinity down the road of discovery.
During the heresies of Gnosticism and Arianism, another church father named Tertullian, also helped combat Gnosticism. Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 225), is recognized as the man who coined the word Trinity (Berkhof, 1938; McGrath, 2013; Tertullian, 1885). Not only did he create the vocabulary, but he also gave it a distinct form. Tertullian used Irenaeus’s economy of salvation theme to demonstrate how it is “substance that unites all three aspects of the economy of salvation; the person is what distinguishes them” (McGrath, 2013, p. 62). In his view, the Trinity was three distinct persons (persona), but yet one substance (substantia). These ideas were his counter-response to not only Gnosticism but also modalism (the idea of God ceasing to be the Father to become the Son). Therefore, redemption is the result of three persons of the Godhead acting distinctly yet in coordinated manners.
On the other side of heresy during the patristic time, there was a man named Arius, bishop of Alexandria, who promoted a false doctrine known as Arianism (Bird, 2013; Grudem, 2004; McGrath, 2013). Arianism was an attempt to destroy the deity of Jesus Christ by arguing that Jesus was a created creature instead of being the instrument of creation (McGrath, 2013; cf. Col. 1:16). Thankfully, God raised another man to combat this heresy, and his name was Athanasius. Athanasius (c. 296 – c. 373), devoted the rest of his life to fighting this heresy and was instrumental with works such as On the Incarnation in magnifying the deity of Jesus Christ. Later, this work and others prompted the Athanasius creed. This creed focuses on the divinity of all three persons of the Godhead being: uncreated, incomprehensible, eternal, almighty, Lord, and finally, all three are God (Berkhof, 1938; Bird, 2013). The purpose of this creed was to combat Arianism and subordination and stress the unity of three persons in one being while denouncing the worship of three Gods. It is a testimony to God that even through heresies, He raised men to respond. This helped form the foundational doctrines of deity regarding Christ and the Holy Spirit. These men sparked a further desire to learn and then faithfully declared creeds formed in church councils for the world to hear.
Councils and Creeds
After several early church fathers established the foundation of the Trinity, it was time for the Church to make it official. With the help of creeds and councils, the Church could stand united in belief. The English word creed comes from the Latin word credo, which means I believe (McGrath, 2013). These creeds in the patristic period were a simple summary of Christian beliefs common to all Christians. It can be defined as “a concise, formal, and universally accepted and authorized statement of the main points of Christian faith” (McGrath, 2013, p. 38). One of the first councils by the Church is known as The Council of Nicaea (c. 325), also known as the first ecumenical council. This council was convened by Constantine, the first Christian emperor, who wanted to sort out all the debates about the divinity of Christ (McGrath, 2013). From this council, came a creed that the early Church proclaimed as the Apostle’s Creed. This creed is trinitarian, being that the Church acknowledges and confesses the belief in God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit (McGrath, 2013). This council settled the Arian controversy by affirming that Jesus Christ was, in fact, homoousios-one in being or one of substance to that of the Father (McGrath, 2013).
Another fundamental creed the Church declared was a revised version of the Nicaea creed known as the Nicene–Constantinopolitan Creed completed in c. 381 (Waneye, 2017). This particular creed mentions all three persons of the Trinity and proclaims the deity of all three. This creed was born out of the second ecumenical council and was the product of faithful defenders of the Trinity: Irenaeus, Tertullian, Athanasius, and the Cappadocian Fathers (Bord, 2013; Schaff & Wace, 1900). These councils and creeds were brought together to combat false heresies (Gnosticism and Arianism) polluting the Church (Waneye, 2017). The last most crucial council, The Council of Chalcedon, where another fundamental creed was formed, was in c. 451 (Schaff & Wace, 1900). A portion of the creed statement below demonstrates how the doctrine of the Trinity is now in full effect, but also how Jesus is confirmed and declared once again as hypostasis. The text reads,
Following, then, the holy Fathers, we all unanimously teach that our Lord Jesus Christ is to us One and the same Son, the Self-same Perfect in Godhead, the Self-same Perfect in Manhood; truly God and truly Man; the Self-same of a rational soul and body; co-essential with the Father according to the Godhead, the Self-same co-essential with us according to the Manhood; like us in all things, sin apart; before the ages begotten of the Father as to the Godhead, but in the last days, the Self-same, for us and for our salvation (born) of Mary the Virgin Theotokos as to the Manhood; One and the Same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten; acknowledged in Two Natures unconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the difference of the Natures being in no way removed because of the Union, but rather the properties of each Nature being preserved, and (both) concurring into One Person and One Hypostasis; not as though He was parted or divided into Two Persons, but One and the Self-same Son and Only-begotten God, Word, Lord, Jesus Christ; even as from the beginning the prophets have taught concerning Him, and as the Lord Jesus Christ Himself hath taught us, and as the Symbol of the Fathers hath handed down to us. (Bindley, 1899, p. 297)
It is absolutely beautiful the effect and help that the councils brought to the development of the Trinity.
The Cappadocian Fathers from the East
Councils and creeds were essential to the development of the Trinity, but the Cappadocian fathers were also instrumental in the eastern understanding of the Trinity. The creeds and councils helped combat false teaching and confirmed the deity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. Still, the creeds and councils were inadequate to help people understand how the three persons were the one true God; this is where the Cappadocian fathers came into play and fulfilled a very critical role in the development of the Trinity (McGrath, 2013; Waneye, 2017). Not to be taken in a similar sense of the Trinity, the Cappadocian fathers were three: “Basil of Caesarea, popularly known as (Basil the Great), Gregory of Nyssa, he was brother to Basil; and Gregory of Nazianzus, he was a friend to Basil” (Meesters, 2012; Waneye, 2017, p. 152). These three great mens’ contributions to the Trinity will be demonstrated collectively instead of individually.
Two of the most important things that these fathers brought to the table were how they affirmed and wrote about the Holy Spirit being God and how they presented the Godhead’s modes of being (McGrath, 2013). These fathers demonstrated how they found two Greek synonyms to describe unity and separations. The Greek word ousia (essence) and hypostases, meaning the center of consciousness or independent reality (Meesters, 2012; Waneye, 2017). God shares the same essence, nature, or will (ousia), and because of this, each person has unique properties. These fathers would also say how there is one indivisible Godhead who is common in all three members of this Trinity but also that this one Godhead exists simultaneously in three different modes of being – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
In addition to this enhanced view of the Trinity, the Cappadocian fathers also gave visual examples of how this could be understood. One example was comparing humanity and individual human beings. Basil of Caesarea argued that the ousia could be conceived as a universal and the hypostases to particulars (McGrath, 2013). All of humanity shares a universal human nature, yet this does not mean that all humanity is precisely identical (Frazier, 2002). People still can maintain their individuality even though they share the same universal nature. Therefore, because of this, each person of the Trinity has a distinctive characteristic. Father is set apart by Fatherhood, the Son by Sonship, and the Spirit with His ability to sanctify (Frazier, 2002). Despite their magnificent contribution to the Trinity, the Cappadocian fathers were criticized for their Godhead's subordination view (Meesters, 2012; Waneye, 2017). Regardless, they were skilled, educated, and energetic defenders of the faith. Their efforts to maintain the coequal, coessential, and coeternal aspects of the Trinity led to the victory of the Trinitarian doctrine (Waneye, 2017). The discussion of the Trinity now leads to Augustine.
Augustine of Hippo from the West
Augustine of Hippo (c. 354 – c. 430), had a significant impact on how the western church viewed the doctrine of the Trinity, especially in his work, De Trinitate. Augustine confessed himself that the task of understanding God in Trinity is no easy task. Augustine said, “There is no subject where error is more dangerous, research more laborious, and discovery more fruitful than the oneness of the Trinity [unitas trinitatis] of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” (Augustine of Hippo, 1887, 1.3.5). Augustine moved away from the ontological approach and understanding of the Trinity and instead focused his efforts on treating the persons of the Godhead in relational terms (Augustine, 1996; McGrath, 2013). Understanding the Trinity in this way, took away the negative tones of the subordination view that the Cappadocian fathers were accused of portraying.
In his work On the Trinity, Augustine (1887) says,
This doctrine, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and therefore that they are not three Gods, but one God: although the Father hath begotten the Son, and so He who is the Father is not the Son, and the Son is begotten by the Father, and so He who is the Son is not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son, but only the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, Himself also co-equal with the Father and the Son, and pertaining to the unity of the Trinity. (Vol. 3, p. 20)
This is a beautiful summary of Augustine’s belief in the Trinity without it carrying the baggage that some critics mention regarding his views of the Trinity being two processes of divine life: self-love and self-knowledge.
The Reformation and Post-Reformation Trinity
The last notable historical development of the Trinity is found in the Reformation and post Reformation period. The Reformations in the sixteenth century, and even post-Reformation period, have two crucial individuals that captivated the hearts and minds of believers about the Trinity. Their names are John Calvin (c. 1509 – c. 1564) and Karl Barth (c. 1886 – c. 1968). John Calvin produced the Institutes of Christian Religion, a life spring of clear theological frameworks that fit the entire Protestant movement. Calvin’s theology of the Trinity is rooted in Augustinian western belief and further lines up with the patristic creeds (Calvin, 1845). Calvin’s view of proclaiming the Biblical view of God's doctrine continued to not only spark the minds of brilliant theologians of the future, but it also forced him to expound on the Trinity. In Calvin’s mind, understanding the Trinity was the only way that humankind could fully understand who God is: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Calvin’s contributions to the Trinity are two-fold. The first and perhaps most prominent is Calvin’s point that all three persons of the Godhead are consubstantial (Calvin, 1845). Throughout Scripture, Calvin masterfully shows how three people are spoken of as entirely God (autotheotes), but there is only one God (Calvin, 1845). Calvin’s work further demonstrates how the Son and the Holy Spirit are autotheotes, just like God the Father. B. B. Warfield (2008) applauds Calvin’s contribution to the Trinity in this way,
In particular, it fell to Calvin, in the interests of the true Deity of Christ—the constant motive of the whole body of Trinitarian thought—to reassert and make good the attribute of self-existence (autotheos) for the Son. Thus, Calvin takes his place, alongside of Tertullian, Athanasius, and Augustine, as one of the chief contributors to the exact and vital statement of the Christian doctrine of the Triune God. (p. 170)
Lastly, Calvin did not attempt to degrade, innovate, or put a new spin on traditional beliefs of the Trinity in his writings. Instead, he simply sought to clarify it, making it more understandable for believers.
The final person that perhaps put a final touch on the Trinity is the twentieth-century post-Reformer, Karl Barth (McDonnell, 1985). Barth was born into a context when liberalism (the idea to demote the Bible as an authority) was rampant. It claimed that the incarnation of the Son of God was just a myth. Barth spent much of his time defending Christianity against people like Friedrich Schleiermacher, Adolf von Harnack, and others (McDonnell, 1985). One of his greatest works that he put together was called Church Dogmatics. In this work, many crucial areas of Christian theology are defended, like the deity of Christ and the Trinity (McDonnell, 1985). Like Calvin, Barth was a champion of discovering theology by studying the Word of God rather than philosophy and experience. Regarding the Trinity, it is accepted that Barth made a great contribution to the Trinity in terms of identifying the Godhead as modes of being and also associating the Godhead with revelation (McDonnell, 1985).
Barth seemed to coin a couple of new phrases to display the Trinity in unique ways. He used the phrase modes of being and also the word repetition. Barth chose these words to describe the Trinity to prevent the continued ideas of tritheism, modalism, and subordinationism. Barth did not like the word of person to describe the Trinity and thought it was now obsolete to explain the Trinity (McDonnell, 1985). A good quote to sum up his idea of modes of being can be observed when he writes,
What we have here are God’s specific, different, and always very distinctive modes of being. This means that God’s modes of being are not to be exchanged or confounded. In all three modes of being God is the one God both in Himself and in relation to the world and Man. (Barth, Bromiley, & Torrance, 2004, p. 373)
Barth’s idea of modes of being is similar to earlier theologians that talk about the economic Trinity regarding salvation and the immanent Trinity regarding the ontological relationship. Barth uses this mode of being to present new ideas of the Trinity in Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Father in various ways. For example, when it comes to the work of Christ, he sees the three modes as the crucifixion, the resurrection, and then Pentecost (McDonnell, 1985).
When Barth speaks of the Godhead in terms of revelation, he states that God is Revealer, Revelation, and Revealedness (Barth, Bromiley, & Torrance, 2004). God, who is the Revealer, continues to make Himself known through His Son Jesus Christ, who is the Revelation. Furthermore, God is on full display by the person of the Holy Spirit, who continues to be Revealedness to Christ. Barth (2004) explicitly states,
God’s Word is God Himself in His revelation. For God reveals Himself as the Lord and according to Scripture, this signifies for the concept of revelation that God Himself in unimpaired unity yet also in unimpaired distinction is Revealer, Revelation, and Revealedness. (p. 305)
The core of Barth’s theological question was, who was God? This question expands into the idea of who is the God that reveals Himself to humanity? In Barth’s mind, starting with the Trinity is foundational and necessary to answer this core question since, to him, the Trinity is the self-interpretation of God (Barth, Bromiley, & Torrance, 2004). This idea was monumental during this time and helped the people of his day focus back on the Word of God and the Trinity. His impact on the Trinity continues even to the present day.
Why the Trinity Matters
With all of the discussion on the Trinity, what does this mean for believers today? What is at stake if the Trinity were removed from Christian doctrine? Actually, everything is at stake, especially the idea of salvation/atonement (Aaron, 2012; Grudem, 2004). The God of the Bible demands that atonement must be made for sin. The Bible teaches that man is in a desperate, corrupted, and polluted state. People inherit Adam’s guilt and sin due to the fall and are, by default, separated from God, destined for hell. The only way for man to be reconciled to a holy God is if God Himself makes it possible for redemption to happen. This is where Jesus comes into play. For Jesus’s sacrifice to be offered up to God and atone for the sins of all who would ever believe in Him, it required that the sacrifice be perfect; and the only perfect one in existence is God. Jesus Christ is revealed as God by Scripture and therefore, can be viewed as a person of the Triune Godhead.
Not only is salvation at stake if the Trinity is removed, but the believer’s relationship and true worship of God is also at stake (Aaron, 2012; Grudem, 2004). Jesus speaks of a time when people will worship God in Spirit and Truth. Believers today have the full revelation of God at their fingertips and can now understand the Godhead of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and now can worship Him in this manner (John 4:23-24). God wants people to worship with their hearts and their minds, and it is only possible to worship God in His fullness by knowing of His Triunity. Edgar (2004) puts worshiping in Trinity this way, “Trinitarian worship is the gift of participating through the Spirit in the incarnate Son’s communion with the Father” (p. 23). True worship is given to the Father, through the Son, in the power of the Holy Spirit (Bird, 2013).
Radiating from this type of worship comes a personal relationship with the creator. His desire for people’s lives is to experience community, relationship, and love just as He has eternally experienced in Trinity (Bloomquist, 2014; Pettit, 2008). In the O.T., God calls forth a community of people; the nation of Israel to save. In the N.T., God calls the Church to continue the calling of His chosen people, and in the eschaton and consummation of history; there will be left a community of people from every nation, tribe, and tongue in fellowship with the Godhead (Johnston, 2008). The concept of Trinity has the very fabric of community built in it for us to know, experience, and enjoy forever. God did not see it fit to keep the community, relationship, and love within Himself, rather he exploded these communicable attributes into humanity and believers fully experience and understand these realities by understanding the Godhead in a Trinitarian way. Bavinck (2003) rightly says, “Athanasius understood better than any of his contemporaries that Christianity stands or falls with the confession of the deity of Christ and of the Trinity” (p. 281). Many other benefits exist through knowing and experiencing God in Trinity form, but these three are particularly breathtaking to realize.
Conclusion
As one can see, knowing the historical development of the Trinity is critical to one’s faith and spiritual growth. The Trinity was not invented; rather, it was discovered as the full revelation of God’s Word was penned down, read, taught, and preached. The infant stages of the Trinity formed with Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Athanasius, gave rise to councils and creeds that solidified the doctrine. This doctrine was then further developed by the Cappadocian fathers, Augustine, John Calvin, and other post-reformers who gave the doctrine a solid understanding for the rest of human history. The Holy Spirit, as the final person of Trinity, fully revealed the astonishing synergy between God the Father, Jesus the Son, and Himself. All of them coequal, coeternal, and consubstantial divine persons. The Trinity is foundational and is at the core of Christian doctrine to help Christians understand salvation, authentic worship, and relationships. Every Christian for all time must know not only that God is Triune, but also how this doctrine developed over time. It is a beautiful unveiling that can only be displayed with the truth that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the Holy Trinity.
References
Aaron, D. (2012). Understanding theology in 15 minutes a day. Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers.
Augustine, S., Bishop of Hippo. (1887). On the Trinity. In P. Schaff (Ed.), A. W. Haddan (Trans.), St. Augustin: On the Holy Trinity, doctrinal treatises, moral treatises (Vol. 3, p. 19). Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company.
Augustine, S., Bishop of Hippo. (1996). The Confessions of St. Augustine. (E. B. Pusey, Trans.). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
Barth, K., Bromiley, G. W., & Torrance, T. F. (2004). Church dogmatics: The doctrine of the Word of God, Part 1 (Vol. 1). London; New York: T&T Clark.
Bavinck, H., & Hendriksen, W. (2003). The doctrine of God. Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust.
Berkhof, L. (1938). Systematic theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co.
Bindley, T. (Ed.) (1899). The ecumenical documents of the faith. London: Methuen.
Bird, M. F. (2013). Evangelical theology: A Biblical and systematic introduction. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Bloomquist, K. L. (2014). The connectedness of ecclesial formation. Currents in Theology and Mission, 41(4), 240–246. Retrieved from https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001995137&site=eds-live&scope=site
Calvin, J. (1845). Institutes of the Christian religion. H. Beveridge (Trans.). Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society.
Edgar, B. (2004). The message of the Trinity. Leicester, UK: Inter-Varsity Press.
Frazier, S. D. (2002). The Trinity in The Thought of Basil of Caesarea, The Western Tradition, And A Modern Greek Orthodox Theologian. Theological Research Exchange Network (TREN): Theses & Dissertations, 1–60.
Grand Canyon University. (2019). HTH-350 Topic 1 Overview: Introduction to historical theology in the early Church. Phoenix, AZ: Grand Canyon University.
Grudem, W. A. (2004). Systematic theology: an introduction to biblical doctrine. Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan Pub. House.
Irenaeus of Lyons. (1885). Irenaeus against Heresies. In A. Roberts, J. Donaldson, & A. C. Coxe (Eds.), The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus (Vol. 1). Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company.
Johnston, G. (2008). "Love and spiritual formation." In P. Petit (Ed.), Foundations of Spiritual Formation. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel.
Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Klippenstein, R., & Hurst, R. (Eds.). (2014). Lexham Theological Wordbook. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
McDonnell, K. (1985). A trinitarian theology of the Holy Spirit. Theological Studies, 46(2), 191–227.
McGrath, A. E. (2013). Historical theology an introduction to the history of Christian thought. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Meesters, A. (2012). The Cappadocians and their trinitarian conceptions of God. Neue Zeitschrift Für Systematische Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie, 54(4), 396–413. https://doi-org.lopes.idm.oclc.org/10.1515/nzsth-2012-0017
Pettit, P. (Ed.). (2008). Foundations of spiritual formation: A community approach to becoming like Christ. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications.
Schaff, P., & Wace, H. (Eds.). (1900). The Seven Ecumenical Councils (Vol. 14). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Tertullian. (1885). Against Praxeas. In A. Roberts, J. Donaldson, & A. C. Coxe (Eds.), P. Holmes (Trans.), Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian (Vol. 3). Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company.
Waneye, C. (2017). The Cappadocian Fathers and Their Contributions to the Trinitarian Debate. BTSK Insight, 14, 146–159.
Warfield, B. B. (2008). The works of Benjamin B. Warfield: Biblical doctrines (Vol. 2). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.