Loading...I have started what will almost certainly be a long thread on where the idea of the Trinity came from within the Christian tradition. In plotting out the thread I saw right away that the very BIG issue is not really about the “three” (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) but about the “two”: God and Christ. This was the matter Christians debated for centuries, with the Spirit being (by far) a less central figure. The very major problem early Christians confronted was that they were monotheists who believed in only one God but they also thought Jesus was God. And they did not think that he was the same being as his Father. So God was God and Christ was God but there was only one God. How can that be? Answering that question will eventually get you to the doctrine of the Trinity.
To explain it I will need to go into some length on the issue of Jewish monotheism, and what it meant (especially in a world where everyone else was a polytheist), and then explain the origin of the idea (among monotheists!) that Jesus too was God.
That is the topic of my book How Jesus Became God, parts of which will be more relevant for this thread than others. When I was thinking this morning about how to approach the issue for the blog, I opened up my book to the chapter where I start discussing the issue (Christ is God; God is God; there is one God) and re-read the anecdote that I began with. I had rather forgotten I had written that bit. And now that I reread it, I thought it might be a helpful way to begin here as well. Here ‘tis. Among other things it shows how you (I) can miss something obvious staring you in the face.
***********************************
When I first started my teaching career in the mid 1980s I was offered an adjunct position at Rutgers University. My teaching load was three courses a semester. The tenured faculty there taught three courses as well, and were, of course, considered full time. But since I was only an adjunct, my three courses were considered part time. As a part time faculty member, I was not entitled to a decent salary or benefits. To make ends meet, I worked other jobs, including one at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton.
There was a long-term project underway there called…
This is a post where I describe how, after years of study, I first came to realize what it might *mean* for ancient Christians to call Jesus God. Wanna see? If you’re not a member of the blog, join up. Nothing to lose, lots to gain, and your membership fee goes entirely to help those in need.
Wow! Please keep going!
Dr. Ehrman,
I do recall one of your talks regarding this epiphany during your illustrious career! I always wondered though, how did Greek Jews differ from native Jews in antiquity? For example, in modernity where immigration is very common, you can have Mexican Americans, Korean Americans, (Jewish Americans?) etc. Immigrants assimilate and adopt cultural values of there new found country some more than others. Jews however, are on that other side of the spectrum whereby the are a tight knit, more or less closed off community.
During antiquity, were Greek Jews more likely to adopt outside thinking that led to the exaltation Christology of Jesus in alignment with Roman ideologies and how much so? I’m sure Greek Jews observed the Jewish Laws, but they did run with outside circles i.e. fraternize with the gentiles and how much so and how much of it was tolerated with the native Jews and this this cause any strife between both Jewish communities? We know in Acts the contention between James and Paul (of course the Geek Jew).
Can we assume that the way non native Jews in antiquity related to native Jews of that time is no different than today?
It used to be thought that Palestinian Jews and Hellenistic Jews were very different from each other. For about hte past 50 years scholars have realized that many Jews in Israel at the time were also heavily Hellenized. Probably the difference is not between Jews in Diaspora and Jews in Israel, but instead, upper-class educated urban Jews and lower-class uneducated rural Jews. There were massively more of the latter!
Actually this part of your book (ie. the trip to Priene) made a big impact on me when I first read it and I have remembered it ever since. The spread of the Augustan cult in the Greek East at the same time as the divinity of Jesus was being discussed in Christian circles makes a great deal of sense to me. PS. Thank you for your answer to my previous question about Temple virgins. It was very helpful.
Excellent articles the last few days on the trinity. I just don’t understand why these middle age church folks thought that the trinity was an important concept.
Fascinating work. Thank you
Dr. Bart I had recently read your book ”How Jesus became God” in comparison with another book entitled ”how God became Jesus”….and ur book and craig evans essay in different ways really informed me a lot about jesus’s self conception…my question is does the historical marry (mother of jesus) think jesus is some kind of divine?
Do you mean the historical Mary herself? Almost certainly not.
I can see the connection relating Jesus as God and Caesar as God. My god is greater than your god sort of thing. And yet, who were these people who wanted to go in this direction? Surely they weren’t Jews? I’m waiting to hear more of your thinking. It seems to me that Paul tended to go in that direction. Even though a Jew, he didn’t seem to cling to his Jewishness. Perhaps his influence aided in this way of thinking. He seemed to accept Jesus as God; therefore, there was still just one God. Is it Paul’s fault?
Actually I think that the followers of Jesus *before* Paul were saying Jesus was God. But they did not mean the same thing by it that he meant, and even afterward different people meant different things! Early on, before Paul, they almost certainly meant that Jesus had been made into a divine being when God exalted him up to heaven.
I understand why study of the Trinity becomes largely a consideration of Christology. However, I do hope you will devote just a little time in this series of posts to that mysterious Third Person of the Trinity, and when you’ve surveyed the Christology practice a bit of Pneumatology as well!
Thanks
I’m gettin’ there. One step at a time!
You don’t understand.
David, a typology of the rejected and reigning king, spoke often about Jesus. One that comes to mind is Psalm 110, ‘The Lord said to my Lord…’ No monotheism here – Yahweh said to Adoni, ‘…sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.’
Ca 1,000 BC, NO ROMAN EMPERORS IN SIGHT.
Yahweh is God, Adoni is the Messiah. Sometimes ‘God’ is used interchangeably between the Father and the Son, so too is the term ‘Lord.’ But Christians (not power seeking Catholics) understood what the terminology meant.
The enemies of Adoni will not be His footstool at first – but later. This is important – Adoni, Lord, the Son, the Messiah – will first suffer as the Lamb of God.
Zechariah says the Jews will mourn when they see their Messiah is the same one they pierced.
Dr. Ehrman, do you think that the NT authors are claiming that Jesus “is God”? I thought I remembered you saying before that you don’t even think John or Paul are making that claim.
I’m giving my views with a bit of nuance. None of the NT authors makes the statement “Jesus is God.” But the things they do say show that they do think that in some sense he is a divine being (in different ways, depending on the author); I’ll be showing that more as we get along.
I hope you get back to the Holy Spirit at some point. I’ve never understood why it is a third element of the Trinity. What is its purpose? How is it different from God itself? Why wouldn’t it be just as easy to say that God visited Mary, not the Holy Spirit?
I’m gettin’ to the Spirit. One step at a time….
That was a great anecdote, and this topic is fascinating. Looking forward to more!
Your third sentence in the post above (“This was the matter Christians debated for centuries, with the Spirit being (by far) a less central figure.”) hints at a point I hope you will cover: the oddly unbalanced third wheel of the Trinity.
Ostensibly, the three are equal, but as you allude to, that’s not even remotely accurate in practice. Some Christians pray to God, some pray to Jesus, some even pray to Mary and various Saints; very few pray to the Holy Spirit. I’ve heard over 2,000 sermons in my life – I can only recall one that talked about worshiping the Spirit.
I’m sure you will, but I hope in an upcoming post you will comment on how and why, historically, the Spirit was even included in the theology (why not just reconcile the relationship of God and Jesus?) and, given that the idea of the Trinity was adopted, any personal or professional thoughts on how the theory is overtly contradicted in practice (for example, did that contradiction ever occur to you as a Minister, and if so, did it impact the way you worshiped or preached?).
I’m gettin’ to the Spirit. One step at a time…
So, were the gospels written by upper- class Jews who were influenced by Greek culture? We know they were not written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John. It seems that the gospels were written by someone well versed in Greek but knew and had a good understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures. But they did not stay with the orthodox Jewish beliefs.
I don’t think Mark or Luke were Jews, and I”m doubtful about John and even Matthew.
This is news to me. I didn’t know you held this view nor was even A topic of debate. I assumed that the consensus was that these gospel writers were Hellenized Jews. Has there been scholarly work that makes this case? Is this case mostly relying on such a divergent hermeneutical understanding between hellenistic thought vs jewish thought? Have you spoken on this topic before if not would be interested.
Yes, it’s been widely discussed. I discuss it a bit in some of my books, but I’m not sure I ever go through all the evidence in one place. It isn’t as simple as Hellenistic or Jewish, since most Jews in the Roman world were Hellenized. (Just like today we wouldn’t differentiate between “Jews” and “Americans” or “Jews” and Europeans”) It has more to do with whether the authors themselves distance themselves from “Jews” and/or don’t appear to know much about some of the basics of Judaism.
Is your view here similar to Dominic Crossan’s “matrix” where he mentions the Roman emperor as son of god would have influenced the gospel writers and Paul? I can’t remember all the details, but one is that “son of god” would have been stamped on the coins of the realm. I know you differ with Crossan on the apocalypticism of Jesus but seeing emperor cult as way to understand early christianity’s view of Jesus as son of god seems similar.
Yes, I think it’s pretty widely thought that the Roman emperor cult had some close ties to the development of Christology…
Excellent – I’m anxious to read subsequent posts. I was in Turkey in May of 2019 and I completely agree with you about Priene. What an incredibly beautiful place. What I remember most though is that I had fallen in Istanbul and hurt myself rather badly, but continued the tour. The hike into Priene was a challenge. But worth the pain and struggle! Thanks…
The question of how Christian salvation is achieved, by faith alone, by works or a combination of the two, is widely debated among fundamentalists and between fundamentalists and the more ‘liberal’ Christian groups along with the related question of ‘once saved, always saved’. There appears to be this disagreement when one compares the Epistle of James with Paul’s writings. Some fundamentalists, in an attempt to create a ‘closed, internally coherent system’ of theology (as you put it) try to reconcile this by saying that Paul was talking about works in accord with the law of Moses, not good works in general. Others use a ‘standing or state’ explanation as to how it applies to salvation (one could be in a state of grace by faith, but, his standing would be affected by works). But, to me, it has always seemed like you could make a case for faith or works, depending on where you read. My question is, was this a serious debate then and on into the second and third century (like the Trinity) or did it not surface again until the Protestant Reformation?
My sense is that just about all Christian authors in the early centuries assumed that salvation to some extent hinged on proper moral behavior. But yes, the issue for Paul really was “works of the (Jewish) law” — this isn’t a fundamentalist view so much as one promoted by critical scholars for the past fifty years, the so-called “New Perspective” on Paul.
What do you think is the meaning of John 10:30 ‘I and my father are one’ please? Is this a binitarian statement or does it simply indicate that Jesus and God agree on things?
In its context it signals more than agreement. In response the Jews take up stones to execute Jesus for blasphemy. So it must involve some kind of divine claim for himself.
Please excuse the two-day delay in asking. Is it possible that in addition to signaling “both he and the father are one” in agreement, that Jesus states some kind of divine claim for himself, and for all others as well by saying in John 10:34: “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?” Jesus is referring to Psalm 82:6. “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.”
Yes, he’s quoting the verse to show that even the Bible indicates it is not blasphemous to say that one is divine.
Dr Ehrman,
1. In the earlier formative years of Trinity doctrine, were there ever DIFFERENT types of trinitarian formula? Like Father, Mother, Son OR Father, Holy spirit and Mother etc?
2. If HS is to be assigned a gender (He/She), what would you say it would be?
3. In Sufi Islam, many Sufi Masters claim “ONENESS” with God….Is it different from when Jesus says Me and My Father are one?
Regards
1. No, it was alwasy FAther, Son, and Spirit 2. The Greek word was feminine, but that doesn’t mean they thought of the Spirit as feminine; every word was masculine, feminine, or neuter; 3. I don’t know