Text Box: Volume 4, Number 8, August 2023 e-ISSN: 2797-6068 and p-ISSN: 2777-0915

 


THE TRINITY AND CHRISTOLOGY IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF PAULINE AND GENERAL EPISTLES

 

 

Donald Steven Keryapi, Jeslin Simatupang

Sekolah Tinggi Teologi Paulus Medan, Indonesia

Email: [email protected], [email protected]

 

KEYWORDS

Trinity; Christology; Pauline Epistles; General Epistles

ABSTRACT

A true and biblical understanding of the Trinity and Christology must be possessed by every believer. A correct understanding of these two doctrines will certainly affect the life of the personal faith. This study aims to provide a brief understanding of the Trinity and Christology which is specifically highlighted from the perspective of the Apostle Paul's Epistle, General Epistle, and Book of Revelation. This research was carried out because it looked at various theological arguments that emerged and developed, but were very far from the truth of the Bible. This study proceeds from the question of how to understand the Trinity and Christology in Paul's Epistle, General Epistle, and the Book of Revelation. The method used in this study is the descriptive-Bibliological method where researchers make descriptions or descriptions of each point or idea about the Trinity and Christology built from the letters above. The results of this research are expected to contribute to improving the understanding and teaching of the Trinity and Christology, as well as helping believers to deepen their faith. A correct and biblical understanding of the Trinity and Christology will enrich personal faith life and strengthen the foundation of the Christian faith.

 

INTRODUCTION

The doctrines of the Trinity and Christology are at the heart of the Christian faith. Many theologians often misunderstand this doctrine. So many heretics emerged from within the church. They misconstrue the teaching of the Trinity and Christology. Church history has recorded this, even though in the seven councils during the 4-8 centuries AD the early Church had thoroughly discussed the subject matter of this doctrine, became an orthodox doctrine, and became the standard for all teaching throughout the church in all places and centuries (Gulo et al., 2021).

In the development of understanding of the Trinity and Christology, there are often many errors that arise due to misunderstandings, even the inability to formulate the above teachings. The resulting understanding of the Trinity and Christology is not a teaching according to the scriptures (Montang & Mansilety, 2022). Therefore, the understanding of Christology and the Trinity must be returned to the teachings of the Bible and sacred Tradition in understanding these formulations.

The Church Fathers who have formulated the doctrine above certainly explored the understanding of the doctrine from apostolic sources, especially the letters of the Apostles of Jesus Christ, especially the letters of Paul, letters of Am, and the Revelation of John. The Church Fathers are awarethat the teachings of the Apostles can be trusted, because they were eyewitnesses to the life and teachings of Jesus Christ.

In this paper, the researcher explores the concept of the Trinity and Christology which is implied in Paul's letters: Romans-Hebrews, Letters Am: IPetrus-Jude, John and Revelation. The question posed in the following research is how is the understanding of the Trinity in the writings of the Apostle Paul, Letter Am and the Book of Revelation. This topic is a topic discussed in Lectures in PB II Theology class at STT Paulus.

This research is taken from these letters which are important letters and very rich sources of understanding of the Trinity and Christology. This paper will start with an introduction, then teach the Trinity according to the letters of Paul, Am, and Revelation as well as the understanding of Christology which also comes from these sources, and will end with a conclusion. This study aims to provide a brief understanding of the Trinity and Christology which is specifically highlighted from the perspective of the letters of the Apostle Paul, the Epistle to Am, and the Book of Revelation.

 

RESEARCH METHOD

The method used in this research is a descriptive-bibliological method. The researcher will make a description or description of each point or idea regarding the Trinity and Christology which is built from the letters that are the object of research. The descriptive-bibliological method is a qualitative method that is descriptive in nature and aims to describe phenomena that occur in the text of the Bible. This research can be done by reading, analyzing, and interpreting the Bible text which is the object of research. This method can help researchers to understand and describe the concept of the Trinity and Christology contained in Paul's and Amos' letters.

In the study of Trinity and Christology, researchers used a descriptive-bibliological method with a qualitative approach. The following are steps that can be taken by researchers in using this method:

1)  Identification of research objects: Researchers identify the letters of Paul and Amos as research objects that will be analyzed in the context of the Trinity and Christology.

2)  Read and understand the text: The researcher carefully reads and understands the Bible text that is the object of research. This involves understanding the historical, cultural, and theological context associated with the letters.

3)  Analyzing the text: The researcher analyzed the text of the Bible using a descriptive approach. This involves identifying points or ideas related to the Trinity and Christology that are found in the letters.

4)  Describing and interpreting: The researcher makes a description or description of each point or idea found in the letters. This involves describing the concepts of the Trinity and Christology contained in the biblical texts and interpreting their meaning and implications.

5)  Linking to the theological context: The researcher relates the descriptive-bibliological findings to the wider theological context. This involves comparing and relating the concepts of the Trinity and Christology found in the letters to Christian theology in general.

6)  Drawing conclusions: The researcher draws conclusions based on the descriptive-bibliological findings and theological interpretations that have been carried out. This conclusion can provide a better understanding of the Trinity and Christology in the perspective of the letters of Paul and Amos.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The Most Holy Trinity

Trinity Persons

   As stated above, the understanding of the Trinity is at the heart of the Christian faith and belief in the Trinity is a marker of whether the teaching is true or false. Indeed, in the New Testament Scriptures, the term Trinity is not found, because this term was only popularized around the 2nd to 3rd centuries by Tertullian. In the understanding of the Trinity, it can be explained that there is a belief in the oneness of the nature of God, in three persons who are equal in authority, and have a relationship with one another, and play an active role in salvation. (Enns, 2008). This person is the Father. Son, and the Holy Spirit.

1)  Father

In terms of "Father" certainly does not have a sexual or biological connotation. This term is a pointer to the unique nature of the Father, as a God who loves and loves His children(Manalu & Kateketika, 2012). This title also wants to point to His nature as the Creator, and the source of all things. The Apostle Paul in teaching the Congregation in Corinth gave an understanding that is the Father who is the source of all things (I Cor. 8:6). The point here is, the Father is the origin of everything, both the universe and everything in it.

The traditional opinions above have not provided answers to the reasons why God is called the Father. If He is called the Father because of creation, then the fatherhood of the Father is not eternal because everything that is created has a beginning or beginning. This is certainly contrary to God Himself who is eternal. In God there can be nothing that is impermanent including his fatherhood, then whose Father was it Before all things were created? The person who has the same eternality as the Father is His Son who is referred to as the Logos or the Word (Koamesakh, 2019).

2)  Son

The second Person of the Trinity is the Son. The term “son” is applied to Jesus Christ. This term cannot be seen from a biological perspective, where children are seen as the result of a biological relationship between men and women. This term wants to refer to the person of Jesus who is the word/word that comes from God. This term also wants to show the obedience of Jesus to His Father.

In his letters Paul gives an understanding when he talks about God, then he will continue his talk about the Son. For example in Romans 1: 9, Romans 8: 29, Colossians 1:13. Paul's understanding of children will always be associated with Jesus' mission as a whole, both in life and the work of salvation carried out by Jesus Christ (Guthrie, 2016). Where Jesus absolutely submissively obeyed the will of the Father in his perfect ministry for humanity.

3)  The Holy Spirit

The third Person of the Trinity is the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity that comes from the Father, the person of the Holy Spirit, this cannot be equated with the person of the Father or the Son. The Holy Spirit is a person present in man and in the Church, and He seals the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. Humans who live in the power of sin have been set free by the Spirit who gives life (Rom. 8: 1-2). The holy spirit also gives renewal in every human being. The work of the Holy Spirit will always be related to the work of Christ, where Christ carried out the work of redemption, so it is the Holy Spirit who seals the work of redemption in believers (Frangopoulos, 2006). It is also the Holy Spirit who unites every person who has been saved by Jesus Christ in the Church. It is the Holy Spirit who gives spiritual gifts to believers (I Cor. 12).

The recognition of the Trinity in the New Testament, especially the Epistle of Paul cannot be stated explicitly, however, the use of the name of each Trinity Person shows an understanding of the Trinity. The Apostle Paul in the Corinthian letter gives the understanding that in the persons of the Triune God, it is seen in the work of salvation that God does, this is seen in Paul's words of blessing (II Cor. 13:13).

The work of salvation was indeed carried out by the second person of the Triune God, namely Jesus Christ, however, the work of salvation as a whole is not exclusively the work of only one person of the Triune God, however, the work of Salvation is also a long series carried out by the Triune God, where these three persons work together in a harmony (Uling, 2019). The Father as the person who takes the initiative for human salvation, Jesus Christ the word who becomes the redeemer, and the Holy Spirit who lives in the believer or the Church and perfects it through the events of the Sacraments (Frangopoulos, 2006).

            In the three persons of the Trinity, the relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is eternal. The point here is the non-separability of these three persons. The eternal God is attached to the Word and also the Holy Spirit.Where God together with the Word and the Holy Spirit work together in creating, maintaining the universe. The Word took all the existence of human flesh and became human in Christ Jesus. In Christ Jesus also dwells the Spirit of Christ where the Spirit refers to the Spirit that comes out from God and resides in His child (Yohanes, 2012). The Holy Spirit is also a person who always cooperates with the Word, where the Holy Spirit never works alone, and always glorifies the Son.

            The thing that needs to be underlined is that the understanding of the Triune God is different from the understanding of the Trimurti in Hinduism. The Trimurti view in Hinduism has the concept that each person is a person of God who is different from other persons, and demands different worship from each person. In fact, it can happen that the three persons of the Trimurti can have different wills and wills and destroy one another. The three persons of the Trinity, whether Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, are individuals who stand alone and do not depend on one another, and demand different worship.

The Development of the Understanding of the Trinity and the Formulation of the Doctrine of the Church Fathers

The second and third centuries were the centuries in which the development of an understanding of the Trinity among theologians began. At least two views of the Trinity emerged at that time. First, Monarchianism, gives the opinion that the position of a person in the Trinity is like a hierarchy, which means that one person is higher than another person. Monarchianism is divided into two, namely Dynamic Monarchianism and Modalistic. Dynamic Monarchianism argues that Jesus Christ is an impersonal force. This view wants to deny the second person, namely Jesus who is only seen as the strength or power/dynamos of God. Modalistic Monarchianism holds that there is only one God who appears in a variety of ways (Yohanes, 2012). The second view is Docetism, where this view argues that Jesus Christ is not a real person but is a person who has a pseudo body. It can be concluded that this erroneous understanding stems from an erroneous understanding of Christ.

In addition to the above understanding, a wrong understanding of the Trinity also comes from an understanding of the Holy Spirit. Arius believed that the Holy Spirit was a divine power or impersonal Divine power. Therefore this view was condemned at the Second Council at Constantinople in 381 AD.

The concept of the Trinity was ultimately formulated by the Church Fathers, especially Tertullian. He thought of God as a person who had with him the word and the Spirit, and who gave birth to them from within himself for the creation of the world. This reminds us that Tertullian argues that the creation of the universe is a form of love from the Triune God where God wants the love between individuals to also be enjoyed by other creatures, in this case the universe and humans. For Tertullian, the oneness of God is a fixed price that he still adheres to, where the oneness of God is reflected in the unity of the essence of God in the three persons who are related to one another (Willis, 2002).

Tertullian's greatest contribution to the concept of the Trinity is a definition that is so precise that it is always used in ecclesiastical terminology when discussing the Trinity, namely the term Trinity. The term Trinity refers to the three divine persons who are always used in Tertullian's explanations. Then the term person refers to each person, both the Logos as the Word who becomes flesh and the Holy Spirit as a third person or person. However, Tertullian's teaching also had several shortcomings where he made a subordination, where the Son was not equal to the Father.

In addition, the Three Cappadocians also developed a proper understanding of the Trinity where they succeeded in defining and using the concept of ousia to designate the Divine nature that these three persons possessed. Then the term hypostasis refers to the personal existence that belongs to the person of the Trinity. The three persons have one ousia, which means that these three persons are equal without any subordination, and in a different hypostasis, where these three persons have their respective duties and functions in the work of salvation.

As a conclusion from the concept of the Trinity that the Father is the source of everything where the Father's personal eternity is the source for the three eternal persons, namely the Word and the Holy Spirit. In addition, the three persons of the Triune God cannot be separated from one another, where the Father's Person always works together with the Son and the Holy Spirit in the creation of the world, as well as human salvation. The Word of God takes over the entire human being, and becomes the human person in Jesus. In Jesus also dwells the Spirit of Christ who comes from the Father. Likewise the Holy Spirit, will always do his job and glorify the Son.

 

Christology

Word Incarnation

The understanding of the Incarnation does not solely belong to Yohanin's writings. Paul also recorded an understanding of the Incarnation in at least several texts namely Romans 8: 3, Colossians 2: 9, I Timothy 3: 6, Hebrews 2: 14-17. The text at least gives us an understanding of the concept of the Incarnation from Paul's own perspective.

   Romans 8: 3 confirms that the Torah Law can no longer be carried out perfectly because humans live in flesh or sin alone. Therefore God sent His Son in the flesh and in the likeness of the flesh. This text wants to explain that God sent His son in human form, who lived in sin. Humans who are unable to carry out God's law because of their sinfulness. And God passed judgment on sin in the flesh only through His son who took the reality of the flesh of humanity throughout the world, so that the law of sin was subdued through the death of Jesus on the cross (End, 2010). Whereas I Timothy 3: 16 which confirms that God has revealed Himself in human form (en sarki). Meanwhile, Colossians 2: 9 explains that in Christ the fullness of God dwells physically (somatikos). This means that in Christ there is the reality of humanity or the flesh, as well as the fullness of God. From this text we can see that Christ himself was truly human, and also truly God. Meanwhile, Hebrews affirms that Jesus as God has a part in the flesh, and in his death on the flesh he defeats the devil who has power over death as a consequence of the deeds of the flesh.

So it can be concluded that the concept of the Incarnation put forward by the Apostle Paul wanted to point to the actions of Christ who wanted to punish the deeds of the flesh through his death on the flesh, and destroy all the deeds of the Devil. In other words, Paul's concept of incarnation is always related to the reality of Christ who will punish the power of sin in the flesh through His death (Frangopoulos, 2006).

In general we can see that the Incarnation is an event where the word of God does not experience changes or inconsistencies. His divinity did not change to human status, however, in the word of God, his human element was added. Where, Allah does not use omnipotence but limits himself, and within his limitations He adds an element of humanity (human substance). So that in Jesus Christ there are two natures, namely Divine Nature, and Human Nature, which are not fused, but also inseparable.

By the merging of these two natures in the physical body of Jesus Christ, the divine and human elements have met and greeted each other. The incarnation of the Word did not stop the divine nature in Christ, Jesus Christ remained in his position as the word of God to live and be attached to Him (Yohanes, 2012). Jesus Christ did not activate his divinity, but used all of his human elements, to show humanity and the world, that He was present as a complete human being who could obey absolutely more than the first Adam who had fallen into sin. This is clearly seen in the event of his death on the cross, where his existence in the flesh was punished for sin in the flesh (Rom. 8: 3). Through this text, we can see that Jesus Christ died as a human and received the wages of sin as a result of the flesh he used from all mankind. This is in line with Paul's statement in Ephesians 2: 15, that He by His existence as a human has died and canceled the curse of the Torah. From this statement,

The Relationship of the Two Natures in the Person of Christ

The misunderstanding in understanding the relationship between the two natures in the person of Christ gave birth to several heresies which were finally condemned by the Church through the third and fourth councils (Ephesus, 431 AD, Chalcedon, 451 AD). Nestorius was one of the heretics that emerged in the church at that time. Nestorius is the Patriarch of Constantinople who believes that Jesus has two separate persons, namely the person of God and the person of man. So he objected to calling Our Lady the Theotokos, but he called Mary the Christotokos (Yohanes, 2012). This teaching was later condemned at the Council of Ephesus. The church condemns this view, because if Nestorius' teaching is accepted then the question will arise, when did Jesus become God? Because the baby Jesus that Mary gave birth to was not God. The Church considers that the baby Jesus is also God, because the existence of the word of God is eternal in Jesus, so the baby that Mary conceived is still God, and in the end Mary is still honored as the Mother of God.

The dispute regarding the relationship between these two natures seems to have not stopped, because Eutiches, an Archimandrite of Konstantinople, taught that Jesus only had one nature, namely the divine nature, where his human nature was immersed in his divine nature. This forced the church to convene a Council at Chalcedon which decided that the divine and human natures of Jesus were equally perfect. Jesus also has a rational person and has a body, in his humanity the same as other humans, but without sin (Dister, 2015). In addition, this council also decided that in Christ there are two natures which are not mixed, do not change, do not share, are not separated. The two natures merge in one person and one self. This conception is also questioned by the Monothelitist heresy who thinks Jesus only has a divine will, and does not have his human will. This is clearly contrary to the formulation of the Church's teaching where, Jesus has two natures with every will that is not separate and does not mix. In Jesus there is still a divine nature that cannot be lost because the divine nature is eternal. However, this divine nature is disabled, not eliminated. Jesus showed in his life as a son of man to obey, and to live himself as an ordinary human who needs food, breath, and so forth. However, at the same time Jesus was still God when he performed his Divine Miracle, however, he still used his human nature until he died on the cross. So that death on the cross is the death of Jesus' humanity, not the death of the divinity of Jesus. To show the nature of Christ's humanity, the Apostles gave terms in their writings to point to Christ.

Christological Terms in the Letters of Paul

1)  God's Wisdom (Sophia)

One of the fundamental differences between the patterns of teaching between John and Paul concerning the pre-Incarnation of Christ is regarding the nature of Jesus as the word. John explains in the beginning of his Gospel that Jesus is the Word of God (Logos), but he almost never uses the term Wisdom. The Apostle Paul used the term Wisdom to refer to Christ the most.

Paul uses the term Wisdom to refer to Christ in the Corinthian letter. Paul refers to Christ as the power and wisdom of God (I Cor. 2: 7). Wisdom in the text is translated from the word σοφια (sophia). Do the names between sophia and logos have contradictions or are they similar to each other? We can see this through a comparison between the thought patterns of John and Paul.

The word "Logos" has various meanings, but there are several meanings that are parallel to the logos, namely "Speech" to refer to the use of language and communication, "Reason" to refer to reason or mind, "Ratio" which is also interpreted as reason, and can also be translated as "word" or sayings (Collins, 2003). In addition, Eusebius, a Church Father, also defined "Logos" as a rational soul that enables humans to think. Another meaning is a word that has a meaning. Eusebius also interprets Logos as a seed (Logos Spermatikos) that is Logos which has a power or can be expressed as a Person (Labobar & Th, 2022).

For a moment we turn to the concept of "sophia". In Greek terms this word has a meaning that is parallel to the word "wisdom" or Wisdom. This term can also be equated with "Nous" (Mind), or Psyci (soul) which has reason or Reason. Therefore definitively these two words have in common.

The word “wisdom” is very closely related to knowledge. If someone has wisdom then he will have knowledge. Wisdom is always associated with knowledge. Knowledge here is not meant as knowledge that is mastered by someone, however, knowledge here is the truth that connects humans with God. The dimension of knowledge is eternal because it lies in its nous. It can be concluded, a person who has wisdom or sophia can get knowledge that will connect himself with God or his creator.

The Church Fathers did not distinguish between these two terms. Athanasius the Great revealed that Sophia is the image of God in humans through which humans know God. The true Sophia is Logical, namely the word of God which points to Jesus Christ as the image of the true God (Koamesakh, 2019). Sohia is a guide to the knowledge of God. If Christ is the Wisdom of God to guide people to know God, then this is parallel to the Concept of the Logos incarnated in the flesh as Christ who is the way to God or the Bap (John 14:6).

Then why in the writings does Paul use the term Sophia more, according to the writer's opinion, the Apostle Paul actually wanted to contrast God's Wisdom with Human Wisdom which was questioned by the Philosophers at that time, so Paul used that term to indicate that Jesus is God's wisdom which shows knowledge of God. If it is contradicted by the Wisdom/sophia of the world, God's Wisdom, namely Sophia, is the true sophia who adds to herself the reality of the flesh (sarx) and becomes the whole human being known in Jesus Christ.

2)  God's likeness

The term likeness of God is used by Paul in Philippians 2: 5-11. This term is translated from the word "morphi" this term is somewhat different from Paul's habit of often using the term "image" of God or "icon". There are many theologians who align the term "Morphe" or likeness with "icon" as an image. In fact, in some interpretations, especially II Cor. 4:4, Colossians 1:5, Philippians 2:6, the terms Icon and Morhe are often considered synonymous.

In the text it is said that Christ is the likeness of God or the image of God, not maintaining equality with God as something that must be maintained. This reminds us of the first Adam in Genesis 3, who wanted to become equal to God by following the Serpent's seduction. Therefore this text seems to reflect a view of Christ's obedience as the second Adam (Romans 5: 19). Christ as the second Adam, did not maintain equality with God and even took the form of a servant to suffer (Ridderbos, 2010).

Turning then to the term "emptying oneself" which is translated from the word "ekenosen". This term causes a lot of problems because it raises the question, “what is the thing that is thrown away so that it becomes empty? Experts tried to answer this question which ultimately led to the wrong view, namely that Jesus was only a human who had abandoned his essence as God, and remained within himself his essence as a human. To understand this term, we must return to the context of the verse where the verse is about to talk about Jesus appearing as a suffering servant. Therefore the term "emptying oneself" can be interpreted as the submission of Christ who becomes a human being, who wants to accept human limitations, and performs obedience as a suffering servant,

It can be concluded that Paul wanted to describe Christ as a person who wants to humble himself. Paul also relates this to the concept of the second Adam, who did not want to maintain his equal position with God, which was different from the first Adam who wanted to be like God, and obeyed in His humility as a servant of God who was willing to suffer.

3)  The Firstborn Image of God

This term appears in Colossians 1:15, and II Cor. 4:4. The image of God is translated from the word "icon" this term wants to emphasize that Christ is the perfect revelation of God, where humans cannot know God perfectly, and it is through Christ that God reveals Himself. This text then speaks of Christ as the firstborn from creation. This term is translated from the word "prototokos". This text raises the difficulty that, as it were, Christ was the first of the created. Therefore this text wants to emphasize Christ as an existence that existed before creation, this is further explained in verses 16-17. From this passage Paul wants to emphasize his Christological pattern, namely Jesus who is the final revelation of God, where humans can know God only through Christ, Christ is also a person who participates in creation, and is above all creation.

 

Christological Terms in the Epistle to the Hebrews

1)  Christ as High Priest

The Hebrew text shows Jesus as the Great High Priest (Heb. 4-8). In the context of the Old Testament, the high priest was someone chosen from among the descendants of Aaron. The high priest has the duty to offer a sin offering for all mankind. A Priest once a year will enter the Most Holy Room in God's temple to bring and offer a sin offering for the people. Jesus is a Great High Priest. Why is it called the Great High Priest? The position of the majesty of Jesus as the High Priest is as a Priest, not only offering a sin offering for His people, but He Himself becomes the perfect sin offering for all His people (Sproul, 2018).

Jesus as the High Priest is a sinless person, which exceeds all the High Priests that have ever existed before. As High Priest, he was a sinless person, and became a victim once and for all. This is certainly different from the High Priest of Israel, who must offer sacrifices at every celebration. Christ became the unblemished High Priest and offered himself the unblemished sacrifice once and for all.

2)  The light of God's glory

Hebrews 1:3 mentions Christ as the Light of God's Glory, and the image of God. Light in the Old Testament is always associated with God. God is a person of light who contradicts Satan who is a symbol of darkness. The author of Hebrews wants to point to Christ as the light of God's glory, where Jesus Christ himself radiates the glory of God in Himself. He even continues that Jesus is the image of God who is exactly the same as God (of the same substance as God) who created the universe and sustains it. It can be concluded, the author of Hebrews wants to present Christ as the person who is the fulfillment and perfection of the Old Testament rites, so that it can be said that Christ is the perfecter of all the customs in the Old Testament.

In the writings of the Apostle Paul, he gave Christological titles that pointed to Christ both the Wisdom of God, the Logos, the Form of God, the firstborn Image of God, the High Priest, and the Light of God's glory. All of these titles have deep meanings, which point to the existence of Christ as the perfect God, and the perfect human in carrying out every task of his ministry.

 

CONCLUSION

The Trinity and Christology are subjects of the Christian faith that are frequently attacked by many opponents of Christianity. These opponents come from outside the Christian community who question the pattern of faith thought which they think is unreasonable or irrational. However, these opponents also came from within the Christian community itself, as they misunderstood and misinterpreted this very important doctrine.

The Trinity is a formulation of the Church Fathers, where the Bible never mentions the Trinity directly, however, the concept of the Trinity already exists in the New Testament texts, especially Paul's letter. Paul as a theologian brings up the triad, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, in His blessing. Even Paul also stated that the Son and the Holy Spirit are one person with the Father.

Paul's Christology, which he expressed through letters, often uses symbols that often create new questions, such as Sophia, the Second Adam, Image or Likeness of God. This is to point to the person of Christ as a person who is truly human and also truly God, who is not mixed up, and not separated from one another.

 

REFERENCES

Collins. (2003). Greek-English Dictionary. HarperCollins Publisher.

Dister, N. S. (2015). Teologi Trinitas dalam Konteks Mistagogi. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.

End, T. Van den. (2010). Tafsiran Alkitab Surat Roma. Jakarta: BPK Gunung Mulia.

Enns, P. P. (2008). The Moody handbook of theology. Moody Publishers.

Frangopoulos, A. S. (2006). Our Orthodox Christian Faith, Athens: O Sotir.

Gulo, Y., Malau, P., & Saragih, N. R. (2021). Dogmatika: Doktrin Trinaitas, Manusia dan Gereja. -.

Guthrie, D. (2016). Teologi Perjanjian Baru 2: Misi Kristus. Roh Kudus, Kehidupan Kristen.

Koamesakh, A. E. (2019). Logos dan Sophia dalam Perjanjian Baru. SOTIRIA (Jurnal Theologia Dan Pendidikan Agama Kristen), 2(2), 60–78.

Labobar, P. D. K., & Th, S. (2022). Teologi Agama-agama Baru. Penerbit Lakeisha.

Manalu, C. P., & Kateketika. (2012). Bahan Kuliah.

Montang, R. D., & Mansilety, K. L. (2022). Pengaruh Pemahaman Allah Tritunggal Terhadap Kualitas Iman. Eirene: Jurnal Ilmiah Teologi, 7(2), 582–602.

Ridderbos, H. (2010). Paulus: Pemikiran Utama Theologinya. Surabaya: Momentum.

Sproul, R. (2018). Kebenaran-kebenaran Dasar Iman Kristen, Terj. Rahmiati Tanudajaja, Malang: Literatur SAAT.

Uling, M. (2019). Implikasipraktis-Relasional Doktrin Tritunggal: Refleksi Injili. Missio Ecclesiae, 8(2), 172–189.

Willis, J. R. (2002). The teachings of the Church Fathers. Ignatius Press.

Yohanes, B. C. W. (2012). Roh Kudus dan Karya-Nya, dalam Perspektif Gereja Timur.

 

 

Copyright holders:

Donald Steven Keryapi, Jeslin Simatupang (2023)

First publication right:

Devotion - Journal of Research and Community Service

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International