A Philosophical Defense of the Trinity

By Melissa

To many cultists and skeptics, the doctrine of the Trinity may appear to be a contradiction. The first thing to establish when discussing this possibility is what is meant by “contradiction”. Ignorance to what the doctrine of Trinity really involves is what leads people to this assumption. The best way to address this is by the Law of Non-contradiction, which states that two opposite statements can not be both true and false at the same time and in the same sense. In relation to the Trinity, there would definitely be a contradiction if we were to claim that there is one God and that there is not one God, but actually three Gods. Also, if we were to claim that in the Trinity, there is one Person and at the same time and in the same sense, there is not one Person, but there are actually three Persons, then we would be presenting a contradiction. However, we can philosophically refute the claim that the Trinity is a contradiction by actually breaking down what the doctrine of the Trinity consists of.

Christians do not hold the view that there are three Gods in the one God or three Persons in the one Person. Deuteronomy 6:4 (paraphrased) teaches us that there is one God, yet in Scripture, there are three Persons who are referred to as God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The conclusion, therefore, is that there are three distinct Persons (the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit) in the one God, which is were we get the term “Trinity” or “Tri-unity”.

To many theists, such as the Jehovah Witnesses and Muslims, this may be considered incomprehensible. However, these same groups believe that God created the universe out of nothing (ex-nihilo). This is also an incomprehensible thought. Also, the notion that God is eternal and had no beginning is incomprehensible. Consequently, just because something is incomprehensible to the finite mind does not mean that it is impossible for an infinite God or that it never happened.

Another argument that theists will use when disputing the doctrine of the Trinity is that the Trinity somehow violates the immutability of God. The immutability of God one of the attributes of God, that describes the fact that He never changes. In Malachi 3:6 (paraphrased), the Lord clearly states that He does not change and those within orthodox Christianity hold to that view. Jehovah Witnesses, however, will say that during the Incarnation, when the Word became flesh, that violates God’s immutability because He does not change. They will therefore conclude erroneously that Jesus is not divine because of that apparent contradiction. In this case, we have to go back to the Law of Non-Contradiction. Upon first glance, this appears to be a contradiction. How did God become flesh yet He said that He does not change? The answer to this question lies in the understanding of the difference between the attributes and activities of God. Malachi 3:6 refers to the attributes of God so God is saying that His nature never changes. He has always and will always be eternal, infinite, loving, just, etc. However, this Scripture does not apply to God’s activities. For instance, in Scripture we see God creating and ruling and healing and pouring out His wrath. We also see Him becoming a man so that He could become that Lamb, who would take away the sins of the world. None of these violate God’s immutability because while His activities changed, His nature did not. According to the Jehovah Witness and Muslim definition of immutability, when God created, He violated His immutability, which doesn’t comply with the biblical definition. The first place to start in this discussion would be the definition of immutability. These are just three philosophical arguments for the doctrine of the Trinity.