It's pretty much a normal day when we get a somone questioning the Trinity, either because they don't understand it or don't believe in it. We have a lot of questions that we can use as duplicates when asked about:

But we don't seem to have a question explaining "What is the doctrine of the Trinity?". Should we create one?

| |

I agree that a canonical question to "What is the doctrine of Trinity" can be useful in conjunction with the various questions you linked in your OP. Usually someone who doesn't quite understand the doctrine poses an objection, so giving the user a reference to both "What is the doctrine of Trinity" and existing appropriate question to address the specific objection will work very well.

To avoid duplicating the effort that the Wikipedia entry on Trinity already does very well, we can make one of the answers short and sweet targeted to new Christians (or someone new to Christianity), as opposed to the academically minded audience implied by the Wikipedia entry. That simple answer can have references to other sites for further study.

Other answers can bring different perspectives to "What is the doctrine of Trinity" as what @curiousdannii commented on: philosophical, historical, creedal exposition, analogical, Johannine perspective, counter-argument, practical, etc. to suit the angle that the questioner brings.

| |
  • 1
    The main benefit of the SE Q&A model is that there can always be multiple answers. Canonical questions are canonical because they are the one question we point people to, but they don't have canonical answers. Instead they can have multiple answers, as each person answers for themselves in the way they think explains it best. Some people will use more philosophical language than others, some will use history, some will quote John, some will use analogies, some will use the Athanasian Creed heavily, some will base their answer on the implications of the Trinity being false, etc. – curiousdannii Feb 6 at 22:44
  • @curiousdannii Thanks. I edited my answer accordingly. – GratefulDisciple Feb 7 at 4:45

So St. Augustine walks up to this kid on the beach, the kid is trying to empty the ocean into a tiny tide pool. St. Augustine says, "kid, it ain't gonna happen" kid says, "It will before you understand the Doctrine of the Trinity".

Are we to surmise that what the kid should have said was, "I dunno, go ask on Christianity StackExchange"?

In any event, the best, easiest thing to do would be improve the tag wiki https://christianity.stackexchange.com/tags/trinity/info

| |
  • You make an excellent point. We shouldn't claim to write a definitive answer, but perhaps something explaining the basics? Three persons, one God, co-equal, co-eternal? – DJClayworth Feb 4 at 14:47
  • I think canonical questions are far better than tag wikis. – curiousdannii Feb 4 at 22:43

The Creeds of the early Church were written for this very purpose and I wonder if perhaps a question should just ask 'What are the fundamental creeds of the early Christian Church ?' and an answer could list the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed the Chalcedonian Creed and the Athanasian Creed, then also link to Wikipedia to show that there are some other creeds as well.

| |
  • 2
    I think this is a good idea, but the Creeds cover a lot of ground, and I think something specifically about the Trinity is a good idea. We get a lot of Trinity questions and not many about the Creeds. – DJClayworth Feb 5 at 14:40
  • The Nicene is brief and contains a lot about the fundamental question of Deity. – Nigel J Feb 5 at 14:41
  • True, and the Athenasian is almost entirely Trinity focussed. And any answer about the Trinity is going to quote those Creeds extensively. I still think it will be easier to redirect people who ask specifically about the Trinity to a question that is clearly focussed on the Trinity. But I could be persuaded. I'm mostly thinking aloud here. – DJClayworth Feb 5 at 14:46
  • It is my own view that the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds can be appealed to and can be referenced as both valid and authoritative and can be looked upon as historically significant statements. It would also be useful to have a focal point upon which the large majority of users will be in agreement. – Nigel J Feb 5 at 14:52

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .