We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

old church

The Cruciform Trinity

As paradoxical as it sounds, if God is supremely revealed when he stoops to the infinite extremity of becoming his own antithesis on the cross, then we must conclude that stooping to this extremity out of love must, in some sense, be intrinsic to who God eternally is. And rendering this coherent necessitates that we understand God’s revelation on the cross in Trinitarian terms.

The orthodox doctrine of the Trinity states that from all eternity, and apart from any relationship with others outside himself, God’s exists as three Divine Persons who fully pour themselves out for one another and who fully dwell within one another in perfect love. In my opinion, this pouring out and mutual indwelling was best expressed in the Cappadocion doctrine of the “perichoresis” of the three Persons and, with von Balthazar and Moltmann, I understand the eternal act of each divine Person completely giving themselves to the others in love to entail a sort of self-emptying (kenosis) in the very essence of God. (See J. Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom: The Doctrine of God, 58-60, 118-9; von Balthasar, Love Alone, 86-9.) Indeed, if the self-emptying of God to become a human and to die on the cross (Phil 2:6) reveals God’s eternal nature, there must be something corresponding to this self-emptying within the eternal Godhead.

This means that, when the Son emptied himself to identify fully with our limited humanity, our sin, and our God-forsakeness, he was not doing something that was alien to God’s eternal nature. Rather, as Bauckham puts it, “[i]n this act of self-giving God is most truly himself and defines himself for the world.” The perfect, humble, other-oriented love that is displayed in the self-emptying of the Incarnation and Crucifixion, considered as one revelatory act, reveals God precisely because it reflects what God is like within himself and throughout eternity. Torrance argues that, “the atoning act perfected in the cross of Jesus Christ is grounded in the very being of the eternal God, that is, in the eternal being of the Holy Trinity.”

We can, in fact, take this a step further by noting that, in pouring himself out to the point of experiencing his own antithesis, God was not only not doing something that was not alien to himself: he was rather enveloping humans into the same pouring out and mutual indwelling of the three divine Persons that constitutes his eternal essence. And this incorporation is how God makes his eternal nature known to us and how he thereby saves us. We are not only made beneficiaries of God’s self-giving love; we are made “participants of the divine nature” (2 Pet 1:4). By being placed “in Christ” (e.g., Eph 1:3-9) we are by grace becoming participants in the loving oneness of the Father and Son (Jn 17:21-3). Hence, in Christ we are loved by the Father with the same perfect love the Father has for his Son (Jn 17:26; Eph 1:6) and (what comes to the same thing) we are given the same “glory” the Father gives to Jesus (Jn 17:24).

When the Son stooped to the infinite extremity of identifying with our sin and experiencing our God-forsakenness, he was manifesting, and incorporating us into, the perfect, loving holiness and unity that he eternally enjoys with the Father and Spirit. He became our wrong-relatedness to God (sin) in order to incorporate us into his eternal right-relatedness with God (righteousness, 2 Cor 5:21). Hence, we must conclude that the triune God reveals who he truly is, and allows humans to participate in who he truly is, precisely when God, out of love, stoops to becoming his own antithesis. And this is why God’s unsurpassable accommodation of our limitations and sin on Calvary constitutes the ultimate revelation of the triune God. The Trinity is thus not only the presupposition of the intelligibility of God’s revelation on the cross; it is also the content of what is revealed and shared with us on the cross.

Image by Stefan Kunze

Related Reading

Hearing and Responding to God: Part 5

We hope you’ve enjoyed this series on hearing and responding to God. In this last video on the topic, Greg discusses the significance of the fact that God IS love, and how our communion with him is the product of God’s eternal loving nature. You can watch the earlier installments here, here, here, and here. ***Bonus: Greg experiences a…

Merry Christmas!

Hoping you all have a blessed Christmas. Love, Greg and Shelley and the grandkids

Why Did Jesus Curse a Barren Fig Tree?

While no one argues that the NT advocates violence explicitly, many allege that some passages reflect violent attitudes toward outsiders, and especially toward non-believing Jews, while others detect an element of violence in some of Jesus’ teachings and behavior. Some scholars argue that this violent aspect of the NT laid the groundwork for later Christian…

5 Differences Between The Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of the World

Image by matthijs rouw via Flickr The kingdom of God looks and acts like Jesus Christ, like Calvary, like God’s eternal, triune love. It consists of people graciously embracing others and sacrificing themselves in service to others. It consists of people trusting and employing “power under” rather than “power over,” even when they, like Jesus, suffer because…

Imaging God Wrongly: God’s Self-Portrait, Part 2

Our relationship with God depends on the way we imagine God. When we get the image of God right, the doors open for us to trust and relate to God in the ways we were created to do. But there are so many images of God that are entirely messed up. Just think about the…

Topics:

A Dialogue with Derek Flood Part 2: Is ALL of the Bible Inspired?

Image by TheRevSteve via Flickr Yesterday, I offered the first part of my response to Flood’s comments regarding my review of his book. Today I’ll finish up my thoughts.  Scripture and Its Interpretation Flood confesses that he is confused as to how I can claim that “in the light of Christ, we must reject violent interpretations of Scripture”…