6

A common argument for the Trinity (or at least the eternity of The Son) is that God is love, and thus there must have been an object that could be loved by him throughout all eternity. The Trinity's idea of fellowship within unity seems an attempt to deal with this issue.

If Jesus the Son of God had a beginning, then it follows that before the existence of the Son, God being solitary, would have no object towards which to express his love. Without having anything to love, it seems God could not rightly be called “love” or possess love from all eternity.

How do non-trinitarian Christian's respond to such an argument?

Perhaps they would argue that whether the Father loves himself, or the Father loves the Son, God is still loving himself since both the Father and the Son are God, but I am interested in seeing what others say.

  • 1
    As Jimmy Kimmel said, “Don't forget to get into a stupid argument in the comments section.” – למה זה תשאל לשמי Feb 8 at 2:20
  • 1
    One form of trinitarianism is Binitarianism which is the same as trinitarianism without the Holy Spirit. That is, TWO co-equal and co-eternal beings composing God. Antitrinitarianism comes in several forms. Should we specify which form? – Mac's Musings Feb 8 at 3:05
  • "If Jesus the Son of God had a beginning" in time? "before Abraham was made, I AM." (John 8:58). – Geremia Feb 8 at 3:47
  • 1
    Thanks for the link. I’ve learned something new today, so it was worth getting out of bed! I understand that Tim Keller and John Piper are part of The Gospel Coalition and support the ‘New Calvinism’. I can see why Muslims struggle with the concept of the Trinity, but that’s mainly because they only perceive Jesus as a man and deny he pre-existed in heaven before he was born. – Lesley Feb 13 at 10:37
  • 1
    I am a Trinitarian and concur with the last sentence in the article you gave a link to: “But with a biblical understanding of the Trinity we can say that God did not create in order to be loved, but rather, created out of the overflow of the perfect love that had always existed among Father, Son, and Holy Spirit who ever live in perfect and mutual relationship and delight.” Found this article about the Gospel Coalition and New Calvinism: gotquestions.org/new-calvinism.html – Lesley Feb 13 at 10:38
1

The problem with this argument is that it's not based on Scripture. It's based on the unsupported assertion that "there must have been an object that could be loved by him throughout all eternity."

Jehovah's Witnesses are non-trinitarian, but they don't reason on things that the Bible doesn't comment on, such as the details of what God did before the beginning of creation. They do agree, however, that God is love (1 John 4:8) and that his identity and personality does not change. (James 1:17; Malachi 3:6; Isaiah 43:10; 46:4)

  • So how do JWs explain what it means for God to be loving with nothing else? How would God be different if he wasn't loving before the universe is created? – curiousdannii Feb 8 at 4:27
  • 1
    The problem with this objection is that agape love is fundamentally "other" centered. God cannot be "love" (1 John 4:8, 16) if there is no one else. That is fairly basic stuff! – Mac's Musings Feb 8 at 9:50
  • Therefore, the argument about agape love is absolutely Scripture based as love is the most basic and fundamental, quintessentially Christian concept we have!! – Mac's Musings Feb 8 at 9:53
  • 1
    @curiousdannii As I said, the Bible doesn't comment on what God did before creation. The Bible does teach that he has always had the quality of love, and one way he expresses that love is through his creation, but the Bible doesn't say how God expressed love before creation. It may be that he expressed love by means of his thoughts for what he would create in the future. – 4castle Feb 8 at 14:09
  • 1
    That is not true. The Father chose us in Him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and without blemish before Him, in love” (Eph. 1:4). God chose us in love before the foundation of the world (before creation). How is this explained then? – pehkay Feb 9 at 1:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.