A blind faith?

Growing up in the Philippines, I came to believe that there is but One God in Three persons. This is the confession we were taught since elementary school. While I never fully understood how the doctrine of the Trinity came to be or what conceptual dilemma it entailed, I knew it was what a faithful Christian should confess. It may be a common experience for those raised in a confessional tradition.

When I began to see how the Scripture attests to the divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, I became persuaded that there can be no other valid interpretation of the being of God other than the doctrine of the Trinity. Yet it becomes complicated when one attempts to explain one God in three persons (Deut. 6:4). This is because there are no clear frameworks that explain the concept of “three-in-one” in a purely logical manner.

Even in the early centuries of Christianity, theologians relied on abstract or theoretical concepts drawn from philosophy and other disciplines. They also utilized analogical methods or various metaphors, signs, and symbols from their era. Through these diverse tools, they aimed to articulate that despite the existence of three divine realities, Christians are still worshipping one God. For example, while some theologians used physical images derived from celestial bodies (the sun), nature (rivers and plants), and phenomena (a rainbow), others opted for more abstract ideas, drawing parallels with concepts such as time and space. Church history further demonstrates the inclusion of signs and symbols (such as the triangle, triquetra, and fleur-de-lis) as tangible expressions of the Trinity.

Inklings of the Triune God

The challenge of comprehensively communicating the doctrine of the Trinity continues today, especially within the diverse cultural landscape of Asia. Those seeking a contemporary exploration of this challenge can find a valuable resource in the edited volume, Asian Christian Theology: Evangelical Perspectives. In Chapter 3 of this work, George N. Capaque explores various attempts at interpreting the Trinity in Asia.¹

The abstract nature of Western discourses on the Trinity primarily centers on the inner being of God, known as the immanent Trinity.² This results in a gap for cultures that are less inclined to an abstract way of perceiving divine realities. For instance, many people raised in animistic belief systems may find themselves disconnected or lacking adequate frameworks to engage with the philosophical approach such as the categories of universal (God is one) and particular (three distinct individuals).

This gap has prompted a growing number of theologians to try to express the Trinity through prevailing indigenous and religious concepts in Asia. Capaque observes that such development is inclined toward exploring the economic Trinity; that is, focusing on the unique roles each person of the Trinity plays in the redemptive plan for the world. This “theology from below,” as some might call it, carries various implications that can be correlated to effectively communicating the Christian faith to people’s everyday concerns.

Capaque’s work is a good primer for those seeking to find examples of early attempts to correlate the Trinity with some concepts from dominant non-Christian religions such as Hinduism, Confucianism, and other prevailing Asian belief systems. The chapter provides at least three examples:

1. The concept of “Absolute in three-fold images” derived from one of the Hindu sacred texts, the Upanishads, can be used as an illustration for the Trinity.
2. The complementary functions of each person of the Trinity can be explained through the concept of yin-yang.
3. Advaita, an Indian school of philosophy teaches a non-dualistic view of reality. Some theologians seek to unravel the deep interconnections and unity of the Godhead through this lens, known as Advaitic trinitarianism.

Moreover, Capaque considers how economic and social conditions shape one’s perception of God. Focusing on Dalit Theology from South-Asia he looks at the plight of the “untouchables” within the Hindu caste system who face severe social, economic, and political marginalization (72). The Dalit’s understanding of the Triune God often resonates with their struggle for justice, dignity, and liberation. For example, the experience of oppression may foster a deep resonance with the suffering of Jesus Christ. Just as Jesus endured persecution and injustice, Dalits see in him a figure who understands their pain and struggles intimately. This identification with Christ’s suffering not only provides solace but also serves as a source of empowerment and resilience in the face of adversity.

Finally, Capaque explores the framework of the family, drawing on Simon Chan’s observation that this social institution holds significant importance in Asian cultures. This helps to understand the dynamics governing the relationships among the persons of the Trinity. A few Filipino lingua-cultural concepts stand out in Capaque’s discussion. He first proposes that the Filipino description for mothers, ilaw ng tahanan (“light of the home or family”), can describe the role of the Spirit, emphasizing its illuminating and nurturing presence. Capaque also draws parallels between the reciprocal love resembling familial interconnectedness and the doctrinal concept of perichoresis, which speaks to the perfect unity and communion within the Godhead.³ Finally, he argues that the term mag-anak (“family”) holds potential significance to underscore the centrality of God’s revelation of the Son. Through these local concepts, we can communicate essential aspects of the relationships within the Godhead, bridging theological discourse with cultural understanding.

Do we lose God in analogies?

Pastors and theologians commonly assume that their congregations or readers accept the complex truth of the Trinity without reservation. Yet faith is strengthened by deeper understanding. There exists an innate human inclination to delve deeper and to grapple with the complexities. As Anselm of Canterbury famously said, “Faith seeking understanding.” This pursuit of understanding is not merely an intellectual exercise but a fundamental aspect of spiritual growth.

Capaque believes that “cultural and contextual perspectives can provide new insights in a God-talk that is related and relevant to one’s life situation.” (74). Appropriating cultural and religious imagery, symbols, and concepts as analogies for interpretation remains one of the primary approaches for understanding and articulating the Trinity. “[A]nalogical reasoning is about solving problems,” says André Juthe, “describing something, learning or explaining things by extending our thought from things we do understand to things we do not, at the time, comprehend.”⁴ Of course, we must acknowledge that some analogies can do more harm than good. For instance, many commonly used examples, such as the states of water, the three parts of an egg, or the different roles of a person (husband, father, friend), carry the risk of veering into theological error. In particular, these images might convey that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are different modes or manifestations of the same divine being rather than distinct persons. Yet while analogies fail to encapsulate the entire essence of the Triune God, they can nonetheless highlight certain aspects of it.

Capaque’s work highlights the ongoing task of moving beyond Western interpretations of Christian theology and embracing its relevance within Asian contexts, despite their diversity. As we endeavor to make the Christian faith resonate deeply with its hearers, let’s approach each thought with open minds and hearts, prepared to grapple with the profound truths it presents, and perhaps, in the process, uncover new perspectives on the nature of the Triune God.

C. Paul Mojica is a faculty member at the Center for Biblical Studies – Institute and Seminary. Since 2009, he has been serving as a Pastor-Elder of FCF-Baguio Mission Centre in Baguio City, Philippines. He contributes to collaborative works in philosophy and serves as an editor at Wise Ideas Publishing Co. Paul and his wife, Pauline, have been homeschooling their children, Paull Amos and Psalm Ayla. He is currently pursuing PhD in Theological Studies with AGST.