The seven letters known as the General Epistles (James, 1–2 Peter, 1–3 John and Jude) are comparatively brief, but taken together reveal much about the trinitarian nature of God. These epistles move seamlessly between the persons of the Godhead and give us a peek into the trinitarian planning, accomplishment and application of salvation. I will address these letters in their canonical order.
The letter of James emphasizes the implications of the salvation wrought by Christ, but he does so in a robustly monotheistic way, even as he attributes a divine role to Jesus. James thus writes from the world view of a first-century Jewish believer in Christ. This means that the Old Testament Scriptures were viewed as the foundation for faith and life, yet as a believer in Jesus as the Messiah the teachings of Jesus were also of the utmost importance.
The Jewish framework for James’s teaching is evident in several ways. First, James addresses his letter to the twelve tribes of the Diaspora (1:1), which is the Jewish dispersion. Second, the world view of the Old Testament permeates James. Not only does he explicitly quote the Old Testament (e.g. Lev. 19:18 in Jas 2:8; Gen. 15:6 in Jas 2:23), but James’s discussion throughout also reveals an author steeped in the language and imagery of the Old Testament (e.g. Abraham, Rahab, law, faith, wisdom). Third, building on the previous point, James identifies himself as a servant of God (1:1), which must also be the God of the Old Testament (so e.g. Prov. 3:34 in Jas 4:6). James therefore understands God to be the God of the Old Testament, even as he understands God in the light of the new revelation that has come through Jesus.
An important text that reveals that James shares the monotheistic outlook of the Old Testament is James 2:19a: ‘You believe that God is one; you do well.’1 Or, as the niv captures the thrust, ‘You believe that there is one God. Good!’ Though James goes on to say that understanding the oneness of God is not enough to have genuine, saving faith (2:19b–26), he nevertheless confirms that it is vitally important to believe that God is one. James further identifies God as the source of wisdom (1:5), the giver of good gifts (1:17), the lawgiver and judge (4:12), the providential Lord (4:14–15), the Lord of hosts (5:4) and the compassionate and merciful Lord (5:11). Moreover, God is the one who is attributed with bringing us forth by his will (1:18), and the one who chose the poor to be rich in faith (2:5). These texts are consistent with the role of the Father in the economy of salvation elsewhere, as the one who plans salvation.
In addition, James’s identification of God as Father reveals the New Testament emphasis that God is the Father of Jesus Christ. To be sure, God was already known as Father in the Old Testament (e.g. Deut. 32:4–6; Isa. 1:2; Hos. 11:1; etc.), yet the emphasis in the New Testament is more emphatically on the fatherhood of God in the light of the centrality of the sonship of Jesus Christ – Jesus is pre-eminently the Son of God. An important text in this regard is James 1:27, where God and Father both appear in the dative case in Greek, linked by kai (thus it reads, tō theō kai patri). Significantly, the Greek definite article is not repeated before ‘Father’ (cf. Matt. 28:19), which leads to the most natural reading that God is identical with the Father. This construction is an example of the Granville Sharp rule, which will also be relevant for our understanding of 2 Peter 1:1. In brief, the Granville Sharp rule states that when two singular, personal nouns are joined by kai and the article appears only before the first noun, then the two nouns refer to the same person.2 James’s emphasis on God as Father also goes hand in hand with his emphasis on Jesus Christ, since fatherhood pre-eminently denotes God’s fatherhood towards Jesus. God is our Father because God is the Father of Jesus Christ.3
An additional key to the understanding of God in James is the identity of both the Father as Lord and the Son as Lord. Jesus is clearly identified as Lord in 1:1 (‘the Lord Jesus Christ’), in 2:1 (‘Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory’) and 5:7 (‘the coming of the Lord’). Additionally, the Father is clearly Lord in 1:27 (‘God and Father’), in 3:9 (‘our Lord and Father . . . people who are made in the likeness of God’),4 and probably three times in 5:10–11 (‘prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord’). Additionally, the Lord to whom prayer is made in 1:7 most likely refers to the Father, as does the Lord before whom we should humble ourselves in 4:10.
However, other occurrences of Lord appear to be more ambiguous, especially in James 5. Thus whereas James 5:4 seems to refer to the Father as Lord, closely thereafter in 5:7 James almost certainly refers to Jesus as Lord, since the return of Jesus as judge is in view (5:9). Yet, as noted above, in the next two verses Lord again seems to refer to the Father (5:10–11). Finally, James speaks of prayer in the name of the Lord for healing and the forgiveness of sins in 5:14–15. Given that most of the references to Lord in James refer to the Father, and since the most immediate antecedent for Lord is the Father, perhaps we should conclude that the name of the Lord in James 5:14–15 is the Father (cf. 4:10). However, we cannot be certain of this since it is also appropriate for healing and prayer to be done in the name of Jesus. In addition to the overlapping use of Lord for both Father and the Son, both the Father and Son in James are identified as judge. The Father is most likely in view as judge in James 4:12, in association with God the Father as lawgiver, whereas the returning judge in 5:9 is almost certainly to be understood as Jesus as Lord (cf. 5:7).
What are the implications of James’s overlapping use of judge and Lord for the Father and the Son? First, we should note the ease with which James can use the same terms – divine terms – to speak of both the Father and the Son. We need not, however, conclude that James has a confused or modalistic understanding of the persons of the Godhead since he clearly recognizes distinctions between the Father and the Son in some texts (e.g. 1:1).5 Second, we must not miss the force of the appellation Lord for Jesus (1:1; 2:1; 5:7). In James 1:1 Jesus is identified as the Lord Jesus Christ. Given the familiarity many readers of the Bible have with the identification of Jesus as Lord, the impact of this phrase may not be felt as strongly as it should be. By identifying Jesus as Lord, James is claiming that Jesus is exalted in the highest heavens with God himself. This is further clarified in 2:1, where James identifies Jesus Christ as the Lord of glory.6 Here James is making a most remarkable claim: that the man Jesus from Nazareth – who was probably James’s half-brother! – was not only the Messiah, but could rightly be described as the glorious Lord of heaven! This is an astounding claim for a monotheist like James (2:19) to make about a person who lived on earth just a few years earlier. Yet James can describe both God the Father as (glorious) Lord and Jesus Christ as glorious Lord. A key implication of the uniqueness of God in the Old Testament is the truth that God does not give his glory to any other (e.g. Isa. 42:8; 48:9–11). Yet James, without undermining the one God of the Old Testament, teaches that the glory reserved for God belongs to both Father and Son.
Finally, though James does not explicitly mention the Holy Spirit, it is worth noting that Scripture speaks of the Holy Spirit in close association with the glory of the Lord.7 Therefore, in James’s reference to Jesus as Lord of glory (2:1) we may find an implicit allusion to the glory of the Holy Spirit, though admittedly James does not explore this possible relationship.
Though in some texts it may be difficult to determine whether James has in view the Father or the Son when he speaks of the judge or Lord, that James can use both terms to refer either to the Father or the Son reveals a Christology of the highest order. Jesus is the glorious Lord just as God is the all-glorious One. James says less about the Holy Spirit, but thankfully we know more of the Holy Spirit’s relationship to the Father and the Son through other portions of the New Testament, including 1 Peter, to which we now turn.
From the first verses of 1 Peter much is revealed about the trinitarian nature of God, where we read of ‘the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood’ (1:2). All three divine persons are included in Peter’s greeting.8 In 1 Peter 1:2 salvation is presented as a trinitarian blessing, with each person of the Godhead having a particular role in the outworking of salvation. God the Father is the one who foreknows his elect people (1:1). The sanctification of the Spirit in this context probably points to the Spirit’s initial application of the work of Christ to God’s elect people, setting them apart from the world. In other words, conversion (‘obedience’) is probably in view, which emphasizes that the Spirit’s work is a divine act.9 Conversion also comes through the covenantal blood of Jesus Christ, which points to forgiveness of sins through the shedding of Jesus’ own blood.10
Much more could be said about the richness of 1 Peter’s greeting, but for the present purposes it is significant that Peter views the work of salvation through a threefold lens. Salvation is a unified work of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Significantly, Peter does not argue for the divine nature or actions of any of the persons of the Godhead, but argues from the presupposition of a salvation that has a unified, threefold dynamic.11 Although Peter does not elaborate on the triune character of God, it is striking that his greeting stands very close to later trinitarian formulations that identify the Father as Creator, the Son as Redeemer and the Spirit as Sanctifier.12 Peter’s triadically shaped greeting is not anomalous, but fits well with the rest of 1 Peter, where we find Father, Son and Spirit woven throughout the letter.
As we see throughout the New Testament, God is identified as the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ (1:3). At the same time, God is also the Father of his people (1:17) through Jesus Christ (1:21). God’s power keeps his people for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time (1:4). Just as Jesus trusted his Father through his earthly trials (2:21–24) and God raised him from the dead (1:21), so Peter instructs God’s people in each succeeding generation as exiles to trust in God as Father in the face of difficulty (1:17; 2:19–20), since God has caused us to be born again through the resurrection of Jesus (1:3). As exiles we should honour all people, fearing God above all (2:13–17), knowing that if we humble ourselves under the hand of God, he will also lift us up in due time (5:6–7). Just as Jesus’ suffering led to glory as he trusted his Father, so should Christians be encouraged in the sovereign control of God even in the face of suffering, since an eternal inheritance awaits (4:12–19).
The role of each person of the Godhead in salvation appears to be rather clearly defined in 1 Peter. In addition to what we have seen in the trinitarian greeting, Peter writes that God caused believers to be born again through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1:3), we come to believe in God through Jesus Christ (1:21) and spiritual sacrifices are made to God through Jesus Christ (2:5). Similarly, Peter’s hope is that the Gentiles will glorify God when Jesus returns (2:12; cf. 1:7, 13; 5:4), which accords with Peter’s later doxological statements that God may be glorified through Jesus Christ (4:11), and his insight that God has called his people to his eternal glory in Christ (5:10). This brief overview indicates that 1 Peter has much to say about God the Father in relation to salvation, particularly in relationship to his Son. Of course, Peter has much more to say about Jesus, which is the topic of my next heading.
The Son is identified in 1 Peter as the Lord Jesus Christ, which we have seen reveals an incredibly high Christology, since Jesus as Lord means he is Lord of the universe, having ascended to the Father’s right hand. Jesus is also the returning Lord, who will be revealed at the last day (1:7, 13; 5:4). Since Jesus is Lord, Christians are to honour him appropriately (3:15). Along with his status as Lord, the Son is said to be foreknown before the foundation of the world (1:20). Although the Son and Father have always enjoyed perfect fellowship, the foreknowledge in view in 1:20 is most likely in relation to the Son’s role as redeemer.13
In this light it is clear that Jesus Christ is the one who suffers for salvation in 1 Peter (2:21). Jesus is the spotless lamb whose blood takes away sin (1:2, 19). Jesus is the one who bore our sins in his body on the tree (2:24; 4:1, 13), having been put to death in the flesh (3:18). Peter was not a modalist. It was the Son who became incarnate (1:20) and suffered on the cross (2:24; 5:1), and the Son entrusted himself personally to his Father (2:23). Additionally, it is clear that Jesus Christ is the one who was raised from the dead (1:3, 11, 21; 3:18, 22; cf. 4:13; 5:1). As the Great Shepherd of the sheep (2:25; 5:4), Jesus is also the spotless lamb of God who shed his blood for the salvation of his people. And as Shepherd, Jesus is the glorious, returning Lord of all who tenderly cares for his flock, leaving an example for the elders to care for the flock until he returns, at which time they will receive an unfading crown of glory (5:1–4).
1 Peter also has much to say about the Holy Spirit. We have already seen that the Spirit is the one who sanctifies God’s people (1:2), which is a divine act. Peter also speaks of the Holy Spirit’s activity before the coming of Jesus Christ in at least one, and maybe two, passages. In 1 Peter 1:10–12 we read of the prophets who prophesied about the sufferings of Christ and his subsequent glories (1:11), though they themselves did not live in the age of fulfilment (1:20).14 Significantly, Peter tells us that the prophets were inspired by the Spirit of Christ, who is also the Holy Spirit (1:12) and the sanctifying Spirit (1:2), which underscores the continuity of salvation through the ages. Indeed, this same Holy Spirit inspired the preaching of the gospel that led to the salvation of Peter’s own audience (1:12). Additionally, by identifying the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of Christ, Peter is also alluding to the pre-existence of Jesus, as he does again in 1:20.15
More broadly, 1 Peter 1:3–21 offers additional glimpses into the trinitarian nature of God. Following closely after the trinitarian greeting (1:2), Peter speaks of all three divine persons in relation to salvation. God is the holy Father of the Lord Jesus Christ (1:3, 16–17, 21), it is Jesus Christ the Son who suffered, was raised and is returning (1:3, 7, 11, 13, 18–21), and it is the Holy Spirit who inspired the prophets to speak of the sufferings and glory of Christ before the incarnation (1:11), and who, moreover, continued to empower the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ unto salvation in Peter’s own day (1:12). Peter speaks of one plan of salvation accomplished by one God in three persons. Something similar may be in view in 2:5, where Peter speaks of spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God, through Jesus Christ. It is probably that the sacrifices are wrought by the Holy Spirit, especially in the light of his association with worship elsewhere in the New Testament (John 4:24; Rom. 12:1; 1 Cor. 11 – 14; Phil. 3:3), though here he may have in view all that Christians do by the power of the Holy Spirit.16 If the sacrifices in 2:5 are indeed offered by means of the Holy Spirit, then we have another text in 1 Peter that reveals a triadic shape for God.
Another text that may speak of the Holy Spirit’s role in the economy of salvation before the coming of Christ is 1 Peter 3:18–19. These verses constitute part of one of the most debated passages in the New Testament (3:18–22), and interpretative questions are legion. However, for the present argument we should observe the general movement in the text that speaks of Jesus’ resurrection and glorification following his death (3:18, 22). However one takes zōopoiētheis de pneumati (3:18), it is quite likely that a reference to the Holy Spirit is in view, whether it is the agency or the sphere of the Spirit, since elsewhere in the New Testament the Holy Spirit is constitutive of the new life and new age inaugurated by Christ’s resurrection (Rom. 1:3–4; 1 Cor. 15:42–49; cf. Rom. 8:11).17 One’s understanding of s/Spirit in 3:18 affects one’s understanding of the proclamation to the spirits in 3:19. If one understands pneumati in 3:18 to refer to the Holy Spirit, then we may have in 3:19 a similar view to the role of the Spirit to what we saw in 1:11–12 – just as the Spirit of Christ spoke through the prophets, so the Spirit of Christ preached righteousness through Noah (cf. 2 Peter 2:5). However, this is by no means certain.
Finally, two passages in 1 Peter 4 further reveal aspects of the Holy Spirit. First, in 1 Peter 4:14 we read of ‘the Spirit of glory and of God’ (to tēs doxēs kai to tou theou), or possibly ‘the Spirit of glory, namely the Spirit of God’. The Greek phrasing can be translated in various ways, but it seems eminently probable that Peter is somehow identifying the Holy Spirit (who rests on believers; cf. Isa. 11:2) with the divine glory. This is not the way one would speak of a created spirit. Peter’s apparent mention of the divinity of the Spirit fits with the divine work of the Spirit mentioned earlier (1:2), and the emphasis on the glory of Christ through the Spirit elsewhere in 1 Peter (1:11, 21; 4:11, 13; 5:1, 4, 10). It is also instructive that we find Christ, the Spirit and God all mentioned in brief scope in 4:14: the same Spirit who was on Christ rests on believers in their identification with Jesus’ suffering (4:13–14, 16), and is also known as the Spirit of God.18
A second text from 1 Peter that seems to speak of the Holy Spirit is 1 Peter 4:6, which speaks of living in or by the s/Spirit like God (zōsi de kata theon pneumati). It is usually a good exegetical instinct to understand pneuma language as a reference to the Holy Spirit when used in reference to God or Christ, and this seems to be the best option in 4:6. As we saw in 3:18, 1 Peter 4:6 sets up a contrast between flesh and s/Spirit. Since God is described as the one who lives according to the s/Spirit in 4:6, Peter is most likely referring again to the Holy Spirit, who is the same Spirit in view in relation to Jesus’ resurrection life elsewhere in 1 Peter (3:18).19
1 Peter has much to say about Father, Son and Spirit, but we must not miss the practical reasons for his letter. Peter was writing to encourage people who were facing difficulties because of their faith. Christ has not only redeemed his people, but set an example that we should follow in his steps, and this is ultimately for the glory of God (4:11; cf. 5:10–11).
2 Peter has much to say about the divinity of Jesus Christ. In fact, 2 Peter contains some of the most explicit language in the New Testament identifying Jesus as God. Therefore, we will look primarily at the divinity of Jesus in 2 Peter, before considering some triadic aspects as well.
In 2 Peter 1:1 we find a reference to the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ. The Greek phrasing (tou theou hymōn kai sōtēros Iēsou Christou) is another example of the Granville Sharp rule we noted in James, which refers to one person.20 In other words, Jesus is identified as our God and Saviour.21 Further corroborating this view, in 1:3 we read that ‘his’ divine power has granted us ‘all things that pertain to life and godliness’. The most natural antecedent to 1:3 is ‘Jesus our Lord’, which comes in the immediately preceding phrase (1:2). Moreover, 1:4 speaks of participating in the divine nature, which most likely has in view our growth in Christlikeness.22 Therefore, to participate in the divine nature does not mean we become a part of God (the Creator–creature distinction is never abrogated), but that we become in practice more like Jesus Christ. To be like Jesus in holiness of character (1:4–10) is to participate in the divine nature.
Peter also states that Jesus will return (3:8–13; cf. 1:16), which is consistent with Jesus’ identification as (resurrected and ascended) Lord throughout the letter (1:2, 8, 11, 14, 16; 2:20; 3:2, 10, 18). The certainty of Jesus’ return is one of the key features of 2 Peter, which goes hand in hand with Jesus’ identity as the glorious Lord. The glory of Jesus’ exalted state, which will be revealed when he returns, was anticipated in the transfiguration during Jesus’ earthly ministry, which points ahead to his power and coming (1:16–18).23 2 Peter ends in a similar way to how it opened, encouraging the audience to grow in the grace and knowledge of our (glorious) Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Remarkably, 2 Peter ends with a doxology ascribing glory to Jesus Christ both now and for ever (3:18). Jesus is clearly divine in 2 Peter.
Although 2 Peter identifies Jesus as our God, he does not confuse the Father and the Son, though he does describe them in similar ways. 2 Peter speaks of the multiplication of grace and peace in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord (tou theou kai Iēsou tou kyriou hymōn) in 1:2, which is most likely a reference to two divine persons: Father and Son.24 Additionally, in 1:3 we clearly find a distinction between Father and Son, since God is identified as Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. Again we see that the Petrine epistles are not modalistic.
At the same time, 2 Peter can also use interchangeable language (i.e. Lord or God) to refer to both the Father and the Son. Thus the Son is identified as God in 1:1, but elsewhere God seems most likely to refer to the Father (1:2–3, 17, 21; 2:4; 3:5). Likewise, the Father is sometimes identified as Lord (2:9, 11; 3:8–9), but this is a preferred title for Jesus in 2 Peter (1:2, 8, 11, 14, 16; 2:20; 3:2, 8–9, 15; 3:18) as in the context of early Christianity more broadly. One particularly noteworthy passage is 3:8–12, which seems to refer both to Jesus and the Father with the terminology of ‘Lord’ (cf. 3:8–9 with 3:10). Additionally, 3:12 refers to the coming of God. Is the Father or Jesus in view in 3:12? One’s conclusion could go either way,25 but it is clear that the Father and Son are distinct persons, and the return of Jesus can rightly be described as either the coming of the Lord (cf. 3:10) or the coming of God (cf. 1:1).
We see the presence of all three divine persons together, albeit briefly, in the recounting of the transfiguration in 2 Peter 1:16–21. 2 Peter 1:17 speaks of the glory that the Son received from the Father, along with the voice from the majestic glory. Earlier, in the discussion of Matthew’s Gospel, I suggested that in the biblical-theological context the glory cloud at the transfiguration (particularly in the light of the parallels with Jesus’ baptism) may refer to the presence of the Holy Spirit. If so, the same may be true in the account of the transfiguration in 2 Peter 1:16–18. Even if one dismisses this possibility, however, a few verses later (1:21) we find explicit mention of the Holy Spirit, who inspired the prophets who spoke from God. What is striking is the continuity between God’s speech, through the Holy Spirit, in Scripture in the light of the promise of Jesus’ return. One could possibly construe the parallels as follows: just as God’s word came from the majestic glory at the transfiguration (1:17–18, which may well be a reference to the Spirit’s presence), providing a preview of the glory that will be manifested when Christ returns, so did the Spirit speak for God through the prophets of the return of Christ.26 If this construal is correct, then the role of the Holy Spirit seems to point to the continuity of God’s plan throughout the ages, as it did in 1 Peter. The word of God in Scripture, inspired by the Holy Spirit, is as sure as the voice Peter heard at the transfiguration. In sum, however one construes the details of 2 Peter 1:16–21, we clearly encounter all three divine persons – Father, Son, and Spirit – in relation to the future salvation that will be consummated when Jesus returns.
The preface of 1 John (1:1–4) speaks of the pre-existence of the Son of God in a way that recalls the prologue of John’s Gospel. 1 John speaks of the word of life that was from the beginning, which was with the Father. This life became manifest and was seen by John and his associates (1:1–2). Similarly, the Gospel of John speaks of the Word that was in the beginning with God (John 1:1–2; cf. Gen. 1:1), who was made flesh (John 1:14). In both texts the pre-existence of the Son of God is in view, who became incarnate and dwelt among us. Because of this our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ (1 John 1:3). Moreover, by identifying the Son as eternal life (1:2) John appears to speak of the timelessness of the Son’s life – this is not just eternal life extending into the future, but eternal life that has always been true of the Son, in fellowship with his Father.27 As the one who is defined by eternal life, Jesus has all life in himself, which is true only of God (cf. John 5:29). Creatures are limited by time; God is not.28 Yet, remarkably, these verses also emphasize the fellowship we can have with the Son (1:3), who is eternal life.29
Throughout the Johannine epistles (especially 1 John) we see the unity of the Father and the Son. In addition to the preface of 1 John, we find that both Father and Son are sinless, in contrast to sinful humanity. God is light: in him there is no darkness of sin (1:5). If we say we do not sin, then the truth is not in us and we make God out to be a liar (1:8, 10). To walk in the light is to walk in fellowship with God, having our sins cleansed by the blood of Jesus Christ (1:7; cf. 1:9), our righteous Advocate with the Father (2:1). In addition, we read that the antichrist is the one who denies both Father and Son (2:22), whereas the one who confesses the Son also has the Father (2:23). Abiding in the message from the beginning ensures that we will continually abide with both Father and Son unto eternal life (2:24–25). Jesus is the life that became incarnate (1:2), and Jesus is identified as (eternal) life throughout 1 John (5:11–13, 20). At the same time, life is constitutive of the Father (cf. John 5:21, 26), who grants eternal life (5:11, 16; cf. 2:25). In other words, one way we can perceive the unity of Father and Son is through the lens of life.
We also see the unity of Father and Son in the Father’s sending of the Son (4:9–10, 14). Unfortunately, some have argued that the Father’s sending of the Son to die amounts to an abusive, tyrannical act. However, this misguided view severely misunderstands the trinitarian works of God. We have seen that the outward works (ad extra) of the Trinity are indivisible. Therefore, both Father and Son (and Spirit) are united in the work of redemption; there is and can be absolutely no disharmony between Father, Son or Spirit.30 Indeed, we read in 1 John 4:10 that the Father sent his Son to be a propitiation (hilasmos) for our sins because he loved us (cf. 4:19). This is the same love that characterizes the Son, who showed love by laying his life down for us (3:16; cf. 2 John 3). In addition, in 1 John to believe in the Son of God is tantamount to believing God (5:10). In the light of the profound unity we find between the Father and Son in 1 John it would not be out of character for the letter to end by identifying Jesus Christ, who is eternal life, as the true God (5:20).31
Though we clearly find the unity of the Father and Son in the Johannine epistles, we also do well to note distinctions between Father and Son. Thus it is the Father who sends the Son (4:9–10, 14), and it is the Son who becomes incarnate and serves as the propitiation for sins (1:2–3; 2:2, 22; 3:8, 16; 4:2, 10; 5:6–8). Though God cannot be seen (4:12, 20), we can see the Son of God who makes the Father known (1:1–3; 4:2, 14; 2 John 7). Additionally, our fellowship is with both the Father and his Son (1:3) at the same time, which bespeaks a distinction in persons.
1 John also relates the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son. In 2:20, 27 we read of the anointing of the Holy One, which most likely refers to the Holy Spirit. Significantly, the Holy One teaches believers all things, so there is no need to be taught by anyone else (e.g. the errors of the schismatics).32 More specifically, the Holy Spirit teaches about the realities of the Father and the Son (2:21–23), which are truths pertaining to salvation (cf. 5:11).
Another possible reference to the Holy Spirit comes in 3:9, which speaks of the seed (sperma) of God that abides in believers. The identity of this seed is debated, but a strong argument can be made that the Holy Spirit is in view since the seed appears to be the agent of new birth (cf. John 3:5–8), along with the operative principle enabling believers to walk in righteousness, in contrast to the schismatics (cf. 2:28 – 3:10).33 If so, then the Holy Spirit would be viewed here as an anointing enabling sanctification, which would further comport with the sinlessness predicated of the Father and Son elsewhere in 1 John. Moreover, 1 John 3:4–9 would then evidence a triadic character: the Son of God appeared to destroy the works of the devil (3:8), God’s Seed (Holy Spirit) enables true believers to practise righteousness (3:4–9), in order that they may be seen to be truly children of God (3:10).
An even clearer triadic pattern is seen in conjunction with the mention of the Holy Spirit in 3:24.34 Those who keep God’s commandments abide in God (3:24); God’s commandment is to believe in his Son, Jesus Christ (3:23); we know God abides in us because of the Spirit he has given to us (3:24). We should abide in the Father (2:24; 3:24; 4:12) and the Son (2:6, 24, 27–28; 3:6), and it is the Spirit who provides the knowledge that we do (3:24). The role of the Spirit in this regard also points us to his role in providing assurance of salvation, which is an important concern in 1 John (5:13), since only a divine person can provide assurance of a divine salvation.35
We find a similar focus on abiding in conjunction with the Spirit in another triadic passage (1 John 4:7–21). In this context the love of God is particularly emphasized, and this love characterizes Father, Son and Spirit. Love is from God (4:7), and God is love (4:8). God demonstrates his love by sending his Son as a propitiation for our sins (4:9–10). If we love one another, then God’s love abides in us, and we know this because of the Spirit God has given us (4:11–13). Again we get a glimpse into the profound unity of the triune God’s works: God loved us, and sent his Son (4:9–10) – who also loves us (3:16; cf. 3:23) – as a sacrifice for sins, and God’s Spirit provides assurance that we belong to God (4:13). Earlier the Spirit is associated with the truth of Jesus Christ (4:2, 6). The Spirit of God (4:2) testifies truly to God’s children (4:4, 6) that Jesus Christ has come from God in the flesh (4:3). These verses underscore the agreement between Father, Son and Spirit, and therefore also exhibit a triadic shape.
Finally, we turn to 1 John 5:6–8. As is commonly known, in some translations and manuscript traditions 1 John 5:7 contains an explicit reference to the Trinity (the so-called Johannine comma). The av phrases 5:7, ‘For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.’ As true as this statement may be, it is extremely improbable that it is original to 1 John. By way of illustration, in the early trinitarian controversies of the church this would have been a tailor-made passage for the church fathers to utilize as biblical evidence for the Trinity, but it is quoted by none of the Greek church fathers.36 It is best explained as a later interpolation that probably derived from someone’s marginal comment. However, to view the Johannine comma as secondary is not the same thing as saying that 1 John does not provide evidence for the Trinity. In fact, although I view the Johannine comma as spurious, I have argued throughout this section that we do find evidence for the Trinity in 1 John. Moreover, I believe we have good reason for reading 1 John 5:6–8, in its wider context, as evidence for a trinitarian understanding of God.
In 1 John 5:6 we read of Jesus Christ, who came by (or through) water and blood. We also read in 5:7–8 that there are three witnesses who agree: the Spirit, the water and the blood. This has historically been a tricky passage to understand, but the most probable interpretation in my view is that it refers to the entire ministry of Jesus, from his baptism (water) to his death (blood). The Spirit quite probably refers to the testimony of the Spirit at the baptism of Jesus (cf. John 1:29–34), and possibly the Spirit’s presence throughout the entire ministry of Jesus.37 This understanding recalls the Synoptic Gospels, in which the Father, Son and Spirit are all revealed at the baptism of Jesus.38 Moreover, 1 John 5:9 makes more explicit what is implicit in 5:6–8, namely that the Spirit (along with the water and the blood) provides testimony to Jesus Christ that God himself has given.39 And in 5:10 we read that the testimony (from the Spirit) abides in those who believe in the Son of God, whereas those who do not believe God’s testimony (through the Spirit) make God out to be a liar. Again we see the interplay between Father, Son and Spirit.
In sum, whatever one’s view of the Johannine comma, it should be clear that the God of the Johannine epistles is described in triadic terms: Father, Son and Spirit, and this understanding is not limited to one contested verse.
Jude addresses his letter to those who are called, beloved by God the Father and kept for (or perhaps by) Jesus Christ (v. 1), indicating a shared divine status (the source of mercy, peace and love, v. 2), but a distinction in divine persons. This is confirmed throughout the letter, as the Father and Son are often mentioned in close proximity in relation to salvation. Thus in verse 4 Jude warns against those who pervert the grace of God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ, again placing Father and Son in close collocation in relation to salvation as he writes to contend for the faith that has been handed down (v. 3).
One of the most widely discussed verses in Jude is verse 5. Who was it that led the people out of Egypt? The twenty-eighth edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek text reads Iēsous (Jesus), whereas the twenty-seventh edition reads kyrios (Lord).40 The text-critical arguments are complicated, and although either reading is possible, Jesus may be the best reading.41 If so, then this would seem to be a rather clear indication of the pre-existence of Jesus, who was leading (and destroying) during the period of the wilderness generation in the Old Testament. However, even if Lord is the correct reading, the referent is quite probably still Jesus, in the light of Jude 4 and Jude’s typical usage of Lord for Jesus elsewhere.42 If so, Jude 5 may be a reference to the pre-existence of the Son, similar to what we see elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g. 1 Cor. 10:4, 9). By speaking of Jesus as the Lord throughout his epistle (4, 14, 17, 21, 25) Jude demonstrates consistency with other New Testament authors, who view Jesus in glorious, exalted terms, which far exceeds the glory due to created beings.
The Holy Spirit is also explicitly mentioned in Jude. In Jude 19 we read of scoffers who are devoid of the (Holy) Spirit, who cause divisions. In contrast, Jude’s audience is to build themselves up in their holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit (20). We should not miss the significance that our prayers are to be made in the Holy Spirit.43 This fits with the traditional trinitarian understanding that the Spirit must be divine if he is to provide us genuine fellowship with the Father and the Son.44 At this juncture in the epistle Jude moves seamlessly between persons of the Godhead, exhorting his audience to pray in the Holy Spirit (20), keep themselves in the love of God (21a) and wait for the mercy of the Lord Jesus Christ (21b). This is not an argument for a trinitarian understanding of God, but it reveals a deeper structure of thought in which salvation is triadically shaped.
Jude ends with one of the great benedictions of the New Testament (24–25). Again the emphasis is on the glory of God as Saviour, which comes through the Lord Jesus Christ. The glory, majesty, dominion and authority belong to God for ever and ever. It is also interesting that God as Saviour is able to present his people faultless before his glorious presence with great joy (24). Though the Holy Spirit is not mentioned in verse 24, the combination of God’s glory and God’s presence reminds one of the Holy Spirit’s close relationship to God’s glory elsewhere in Scripture (cf. 1 Peter 4:14). Jude’s benediction, however, appears to focus on the glories of the Father and the Son. Nevertheless, we know from Jude’s exhortations that we are to pray in the Holy Spirit, and by so doing can keep ourselves in the love of God as we await the return of the Lord Jesus Christ.
© Brandon D. Crowe, 2016