Understanding the Trinity

The stated purpose of this book is to lay the foundations for the Christian understanding of the Trinity. As such, it does not deal extensively with either the biblical evidence or the historical development of the Trinity but rather with unpacking the meaning and significance of the doctrine. While many works have dealt with the former, few have dealt with the latter and certainly not with the skill and clarity that McGrath brings to this problem.Using humor and illustrations drawn from everyday life to Quantum Mechanics, he assists the reader in grasping the limitations of language when speaking about the divine nature, the purpose of analogical models, and the semantics behind the theological language of the Trinity. Along the way, he also deals with some related and important issues (i.e., the existence of God and the denial of the hypostatic union). The final section includes an annotated bibliography for further study.In conclusion, McGrath has answered a wide range of criticisms and conceptual difficulties with creativity and aplomb.

He does a good job of explaining a difficult topic. I still don't understand it but in his book he makes it clear that non-understanding is perfectly natural and ok.

McGrath challenges the reader to a deeper recognition and hopefully, understanding of a centerpiece of Christian faith. The progression of chapters elevated the group discussion for our mens' circle.

This book is a pleasant quick read with basic information on the Trinity that would be enjoyed by many readers.

Excellent introduction and explanation of a paradoxical mystery!

This book gives great clarity on how to better understand the Trinity! In additon, it is an easy read with short chapters.

Love this.

the book is bit old but it is still in quite good condition except there is name written on the first page. Anyway, I'm happy about it.

I didn't find this book helpful. I was looking for a book I could recommend to young Christians or to those from another background, such as Muslims, who traditionally struggle with the Trinity. This clearly isn't it - in that regard I've found Millard Erickson's 'Making Sense of the Trinity' to be much more clear.McGrath devotes almost the first half of the book to defending the idea that there is a God, for example against the suggestion that God is the opiate of the masses, as in Marxism, and to attacking ideas, such as universalism, which he disagrees with. Some of his arguments are a little eccentric - God cannot save everyone because some choose not to be saved, and God will not overrule their free will since that would be the equivalent of raping them. This antipathy to rape on God's part doesn't mean he can't deliver the lost into eternal torture.McGrath makes plentiful use of the idea of a 'model'. Mostly by a model he simply means what is generally called an image. An example is God as a shepherd - we're not saying that God actually IS a shepherd when we use the image, we're using it to convey, for example, the way the shepherd cares for his sheep, rescues them when lost, defends them against wild animals, and so on.However, when he moves on to the Trinity McGrath continues to work with models and images, some of which are more confusing than they are helpful. So he mentions the lunar explorations bringing to earth samples of moon rocks. For sure, something which was remote and inaccessible is made available to us to examine and touch, as Christ is God made flesh, tangible and observable. But McGrath seems at times to imply that somehow Christ is only a sample of God, and a small sample at that, with God the Father made of the same 'stuff' but bigger and still remote.Worse, McGrath turns briefly at the end of one chapter to the model, as he puts it, of God being three persons. He points out that the early language of the Trinity made use of the Latin word persona, which was the word for the mask through which actors spoke in the theatre. Father, Son and Spirit, he suggests, are simply three masks through which the same God appears or speaks, and in a passing remark McGrath says we mustn't confuse this classical sense of persona with the modern sense of a unified, singular person, in which sense God is one person. But surely in seeing God as three distinct persons the church has historically meant something more than a single person with three masks. It seems equally clear that the church (regardless of the word's etymology) has not seen 'persona' as a model or image in the same sense in which it has seen the word shepherd.It seems odd that McGrath should so ponderously lay down an initial understanding of God, only to whip through the really tricky stuff in less than a page of text and then exit the chapter sharpish. I was left wondering if McGrath really is presenting the historic doctrine of the Trinity, or if his use of the notion of the model hasn't actually confused him.The book isn't helped by its lack of historical reference. The development of the doctrine of the Trinity has involved much very careful examination of the meaning and implication of particular words. By and large McGrath dismisses all this - the filioque controversy, for example, zips by without being named as such in as much space as it takes McGrath to pronounce it unimportant.Overall, a disappointment.

this book came in the allotted time and had only light use as was described. very happy with the service.