Complicated Histories of the Christian New Covenant, Holy Spirit, and Trinity
There are several branching off points from the Old Testament (shared by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). Christians use the “New Covenant” of Jesus Christ (pretty much the basis for the New Testament) to depart from some of the Old Testament laws (many of which are questionable in a modern context). Next, there is a series of historic divisions within the Christian Church. Though fortunately most all Christian Churches follow the “Nicaean Creed”, which establishes the Holy Trinity, there were some early differences over the exact nature of Christ (Arian and Nestorian beliefs). Next, there are divisions between Holy Roman, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox, and finally the Reformation, all pretty much over specific practices of the church (and not the Trinity). Whew!
History of the New Covenant of Christianity: It is not widely advertised, but the New Covenant brought forth by Jesus Christ (officially by the Eucharist, most believe) is sort of the punchline of the Christian New Testament. It states that Jesus came to release humanity from the old laws (which ones are not exactly clear, which I’ll soon attempt to explain). The New Covenant is also a kind of contract with humanity that those who believe (how is also not exactly specific) will attain life everlasting. The New Covenant is best explained in the New Testament by Hebrews 8:6–13 which states: “But now Jesus has obtained a superior ministry, since the covenant that he mediates is also better and is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. For he finds fault with them when he says: “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.” The Old Testament prophesizes this New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31–34 when it says “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord.”
The most specific directives of the New Covenant may be in the words of the Beatitudes, which incorporate the Ten Commandments along with Jesus’ “turn the other cheek” directives (basically, Bill & Ted’s “Be excellent to one another”). They are in Matthew 5:3–12 “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the Earth. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be satisfied. Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the Sons of God. Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.”
Most Christians believe that there are three components of Old Testament law, ceremonial, moral, and civil (judicial), and that the New Covenant breaks with all but the moral law. Christian denominations disagree upon who is a member of the New Covenant, some say believers only, others say believers and their children. Some say that the New Covenant relieves believers of original sin. New Covenant Jews tend to believe the New Covenant mentioned in Jeremiah is a reinforcement of the old laws, the word “new” meaning a greater commitment to the old laws. Islam tends to believe the Quran acknowledges a New Covenant, but that Christians have subsequently broken with portions.
History of the Holy Spirit: The Holy Spirit is mentioned several times in the Bible, notably:
Isaiah 63:10 “His Holy Spirit”
Genesis 1:2 “Spirit of God”
Genesis 7:22 “The Breath and Spirit of Life”
Matthew 1:18 “Holy Spirit”
Matthew 12:28 “Spirit of God”
1 Peter 1:11 “Spirit of Christ”
At the end of Matthew, “Make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
The Holy Spirit seems to have evolved as a kind of intermediary between a somewhat remote God (and later Jesus), and humanity.
a) Ancient Holy Spirit: There has always been a kind of animistic spirit in religions, one which occasionally possesses people (similar to Pentecostal Charismatics speaking in tongues, Sufi Whirling Dervishes, or possessions in African Zar).
b) Old Testament Holy Spirit: The Old Testament spirit is said to be animistic.
c) New Testament Holy Spirit: The New Testament spirit is said to be dynamistic. It is thought to be a kind of universal spirit that unites all humanity, a kind of collective consciousness.
d) Islamic Holy Spirit: Some elements of Islam believe that the Holy Spirit later became Mohammed. Others believe that the Holy Spirit is the Angel Gabriel.
e) Judaism Holy Spirit: Usually refers to the Divine aspects of prophecy and wisdom.
The Holy Trinity: There has been much historic debate over the exact nature of the Holy Trinity, mostly over whether Jesus is fully imbued with God, or partially (and the exact nature of partially), or simply a divinely inspired human. Arius (256–336 AD) believed that Jesus was truly the “Son of God”, did not pre-exist God, and was separate as son to the father (Arianism, sometimes called Binatarianism), while Nestorianism (initiated by Nestorius, 386–451 AD) believed that Jesus was part Divine, part human. The 325 Council of Nicaea essentially overruled Arius (creating the Roman Catholic Church), and the 431 Council of Ephesus overruled Nestor (creating the Oriental Orthodox Church, including Egyptian Coptics, Armenians, and Ethiopians). There is a Nestorian Church to this day, and a few modern churches follow beliefs similar to Arianism (Jehovah’s Witnesses, Church of Latter Day Saints, Unitarians). It could be argued that Nestorianism and Arianism are a form of Trinitarian belief, since they don’t question the God-Jesus-Holy Spirit trilogy, just the specific nature of Jesus Christ.
Among other Biblical justifications for the Trinity, there is this one in Isaiah 9: The Messiah is called “Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” Some Christians see this verse as meaning the Messiah will represent the Trinity on earth. This is because Counselor is a title for the Holy Spirit (John 14:26), the Trinity is God, Father is a title for God the Father, and Prince of Peace is a title for Jesus. This verse is also used to support the Deity of Christ. Trinitarians believe the Trinity to be a bedrock belief, and any disagreement heresy.
Reasons for the Great Schism: The Great Schism (break between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy) occurred in 1054, for the following reasons:
a) Procession of the Spirit: In John 15:26, Jesus says of the Holy Spirit: “But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me.” The Eastern Orthodox Church had accepted since the 381 First Council of Constantinople, and the 451 Council of Chalcedon, that the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father only. Meanwhile, Roman Catholics had accepted at the 589 Third Council of Toledo, that “The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and Son”
b) Papal Privilege and Authority: At the time, the Pope in Rome ruled both West and East. Church officials in Constantinople came to resent Roman authority. Chief among these resentments was the concept of Papal Infallibility, more or less elevating the Pope to supernatural status.
c) Ecclesiastical Differences: Several disputes broke out over jurisdictional boundaries, promotions, hierarchies, and practices.
d) Whether leavened or unleavened bread should be used in the Eucharist.
e) The Oriental Orthodox religions had their own Schism, breaking with the rest of the church after the 451 Council of Chalcedon (which determined that Christ had two distinct natures, which Oriental Orthodox thought was Nestorian and heretical). Oriental Orthodox to this day believes that Christ has two, inseparable and comingled natures.
Reasons for the Reformation: The Protestant Reformation grew out of five main complaints against the Catholic Church: Selling of Indulgences, Simony, Priest Celibacy, Icon worship, objections to Shamanism and Transubstantiation. An important subset of the Reformation was a restructuring of all church management, which became much smaller under Protestantism.
Protestant Restructuring of Church Management: The Reformation occurred about the same time as the invention of the printing press, and the translation of the Bible into the vernacular (native language of the user). Along with the corruption (and subsequent elimination) of indulgences and political appointments, Protestant Churches became much smaller, neighborhood institutions, with smaller staff. Since people could now read their own Bibles, there was no need for the monks and monasteries (which started to be replaced by lay ministers, Elders, Presbyters, and Universities).
Free Grace and Free Will: The concept of Arminianism in the 16th Century led people to believe that by God’s Free Grace alone, people could achieve salvation. Further, the Baptist concept of “Free Will” (a kind of self-driven Baptist and salvation path) lessened the need for “Big Church”. Thus people like Anne Hutchinson began home Bible studies, which didn’t even involve the Ministers. The extreme example was the emerging Quaker movement, whose Free Grace principles eliminated ministers altogether.
Salvation by Good Works: Meanwhile, people like the Puritans (an Anglican offshoot), were experimenting with a combined Church and State, in which good behavior was defined and monitored. This system of “Salvation by Good Works” came into conflict with “Salvation by Free Grace”. Most mainstream churches of today believe that Salvation comes from both Faith and Good Works, the former preceding the latter. In most modern Nations, Churches and Governments are separated.
Evangelicals and Charismatics: 18th Century America saw the beginnings of the Evangelical Christian Movement (Faith Based Biblical Literalists, emphasizing a spiritual “born again” experience with subsequent proselytizing) and followed by a 19th Century Pentecostal Movement (Evangelicals highly possessed of the spirit, which causes them to speak in tongues)
Takeaways: Lots to unpack here, but there seems much dispute over some minor differences in views, which further implies that Christ and his followers did not leave enough clarity (chiseling these things in stone may have helped). First, that God and Jesus are the same doesn’t really make sense, since as some say, “why would Jesus then pray to himself”. It would then seem logical that Jesus is the “Son of God”, and part human (after all, his Mother was Mary). I guess that makes me Arian, Nestorian, and excommunicated, but ok. The strong adherence of mainstream Christianity to Trinitarianism may be influenced by several apparent Biblical references, but then none of them specifically mentions the word “Trinity”, all of them are rather oblique, and the Trinity concept didn’t really take hold until 300 years after Christ. The biggest reason for the deification of Jesus (after the fact) might’ve been to “sell” the concept of salvation through belief (part of a strong membership drive). After all, if Jesus were part human, it might be hard for people to believe he had full powers of salvation. The Holy Spirit seems to play a kind of “wild card” role in not only Christianity, but all religions. It is that handy spiritual thing that mediates interactions with God and Jesus. Many people since the beginning of time, perhaps relate only to “the spirit” (and not doctrine), and sense this spirit in daily life, in prayer, healing, and devotion…perhaps the “Holy Spirit” is also a nod to these people. Overall, one can understand the need for a kind of orthodoxy, consistent beliefs and principles as a means of standardizing and unifying the church. Alternatively, one has a hard time understanding some of the petty church disputes, and some obvious corruptions as Papal Infallibility, Simony, and Indulgences. (CyanMagus et al,2023)
Steps Toward a More Reasonable Bible: If there were somehow an Ecumenical “Forty-seventh Council of Nicaea”, these would be my recommendations:
1) The New Covenant would simply mean following the Ten Commandments and Beatitudes
2) Holy Communion (Eucharist) and Baptisms would simply be symbolic acts that remind us that Christ died so that we’d remember the New Covenant.
3) The Holy Spirit? Oh well, ok…whatever helps you cope. Too mysterious to define or legislate.
4) The Holy Trinity: Jesus is often referred to as the “Son of God”. Why not accept that Jesus has human elements, yet is still part of the Holy Trinity? The story makes more sense (and has more relevance) that way, plus there is some Biblical justification.
5) The Reformation cleaned up much of the Catholic corruption, but then started relying again on too much Old Testament (dangerous) and then began splitting into several disparate factions. It should be a virtue of Christianity to seek consensus, not only within itself, but with Judaism and Islam. The latter might start with some agreement on the New Covenant (essentially, a modern correction of the Old Testament). Then it might end with something like “Holy Spirits, Trinities, salvation mechanisms are details left to the discretion of the various adherents”.
6) Faith or Good Works Salvation? When you think about it, you probably need both (but I accept that the “faith” of believers helps lead to “good works”). The thing is, a really ethical Aborigine (who’d never heard of the Bible), would also need a pathway into Heaven.
7) The test for a “Believer” might be religious ground zero, as there are many phony “believers” (and “patriots”) out there (Donald Trump, are you listening?). A strong reason for combining faith and good works is as a “believer test”, with true believers capable of carrying out the work required by the Ten Commandments and Beatitudes (ie service to the poor, advocating for peace, creating systems of humility and impartiality).
8) In religion, lots of groupthink, cognitive dissonance, and effort justification going on. I understand that the church must do these things to cement and promote their membership, but they also have a responsibility to remain rational and relatable at large.
Additional Vern Scott Articles on the History of Religion:
