Review of The Deep Things of God

I previously posted Chris Spano’s summary of Fred Sanders’ new book The Deep Things of God: How the Trinity Changes Everything

Chris serves as a ministry resident at College Church and I really respect the way he thinks about theology and tying it in with historical movements and how doctrine has been thought about throughout the history of the church. He taught a class in one of our Adult Communities last school year that was very thoughtful and provocative. I hope you enjoy his review and even if you don’t have time to read the book that you benefit from the ideas in the book and Chris’ interaction with them. Thanks, Chris for your work!

Review by Chris Spano
Few people (if any) would accuse me of being an expert in Trinitarian theology. Still, Trinitarian theology is my favorite loci in Christian theology and I have read a fair bit of it—especially in the last couple of years. In my view, Sanders’ book is excellent and I would highly recommend it to faithful and thoughtful Christians who are seeking a deeper understanding of Trinitarian theology, and therefore, a deeper and richer understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The Triune nature of God can be a very complicated thing to understand. To Sanders’ credit, The Deep Things of God is not overly esoterical; it is appropriately simple without becoming simplistic; for those familiar with the history of Trinitarian theology, there are many insightful observations made between the lines, which are well worth pondering. (I wish Sanders would have been more willing to expound the development of Trinitarian theology in Christianity; perhaps he did not because there are ample resources for this specific investigation elsewhere). Even so, some theological concepts in this book may be a bit too deep for the average Christian to grasp without having previously studied Biblical teaching about the Triune God. Still, even for those whose only knowledge of Trinity is that woman from The Matrix, the excavation may be challenging, but there are nuggets of gold ready to be dug up from between the covers of this book.

I would now like to quickly evaluate Sanders’ two main claims: First, that the Trinity is the gospel. Second, therefore, since evangelicals are inherently gospel people, we are “profoundly” Trinitarian, “whether or not [we] know it” (27).

Regarding claim #1: In my view, Sanders is absolutely correct to claim that the Trinity is the gospel. I also think that, presented with the evidence, most evangelical Protestant Christians would heartily agree. Last year I taught and adult Sunday school class at my church entitled: Trinity and Christology. For thirteen weeks, we traced the historical development of these two foundational doctrines in historic orthodox Christianity. All along my goal for the last week of class was to demonstrate (as Sanders puts it) that the Trinity is the gospel. (Specifically, I wanted to illustrate the inherently Trinitarian structure of penal substitutionary atonement—the doctrine that Christ died vicariously in the place of sinners to reconcile God with man). All thirteen weeks proved to be an intellectual exertion of faith seeking understanding, but for me, the final five minutes of the last class were worth all the effort. When I was finished teaching and it was time for questions, one very thoughtful and insightful woman named Ashley raised her hand and said with inquisitive assurance, “I don’t think it’s even possible to think about salvation without thinking about the Trinity!?” Exactly. I expect that if you read this book you will have an insightful experience similar to that of Ashley. Regardless of who delivers the package, once you receive the gift of understanding how the gospel is inherently Trinitarian, I believe you will never be the same. Ever since receiving this gift from the team of Augustine, Anselm, W.G.T. Shedd, and C.S. Lewis, two aspects of my life have changed rather dramatically: how I read the Bible and how I pray—Sanders’ two examples of implicit Tinitarianism are perfect.

Regarding claim #2: In my view, Sanders’ claim that, as gospel people, evangelicals are profoundly (even if only implicitly) Trinitarian is correct—and also incorrect. It’s correct insofar as we are indeed implicitly Trinitarian. Not to belabor the point, but if the Trinity is the gospel (which it is), then belief in the gospel is indeed—and cannot be otherwise—an essentially Trinitarian reality. When I first believed the gospel, I didn’t have a clue about the Triune nature of God—and neither did most of the rest of us! But, as Sanders points out in chapter four, our union with Christ by faith in Christ through the Spirit’s power is nothing less than our participation in the eternal Trinitarian fellowship shared between, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Once I believed, then I was prepared to understand this. As the relationship between the Trinity and salvation became clearer, it did not feel like I was learning something “new.” It felt so intuitively obvious that I almost immediately felt like I had always known this to be true. It was a necessary part of who I am as a Christian—or rather, a necessary inference given who I am in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Still, I believe it’s incorrect insofar as we are not profoundly Trinitarian. As the online Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it, something implicit “is capable of being understood from something else though unexpressed.” Profundity, however, is “having intellectual depth and insight” of things “difficult to fathom or understand.” Think of the distinction between implicit and profound in this way. Implicit knowledge derived from experience is nothing to pooh-pooh at! We live by it. But we are disinclined to consider implicit or intuitive knowledge and understanding as profound expertise. For example, if my sons were (to appropriate Sanders’ language) ‘cold toward Einstein’s theory of general relativity, confused about its meaning, and noncommittal about its importance,’ even though they constantly experience the pull of gravitational force, I would not accuse them of being physicists ‘whether or not they know it.’  The point is, there is a difference between being implicitly/intuitively and profoundly Trinitarian—at least in the way we typically use these words. But profundity comes with concerted and vigorous reflection upon and study of what we intuit or observe to be true—whether in general revelation (physics and farming) or special revelation (theology). In my mind, we must acknowledge that evangelicals are implicitly Trinitarian given their doctrinal emphases vis-à-vis the gospel. It would be wiser, however, to reserve the accolade of profundity for a time when we implicitly Trinitarian evangelicals, who are “bedeviled by spiritual shallowness” (11), have plumbed ‘the deep things of God.’ Sanders’ claim that evangelicals as a whole are profoundly Trinitarian is not as much incorrect as it is the result of a conflation of language. Of course some evangelicals, like Sanders, are profoundly Trinitarian. By God’s grace, may some become many—and may The Deep Things of God get the party started!