Revelation 4:8 | Ichthys translation
Holy, Holy, Holy, the Lord, God, the Almighty
He who was, and He who is,
and He who is coming.
No specific term for the triune nature of God occurs in the Bible. The inspired writers of the New Testament clearly felt that the existence of one God in three distinct persons, the doctrine which we now call "the Trinity", was a relatively straight-forward concept and accessible enough (even with a cursory reading of the scripture) from passages such as the one quoted above.
---
Technical discussion
To flesh out a bit more why we might make the claim that Revelation 4:8 supports the doctrine of the Trinity, consider:
- The threefold repetition of the adjective Holy (Greek: ἅγιος, hagios)
- The three titles used: κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ.
- κύριος, kurios, means "Lord"
- θεός, theos, means "God"
- παντοκράτωρ, pantokrater, means "the almighty". It is a compound noun formed from the combination of πᾶς and κράτος.
- The three aspects of God's eternal existence: He who was (ὁ ἦν), and He who is (ὁ ὢν), and He who is to come (ὁ ἐρχόμενος). The first two are, respectively, the imperfect active and present active participles of εἰμί (Greek's "to be" verb), and the third is a present middle participle, from ἔρχομαι.
Perhaps someone might say that it is not impossible or even particularly uncommon for multiple adjectives and titles to be applied to the same person. Fair enough. But one might also point out this verse's structure of threefold repetition of threes would be somewhat odd unless it were intentional, right? That is, why is it that we have three groups of threes (three Holy's, three titles, and three aspects of God's eternality) rather than some other structure like one/four (two non-three groups), or two/one/three/one (four groups, only one of which is a group of three), and so on?
The explanation that makes the most sense is simply that John, inspired by the Holy Spirit, put things this way intentionally. And therefore it ought not be ignored. QED.
---
### Is the terminology itself important in considering the development of this doctrine?
The Apostolic Fathers, the generation that followed the men who actually penned the New Testament, also felt that merely quoting scriptures was an entirely adequate way of discussing the relationship between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Not until the late second and early third centuries did the term "Trinity" itself come into general use as a way of defending (against a variety of heresies which sought to deny various aspects of the unique triune nature of God) what earlier generations of Christians had taken completely for granted based upon their common-sense approach to reading the Bible: that God the Father, the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are all God, and that at the same time they are---in what we may call a "personal" way---also distinct from each other.
God is one. God is also three. And there is no contradiction between these statements.
---
### Spelling it out a bit more
As we have said, the core definition of the Trinity is that God is one *in essence*, and three *in person*.
To put the doctrine in complete terms, the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; yet at the same time the Father is not the Son or the Holy Spirit, the Son is not the Father or the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son.
---
#### Outline
- [The core definition of the Trinity: God is One in Essence, Three in Person](#4)
- [Is the terminology itself important in considering the development of this doctrine?](#5)
- [Spelling it out a bit more](#6)