Spencer argues for the legitimacy of the use of imagery in teaching the Trinity. For Spencer, such complex doctrine requires natural illustration to help us understand the Triune Godhead. Spencer’s research is thorough, and the structure of his argument is well-presented. I began reading this monograph as a critic who denied any value for using images to teach the Trinity. While I remain unconvinced by Spencer’s arguments, reading Spencer made me realize one way the use of imagery in teaching the Trinity may be helpful, but it may not be in the same way intended by Spencer. Before presenting this one way that imagery could be helpful, here are three arguments against the legitimacy of the use of imagery to teach the Trinity: What then is the help of these illustrations of the Trinity? One thing that this monograph helped me realize as Spencer kept citing his students’ responses is that these illustrations could be a pedagogical tool to negatively demonstrate what the Trinity is not. In other words, since these illustrations all come short of the entire concept of the Trinity, they are helpful in so far as the teacher demonstrates how the Trinity is unlike any of these images. Once the point of distinction is made, the understanding of the biblical teaching of the Trinity becomes apparent. In this negative way—and only in this way—images and illustrations are helpful in the teaching of the Trinity.
LeeJaredGarcia.Com 