Tried With Fire

I posted this quote a year ago, but in the light of the Trinity debate, it's worth repeating. Many people do not like arguing. They picture an angry dispute between two individuals… It is usually characterized by negative emotions: we are upset, raise our voices, and maybe even stomp out of the room in frustration… Usually, if we are honest, the goal of this kind of arguments is to win… Another type of arguing features a dispute not between competing individuals but between competing ideas… Rather than emotional; it is rational. We are seeking reasons for why we think a belief is true. In arguing this way, we do not attack the other person, but we are both attacking an issue or problem. This is why philosophers often can hold opposite views on issues and yet be good friends.  The goal of this kind of arguing is not to win but to find the truth. In fact, if you can show me that a belief I had thought was true is actually false, I have not lost but have won, because, I do not ...

"If this confession of the trinity of God takes such a central position in the Christian faith, it is important to know on what ground it rests and from what source it has flowed into the church. They are not a few in our time who hold that it is the fruit of human argument and academic learning and who, accordingly, regard it as of no value for the religious life. According to them the original Gospel, as it was proclaimed by Jesus, knew nothing about any such doctrine of the trinity of God — that is, nothing about the term itself nor about the reality to which the term was intended to give expression. It was only — so the argument goes — when the original and simple Gospel of Jesus was brought into relationship with Greek philosophy and was falsified by it that the Christian church absorbed the person of Christ in His Divine nature, and eventually also the Holy Spirit into the Divine Being. And so it came about that the church confessed three persons in the one Divine being. ...

ht: Lloyd Legalist on Twitter

In perusing the blogsphere, I have read many posts challenging women to exercise discernment in regard to the resources they use. Concerns have been raised about: - Hermeneutics. How does the author interpret scripture? - Commitment to the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible. - The subtle incorporation of New Age mysticism. - Shared platforms and endorsements by questionable teachers, e. g. Word of Faith/prosperity gospel teachers - Ecumenicism that muddies the gospel. - Inadequate recognition of sin and calls for repentance. - Legalism that supplants the gospel. I could list more, but you get the point. People may have varying degrees of discomfort over the meat-to-bone ratio and which issues are deal-breakers, but I think we would agree that it is wise to consider who is teaching and what is being taught. Given the recent debate over the Trinity and more specifically the relationship between the Father and the Son, it's worth repeating the question t...

Exhibit A: The Bible several times says that Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father, but He's at the right hand. He sits with Him on His throne. He has equal glory and equal honor but not equal authority. The Father and Son are equal in all their attributes, and the Holy Spirit is too. But among those persons of the Trinity, though they are equal in all their attributes: infinitely wise, infinitely powerful, infinitely loving, just and merciful, omnipresent and omniscient; they share all attributes, but there is a difference in the way they relate. The Father has an authority that the Son does not have. .. The idea of headship and submission never began. It has existed eternally in the relationship between the Father and Son in the Trinity. It exists in the eternal nature of God himself. And in this most basic of all relationships, authority is not based on gifts or ability. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are equal in all attributes and perfections, but authority is just t...

"What the Christian goes on to confess about that God is not summarized by him in a number of abstract terms, but is described, rather, as a series of deeds done by God in the past, in the present, and to be done in the future. It is the deeds, the miracles, of God which constitute the confession of the Christian. What the Christian confesses in his creed is a long, a broad, and a high history. It is a history which comprises the whole world in its length and breadth, in its beginning, process, and end, in its origin, development, and destination, from the point of creation to the fulfillment of the ages. The confession of the church is a declaration of the mighty deeds of God. Those deeds are numerous and are characterized by great diversity. But they also constitute a strict unity. They are related to each other, prepare for each other, and are interdependent. There is order and pattern, development and upward movement in it. It proceeds from creation through redemption to san...

ht: Modern Reformation on FB