Skip to content

Category: Doctrine of God

Published on Leave a comment on Nicene Trinitarianism (a re-post, slightly reworked)

The trinity is a very old doctrine. See The Trinitarian Old Testament for just how old.

But the council of Nicea gave us certain terminology that is accepted by both East and West.  The creed that came from it (and here I refer to the Niceno-Constantinopolitan creed of 381) is basic to all Christian churches.  Yet its doctrine of God is a particular one - one that is sometimes unwittingly (sometimes wittingly) side-lined, ignored or opposed.

The first thing to notice is Nicea's doctrine of 'the one God.'  To the untrained eye, it looks like it doesn't have one.  It simply says 'We believe in one God' and then immediately goes on to speak of 'the Father Almighty', 'one Lord Jesus Christ' and 'the Holy Spirit'.  In this it follows Paul in 1 Corinthians 8:6

"For us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."

The one God and the one Lord are the Father and the Son.  It is not the case that the one God is the omni-being of philosophical theism and the Persons are sub-species of this divine stuff.  No.  Nicea gives absolutely no definition of the one God except to unfold His being in the description of the Three.

No doubt many later theologians would have loved to have travelled back in time to Nicea and inserted a lengthy treatise on the 'omnis' somewhere between "I believe in God..." and "...the Father Almighty". But Nicea doesn't go there.  There's not even a footnote between the two.  The one God is the Father Almighty, to Whom is joined the Lord Jesus Christ in the unity of the Spirit who is the Lord, the Giver of life.  Athanasius and co. will not let you force a breach between a description of the One and the Three.  To describe the One is to unfold the Three.

And what does Nicea tell us about the ousia (being) of this triune God?  Again a typical western theologian may be disappointed.  The only reference in the creed to this 'ousia' is that controversial phrase 'homo-ousios'.  Jesus, the Son, is 'homo-ousion tw patri' (of one being with the Father).  Please note, the creed does not give us a prior definition of 'ousia' which is then mapped onto the three Persons.  (See these diagrams).  Instead we infer what the 'ousia' is from the fact that Father and Son are 'homo-ousios'.

Jesus, in all His difference from the Father - i.e. born of a virgin, crucified, buried, raised, ascended - is still homo-ousios with the Father. In His difference He is divine.  And in His divinity He is 'God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God, begotten not made." Even in His divinity He is 'ek tes ousia tw patri' (out of the being of the Father). There are important differences between Father and Son that are not papered over but rather affirmed by, and included in, the homo-ousios.

The homo-ousios does not denote three-fold repetition but rather, in TF Torrance's words:

"The Father/Son relationship falls within the one being of God.” (Trinitarian Faith, p119).

Homoousios “meant that the Son and the Father are equally God within the one being of God.” (ibid, p122)

The homo-ousios upholds the distinction (as well as unity) of Father and Son. Remember that you can't be 'homo' with yourself.  And it points us to the fact that the Father is Begettor, the Son Begotten.  The Father from Himself, the Son from the Father (even according as He is God, contra Calvin but with Nicea!).

There are genuine differences in Persons that in no way compromise their equality of divinity. There is never a time when the Son is not homo-ousios with the Father nor is there a time when the Son is not begotten of His Father. Therefore there is not an ousia of the Father that could ever be separately conceived and then assigned in equal measure to Father, Son and Spirit. Instead the ousia of God is a mutually constituting communion in which Father, Son and Spirit share.  The ousia of the trinity consists in three Persons who are 'homo' with one another.  While Nicea does not say explicitly that the 'ousia' is the communion of Persons, it points decidedly in this direction. (See Torrance's 'Trinitarian Faith' for more).

All this is to say that distinctions between Father, Son and Spirit are upheld within the divine nature. The divine nature is not a set of pre-determined attributes which are identically mapped onto the Three. The divine nature is constituted by difference, distinction, mutuality, reciprocity - it is a divine life (a dance even!) not a divine stuff.

Compare this with so much doctrine of God in the west.  First an ousia of 'omnis' is determined.  The one God is discussed for 600 pages in terms of 'uncreated Creator'.  And then we face the Three.  What do we then do?  Simply give to each Person this CV of attributes and insist that this is what the Nicene homo-ousios demanded!  On this understanding all difference, distinction, mutuality and reciprocity is banished from the status of deity.  In preference to the lively interplay of Father, Son and Spirit, a 'simple' doctrine of the One is forwarded.  And God's own being is conceived of as a stuff not a life.

Think I prefer Nicea!

.

19

Published on 19 Comments on Calvin on the proper and the accidental office of the gospel

Last week Dave Kirkman helped me to distinguish between what Luther called God's 'alien work' and His 'proper work'.

Death is the alien work.  Life through death is gospel and God's proper work.  But it's extremely important not to view death and life as equivalents in God's eyes.  One is the alien work, transformed by the proper work of resurrection.  This has many implications for theodicy - the study of God's justice in the face of evil.  The LORD may indeed kill and make alive, yet He is not so capricious that they are both alike to Him.  Rather, they belong together as one redeeming work - the former being the alien, the latter being the proper. (cf Isaiah 28:21)

Anyway, I came across Calvin using a similar distinction between the 'proper' and the 'accidental' office of the gospel.  (And again 2 Corinthians 3 was important - just as it was to Luther).  Calvin discusses the fact from 2 Corinthians 2:15-16 that the gospel hardens unbelievers.  This we know.  But we also ought to know that this is not its proper work.  It's proper work is as a 'ministry of life' (2 Cor 3:6).  How do these relate?  The last sentence is fascinating.

The term odor is very emphatic. Such is the influence of the Gospel in both respects, that it either quickens or kills, not merely by its taste, but by its very smell. Whatever it may be, it is never preached in vain, but has invariably an effect, either for life, or for death.”  “We are the savor of death unto death. But it is asked, how this accords with the nature of the Gospel, which we shall find him, a little afterwards, calling the ministry of life? (2 Corinthians 3:6.) The answer is easy: The Gospel is preached for salvation: this is what properly belongs to it; but believers alone are partakers of that salvation. In the mean time, its being an occasion of condemnation to unbelievers — that arises from their own fault. Thus Christ came not into the world to condemn the world, (John 3:17,) for what need was there of this, inasmuch as without him we are all condemned? Yet he sends his apostles to bind, as well as to loose, and to retain sins, as well as remit them. (Matthew 18:18; John 20:23.) He is the light of the world, (John 8:12,) but he blinds unbelievers. (John 9:39.) He is a Rock, for a foundation, but he is also to many a stone of stumbling — “Of offense and stumbling.” (Isaiah 8:14.) We must always, therefore, distinguish between the proper office of the Gospel,  — “The proper and natural office of the Gospel.” and the accidental one (so to speak) which must be imputed to the depravity of mankind, to which it is owing, that life to them is turned into death.

Calvin on 2 Corinthians 2:15 in his commentary:

.

Published on Leave a comment on Glorifying the Other – the heart-beat of God's own life

From Halden:

“I do not seek my own glory” (John 8:5). With these words Jesus set a precedent for all those who claim to follow him. Fundamental to the call to discipleship is the renunciation of seeking to glorify, to magnify, to enhance and promote oneself.

It is often thought that this calling is based on the distinction between God and humanity. God should be glorified, not us. Therefore we refuse to glorify ourselves and instead glorify God. Indeed, aspects of the Reformed tradition insist that God’s whole aim in being involved with the world is to glorify God’s own self. Thus, we glorify God rather than ourselves because God wants to glorify God’s self rather than humanity.

However, this is all entirely wrong. Jesus, according to the Christian confession is God’s very self come among us. Thus, when Jesus reveals that he does not seek his own glory, he is stating something that is not only to be true about us, but preeminently about God’s own life. God’s life consists in the refusal to seek self-glorification. Rather, the life of the Godhead itself consists in the loving mutuality of the trinitarian persons who only seek the glory of one another. Thus, Jesus seeks the glory of the Father rather than his own, and so also the Father seeks to glorify Jesus (John 7:18). Finally, God also fundamentally desires to glorify humanity: “those he justified he also glorified” (Rom 8:30).

So, we do not reject the quest of self-glorfication to somehow “make room” for God’s desire to self-glorify. Rather we reject self-glorification because that’s precisely what God is like. To reject the quest for self-exaltation is, counterintuitively, the very epitome of what it means to be God-like. We don’t reject self-glorification because self-glorification is reserved for God alone. We reject it because self-glorification in any form is demonic.

Published on Leave a comment on Glorifying the Other – the heart-beat of God’s own life

From Halden:

“I do not seek my own glory” (John 8:5). With these words Jesus set a precedent for all those who claim to follow him. Fundamental to the call to discipleship is the renunciation of seeking to glorify, to magnify, to enhance and promote oneself.

It is often thought that this calling is based on the distinction between God and humanity. God should be glorified, not us. Therefore we refuse to glorify ourselves and instead glorify God. Indeed, aspects of the Reformed tradition insist that God’s whole aim in being involved with the world is to glorify God’s own self. Thus, we glorify God rather than ourselves because God wants to glorify God’s self rather than humanity.

However, this is all entirely wrong. Jesus, according to the Christian confession is God’s very self come among us. Thus, when Jesus reveals that he does not seek his own glory, he is stating something that is not only to be true about us, but preeminently about God’s own life. God’s life consists in the refusal to seek self-glorification. Rather, the life of the Godhead itself consists in the loving mutuality of the trinitarian persons who only seek the glory of one another. Thus, Jesus seeks the glory of the Father rather than his own, and so also the Father seeks to glorify Jesus (John 7:18). Finally, God also fundamentally desires to glorify humanity: “those he justified he also glorified” (Rom 8:30).

So, we do not reject the quest of self-glorfication to somehow “make room” for God’s desire to self-glorify. Rather we reject self-glorification because that’s precisely what God is like. To reject the quest for self-exaltation is, counterintuitively, the very epitome of what it means to be God-like. We don’t reject self-glorification because self-glorification is reserved for God alone. We reject it because self-glorification in any form is demonic.

Published on Leave a comment on Thawed out Thursday – The God who is…

Here's the first thing I ever published on the internet.  It's the heart of my website began about 5 years ago.  It's a decent summary of where I'm coming from theologically. This is the introduction to 5 Doctrine of God papers.

 

The God who is...

Revealed in Jesus

We meet the Living God only in Jesus. He is the sole point of contact between God and the creation. Theology cannot begin without Him nor continue outside of Him. We must be radically and self-consciously Christ-obsessed. This is the mark of Christian theology, distinguishing it from all human philosophy and theistic supposition. Taking every thought captive to Christ is the means by which we will defend true knowledge of God against the countless philosophical accretions which threaten the Church. click here for more

 

Three Persons United  

Our Christian life begins when we meet the Father in the Son and by the Spirit. The Christian life is, from first to last, a life lived in and by the Three. The Trinity is not special information for the advanced believer. The God we know is the Three Persons united in love. There is no 'more basic' truth to God than the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. There is no real God beneath or beyond the Persons. All talk of the Living God must therefore be about the Persons. Understanding them and deepening our fellowship with them in their relations and roles will be the very stuff of our Christian lives. click here for more

 

Bigger than you think 

Since God is the Three Persons united, we must not imagine some fourth 'substance' that is somehow more foundational than the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We must not enquire into impersonal 'attributes' or 'essences' as though they are the bedrock realities upon which the Persons are founded. We understand God's attributes only when we understand His Triune ways and works as revealed in Jesus. We must not come to the Word of God with our philosophical notions of God's attributes and then fit the Persons into these idolatrous moulds. As the Father reveals His character in the Son and by the Spirit then we can see the power, love, wisdom etc of the Living God. Allowing our doctrine of God to be shaped in this way will open our eyes to a God who is bigger than we could ever conceive. click here for more

 

Love

The Living God is Persons in loving, committed relationship. His will for our life is to be swept up into this eternal love affair and to be agents of His love for the creation. If our doctrine of God is fundamentally impersonal, our Christian lives will consist of duty-bound Pharisaism. If we understand the Passionate God then our lives will begin to conform to the total love of heart, soul, mind and strength which Jesus models and commands. click here for more

 

Proclaimed by Moses

The Scriptures do not introduce us to God and then to the LORD and then to Christ and the Trinity. Revelation does not progress towards Christ - it begins with Him. Moses and the Prophets proclaim the same Triune God as Jesus and the Apostles. From Genesis 1, the Trinitarian Gospel of the LORD-Messiah is front-and-centre as the focus of all Biblical revelation. In this paper we will briefly run through Genesis and Exodus to see how Christ is proclaimed as the One and Only revelation of the Unseen LORD. click here for more

.

 

2

Published on 2 Comments on Trinity rant #37462

Here's a beef of mine - when people almost completely reverse Gregory of Nazianzus's famous trinity quote while expressing admiration for it.  You know the one...

"I cannot think on the one without quickly being encircled by the splendor of the three nor can I discern the three without being straightway carried back to the one.".

I too love the quote.  But many times this is what the quotation is wheeled out to mean:

When I spend 600 pages of my systematic theology expounding a simple divine essence I then force myself to examine the Persons and when I've had enough of discussing the Persons I gleefully return to the omnibeing.

or

After I've thought of the god of monotheism for a bit I make sure I spend at least as long thinking about the gospel.  And once I'm done thinking about the gospel, then I make sure I think about that other idea - you know, god's oneness.

Here's how I reckon the reversal happens.  First people take Gregory to be saying something very basic - i.e. the One and the Three are 'equally ultimate' (or, if you're really posh, equiprimordial!).  Then you run away with the 'equally ultimate' thought and think of it as some kind of 'equal air time' agreement between competing political parties. 

But first of all, Gregory is saying something much more than that basic thought.  Look again at the 'cannot', the 'being encircled' and the 'carried back.'  Gregory is not forcing himself to give equal air time to One and Three.  Gregory says that the Oneness of God actually gives him the Three.  And the Three give Him the Oneness.  It's not that he's ensuring equal treatment, he doesn't need to turn from a consideration of Oneness to a consideration of Threeness.  It's a right contemplation of the Oneness of God itself that presents him with the Three.  And the Three simply present to him as the One God.

This is how the One and the Three are related.  The One God simply is the loving unity of those Three Persons. And those Three Persons simply are without remainder who this One God is.

Trinity simply means 'unity of three'.  That's how the One and the Three are co-ordinated. They are not separate topics to be separately studied.  You cannot talk about the One God if you're not talking about the Three Persons who are the One God.  That's the radical importance of Gregory's insight.

Now go and re-write those 600 pages.

Rant over.

.

Published on Leave a comment on Our God's done stuff

It's a law of human resources that the less experience a person has the more adjectives appear on their resume.  "Team-player.  High-achiever.  Fast learner.  Leadership qualities."  Wherever these descriptors are piled up it's designed to hide a worrying lack of achievement.

Dead idols have a rubbish resume.  No educational history.  No work experience.  No prior achievements.  So how are they described?  Adjectives, piled to the heavens.  99 names etc.  Put them in capitals, add the word 'Most', 'All' or  'Ever' and repeat them loudly in the vain hope they won't have to be substantiated. 

Does it ever strike you how few adjectives there are in our creeds.  Instead they are just chock full of verbs.

When we're asked about the Living God we answer with confidence, 'Let me tell you what the Father, Son and Spirit have done...'  Our God simply is the God of the Gospel - the One who has performed these marvellous deeds.

Some verbs I've really enjoyed recently:

24And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25God saw the people of Israel—and God knew. (Ex 2:24-25)

4 I... established my covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, the land in which they lived as sojourners. 5Moreover, I have heard the groaning of the people of Israel whom the Egyptians hold as slaves, and I have remembered my covenant. 6Say therefore to the people of Israel, 'I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from slavery to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great acts of judgment. 7I will take you to be my people, and I will be your God, and you shall know that I am the LORD your God, who has brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. 8I will bring you into the land that I swore to give to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. I will give it to you for a possession. I am the LORD.'" (Ex 6:4-8)

2And you shall remember the whole way that the LORD your God has led you these forty years in the wilderness, that he might humble you, testing you - to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep his commandments or not. 3And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.  (Deut 8:2-4)

Beware lists of adjectives in your theology.  It might be a sign you've stopped describing the Living God.  Beware getting embroiled in discussion of what God's like, more than what He's done.  Especially beware discussions of what He can do rather than a concentration on what He has done.

And as you consider how the Father, Son and Spirit are towards you right now, where does your mind go?  Abstract qualities?  No, don't let your mind run to adjectives.  Think of the verbs:

To Him Who loves us (present continuous) and has freed us (past tense) from our sins by His blood...  (Rev 1:5)

Think verbs.  That's what makes for gospel theology and gospel assurance.  It makes all the difference.

.

 

Published on Leave a comment on Our God’s done stuff

It's a law of human resources that the less experience a person has the more adjectives appear on their resume.  "Team-player.  High-achiever.  Fast learner.  Leadership qualities."  Wherever these descriptors are piled up it's designed to hide a worrying lack of achievement.

Dead idols have a rubbish resume.  No educational history.  No work experience.  No prior achievements.  So how are they described?  Adjectives, piled to the heavens.  99 names etc.  Put them in capitals, add the word 'Most', 'All' or  'Ever' and repeat them loudly in the vain hope they won't have to be substantiated. 

Does it ever strike you how few adjectives there are in our creeds.  Instead they are just chock full of verbs.

When we're asked about the Living God we answer with confidence, 'Let me tell you what the Father, Son and Spirit have done...'  Our God simply is the God of the Gospel - the One who has performed these marvellous deeds.

Some verbs I've really enjoyed recently:

24And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. 25God saw the people of Israel—and God knew. (Ex 2:24-25)

4 I... established my covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, the land in which they lived as sojourners. 5Moreover, I have heard the groaning of the people of Israel whom the Egyptians hold as slaves, and I have remembered my covenant. 6Say therefore to the people of Israel, 'I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from slavery to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great acts of judgment. 7I will take you to be my people, and I will be your God, and you shall know that I am the LORD your God, who has brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. 8I will bring you into the land that I swore to give to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. I will give it to you for a possession. I am the LORD.'" (Ex 6:4-8)

2And you shall remember the whole way that the LORD your God has led you these forty years in the wilderness, that he might humble you, testing you - to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep his commandments or not. 3And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.  (Deut 8:2-4)

Beware lists of adjectives in your theology.  It might be a sign you've stopped describing the Living God.  Beware getting embroiled in discussion of what God's like, more than what He's done.  Especially beware discussions of what He can do rather than a concentration on what He has done.

And as you consider how the Father, Son and Spirit are towards you right now, where does your mind go?  Abstract qualities?  No, don't let your mind run to adjectives.  Think of the verbs:

To Him Who loves us (present continuous) and has freed us (past tense) from our sins by His blood...  (Rev 1:5)

Think verbs.  That's what makes for gospel theology and gospel assurance.  It makes all the difference.

.

 

Published on Leave a comment on Schori: Not too hung up on the mechanism

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IxG96wpx60&feature=player_embedded]

From Stand Firm in Faith

Any number of things madden me about this:

1. If Jesus is a 'mechanism' for Schori - she ain't a sister.  She's just not.  If Jesus is incidental to the identity of 'God' she's got the wrong god.

2. Apparently Schori looks to fruits of the Spirit in religious teachers to demonstrate their closeness to God.  But then for 'conservatives' to insist on the confession of Christ as Lord amounts to works.

3. Her arguments are about the Abrahamic faiths - but just how does the Dali Lama fit into this?  Is he an anonymous Abrahamite?  Just who is the 'God' who's in charge of this 'salvation'?  Apparently he's not even as specific as the God of Abraham.  Apparently His identity just isn't important.

But one other thought:

4.  I believe we Evangelicals are a bit hamstrung when it comes to answering Schori whileever we remain unclear that Jesus just is the God of Abraham.  When our own reasoning also runs along the lines of "Jesus is essential for us, but not for them" our opposition to this teaching will not be as strong as it should be.

Just a thought.

.

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer