Blogogetics

Giving an apologia (defense) for the faith we have

Archive for November, 2008

Six Issues of Separation

Nov 26

Posted by Guest Author in By Others | No Comments

A Refutation of Roman Catholicism

I. An Open Letter to Roman Catholics

II. Six Issues of Separation

III. Cults and Catholicism: Comparison Chart

An Open Letter To Roman Catholic Scholars

The New Catholic Catechism in Section 847 states that non-Catholics who “seek God with a sincere heart” and “try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience” will “ achieve eternal salvation.”

The Catholic Catechism in Sections 839-845 says that sincere people from non-Christian religions such as Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Taoists, animists, etc. will make it to heaven without the necessity of hearing of or believing in Catholicism. As long as they are sincere in their faith and live a good life, they will make it to heaven.

Various modern Popes have also publicly stated that this means that sincere people who have no religious convictions such as agnostics, atheists, skeptics, etc. will make it to heaven without the necessity of hearing of our believing in Catholicism. As long as they are sincere and live a good life, they will make it to heaven.

The Catholic Catechism also says in Section 838 that the Orthodox, Evangelicals, Pentacostals, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, etc, will also make it to heaven without hearing of or believing the Roman Catholic Church. As long as they are sincere in their faith and live a good life, they will make it to heaven.

Since Catholic scholars teach that non-Catholics can make it to heaven without converting to Catholicism, why do Catholics continue to try to convert us to their church?
Read the rest of this entry »

Controversy

Nov 21

Posted by Duane Smets in General Info | No Comments

What do you do when two “scholars” or “theologians” or “pastors” or “people” disagree on something? What do you do with controversy? There are three main views. 1) Balance. Some think the truth is always somewhere in the middle. 2) Unity. Some think truth pertains only to the things there is no disagreement. 3) Conviction. Others think truth must be worked for by considering both positions and settling on one with a full conscience.

Our Motivations

It is difficult to separate this discussion from the issues of the heart and its motivations. For no doctrinal or theological or intellectual issue is really just a head matter but our past experiences, biases, and sometimes sinful inclinations effect the way we think about or handle an issue. Our personal presuppositions matter.

Often times the vie for balance is motivated by either laziness or disillusionment. That may sound harsh but usually a person who always thinks the truth is in the middle really has not took the time to thoroughly study both viewpoints (laziness) and feels overwhelmed by the amount of information or disagreement on the subject so they preemptively conclude neither position can be wholly true.

Often times the vie for unity is motivated by a fear of conflict or confrontation. Most of us don’t like the feeling of strife or contention. It is uneasy and unsettling and when people are not getting along whether you are on the inside or outside of it, it is uncomfortable. Thus, many try to approach life by avoiding difficulty and disagreement at all costs and consider the only things to be true, to be the things which are for the most part universally accepted.

It is my contention that we must be a people of conviction. 1 Thessalonians 1:5 states, “…our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction.” We are to each be “fully convinced in (our) own mind (Rom 14:5).”

Such a thing takes a lot of work. To be honest and consider something from both viewpoints and only have a motivation for what is actually true, even if it means we have been wrong up is to approach controversy with true humility. It is a false humility which says one position cannot be correct.

Consider the words of John Piper on controversy:
“Can controversial teachings nurture Christlikeness? Before you answer this question, ask another one: Are there any significant biblical teachings that have not been controversial? I cannot even think of one…As much as we would like it, we do not have the luxury of living in a world where the most nourishing truths are unopposed. If we think we can suspend judgment on all that is controversial and feed our souls with only what is left, we are living in a dreamworld. There is nothing left…Besides that, would we really want to give to the devil the right to determine our spiritual menu by refusing to eat any teaching over which he can cause controversy?”

Those are good words from Pastor Piper. Throughout the Bible it seems one of the enemy’s chief tools is to mix a little bit of truth with untruth in order to create controversy so people end up wandering away from the faith. Instead we must hold the Bible firm in our hand and work hard to work it out.

Adiaphora

“Adiophora” means matters of indifference, tertiary, or secondary issues. Perhaps you have heard it said that there are essentials and non-essentials or closed-handed and open-handed issues in the Christian faith. This idea, as far as I can tell, originally comes from the debate of Calixtus and Calovius in the early 17th century. You can read about it here: (www.theresolved.com/downloads/essentials.pdf).

Calixtus sought to unite the Lutherans, Reformed, and Rome based on unity in fundamentals (”consensus quinquesaecularis”), he was the first ecumenicist. Calixtus thought systematic theology was too specific and devisive. Calovius said we need clarify or elaborate on what the first fundamentals are, which leads to secondary fundamentals needed to protect us from doctrinal error because uniting when there is disagreement in some areas can lead to compromise in bigger ones. Calovious thought such openness would eat away at the Christian faith and that all doctrines are related in some way.

I think there are two dangers and Calixtus and Calovius both make good points. The first danger is making your doctrinal acceptance so narrrow there is no room for an individual’s growth and you end up spending most your time fighting with other Christians about minut points. Which is what happened in the scholasticism era when theologians started arguing about things such as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

The other danger is not making your doctrine clear and providing acceptable boundaries. Which is what happened in the theologies of 19th century liberalism, when it was thought that inerrancy could be dismissed. I agree, like Calovius that if push it far enough we can see that everything connected to our salvation in Jesus Christ. Then must we require everyone accept every point of our doctrine for church membership? I don’t think so. I think what we are really after in membership is people who put their faith in the blood of Christ for their sin and not their own works and that they are people who are humble and willing to learn, grow, follow leadership and be on mission.

Getting Dirty

So, say you’ve been convinced and now you want to dig in and get dirty. How do you go about doing that? One misnomer is the view of the “scholar” or the expert. Sometimes certain positions are advocated by saying that “this is the only reasonable thing to think” because this is what the scholars say. Essentially this is a viewpoint advocating trust in a person rather than a position. If there is anything worth believing, I’m sure there are not simply people who are “too stupid to get it.” Besides, for nearly every controversial belief there are “scholars” on both sides if you take the time to look. We must remember that whether the person is a “scholar,” a “pastor” or some other expert, they are still a fallible human being who could be wrong.

Here is my advice…

- Multiple Viewpoint Books: At least in the arena of theology, for nearly every controversial belief there are books which contain multiple viewpoints from the advocates of certain positions. Some are better than others but usually the way it goes is…each author presents his case, the other viewpoint authors respond, and then the author has a final response to them all. This way you can avoid being intellectually dishonest and get a fair view of the lay of the land and the issues involved so that you can become fully convinced in your own mind.
- Do your own study: Even without having extensive training a person can do a pretty good job at studying an issue or a passage of Scripture in the Bible. This is easier than ever before with the amount of free tools available on the internet today. You can often do just as good of study or better than most Bible commentators and in then you might have reason to actually agree or disagree with them. For an example of my personal study methodology and some good resource guides you can read this post: www.theresolved.com/?p=326
- The Bible is the Final Arbitar: Whatever the Bible says is our ultimate and final authority. When it comes down to it all of our consciences ought to be held captive by the Word of God. If the Bible says it we believe it and if it doesn’t we do not. All controversy ends with what the Bible says. We must adhere to the clear and present declaration of 2 Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.”
- Practice Humility and Grace: A humble and gracious spirit is imperative for the Christian when in the midst of a debate or disagreement. Too often have Christians, perhaps from being cast out and dismissed so much of the time, have spoke in harsh tones and words.

Jonathan Edwards writes, “The proud enjoy to speak in the most harsh, severe, and terrible language…they say we must be plain hearted and bold for Christ, we must declare war on sin wherever we see it, we must not mince the matter in the cause of God and when speaking for Christ…(this) is to overthrow all Christian meekness and gentleness…and defile(s) the mouths of the children of God…under a cloak of sanctity and zeal and boldness for Christ.”

R.C. Sproul too speaks so wisely about the spirit of humility versus an argumentative spirit. He writes, “It is so easy to disagree and debate. There is no way we are always going to agree with everybody on everything. But if we do disagree we should have a certain attitude in the context of disagreement an attitude of charity. Disagreements can be over important issues. There is nothing wrong with a godly agrument..when it is to get at truth. But it is one things to have a good, healthy, positive argument. It is another to have an argumentative spirit that seems to thrive on disunity, discord, and conflict. Pride is seen where we are not interested in anybody else’s opinion and where we just assume that anybody that disagrees with us must be wrong. We need to be teachable…(and have) convictions based on a humble heart and humble attitude. Humility is being able to listen to people and give an honest hearing and consideration to what they are saying.”

Conclusion

Let us be a people of conviction. Let us be striving and holding to the truth with a humble spirit of grace and submission to Jesus’ book. Let us not be awash in the pools of friction and disbelief but plant our feet with surety that God’s Word is true. Let us give others the room to grow and grant them grace to learn not just from our words but from the character with which we carry the truths breathed out by God’s Holy Spirit.

Assurance

Nov 14

Posted by Guest Author in By Others | No Comments

Once of the greatest aspects of true Biblical religion is that it puts forth the position that a believer can have a true and full assurance of his personal eternal salvation. We can know without a shadow of a doubt that we have been chosen by the Father, purchased by the Son and sealed with the Spirit. Blessed God three in One!

That this is the Biblical position on assurance can be seen from the example, command, and precept of the Holy Scripture.

We find many examples in Scripture of believers who possessed an absolute assurance of their eternal salvation. They knew that they were strangers and pilgrims on earth who were on their way to the celestial city of heaven.

Did not Mary express her assurance that God was her Savior in Luke (1:46-59)?

Didn’t Stephen face death with the absolute confidence that his spirit would ascend to heaven at death to be with Christ in (Acts 7:56-59)?

Is it not true that the Apostle Paul give us in his epistles many expressions of his assurance in (Romans 8:38, 39; Philippians 1:21-23; 2 Timothy 1:12; 4:7, 8)?

We not only find the above examples of assurance in Scripture, but we are also commanded and exhorted by the apostles to seek personal assurance.

Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall (2 Peter 1:10)

And we desire that every one of you do show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end (Hebrews 6:11)

Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water (Hebrews 10:22).

God in His mercy has also given us a passage of full mention on the doctrine of assurance so that we might learn this doctrine by way of precept as well as by way of example and command. Of course, I am referring to the epistle of 1st John.

The Apostle John tells us his reason in writing his letter in 5:13.

These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life.

Some have thought mistakenly that John’s statement in I john 5:13 only referred to the two verses immediately preceding it.

And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.

He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the son of God hath not life.

But a close analysis of verse 13 reveals that this is John’s statement of purpose in writing the entire epistle. Thus the entire book was written in order to instruct Christians how to obtain a true and full assurance of their eternal salvation.
This understanding of 1 John 5:13 is further strengthened by the observation that throughout his epistle John is concerned to tell us by what standards we can judge ourselves and others to be true Christians. Thus we find him writing, “Hereby we do know that we know him, if…” (1 John 2:3, etc.)
John’s concern that believers would be assured on their salvation arose out of his desire that they could experience the fullness of joy and fellowship with God. Thus he states in 1 John 1:3, 4,

That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.

And these things we write unto you, that your joy may be full.

Assurance is not just a theoretical issue in Christian doctrine but it is one of the most important issues of the Christian life. It is the main stream from which flows the spiritual dynamic of the Christian faith. Until a believer possesses true assurance, can he really worship God as his Father with all his heart while doubting his salvation at the same time? Can he apply all the commands and duties to himself if he doubts his sonship? Can he give himself to service in the world if he does not know if he is yet saved? Can he excel in any aspect of Christian living if he does not know if he is a Christian? Will not his witness to the non-Christian be robbed of its power and effectiveness because of his own inner insecurity of salvation?

When God the Holy Spirit gives the precious gift of assurance to a believer, the change in the believers life is so powerful and dynamic that it is often confused with conversion, a deeper life experience or a second work of grace. Why? Assurance causes holy joy to well up in the believers heart and to put boldness and power in his walk and witness.

Because of all of the benefits to be desired from true assurance, the Westminster Confession states,

It is the duty of everyone to give all diligence to make his calling and election sure; that thereby his heart may be enlarged in peace and joy in the Holy Ghost, in love and thankfulness to God, in strength and cheerfulness in the duties of obedience, the proper fruits of this assurance (XVIII, III).

Each one of you here tonight should ask yourself, “Am I sure of heaven? Do I know that my sins are forgiven? Have I been born of God? Upon What grounds do I base my assurance of my own personal salvation? Am I really saved or deceived?”

Despite the multitudes of professing Christians in our day who would quickly respond that they have assurance of salvation, a true Biblical understanding of assurance is actually a rare jewel! It is a pearl of great price which is not owned by many in our day. Indeed, in the light of the present times, we are warranted in saying that the 21st century church has, by in large, suffered itself to be decked with the cheap imitation jewelry of false teaching on assurance instead of adorning herself with the beautiful jewels of Biblical truth.

Let’s begin with a call of self-examination for God’s Word tells us in 2 Corinthians 13:5,

Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you? –unless indeed you are disqualified.

Also in 1 Corinthians 11:20,

For if we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged.
32 But when we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world.

Self-examination is very neglected in these days and much denied and resisted. This has happened because self-examination is humbling to the fleshly nature of man. When we examine ourselves, we look into the mirror of God’s Law and see ourselves as we really are. This is a painful experience and many would rather go their way and forget their condition before God. James 1:22-25 states that only the true believer can abide in spiritual duty of self-examination.

22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. 23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man observing his natural face in a mirror; 24 for he observes himself, goes away, and immediately forgets what kind of man he was. 25 But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does.

With an attitude of self-examination, let us turn to a study of 1st John in order to discover true Biblical assurance.

I. The Test of Assurance

Throughout his letter, we constantly find the Apostle John giving us ways to test the reality of validity of a profession of faith. The tests at first center on one’s personal profession of salvation and whether or not you can consider yourself a true believer. At other times John gives us tests by which we examine the professions of others to see if they are truly saved.

First John calls us to examine our FAITH. And John stresses that there are two distinct areas of faith which we must examine to determine if we are the children of God or the children of the devil.
First of all, John tells us to examine the CONTENT of our faith. Faith in this sense is used in its noun form as the object of faith, i.e. the doctrines which constitute our beliefs.
John tells us that we must believe in the essential biblical doctrines concerning the person and work of Jesus Christ. Thus if you are believing, then you have passed the first test. John emphasizes this in the following passages.

4:2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,
3 and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.

4:14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world

4:15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God

5:1 Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him.

If a person denies the fundamental doctrines of the person and work of Christ, John says that their profession and assurance of salvation is to be rejected. Thus if you are denying what you should be believing, you have failed the first test.

2:22 Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.

2:23 Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

4:1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

4:3 and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.

Evidently, John would never have anything to do with universalism. For John’s doctrine does divide. It divides the children of God from the children of Satan. This division is good and must be urged all the more in a world which chooses to ignore doctrine and to seek unity in either service or experience over truth.
Second, John tells us to examine our COMMITMENT of our faith. This is faith used in its verb form, i.e. as the activity of believing. It is not enough to understand and give assent to orthodox doctrine but you must also put your personal trust and faith in Christ Jesus Himself as well as in the Biblical truths concerning His person and work.
It is also important to point out that the Apostle John always emphasizes the present tense character of true saving faith, i.e. faith is never viewed as a decision made in the past and now over with or completed.
Faith is an ever-present exercise of the soul in receiving all that Christ gives to spiritually hungry sinners and saints. Thus John says in 5:1,

5:1 Whoever believes (is believing) that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves (is loving) Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him.

Throughout the Gospel of John, John emphasizes this present tense character of faith in such places as John 3:16.

3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes (is believing) in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

The proper question is not, “Did you believe and receive Jesus Christ one time in the past?” John does not once refer to past decisions as having anything to do with true assurance.
The proper question is, “Are you believing in Christ right now? Are you trusting Him for salvation right now?”
What evidence is there in your life today- right now- that leads you to believe that you are truly saved?

The second general area to which John would direct our self-examination is the area of our LIFE.
John first calls upon us to examine the OUTWARD WALK of our life, i.e. to examine our lives to see if we are conforming ourselves to God’s Law.
John tells ust o stand before the mirror of the Law and to ask ourselves,

“Do I purposely attempt to keep God’s Law? Do I delight in God’s Law? Or, do I purposely disobey the Law and look upon it as grievous?”

Not only must we be believing what we should be believing but we must also be doing what we should be doing. Namely, seeking to conform out lives to the standard of the Law of Christ.
John is not demanding perfect obedience before assurance is attainable for none can say that they are without sin (1 John 1:8-10). He is talking about purposeful obedience, i.e. the intent of the heart, the general bent of the will and affections is toward God and His Law. In this sense he states that obedience to God’s Law is necessary for true assurance.

1 John 2:3 Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments.

2:5 But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him.

2:6 He who says he abides in Him ought himself also to walk just as He walked.

2:29 If you know that He is righteous, you know that everyone who practices righteousness is born of Him.

3:7 Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous.

3:9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

3:10 In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother.

3:18 My little children, let us not love in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth.

3:19 And by this we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before Him.

5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.

How many present day “converts” live a life of willful disobedience and rebellion against God’s Law? They want to live “under grace” and “not law” in order to feed their lusts. The Apostle John’s appreciation and presentation of the use of God’s Law in discovering the children of multitudes of profession Christians who abound on every hand. Oh, that God would raise up men who boldly proclaim the precious truths of 1st John.
John also tells us to examine our EMOTIONAL FOCUS of our life, i.e. to discover the objects of our desires and feelings.
As a wise theologian, the Apostle John does not deal with every emotion of the human heart but he deals with the two major emotions from which all other emotions flow: Love and Hate.

Love and hate are like the engine of a train. Where love goes, we see all the other virtues follow. If we love we will find all the elements of 1 Cor. 13 present on the train. In the same way, if we hate, all of the evil emotions follow where hate goes. If we hate then we find the works of flesh (Galatians 5:19-21). Thus John deals with the focus of ones love and hate to determine if one is truly a child of God. If we love what God loves and hate what God hates, the we have passed this test. Thus John says that the true Christians love fellow believers and hate the world of sin.

2:10 He who loves his brother abides in the light, and there is no cause for stumbling in him.

2:15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

3:11 For this is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another,

3:14 We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love his brother abides in death.

4:7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God.

4:11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.

4:12 No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us.

4:16 And we have known and believed the love that God has for us. God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him.

4:21 And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also.

But if we hate Christians and love the world, we reveal that we are not born of God.

2:9 He who says he is in the light, and hates his brother, is in darkness until now.

2:11 But he who hates his brother is in darkness and walks in darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.

2:15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

4:8 He who does not love does not know God, for God is love.

4:20 If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?

II. The Spiritual Application of Assurance

Self-examination even along the lines of Biblical tests of assurance, will not automatically give anyone assurance for assurance is the personal sovereign work of the Holy Spirit. John points this out in his epistle,

1 John 3:24 Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.

1 John 4:13 By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit.

But listen carefully, the Holy Spirit does not give assurance to those who fail to manifest the Biblical evidences of salvation. Instead, John combines the evidence of saving faith with the work of the Holy Spirit in 1 John 3:24.

The Spirit may give us assurance by making us realize that our life and faith meet the Biblical tests for it is “the Spirit who bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God” (Rom. 8:16). Thus no amount of personal introspection or mental syllogism will automatically produce true assurance. The sovereign Spirit is the Lord of Assurance and He gives it to whomever he wishes.

Q-Is assurance part of saving faith? Can a person be a Christian and still lack assurance?
A-1st John was written to believers to call them to have assurance of their salvation, so yes.

Q-Can we possess assurance and then lose it? And may we regain it?
A-Assurance is not a “thing” which is given to the believer and then he has it for good. Assurance is that personal ministry of the Holy Spirit to the heart of a soul of a believer. When we grieve or quench the Holy Spirit by unconfessed sin in our life, the personal ministry of the Holy Spirit in assurance may be taken away from us along with the other fruit of the Spirit (Eph 4:30)

The Theoanthropos – a hypostatic union

Nov 7

Posted by Duane Smets in General Info | 16 Comments

Introduction

Theos is Greek for God and anthropos is Greek for man so the theoanthropos is God-man, referring to Jesus Christ. Hypostatic means a state union between two substances, ousias, or natures in one unified person. The Westminster Confession describes the hypostatic union this way, “The Redeemer of God’s elect is the Lord Jesus Christ, who being the eternal Son of God became man, and so was and continues to be God and man in two distinct natures and one person, forever.”

Why is this important?

With a word like “hypostatic” I’m guessing that the tendency in our minds is to think that this is simply high theology, mere speculative information, that belongs to white bearded men stuffed in ivory towers. That this is an area of theology which really isn’t all that important but may be sort of fun for us to think about. But don’t let the language fool you. Words are helpful tools, I love big words because they are a way of short hand…you can say a lot in a very little amount of time or give good explanations, if the people you are talking to know what those words mean. So yes, words are helpful but they can also be very deceptive. They can deceive into thinking that the childlike simplicity of faith that Christ calls us to does not require that we understand some necessary things about who He is!

And that is my first point, that this doctrine matters and it matters a lot because if you get Jesus wrong it’s not just a “well, that’s my opinion” or “that’s my take” sort of thing but it becomes a hell thing. You can very easily end up having a Jesus that you like or that makes sense in your head and you can follow that false Jesus straight into the pit of hell and taste the lick of God’s wrath upon your soul for rejecting His Son. You don’t want that.

So my first point is that the hypostatic union is a salvation issue. Let me explain why. Now, I’m going to assume that you guys know your Bibles fairly well, and if you don’t that’s okay, but I’m going to assume you know your Bibles and thus some good Anselmian soteriology. What that means is that our problem as human beings is sin and that we need salvation from it, we need a savior. But how do we get a savior?

First let’s talk about sin. Sin is moral wrong. But it isn’t so much the acts, the specific things that we do which make sin. And it isn’t so much the condition of our hearts which give us certain affections leading us to immoral acts. So sin isn’t so much the acts themselves and it isn’t so much our motives for doing what we do but it is a personal betrayal or attack against the source of morality, God himself. Because morality isn’t something that God just made up but is something that flows out of His being, it is who He is, He is a holy God. And wronging a holy God is rightly deserving of an infinite or eternal (same thing) outpouring of justice or he isn’t really holy or the author of morality if he let’s infinite wrongdoing go unpunished. Because God is so good the proper response to our attack against the moral fiber of His being is eternal. So we need a savior who can somehow save us or spare us from having to own up to our sin and suffer eternal consequences. (see Romans 1:18-25)

Let’s talk a little about having a savior of humanity. Each human deserves eternal justice, that’s hell. The only way for a human to escape that is not to sin but every human sins both because of their own volition and first and foremost because of what happened with Adam in the garden Eden. So what I need is a human that doesn’t sin and one who can be another Adam who can be a representative for all humanity in order to undo all that has happened and effected everyone. I need a human savior whose sinless actions can effect everyone. (see Romans 5:12-21)

Now let’s put it together a little bit. Here is why I say the theoanthropos or the hypostatic union is a salvation issue. Because if you don’t have a divine Jesus he is insufficient to satisfy the eternal demands of justice that hangs over your head. And if you don’t have a human Jesus then he is insufficient to take my place on the cross and be my representative. So we must have one person that is fully human and fully divine or else there is no hope. (see Romans 3:25 and 1 John 4:10) We have to get this right. But those who have borne the name “Christian” have not always got this right and there are groups today who still cannot get past this issue and it is a stumbling block to their faith.

History and Errors

I want to take a few minutes to explain to you a few of the major historical controversies that arose concerning this issue and how godly men of old ended up ultimately dealing with it at a council called Chalcedon. There is something great about being part of a rich history of faith. That we have a Christian tradition and heritage and that there is an orthodox teaching is very significant because we are not following new teachings but are part of a historic time tested faith. These things we are talking about are not new issues. There have been many other occasions throughout history where men with beer in hand read scripture and wrestled and taught and talked about who Jesus really is and what he really has done for us and that is a great great thing. We stand in a privileged place to be able to read and learn from errors and mistakes and the responses to those heresies.

Truth throughout history is most often clarified by falsehood. Many times there have been new ideas that arise, some new take on something that raises an issue no one had thought of yet. And Christian leaders and teachers have then turned to the Scriptures and the new counterfeit claim clarifies with even greater precision what exactly Christianity is and that is a good thing even though it may be trialsome.

The other thing I want to say before we start talking about these different errors is that just because there is controversy over something does not mean that one particular view is not correct. I’ve quoted this passage of John Piper a few times at The Resolved Church where I preach, but he says this,

“We do not have the luxury of living in a world where the most nourishing truths are unopposed. If we think we can suspend judgment on all that is controversial and feed our souls only on what is left, we are living in a dream world. There is nothing left. The reason any of us thinks we can stand alone on truths that are non-controversial is because we do not know our history or the diversity of the professing church. Besides that, would we really want to give the devil the right to determine our spiritual menu by refusing to eat any teaching over which he can cause controversy?”

With that said let me expose you to a few wrong views of the person of Christ which were all rightly condemned as heresy by the leaders of the church. There are other erroneous teachings about Jesus but these are the most relevant to our discussion so I’ll try to keep it short and not explain all the circumstances and exchanges but just the outcomes.

The first is Arianism. Arius was the pastor of the church in Alexandria in the beginning of the fourth century and he began teaching that Jesus was God’s created son, who is like or similar to the Father but is not of the same nature as God the father. Jehovah’s Witness is Arianism’s bastard child whose teachings end up with a Jesus who is not fully God and thus unable to satisfy the eternal demands upon us.

The second is major error was Apollanarianism. Apollanarius was the pastor of a the church in Laodicia about halfway through the fourth century and taught that Jesus had a human body but not a human mind. So the human body was just sort of a container cell for the divine nature of Christ. This Jesus isn’t fully human because he doesn’t’ have a human mind or soul and is thus unable to be our human representative.

The third error is Nestorianism. Nestorius was the pastor of the church in Constantinople in the fifth century. He said that there were two separate persons, a divine person and a human person in the one body of Jesus so that these independent persons could operate contrary to each other. As a result of not having a unified person, this Jesus would be unable to be our human representative and unable to satisfy God’s just demands.

The last view is Eutychianism. Eutyches was the leader of a monastery in Constantinople through the fourth and fifth century and he said that the one person of Jesus Christ was a mix of human and divine creating a whole new nature that was neither fully divine or fully human but one new substance. This Jesus too would have been both unable to be our representative and save us from the wrath of God because he was neither fully God nor fully man.

So here is what happened. All these teachings are flying about, people getting excited about them thinking they somehow discovered some new thing and unlocked the secrets of the universe…and a bunch of the church pastors and leaders from all over get together at Chalcedon and draft this creed. Here is the Chalcedonian creed:

“We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [coessential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.”

“Since now we have drawn up this decision with the most comprehensive exactness and circumspection, the holy and ecumenical synod hath ordained, that no one shall presume to propose, orally, or in writing, another faith, or to entertain or teach it to others; and that those who shall dare to give another symbol or to teach another faith to converts from heathenism or Judaism, or any heresy, shall, if they be bishops or clergymen, be deposed from their bishopric and spiritual function, or if they be monks or laymen, shall be excommunicated.”

The geniusness of the Chalcedonian creed is that it doesn’t try and answer how Jesus is both fully God and fully man and is one person, but it sets boundaries for what must be believed about Jesus in order to have the correct Jesus. In essence it creates a box. On the top you have Jesus is true God. On the bottom you have Jesus is true man. On the left side you have Jesus is one person. And on the right side you have Jesus two natures are distinct. What you come up with in the middle is open but beyond those parameters is heresy. I love it. I think the Chalcedonian box is the best way to think about the hypostatic union of the theoanthropos.

About a hundred years ago a new teaching sprung up called the “kenosis” theory. They took the words “emptied himself” from Philippians 2:5-7 that says “Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not consider equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men”; and said that Jesus gave up some of his divine attributes while here on earth.

So let’s put our Chalcedonian box to work and see how a wise use of history can help us. I’ve got two distinct natures, got one person, Jesus is true man, but no…not fully God. So what of this interpretation of Philippians? I’m not going to do a full exegesis on the passage but it isn’t difficult to see how this theory violates the surrounding words, context, and plain meaning of the passage. What Jesus emptied himself of was the constant display his divine glory. The point is humility, in allowing his divine and infinite glory as the creator of the universe to be primarily shielded while on earth and to undergo the shame and suffering of being a man and the lowest of man a servant. Jesus’ subtraction was a subtraction by addition. He added something to himself but never gave up any of his divinity.

Scriptural Considerations (how this plays out)

Okay, heresy just makes me mad. So let’s move on and see how the hypostatic union plays out in a few scriptural issues or questions that arise.

One thing I want to point out before we get into these thing is the humanity and divinity of Jesus. No one today really questions whether there was a Jesus and whether Jesus was really a man. Some early groups called docetists did, who said Jesus was just a spirit that appeared as a man, who if walking in the sand would not leave any footprints. But the big question about today, the thing challenged most often, is Jesus’ divinity. But I don’t want to take a bunch of time proving to you with reason and scripture that Jesus is divine.

We could talk about attributes of what it means to be God and see how they were exhibited in Jesus life, or about Jesus being called I AM or LORD or the Son of God or the Creator. But if the Bible really is God’s revealed Word, even in every letter and stroke of the pen..then what the Scriptures plainly and clearly say is true. So I’ll just refer to a couple of Scriptures which should be sufficient. Even if something occurs just once in scripture it is enough.

So listen to John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.” And at the end of John’s gospel after Jesus’ has risen from the dead and after He appears to the disciples and Thomas comes up to him to inspect the holes in his hands and after seeing them he falls down and worships and says “My Lord and my God (Jn 20:28)” and Jesus tells Thomas that many will come to believe this even without seeing Jesus with their eyes (that’s us).

That should be sufficient for us to know that Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus is God. So let’s talk about how this one person, Jesus, both God and man at the same time, is born, grows up, is tempted, and is self-conscious.

It would be easy at this point just to chuck all of that to mystery. A lot of times when stuff like this comes up…like the trinity or like predestination, people just say, oh well…it’s just a mystery. Now, don’t get me wrong, because I love mystery, I’m all about mystery. I think in mystery there is something very great and wonderful about recognizing that our infinite God has an unending amount of things to teach us for eternity and before we know them are mysteries to us. Mystery is great, the gospel is in one sense is a great mystery. Rudoph Otto said God is a “mysterious tremendum.”

But we must let mystery be where God tells us. Yes, our finite little minds can only comprehend so much of infinite deity until we throw up our hands and cry mystery! But what we can comprehend is determined by what He has revealed to us. So my plea is to draw the line of mystery where Scripture does, no less, no further.

Okay, so how does all this play out according to Scripture? How does the theoanthropos come into the world, grow up, be tempted and be aware that He is both God and man?

First the virgin birth. At Christmas time talking about the hypostatic union seems appropriate because the Chrsitmas story begins with Jesus, God, becoming man in a manger. An angel comes to Mary, the mother of Jesus and says “The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God (Lk 1:35).” The virgin birth, that Mary conceive the baby Jesus without having sex with anyone is important because it tells us first that salvation comes from God and not human effort, it shows us the means God used to unite himself with humanity, and it makes Jesus humanity possible without inheriting sin.

One of Jesus’ names is properly “the redeemer” and the thing that makes the Christmas story so great is that we have a savior who was born to die. God came into the world to save us since we can’t save ourselves. God perhaps, I don’t know how, but perhaps He could have done something so that Jesus was the result of two humans having intercourse but then it would be very difficult for us to understand how Jesus was fully like God since his origin would have been like ours in every way. Likewise God could have sent Jesus into the world without any parents but then it would be very difficult for us to see how Jesus was fully human.

Most importantly the virgin birth makes it possible for a divine-human savior who did not inherit sin from the first man Adam like all the rest of us have down through the centuries. It may not be far from the truth that sin is passed through the semen but we hit a point of mystery and speculation there. Now, surely Mary was sinful. The Catholic church says no she wasn’t and couldn’t if she had God in her which is correct. However, listen to the words of Luke again, “the Holy Spirit will come upon you…therefore the child to be born will be called holy.” Thus the Holy Sprit sanctified or purified the womb of Mary from her sinfulness. The Catholic church’s solution does not help any, it only pushes the problem backward because at some point God had to purify some womb to allow for an unsinful person and we know from other Scriptures that only God is without sin, so Mary would not fit the profile.

Thus, the God-man is born but then we have this passage in Luke when Jesus is 12 years old which says that Jesus “grew in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man (Lk 2:52).” This helps us think about how being a God-man played out. How can a divine being who knows all things grow in wisdom?

Now think with me. Jesus is fully-God and fully-man and the purpose of him coming into that state is to redeem mankind and in order to do that he comes to be humiliated and to experience all human weaknesses and limitations. So Jesus has a mind that learns because learning is part of the ordinary process of what it means to be human. Does it mean he did not know everything and thus was not fully God? Not at all. He demonstrated his ominiscience on several occasions (woman at the well etc.). But he chose to be humiliated and to experience human weakness by allowing his human side to be taught.

So perhaps you ask how he experienced this. Essentially what we find is that Jesus has a twofold consciousness, a human consciousness and a divine consciousness and both are aware of each other because of their unity in one person. Not consciousness in the modern psychological sense of dormancy and discovery of some hidden inward virtue but rather ever present consciousness. And thus we find two wills, a human will and a divine will in Jesus. Wherein the human acts perfectly because of its union with the divine…it always follows and submits to the divine will. Example: the garden of Gethsemane.

This is the difference between doing theology from the top down vs. the bottom up. It is our inclination as humans to first attempt to conceive of Christology from the human perspective, but the human perspective is always secondary, we must start from the divine and from that dictate what human aspects properly fall in line. We need to do theology from the top down, where our first and primary concern is God and His glory.

Now, I say those things to prepare us for point at which the most questions arise and that is concerning the temptation of Christ. Theology from the bottom up thinks that for Jesus to be a high priest who sympathizes with our weakness (Heb 4:15) and who is truly human then he must know what it is like to have been sinful. However, this line of thought not only directly denies scripture’s multiple statements that Jesus was without sin throughout the entirety of his life but it also forgets that sinfulness is not part of true humanity. Sin was introduced to humanity in the garden of Eden after human beings were created, thus sin is not something that properly belongs to our nature, it is foreign and our spirits and bodies hate it.

If we say that Jesus was able to sin we also fail to recognize that one does not have to give into the temptation or even have the possibility of giving in for the temptation to be real and to be intense. Jesus’ divinity assured that his human humiliating experience of real temptation could not fail. As our perfect human example he drew from divine strength, though he could have used it carte blanké he chose to draw from his divine power in ways that we can emulate (prayer, fasting, reading God’s word, caring for God’s people).

Listen to what William G.T. Shedd says, “Because an army is victorious, it by no means follows that the victory was cheap one. The physical agony of a martyr is not diminished in the least by the strength imparted to him by God to endure it. In order to sympathize with a person, it is not necessary to have had exactly the same affliction. It is only necessary to have been afflicted. A different kind of affliction may make a man all the more sympathetic. Because Christ was sinlessly tempted, he feels a deeper and more tender sympathy with sinfully tempted man than he would had he been lustfully and viciously tempted.” The pain and agony, suffering, of one who withstands temptation is much greater than the one who gives in.

Conclusion

Okay, let’s conclude with a few personal applications and then some questions. Some personal applications I see are when we face difficult situations. We are then able to identify with the humanity of Jesus that we have someone who is with us and knows exactly what it is like to feel what we feel. Then because Jesus is divine we can find hope because he overcame those intense feelings and as a result we can find hope in the impartation of his strength to us.

As the disciple’s understanding of Jesus grew and deepened over the years they spent time with Him so shall ours as we have a growing realization of who Jesus truly is and we will come to worship Him with greater and greater allegiance as our king.

We can rejoice because Jesus is our mediator, our representative and substituted himself for us on the cross and died an eternal death. And not only that one act but all the acts leading up to it from the time of his manger through his youth and into his earthly ministry, all serve as an example and pattern of life for us both now and unto the day we die when we receive a fully redeemed and glorified body like Jesus’ resurrected body.

There are many facets in the beautiful diamond of Jesus’ humanity and divinity. May we cherish and pursue the theoanthropos with all our might.

Tags: , , , , ,

Gospel and State

Nov 3

Posted by Thomas Moller in General Info, Relationships | 1 Comment

To the community of believers, empowered by Gospel of Jesus Christ. An Appeal of Gospel Application in the voting process. Please forgive the length of this letter, it is not my intent to bowl anyone over with words, but any shortening on my part may be misconstrued. For a summation of this letter refer to the last page. Also please forgive any typos in this!

After talking to individuals within our church I have come to understand that there is widespread confusion as to how being faithful to Scripture, through political action, to help encourage city-wide shalom (peace), is attained. In other words I have seen a “disconnect” between how we view God, and how God informs the state, and therefore; how we think and vote in this civic process to attempt to maintain a unity between Scripture and state. Because of this disconnect, we don’t know how to enjoin God’s idea of city-wide shalom and our role in encouraging this through a vote, or whether this is even proper. As an elder of Kaleo it is my responsibility to shepherd you through this thought process and help you make an informed decision come election time. Well, election time is here, in fact it is tomorrow, and I know as a community we are woefully ill informed as to how Scripture and the state are to exist together, and how our role as Gospel practitioners has a voice in that relationship.

There are many issues we can speak to that illustrate the relation of Scripture and state, but the one that has spurred my thinking on this subject is California State Proposition 8, where the term “marriage” seeks a definition. The official ballot description of 8 is:

Read the rest of this entry »

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE