Trinity: unity AND diversity

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Trinitarian orthodoxy teaches that the members of the Godhead are equal in nature but distinct in their roles.

In the recent debate about the doctrine of the eternal subordination of the Son, critics are in danger of over-emphasising the first of these, whereas advocates are at risk of placing too much stress on the latter.

This is not, of course, the only area in theology where a tension has to be maintained between two (or more) truths that human reason cannot fully reconcile. …

Subordinationism: what is it?

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Eternal subordination of the Son ought to be (but is not always) distinguished from the heresy of subordinationism.

Subordinationism has been defined as,

‘A doctrine that assigns an inferiority of being, status, or role to the Son or Holy Spirit within the Trinity.’ (R. C. and C. C. Kroeger, “Subordinationism,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 1st and 2nd editions)

This, however, is a little too broad, because (setting aside the word ‘inferiority’) it implies that any kind of subordination is to be regarded as heresy.…

Eternal Submission of the Son: the main issues

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Early on in the debate which erupted in mid-2016, Andrew Wilson attempted to tease out the main issues at stake.

Here are headlines:

  1. Is the Eternal Functional Submission of the Son (EFS) taught in Scripture?
  2. Is the Eternal Functional Submission of the Son novel?
  3. Is the Eternal Functional Submission of the Son heterodox, or even heretical?
  4. Is there a separation of the divine will?
  5. Does the Eternal Functional Submission of the Son imply that Christ only had one will?
…

Grudem: the case for eternal submission of the Son

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Wayne Grudem states that

there are no differences in deity, attributes, or essential nature between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each person is fully God and has all the attributes of God. The only distinctions between the members of the Trinity are in the ways they relate to each other and to the creation. In those relationships they carry out roles that are appropriate to each person.

(Systematic Theology, 1st ed., p251; 2nd ed.,…

Eternal subordination not a novel doctrine

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Critics of the doctrine of the Eternal Subordination of the Son (such as Kevin Giles and Liam Goligher) are very ready to assert that it is a novel doctrine: it is inconsistent with the historic creeds of the church, and whenever, in the past, it has reared its head it has been summarily rejected.  This has led Goligher and others to accuse those who subscribe to this doctrine of heresy, and of having disqualified themselves from teaching office in the church.…

Eternal submission: Liam Goligher says “No”

Walking With Giants Posted on by

In the middle of 2016, Liam Goligher fired the first volley in a skirmish prompted by Wayne Grudem’s and Bruce Ware’s advocacy of the doctrine of the Eternal Subordination of the Son (ESF).

I offer some extracts from Goligher’s piece, along with a few comments of my own.

‘Is the Trinity no more than a social program for the world and the church? Is the eternal life of the Trinity hierarchical or egalitarian? Are there three minds, three wills, and three powers within the Godhead?

…

Some theses on the Father and the Son

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Fred Sanders, a systematic theologian with a special interest in the Trinity, has jotted down 18 Theses on the Father and the Son.

I found the following extracts helpful, particularly in relation to discussions about the ‘eternal subordination of the Son’.

The reason we know the Father-Son-Holy Spirit distinction is because the Father sent the Son and the Holy Spirit. The distinctions among the three persons were revealed in the act of the Son and Spirit coming to be among us for our salvation.

…

The Bruised Reed and Smoking Flax

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Some choice extracts from this precious work by Richard Sibbes (1577-1635)

In time of temptation, misgiving consciences look so much to the present trouble they are in, that they need be roused up to behold him in whom they may find rest for their distressed souls.

What a support to our faith is this, that God the Father, the part offended by our sins, is so well pleased with the work of redemption! And what a comfort is this, that seeing God’s love resteth on Christ, as we pleased in him, we may gather that he is as well pleased with us, if we be in Christ!…

5 reasons why I’m not keen on reverential capitalization

Walking With Giants Posted on by

‘Reverential capitalization’ refers to the practice of capitalizing, for reasons of reverence or respect, the initial letters of words that refer to the deity.

Capitalization of nouns, in written English, does not convey respect or reverence.  Rather, it conveys specification.  We capitalize both Churchill and Hitler, both Pol Pot and Gandhi.

But what about capitalizing personal pronouns that refer to God?

Well, I think it is unnecessary and unhelpful, here’s why.

1. There is no biblical mandate for it

Biblical Hebrew does not distinguish between upper-case and lower-case letters, and the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament were written in all capital letters.…

9 things you didn’t know about the Star of Bethlehem

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Well, actually, you know all this stuff already if you’ve read my various notes and articles.

But here’s a convenient summary from Colin Nicholl, whose book The Great Christ Comet explores the topic in much more detail.

I here reproduce Nicholl’s article from The Washington Post in its entirety.

1. The Star was historical

Some have claimed that the Bethlehem Star is nothing more than a myth invented by the early Christians. But the latest scholarship suggests that Matthew’s Gospel is a biography that strives for historical accuracy.

…