The Surprising God

Belong before believe?

2009-11-16T13:15:00.000-05:00

Jesus includes all humanity, including non-believers in his love and life. Is it not then appropriate for the church to embrace non-believers and include them in the life and ministry of the church? In short, is it OK for people to belong before they believe?

In answer, we need only look to what Jesus did. In calling and forming his first group of followers, Jesus reached out to several young men who did not yet believe in Jesus - though Jesus believed in them, and included them in his group (and thus in his ministry) before they came to believe in him as their Messiah, the Son of God.

In a progressively post-Christian world, this insight has particular relevance - people will often need to experience the loving, inclusive community of Jesus' followers before they come to believe that Jesus is their Savior and Lord. For more on this topic, click here to download a paper on the Mosaic Alliance Project written by Eric Bryant (pictured left). You can read more from Eric on his blog at www.ericbryant.org.

The continuing (glorified) humanity of Jesus

2009-10-29T16:42:00.000-04:00

Click here to read a helpful and succinct blog post at TheoCentric. It summarizes the orthodox, biblical teaching concerning Jesus' ascension (including his continuing, glorified humanity).

The vicarious humanity of Jesus

2009-10-20T14:55:00.002-04:00

One of our blog readers, Gerald McNaughton, wrote me wondering if by referring to Jesus' "vicarious humanity" we are saying that he participates in humanity only "vicariously." Here is my reply to Gerald's question:

To speak of Jesus' "vicarious humanity" is NOT to say that Jesus is anything less than fully human. Scripture declares that the eternal Son of God became human through his incarnation, and remains human forever (see 1Tim. 2:5). The resurrected, ascended Jesus is fully God and fully human (now glorified in his humanity). And the one who will return in glory will be fully God and fully human.

Jesus is the permanent union of God and humanity in his own person: one person with two natures. Thus to say that Jesus is the "vicarious human" is not to suggest that he is anything less than fully human. Rather it is a statement concerning the meaning of his humanity for the benefit of all humanity. Because Jesus in his divinity, is humankind's Creator and Sustainer, his humanity has profound import for all people everywhere in all times. In his humanity he is the unique representative of and substitute ("stand in") for all humanity. This is what we mean by referring to Jesus as the "vicarious human."

Here's what this means: what happened to Jesus in his humanity, happened to all of us. When Jesus (who became sin for us) died to sin, we all died to sin. When he rose victorious from the grave, we all experienced in him victory over death and sin. When the man (resurrected and glorified) Jesus ascended to heaven, we all ascended with and in him (Eph. 2:5-6).

Paul says that the lives of all humans are "hidden" in the life of Jesus (Col. 3:3) - we don't now fully see who we are in him, but one day we shall. And forever our lives will remain in him, because forever he remains human - the vicarious human - God with us and for us, as one of us - the one for the many, the many in the one.

A trinitarian perspective on evangelism

2009-09-27T08:53:00.014-04:00

If all people are included already in Jesus, why be involved in evangelism? The GCI Ministry Development Team addresses this question in a seminar titled, Relational Evangelism. The subtitle (see picture) speaks to our trinitarian focus: "Sharing with Jesus in relating with non-believers."

Evangelism from this perspective is not about bringing Jesus to people as though he were absent. Rather it sees evangelism in light of the truth that Jesus is present - including non-believers in his life, and relating to them in the Spirit, expressing the Father's love and grace.

Evangelism is about participating with Jesus in that relating. By doing so we declare the good news (which is the biblical definition of evangelism), by being the good news and then verbally sharing our own experience of Jesus (who is the good news). In short, we help people identify and come to know the Jesus who is already present in their lives. And we invite them to participate actively in Jesus' life - which includes participation in the community of Jesus' followers, the church.

Evangelism is thus a "three-way street" - the non-believer, Jesus, and we the believer - all relating one to the other through the fellowship of the Spirit. And this relating changes not only the non-believer (into a believer), it changes us too. Together we are being transformed into the image of Jesus, who in his humanity is the perfect image of God.

Evangelism from this perspective is not about heavy-handed tactics where we blow into town and unload a shotgun full of information and then depart. It's about being with Jesus who is already present and who remains. It's about entering into friendship with people - a friendship mediated by Jesus himself. And friends share their "best stuff" with friends. For us, the "best stuff" is Jesus and the difference he has made and is making in our life.

So, yes, there is a definite role for followers of Jesus in evangelism. But forget the idea of a "role" - it's not about play-acting; it's about real life lived in communion with the Father, Son and Spirit - a communion that embraces all humanity. It's our calling to participate with Jesus in that communion - including in evangelism. We are called to be those who declare the good news of Jesus, which is good news for all people. Enjoy!

Thomas F. Torrance - not an "ivory tower" theologian

2009-10-06T20:33:00.004-04:00

On this blog we've often referred to the writings of trinitarian theologian Thomas F. Torrance (pictured right). In this post, Mike Hale shares interesting information concerning Torrance's life - illustrating that he was no "ivory tower" theologian. Thanks Mike for sharing.

-Ted Johnston

Sometimes theologians are dismissed as living in the ivory towers of academia, far from the harsh realities of life. Thought of as having their head in the clouds, their theology might be dismissed as having little or no relevance in the "real" world, including the world of Christian living and ministry. However, the life of Thomas F. Torrance (arguably one of the premier theologians of the second half of the twentieth centur) stands in stark contrast to any such notion.

Elmer Colyer states that Torrance’s theology arose out of the evangelical and doxological life of family and the church, including pastoral ministry and personal experience in numerous life-threatening situations, beginning with his parents as a missionary family in China, and including attempts on his life in the Middle East, and as an army chaplain on the front lines of war in Italy, ministering the gospel to wounded and dying soldiers.

In “How to Read T.F Torrance,” Colyer states, “Experiences like these crystallized for Torrance that Christian theology has to be able to ground one’s existence amidst the most acute moments of life and death. Torrance later called theologies without this kind of existential depth “paper theology”-- interesting reading, but inadequate for living and dying.”

Following the death of Torrance in late 2007, his youngest brother David, himself a retired parish minister of the Church of Scotland, described numerous experiences that served as formative influences on T.F. and his theology.

T.F. was the oldest of six children born in China to missionary parents during turbulent times. Armies of warlords killed and plundered at will, and bandits and robbers frequented the treacherous mountain paths of West China. As a young teen, T.F. accompanied his father through those mountain valleys in distributing Scripture to peasant Buddhist farmers.
Constant danger made the family rely on God and continue in prayer, and there was joy and thanksgiving over answered prayer.
In 1927 West China was in a state of civil war and “the family saw people have their heads whipped off by swords in the streets. A missionary friend of our mother was beheaded in the street near our home in Chengdu.”
The British Consul ordered British subjects to leave and the family journeyed by boat down the Yangste to Shanghai as bullets were hitting the steel balustrade behind which the family was sheltering on deck.
In 1936 while still a student in New College, Edinburgh, T.F. traveled to the troubled Middle East after studying Arabic for use in visiting historical and archaeological sites. He traveled (often alone) through Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Turkey and Greece. Traveling by donkey with an Arab guide in the mountains of Moab, he was suddenly surrounded by armed Bedouins, and it took some while to persuade them he was not a Jew but a Scot.
Not long back in Jerusalem, he and seventy others were given rifles, police armbands, and asked to temporarily join the Palestinian Police, as Hitler had spread anti-Jewish propaganda and provoked an Arab revolt while most British troops were in Egypt, and not enough troops were stationed in Palestine. T.F. was continuously on duty for several weeks until he could be released to continue his educational travel and studies.
As anti-Semitism spread, T.F. kept running into hostility and kept being mistaken for a Jew. An attempt was made on his life when a knife was flung at him that sailed over his shoulder.
In Jordan while traveling in a taxi with two nuns, they stopped to pick up a Bedouin, who suddenly pointed a revolver at Tom and shouted “Jew!” Tom shouted in Arabic, “Not Jewish! Scottish!” and as the Bedouin hesitated, Tom and the driver were able to throw him out.
Traveling by train through southern Iraq, Tom was arrested on suspicion of being a Jewish spy. After questioning he tried to escape to find his way to the British Consulate but was caught and taken back to police Headquarters, was refused to see the British Consulate and was sentenced to death, until one of the judges was mercifully tempted to believe Tom was not Jewish and put him on a train to Damascus.
In 1943 he joined the army and served the next two years in Italy as a chaplain until the end of the war. He insisted that whenever possible he be with the soldiers in the most forward positions.
On one occasion when being shelled by enemy fire they were sheltered in a ditch. Tom’s helmet was touching the boots of one solder in front while his boots touched the helmet of the soldier behind. Both the soldier in front and behind were killed, and Tom was unscathed.
As chaplain, Tom was given his own army truck that he normally slept in. One night he chose to sleep outside behind a wall and that night a German shell passed through where his head would have normally been.

Tom’s work at the font lines, ministering to the wounded and dying, had strengthened his conviction of the need to preach Christ and the message of the cross, and persuaded him of the futility of any theology that does not present God as what we see in Jesus, a God who loves, is present with us in our suffering and forgives and redeems us. Tom Told his brother David that he felt God had protected him and had a purpose for his life, and in prayer and thanksgiving he rededicated his life to God for the furtherance of the Gospel. Years later in Tom’s lectures to students, he often mentioned the lessons that he learned as a chaplain on the battlefield.

In 1994 at the age of 80, T.F. traveled back to the remote mountains of China where his family had once served. Coming full circle, he was traveling as a Christian emissary carrying money for the rebuilding of churches destroyed by the communist takeover in 1935. Though a respected theologian’s theologian, he was still, and had always been, a minister of the gospel with a concern for serving and evangelizing all people.

What does trinitarian theology say about ministry?

2009-09-19T09:37:00.007-04:00

Some wonder if trinitarian theology leads to inactivity (if all are included already, why bother with ministry?). I address this question in a recently posted You're Included interview with Mike Feazell. Click here to watch online. For additional You're Included interviews, click here.

Announcing the Trinitarian Worship blog

2009-09-24T06:11:00.005-04:00

GCI annouced this week the launch of Trinitarian Worship - a blog for discussing the principles and practices of worship ministries grounded in and shaped by trinitarian theology.

The blog will be of particular interest to those who are involved in teaching about, planning and conducting the worship of the church.

Your participation is invited, and please let others know that it is available.

A trinitarian critique of "Walking with God" by John Eldredge

2009-09-05T07:28:00.004-04:00

John Eldredge (pictured right) of Ransomed Heart Ministries, is a popular evangelical Christian author of such books at "Sacred Romance" and "Wild at Heart." A reader of this blog offers in this post a critique of Eldredge's book "Walking With God." Though this critique is not intended to discount the positive benefits some have derived from Eldredge's books, it does object to some of the premises of "Walking with God" that seem in conflict with a trinitarian/incarnational understanding of the gospel. See what you think. And feel free to send to The Surprising God critiques (positive and negative) of this or other books as we reason together in the light of Jesus.

-Ted Johnston
moderator, The Surprising God

It seems to me that "Walking with God" [WWG] espouses a form of magical thinking by implying that God can be manipulated by human activity. Through a highly individualistic approach to Scripture (where every verse is construed to be about "me"), Eldredge seems to ignore what I believe is the primary thrust of Holy Scripture - the revealing of the Son of God, and his in-breaking into all of creation through his incarnation, life, death, resurrection and ascension.

Eldredge's stated purpose for WWG is to show that God knows us intimately and desires with each of us a conversational intimacy in which one has an ongoing "conversation" with God. To show how such conversational intimacy is attained, Eldredge offers his own experience, which was gained during a year in his life when he asked God questions and sought to hear God's answers.

Before I take exception to many of Eldredge's conclusions, I should point out that he does offer words of caution. On p. 49 he notes that sometimes he is not able to hear from God. He also notes that on important matters, we should always seek confirmation from others as to whether we have or have not heard God correctly. He also notes that God will never tell us to do what is contrary to Scripture or against God's own nature. These are good words of caution, but Eldredge seems to throw caution to the wind in making some rather bold and sweeping claims.

Eldredge's claims are largely based on his survey of nearly every Old Testament character that Scripture says God spoke with personally (Adam, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Elijah etc.). Eldredge concludes that we can (and, indeed, should) expect the same kind of personal communication with God if we will only do certain things in order to bring about such communication.

The primary flaw I see in Eldredge's argument is that he makes no mention of the Living Word of God talking and otherwise working with these OT servants in order to further the miraculous breaking into history of the Great-I-Am Creator within his creation to affect the entirety of history and prepare for the coming of the "Word made flesh," which means the renewal of all of creation.

Instead, Eldredge's focus is on hearing from God in his "still small voice" (as in I Kings). To help us get started, he cautions that listening to God in this way takes some getting used to - thus we should start with some practice - doing so by asking God "yes or no" questions, or asking about small things that don't matter too much (things that we are not emotionally wrapped up in, or are secretly or desperately wanting to hear about). For example, we might begin by asking God, "What do you want for me this weekend: should I go to the ranch (a vacation spot) or stay home?" He says he then repeats such questions quietly in his heart, and then pauses to listen for God's answer. Then he repeats the question, and listens again. He says that all during this asking and listening, it's vital to stay "surrendered" and thus open, and perhaps to say to God, "Lord - I will accept whatever it is you want to say to me" (pp. 30-31).

Eldredge's advice then continues: "If I don't seem to be able to hear God's voice in that moment, sometimes I will 'try on' one answer and then the other. Still in a posture of quiet surrender, I ask the Lord, 'Is it yes, you want me to go?' Pause. In my heart I am trying it on, letting it be as though this is God's answer. 'Is it yes?' Pause and listen. Or is it 'no, you want me to stay home?' Pause and let this be the answer. 'I should stay home?' Pause and listen again" (page 32).

It seems to me that this approach does not fit well with the concept of the mediation of Christ from above and below. In fact, I think Eldredge's "yes or no" approach sounds like using a heavenly Ouija Board - asking a question and waiting to see which way the pointer goes. In short, I see this as magical thinking.

Eldredge repeatedly references the 10th chapter of John, in which Jesus talks about the gatekeeper, and the Good Shepherd whose sheep know his voice, and the others that do not. In WWG this passage is used to show that Jesus wants to hear from us, and that we will learn to hear from him in answer to our prayers about all the details of our lives if only we open the gates of our heart and mind and listen for his voice, ignoring all other competing voices.

But Eldredge makes no mention in his exegesis of this chapter of the prophets (the gatekeepers) having already opened the way for Jesus (the Good Shepherd). He fails to note that the context of the passage is Israel's rejection of the prophets and now their Messiah. This rejection is principally the responsibility of Israel's spiritually blind religious leaders (such as the Pharisees). These false leaders failed to protect the sheep. And now comes Jesus, the true Shepherd, to lay down his life for the sheep and then take it up again (in his death, resurrection and ascension). He does this on behalf of all humanity (Jew and Gentile), making Jesus the Shepherd of all nations - one flock that the Father has entrusted to Jesus' care.

To me, this exegesis is a far more significant reading of John 10 than the one Eldredge offers. Moreover, this exegesis does not support Eldredge's use of the text to bolster his idea that God promises to speak with us on a minute-by-minute basis concerning every detail of our daily lives.

Several thoughts come to mind at this point. Certainly every believer desires a stronger relationship with God (and, indeed, trinitarian theology is about this relational life). And, no doubt, each of us can point to multiple times when God "spoke" to us in one way or another. But doesn't the notion of attempting to hear from God about every little detail of life tend to discount the need for living in faith - the need for faith in the perfect faith of Christ? And don't our lives often contain things that bring doubt and fear? Don't we sometimes face unresolved issues? And yet are we not reassured by Jesus' enduring promise to never leave or forsake us (even if it might "feel" that he has)? In this regard, I appreciate Christian Kettler's book, "The God Who Believes: Faith, Doubt, and the Vicarious Humanity of Christ."

I have seen some of the unintended consequences that come from a reliance on the approach advocated in WWG. It tends to create two groups of people - one claiming to hear regularly from God, and another that feels somewhat inadequate (even guilty) because they can't seem to hear from God in the same way as the other group.

I conclude by noting that there are no perfect books that contain perfect teaching, but I have significant reservations about WWG and thus do not recommend it. Any comments and insights readers of this blog might have would be appreciated.

What is our part in a face-to-face relationship with Jesus?

2009-09-22T16:53:00.000-04:00

Craig Kuhlman submitted the following questions related to our personal participation in the salvation we have in Jesus. I encourage your reply to his questions via "comments."

How can we maintain engagement (in face-to-face relationship with Jesus) without ebb and flow?
How do we continue to live in that relationship and bear spiritual fruit without becoming formulaic, or something "that must be done" by ourselves, when all was done by Him?
How can we maintain the Spirit's active regeneration that comes from face-to-face relationship with Jesus and yet avoid the impression we must "do" the spiritual disciplines, when Jesus has already done it all?
What is "our part," if any? And is it fair to say, that if there is any "our part," isn't that part initiated by Him to begin with?
If we have a part now, why didn't we have it from the beginning when we were dead in sin?

The Trinity Imaged in Our Humanity

2009-09-09T10:23:00.006-04:00

I'm reading Like, Father, Like Son, the Trinity Imaged in Our Humanity by Tom Smail (pictured left) who presently serves as senior visiting research fellow at Kings College in London. I think Smail does an excellent job of exegeting from a trinitarian perspective the scriptural teaching concerning humankind created in God's image. In short, his thesis is this: the image that humankind is given in creation and that is restored in redemption is the image of the Father, Son and Spirit - the tri-personal God revealed to us in Jesus.

He notes that we image God in two ways: in God's oneness (which is his three in oneness in perichoretic relatedness); and in God's threeness (the distinctive qualities and roles of each person of the triune God).

Smail then explores the implications of this triune image of God as it is expressed in and through various aspects of our humanity. Concerning the imaging of the Holy Spirit in our humanity (inclusive of human culture) he says the following on pp. 196-7:

...In every period and in every controversy [of church history] the creative Spirit has been at work and has led the Church to an outcome in which the gospel is indeed reinterpreted in a way that enables it to address the concerns of the culture but that is faithful to its origin in Christ. In him all human cultures are judged with the penetrating truth and the immeasurable mercy that define God's relationship to his people, and point them to transformations that will lead them toward a fulfilment that they cannot find immanently in themselves...We become aware of a process of sifting and discernment in which the Spirit is the hidden participant in the debate, sorting out what is valid and what is invalid in seemingly irreconcilable opinions and leading toward an ultimate solution in which the mind of God in a particular area of faith and practice can be more faithfully and relevantly apprehended and obeyed....In all these ways the Spirit whose being is characterized by the sovereign divine love expressing itself in terms of transforming creativity, reflects himself in the human activity that stems from the human life which is his gift (Gen. 2:7)...We fail to reflect what the Spirit does in what we do when our actions are not characterized either by creative freedom or transforming love, when we have neither the courage nor the imagination to engage with the status quo in hope of moving it toward God's purpose for it.

The incarnation includes all creation

2009-09-01T10:54:00.016-04:00

A key concept of trinitarian Christ-centered theology is that the incarnation encompasses all the created order. In the incarnation of the Son of God, the agent of creation, all the cosmos (not just humanity) is included in God's work of redemption - re-creation.

This view of the incarnation is expressed by Robert Webber (pictured right) in his book Who Gets to Narrate the World?

The book is cited in the September 1 issue of Preaching Now, noting that Webber (now deceased) attributes much of the secularization of Western culture to the church's shift away from this comprehensive view of the incarnation. According to Webber...

"God, in the incarnation, took up unto himself the entire creation, so that the creation redeemed by God himself is now to be once again, as in the Garden, the theater of his glory. The ancient church understood the impact of creation, incarnation and re-creation on all of creation, and that is why Christians were the leaders in the arts, in learning, and in the sciences. The Christian faith narrates the world and gives shape to culture-making and to all of civilization.

"The historic understanding of the incarnation as the assumption of the entire created order has been replaced by a view that in the incarnation God stepped into history to save souls. The focus is no longer on the cosmic work of God in history but on personal salvation. The language often used to describe salvation through Christ expresses this shift. We speak of God 'saving souls.' We focus then not so much on God who redeems the world but on Christ who saved me.

"Obviously it is true that God has saved me. We don't want to lose that personal touch. What I decry here is the loss of the cosmic vision, the idea that God's work of redemption narrates the entire world. . . . God redeemed all of life by the cross and empty tomb, so that when he returns to the earth not just souls but all of creation will be made perfect. . . .

"The assumption that the true me is a soul that lives inside of and is redeemed from the body to soar into some kind of ethereal realm is not Christian, it is Gnostic. And this is the primary spirituality of the New Age religion of our time. The current misunderstanding of the incarnation logically results in a split between the sacred and the secular because if Christ only redeems souls, the stuff of this world is unredeemable. This split in turn resulted in our loss of God's narrative of the world. Modernity began to see creation and all of life apart from God. The origin, meaning and destiny of the world found new gods in reason and science. Creation separated from redemption will always result in the secularization of life."

God is for us!

2009-08-24T06:51:00.020-04:00

The understanding that God is Trinity, tells us not only who God is, but also what God does. The good news is that God, who is relational love in his being, is relationally loving in his doing. Thus to know God as Trinity is to know the God who as love, and in love, saves us. To know God as Trinity is to know that God is for us!

This stunning truth is revealed in the person of Jesus, the incarnate Son of God who as one of us, is God with us and for us. This vital point is made well by Martin Davis in a recent post on his blog. Martin (pictured right) provides a careful analysis of the development of thought concerning God within Western Christianity - a development that, sadly, lost much understanding concerning God's triune being and relating. Thanks Martin for your contributions to this conversation.

Speaking of Life: trinitarian theology

2009-08-21T06:25:00.004-04:00

Click here to view a Speaking of Life program with Dr. Joseph Tkach (pictured left) that helpfully summarizes the trinitarian theology discussed in this blog.

For a listing of other Speaking of Life programs, click here.

The gift of faith - to whom and when?

2009-08-16T17:40:00.006-04:00

A reader of this blog submitted the following question:

Since salvation in Jesus comes through faith and this faith is God's gift, why does it seem that God is not giving this gift to everyone at this time?

Here is my reply:

I agree that the faith needed for salvation is, like salvation itself, God's gift - it's all of grace! Moreover, I understand from Scripture that this faith unto salvation is not our own - rather it is our sharing in the faith of the God-man Jesus who believes on our behalf, and shares his saving faith with us (see the KJV translation of Gal. 2:20, which rightly translates "faith in Jesus Christ" as "faith of Jesus Christ"). It is the faith of Jesus, the vicarious (representative - substitute) human, that unites humankind to God.

Both Calvinism and Arminianism (two dominant evangelical Protestant theologies) assert that the faith that leads to salvation is, indeed, God's gift and thus not to be viewed as a meritorious work of our own. The Christ-centered, trinitarian theology promoted in this blog agrees. But there are two related questions: Who is given this gift of faith? And, When is it given? These three theologies provide different answers:

Calvinistic theology asserts that God gives the gift of faith only to those who God has predestined to be saved. This idea is the outworking of the related Calvinist idea of a *limited atonement* - that Jesus died only for those predestined to be saved. It's also related to the Calvinist idea of *irresistible grace* - that those predestined to be saved will be called (given the faith that leads to salvation) and that this grace (like all forms of God's grace to us) will not be refused - it is "irresistible."

Arminian theology asserts that *all* will be given "prevenient grace" (John Wesley's term) that involves the Spirit's illumination ("opening of eyes") by which individuals are enabled to "see" Jesus and the choice set before them to either embrace or repudiate their salvation in Jesus. This gift of prevenient grace is extended to all, and thus all may (at least potentially) be saved.

Christ-centered trinitarian theology asserts that the one elected unto salvation is Jesus - the one vicarious human, who as the incarnation of the Son of God, the Creator, includes in his own life all humanity. Jesus has thus included all people in his election unto salvation and in his human faith toward God. Jesus, the "elect one," sends to all humanity the Holy Spirit to illuminate each mind to understand who he is (and thus who they are in union with Jesus). This gift of grace gives each person a meaningful, informed opportunity to add their personal "yes" to Jesus' pre-existing universal "YES" to God on their behalf. Why is their personal "yes" needed and invited? Because God will never force anyone to embrace, and thus personally participate in the salvation that is theirs in union with Jesus. Thus this theology preserves the ideas of human freedom and God's sovereignty - bringing both together in Jesus who, in his own person, is the union of God and all humanity.

This leads us to ask a third question: WHEN does the Spirit bring this illumination to each person? In my view, Holy Scripture does not say definitively - though it does give hints, which serve as the basis for speculation:

Some speculate that if God does not call people earlier, he will do so as they die (thus locating his call always before death)
Some speculate that God will call some (most?) when they stand before Jesus in the general resurrection (at the final judgment following Jesus' return)
Some speculate that the call may happen at any time - in this life or any time in the next

While I think it's OK to speculate, I suggest that we cannot speak with certainty concerning the issue of timing. However, we do know for sure that our salvation is in Jesus, and Jesus will make himself known to all, and through his Spirit invite and enable all to a personal decision - will they embrace Jesus? or will they repudiate him? That is a question for all to answer for themselves. But first they must hear of this Jesus who has answered already in his humanity on behalf of all. And God assures us that all will hear - and both the "how" and the "when" are in God's able and soveriegn hands. In the present time, God invites us as disciples of Jesus, to participate with the Spirit in making Jesus known far and wide. To do so is our privilege and calling.

I. Howard Marshall on penal substitution

2009-08-11T17:36:00.013-04:00

Among contemporary evangelical (including trinitarian) theologians, much (often heated) discussion continues concerning whether or not the idea of "penal substitution" is a valid way to characterize the atonement. Some sweep it aside as hopelessly flawed. Others assert its validity even if they object to certain ideas attached to its use.

An influential theologian in the second camp is I. Howard Marshall (at left), who argues for penal substitution, but against certain biblically indefensible ideas that have come to be attached to the concept.

In "The Theology of the Atonement" (click here to download), Marshall does a good job of surveying the issue from the perspectives of the Bible and contemporary theological literature. He places the issue in a trinitarian context without sweeping it aside. See what you think of his viewpoints. I think it would have been helpful if he had said more about the incarnation (Jesus' vicarious humanity), and the NT metaphor of adoption (our inclusion with Jesus).

Sanctification and glorification

2009-08-06T10:40:00.000-04:00

Warren Wilson sent the Surprising God Blog the following questions:

I've recently read some articles on the Internet that said that since Jesus had a fallen human nature but was able to completely avoid sin through the power of the Holy Spirit, that we who also have the Spirit should be able to become completely sin free in this life. That seems to overstate things to me and ignores that Jesus' situation and ours is not exactly the same. Am I correct in that?

Also, I've never seen anything written about the question of whether Jesus continues to have a fallen human nature in heaven? In other words, what effect does glorification have on fallen human nature? Are we doomed to continue to have fallen human nature for eternity, even after we're glorified?

Thanks Warren for your questions. I agree that the human nature assumed by the Son of God through his incarnation in the person of Jesus is the *fallen* nature we all have. By taking on our nature, Jesus redeemed us as the fallen sinners that we actually are. And thus our redemption in Jesus is complete - body, mind and spirit.

Some object to the idea that Jesus had a fallen human nature - they think that this means that Jesus sinned. Yet scripture testifies (2Cor. 5:21) that "God made him [Jesus] who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." By taking upon himself our sin nature, and beating it back moment by moment ("tempted in every way, just like we are" - Heb 4:15), he brought, within himself, sanctification to our fallen nature, never once succumbing to the temptation to personally commit sin. In Jesus, our human nature, has been redeemed; re-created; made pure and holy.

Does it follow that we, with a fallen nature like Jesus had, and led by the same Spirit that led Jesus, should experience his perfection of behavior (his sinless life)? Christians have long asked this question and some have answered "yes." They have thought that there could (or at least should) come a time in this life when followers of Jesus would achieve what some call "entire sanctification" - coming to the place where a person would no longer ever commit an act of sin.

The problem with this view is that it does not line up with our experience (what Christian has ever experienced a life free from all acts of sin and from all sinful thoughts?), nor does this view line up with Scripture (where do you read, for example, of Paul or Peter proclaiming that they no longer commit any sin?). The confidence of Christians is that in Christ, they are forgiven of all sin, and their hope is full deliverance from the stain of sin in glory (even as they progress in that direction now). Indeed, we understand that it is in our *glorification* with Jesus that our *sanctification* through Jesus will be made complete. In the future resurrection of our body at Jesus' return, we will experience for the first time the full, unstained perfection of our life in Christ in body, mind and spirit.

And that brings me to your last question Warren. Indeed, in our bodiliy resurrection (our glorification), we will be freed entirely from sin. We will experience then the fulness of Jesus own perfected (non-fallen) humanity - the humanity of his glorification. That perfection, which is ours in Jesus is now "hidden in Christ" (Col. 3:3), to be revealed in all its fullness when we stand glorified with our Lord at the eschaton. So Jesus, the glorified human now in heaven, has a human nature that is not fallen, and in that day, so shall we.

Come Lord Jesus!

Jesus and God's judgment

2009-07-31T05:38:00.011-04:00

When it comes to the topic of the final judgment, many have formed opinions based on what I feel is an inaccurate reading of Revelation, leading them to conclude (in error) that when God comes to earth at the end of time he comes as an angry, hostile and vengeful God.

But through a careful reading of Revelation, we are introduced to the Lord, the God of covenant grace, who in the person of the God-man Jesus, returns to earth as the one he truly is - the Savior of all mankind.

This Jesus who returns is the same one we met in the Gospels who walked the roads of Galilee as a "friend of sinners"; who died on Calvary's cross to save sinners; and who cared for his doubting disciples after his resurrection, promising to be with them "always, unto the very end of the age" (Mat. 28:20) as they reach out with Jesus' love to all the world.

It is this Jesus, God's Lamb, who in Revelation comes to earth not to destroy, but to save, and his personal presence on earth at the end of time constitutes God's decisive and final judgement on all evil. For in the personal presence of this Lamb of God, all evil melts - it turns on itself and self-destructs. Indeed, the long anticipated final battle between good and evil (Armageddon) is over before it even begins.

In Revelation, it is God’s saving love in the personal presence of the God-man Jesus, that constitutes the basis of God's judgment on all humanity. God's love and final judgment thus go hand-in-hand. T.F. Torrance makes this point in “The Christian Doctrine of God.”

…The love of God…functions unreservedly and equably as love even in the judgment of the sinner. It is his loving of the sinner which resists his sin that is his judgment of the sinner…the total self-giving of the self-affirming God in love is and cannot but be the judgment of his love upon the sinner. He does not hold back his love from the sinner, for he cannot cease to be the God who loves and loves unreservedly and unconditionally. Is that not why St. John in the Apocalypse could speak of the wrath of God as ‘the wrath of the Lamb” (Rev. 6:17; 11:18; 16:1; 19:15), for his wrath is the total unrestrained self-giving of God’s love upon the Cross which he does not withhold even from those who reject it, and which is and cannot but be wholly opposed to evil and sin? And that is surely why St. Paul could speak of his ministry of the Gospel as a savor to one of life unto life and to another of death unto death. In God there is no Yes and NO, but only Yes (1Cor. 1:19f; 2:15f). It is upon the Yes of God’s eternal love for us that our salvation rests, but that Yes is also the judgment of those who perish. Why people may want to reject the love of God is quite inexplicable, but whether they believe in Jesus Christ as the incarnate love of God or refuse to believe in him, the love of God remains unchangeably what it was and is and ever will be, the love that is freely, unreservedly and unconditionally given to all mankind (p. 246).

N.T. Wright makes a similar point in “Surprised by Hope,” where he comments on John 5:22-30:

…The future judgment is highlighted basically as good news, not bad. Why so? It is good news, first, because the one through whom God’s justice will finally sweep the world is not a hard-hearted, arrogant, or vengeful tyrant but rather the Man of Sorrows, who was acquainted with grief; the Jesus who loved sinners and died for them; the Messiah who took the world’s judgment upon himself on the cross. Of course, this also means that he is uniquely placed to judge the systems and rulers that have carved up the world between them, and the New Testament points this out here and there [e.g. John 16:8-11].…Jesus [in the Spirit]…confronts the world in the present, and will do so personally and visibly in the future. He is the one to whom every knee shall bow (Phil. 2:10-11) as well as the one who took the form of a servant and was obedient to the death of the cross (Phil. 2:608). Indeed, as Paul stresses, he is the first because he did the second” (pp. 141-143).

Preaching grace

2009-07-21T09:16:00.003-04:00

In "Christian Preaching: A Trinitarian Theology of Proclamation," Michael Pasquarello writes,

"Perhaps the most offensive and scandalous aspect of speaking the Word of God in our time may be the notion of grace, which announces that from beginning to end our human lives are not of our own making, management, or control. In learning to confess that we are sinful creatures of a gracious God, we discover that our lives are constituted as gifts rather than possessions, whose purpose is to know and love our Creator.

"In Christian worship, then, we acknowledge our grateful dependence according to the particular wisdom displayed in the self-giving of Christ, through which the Spirit evokes responsiveness and receptivity to the God who speaks both creation and salvation. Thus, in a time that calls for a strong, robust message of faith, hope, and love, there is no 'deeply felt need' more urgent than proclaiming the 'foolishness' of the cross - the power and wisdom of the gospel that creates a people of loving praise and glad obedience in whom the Spirit bears witness to the flourishing of humanity before God."

More on theology and music

2009-07-07T21:08:00.021-04:00

In a post last March, I mentioned the insights of theologian -musician Jeremie Begbie, who explores the interplay of theology and music.

In a new video, Begbie discusses the interplay of theology and the arts - music in particular. Begbie understands that the creativity expressed in composing and playing music, is a way in which we share in the free yet ordered (perichoretic) communion of the Father-Son-Spirit.

God shares this communion with us in and through the Son of God incarnate, Jesus Christ, who in his own person is the union of our humanity with God's divinity. This permanent union opens to us, through the indwelling Spirit, the opportunity for our participation in what Jesus, the God-man, is doing in the Spirit within our world.

Music is one of his masterful, creative tools. It is our joy to join with him, and in so doing to learn more about the harmonies of his union with all the cosmos. Play on!

New booklet on trinitarian theology

2009-07-05T07:37:00.008-04:00

Grace Communion International (sponsor of this blog) recently published a booklet titled "A Brief Introduction to Trinitarian Theology" Click here to read it online (and the online version tells you how to order a printed copy).

This booklet presents key precepts of Christ-centered, trinitarian (sometimes called "incarnational") theology; summarizes the history of the development of this theology; and answers typical questions and objections.

Theology speaks to all of life

2009-07-02T16:33:00.014-04:00

Mention the word theology and some people yawn while others run for the door. For many, theology is "ivory tower" stuff with little relevance to "real life."

How sad, for true theology (God knowledge) speaks directly to the ultimate "real life," which is the triune communion of the Father-Son-Spirit that they are sharing with all humanity in and through their union with all people (indeed the whole cosmos) in the person of the God-man, Jesus Christ.

Trinitarian, incarnational theology addresses this abiding union of grace, which is the "truth of all truths." It is the "logic" - the "reality" by which we rightly address all other issues/truths including the nature of humanity (anthropology), the nature of the church (ecclesiology) and the nature of Christian mission (missiology):

1. Anthropology. We understand that humankind is united to the triune God through the incarnation of the Son of God in the person of the man Jesus. Understanding who God is, leads to a right understanding of humanity as the accepted, forgiven and dearly loved children of God.

2. Ecclesiology. We understand that the church is the assembly of all who, through the ministry of the Spirit, have come to understand and embrace their identity as God's children, and have committed to following Jesus as one of his disciples.

3. Missiology. We understand that God the Father has a mission, that he sends Jesus, in the Spirit, to fulfill within our world. Jesus then sends the Spirit to call and gift his church to participate with him as his "Ambassadors" in fulfilling the Father's mission. In that sense, the church does not have a mission, rather, the Father's mission has a church. Our calling to mission is not to a mission "for" Jesus, but "with" Jesus. We join him in what he is already doing in our world - which is multiplying his disciples (followers). Indeed, God (like a good father) disciplines ("disciples") those he loves, and God's discipling is fully relational. He disciples by sharing his life and love with others. Thus our call to share in the Father's mission with Jesus is a call to be "place-sharers" with Jesus, in the Spirit. This is the ongoing, incarnational loving and living (ministry) of Jesus.

For more on mission as "place-sharing" I highly recommend the book Revisiting Relational Youth Ministry by Andrew Root. As the title suggests, it focuses on youth ministry, but its principles are applicable to all types of Christian ministry.

Mourning the loss of Ray Anderson

2009-06-24T08:00:00.007-04:00

We are saddened to learn that Professor Ray Anderson died on Father's Day (June 21). As a trinitarian-incarnational minister, theologian and professor, Anderson made many important contributions to our understanding of the life and love of our triune God into which we are adopted in Jesus.

To read an obituary on the Faith and Theology blog, click here. To view a tribute video, click here.

To listen to two "You're Included" interviews with Anderson click here for interview #1 and here for interview #2.

Can you be "included," in Christ, yet not "have the Spirit"?

2009-06-13T17:10:00.025-04:00

In Rom. 8:9, Paul writes: "If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ." How does this statement square with many biblical statements that testify to the present inclusion of ALL humanity in God's love and life through the representative - substitutionary (vicarious) humanity of Jesus? Also, what does Paul mean by "have" the Spirit? And, can a person be included in Jesus, yet not "have the Spirit"?

The reality presented in Scripture (and I am indebted here to helpful comments from Dr. Joseph Tkach and Dr. Gary Deddo), is that the Spirit is always working with everyone (believers and non-believers alike). However, it is believers who are both aware of and receptive to the Spirit's work. While all people have been reconciled to the Father through Jesus' vicarious humanity, not all believe - and thus not all actively participate in God's new creation of humanity in Jesus.

Thus there is a difference between believers (those who embrace their inclusion in Jesus) and those who have yet to do embrace what they have already been given. So when Paul says, “If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ,” we understand him to mean that though all are included (loved, forgiven and accepted by the Father), not all believe this, and thus not all actively participate in the life that is theirs with God, in Christ.

Paul tells us in Rom. 5:10 that we were reconciled to God "when we were God's enemies" - not when we "turned to God" in belief. Reconciliation on God's part toward us occurred prior to any personal response. In Adam, all humans were God’s enemies, but now through Jesus' life, death, resurrection, ascension and his pouring out of the Spirit on all flesh, all humans are included in Jesus (the last Adam) and are thus no longer God’s enemies; no longer condemned; but reconciled; forgiven; accepted; and unconditionally loved as God's dear children. That is the gospel (the good news).

In Rom. 9, Paul exhorts believers (those who embrace God's reconciling work, in Jesus, on their behalf) to actively, through the Spirit, participate in their reconciliation (inclusion) in Christ. This is what Paul means when he writes of "walking in the Spirit." All are included, but not all walk in the Spirit. In that sense, not all “have” the Spirit - it is not the defining, dominant reality of their lives. Indeed, to "belong to Christ" is to believe, receive, and through the Spirit, actively participate in Christ's continuing human life.

But note: we can't share what we don’t already have. Our belief (faith and repentance) does not create our reconciliation (our inclusion; also referred to by Paul as our "adoption") - it does not create our true identity as God’s children. Rather, we believe because we are already included/adopted. Through belief, we come alive to what is already true. Like the prodigal son, we turn our hearts to the home we already have with the father who already loves and accepts us.

Note also that no one is able to declare that Jesus is Lord, except by the Spirit that draws them to the Son. Thus personal belief is, itself, a sign of the Spirit's presence with, and work in, that person prior to their belief. Then as a believer responds to the Spirit's work, there are deeper "fillings" of the Spirit in their life of growth in Christ. This filling is not some sort of mechanical, automatic, cause-and-effect process - indeed it is part of a dynamic, ongoing relationship with God, made possible for us by Jesus as, in the Spirit, he shares with us his transformed humanity. Jesus opened the door for all of us to be indwelt by his very Spirit.

Irenaeus on the Trinity

2009-06-09T16:00:00.021-04:00

In about A.D. 180, Irenaeus (pictured at left) wrote the following important statement concerning the triune God (quoted from "The Christian Theology Reader" by Alister McGrath, p. 93).

We find here the basic elements of the doctrine of the trinity. Note, in particular, the distinct role of each member of the Godhead and its relationship to all of humanity.

This is the rule of our faith, the foundation of the building, and what gives support to our behavior.

God the Father uncreated, who is uncontained, invisible, one God, creator of the universe; this is the first article of our faith.

And the second is: The Word of God, the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who appeared to the prophets according to their way of prophesying and according to the dispensation of the Father. Through him all things were created. Furthermore, in the fullness of time, in order to gather all things to himself, he became a human being amongst human beings, capable of being seen and touched, to destroy death, bring life, and restore fellowship between God and humanity.

And the third article is: The Holy Spirit, through whom the prophets prophesied, and our forebears learned of God and the righteous were led in the paths of justice, and who, in the fullness of time, was poured out in a new way on our human nature in order to renew humanity throughout the entire world in the sight of God.

Are Jesus and his Father of one mind?

2009-06-02T16:15:00.051-04:00

Sadly, some theologies present a Godhead that is divided in mind and heart. On the one hand, Jesus is presented as the "friend of sinners." But on the other, God the Father is presented as angry with sinners - so "holy" in fact, that he refuses to be in their presence.

But trinitarian, Christ-centered theology declares the gospel to be the truly good news that it is for both believers and non-believers. This good news is grounded in the truth that the Father, Son and Spirit are of one mind and heart in their unconditional love for all humanity.

I think it was TF Torrance who wrote, "There is no other God behind the back of Jesus." The point is that there is not another God who is unlike Jesus. God the Father, just like Jesus, loves and embraces all humanity, having acted in love (in and through Jesus' incarnation, life, death, resurrection and ascension), to include us all in his life.

Sadly, many people (non-Christians and Christians) think that the Bible teaches a gospel that is more bad news than it is good. Their common misconception of the gospel (and of God) is spoofed in a YouTube cartoon (click here to view) - it's pretty funny (if a bit profane). I laughed - but then I cried - wishing that the non-believing central character (pictured above) would come to understand the actual gospel of Jesus that the triune God really does love, want and accept him. I'd be interested in what you think of the cartoon.