Accepting False Teaching

Yesterday I mentioned some of the heresies the church has experienced during it's existence, some of which fuel what I believe to be false teaching today (I think Jehovah's Witnesses have roots in Arianism).

What is it that drives people to develop or follow a false teaching?

Is it pride and arrogance? Is it ignorance? A desire to be a people pleaser? (That last term comes from the sermon my pastor did yesterday).

What do you think motivates false teaching about the Trinity and what can be done about it?

How do we speak the truth with love (Ephesian 4:15) to win people to Christ without being prideful and arrogant ourseves, without being incompetent about it?

My Favorite Heresy

OK, I do not have a favorite heresy but catchy blog post titles attract readers.

What I want to ask is there a theological position that has been held to be heretical that you struggle with? Ever had doubts about what is called heresy, thinking it made some sense?

As far as the Trinity goes, let me briefly describe a few of them:

• Arianism-the Father created the Son (the only begotten Son), and created all else through Him.
  
• Modalism-God is one Person who appears in three different modes depending on times and circumstances.
  
• Sabellianism-God as Father in Old Testament, Son in the Incarnation, Holy Spirit after Pentecost.
  
• Adoptionism-God adopted a human Jesus, deified Him at some point and made Him Lord over all.
  
• Subordinationism-Jesus is eternal and divine, but not equal to the Father
  

These are the briefest of summaries. We could go on, both on the details of each position and coming up with even more positions. Another topic for another day, maybe.

Does it trouble you that any of these are held to be false?

Do you have a favorite heresy?

Weekends Off

A Trinity of 3 will not post on weekends from here on in. Need time to reflect and recharge. See you all Monday with a new post.

What is the Trinity? (Part II)

Is the Trinity a hierarchy? Is the Trinity co-existent, co-equals?

If one was to make an argument for a primary partner, a first amongst equals, I think one would have to argue for the Father to fill that role. I say was to make or would have to argue because the concept of leadership thought of in human terms cannot be expected to fit into a divine relationship. Yet there are intriguing passages in Scripture that would lead you to believe a hierarchy is there:

saying, "Father, if You are willing, remove this cup from Me; yet not My will, but Yours be done."
Luke 22:42 (NASB)

In the garden of Gethsemane, Jesus clearly indicates a desire (and a struggle with complying) to fulfill the Father's divine will over that of His. In this case, I believe it to be His human will that is struggling against the Father's will, Christ in His divinity would in my mind have the same will as the Father. But that may be a point we could debate.

But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.
John 14:26 (NASB)

In the Upper Room Discourse, Jesus seems to indicate that the Father is directing the activity of both the Son and the Spirit. They may be on equal terms, but the Father appears to have primacy here.

But there are many passages that indicate the equality that exists amongst the Trinity:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.
John 1:1-2 (NASB)

Here is one of many indicating the side by side nature of the Trinity in the relationship of Jesus to the creation. '

What are your thoughts about it? Is there a hierarchy? A primacy to the Father? Is there an equality, that doing the will of one member of the Trinity is a free and voluntary action by another member?

The Holy Spirit is Not a Silent Partner

Getting your mind around the concept of the Holy Spirit has got to be even harder than grasping the concept of the Father and the Son.

It sounds a little like the divine example of a double negative:

"God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."
John 4:24 (NASB)

OK, God is spirit. But here we are talking about God, not just the Holy Spirit. In this passage, it appears that the Trinity, not just the Holy Spirit is being talked about. But wait, there's more:

Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
Matthew 28:19 (NASB)

Clearly, the Holy Spirit is a person within the Trinity, God is spirit, but is also the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The use of the term spirit is a way to describe the unity (God is spirit) but also the diversity (the Father, Son and Holy Spirit) within the Godhead.

So, the term spirit refers to God as a divine entity, and the Holy Spirit, as a distinct member within the Trinity. There is no passivity to the Holy Spirit; while there are no words spoken in scripture by the Holy Spirit, there is a clearly active person within the Trinity embodied in the Holy Spirit:

The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and ^C)">the Spirit of God ^D)">was moving over the surface of the waters.
^{Genesis 1:2 (NASB)}

In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words;
Romans 8:26 (NASB)

The Spirit was there at the creation, the Spirit was there to aid and comfort, instruct and encourage when Christ returned to the Father. A very active member of the Trinity.

Not speaking, but not silent either.

In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words;
Romans 8:26 (NASB)

Not speaking, but not silent either. Some times, the only way with something to be said on our behalf.

How else have you pictured the Holy Spirit in your readings through Scripture?

What do you have to say about this not so silent partner in the Trinity?

One of the Things That Bothers Us About God

Laurie, in a comment yesterday mentioned both John Piper and Jonathan Edwards and a concept of God knowing and having perfect knowledge of His own glory and a desire to share that with us.

As we were made in His own image as noted in Genesis 1:27, it is clear from the beginning of Scripture that we are to share in that relationship, to know that joy, as God in triune form knows it.

My thought for today is going in a different direction: do some of us reject God because we cannot fully experience the knowledge of that love fully as sinful human beings, and in our pride and arrogance we reject what we cannot fully have?

Are we moving away from the bliss of the perfect fellowship of a divine relationship because we cannot experience it fully, in all it's manifold complexity as finite beings?

Are we that impatient that we would walk away from eternal peace because we cannot experience it in the here and now?

I would love to hear your thoughts on this.

How Close is Close?

As I think about the closeness of the members of the Trinity, I realize I can never have a human relationship that is as close as the Trinity has within itself.

But I wonder how close is close? When I try to think about the closeness, the thought that pops into my mind first is separation:

At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, "ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" which is translated, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"
Mark 15:34 (NASB)

This is a cry of a man who feels the full, complete and total separation from God, that crushing feeling awaiting all who do not turn to Jesus and place their faith and trust in Him alone as Savior. It is a feeling none of us have experienced and by the grace of God never will. But it is a complete separation for Jesus as a man of the unity He feels within the Trinity as God.

William Young, in his book The Shack, has an incident where the main character in a discussion with God the Father notices the scars of crucifixion on His wrists, scars also borne by the Son. This is a picture that does not sit well with me for in my mind for it negates for me that separation from the Father that proved incredibly painful for the Son to bear. It intimates a sharing of the physical pain, a closeness that I believe needed to be broken on the Cross in order for Christ's sacrifice to be completed. This passage in the book, along with the Scripture verse above, paint the picture of defining closeness by the pain separation brings about.

What are your views of the closeness of the Trinity? Are there other Scripture verses called to mind as you think abouyt that closeness? Are there other books you have read that touch upon that topic for you?

I would love to hear your thoughts.