Assignments for Understanding the Chriatian World, Fall 2008
Post your assignments below. All further comments and discussions should be posted under the thread entitled: "Comments on Assigments."
93 comments:
Anonymous
said...
"EGG-HEAD" - by Simona Mills Chapter one of McKim's book Theological Turning Points, talks about the Trinitarian Controversy. While I recognize the struggle between the Biblical principle and the all influencing principles of Greek philosophy regarding the God head, I have to say that our first, second and third century theologians did an excellent job tackling this subject. While I did not agree with all the logic, I remain intrigued by the homoousios and homoiousios. Two closely related terms yet miles apart in the eyes of 3rd century fathers. Of the two words, I like homoousios more. It gives everyone in the Godhead "God" status and an indivisible nature. However, Athanasius does not answer the individualism of the Godhead. Here is my query, when Christ died on the cross was he cut off from the Godhead? If so did humanity and divinity die? If He was never cut off did God and the Holy Spirit experience the death of the cross? My last question, does it matter?
I always looked at the Godhead as an egg. What makes an egg an egg? The Shell, the yolk and the white. All three together equal an egg. Without the shell the yolk and white would not survive. The shell holds everything in place. But can you say that the yolk or white is not an egg in the absence of the shell? There are boxes of Egg-Beaters and egg whites on the shelves of our local supermarkets. But with out the shell can you still call them an egg? All this talk of eggs has now tantalized my appetite. Omelet anyone?
Good job Simmona.It appears that that misunderstanding of the nature of Christ triggered the minds of the early fathers such that we are able to see light on this topic. The illustration you have used of the eggs puts the point clar to me.
Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 1 Michaela Lawrence
As I read these pages, I’m reminded of the intricate weaving of points that must be done in order to properly understand and present this complex yet simple thing called Christianity. Although the focus on Christ is clear to me, there are many details within which to get lost momentarily or, sadly, forever if we lose proper perspective. And it’s that perspective I really wonder about because I recognize the Christian world to be filled with so many nominal Christians who just want to love Jesus and not be bothered by all these details. I can’t blame them for that stance—I used to feel the same way and often want to go back to what seems so simple.
So the biblical caution to be both Christ-centered and relevant to the world in our theology aids my perspective. While I want to be able to clearly explain to a nominal Christian friend how the Bible can be primary along with Christ and the cosmos, I also want to be able to know what my friend really needs to hear from me and I want my knowledge of these three primacies to transform me in such a way that I become a better witness whether or not I share these specific ideas.
Evangelista Polanco Let The Holy Scriptures Speak!
I love to read themes like this one. There are many information that we can be agree or not, but I will try to give my opinion in some of the questions that Dr. Hanna makes in this chapter. For example, is there any new light in the old lamp? I think that the Old Testament does have new light specially concerning of prophecies such as the book of Daniel. Many Christians use to say that the OT is abolished after the death of Jesus, but I think is that they do not have the knowledge that the book of Daniel is talking about, and this will let me give my opinion in the question of who are the many who will increase knowledge in the time of the end. Those who are believing, following, obeying and practicing the word of God will receive knowledge. Their knowledge will increase in both ways acquiring it and sharing it. The question about what does going to and fro mean, could be in two directions. First, there are people that today are in one church but tomorrow they will be in another kind of congregation. They will change their mind of thinking or believing in God in different method of following Him. Some of them will move of way to think because their convenience and others for the reason that they are true followers of God and want to know more about Him. Second, this expression to and fro could refer to places. People change of places for different reasons such as jobs, weather, family, better economy etc. Giving my opinion in what kind of knowledge will increase, I agree with Dr. Hanna that it is not a secular knowledge only but both sacred and secular knowledge what God was telling to Daniel that would increase. I think that people who follow God with all their heart will increase in wisdom and they will understand God’s way. It is nothing bad to have secular knowledge; the problem would be to stay there. The Bible is the book inspired by God that will give us such knowledge and will help us to understand the Christian World.
Christological Controversy: Who Is Jesus Christ? Theological Turning Points
This is an interesting chapter where we can remember that there is an existent controversy about who is Jesus Christ. What I think is that the doctrine of incarnation gives us light in order to understand Christogical questions. There is not another person in our world that fit in what Jesus is and represent. By faith I believe that Jesus was incarnated in the Virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit. If one of you have different opinion or believe I would like to discuss more about this belief. But what about his resurrection? This is other theme that I think we need to accept by faith and so all the rest of Scripture. Things that happen in our daily life convince us about the existence of Christ, his life, death and resurrection. The whole Bible since Genesis through Revelation testifies who is Jesus. He is the same God who created the heaven and earth. Ebionism, Docetism, and Gnosticism were movements that came with wrong ideas that instead to help to understand Christology they would confuse the minds of those who are searching the truth. I was a member of the Gnostic movement before to be a SDA member 20 years ago, and they have a lot of belief out of the light of the Bible. I just said thank you Lord to bring me to the right knowledge which is SDA. The reading of the apologist gave us the understanding in this controversial theme. In other word, their arguments help us to investigate the truth that for age have being discussed. Although the word trinity is not in the Bible, I believe that there are three persons: God Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. I have never understood why it is so difficult for others to understand this theme. Is it hard to understand that? three in One. What I know is that they are one in thought and they are united. All of this things humanity and divinity we have to accept them by faith. After doing research in the Scripture, we will find that we need to believe and follow His instructions. Apologists like Nestorious, raised terms like theodochos “recipient of God” indicating that the Virgin Mary was that such recipient in order to bring Jesus to this world and he doubted. His argument let us think that he never knew the power of God and His love. If God used a woman it was because He wanted to redeem us by a human because by a human we fell. There and today could be councils in order to discuss Christological controversy if Jesus is God or not, but one thing I know is that we need to be humble and come to our Lord with mind such Abraham, Daniel, David, Moses, Joseph etc.
Who is God? My study of the book Turning point reached to the core of my own belief and understanding of who this God I serve is. Many times during my earlier years, I truly struggled with this mystery of God which is oh so ‘great.’ It would take years of many pleasant as well as countless painful experiences to come to a true knowledge of his (God) being, omnipresence and very existence; therefore in reading the first chapter which is where my concentration is based and written from, I was very engaged in the differences of beliefs and opinions by the various philosophers / theologians as to “who is God?” The idea that God is one and God is there should not be questionable (in my mind at least) but we see that during the early centuries it was very much a debatable issue. We see how this very debate brought about Christianity from Judaism, which holds to this day the Monotheistic acknowledgement of God outside of his connection with his son Jesus. This branch of from Judaism (Christianity) received the trinity doctrine in identifying the personhood of God as a ‘father, son and holy spirit.’ I am always amazed at how humans “only” interpret scriptures to satisfy their logic and reasoning. A case in point: When we read self - help, medical, romantic, business or even certain spiritual literature, we do so in approval and nod our heads all along the way in agreement. We quickly, make reference to its pages to friends and family, we keep a to-do list of all the things we will do to implement its teachings to better our lives. We never remind ourselves of it not being authentic or that only man wrote it so it’s not credible. Yet whenever it comes to the Bible, we, (humans) do all the things I have just mentioned. Is it scripture we have a hard time understanding that allows us to interpret it is such erroneous ways? Is it because we approach it with finite minds which are incapable of understanding the things of God? As I read through the various positions of those theologians and philosophers such as: ‘Irenaeus who (saw the trinity as distinctive of each other), and origen who (saw the spirit as inferior to the son) what was so difficult in understating the words of Jesus in saying; “I and my father are one, if you have seen me you have seen the father.” This is just plain! Yet, each of these individuals placed human intellect and reasoning to cloud God’s Revelation of his written word. We cannot forget that spiritual things are spiritually discerned. I pray that we do not fall into the temptation of placing intellect over receiving the discernment of God to interpret his word.
Comments on Chapter VI, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture by Martin F. Hanna
The Theme of the Bible is Jesus – “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us”
The Bible is the Word of God. Jesus Christ, is God the center of the Holy Scriptures. The Divine nature and relationship of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is revealed to us through the Scriptures. The symbiotic relationship clearly and /or uniquely show us their mutual indweling and identity. Interpretations of order, first as Father indetified as God second as Son identified as Jesus Christ and third as Holy Spirit. They are Divine and One. Jesus the Son is doubly unique in ways of understanding and roles. As Divine Human, fully divine and fully human, yet fully sinless. Jesus is Creator and yet Savior. Christ is the Connection and center of life, is the focal point of the relations between divine and human persons. The Church and the Body is personified through Jesus by His spiritual body. We aught to willingly accept and respect God’s role in our lives as Peter and Paul did (1 Pet 2:24, Gal 4:4 and Eph 4:3-13). The relationship of God, Word, Jesus Christ, and man in terms of Creator, Author and Savior of man the sinner. “So God made humanity in His own image, male and female created He them (Gen 1:26). Jesus is the Theme of the Bible/Scripture and uniquely took center stage when man was created and subsquently fell. He came and saved me. What about you?
“Diamonds Aren’t Only a Girl’s Best Friend” - by Simona Mills In The Cosmic Christ of Scripture the chapter “Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Biblical?” I found several gems of information. First is the issue of knowledge. As pointed out by the author, truth and knowledge is revealed through Scripture, Christ and Nature. We increase our knowledge by the study of these truths. But what I am most excited about is the fact that we should increase both in scriptural and secular knowledge. It is so important that ministers of the gospel treasure all knowledge. It is knowledge that helps us “custom fit” the message to fit those desperately seeking answers to the understanding of God and His role in their life. This is especially true when we are approaching those who do not think like me. How can I present the truth and knowledge I posses as revealed to me through Scripture, Christ and Nature to my Hindu brother if I do not posses the knowledge or understanding of how he thinks? All knowledge, both secular and spiritual should be treasured and used to lead others and ourselves to Christ. What use is knowledge of truth if it does not “lead us to Jesus or increase our knowledge of Him or love for Him”? (The Cosmic Christ of Scripture pg51) I absolutely love this quote found on page 60 of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture “…Every text is a diamond, touched and irradiated by the divine rays [of Christ]. I want to make my time alone with God as well as time in my classes and studies at the seminary moments in which I search for hidden treasure chests of Diamonds. Then I believe I will achieve the highest education one could ever attain. “Diamonds” are not only my best friend, they are life!
As Christians living in the 21st century it is our privilege to inherit many of our doctrinal values from those who deemed it necessary to solidify their faith in the word of God. It is very interesting to note that although the early church fathers based their doctrinal stance on their understanding of the scriptures, often times these church leaders came up with what is considered heretical conclusions. However, it was through these continuous scriptural debates and tension that has allowed us to become the recipients of a theology based on a solid foundation that has been tested and tried. This does not suggest that we can now afford to live in a state of spiritual nirvana. There are still issues that must be addressed and hammered out. I wonder do we have the spiritual maturity to wrestle with seemingly heretical positions that challenge our faith and stretch our understanding. In the book “Theological Turning Points,” a very interesting statement was made it states, “Though his views were condemned, Arius did serve the church by advancing the discussion of the question Who is God?” Arius views on the trinity caused a great disruption with in the church body which roused great opposition among those whom we label defenders of the faith. But as we investigate history it was Arius and the search of many others to know Who is God? that led them to what some would consider erroneous conclusions. I am intrigued by the depth of knowledge these leaders had of the scriptures as well as their fearless devotion to serve God in the face of being ostracized by the thought leaders of their day. May God help me to bring that much fervency to the study of the scriptures and an openness to hear what God has to say through others.
Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 6 by Michaela Lawrence
I’m responding to the idea that sinfulness is not proper to our humanity, as in we weren’t made to sin but to do quite the opposite—worship God. Within the context of who Christ is, this truth connects to Christ’s mission to reunite us with God in a divine-human relationship that cannot otherwise be maintained.
It’s this sort of discussion we have to have with each other to better understand how all these many pieces of our theology fit together and to better appreciate and desire the salvation Christ offers us. Perhaps it’s not enough to keep telling people to accept Christ’s forgiveness of their sins, even people who consider themselves strong Christians. To tell someone that Christ didn’t create them to be sinful and wants them to be the opposite so that they can be who God intended them to be—that’s a helpful twist. Salvation isn’t just about you not sinning it’s about you become your intended self. One thing ends and another blossoms. There’s more to this life because there’s more to God’s plan, to God’s desire, to God’s love. It’s an incredible upgrade.
I guess we just have to be careful not to talk about that upgrade in terms of selfish achievements but in terms of the transformation that only God can provide.
Gerard Vertilus 9/10/08 My reading this week help me to increase my knowledge about salvation: salvation end time prophecy, and the state of dead are significant topic that capture people attention very much now day. A lot of people always want to know that what they should do to inherit salvation. This topic bathers Christian, Muslim, Jews, non- Christian, orthodox, even atheist. Salvation is a board subject; it is true that the more we study about salvation the closer our relationship should be with Christ. The article we had to read online correlates with Apostles Paul writing especial the letter of Ephesians stated clear that salvation in found in Christ Jesus. There are Christian in many churches including our churches cannot comprehend that Christ is the only way of salvation. In Romans chapter 2, we read that the Jews understanding of salvation was to keep the Law of Moses, practice circumcision then they will be saved. Scripture is not agreeing with this practice because as it says Christ in you is the hope of glory. It’s not mention about laws or partiality as the Jews would have thoughts. There was a period in Ellen white life after her conversion she had different views about salvation. She had developed fears in her heart because of her pass sinned. Until she realized that there is nothing absolutely nothing she can do to inherit salvation other than accepts the sacrifices of the Lord Jesus Christ on the cross and faithfully confess. After she confesses her sins and she declare that she felt that God accepted her forgiveness of her sin and she felt free from guilt. Salvation is a difficult subject to swallow yet simple to understand because the Bible make it clear for us. There are other questions raise about salvation despite of the answer the Bible provide. Should we be holly? Or shall be perfect to inherit salvation? Again Ellen G white helps us with these questions in page 22, A Chronological Study by Woodrow W. Whidden II “she stated that Perfection was not to be claimed as some sinless accomplishment, but rather sought as a way of life that would see belivers grow in grace until they received the finishing touch of sinlessness at glorification.” Salvation is a gift God gives it free through Christ nothing can be done to obtain it, and our pious way of living cannot guarantee salvation
It is interesting to note that God has not left us without a means to understand and draw nearer to Him. God provides us with different modes of Revelation in order to grasp our attention and shine light upon His Plan for humanity or the universe as a whole. As the “Cosmic Christ” would suggest that there various modes of revelation that God uses are first the Book of Incarnation (written in the life and ministry of Jesus Christ). The second means of revelation are the Book of Inspiration written in the Judeo-Christian scriptures. The third means of revelation is the Book of Creation written in the Cosmos. It is through these means that God is bringing humanity to a clearer knowledge of Himself. That brings me to an experience I had a couple of years ago. When I first started the seminary I can remember flying back to Georgia to begin the final process of moving my wife and children here to Berrien Springs. While on this flight I had the opportunity to sit next to a gentlemen who was a former Adventist who struggling with the inner workings of salvation. His concern was how God was going save those who had never heard of Jesus Christ. He wrestled with how God could allow so many people to perish if He is true and just. I do not know what all of this gentleman’s hang ups were of Adventism but this problem seemed to really affect His perspective on God and Adventism’s focus on proclaiming the gospel through out the world to bring about the second coming of Christ. What if one person fails to hear about Christ does that negate the mercy and fairness of a just God? This is a question that many ponder and although at times can be complicated to explain, we have been given enough scriptural evidence that suggests God is not limited in His ability to save those outside hearing the actual gospel. Romans 1:20 expounds on our understanding of this. At this point in time we can not afford to grow lax in our witness to others believing that God will remove all ambiguities that hinder many from accepting Christ. However, we can place our confidence in a God who reveals Himself to all through these three methods, giving all every viable opportunity to accept Him.
Theological Turning Points- Chapter 5 "How are We Saved?"
The question that I've asked myself over and over again. It's comforting in a way that people throughout the centuries have had the same questions.
The quest to find a tidy formula that describes how and when we are saved is familiar to me. Perhaps if I could do so then it would give me a little more control over the situation. The fact that salvation is a free gift of God regardless of my unworthiness makes me feel happy but also uncomfortable at times.
So Luther defined the process of salvation as being by faith, grace and Christ alone. He states that a life that is saved is a life that produces fruit of salvation.This is reminiscent of the fruit of the Spirit and when Jesus tells his disciples that they cannot bear fruit unless they first abide in Him(Galatians 5 & John 15).
After reading this chapter and hearing the scriptural allusions the question that is now on my mind is not "How am I saved". The question is "Am I abiding in Christ(the essence of salvation)so that He can nurture his fruit in my life?"
Christological issues were not so much confused as the trinity because people confronted Jesus and asked Him who he was. The New Testament explicitly gives titles various titles for Jesus for example Messiah or Christ, son of David, son of God, servant of God, Lord final prophet, the word and sometimes God. All these are meant to give a clear picture who exactly was Jesus. It appears he was well known but some wanted to bring a controversy for no good reason. For Paul Jesus was God; and he didn’t mince words to describe God into that effect. Maybe that was the reason why most early Church father took the issue serious to discover exactly who Jesus was. Historically we see others totally opposed to Pauline views like Ebonites while others denied the humanity of Christ like the Docetism. Although Justin Martyr failed to reconcile the divinity and humanity of Jesus, it is evidently seen that the controversy was raging What I have observed in this Chapter implies that the controversy is basically based on Logos -flesh model which begins with the logos and went on to speak of his incarnation. To me this was the trap of the devil to create misunderstanding in the Christian world. After so much controversy, the council of the Chalcedon opted to end the debate by declaring Jesus was truly God and truly human, perfect in godhead and perfect in manhood. Christ remained without division or without separation to date.
I would like to comment on chapter 3 of Theological Turning Points. On this chapter Donald McKim explains about hundred different images of the church in the New Testament. The church is associated through minor images such as the salt of the earth, ark, one loaf, branches of the vine, God’s building, citizens, and exiles to major images—the people of God, the new creation, the fellowship in faith, and the body of Christ—around which a cluster of other images can be seen.
The list to mention the church does not stop there. These include the themes of the saints and sanctified, believers and faithful, slaves and servants, the people of God, kingdom and temple, household and family, the new exodus, vineyard and flock, one body in Christ, and the new humanity. And there are still some other descriptions from the list that I cannot put them all here.
I am impressed with those imageries and thinking of what the awesome God we have. For me, those varieties of biblical imagery are intended for us to learn more about the characteristic of God. Christian character, and not church character, needs to be developed. Quality relationship with Him and with others needs our attention to be developed and maintained. Abide in Him and abide in His church.
Understanding Scripture "Hermeneutics and Culture"- Lael CaesarI
The chapter, "Hermeneutics and Culture" by Lael Caesar, discusses how different cultures relate to the Bible hermeneutically. Is there a different hermeneutic depending on one's cultural affiliation and sitz em laben? And what presuppositions do different cultures bring to the text?
Caesar generally dealt with the subject in terms of the "oppressed theologies" that have risen in the last century such as Black Theology, Feminist Theology and other liberation theolgoies. He did an overview of the main tenets of each of those theologies and then did a biblical evaluation of their hermeneutic. Overall, I agree with his conclusion that many of these theologies have their own experience as the main source of their hermeneutic. As a result, the Bible is reinterpreted to fit into their current situation.
Now it is indisputable that this type of hermeneutics is unacceptable and unfaithful to the biblical text. However, is there no room for understanding "a hermeneutic of the oppressed" as it were? Many, if not all, of these theologies are a reaction against the traditinal Euro-centric theology that has been practiced in the West for God knows how many years. Those theologians have had hundreds, yea even thousands of years to "get it right" while many of these liberation theologies are less than 50 years old!!! The Western theologians didn't get it all right the first 50 years either (and we're not so sure they have it right now). Basically, I think there should be more consideration of this fact when we seek to "critique" liberation theologies and other so-called "third world" theologies.
Romel Charles Tuesday, September 23, 2008 Reflection #1
In “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture” chapter three makes a bold statement in the chapter’s title. It says, “Let the Holy Scriptures Speak!” It would seem that this is the most important thing that anyone can do whether as a Pastor or a lay person because the scriptures have a lot to say. I guess it all boils down to whether we are listening or not. Can letting the Holy Scriptures speak be such a hard thing. Well, the answer is yes. Like Dr. Hanna says, “We often treat the Bible like a child instead of treating it like the word of the Divine Father” and expect it to be seen and not heard. Although being a student of the Word and being taught to exegete the Word at times I still found myself doing the opposite of what this chapter said we were supposed to do. It sometimes seems that as ministers and being learned in the Word of God we still have a tendency to tell Scripture what it is saying and not letting it tell us what we should be saying. It was not until recently that I sat down and read, read and read some more until the Bible, which has no lips, actually spoke to me and it was just amazing. It is mind boggling when something as simple as this can change the way that we look at things. Hanna says, “This unintended but real disrespect for Scripture is manifest in the exclusive definition of the Scripture principles so that other revelations recognized by Scripture are undermined.” This disrespect occurs when we neglect the theological roles of Biblical and extra-Biblical revelation. We as students of the Word of God need to understand that just as the God head is made up of three but are yet one, we need to see the revelations of God as one also although they three. IF only we stop and listen to the Holy Scriptures then and only then will there be new light in old lamps.
Romel Charles Tuesday, September 23, 2008 Reflection #2
In Theological Turning Points by McKim in chapter 1 the debate over who God was is discussed. It goes to show that logic is not what it takes to understand concepts of the Bible and definitely not in understanding God and the Trinity. In In the Caribbean there is a saying that goes, “Common sense isn’t common.” I say this because we try to reason things out and to use logic to explain certain things and to even debate people on certain subjects but sometimes common sense is not common because to understand God we need His help to help us understand Him. Like in my last post when I spoke about how we try to hush the Scriptures and to speak for it instead of us being quiet and letting it speak to us and for us the same principle can be applied with this topic. Instead of letting the Scriptures speak, people were stating their own views and arguing with each other. Now we know that the Bible has certain principles that most Christians then and now believe but there were some that needed to be ironed out. It was just too sad that it took two Nicean Councils to help solve the issues at hand. We need to understand that looking at the Bible from one angle can be detrimental but as Christians we have to look at all subjects on a wholistic level.
Chapter 3 Let the Holy Scriptures Speak This chapter and class has brought new light to me that Scripture is telling us to not ignore the Biblical foundation for extra-Biblical revelation. The primacies of Gods three revelations show the unity in diversity of God. In some ways this mirrors much of the creation of God. For instance marriage and family is the unity of two persons and with a child it makes three. The three revelations also resemble the unity in diversity of the Trinity. I am also excited that Daniel predicts an end-time growth of knowledge by Gods people. I pray that I would be able to be a part of that growth. This is happening now I believe as there is such a huge explosion in the area of Gods Cosmos. I believe that there are so few Christians that are standing up for Gods revelations within the area of the cosmos. Sometimes in Issues in Origin class I feel like Professor Baldwin and Younker are like two against the world. I challenge all of us to study more both in Scripture and in the Cosmos so that we may stand for Gods revelations during a time when the world is trying to undermine them. We should work together to allow Christ and the Cosmos to Illuminate Scripture.
Chapter I Trinitarian Controversy Several things stood out to me when reading this chapter. The first is that God can work through time and through controversy. I found it amazing that the Trinitarian theology developed over several centuries. This could only happen through the work of the Holy Spirit. What I learn from this is that I should not stress or worry about controversies today. Instead we should prayerfully continue to learn of God and I believe that God will guide His people into more light as needed. I like Athanasius approach to the matter of the Trinity as stated on page 17. He urged for a respect for the mystery of the Trinity. I believe that as humans we will not be able to come up with a humanly defined definition of God since I believe that God is more than what our minds can comprehend or imagine. I think it is human nature to be afraid when we feel uncertain or out of control of our knowledge. Surprisingly in this case I have a sense of peace even though I cannot fully comprehend how the Trinity works. This peace can only come from God. I also feel there is a human desire to want to control others around us. I think it comes from a fear of not wanting to be different so we try to make everyone around us the same. Looking at the way the church has fought itself in the past we should not do likewise. I feel we should not lose focus on perhaps what is more important. That God is a One who wants to be personal and close to us. And that He is a God of community.
READING THE SCRIPTURE. We may understand what the Bible means to us unless we identify what really makes the bible unique from other books. I agree with Dr Hanna that the Bible posses authority which comes from God alone. So we must understand this authority before we start using it. This misunderstanding has caused a lot of confusion the scripture in the world. Actually it is through God that we have the scripture, he used men and women filled with Holy Spirit to write the scripture for us. He exerts authority therefore the scripture has the necessary authority to perform what God wants from us. Moreover this authority is pointing to Christ who has authority like the father. He reinforces what the father asserts. So when we know Christ then it implies we understand the scripture because already the Holy Spirit is ready to guide us. We must strive to get what the scripture has for us instead of depending on our own selfish desires we always leads to astray. There the scripture remains our guide and still it gets its authority from God who gives us knowledge to understand what we are required to do. Like in II Timothy 3:16 the scripture is for divine direction always and we must accept to be lead by its authority.
In his book, “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture,” chapter 3, mentions about how we treat the Bible like a child. When I thought about it, I was also treating the Bible like a child. I often tried to guide the Bible and not guided by the Bible. I read it whenever I felt like it, and I ignored it whatever it contradicted my daily life. I had great disrespect for the Holy Scripture treating like any other books. I often forget the fact that the Bible is the word of God. The Bible was often my entertainment or encouragement or meaningless routine for me. I didn’t practice what is written in the Bible, but I just read it because I felt like Christian needs to read it. I often just glance it through as if it doesn’t have anything to do with me. Dr. Hanna effectively explains why the Scripture is the only rule of faith. Not only for our faith, but for our knowledge which leads to our practice. I believe that everything would be meaningless unless we practice. Faith would be meaningless unless we practice, knowledge would be meaningless unless we practice just as “it is useless to search Scripture if we will not come to Him (Jn 5:39, 40)” I agree that “the Bible is not a textbook containing all knowledge.” But I believe that the Bible reads us to the One containing all knowledge. And we can come to Him when we practice what is written.
Chapter 1 of the “Theological Turning Points” talks about History of Trinity. How theologians and Church fathers struggle to find out the answer for “who is God?” I understand, by looking back with developed knowledge of Trinity, some of them were wrong. However, they all seem to have innocent attempt to find out who truly God is. Even though it was wrong ideas, they contributed to the world new aspects or perspectives of Trinity and made the Christian think deeper about God. I believe that some of their wrong attempts were better than nothing. Without their arguments, Christians would not have been exposed to the deeper thoughts about God. And now we stand this age, with more fully developed understanding of God and Trinity. We cannot say that we understand about God and Trinity perfectly. There are still some aspects that remain mystery. However, further arguments would lead us to better understanding of God. I believe that in many cases, we grow with struggling. It is because we have to get out of our comfort zone, be expose to new zone that is unfamiliar, which can be very uncomfortable. But after we have gone through, we are glad because we can see ourselves grown.
Comments to Janice De-Whyte: Theological Turning Points- Chapter 5 "How are We Saved?"
Yes I agree, but sometimes I wonder how do we know if I am abiding in Christ. What if I am trying my best but I don't see my fruits? Or is it something I don't see?
Comment on Chapter 2&3, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture.
Reading the Book of Scripture: Is There a Problem with Biblical Authority and Let the Holy Scripture Speak!
I agree that Scripture is the authority or rule for Christians faith and practice. As Christians we must use and rely upon scripture to deepen our faith beside Paul says in Timothy 3:16 that "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for instruction." Some denomination says that "all save is always save" I'm not trying to look down on anyone's belief but that statement cannot be proved from scripture. If that's really the case why can't they prove it in scripture. Daniel says that in chapter 12:4 many will run to and fro, and knowledge will be increased. As we look around whether in Christianity or in the secular world knowledge does increase, but God's people must go to scripture to increase their knowledges because all scriptures testify of Christ and it is from the direction and guidance of scripture we will come to Christ for He is the way the truth and the life. I don't mind following tradition but without the proof of scripture tradition is very much useless to me. Scriptures alone stand for theological reading of revelation and which is first among other revelations.
Theological Turning Points Chap 2 Michaela Lawrence
For Nestorius to say that God cannot have a mother means that he understands what it means to be God and the negative implications of God having a mother. We know that no one has complete knowledge. So how far do we go to define God and when have we gone too far?
My questions are based on the fact that many in the Christian world don’t wish to dig any deeper because they can’t easily see what difference more knowledge will make. And after all, they spend enough time as it is trying to live up to the high calling of their various denominations coupled with social/cultural expectations. And while their childhood understanding of Christ is recognizably elementary, does knowing the intricacies of how Jesus is both fully human and fully divine really impact how often we feed the hungry and clothe the poor?
If I weren’t interested in deeper understanding, I wouldn’t be in the Seminary. But I often wonder how the information I’m learning is going to impact the people in my life. Living in a fast-paced culture, when a concept doesn’t have immediate significance, there’s often no time set aside to really grapple with it and no impetus to care.
So as I mull over the implications of Christ having a human mother, I’m thinking of my Christian and non-Christian friends who may never ask me about those implications and I’m wondering, “Okay, how long should I really spend on this.” And I do see the significance of this knowledge. I see how understanding the nature of Christ impacts my view of salvation. I see that my understanding has been faulty because I essentially expected Christ to truly be like me in order for him to be a “fair” substitute, not realizing that my notion of fairness was incorrect and my understanding of his two natures was mislead. So I guess I need to ask God to help me find that necessary balance between learning all this information and learning how to best minister to people’s immediate needs. Sometimes the two will be clearly linked…and sometimes they won’t.
Who Is God?: Thoughts on the Journey to Enlightenment
First, I am impressed so far with how McKim manages to capture the essence of vast and complex theological movements/controversies into a few short pages. Masterful.
On to chapter 1: I am struck yet again by the reality of human nature patterns. We discover, experience, thrill in it. Then we are challenged, driven to seek clarity, support and hard proof; we do so within the current cultural milieu. We wrestle, fight, and accuse. Finally, when the dust settles, something that resembles the truth remains amidst the casualties.
It happened between the parties of Paul and Peter as they debated the problem of the Gentile Convert; it happened among the likes of Athanasius and Arius as they fought to resolve questions on what Tertullian coined as the Trinity. It happened between Joseph Bates and John N. Andrews as they sought to verify their positions on the Sabbath time frame.
And it happens, in small and sometimes imperceptible ways, each time we gather for a seminary class to listen to each other, wrestle with contradictory ideas and perspectives on "what the data means."
Each time our cultural backgrounds and individual worldviews come into play. Often, we find ourselves striving to communicate our perspectives and beliefs in such a way that our peers from very different starting points can comprehend.
And, sadly, there are still casualties.
In viewing these patterns, I find a strange comfort and stability. We humans do our best century after century, and God's hand guides and provides.
It also challenges me to not shirk from my responsibility to stand for what I know to be true, while remaining humbly open to "new light."
It drives me to be merciful, grateful, and humble. Merciful to those who appear to be "walking away from truth"; grateful for the clarity and confidence that emerges as a result of painfully wrestling with truth and error--and for the constant hand of God. Humble in the realization that, as the early church fathers discovered, theology cannot be neatly packaged and shelved.
Trinitarian Revelation: Reflections on "Let the Holy Scriptures Speak!"
Hanna's presentation of the supremacy and relationship of the three revelations, Scripture, Christ, and the Cosmos is clarifying and foundational. The Scripture is tota and prima in authority and direction. It directs us to Christ, from whom all things are come. The Scriptures and Christ are set within the context of the Cosmos which reflects and reveals Christ. Each of these revelations have primacy, yet interrelate and unite to form a kind of "trinity" in their roles of divine revelation.
For the human being, authority always must begin with and end with Scripture. It is the Bible and the Bible only that should inform us and direct us to Christ, and it is the Bible that describes the role of the Cosmos in the revelation of Christ.
And in the end, these tools, Scripture and the Cosmos, serve only to illumine Christ--"...In Whom all things consist" (Col.1:16-17).
On a more "personal application" note, I am glad to see that the role of the Cosmos is not ignored. With the New Age and related pantheistic practices, it seems that Christianity often avoids celebrating the role of nature and the Cosmos in revealing God. Properly understood and in maintaining its Scripture-defined role, the Cosmos is a beautiful and wise revelation of Christ, the one who spoke it into existence.
Scripture, Christ, and the Cosmos: three diverse revelations unified in ultimate purpose.
The History of the Christological Controversy makes for tedious reading. There is so much argument and counter argument. It is easy to get lost in the detail. What to me is obvious though is that whatever God is we are not. We are not all wise, all powerful, completely loving. Is the nature of Christ important? I do not want to say it is not; neither do I want to in a few strokes on this keyboard render of no consequence the History of Christianity. I do however believe that great damage was done to the Church by these arguments and the way in which they were conducted. What history does not tell us about is what these arguments in the church did for the faith of Bro and Sis Yosef Blogutos whose son while studying Greek Philosophy started to have doubts about the bible. It doesn’t inform us about what happened when he came to the church, not only for answers but for reassurance that the faith he had been raised in was indeed valid and found only ‘highfalutin’ discussions and divisions over things that we can not know for sure this side of eternity if at all. What we do know however is that somehow out of this inability to sometimes leave well alone and at other times be able to live with people you don’t agree with came a system of belief and practice which was so terrible that it made the Prophet Daniel faint when he saw it a vision. What will we do when confronted with controversies of our own, in our ministry, family, work place etc? A word to the wise (Dan 12:3) should be sufficient.
I would like to commend on Chapter 2 of Theological Turning Points.
In the New Testament uses various titles for Jesus. NT calls Him Messiah or Christ as the fulfillment of the Old Testament expectation. NT calls Him Son of God as to signify a special, unique relationship between Jesus and God. NT calls Him Son of Man means both a human being and a coming ruler who receives eternal dominion kingdom. NT calls Him Servant of God as allusions and link to the work of Jesus as the servant of Yahweh. All these terms are beautiful and have special meaning to me, but I would like to share with you about His servant hood.
As a servant Jesus humbles Himself, coming from His mighty office in heaven, He took the journey to this planet. Visited my home, had some conversation about His plan of salvation, leaving me His business card, with complete contact information, His heavenly address, phone numbers, and gave all necessary instructions and asked if I would like to go with Him on His second coming—He told me to read Bible for detail. Reading the whole series of God’s three books would help. Let me know if you need further information.
I appreciated the clear explanation of E.G. White's role. At time we as Adventists are too quick to side on the extremes in regards to the role of Mrs White's writings. One one hand, Mrs. White is presented as the sole authority while on the other hand some present her as having no authority at all. This chapter encourages us all to make Sola, Tota and Prima Scriptura the foundation of all our reading and reflection (p. 18).
Last week I was worshipping with a group of ladies in the dormitory. We were reading and reflecting on the story of the golden calf and the Israelites. In wanting to settle the question of why God chose the Levites as the priestly tribe one young lady mentioned that Ellen G. White commented that they were the only tribe that did not worship the golden calf. Now, I had not read E.G. White's commentary on this story while preparing for this worship (is that a bad thing?). From my reading and reflecting on the text I had understood that all of the people were engaged in this rebellion and that the only redemption that the Levites had was choosing to repent and be on God's side once more. However, my friend disagreed with me and strongly told me what Mrs White had written.
I was honest and told the group that I had not read what Mrs White had written on this Scripture text but that did not mean I did not believe her writings to be inspired or legitimate. BUT there it was, the young lady's clear expression of confusion (or maybe it was shock). It was not so much about the details of the golden calf story as it was about the inadvertent message she had heard- "I don't always read E.G. White's writings after reading a bible passage". I can almost guess the question she wanted to blurt out "but you're a minister and you didn't read Mrs White's commentary on this passage?"
Seventh-day Adventists should read the Bible as our priority. "It is important to note that Seventh-day Adventists regard Scripture as the Christ-centred rule of faith and practice by which to evaluate the cosmic relevance of the writings of White and all other writers." p. 23
In my life and as I share with others I'm seeking to have a right and respectful understanding of God's Word and it's supremacy. At the same time, I am also being intentional about not downgrading or elevating the writings of Mrs White. I'm finding the balance between her being "lesser" but nonetheless a "light" to our understanding and experience of Scripture. Perhaps the confusion that was expressed was a sign that we're not doing such a good job of putting the Scripture Principle into practice but maybe it was also a wake-up call for me to be more sensitive to the interpretive tools that all of us bring to any one passage of Scripture. I was helped and challenged by this chapter of the book.
Here endeth my confession about a calf & confusion.
Soteriological Controversy, Chapter 5 By Evangelista Polanco
When I first saw the title “soteriological” I thoutht that it was something about saints, but when I started to read the chapter I could see that it is all about salvation. The word come from the Greek soteria. My confusion was because in Spanish the word Santeria is a group of saints that belong to the Catholic Church and who follows the saints. The doctrine of salvation taught here has a lot information concerning salvation. For example, the justification point brought by Saint Augustine. Our sins have been forgiven (if we repent and go apart from sin). It was amazing how Luther confronted the church and defended the doctrine of justification by grace through faith. My question is: Are we with the same spirit of Luther that revealed the truth of God? I think that it was the beginning of how God used him (Luther) in order to turn human back to the right doctrine (salvation) to save them from sin. Then, the work of God sending His Son to die for us I think is relevant for the reason that He has delivered us from slavery and reconciliated us with Him giving us the peace that we need when we receive forgiveness. It is important and I agree with this chapter that explains through the Bible that we are not saved by work but by faith by the grace of God. And we understand that faith brings the works, both go together, if we have true faith then, we will work because the love of God is in us. I understand that it was the love of God that moved Him to act in the way of offering His Son.
The Theme of The Bible is Jesus, Chapter 6. Comment by: Evangelista Polanco
At the beginning of my knowledge of the SDA, it was a very hard confusion that I had concerning to the divinity of Christ. I understand that the Old Testament testify of Him as the Messiah that had to come, but the way of his divinity and human at the same time, I did not understand. Now, I feel that because I have accepted by faith not only his divinity but all things concerning to the trinity I understand better. It is not easy to explain, neither to understand, but one thing I know is that the Lord will reveal misteries as He has promissed. Sometimes we deal with the question; Are there three Gods? Now as we have seen in Dr. Hanna's book, and in his class, we have agreed that there are three persons, but one God. One (united). Jesus came to teach us the Father, and he sent the Holy Spirit. I think that all the confusion come because the Old Testament does not mention Jesus (the name Jesus) anywhere, does not say specific argument about the three persons of divinity by name, by detail. Once again I do think that God will reveal this things to the wise, those who are looking for Him with a true heart. To me it is not a problem of salvation, I just wait in my Father the Creator, who sent His unique Son and who sent His Holy Spirit. Three, and Jesus the savior is one of the three. Believe or not it is there in the whole Bible. Other question could rise in our mind; why then, Satan was jealous of Christ? Why does E.G.W. says that he was the fourth after Christ?. If she saw that explanation, and God gave her that information is because there are three, and Jesus was the Son. I mean is the Son of God. I think we need to be thankful to Jesus because of his work in coming to this polluted word and gave his life for us and to let us be partakers of his divinity, knowing that we do not become in other God in other word, we have relationship with him, and we can make things that he did, but limited to our humanity.
CHRIST: THEOBIPOLAR – By Simona Mills – October blog 1 The word bipolar means having or expressing two contradictory qualities or ideas. Thus I have coined the term theobipolar to mean (for my intents and purposes) expressing two contradictory theological qualities or ideas: humanity and divinity. As I contemplate the Christological Controversy outlined in our text book, I realize that I have it pretty good from this vantage point. Being able to look back at all the theories of the forefather theologians on the mystery of Christ gives me an advantage. Or does it? Pope Leo I’s document “Leo’s Tome” basically summarized everyone else’s work in his day. I am essentially doing the same today. Then I thought if I took another approach, say that of a psychologist, what would my diagnosis be when it comes to the question of the nature of Christ. Schizophrenic would be too hard a sell. Multiple personalities would be a little better. But I would go with bipolar. Christ having two poles: 100% humanity and 100% divinity. The fact that scripture records that he shed tears, got hungry, slept, expressed anger, felt compassion and pain (to name a few attributes) shows clear evidence of his humanity. Raising the dead, healing lepers, giving sight to the blind, and many other wonders show clear evidence of his divinity. The contradiction comes in knowing that humanity is fallible and divinity is infallible. Yet, Christ somehow made the two work together as one. Our forefathers as well as theologians today struggled with placing Christ on the same level as the Creator of the Universe while seeing him suffer on a cross, dying a humiliating death. I must admit that I struggle with that too. It would be wonderful if I could grasp the inner workings of this mystery. But for now all I can do is to continue to gather the biblical evidence of the two “poles” that make up a theobipolar Christ and accept that my term along with previous terms like substance, ousia, heteroousios, homoousios, and several others, are futile attempts to nail down a mystery.
MIRROR, MIRROR ON THE WALL – By Simona Mills – October blog 2 As I read “The Theme of the Bible is Jesus” in The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, I could not help but think about the fairy tale story of SNOW WHITE AND THE 7 DWARFS. In this story the wicked witch had a magical mirror that showed her every thing she asked. What is interesting about the magic mirror is that it did not lie. When she asked, “mirror, mirror on the wall, whose the fairest of them all” the mirror showed her Snow White. She was not amused because she wanted to be the fairest of them all, thus her plot to destroy Snow White began.
Similarly, when Lucifer realized that he was not called into the “board meeting” of heaven, he began his plot to destroy the creation of God. When I look in the mirror, I see Simona. But when I put on the “glasses” of scripture and look again, I see the Trinity, I see God (Genesis 1:26 – “And God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness’…). So on those days that Satan’s lies distort the mirror, I can apply the Windex of Scripture. Then I can see again the sharp image of my loving Creator, Savior, King, Friend… my everything. Best of all, I can stand firm on the Word of God knowing that I share the divine image of God; something that Satan can never say is true of himself. His plot to destroy God’s creation was successful at first glance. But in the mirror that was created on the cross, I can step up and say (as I see my reflection in His blood), “mirror, mirror on the cross, who now is saved from being lost”. This mirror will show all of mankind, even those who do not accept the gift of salvation. That is one cool mirror, don’t you think?
Christ of 2 Natures: Divine & Human (Theological Turning Points Chap 2)
Jesus Christ is the reason why we are Christians. An obvious statement. It follows, then, that we should explore the nature of Jesus Christ. The Scriptures speak of Jesus as both God and Man. He is the Messiah, the Son of Man but he says that he has the power to forgive sins and that he could destroy and rebuild his temple in three days. He said that he came to seek and to save the lost!
There are two "sides" of Jesus that we find in the Bible:the human "side" and the Divine "side". Through the centuries of theological discussion and work people have tried to reconcile thee scriptural facts of Jesus being fully Divine and also fully human.
What we affirm affects our theological conclusions about our own human nature and also the nature of Salvation. Everything we believe is intertwined in this Jesus Christ and so we must have a Biblical understanding in order to ensure our theological reflections are in harmony with the Biblical testimony. Jesus Christ had two natures that did not conflict with each other- the mystery of Christology.
At this moment I am thinking of numerous sermons/bible studies that I have heard that say that we can be sin-free because Jesus was a human being like us and if he could overcome sin then we can also live a sinless life. The question that I have is how can we make this reality clear and not confusing when we preach and teach. I'm certainly going to do a lot more reflection on Christology because essentially Christ is, or should be, the centre of all we preach and teach.
As I was reading the Authority Controversy which dealt with the role of the bible, the place of tradition, and the role of leadership I was intrigued by the section “Later Developments.” It stated that the issue of authority has taken on dimensions of grater proportion in the centuries since the turning point between the Reformers and Roman Catholicism. The three dimensions that it list are: the church is the living custodian of the gospel…and the continuing historical manifestation of Christ’s authority on earth. The second is represented by protestant who believe in sola scriptura. The third deals with those of the charismatic movement who say the Spirit and individual revelation is the ultimate form of authority. I remember coming in contact with a kind older gentleman who was a devout Catholic. I heard of the various experiences that Adventist have had when giving Catholics a Great Controversy so in pursuit of winning a soul I did the same. The next day I was shocked when he gave me my Great Controversy back just to tell me this book goes against my catechism and my beliefs. What a blow to my witness. I have had other experience with those who are Pentecostal who believe individual revelation as the ultimate form of authority. Looking back I believe I could have been a better witness if I wasn’t so arrogant because I believed in sola scriptura. I was nice but arrogant. There is no doubt that we are living in an age were people have views and traditions that are very hard to give up. My recommendation is that we allow sola scriptura to become visible in our lives that we can help others see the difference that the scriptures can make in our lives
Comments on Cosmic Christ by Dr. Martin Hanna The question of how Christ can be both divine and human at the same time is a subject that the best of minds have wrestled with. The bible is very clear that Jesus the Word became flesh and dwelt among men. (John 1:14). With all the scriptures that prove Christ was both divine and human the finite mind still wrestles with how can this phenomenon be. This perplexing subject seems to be one that we must except by faith therefore all we have to do is take the scriptures for what it says and leave the matter alone. If this were the case then the would be some merit in that position but I find something troubling that emerges from this dual quality of Christ. In my discussion in the past some have stated because Christ is both divine and human then He had an advantage over us and thus this nullifies our struggle with sin because there is no possible way we can overcome as Christ overcame. It is very tempting to take this point of view in that it becomes an easy out for those who perceive the struggle against sin as a losing battle. I admit the human struggle can become quite overwhelming at times but we have been given the promise “Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these you might be partakers of the divine human nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. (2 Pet 1:4) One writer stated when dealing with the temptations of Christ, He was tempted according to He was as we are tempted according to who we are. If anything Christ could almost [I say almost it just depends on your perspective] be considered as the one that is disadvantaged. Christ had the power to change His circumstances at any time yet He chose not to for me and for you. To this I say Praise God. Christ advantage was relying on His Father and this is our advantage as well.
I am commenting on tyler kraft's post on 9-25-08. I am with you tyler in that I don't fully grasp the primacy thing either. I thought your idea of primacies related to key time periods was creative, but to me it doesn't fit in many respects either. From what I understand Dr. Hanna to be saying, he says creation, Scripture, and Christ each have their own primacy in a sense all at the same time. Think about this. Before Scripture there was still the oral tradition passed down from Adam and Christ existed too. During Christ's ministry on earth, nature and the OT Scriptures still existed, and now after Christ you still have nature and Christ existing. I think Dr. Hanna would say that throughout the entire period of Earth's history nature, Christ, and Scripture have their own unique primacy at any given time. These are just my thoughts.
Well, each time I log on to check out comments I enjoy and appreciate SM's creative expansion of concepts found in our class textbooks. I like the illustrations and clever metaphors. The give "hands and feet" to otherwise abstract, enigmatic concepts--a sign of a great preacher. :)
However, the connection between "bipolar" and Christ's nature doesn't work for me. This illustration would teach that though the two conditions (read: natures) exist in the same person, when one is expressed, the other is absent (in terms of expression).
Though it is true that by definition "The word bipolar means having or expressing two contradictory qualities or ideas," and Christ did, in fact, take on two natures that are distinctly different (and I might even argue against the word "contradictory"--in a separate comment) in at least some qualities and ideas, "bipolar" also denotes the idea that a person moves from one extreme to another--hence the inclusion of the term "pole." So an individual with bipolar anything will at one time express/operate at one extreme position, and then at another time express the completely opposite position/frame of mind/etc. The two positions or mind frames (and in this case, natures) do not intermingle. They are not integrated. They are separate, opposite, and solo in expression.
Jesus was an integrated personality. His humanity and divinity resided together, somehow and mysteriously. Even when His divinity "flashed through" His humanity, He was still operating as a human being, not swinging from one extreme to the other. While Jesus ate, drank, slept, cried, and starved, He still had, at His command, divine powers that He chose not to employ unless summoned by God. While living the very human life, He was not far from His divinity; it was somehow, mysteriously, very present, though perhaps not always more fully expressed.
And, of course, the reverse must also be true: While Jesus calmed storms, fed thousands, and stood wrapped in glory atop mountains, He was still a very human being in the presence of his very human disciples. To act in His divinity did not require Him to abdicate His humanity, and vice versa.
For me, the implications that come from using the term "bipolar" with Christ's nature are disturbing. In fact, if pushed further, it could express something along the lines a "coexistence" of docetism's and ebionism's ultimate reality: Jesus was not really human when He acted divinely; and Jesus was not really divine when He was acting in His humanity. Christ was an integration of humanity and divinity, not two natures taking turns.
(And what does *that* mean?!? I wonder if we'll ever know. :)
I'm sure SM did not intend for harpers like me to stretch her metaphors to such distortions, but it is interesting (and for me, sobering) to explore the ramifications of this particular illustration. :)
Salvation is one of the controversies that the church has wrested with since its inception. Basically this is due to the opinion presented by the early church fathers like Pelagius and Augustine. Both Roman Catholic Church and the protestant have not agreed on the common ground of salvation. The Old Testament provides a basis on how God has tried to rescue his people from sin and other suffering and the New Testament put message clearly what is supposed to be done. We can not limit salvation to only freedom from sin but it should be a process that is based in Romans 8:28-30. I think because many have limited it to one area like Sanctification, justification, and glorification, this is where the controversy arises. We should also remember that there is forgiveness of sin which will make us to be reconciled back to God and then have peace. We should also remember that Christ paid a ransom price for us to be saved. Some have said that we have been satisfied by the grace of God but the question is shall we then remain in sin because of this. Maybe this is reason as to why early church fathers were giving different views that salvation is illumination because we are able to get out darkness. While others saw it as restoration and victory over sin, so as much this is written and debated, salvation remains a process which we will not avoid to attain if we follow the process to the end. We should follow the biblical principle to avoid much controversy.
It appears there is too much confusion regarding the divinity of Jesus Christ. Arius sparked the controversy but Igree with the sentiments that Dr. Hanna has put forward to prove the case about Christ’s divinity in humanity. Yes Christ was born of a woman but we should also understand that a it was the systematic plan of God which we don’t understand as human beings. Indeed Dr. Hanna sets the record clear by stating that Christ is among the Divine persons of the trinity. Actually to him the main theme of the Bible is Christ because he has met the entire requirement described in the bible. No other human being is able to fulfill all those but Christ alone. We are also aware that whatever the father was doing, Christ and the Holy Spirit were also participating in full swing. That is why God said that they make man in their own image which implies that Christ the same powers as God. There is no day his divinity changed, nor was he created like other creatures. But he is also human but this does not imply that he lost his divinity. He died so that we may have life also. Humanity did not stop the redeeming power of the lost instead it strengthened the relationship with God. Otherwise we have no excuse to remain in sin
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture by Martin Hanna Chapter 10: Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos I enjoyed reading Ellen Whites writings concerning the Cosmos. I have not experienced the power of a stormy ocean but there are times when I’ve seen the awesomeness of Gods creation that I could not speak but only stand amazed. I found the quote where Ellen White says the law of God is written in every art of our body to be interesting. If I disregard the law of gravity by jumping off a cliff the consequences can be deadly. I think there has been much scientific evidence for affects that can happen in our bodies if certain laws are not followed. For instance it is accepted that meat eating is correlated to heart disease and also outside toxins can promote cancer. Or the affects of high sugar diet can result in diabetes and nerve problems. This reminds me that God did not create laws because He felt like he should restrict us but laws are naturally part of creation and disregard for the law will not break it or make it disappear but will only result in negative consequences. One other important point within this chapter is on page 121 where a correct understanding will result in harmony. I think our society right now is caught in the worldview that it is nature versus Scripture. When the true reality is that a correct understanding of both will bring both in harmony with each other. Of course with the unique primacy of Scripture we should make sure not to do violence to Scripture in order to make harmony.
Si On Sung's reflection on Theological Turning Point; Chap 4 When I think about the creation of humanity, I wonder why God has created human at the last. Perhaps God wanted everything prepared for man before he exists. But why couldn’t He make the man involve his creation. We know that He often does His job on this earth through human as an instrument to accomplish His purpose. Why couldn’t He use man when He created the world? Perhaps human can be bothersome in the creation process. Humans are so incapable that we could be obstacle in His job. Or humans are so feeble that He didn’t want to be jeopardized. We know that He care human being the most among his creatures. As the New Testament mentions, He loves us more than birds or animals. He could have made the humans first. But I think He wanted to give us present. It didn’t matter whether we were too feeble or incapable. Even if we could have done something, He just wanted to surprise us. Regards to “what is humanity?” one thing for sure is that we all have choice. And we can accept Jesus Christ as our Savior. And I am sure that God wants to surprise us by bringing us back to heaven.
Si On Sungs' reflection on book: Theological Turning Point; Chap 5 There were disagreements and debates of how humans are saved. The two major different views are Pelagius view and Augustine view. Pelagius says that it is possible not to sin and Augustine says it is impossible to sin. If I am correct, Seventh-day Adventist stands on somewhere between those two views. I see the problem of sin and salvation in this way. I think human’s life is like a marathon. When God told us not to sin, He is saying, don’t stop; keep running during the race. I think it is possible not to sin. However, our body gets tired. Even though the runner does not express it outwardly, he may feel fatigue and stop running. And we cannot stop from feeling that we feel like stop running as long as we feel tired. Jesus says that thinking in our mind is also sin. I don’t know if I am correct in this matter, but it is impossible not to sin in our mind because as a sinner, those kinds of thoughts just pops up in our mind without any intention (even though we can stop thinking about it when it pops up in our mind). Therefore Jesus came to save us and to eventually restore us from our corrupted body.
Si On Sung's comments on dickson morumbwa's comment
I really appreciate your comments. To understand the concept that Jesus is perfectly human and perfectly divine is hard to grasp. But even if I cannot understand fully, I and grateful that He is both, because as being both, He can save me who has fullfilled and will fulfill everything written in the Bible, and even more.
Romel Charles Reflection #3 Understanding the Christian World Ecclesiological Controversy
The Ecclesiological Controversy was one of the major theological interest of the early church. It may seem puzzling that, “the Church” was having a problem understanding, what is the church? This one of those things that puzzles me that the people that the people that comprised the church were having problems understanding themselves. The church having been called out by God to be gathered to God. The Church although being called out it can also imply many other things like a place of worship, prayer and assembly. No matter how you look at it if the early church father did not go through the struggles about what is the church then where would we be today? I mean would we have the understanding that we do have today? How would our understanding of the different images of the church be? While all of these questions are good I am still glad that they had to go through all of the struggle of coming to their own understandings of what they though the church was so that we can compare their beliefs to scripture and decide for ourselves what the church is. Even though people like Cyprian believed that if there was no Bishop then was not a church but today we know that even without a Pastor we are still the church.
I really enjoyed reading the section “How To Read The Book Of The Cosmos” in Dr. Hanna’s book. This section dealt with the relationship of science and the bible.
The dilemma that many scientists face today is how to merge science and the scriptures. Many times it seems as if the bible contradicts science and there can be no correlation. The true problem is that if scientist truly analyzed the bible and science they would have to drop some of their preconceived ideas and acknowledge that there is a God.
I have determined a long time ago that if scriptures seemingly contradict scientific discoveries I would stay with the bible until science catches up. The bible declares “The heavens are telling the glory of God” (Psalms 19:1). I am amazed of how much of the character and power of God is revealed through astronomy, archeology, biology, etc…We are told in Counsels to Parents Teachers and students that, “The whole natural world is designed to be an interpreter of the things of God.” The Psalmist declares that we are “fearfully and wonderfully made.” (Psalms 139:14)
I was impressed with an article I read in Discovery which stated the brain performs at least one quadrillion operations per second, almost a thousand times more that the best supercomputers. As much as we love our Macs or whatever computer you have, man is not capable of making a computer that can out perform the human brain. Many may claim that the bible and science are at odds with one another but we know as Christians that man will always be behind when he compares his ideas with the power of God.
“Searching For Balance” "Theological Turning Points" What is the Chruch Growing up in a Seventh-day Adventist home I can remember those exciting summers when we had our evangelistic meetings. When I was younger the meetings usually lasted for about six weeks, unlike the three week meetings we have now. [I am going somewhere with this] The closing meetings would end with a description of what constitutes God’s remnant church.
When it was explained to me as a child I believed all those outside of the Seventh-day Adventist church were apart of Babylon until they had joined our church body. But life’s experiences have taught me that one can still be apart of Babylon while in the Seventh-day Adventist church, and still be apart of the remnant while not apart of the body of Seventh-day Adventist believers. [Be patient with me as I sought through this enigma]
I am concerned that maybe our traditional interpretation of what constitutes God’s true church at times has left us as self-righteous elitist. [I want to in no way generalize because all do not fall into this category.] Augustine’s position on the church grabbed my attention when he “believed that those who outwardly seem to be within the bosom of the church and to enjoy this invisible fellowship of love nay not actually be truly Christian. Thus Augustine could say of the church, many sheep are without, and many wolves are within.”
I guess my search is for a balanced approach in which members truly become a community bound by “its unity of love, which binds members together around the deepest loyalty they know in life, God’ love in Jesus Christ.” I know all will not be perfect until Jesus comes. I can’t even promise I will not preach the traditional remnant church message. But I will keep wrestling with how to present a message that creates an atmosphere of love for all whatever our denominational background.
This effort to define our humanity fascinates me in that each theologian’s effort recognizes the need for God. Whether Pelagius or Augustine and all those in between, our need for God is still present. The question becomes, how much do we need God?
This is one of the ever-present questions I’ve found being asked by my peers. Because we're such independent people, many resist the notion that they need help even from God. They interpret that need as an insult to their ability, their intelligence. They want God to be more of a "Millionaire" lifeline that they'll call upon here and there. Surely they're smart enough and driven enough to work things out for themselves.
Our perceived need for God is intricately tied to our understanding of the very nature of sin. If we don't recognize the extent to which it separates us from God and if we think that needing God too much is an affront to our ego, our independence will get the best of us. We may eventually find ourselves in a Pelagiun camp attempting perfection.
With just fewer than 2000 years of church history and doctrine development under our Christian belts, it's easy to balk at the direction Arius took as he sought to understand the nature of Jesus Christ. But before I wave my Sword of the Spirit and take a few swings and make a few thrusts, I want to reflect on what appear to be sincerely intentioned, easy-to-make mistakes.
First, Arius "begins with the premise of God's absolute uniqueness and transcendence" (p.31). Whatever humanity experiences in reality finds its source in Him. All things come from God, the One and Only. A good premise for all of us? I think so. With 1600 years of a single-person God (as it appears to be the belief throughout at least the Old Testament), it's no wonder Arius carried on the tradition and challenged church fathers to remain true to what he believed was the truthful understanding of the person of God.
Second, without the history of grappling with such theological concepts afforded the rest of us, how can we expect that every church father would grasp the broader, contextual meanings and original intents of the Bible in it's original languages, including such words as "beget"? Here we are, SDA's 1700 years later, still fighting over whether Christ's nature was pre-fall or post-fall (and though that concept is less pressing than the nature of Christ in relationship to His Father, it still counts to support my little point). Come on, folks, let's be gracious.
In stating that "the Son must be liable to change and even to sin" (p.31) is also understandable when one considers such statements as that of the writer of Hebrews: "For He was in all points tempted as we are," and other related Scripture.
I do, however, balk a bit at Arius' mistaken interpretation of John 1. Unless one takes into consideration--and harps on-- all on-the-surface ambiguous texts related to the nature of Jesus, it's a bit hard to see how he missed out on Jesus as part of infinity: "He was with God in the beginning...through Him all things were made and without Him, nothing was made that has been made." Even so, I can see how Arius would see this text in the earthly context - the beginning of time as you and I know.
So here I am, a couple millennia down the road. I was born into the Trinitarian doctrine, and though it baffles and stretches my little mind, it hasn't been too difficult to remain true to God as Three persons. Not so for our forerunners, and thanks be to God for their tenacious reach for truth.
And thanks to Arius, who stepped forward, shook things up, and got the church's engines revved for the perilous but very necessary journey to understanding part of the mystery of the nature of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
As Christianity emerged into a full-fledged movement, continued organizational development became inevitable. Although core doctrinal issues that were anchor points for the body of "called out" ones had to be hashed out and heresy addressed, it took a while for the church to get to the point where there were established councils, creeds and canon.
As a result of structure and leadership tiers set in place, it's hard to imagine how the church would continue on as a living, dynamic organism and change agent as Bible writers (and Jesus Himself) portrayed it to be by using such metaphors as "branches of the vine," "salt of the earth," "new creation," "God's building," and, of course, the "body of Christ."
The major concerns of the church fathers were in response to the raised issues relating to discipline, government, and authority. Of course these are crucial elements of church life and they must be addressed. I wonder, however, if this is where "family" and the fellowship of the believers that Jesus and Paul cared about began to wane as the pressing matters of church function and institution and, well, clergy control, took over. Did their views on authority and submission to bishops, etc., pave the way for what we still experience--even in our Protestant liberation--a system of leadership that seems to promote a kind of clergy dependency?
Don't get me wrong...I believe in the importance of leadership and shepherding. But I don't believe in apathetic, sluggish, pew-warming congregations who wait for the word from on high--or, if faced with an unpopular leader, move heaven and earth to be rid of him/her, replacing him/her with one who will carry on the mission without members having to break any kind of a sweat.
I know early Adventism, like the early church, did not start out that way. Yet look at us now--the church of the NAD. I wonder if a revolution of our own will emerge one of these days - when church politics and governance and all those important institutional processes (and I do mean "important") will give way to answering the call of hungry souls looking for a community of living, God-breathing, loving, mission-driven Christ-followers who invest themselves in the heartbeat of the church: relationship and authentically shared devotion to each other and to Jesus. Where signs for practical, community building events such as "Forgiveness Seminars" will draw the desperate who otherwise pass by the "Watch-Out-For-the-Beast!" billboards.
The task of a creature seeking to understand itself seems from the onset, daunting! Yet to understand my nature is to give me direction in how to do life, and as we see in Christ's book of the Cosmos, all of creation requires direction from something or Someone.
In church history, there were two general camps: those who taught that I am not ultimately responsible for my sin condition and behaviors, and those who taught that I am.
Without the help of God, humanity is drawn to absolve herself from her misbehaviors and ensuing guilt. It'd be easy, though disastrous and miserable, to surrender to the popular astrological teaching of the day purporting that my environment and I are controlled by heavenly bodies.
Stoicism emphasized that Logos was "implanted" in the natural world, the structure in place; therefore, each human being's direction and outcome were predetermined. Fate. Irenaeus taught that Adam and Eve were not mature enough to choose "the better things intelligently" (p.66).
On the other hand, there were those who saw human responsibility and freedom of choice as crucial. Justin, in countering Stoicism, taught you are a rational being who can choose to do good by your rational powers.
Although Clement believed that humanity was not responsible for Adam's sinful posterity, individuals could and should gain victory over their sinful tendencies and passions. Alongside Clement was Origin, who's creative view on humanity included an intense belief that each person had freedom of choice to follow good or evil.
Although several church fathers developed theologies around the concept of human freedom of choice and responsibility, their teachings usually included some aspect of "salvation by works." This tendency is in part a response to the moral upheaval experienced in society; hedonistic living and lack of accountability left the church in the midst of chaos. Thus, many sought to draw attention to human nature and responsibility, and increased emphases on spiritual disciplines.
The result? Pelagius. He taught the goal of achieving perfection, which he believed was possible.
The response to that? Augustine...who brought the central issue of humanity's captivity to a sinful nature the forefront. Augustine made his case that Adam chose to sin, and all who follow suffer the consequences of what Tertullian termed Original Sin. We do have the freedom to ask Christ to act on our behalf in bringing life and restoration to our otherwise death-bound souls.
In a sense, Augustine's model of understanding the nature of humanity brought aspects of several other models into consideration. Aspects of some of these models are included: Yes, we are helpless. Yes, we are fated to death. But! We have a hope in Christ, who lived the life we cannot live and provides grace to desire and seek restoration. Though helpless, we ARE responsible, accountable, for our choice in asking and allowing Him to bring new life and restoration to our degenerating souls.
The Mind of Christ by Dani Carmona ~ from THE COSMIC CHRIST OF SCRIPTURE
Some years ago, I came across a reality TV show that highlighted people getting caught doing things that were out of character. It seemed that for this episode, there was a church deacon who repeatedly parked in the wrong spot at a non-church site - perhaps work. His vehicle was finally towed. A camera captured his reaction to the person whose job it was to remove his vehicle. The footage showed the deacon violently attacking the tow-truck man who – to no avail – tried to tell the deacon that this was just his job, and he could collect his vehicle at a later time. The tow-truck man recovered from the beating, the deacon was arrested, charged for assault, & I believe did some time in jail. Before being sentenced, however, this reality TV team timed an impromptu interview with the deacon on the same street where the attack took place. The interviewer of camera could be heard asking, “So aren’t you supposed to be a Christian?” Brother Deacon was silent and kept walking avoiding the attention, but the camera crew continued their work. “What was going through your mind when you beat that man up? I understand that you are a well respected member in your church and community. Is this what you are like at church?” When the deacon turned in emotion towards the camera, never missing a beat the interviewer asked, “Are you going to beat me up now?” The question leveled Brother Deacon. It leveled the audience. It looked bad for Christians. What was going through his mind? If his mind was stayed on Jesus, then what was his behavior all about? I would argue that there was something wrong with that man’s mind – indeed that there is something wrong with humanity’s mind after that catastrophic conversation near the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Well, what exactly was wrong with Brother Deacon? Was it that Brother Deacon had a psychological disorder? This is possible. There is such a psychological condition according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder, 4th Edition (DSM IX). Perhaps as a child he had an unresolved Conduct Disorder - part of the definition is being physically cruel to people, and often initiating physical fights. Or perhaps he had Antisocial Personality Disorder. Which is a condition characterized by persistent disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood. Deceit and manipulation are central features of this disorder. For this diagnosis to be given, the individual must be at least 18, and must have had some symptoms of Conduct Disorder (i.e., delinquency) before age 15. This disorder is only diagnosed when these behaviors become persistent and very disabling or distressing. Or it could have been Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED). More likely, Brother Deacon had anger management issues (towards IED), which means that he looked really good in a suit, greeted people well @ the church door on Sabbath or Sunday morning, but likely backhanded his wife when things did not go his way. So the question is – does this man have enough Christ to inherit the kingdom? According to Galatians 5: 19-21 probably not! 19The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. Those are toe-stepping texts. They are very blunt. They don’t seem to give a lot of wiggle-room to explain psychopathology. I have heard Christians saying that they have changed. What has changed? Is it the behavior, the old ways, the old man left in the watery grave of baptism? Many people have chosen to follow Christ thinking that baptism will fix them – but their minds remain the same, they have membership in with the family of God, but they of the same mindset. Perhaps because of my background in psychology / mental health, I believe that unless there is an intervention (confrontation), our minds are not likely to change. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. The brother clearly was not disposed to give the tow-guy a break. His mind reacted – I believe – to past activity. How to address this? Spiritual Intervention / Confrontation. This is how we can be relevant, by accepting the call from the Holy Spirit (in all the wonderful ways He counsels, reminds, rebukes and teaches) the opportunity to teach us to become more like the Mind of Christ. In page 107 of THE COSMIC CHRIST OF SCRIPTURE, the matter of relevance to the cosmos applies to this text - Philippians 2:5 “Let this mind [disposition/ attitude ~ φρονέω phroneō ] - be in you which was in Christ Jesus.” Our minds CAN BE transformed – a big part of that is up to us!
Comments on Theological Turning Points Today, Chapter 10
I think that the topic of who is God has been the controversy where many of us belief different. For example, the definition of God as three persons, God as only one person, God as Spirit, God as an old person with long white beard, and so on. Since we born, I think we hear these definitions, but when we have a close relationship with the Lord, He let us understand what, and who He is. Maybe you are waiting for my opinion on who is God, but I think that as Seventh day Adventist we all think similar, God as three persons, God Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. I know that not all of us think the same. Our problem has been the interpretation, how we see God. What does it mean three persons? Are they three men? Or is the Father male? Is the Holy Spirit female? The gender of Jesus Christ is the one that we are sure. It is not a controversy to define Jesus gender, but who do you think is God? How do you think He is? One thing I know, I just believe in Him (three persons), I believe in the true Church which has the true of Salvation through our Savior Jesus Christ. I won’t go further on what I read in the Bible. I don’t know how do you think, but I hope to be in heaven, and I think that is the desire of all humanity, but we need to have relationship with the Creator, obeying Him, and live our life accepting the “Sacraments, or Misteriums.” Following the teachings of the Bible, and practicing the gospel, I think is the ‘secret’ or the key of salvation that Jesus is offering to us in order to be in His kingdom where He is the King.
YES! E.G.W.’s writings are Christ-Centered. I do not want to offend no one, but who do not believe in her writing, and in addition do not think that her writings are Christ-Centered, I think is because they do not read well, or maybe they do not read at all of her writings. She was the messenger of the Lord as she described herself. I belief in her writings, and I understand that God selected her for one reason. Her writings agree with the Scriptures. She believed in Jesus as the Son of God, and specified about the Holy Spirit as divine. Also, she stated the nature of Jesus in his humanity and divinity. I don’t know, but I consider that when we read her writings we try to become more consecrate to the Lord; we just want to follow Jesus and practice his teachings. E.G.W. is the person or better to say: the theologian who best describes Jesus’ personality, identity, and mission. I feel the Holy Spirit talking to me when I am reading her writings. Without her writings the S.D.A Church would be similar to the others denominations. I understand that the Bible is the greatest light and her writings are the lesser light that take us to Scriptures.I love how she describes the divinity and the humanity of Jesus. “Christ’s humanity was united with divinity, and in this strength He would bear all the temptations…and yet Keep His soul untainted by sin. And this power to overcome He would give to every son and daughter of Adam who would accept by faith the righteous attributes of His character.” (The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, 94). What else to say? I think that this declaration of her,answer the question, but if you are doubt yet, ask the Lord for understanding, but it is clear that her writings are Christ-Centered.
The church has undergone challenges and one of the challenges involves the sacrament. I tend to believe that sacramental controversy is a creation of man to create more confusion in the church. One wonders who then is right between the Catholics and the Protestants about the number of sacraments in the church. The Catholics has seven while the Protestants have two that is Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Although it started earlier in church it again surfaces during the reformation but here more stress is on the baptism and the Lord supper. I agree how Luther encourages people to back to the bible to discover the truth and the real meaning of baptism. This actually encourages me that we need to refer contentious issue back to the bible. The Bible does not contradict itself but gives us the plain truth these basic teachings of the church. The true meaning of baptism involves the burying of sin publically and this is followed later by the Lord’s Supper which will always remind a genuine Christian to get out of the bondage of sin. I think the reformists were right when they referred people back to the bible to discover the truth. The challenge we have nowadays is whether we are leading the people back to the real truth not to the fables of men. Genuine baptism is in our heart although we saw it publically.
THEOLOGICAL TURNING POINTS The GROWTH ECONOMY of humans: Towards a Development Motif to Perceive, Experience and Accept the Trinity PART I
Development is inherent in created beings. This is true of spiritual growth and our understanding of God. We are all growing in our understanding of who God is. With the doctrine of God, we all have common ground – none of us know for sure, because we are in a growing economy. Wish I could say the same for other economies. No one has eye witness accounts - neither do we have the copyright to God. So regarding the trinity, because I believe that we are all growing, this seems like the very doctrine where we would need to take Someone’s word on it to get sleep at night. Humans fear what is unknown - this is how some justify fearing (being terrified of) God. Explaining the Trinity to a non-believer can pose a challenge. Perhaps it is because we need predictability. Some claim that God is unpredictable – I disagree. Or perhaps it is because we need assurance, and our over-reliance on our senses to give us assurance. Others have a pragmatic / mathematical issue with the trinity: How can 3 = 1? Well, we need faith. A growing faith….
PART II The Old Testament affirms that God is one, yet, even here the pattern of three is implied in Elohim (plural) and then in the New Testament, there is the evidence of triadic patterns, of Jesus teaching regarding His Father, the Comforter who would be sent by Him and His Father, while He maintained that He and His Father were one. There was a growing understanding of God from one, to God being in Christ + the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the godhead. As this understanding developed there were differences of opinion. Regarding the Trinity, the early church had its hands full of controversy for the first three centuries. The Nicean Crisis provided some clarity on the various positions of the leaders – Arius believing that they all had different natures or essence & that the Holy Spirit was probably a creature of the Son. Athanasius took the opposing view that all three had the same substance – he also had the strong position regarding the Spirit being divine. I see the developments of Augustine on the Trinity having a significant contribution. He wrote between 399 and 419 on what he considered to be one of the highest and most important aspects of theology: that he accepted the idea of a triune God, distinct in persons yet one in substance. For Augustine there was an absolute unity in the Trinity & all subordination must be eliminated. What a mystery! From God is One to God is Three…. The Bible bears testimony that the Holy Spirit is a person, not an “it” - as I once thought as a child. The Holy Spirit sends, speaks, bears witness, prevents, comforts and appoints. These are all activities of a person, not a smoke, my thoughts on the trinity as a child, were well – not as mature as they are now. Perhaps some day, I will share these….
PART III OK It’s time to come clean on some of my early thoughts. This - by the way - is my first time sharing this information – so go easy on me! When I was a child, I thought that the Holy Spirit was a man that would protect the house. Although this model of the Holy Spirit is not far off biblically – it is what I envisioned that He looked like. In my five year-old mind, I thought that he wore a long robe, grayish in color, a pillow for his head, and that he would crawl around the house in cheetah-like speed on all fours like a security guard protecting our family and home. These were some of my earliest memories of the Holy Spirit – they were certainly friendly. Well, I had some misconceptions about the Holy Spirit then, as I am certain that I still have some now. As I have matured, so has my understanding about God. I am not through maturing. Neither has my understanding of God. I did have some parts that resonate with Scripture – that God is friendly, that He is our protector and will always be there for us. When I was a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child, but as I became an adult, I continued growing in my understanding of God. So, here is a scenario, after the millennium has passed, sin has been eradicated forever, and another 16,000 years have passed. Having reached 17,000 years with a glorified body, and mind, no sin, in the presence of Jesus, and the angels will I have figured out the Trinity then? Or will the perfect understanding be completed in time for my one billionth birthday? Not a chance – although I will know more, I will still be developing my understanding of the Trinity…. To Be Continued….
Major Thrusts in the "Salvation Doctrine": A Stained-glass Window Illuminating Eternal Life
Having re-read the "Soteriological Controversy" for the second time, I am struck again by how the process of coming into a larger understanding of biblical teaching requires more than one human being. The doctrine of salvation poignantly demonstrates this reality, perhaps more acutely than other doctrines; perhaps because it is so complex and rich and all-encompassing to the very essence of what it means to be human (even the Bible must employ multiple images and separately present various facets of what it means to be saved). And perhaps because it speaks so intimately to the hopes and fears and cries of each human heart in his or her own environment and set of circumstances.
So there are the apostolic fathers, the apologists such as Justin steeped in Greek philosophy and culture, who featured salvation as an experience of illumination - true knowledge, faith, life, and immortality. This thrust arose from their experience within their circumstances and thought construct.
Then there is Irenaeus trumpeting salvation as a restorative process - that upon being saved, we are restored into the pre-fall state our father Adam enjoyed. Tertullian emphasized salvation as "satisfying" God, brushing with the biblical concept of satisfying the eternal law, but smacking to loudly of earned salvation - and the Greek idea of appeasing gods.
The Eastern theologians jumped on the the salvation bandwagon with their thrusts as well: Origen heralded salvation as a victory experience; the overcoming, conquering, of God over death and demons. Here, perhaps, lie the roots of the Adventist expression of the cosmic struggle between Christ and Satan.
Athanasius and other Eastern theologians focused on the effects salvation should have on the sinner-become-saved: we are now partakers of the divine nature (true!) and therefore are some form of God (not true!). (This teaching can tempt toward a pantheistic approach to God, I think.)
All these parts of the picture of salvation (pure color, faulty stains, etc.) came to a head in the drama of the controversy between Augustine and Pelagius, who--again--each bore truth mixed with the stain of error (Augustine's predestination; Pelagius' teaching that we begin the salvation process on our own). And throughout the development of the doctrine of salvation, the concept of man's need to DO SOMETHING in order to get in good standing with God kept finding its way into the picture. Until Luther.
It would be fascinating to research how the environment, circumstances, culture, and individual needs of each major figure wrought their piece of the picture in this doctrine. And each of their contributions, warts, heresies and all, aided in the forming the exquisite masterpiece that will, as Ellen white puts it, be our song and study throughout eternity.
This should bring comfort and motivation to each of us when we doubt the value of our discussions, studies, questions, challenges, and contributions to understanding God and humans and life and eternity - salvation. It all helps to bring more clarity to the picture, which in turn allows the truth to shine through more brilliantly to illumine a picture in this life-giving window of our lives.
A I reflect on the meaning of Baptism and the Lord's Supper in light of the controversies, it seems to me that we are still dealing with some of the questions that were dealt with in the centuries past.
A person's belief about Baptism is very much dependent on their conviction about the nature of man and also the nature of salvation. In the Seventh-day Adventist context we do not believe in the mystical transubstiation of the Lord’s Supper or infant baptism or baptism of the dead etc. As I read the chapter on sacraments I noticed that emphasis was not given to the foot-washing ceremony that is often part of communion services. This reminds me of the question that I have received concerning whether the foot-washing is a crucial part of the Lord’s Supper or if it is just something we like to add for the sake of ceremony. It has been explained to me that the foot-washing ceremony is a re-baptism of sorts and that it links our baptism proper with our commitment at each Lord’s Supper.
For Seventh-day Adventists there is nothing mystical about Baptism or the Lord’s Supper, they are symbols of deeper truths. I wonder if this leads us to approach it with less awe and respect?
As someone who serves with and for young people I recognize also our church’s anxiety in certain contexts about baptizing children or giving them access to the Lord’s Supper. There are those who frown on children and teens being baptized or taking the Lord’s Supper because they are not seen as mature enough. I suspect that some of the hesitation to allow these is because of the infant baptism and open communion that is characteristic of catholic and other protestant denominations.
I do hope that we can re-examine what the sacraments of baptism, the Lord’s Supper (including foot-washing) especially with young people. We don’t want to embrace mysticism but at the same time I think we should always search for the awesome truth behind the symbols that we so often engage in.
I’ll leave the issue of Re-baptism to Miss Simona Mills; I do believe she is our research expert on this:-)
Theological Turning Points: Ch7 Sacramental Controversy; what are the Sacraments?
In Protestant, there are only two sacraments: Baptism and Lord’s supper, where as Roman Catholic has seven sacraments including those two: baptism, confirmation, Holy Eucharist, penance, holy orders, matrimony and extreme unction. I learned that that the word sacrament was associated with the word mystery. The mystery of God revealed in Jesus Christ. When Jerome translated “mysterion” into Latin, he sometimes used the word “sacramentum.” Then the second-century apologists used “mysterion” to indicate the religious secret rites or cults. The word “sacramentum had the meaning of surrendering oneself to the authority. Therefore baptism is one of sacraments, because it symbolizes the dedication of one’s life. There are many sacraments, but most of them were appointed by Apostles and only the baptism and the Lord’s Supper are appointed by Jesus, therefore, church leaders such as Alexander of Hales and Thomas Aquinas concluded that those two should be the only true sacraments. It seems that Catholic started to put the value in the act of sacrament itself. They stressed that “if you do it, then you are saved.” However, the reformers stressed on the signs and the meaning of the sacraments and not on the act itself. It reminded me of the Pharisees in the time of Jesus. They focused on the form and did not see the meaning of it. On the other hand, protestant nowadays stresses too much on the meaning of the words and they tend to disregard on the form. I think there needs to be balanced between those too.
As time goes by, many questions emerge and many answers are proposed. And from those answers, new questions emerge which leads to new answers. It seems that new era and new generation brings endless opportunities and possibilities for new thoughts. For some issues, we may never be able to answer them until He comes. Even He comes, it may take eternity to understand them. One thing for sure is that we are exposed to more ideas and we are growing in knowledge. Because of new questions, we search for new answers in the Scripture. Today, many have free access to the Bible. They can read whenever they want for themselves. People tend to focus on the Scripture and want to know what the Bible has to say about the issue. On the other hand, some people question about the nature of the Bible, whether it is infallible or not. Just because one question solved doesn’t mean we are all happy, because it brings the next questions, and all those critical issues in Christianity are on going phenomena. As we look back Christian history, it wasn’t smooth. There was intense arguments, and often involved violence. However, as we try to make more people involved and try to understand each other, Christianity would be spread and enriched.
Respond to Evangelista Polanco Comments on Theological Turning Points Today, Chapter 10
Thank you for your thoughts. I think we all have different ideas about God. but one thing that is mostly important is we shall continually have personal relationship with Him and that we all go to heaven. I think we can have different image of God based on our relationship with God, but as you said, when we sincerely seek Him, He let us understand what, and who He is.
“BY THE POWER INVESTED IN ME” – Simona Mills – November Blog 1 When my older brother and sister were getting married (not to each other of course) by an SDA preacher and a Justice of the Peace (respectively) they stated “…by the power invested in me…” The power they speak of is the ability to marry people in their respective state. But this whole thing about power transfer got me thinking about the Authority Controversy chapter in our textbook.
The sentence on page 98 (first paragraph) raised my eyebrow and sent me plunging into the word of God: “Jesus transferred his authority to his disciples, including the authority to forgive sins…” One of the texts used to support this claim is John 20:23. Jesus had just risen from the dead, ran in to Mary and then went to his father. That same evening he visited the disciples who were cowering from the Jews. He breathed on them and said in verse 22 “… “Receive the Holy Spirit.” Then in verse 23 he says, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” Is that power invested in them to forgive sins? Could this be a proof text for the Catholic Priestley duties in the confessional box? The other texts in Matthew that McKim uses to support the transfer of authority to forgive sins from Jesus to the disciples can be stretched to fit but John seems to be talking about more than the forgiveness of sins. CAN ANYONE PICK UP WHERE I LEAVE OFF?
It was great to see one of my favorite fore-fathers Tertullian talking about the term sacrament (sacramentum). He saw sacrament as having a connection between conversion from paganism to a new commitment of obedience and service to God in Jesus Christ (McKim pg 117). He saw sacrament as referring to baptism and baptism as an “oath of allegiance”. In fact Tertullian actually referred to the Christian religion itself as a sacrament since it pointed to the divine mystery revealed in the gospel. His line of reasoning plunged me back to the days I was in grade school and had to repeat the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. We did this while placing our right hand over our heart and standing at attention facing the flag. Think about it. Even beyond baptism, if I pledged my allegiance to Christ what would that look like? Do I place my hand on my heart while on my knees repeating the Lord’s Prayer? I remember our teacher being very specific about showing the proper respect to the American Flag. This respect is evident when we go to any sporting event where the national anthem is sung. The entire arena is on their feet, standing almost at attention with their hands over their hearts and facing the flag.
While baptism shows our initial pledge to following Christ, I am interested to know what your thought are on how we daily pledge our allegiance to the Christ of the Universe; the Christ of your life.
The Cosmic Christ Part 4: How to Read the Book of the Cosmos
“GREEN”
Especially in our age people want to know how we can, if we can, reconcile Science with the Bible. Dr Hanna’s chapter argues that although the word “science” is not used in the Bible there is a key relationship between science and scripture. Science is the study of God’s cosmos and thus it should perhaps be more central to some of our scriptural discussions. Some of the recent experiences below show me that this discussion of nature and scripture is relevant today:
Anyone remember the presentation in Seminary Chapel “Was Ellen White Green?” I was quite surprised by the topic and even more interested that there were so many supporting quotes from Mrs. White.
The other day I was browsing books and I noticed that there is a new “Green” Bible. All the pertinent texts about environment etc have been highlighted in green. It is made out of recyclable, biodegradable materials and to top it all there is a foreword from the Archbishop Desmond Tutu which is sure to give the added incentive for “green” activists to buy this Bible.
In my Genesis class we have been talking about the different messages of the book. There is certainly a theology of creation, land and environmental prosperity. As I think about the “green” movement that Andrews University and other organizations are participating in I guess it’s time for us to really do some theological reflection on what role nature plays in Scripture and what the implications are for us today. I believe that this section on God’s Cosmos shows us that Nature is a revelation of God and therefore an area that is worthy of our study and theological reflection.
What is Humanity? The Theological Turning Points begins with OT perspective: human was created in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1:26,28), center of creation (Gen. 2:7-8; 18-23), and summarize from these two points if these two accounts show the dependence of humanity on God. Human are created by God and rely on God for their continuing life and existence. Human are seen in a creaturely relationship with God, on whom they depend, and yet they are distant from God in terms of their lives (Isa 45:11; Job 10:8-12). Humanity is also portrayed as social and corporate in nature—means continuous dependence on God and on other human beings. And sin has restricted all relationships. Dependence and relationship are two words that to me important on at this point. This remind me that to depend on God and maintain good relationship with Him and others. Without dependency and harmonious relationship with God and others, I will lose my status as human, and it would put me not on the right track of life.
Reflection on Salvation Theology is interesting to me. Why, because from the book I read, there are various words to explain it. The words such as: redemption, freedom, reconciliation, justification, satisfaction, illumination, restoration, peace with God, victory, or deification are used to define Salvation. But it seems to me that all the definition is good for the purpose of theological study, but would not as easy to lead reader to understand its spiritual emphasis. I would recommend Bible as the best resource to know everything—some time explanation to the Bible would be more difficult than the Bible itself.
It is mentioned on Chapter 6 of Theological Turning point that “frequently Scripture was the primary point of theological reference, but as the church developed, other sources of authority began to find their places as well.” Hermeneutic—various principles of interpretation had contributed to various ways to different channels of authority. As cited from The Church in Search of Its Self Robert S. Paul says: “The first, as represented by Roman Catholicism, appeals to the church as the living custodian of the gospel and the continuing historical manifestation of Christ’s authority on earth. The second, represented by Protestantism, is sola Scriptura ; it appeals to the Bible, the written record of the gospel, as the basic authority for the church. A third approach has emerged prominently at various stages in church history and is represented by the Quakers as well as the contemporary charismatic movement, among others; it appeals to the Spirit and individual revelation as the ultimate form of authority." I would agree and encourage the tota, sola, and prima Scriptura principle to conform what is the right source to which the church appeals for authority.
With regards the social nature of humanity in the image of divinity, Dr Hanna explains it on page 90-91 that Ellen White agrees with Scripture that God has created humanity in the image of divinity. And quoting several texts from her books to support the idea of “as divinity is social, so is humanity.” “We are dependent upon one another, closely bound together by the ties of human brotherhood”. In the human brotherhood it takes all kinds of talents to make a perfect whole. We are members of one another. “We are woven together in the web of humanity. The evil that befalls any part of the great human brotherhood brings peril to all.” How important for us to have a better understanding on this particular idea, the web of humanity, the need to have a spirit to furnish Christian evangelical endeavor.
When starting to read this chapter, I did not realize that this chapter was to complement the previous. I thought this chapter was going to show how Christ is the theme of Mrs. White’s writings. Although it does, it focuses more specifically on the unity in Divinity and unity in diversity of Christ. Three points are used to show unity between scripture and Mrs. White. They are that Divinity is social in nature, secondly, Christ is human and divine, thirdly, Christ accomplished a divine human connection through his divinity unified with humanity. One part that stood out the most is page 94 where Mrs. White says that the power the Christ had to overcome temptation is available to us now. This I must pray over because this is so powerful. I pray that I can understand this fully and fully implement this truth into my life. A second part that stood out to me is on page 91. I truly believe that we dependent on each other. We must support each other as a community and in truth we need each other. I believe we must strive to create more community within our church because our society is heading in the opposite direction of less community.
This chapter gave an overview of current theological areas of discussion. One thing that stood out is that the issues of centuries past are still being discussed today. Questions such as who is Jesus, what is the church, and where is authority still play an important part in theological study. One area that stood out is what is the church. I see a shift towards unification, especially with the WCC and the Lutheran-Catholic agreement. Partly I am nervous about a world unification of religion and at the same time I believe it must happen as we understand prophecy and end times. I think meanwhile we must tell other about Christ while there is relative peace still on earth. Another areas that I noted is in the chapter on humanity. From my research project I discovered that the worldwide Christian church is open to a holistic view of humanity as apposed to a separate spiritual entity called the soul. This may be an opportunity to reach others in other Christian groups by sharing our belief in soul being the unity of body and the breath of life. Finally, I noted that creation/evolution issue was not mentioned in the chapter. I believe that this issue is becoming a major turning point for Christianity because is affects everything we believe about Christ, salvation, the authority of scripture.
Comments on Chapter 2, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture. The Scripture has not only been viewed but acclaimed before the time of the Reformation as the final authority. In discussing this principle, Dr. Hanna did a good job in emphasizing the proper attitude with which seekers of scripture should approach the Bible with. This principle is highlighted by the “Gospel Prophet” when he exclaims, “For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little” (Isa. 28: 10). Therefore, Scripture is the guide in matters of knowledge concerning Christ and the Cosmos. I am convinced that this chapter could have delved much deeper into this concept. It is obvious in the chapter that proper methods for reading God’s word must be used to get a correct understanding the underlying meanings found there in. The point of emphasis is, the Bible is not a story book. The message within the passages should be understood in the total picture of the Scripture because “no Scripture is of any private interpretation” or the prophet’s own exposition (1Peter 1: 20). Thereby, a text should be studied in the totally of Scripture. The chapter underscores the importance of giving the Bible its rightful place in terms of authoritative Word of God.
Comments on Chapter 10, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture: Are Ellen G. white’s writings relevant to the cosmos?
It is a wonderful experience to recognize God in nature. Growing up on a farm and a rural area in Africa helped me to appreciate nature. As a child I used to go in the woods eating different kinds of fruits. And I could imagine how wonderful God is to have made all kinds of flavors, and my mind would just go back to (Gen 1: 12) And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. There were of cause obstacles and dangers among those I remember are the snakes. Since I love plants, fruits, and vegetation as a whole I was not deterred, I killed those which I would and flee when I was over come by fear. Being on the sea when others were seasick, Ellen White says “she enjoyed every minute of it.” “Oh, the wonderful works of God! So much above our comprehension! He, at one Glance, beholds the highest heavens and the midst of the sea.” He is our Redeemer. We may trust Him in the storm as well as in sunshine.” For those who are parents and those planning to be in the future, I would suggest you introduce nature as you tell the love of God to your children early in their lives. They will be able to know “God’s character, thoughts, glory, wisdom, power and the law, as “the whole natural world is designed to be an interpreter of the things of God.” Ellen continues, “the book of nature and the written word do not disagree.”
Comments on chapter in Theological Turning Point: The Growth Economy of humans, Towards a Development Motif to Perceive, Experience and Accept the Trinity
Hierarchical structures have been at center of study within the Christian faith since the early days. Say, since Jesus was here and the disciples were after greatness in the kingdom. As Christianity grew, organizational development became apparently necessary. Although core doctrinal issues that were points of focus had to be addressed, it took a while for the church to get to the point where there were established councils, creeds, canon and work together. Leadership wrangles took center stage, till Jesus said if you want to lead, serve. The major concerns of the church fathers were in response to the raised issues relating to discipline, government, and authority. Of course these are crucial elements of church life and they must be addressed. I ask myself, if this is where it all began as a family of and the fellowship of the believers that Jesus and Paul cared for what went wrong? Did their views on authority and submission to bishops, and others give way to Protestant liberation? Jesus said keep my flock (feed my sheep), it is important to a leader but more important to be a shepherd for Christ. Our church development is inherent and has a role in lives. This is true of spiritual growth and our understanding of God. We are all growing in our understanding of who God is. With the doctrine of God, we all have common ground – none of us know for sure, because we are in a growing economy. Christians or non Christian live in this world and struggle in the same economies, but God has set aside his people.
Comments on chapter 5, Theological Turning Point We often read how scholars and other readers had disagreements and debates of how humans were (are) saved. Two strong characters I read with divergent views were Pelagius view and Augustine view. Pelagius said that it is possible not to sin but Augustine differed and said it is impossible to sin. Between these two we have the Seventh-day Adventists’ views. The problem of sin and salvation in this way has been the central focus since Adam and Eve. When God told us not to sin, man did the opposite, sinned, hence our turning point was established. We established our own race (running the opposite) and not that which God intended us to run. Jesus established a link and lived a sinless life. If we strictly follow as Jesus lived, I think it is possible not to sin. However, our human nature has a tendency of weakness, body gets tired. Even if we don’t express it outwardly, we may feel fatigue and stop running. Jesus was able to know when he or the disciples were physically tired or mentally. Sin once conceived in the mind becomes fruitful by the physical action. Our minds are corrupt by nature and will only be transformed when Jesus comes.
Comment on chapter 3 of Theological Turning Points By Donald McKim The author talks of different of the church which Jesus taught and presented. In the New Testament which he wants us to examine and relate to who Jesus Christ was and is. The reflections I get are those of Jesus’ statements which include “the salt of the earth”, “branches of the vine”, etc. The Church is the branch and He is the Vine. He promises "I will build my church". "…Upon this rock I will build my church…," Jesus promised (Matt. 16: 18, see "Upon This Rock" and "Kingdom of Heaven" in Great Truths, accessed from home page). Indeed, Jesus did built his church and kingdom (Acts 5: 11, Col. 1: 13). And I say to thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). The "Church" Jesus was speaking about was not a building but a group of people, all who follow Him, the Universal church. I am the vine, you are the branches. The one who abides in me while I abide in him produces much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. There are several ways the passage has been presented. There is more such as, “I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing…” I did not get the clear cut point the author was putting across which is different from other sources.
The authority issue is so important to discuss in part because it makes us think through who or what we've allowed to rule us. And on one hand we're scared (of the Pope or of the power Jesus said would be ours) while on the other hand we're overconfident (that the Bible will make everything crystal clear or that we have power in and of ourselves).
I wish it could all be a bit simpler, that Jesus would just hold all power and that's it. The part of the authority issue I'm currently questioning is that of Scripture. I recognize that it is God-breathed, but what does that mean? Does it mean that I take everything said about God as being God's words about himself? For example, we often use the Psalms when talking about how we connect with God and when describing who God is. However, I wonder if there are Psalms that give a description of God but should only be thought of as one man's take on it, not fuel for our fires.
I'm afraid that the authority we give to Scripture is sometimes distorted because we haven’t taken the time to think through the implications. Take Psalm 125:4 which asks God to do good to those who are good and upright in heart. It’s a petition not a description of how God has acted and yet we’ll take that verse to support our idea that because we’ve done good and are upright in heart, God will do good to us. And then it troubles us when bad things happen to the good and upright.
Authority reminds us to always look right back at the Source no matter who or what else has been given authority. What is God saying?
Reading about the eschatological controversy has made me more aware of the important connection between the “already” and the “not yet” in terms of how we make sense of the present kingdom and the future kingdom. While it’s nice to think of the future and the possibility of God feedings us “dainty treats,” I think it’s harder to make sense of how the kingdom has already come and what we’re supposed to do with/for it. Like Barth, I think God’s kingdom “escapes all intellectual systematizing,” but I still want to have a better understanding of its present manifestation.
It’s quite easy to do as the papacy did and claim one’s institution as God’s kingdom on earth especially when I believe we have so much truth. However, that would be far from what God desires and would move us further from having a strong Luther-like desire for the coming of the last days. And this is another reason why we must understand the already-not-yet principle—we can’t afford to put too much emphasis on either the present or the future when obviously both are important to the finishing of the work of God.
One of the best ways I’ve found to live in both present and future is to use the gifts God has given us to present the Gospel. That way we are of present good to our communities and we are pointing them toward home.
The Triadic Formula: Reflection on Chapter one from Theologcial Turning Points
Who is God? This was the question the early church fathers attempted to answer. Its a big question! It reminds me of God's discourse with Job. "Where you there when I laid the foundation of the earth?...Have you commanded the morning since the days began and caused the dawn to know its place...Have you entered into the springs of the sea or walked in the recesses of the deep?...Can you send forth lightnings, that they may go and say to you,'Here we are'?"(ESV) Who is God? What a question! Our finite humanity cannot fully comprehend who God is. He in many ways is mystery to us.
And yet, there is much that we do know. McKim points out that there were three agreed upon ideas about God preceeding the Council of Nicaea: "1) God is one and not two or three gods as in pagan religions 2) God is revealed in three ways as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit 3) the Father and the Son are distinct from each other and thus should not be equated so as to erase differences between them." Although, the debates to follow these preceeding agreements were fierce there was some widely accepted level of clarity regarding who God is. Further, the bible writers, particularly the Gospel writers and Paul, utilize different language to express the triadic formula and yet all protray God the Father, God the Son, and Holy Spirit.
Thus, the problem appears not to be one of understanding as much as it is one of communication. There is a level of understanding we can gain from our experience that cannot always be expressed in language. The early church fathers had an understanding of God which is emphasized by the areas of agreement however, they faced challenges when they tried to communicate their understanding of triune monotheism within the context of Greek philosophy. Whoa! You try philosophically explaining how God is one but He has a Son and a Spirit that exist distinctively enough for all to be present at the baptism of Jesus but are united in such a way that they cannot be considered three gods. Philosophers are still struggling today to find language that can accurately protray what we (on some level) can intiutively understand. The problem is communication.
This is analogous to an event within the Seventh-day Adventist Church - the infamous book entitled, Questions on Doctrine. This book was an attempt to relate Seventh-day Adventist beliefs to other Evangelicals. The book produced outrage among some in our church, in large part, because of the way particular beliefs were explained. A conference about this historic book was recently held here at Andrews University in 2007. 50 years after the book was published, this conference demonstrated that much of the core beliefs of the arguing factors differed very little, however, the emphasis in their explanations were quite different. Nevertheless, they all were able to share the same room for three days in love and harmony.
No doubt, the early church fathers were fighting with the same thing. Each of them guarding against certain extremes and speaking to different audiences developed ways of communicating various aspects of a truth they all believed.
In no way does this minimize the depth of trinity or the necessity to struggle to find ways to communicate that depth. However, it does suggest that as we struggle it might be helpful to realize that we are struggling to communicate a mystery we all embrace. Thus, as we struggle let us struggle in a way that allows for the inevitable falters, because in them we might find bits of the truth along the way.
How Can I Be Saved?: Reflection on Chapter 5 the Soteriological Controversy from Theological Turning Points
McKim opens up this chapter with a dozy! He immediate exposes us to all the complexity of Soteriology. He notes how to describe salvation, “involve a number of related theological issues, including the grace of God, the work of Christ, and human ability or inability to respond by faith. Further, the doctrine of salvation or redemption encompasses the atonement…and justification…, as well as sanctification” (p76) and glorification. Just to have some focus Kim focuses on Justification.
While reading this chapter I felt a sense of awe. McKim enumerates seven different ways that the New Testament speaks about salvation. Particularly during this portion, I was struck by the multifaceted power one sacrifice has upon all humanity. Often there is a particular motif each of us emphasize because of our experience or culture. In part that is the beauty of salvation there is an angle from which it can be understood that speaks to every tribe, people, and nation. However, to look at and understand salvation from several of its angles to see a awe-inspiring beauty.
Currently, I am taking Doctrine of the Sanctuary with Roy Gane. In his book, Altar Call, he examines the articles and the offerings presented in the sanctuary as a means to see the beauty of Christ sacrifice and his heavenly ministry foreshadowed. Each angle gives a new insight and fresh perspective the work God is doing throughout earth’s history. And with each new insight comes a deepening of my heart to the God who chooses to involve himself so intricately in the salvation of humanity.
What is even more amazing is that it for the ceaseless ages of eternity we will continue to learn more about God’s rescue plan for humanity. But for now, I will gather from those who have gone before. For the apostolic fathers salvation was illumination, for the Ireneaus it was restoration, for Tertullian it was satisfaction, for Origen it was victory, and for Athanasius it was deification. For me…well, its just amazing!
SPEAKING IN SURROUND SOUND! by Dani Carmona Here are some of my thoughts in response to Let The Holy Scriptures Speak! - an astute chapter from the Cosmic Christ of Scripture.
“How can the Bible be Holy? Is not the Bible simply a book of parables and mythology, written by men for men? Is not the parable simply a short story, never intended to be taken literally?” This was - in essence - the position of one of my co-workers some years ago – she had big doubts. My co-worker and friend - was very logical. She believed that there was a scientific explanation for everything. Data and hard facts was the key to her worldview. She was deelply impresse, then, with double-blind studies about cancer patients who were prayed over recovering faster and dis better in the long-run (even if slightly) than their comrades who were not prayed for. She simply had no logical response to this. Only silence. We had several casual conversations. It’s clear, atheism has not lost its charm. Although it is becoming quite “metro” to have faith – the group questioning the authenticity of Holy Writ is alive and well. I believe that a host of witnesses in history, archeology, and nature lend strong evidence to the Judeo-Christian claim that the Scriptures are authentic. When taken together, sprinkled, with a little faith, I believe the Scriptures come alive in a Surround-Sound quality. In an eclectic world-view, the post-modern mind has a duty to consider the historical and authenticity argument pertaining to Letting the Scriptures speak.
There is a historical Jesus. Non-believing Jews and Romans wrote about his life, death, and the empty tomb. Those were the non-believing folks! We were many writers that fall into this category! The implications are awe-inspiring! If non-believers were witnesses to the life and miracles of Jesus, then we have a massive situation here in favor of the Gospel. Then of course, there is that fact that textual material meets & passes historical authenticity tests that other writs of antiquity pass – in essence because they have not been tampered with, if we accept secular writs as historical sources, we must do the same with scriptural evidence. Therefore, from a legal position, the evidence is simply too strong to abandon the Scriptures as myth. Also, regarding the effects of persecution on the converts to Christianity, I believe that under duress a liar would come clean. In other words if the disciples were lying, under persecution, and threat many would come clean about their deception - they did not. Multiples of people remained faithful! So, yes indeed, Let The Scriptures Speak!
The Millennium: Reflections on Chapter 9 of Theological Turning Points
The issues of eschatology center largely around the millennium. Today there are premillennialist, postmillennialist, and amillennialist. Premillennials believe Christ second coming will usher in a thousand year reign of Christ on earth (it is important to note that some believe this is actually a definition of Chiliasm and the Premillennialism is broader, Seventh-day Adventist would fall in that group). Postmillenials believe Christ second coming will be after thousand years of peace, pospertity, and Christian dominance on earth. Amillennials believe that Revelation 20 is speaking symbolically and the thousands years will not be literal but spiritual. And for each of these there are several diversions. These varying views have risen out of over a thousand years of dialogue and debate with little consensus but some fantastical and helpful ideas.
The early church fathers suggested everything from the interpretative views found in the Epistle of Barnabas, which argued the world would last six thousand years mirroring the six days of creation and then there would be a seventh-day (one thousand years) of rest to more New Age views such as that from Origen, which suggested the kingdom of God was an, “apprehending of divine truth and spiritual reality, as the indwelling of the Logos, or as ‘the spiritual doctrine of the ensouled Logos imparted through Jesus Christ’”(pp. 156-157). The development since the church fathers has built largely upon Augustine and has retooled many of the ideas prior to him.
This debate cannot be taken to lightly as it has implications upon the body and soul, salvation, the work of the church, the ministry of Christ, and role of His kingdom. Christ said the kingdom of God is at hand and yet there is still a future element (based upon our Adventist understanding) that is to be fulfilled. These issues also have political implications that cannot be fully discussed here, however, much of United States foreign policy is built upon dispensational postmillennialism that restores Israel.
There is not a final word on this subject. As an Adventist I agree with our position of the millennium – Christ will return and take His children home and we will live in heaven with Him for a thousand years and return back to earth in the New Jerusalem at the end of the thousand years. While I stand with this position this chapter has again opened my eyes to the complexity and importance of the issue. As believers we must continue healthy dialogue not so that we can have the final answer but in order that we might sanctify our minds with the truth we discover along the way.
By the way, did anyone catch this quote: “Some church groups have come into existence solely because of their own eschatological understanding and their time table for specific future events”(p152)…I think he’s talking about us yall! ☺
The Divine and Human Nature of Christ: Reflections on Chapter 6 & 7 from the Cosmic Christ of Scripture
Christ is both human and divine! In chapters 6 and 7 of Dr. Hanna’s book we find this discussion grappled with again. How can Christ be both fully human and fully divine? Or even more importantly how can Christ be fully human and sinless? These and many more have been the basis for much debate and discussion in Christendom. However, these questions seem to misplace our attention on the how. In its fullness it is a great mystery. I believe the key issue is what Christ accomplished because he was both divine and human. Two powerful arguments are made about what Christ accomplished. They are found under the Christ connection “Jesus as Restorer of full human personhood.” In chapter six this concept is supported by biblical references on pages 80-83. In chapter seven this concept is supported by Ellen White quotes on pages 92-95. According to the idea presented in these two sections of the book, Christ in His human body restores human personhood and the church and He makes it possible for humans to be partakers of the divine nature. Here lies the power of the Christian and the Church. What was lost in humanity and subsequently the Church is found again in Christ. However, not only that but we may also, once again, be partakers of Christ divine nature. In other words we may have intimacy with Christ. He is the one who asks of us to deny self, follow him, suffer, endure, and more. However, He is the same one who we may go to, in order that we may accomplish what He has asked. For without His sacrifice, it could not and cannot be accomplished. He restored everything we lost in the Garden of Eden through His divine and human nature during his time here on earth. We can rejoice because we have a Savior who is our brother in our infirmities. “He took our nature and overcame, that we through taking His nature might overcome.” What an awesome God! What a wonderful work He has done! What an awesome life we can live through Him!
A further note should be made, by Christ taking on humanity exampled the unity he desires of his church. Christ took on the fallen nature of humanity and united with divinity that it might be redeemed from death. Christ is our example and thus Paul challenges. Paul says we are to be many members but unified in one body, the body of Christ. Although, among believers there is a diversity, that diversity should come together in unity to witness to the world regarding the redeeming love of our Savior. This is how people will know we are disciples of the Living God because we have love towards one another (John 13:35). Thus, as Christ unified divinity and humanity, let us also do likewise, working towards unity among one another.
Further Musings on Unity: Reflections on Chapter 4 Cosmic Christ of Scripture
After reading Chapter 7 “Are Ellen White’s Writings Christ-Centered?” I am compelled to comment on Chapter 4 “Are Ellen White’s Writings Biblical?” In my discussion of Chapter 7 I focused on the concept of Christ as restorer of the human personhood. Specifically, that he has made us partakers of the divine nature. The bible speaks of this and Ellen White clearly discusses it in her writings. In unity with that thought (and possibly the theme of the whole book) is the following quote found in Chapter 4 on page 50, “The book of nature and the written word do not disagree: each sheds light on the other. Rightly understood they make us acquainted with God and his character by teaching us something of the wise and beneficent laws through which he works.” Therefore, it can also be concluded that Scripture and Nature play a role in restoration. In as much as scripture and nature point to Christ and are valuable because of Christ, there is a certain sense in which they help humanity in our process of restoration. Nature and scriptures help humans comprehend the benefits of the sacrifice of Christ and the requirements of living a righteous life. They are not the Restorer, for Christ alone holds that title; however, they are aids in our restoration. We must not exalt them to a position of the Restorer but Christ points to them and gives them authority. Therefore, when utilized in the proper context they lead us to “adore his name and to have intelligent trust in his word” (p50) and thus, compel us to become acquainted with the divine nature He offers to us.
The Mind of Christ: Reflections on Chapter 9 of the Cosmic Christ of Scripture
“But we have the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2:16). In Chapter 9, “What does the Bible say?” an extremely important component to the entire discussion of God’s three books, and in particular the book of the Cosmos, is exposed. It is the offering God gives to us, which Paul illuminates in His epistle to the Corinthians – “the mind of Christ.” What a powerful gift and one important to rightly understanding the Cosmos. The understanding of the Cosmos has been and is a challenge for humanity, particularly Christians. Over the years many of have chosen to compromise precious theology in order to accommodate for “scientific discoveries” and others have rejected “modern science” altogether after recognizing its limitations. However, under the headings “The Natural and the Spiritual” and “Philosophy: Love of Wisdom” Dr. Hanna suggests that there is way to do science biblically. Science does not need to be abandoned but there needs to be a metamorphosis of the minds of those attempting to understand the cosmos. As Dr. John Baldwin would put it, we need to view the world through “Son-glasses.” This principle of viewing the world and all of human experience with a transformed mind is central for balance theology and a balance life. While there are many things that the devil has distorted and abused in this world, we should not be so quick to discard and discount. There is much that can be learned and theology that can be expanded when we view the world through “Son-glasses!”
THEOLOGICAL TURNING POINTS - About the Authority in the Controversy Old & New Testaments.
The church fathers - Origen , Eusebius - told us that certain parts of the Bible the books from Gen - Malachi were no longer relevant because of the new covenant. The covenant never changed, it was old only in the sense that the phase it described took place before Christ, whereas the same and only covenant continued after Jesus' Resurrection. The TaNaK / Hebrew Scriptures or "OT" are relevant today, I would like to illustrate this with a story. I remember growing up and having time when my oldest sister would baby-sit me and my other sister who was also older than me. Since I was the youngest in the bunch, I would often push the limits of the allowable – which would bring tension to my oldest sister. Of course, I knew this. My parents would leave clear instructions about what kinds of things that could or could not be done, especially when it came to going outside – my favorite thing to do! There was to be no going outside until homework & chores were completed. One time, I found a way of not completing my chores & still going out. My oldest sister did not know- or so I thought, and my other sister was also in on it with me, because she wanted to go outside too – it was such a nice day. But neither of us shared this with oldest sister. We both slipped out of the house without completing much of anything, no homework, no chores – all to run into the fresh air and sunshine pretending not to hear our oldest sister – who was up to the minute on the entire plan. Eventually and unexpectedly one of my parents came home. The parent was updated on the events of the escape. During the interrogation, one of my arguments was that the middle sister – the accomplice-in-crime with me – had given me permission to go, and plus the oldest sister had not really been clear about whether I could go out or not. I was proposing that I had been given authority to engage in the behavior. The answer from my father was – “Yes, but what did I say? Did I say you could go outside?” Many other heated questions from Dad followed that afternoon. The effect of the questions settled in my psyche as the right hand of fellowship settled on my sitting muscles. The hermeneutical reply of Christendom when asked about current OT practices and trends is that "Our older brothers – the church “fathers” - in church history gave us permission" to go outside of the Bible. The response from our Heavenly Father is, “Yes, I hear what you said, but What did I say for you to do?” "I the Lord speak the truth, I declare what is right" Isaiah 45:19. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God." 2 Timothy 3:16"Thy word is true from the beginning." Psalms 119:160. "For he [Apollos] vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ." Acts 18:28 "Thy word is truth." John 17:17. The One with Ultimate Authority never said to outside of Scripture - all of it.
The NT writers’ understanding of the Scriptures was unanimous, "The scripture cannot be broken." John 10:35.
What did NT Writers Call the OT? “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” Luke 24:27. In these words, Jesus identifies with the OT fully explaining and teaching about Him. The NT writers called the OT writings the Scriptures. Jesus also called the OT Scriptures Matthew 21:41-43, Matthew 22:29; Matthew 26:54; Luke 24:27, 45; John 5:39; Acts 17:2; Romans 1:2; 1 Corinthians 15:3; 2 Timothy 3:15; & 2 Peter 3:16.) So then why should anyone think that the messages of the OT are not relevant today & more to the point why do we call them “old”?
This week was another week of blessings in this class for I continue to learn about the way how according to my understanding God has been leading men and women throughout history. While reading and listening to different lectures and debates in class, it called my attention how during the years of the reformation the light about God and the plan of salvation was in progress. As the professor in class did, I will like to point out that the men a woman used by God during years of reformation were Catholics. They were the men and women that God called to create a reform. However, the question that I ask is, God called these men and women to reform from what? The answer is to reform from the true that they departed from years ago. I strongly believe the early in history the Roman Catholic church was God’s church in the same way how Israel was God’s people, but both of them apostate. In Revelation 12, we see a woman who is dress up in white, this woman represents the church of God that ran to the desert and after the dragon sent a river of water, the earth open and hide the woman. For me, this is the same woman of Revelation 17, who now became Babylon, who is in the desert sited by many water. In Revelation we don’t see two churches as many will think, there is only one church who at the beginning was pure and then corrupts and later on reforms. Another way to see that is going to Revelation 6 where we find four horses which in reality is one, who a the beginning is white (pure). This horse represents the church that was establish by Jesus and his disciples but little by little changed due to the persecution. But even though the horse changes colors, then in Revelation 19:11 the horse becomes white again, because once again they came back to Jesus and the truth of the Bible. The last way to illustrate my point is with the seven churches, the first church “Sardis” is faithful, pure, a church that suffers a lot for the cause of Jesus, but that later on became corrupt, and it is again in Laodicea the same church, which later on recaptures the truth of the Bible.
93 comments:
"EGG-HEAD" - by Simona Mills
Chapter one of McKim's book Theological Turning Points, talks about the Trinitarian Controversy. While I recognize the struggle between the Biblical principle and the all influencing principles of Greek philosophy regarding the God head, I have to say that our first, second and third century theologians did an excellent job tackling this subject. While I did not agree with all the logic, I remain intrigued by the homoousios and homoiousios. Two closely related terms yet miles apart in the eyes of 3rd century fathers. Of the two words, I like homoousios more. It gives everyone in the Godhead "God" status and an indivisible nature. However, Athanasius does not answer the individualism of the Godhead. Here is my query, when Christ died on the cross was he cut off from the Godhead? If so did humanity and divinity die? If He was never cut off did God and the Holy Spirit experience the death of the cross? My last question, does it matter?
I always looked at the Godhead as an egg. What makes an egg an egg? The Shell, the yolk and the white. All three together equal an egg. Without the shell the yolk and white would not survive. The shell holds everything in place. But can you say that the yolk or white is not an egg in the absence of the shell? There are boxes of Egg-Beaters and egg whites on the shelves of our local supermarkets. But with out the shell can you still call them an egg? All this talk of eggs has now tantalized my appetite. Omelet anyone?
Good job Simmona.It appears that that misunderstanding of the nature of Christ triggered the minds of the early fathers such that we are able to see light on this topic. The illustration you have used of the eggs puts the point clar to me.
Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 1
Michaela Lawrence
As I read these pages, I’m reminded of the intricate weaving of points that must be done in order to properly understand and present this complex yet simple thing called Christianity. Although the focus on Christ is clear to me, there are many details within which to get lost momentarily or, sadly, forever if we lose proper perspective. And it’s that perspective I really wonder about because I recognize the Christian world to be filled with so many nominal Christians who just want to love Jesus and not be bothered by all these details. I can’t blame them for that stance—I used to feel the same way and often want to go back to what seems so simple.
So the biblical caution to be both Christ-centered and relevant to the world in our theology aids my perspective. While I want to be able to clearly explain to a nominal Christian friend how the Bible can be primary along with Christ and the cosmos, I also want to be able to know what my friend really needs to hear from me and I want my knowledge of these three primacies to transform me in such a way that I become a better witness whether or not I share these specific ideas.
Evangelista Polanco
Let The Holy Scriptures Speak!
I love to read themes like this one. There are many information that we can be agree or not, but I will try to give my opinion in some of the questions that Dr. Hanna makes in this chapter. For example, is there any new light in the old lamp? I think that the Old Testament does have new light specially concerning of prophecies such as the book of Daniel. Many Christians use to say that the OT is abolished after the death of Jesus, but I think is that they do not have the knowledge that the book of Daniel is talking about, and this will let me give my opinion in the question of who are the many who will increase knowledge in the time of the end. Those who are believing, following, obeying and practicing the word of God will receive knowledge. Their knowledge will increase in both ways acquiring it and sharing it. The question about what does going to and fro mean, could be in two directions. First, there are people that today are in one church but tomorrow they will be in another kind of congregation. They will change their mind of thinking or believing in God in different method of following Him. Some of them will move of way to think because their convenience and others for the reason that they are true followers of God and want to know more about Him. Second, this expression to and fro could refer to places. People change of places for different reasons such as jobs, weather, family, better economy etc. Giving my opinion in what kind of knowledge will increase, I agree with Dr. Hanna that it is not a secular knowledge only but both sacred and secular knowledge what God was telling to Daniel that would increase. I think that people who follow God with all their heart will increase in wisdom and they will understand God’s way. It is nothing bad to have secular knowledge; the problem would be to stay there. The Bible is the book inspired by God that will give us such knowledge and will help us to understand the Christian World.
Evangelista polanco
Christological Controversy: Who Is Jesus Christ?
Theological Turning Points
This is an interesting chapter where we can remember that there is an existent controversy about who is Jesus Christ. What I think is that the doctrine of incarnation gives us light in order to understand Christogical questions. There is not another person in our world that fit in what Jesus is and represent. By faith I believe that Jesus was incarnated in the Virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit. If one of you have different opinion or believe I would like to discuss more about this belief. But what about his resurrection? This is other theme that I think we need to accept by faith and so all the rest of Scripture. Things that happen in our daily life convince us about the existence of Christ, his life, death and resurrection. The whole Bible since Genesis through Revelation testifies who is Jesus. He is the same God who created the heaven and earth. Ebionism, Docetism, and Gnosticism were movements that came with wrong ideas that instead to help to understand Christology they would confuse the minds of those who are searching the truth. I was a member of the Gnostic movement before to be a SDA member 20 years ago, and they have a lot of belief out of the light of the Bible. I just said thank you Lord to bring me to the right knowledge which is SDA. The reading of the apologist gave us the understanding in this controversial theme. In other word, their arguments help us to investigate the truth that for age have being discussed. Although the word trinity is not in the Bible, I believe that there are three persons: God Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. I have never understood why it is so difficult for others to understand this theme. Is it hard to understand that? three in One. What I know is that they are one in thought and they are united. All of this things humanity and divinity we have to accept them by faith. After doing research in the Scripture, we will find that we need to believe and follow His instructions. Apologists like Nestorious, raised terms like theodochos “recipient of God” indicating that the Virgin Mary was that such recipient in order to bring Jesus to this world and he doubted. His argument let us think that he never knew the power of God and His love. If God used a woman it was because He wanted to redeem us by a human because by a human we fell. There and today could be councils in order to discuss Christological controversy if Jesus is God or not, but one thing I know is that we need to be humble and come to our Lord with mind such Abraham, Daniel, David, Moses, Joseph etc.
Josian Frampton September 6, 2008
Who is God?
My study of the book Turning point reached to the core of my own belief and understanding of who this God I serve is. Many times during my earlier years, I truly struggled with this mystery of God which is oh so ‘great.’ It would take years of many pleasant as well as countless painful experiences to come to a true knowledge of his (God) being, omnipresence and very existence; therefore in reading the first chapter which is where my concentration is based and written from, I was very engaged in the differences of beliefs and opinions by the various philosophers / theologians as to “who is God?” The idea that God is one and God is there should not be questionable (in my mind at least) but we see that during the early centuries it was very much a debatable issue. We see how this very debate brought about Christianity from Judaism, which holds to this day the Monotheistic acknowledgement of God outside of his connection with his son Jesus. This branch of from Judaism (Christianity) received the trinity doctrine in identifying the personhood of God as a ‘father, son and holy spirit.’ I am always amazed at how humans “only” interpret scriptures to satisfy their logic and reasoning. A case in point: When we read self - help, medical, romantic, business or even certain spiritual literature, we do so in approval and nod our heads all along the way in agreement. We quickly, make reference to its pages to friends and family, we keep a to-do list of all the things we will do to implement its teachings to better our lives. We never remind ourselves of it not being authentic or that only man wrote it so it’s not credible. Yet whenever it comes to the Bible, we, (humans) do all the things I have just mentioned.
Is it scripture we have a hard time understanding that allows us to interpret it is such erroneous ways? Is it because we approach it with finite minds which are incapable of understanding the things of God? As I read through the various positions of those theologians and philosophers such as: ‘Irenaeus who (saw the trinity as distinctive of each other), and origen who (saw the spirit as inferior to the son) what was so difficult in understating the words of Jesus in saying; “I and my father are one, if you have seen me you have seen the father.” This is just plain! Yet, each of these individuals placed human intellect and reasoning to cloud God’s Revelation of his written word. We cannot forget that spiritual things are spiritually discerned. I pray that we do not fall into the temptation of placing intellect over receiving the discernment of God to interpret his word.
Comments on Chapter VI, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture by Martin F. Hanna
The Theme of the Bible is Jesus – “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us”
The Bible is the Word of God. Jesus Christ, is God the center of the Holy Scriptures. The Divine nature and relationship of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is revealed to us through the Scriptures. The symbiotic relationship clearly and /or uniquely show us their mutual indweling and identity. Interpretations of order, first as Father indetified as God second as Son identified as Jesus Christ and third as Holy Spirit. They are Divine and One. Jesus the Son is doubly unique in ways of understanding and roles. As Divine Human, fully divine and fully human, yet fully sinless. Jesus is Creator and yet Savior. Christ is the Connection and center of life, is the focal point of the relations between divine and human persons. The Church and the Body is personified through Jesus by His spiritual body. We aught to willingly accept and respect God’s role in our lives as Peter and Paul did (1 Pet 2:24, Gal 4:4 and Eph 4:3-13). The relationship of God, Word, Jesus Christ, and man in terms of Creator, Author and Savior of man the sinner. “So God made humanity in His own image, male and female created He them (Gen 1:26). Jesus is the Theme of the Bible/Scripture and uniquely took center stage when man was created and subsquently fell. He came and saved me. What about you?
By Fred Mainda
“Diamonds Aren’t Only a Girl’s Best Friend” - by Simona Mills
In The Cosmic Christ of Scripture the chapter “Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Biblical?” I found several gems of information. First is the issue of knowledge. As pointed out by the author, truth and knowledge is revealed through Scripture, Christ and Nature. We increase our knowledge by the study of these truths. But what I am most excited about is the fact that we should increase both in scriptural and secular knowledge. It is so important that ministers of the gospel treasure all knowledge. It is knowledge that helps us “custom fit” the message to fit those desperately seeking answers to the understanding of God and His role in their life. This is especially true when we are approaching those who do not think like me. How can I present the truth and knowledge I posses as revealed to me through Scripture, Christ and Nature to my Hindu brother if I do not posses the knowledge or understanding of how he thinks? All knowledge, both secular and spiritual should be treasured and used to lead others and ourselves to Christ. What use is knowledge of truth if it does not “lead us to Jesus or increase our knowledge of Him or love for Him”? (The Cosmic Christ of Scripture pg51)
I absolutely love this quote found on page 60 of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture “…Every text is a diamond, touched and irradiated by the divine rays [of Christ]. I want to make my time alone with God as well as time in my classes and studies at the seminary moments in which I search for hidden treasure chests of Diamonds. Then I believe I will achieve the highest education one could ever attain. “Diamonds” are not only my best friend, they are life!
As Christians living in the 21st century it is our privilege to inherit many of our doctrinal values from those who deemed it necessary to solidify their faith in the word of God. It is very interesting to note that although the early church fathers based their doctrinal stance on their understanding of the scriptures, often times these church leaders came up with what is considered heretical conclusions.
However, it was through these continuous scriptural debates and tension that has allowed us to become the recipients of a theology based on a solid foundation that has been tested and tried. This does not suggest that we can now afford to live in a state of spiritual nirvana. There are still issues that must be addressed and hammered out. I wonder do we have the spiritual maturity to wrestle with seemingly heretical positions that challenge our faith and stretch our understanding.
In the book “Theological Turning Points,” a very interesting statement was made it states, “Though his views were condemned, Arius did serve the church by advancing the discussion of the question Who is God?” Arius views on the trinity caused a great disruption with in the church body which roused great opposition among those whom we label defenders of the faith. But as we investigate history it was Arius and the search of many others to know Who is God? that led them to what some would consider erroneous conclusions.
I am intrigued by the depth of knowledge these leaders had of the scriptures as well as their fearless devotion to serve God in the face of being ostracized by the thought leaders of their day. May God help me to bring that much fervency to the study of the scriptures and an openness to hear what God has to say through others.
Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 6
by Michaela Lawrence
I’m responding to the idea that sinfulness is not proper to our humanity, as in we weren’t made to sin but to do quite the opposite—worship God. Within the context of who Christ is, this truth connects to Christ’s mission to reunite us with God in a divine-human relationship that cannot otherwise be maintained.
It’s this sort of discussion we have to have with each other to better understand how all these many pieces of our theology fit together and to better appreciate and desire the salvation Christ offers us. Perhaps it’s not enough to keep telling people to accept Christ’s forgiveness of their sins, even people who consider themselves strong Christians. To tell someone that Christ didn’t create them to be sinful and wants them to be the opposite so that they can be who God intended them to be—that’s a helpful twist. Salvation isn’t just about you not sinning it’s about you become your intended self. One thing ends and another blossoms. There’s more to this life because there’s more to God’s plan, to God’s desire, to God’s love. It’s an incredible upgrade.
I guess we just have to be careful not to talk about that upgrade in terms of selfish achievements but in terms of the transformation that only God can provide.
Gerard Vertilus
9/10/08
My reading this week help me to increase my knowledge about salvation: salvation end time prophecy, and the state of dead are significant topic that capture people attention very much now day. A lot of people always want to know that what they should do to inherit salvation. This topic bathers Christian, Muslim, Jews, non- Christian, orthodox, even atheist. Salvation is a board subject; it is true that the more we study about salvation the closer our relationship should be with Christ. The article we had to read online correlates with Apostles Paul writing especial the letter of Ephesians stated clear that salvation in found in Christ Jesus. There are Christian in many churches including our churches cannot comprehend that Christ is the only way of salvation. In Romans chapter 2, we read that the Jews understanding of salvation was to keep the Law of Moses, practice circumcision then they will be saved. Scripture is not agreeing with this practice because as it says Christ in you is the hope of glory. It’s not mention about laws or partiality as the Jews would have thoughts.
There was a period in Ellen white life after her conversion she had different views about salvation. She had developed fears in her heart because of her pass sinned. Until she realized that there is nothing absolutely nothing she can do to inherit salvation other than accepts the sacrifices of the Lord Jesus Christ on the cross and faithfully confess. After she confesses her sins and she declare that she felt that God accepted her forgiveness of her sin and she felt free from guilt. Salvation is a difficult subject to swallow yet simple to understand because the Bible make it clear for us. There are other questions raise about salvation despite of the answer the Bible provide. Should we be holly? Or shall be perfect to inherit salvation? Again Ellen G white helps us with these questions in page 22, A Chronological Study by Woodrow W. Whidden II “she stated that Perfection was not to be claimed as some sinless accomplishment, but rather sought as a way of life that would see belivers grow in grace until they received the finishing touch of sinlessness at glorification.” Salvation is a gift God gives it free through Christ nothing can be done to obtain it, and our pious way of living cannot guarantee salvation
This comment is pertaining to Mecheala laurence, I agree that salvation can only found in Chrit
futhermore it is a gift from Chrit, knowledge, experience cannot give but only can obtain from God. I was expecting for you to say
It is interesting to note that God has not left us without a means to understand and draw nearer to Him. God provides us with different modes of Revelation in order to grasp our attention and shine light upon His Plan for humanity or the universe as a whole. As the “Cosmic Christ” would suggest that there various modes of revelation that God uses are first the Book of Incarnation (written in the life and ministry of Jesus Christ). The second means of revelation are the Book of Inspiration written in the Judeo-Christian scriptures. The third means of revelation is the Book of Creation written in the Cosmos. It is through these means that God is bringing humanity to a clearer knowledge of Himself. That brings me to an experience I had a couple of years ago.
When I first started the seminary I can remember flying back to Georgia to begin the final process of moving my wife and children here to Berrien Springs. While on this flight I had the opportunity to sit next to a gentlemen who was a former Adventist who struggling with the inner workings of salvation. His concern was how God was going save those who had never heard of Jesus Christ. He wrestled with how God could allow so many people to perish if He is true and just.
I do not know what all of this gentleman’s hang ups were of Adventism but this problem seemed to really affect His perspective on God and Adventism’s focus on proclaiming the gospel through out the world to bring about the second coming of Christ. What if one person fails to hear about Christ does that negate the mercy and fairness of a just God? This is a question that many ponder and although at times can be complicated to explain, we have been given enough scriptural evidence that suggests God is not limited in His ability to save those outside hearing the actual gospel. Romans 1:20 expounds on our understanding of this.
At this point in time we can not afford to grow lax in our witness to others believing that God will remove all ambiguities that hinder many from accepting Christ. However, we can place our confidence in a God who reveals Himself to all through these three methods, giving all every viable opportunity to accept Him.
Theological Turning Points- Chapter 5 "How are We Saved?"
The question that I've asked myself over and over again. It's comforting in a way that people throughout the centuries have had the same questions.
The quest to find a tidy formula that describes how and when we are saved is familiar to me. Perhaps if I could do so then it would give me a little more control over the situation. The fact that salvation is a free gift of God regardless of my unworthiness makes me feel happy but also uncomfortable at times.
So Luther defined the process of salvation as being by faith, grace and Christ alone. He states that a life that is saved is a life that produces fruit of salvation.This is reminiscent of the fruit of the Spirit and when Jesus tells his disciples that they cannot bear fruit unless they first abide in Him(Galatians 5 & John 15).
After reading this chapter and hearing the scriptural allusions the question that is now on my mind is not "How am I saved". The question is "Am I abiding in Christ(the essence of salvation)so that He can nurture his fruit in my life?"
Christological issues were not so much confused as the trinity because people confronted Jesus and asked Him who he was. The New Testament explicitly gives titles various titles for Jesus for example Messiah or Christ, son of David, son of God, servant of God, Lord final prophet, the word and sometimes God. All these are meant to give a clear picture who exactly was Jesus. It appears he was well known but some wanted to bring a controversy for no good reason.
For Paul Jesus was God; and he didn’t mince words to describe God into that effect. Maybe that was the reason why most early Church father took the issue serious to discover exactly who Jesus was. Historically we see others totally opposed to Pauline views like Ebonites while others denied the humanity of Christ like the Docetism. Although Justin Martyr failed to reconcile the divinity and humanity of Jesus, it is evidently seen that the controversy was raging
What I have observed in this Chapter implies that the controversy is basically based on Logos -flesh model which begins with the logos and went on to speak of his incarnation. To me this was the trap of the devil to create misunderstanding in the Christian world.
After so much controversy, the council of the Chalcedon opted to end the debate by declaring Jesus was truly God and truly human, perfect in godhead and perfect in manhood. Christ remained without division or without separation to date.
I would like to comment on chapter 3 of Theological Turning Points. On this chapter Donald McKim explains about hundred different images of the church in the New Testament. The church is associated through minor images such as the salt of the earth, ark, one loaf, branches of the vine, God’s building, citizens, and exiles to major images—the people of God, the new creation, the fellowship in faith, and the body of Christ—around which a cluster of other images can be seen.
The list to mention the church does not stop there. These include the themes of the saints and sanctified, believers and faithful, slaves and servants, the people of God, kingdom and temple, household and family, the new exodus, vineyard and flock, one body in Christ, and the new humanity. And there are still some other descriptions from the list that I cannot put them all here.
I am impressed with those imageries and thinking of what the awesome God we have. For me, those varieties of biblical imagery are intended for us to learn more about the characteristic of God. Christian character, and not church character, needs to be developed. Quality relationship with Him and with others needs our attention to be developed and maintained. Abide in Him and abide in His church.
Understanding Scripture "Hermeneutics and Culture"- Lael CaesarI
The chapter, "Hermeneutics and Culture" by Lael Caesar, discusses how different cultures relate to the Bible hermeneutically. Is there a different hermeneutic depending on one's cultural affiliation and sitz em laben? And what presuppositions do different cultures bring to the text?
Caesar generally dealt with the subject in terms of the "oppressed theologies" that have risen in the last century such as Black Theology, Feminist Theology and other liberation theolgoies. He did an overview of the main tenets of each of those theologies and then did a biblical evaluation of their hermeneutic. Overall, I agree with his conclusion that many of these theologies have their own experience as the main source of their hermeneutic. As a result, the Bible is reinterpreted to fit into their current situation.
Now it is indisputable that this type of hermeneutics is unacceptable and unfaithful to the biblical text. However, is there no room for understanding "a hermeneutic of the oppressed" as it were? Many, if not all, of these theologies are a reaction against the traditinal Euro-centric theology that has been practiced in the West for God knows how many years. Those theologians have had hundreds, yea even thousands of years to "get it right" while many of these liberation theologies are less than 50 years old!!! The Western theologians didn't get it all right the first 50 years either (and we're not so sure they have it right now). Basically, I think there should be more consideration of this fact when we seek to "critique" liberation theologies and other so-called "third world" theologies.
Meade Adams
Romel Charles
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Reflection #1
In “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture” chapter three makes a bold statement in the chapter’s title. It says, “Let the Holy Scriptures Speak!” It would seem that this is the most important thing that anyone can do whether as a Pastor or a lay person because the scriptures have a lot to say. I guess it all boils down to whether we are listening or not. Can letting the Holy Scriptures speak be such a hard thing. Well, the answer is yes. Like Dr. Hanna says, “We often treat the Bible like a child instead of treating it like the word of the Divine Father” and expect it to be seen and not heard. Although being a student of the Word and being taught to exegete the Word at times I still found myself doing the opposite of what this chapter said we were supposed to do. It sometimes seems that as ministers and being learned in the Word of God we still have a tendency to tell Scripture what it is saying and not letting it tell us what we should be saying. It was not until recently that I sat down and read, read and read some more until the Bible, which has no lips, actually spoke to me and it was just amazing. It is mind boggling when something as simple as this can change the way that we look at things. Hanna says, “This unintended but real disrespect for Scripture is manifest in the exclusive definition of the Scripture principles so that other revelations recognized by Scripture are undermined.” This disrespect occurs when we neglect the theological roles of Biblical and extra-Biblical revelation. We as students of the Word of God need to understand that just as the God head is made up of three but are yet one, we need to see the revelations of God as one also although they three. IF only we stop and listen to the Holy Scriptures then and only then will there be new light in old lamps.
Romel Charles
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Reflection #2
In Theological Turning Points by McKim in chapter 1 the debate over who God was is discussed. It goes to show that logic is not what it takes to understand concepts of the Bible and definitely not in understanding God and the Trinity. In In the Caribbean there is a saying that goes, “Common sense isn’t common.” I say this because we try to reason things out and to use logic to explain certain things and to even debate people on certain subjects but sometimes common sense is not common because to understand God we need His help to help us understand Him. Like in my last post when I spoke about how we try to hush the Scriptures and to speak for it instead of us being quiet and letting it speak to us and for us the same principle can be applied with this topic. Instead of letting the Scriptures speak, people were stating their own views and arguing with each other. Now we know that the Bible has certain principles that most Christians then and now believe but there were some that needed to be ironed out. It was just too sad that it took two Nicean Councils to help solve the issues at hand. We need to understand that looking at the Bible from one angle can be detrimental but as Christians we have to look at all subjects on a wholistic level.
Chapter 3 Let the Holy Scriptures Speak
This chapter and class has brought new light to me that Scripture is telling us to not ignore the Biblical foundation for extra-Biblical revelation. The primacies of Gods three revelations show the unity in diversity of God. In some ways this mirrors much of the creation of God. For instance marriage and family is the unity of two persons and with a child it makes three. The three revelations also resemble the unity in diversity of the Trinity. I am also excited that Daniel predicts an end-time growth of knowledge by Gods people. I pray that I would be able to be a part of that growth. This is happening now I believe as there is such a huge explosion in the area of Gods Cosmos. I believe that there are so few Christians that are standing up for Gods revelations within the area of the cosmos. Sometimes in Issues in Origin class I feel like Professor Baldwin and Younker are like two against the world. I challenge all of us to study more both in Scripture and in the Cosmos so that we may stand for Gods revelations during a time when the world is trying to undermine them. We should work together to allow Christ and the Cosmos to Illuminate Scripture.
Chapter I Trinitarian Controversy
Several things stood out to me when reading this chapter. The first is that God can work through time and through controversy. I found it amazing that the Trinitarian theology developed over several centuries. This could only happen through the work of the Holy Spirit. What I learn from this is that I should not stress or worry about controversies today. Instead we should prayerfully continue to learn of God and I believe that God will guide His people into more light as needed. I like Athanasius approach to the matter of the Trinity as stated on page 17. He urged for a respect for the mystery of the Trinity. I believe that as humans we will not be able to come up with a humanly defined definition of God since I believe that God is more than what our minds can comprehend or imagine. I think it is human nature to be afraid when we feel uncertain or out of control of our knowledge. Surprisingly in this case I have a sense of peace even though I cannot fully comprehend how the Trinity works. This peace can only come from God. I also feel there is a human desire to want to control others around us. I think it comes from a fear of not wanting to be different so we try to make everyone around us the same. Looking at the way the church has fought itself in the past we should not do likewise. I feel we should not lose focus on perhaps what is more important. That God is a One who wants to be personal and close to us. And that He is a God of community.
READING THE SCRIPTURE.
We may understand what the Bible means to us unless we identify what really makes the bible unique from other books. I agree with Dr Hanna that the Bible posses authority which comes from God alone. So we must understand this authority before we start using it. This misunderstanding has caused a lot of confusion the scripture in the world. Actually it is through God that we have the scripture, he used men and women filled with Holy Spirit to write the scripture for us. He exerts authority therefore the scripture has the necessary authority to perform what God wants from us.
Moreover this authority is pointing to Christ who has authority like the father. He reinforces what the father asserts. So when we know Christ then it implies we understand the scripture because already the Holy Spirit is ready to guide us. We must strive to get what the scripture has for us instead of depending on our own selfish desires we always leads to astray.
There the scripture remains our guide and still it gets its authority from God who gives us knowledge to understand what we are required to do. Like in II Timothy 3:16 the scripture is for divine direction always and we must accept to be lead by its authority.
In his book, “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture,” chapter 3, mentions about how we treat the Bible like a child. When I thought about it, I was also treating the Bible like a child. I often tried to guide the Bible and not guided by the Bible. I read it whenever I felt like it, and I ignored it whatever it contradicted my daily life. I had great disrespect for the Holy Scripture treating like any other books. I often forget the fact that the Bible is the word of God. The Bible was often my entertainment or encouragement or meaningless routine for me. I didn’t practice what is written in the Bible, but I just read it because I felt like Christian needs to read it. I often just glance it through as if it doesn’t have anything to do with me.
Dr. Hanna effectively explains why the Scripture is the only rule of faith. Not only for our faith, but for our knowledge which leads to our practice. I believe that everything would be meaningless unless we practice. Faith would be meaningless unless we practice, knowledge would be meaningless unless we practice just as “it is useless to search Scripture if we will not come to Him (Jn 5:39, 40)”
I agree that “the Bible is not a textbook containing all knowledge.” But I believe that the Bible reads us to the One containing all knowledge. And we can come to Him when we practice what is written.
Chapter 1 of the “Theological Turning Points” talks about History of Trinity. How theologians and Church fathers struggle to find out the answer for “who is God?” I understand, by looking back with developed knowledge of Trinity, some of them were wrong. However, they all seem to have innocent attempt to find out who truly God is. Even though it was wrong ideas, they contributed to the world new aspects or perspectives of Trinity and made the Christian think deeper about God. I believe that some of their wrong attempts were better than nothing. Without their arguments, Christians would not have been exposed to the deeper thoughts about God. And now we stand this age, with more fully developed understanding of God and Trinity. We cannot say that we understand about God and Trinity perfectly. There are still some aspects that remain mystery. However, further arguments would lead us to better understanding of God. I believe that in many cases, we grow with struggling. It is because we have to get out of our comfort zone, be expose to new zone that is unfamiliar, which can be very uncomfortable. But after we have gone through, we are glad because we can see ourselves grown.
Comments to Janice De-Whyte: Theological Turning Points- Chapter 5 "How are We Saved?"
Yes I agree, but sometimes I wonder how do we know if I am abiding in Christ. What if I am trying my best but I don't see my fruits? Or is it something I don't see?
Comment on Chapter 2&3, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture.
Reading the Book of Scripture: Is There a Problem with Biblical Authority and Let the Holy Scripture Speak!
I agree that Scripture is the authority or rule for Christians faith and practice. As Christians we must use and rely upon scripture to deepen our faith beside Paul says in Timothy 3:16 that "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for instruction." Some denomination says that "all save is always save" I'm not trying to look down on anyone's belief but that statement cannot be proved from scripture. If that's really the case why can't they prove it in scripture. Daniel says that in chapter 12:4 many will run to and fro, and knowledge will be increased. As we look around whether in Christianity or in the secular world knowledge does increase, but God's people must go to scripture to increase their knowledges because all scriptures testify of Christ and it is from the direction and guidance of scripture we will come to Christ for He is the way the truth and the life. I don't mind following tradition but without the proof of scripture tradition is very much useless to me. Scriptures alone stand for theological reading of revelation and which is first among other revelations.
Theological Turning Points Chap 2
Michaela Lawrence
For Nestorius to say that God cannot have a mother means that he understands what it means to be God and the negative implications of God having a mother. We know that no one has complete knowledge. So how far do we go to define God and when have we gone too far?
My questions are based on the fact that many in the Christian world don’t wish to dig any deeper because they can’t easily see what difference more knowledge will make. And after all, they spend enough time as it is trying to live up to the high calling of their various denominations coupled with social/cultural expectations. And while their childhood understanding of Christ is recognizably elementary, does knowing the intricacies of how Jesus is both fully human and fully divine really impact how often we feed the hungry and clothe the poor?
If I weren’t interested in deeper understanding, I wouldn’t be in the Seminary. But I often wonder how the information I’m learning is going to impact the people in my life. Living in a fast-paced culture, when a concept doesn’t have immediate significance, there’s often no time set aside to really grapple with it and no impetus to care.
So as I mull over the implications of Christ having a human mother, I’m thinking of my Christian and non-Christian friends who may never ask me about those implications and I’m wondering, “Okay, how long should I really spend on this.” And I do see the significance of this knowledge. I see how understanding the nature of Christ impacts my view of salvation. I see that my understanding has been faulty because I essentially expected Christ to truly be like me in order for him to be a “fair” substitute, not realizing that my notion of fairness was incorrect and my understanding of his two natures was mislead. So I guess I need to ask God to help me find that necessary balance between learning all this information and learning how to best minister to people’s immediate needs. Sometimes the two will be clearly linked…and sometimes they won’t.
Who Is God?: Thoughts on the Journey to Enlightenment
First, I am impressed so far with how McKim manages to capture the essence of vast and complex theological movements/controversies into a few short pages. Masterful.
On to chapter 1: I am struck yet again by the reality of human nature patterns. We discover, experience, thrill in it. Then we are challenged, driven to seek clarity, support and hard proof; we do so within the current cultural milieu. We wrestle, fight, and accuse. Finally, when the dust settles, something that resembles the truth remains amidst the casualties.
It happened between the parties of Paul and Peter as they debated the problem of the Gentile Convert; it happened among the likes of Athanasius and Arius as they fought to resolve questions on what Tertullian coined as the Trinity. It happened between Joseph Bates and John N. Andrews as they sought to verify their positions on the Sabbath time frame.
And it happens, in small and sometimes imperceptible ways, each time we gather for a seminary class to listen to each other, wrestle with contradictory ideas and perspectives on "what the data means."
Each time our cultural backgrounds and individual worldviews come into play. Often, we find ourselves striving to communicate our perspectives and beliefs in such a way that our peers from very different starting points can comprehend.
And, sadly, there are still casualties.
In viewing these patterns, I find a strange comfort and stability. We humans do our best century after century, and God's hand guides and provides.
It also challenges me to not shirk from my responsibility to stand for what I know to be true, while remaining humbly open to "new light."
It drives me to be merciful, grateful, and humble. Merciful to those who appear to be "walking away from truth"; grateful for the clarity and confidence that emerges as a result of painfully wrestling with truth and error--and for the constant hand of God. Humble in the realization that, as the early church fathers discovered, theology cannot be neatly packaged and shelved.
Trinitarian Revelation: Reflections on "Let the Holy Scriptures Speak!"
Hanna's presentation of the supremacy and relationship of the three revelations, Scripture, Christ, and the Cosmos is clarifying and foundational. The Scripture is tota and prima in authority and direction. It directs us to Christ, from whom all things are come. The Scriptures and Christ are set within the context of the Cosmos which reflects and reveals Christ. Each of these revelations have primacy, yet interrelate and unite to form a kind of "trinity" in their roles of divine revelation.
For the human being, authority always must begin with and end with Scripture. It is the Bible and the Bible only that should inform us and direct us to Christ, and it is the Bible that describes the role of the Cosmos in the revelation of Christ.
And in the end, these tools, Scripture and the Cosmos, serve only to illumine Christ--"...In Whom all things consist" (Col.1:16-17).
On a more "personal application" note, I am glad to see that the role of the Cosmos is not ignored. With the New Age and related pantheistic practices, it seems that Christianity often avoids celebrating the role of nature and the Cosmos in revealing God. Properly understood and in maintaining its Scripture-defined role, the Cosmos is a beautiful and wise revelation of Christ, the one who spoke it into existence.
Scripture, Christ, and the Cosmos: three diverse revelations unified in ultimate purpose.
The History of the Christological Controversy makes for tedious reading. There is so much argument and counter argument. It is easy to get lost in the detail. What to me is obvious though is that whatever God is we are not. We are not all wise, all powerful, completely loving. Is the nature of Christ important? I do not want to say it is not; neither do I want to in a few strokes on this keyboard render of no consequence the History of Christianity. I do however believe that great damage was done to the Church by these arguments and the way in which they were conducted. What history does not tell us about is what these arguments in the church did for the faith of Bro and Sis Yosef Blogutos whose son while studying Greek Philosophy started to have doubts about the bible. It doesn’t inform us about what happened when he came to the church, not only for answers but for reassurance that the faith he had been raised in was indeed valid and found only ‘highfalutin’ discussions and divisions over things that we can not know for sure this side of eternity if at all. What we do know however is that somehow out of this inability to sometimes leave well alone and at other times be able to live with people you don’t agree with came a system of belief and practice which was so terrible that it made the Prophet Daniel faint when he saw it a vision. What will we do when confronted with controversies of our own, in our ministry, family, work place etc? A word to the wise (Dan 12:3) should be sufficient.
I would like to commend on Chapter 2 of Theological Turning Points.
In the New Testament uses various titles for Jesus. NT calls Him Messiah or Christ as the fulfillment of the Old Testament expectation. NT calls Him Son of God as to signify a special, unique relationship between Jesus and God. NT calls Him Son of Man means both a human being and a coming ruler who receives eternal dominion kingdom. NT calls Him Servant of God as allusions and link to the work of Jesus as the servant of Yahweh. All these terms are beautiful and have special meaning to me, but I would like to share with you about His servant hood.
As a servant Jesus humbles Himself, coming from His mighty office in heaven, He took the journey to this planet. Visited my home, had some conversation about His plan of salvation, leaving me His business card, with complete contact information, His heavenly address, phone numbers, and gave all necessary instructions and asked if I would like to go with Him on His second coming—He told me to read Bible for detail. Reading the whole series of God’s three books would help. Let me know if you need further information.
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture: Chapter 1
I appreciated the clear explanation of E.G. White's role. At time we as Adventists are too quick to side on the extremes in regards to the role of Mrs White's writings. One one hand, Mrs. White is presented as the sole authority while on the other hand some present her as having no authority at all. This chapter encourages us all to make Sola, Tota and Prima Scriptura the foundation of all our reading and reflection (p. 18).
Last week I was worshipping with a group of ladies in the dormitory. We were reading and reflecting on the story of the golden calf and the Israelites. In wanting to settle the question of why God chose the Levites as the priestly tribe one young lady mentioned that Ellen G. White commented that they were the only tribe that did not worship the golden calf. Now, I had not read E.G. White's commentary on this story while preparing for this worship (is that a bad thing?). From my reading and reflecting on the text I had understood that all of the people were engaged in this rebellion and that the only redemption that the Levites had was choosing to repent and be on God's side once more. However, my friend disagreed with me and strongly told me what Mrs White had written.
I was honest and told the group that I had not read what Mrs White had written on this Scripture text but that did not mean I did not believe her writings to be inspired or legitimate. BUT there it was, the young lady's clear expression of confusion (or maybe it was shock). It was not so much about the details of the golden calf story as it was about the inadvertent message she had heard- "I don't always read E.G. White's writings after reading a bible passage". I can almost guess the question she wanted to blurt out "but you're a minister and you didn't read Mrs White's commentary on this passage?"
Seventh-day Adventists should read the Bible as our priority. "It is important to note that Seventh-day Adventists regard Scripture as the Christ-centred rule of faith and practice by which to evaluate the cosmic relevance of the writings of White and all other writers." p. 23
In my life and as I share with others I'm seeking to have a right and respectful understanding of God's Word and it's supremacy. At the same time, I am also being intentional about not downgrading or elevating the writings of Mrs White. I'm finding the balance between her being "lesser" but nonetheless a "light" to our understanding and experience of Scripture. Perhaps the confusion that was expressed was a sign that we're not doing such a good job of putting the Scripture Principle into practice but maybe it was also a wake-up call for me to be more sensitive to the interpretive tools that all of us bring to any one passage of Scripture. I was helped and challenged by this chapter of the book.
Here endeth my confession about a calf & confusion.
Soteriological Controversy, Chapter 5
By Evangelista Polanco
When I first saw the title “soteriological” I thoutht that it was something about saints, but when I started to read the chapter I could see that it is all about salvation. The word come from the Greek soteria. My confusion was because in Spanish the word Santeria is a group of saints that belong to the Catholic Church and who follows the saints. The doctrine of salvation taught here has a lot information concerning salvation. For example, the justification point brought by Saint Augustine. Our sins have been forgiven (if we repent and go apart from sin). It was amazing how Luther confronted the church and defended the doctrine of justification by grace through faith. My question is: Are we with the same spirit of Luther that revealed the truth of God? I think that it was the beginning of how God used him (Luther) in order to turn human back to the right doctrine (salvation) to save them from sin. Then, the work of God sending His Son to die for us I think is relevant for the reason that He has delivered us from slavery and reconciliated us with Him giving us the peace that we need when we receive forgiveness. It is important and I agree with this chapter that explains through the Bible that we are not saved by work but by faith by the grace of God. And we understand that faith brings the works, both go together, if we have true faith then, we will work because the love of God is in us. I understand that it was the love of God that moved Him to act in the way of offering His Son.
The Theme of The Bible is Jesus, Chapter 6. Comment by: Evangelista Polanco
At the beginning of my knowledge of the SDA, it was a very hard confusion that I had concerning to the divinity of Christ. I understand that the Old Testament testify of Him as the Messiah that had to come, but the way of his divinity and human at the same time, I did not understand. Now, I feel that because I have accepted by faith not only his divinity but all things concerning to the trinity I understand better. It is not easy to explain, neither to understand, but one thing I know is that the Lord will reveal misteries as He has promissed. Sometimes we deal with the question; Are there three Gods? Now as we have seen in Dr. Hanna's book, and in his class, we have agreed that there are three persons, but one God. One (united). Jesus came to teach us the Father, and he sent the Holy Spirit. I think that all the confusion come because the Old Testament does not mention Jesus (the name Jesus) anywhere, does not say specific argument about the three persons of divinity by name, by detail. Once again I do think that God will reveal this things to the wise, those who are looking for Him with a true heart. To me it is not a problem of salvation, I just wait in my Father the Creator, who sent His unique Son and who sent His Holy Spirit. Three, and Jesus the savior is one of the three. Believe or not it is there in the whole Bible. Other question could rise in our mind; why then, Satan was jealous of Christ? Why does E.G.W. says that he was the fourth after Christ?. If she saw that explanation, and God gave her that information is because there are three, and Jesus was the Son. I mean is the Son of God. I think we need to be thankful to Jesus because of his work in coming to this polluted word and gave his life for us and to let us be partakers of his divinity, knowing that we do not become in other God in other word, we have relationship with him, and we can make things that he did, but limited to our humanity.
CHRIST: THEOBIPOLAR – By Simona Mills – October blog 1
The word bipolar means having or expressing two contradictory qualities or ideas. Thus I have coined the term theobipolar to mean (for my intents and purposes) expressing two contradictory theological qualities or ideas: humanity and divinity. As I contemplate the Christological Controversy outlined in our text book, I realize that I have it pretty good from this vantage point. Being able to look back at all the theories of the forefather theologians on the mystery of Christ gives me an advantage. Or does it? Pope Leo I’s document “Leo’s Tome” basically summarized everyone else’s work in his day. I am essentially doing the same today. Then I thought if I took another approach, say that of a psychologist, what would my diagnosis be when it comes to the question of the nature of Christ. Schizophrenic would be too hard a sell. Multiple personalities would be a little better. But I would go with bipolar. Christ having two poles: 100% humanity and 100% divinity. The fact that scripture records that he shed tears, got hungry, slept, expressed anger, felt compassion and pain (to name a few attributes) shows clear evidence of his humanity. Raising the dead, healing lepers, giving sight to the blind, and many other wonders show clear evidence of his divinity. The contradiction comes in knowing that humanity is fallible and divinity is infallible. Yet, Christ somehow made the two work together as one. Our forefathers as well as theologians today struggled with placing Christ on the same level as the Creator of the Universe while seeing him suffer on a cross, dying a humiliating death. I must admit that I struggle with that too. It would be wonderful if I could grasp the inner workings of this mystery. But for now all I can do is to continue to gather the biblical evidence of the two “poles” that make up a theobipolar Christ and accept that my term along with previous terms like substance, ousia, heteroousios, homoousios, and several others, are futile attempts to nail down a mystery.
MIRROR, MIRROR ON THE WALL – By Simona Mills – October blog 2
As I read “The Theme of the Bible is Jesus” in The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, I could not help but think about the fairy tale story of SNOW WHITE AND THE 7 DWARFS. In this story the wicked witch had a magical mirror that showed her every thing she asked. What is interesting about the magic mirror is that it did not lie. When she asked, “mirror, mirror on the wall, whose the fairest of them all” the mirror showed her Snow White. She was not amused because she wanted to be the fairest of them all, thus her plot to destroy Snow White began.
Similarly, when Lucifer realized that he was not called into the “board meeting” of heaven, he began his plot to destroy the creation of God. When I look in the mirror, I see Simona. But when I put on the “glasses” of scripture and look again, I see the Trinity, I see God (Genesis 1:26 – “And God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness’…). So on those days that Satan’s lies distort the mirror, I can apply the Windex of Scripture. Then I can see again the sharp image of my loving Creator, Savior, King, Friend… my everything. Best of all, I can stand firm on the Word of God knowing that I share the divine image of God; something that Satan can never say is true of himself. His plot to destroy God’s creation was successful at first glance. But in the mirror that was created on the cross, I can step up and say (as I see my reflection in His blood), “mirror, mirror on the cross, who now is saved from being lost”. This mirror will show all of mankind, even those who do not accept the gift of salvation. That is one cool mirror, don’t you think?
Christ of 2 Natures: Divine & Human (Theological Turning Points Chap 2)
Jesus Christ is the reason why we are Christians. An obvious statement. It follows, then, that we should explore the nature of Jesus Christ. The Scriptures speak of Jesus as both God and Man. He is the Messiah, the Son of Man but he says that he has the power to forgive sins and that he could destroy and rebuild his temple in three days. He said that he came to seek and to save the lost!
There are two "sides" of Jesus that we find in the Bible:the human "side" and the Divine "side". Through the centuries of theological discussion and work people have tried to reconcile thee scriptural facts of Jesus being fully Divine and also fully human.
What we affirm affects our theological conclusions about our own human nature and also the nature of Salvation. Everything we believe is intertwined in this Jesus Christ and so we must have a Biblical understanding in order to ensure our theological reflections are in harmony with the Biblical testimony. Jesus Christ had two natures that did not conflict with each other- the mystery of Christology.
At this moment I am thinking of numerous sermons/bible studies that I have heard that say that we can be sin-free because Jesus was a human being like us and if he could overcome sin then we can also live a sinless life. The question that I have is how can we make this reality clear and not confusing when we preach and teach. I'm certainly going to do a lot more reflection on Christology because essentially Christ is, or should be, the centre of all we preach and teach.
As I was reading the Authority Controversy which dealt with the role of the bible, the place of tradition, and the role of leadership I was intrigued by the section “Later Developments.” It stated that the issue of authority has taken on dimensions of grater proportion in the centuries since the turning point between the Reformers and Roman Catholicism. The three dimensions that it list are: the church is the living custodian of the gospel…and the continuing historical manifestation of Christ’s authority on earth. The second is represented by protestant who believe in sola scriptura. The third deals with those of the charismatic movement who say the Spirit and individual revelation is the ultimate form of authority.
I remember coming in contact with a kind older gentleman who was a devout Catholic. I heard of the various experiences that Adventist have had when giving Catholics a Great Controversy so in pursuit of winning a soul I did the same. The next day I was shocked when he gave me my Great Controversy back just to tell me this book goes against my catechism and my beliefs. What a blow to my witness. I have had other experience with those who are Pentecostal who believe individual revelation as the ultimate form of authority. Looking back I believe I could have been a better witness if I wasn’t so arrogant because I believed in sola scriptura. I was nice but arrogant. There is no doubt that we are living in an age were people have views and traditions that are very hard to give up. My recommendation is that we allow sola scriptura to become visible in our lives that we can help others see the difference that the scriptures can make in our lives
Comments on Cosmic Christ by Dr. Martin Hanna
The question of how Christ can be both divine and human at the same time is a subject that the best of minds have wrestled with. The bible is very clear that Jesus the Word became flesh and dwelt among men. (John 1:14). With all the scriptures that prove Christ was both divine and human the finite mind still wrestles with how can this phenomenon be. This perplexing subject seems to be one that we must except by faith therefore all we have to do is take the scriptures for what it says and leave the matter alone. If this were the case then the would be some merit in that position but I find something troubling that emerges from this dual quality of Christ. In my discussion in the past some have stated because Christ is both divine and human then He had an advantage over us and thus this nullifies our struggle with sin because there is no possible way we can overcome as Christ overcame. It is very tempting to take this point of view in that it becomes an easy out for those who perceive the struggle against sin as a losing battle. I admit the human struggle can become quite overwhelming at times but we have been given the promise “Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these you might be partakers of the divine human nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. (2 Pet 1:4) One writer stated when dealing with the temptations of Christ, He was tempted according to He was as we are tempted according to who we are. If anything Christ could almost [I say almost it just depends on your perspective] be considered as the one that is disadvantaged. Christ had the power to change His circumstances at any time yet He chose not to for me and for you. To this I say Praise God. Christ advantage was relying on His Father and this is our advantage as well.
I am commenting on tyler kraft's post on 9-25-08. I am with you tyler in that I don't fully grasp the primacy thing either. I thought your idea of primacies related to key time periods was creative, but to me it doesn't fit in many respects either. From what I understand Dr. Hanna to be saying, he says creation, Scripture, and Christ each have their own primacy in a sense all at the same time. Think about this. Before Scripture there was still the oral tradition passed down from Adam and Christ existed too. During Christ's ministry on earth, nature and the OT Scriptures still existed, and now after Christ you still have nature and Christ existing. I think Dr. Hanna would say that throughout the entire period of Earth's history nature, Christ, and Scripture have their own unique primacy at any given time. These are just my thoughts.
Re: SM's "Christ: Theobipolar"
Well, each time I log on to check out comments I enjoy and appreciate SM's creative expansion of concepts found in our class textbooks. I like the illustrations and clever metaphors. The give "hands and feet" to otherwise abstract, enigmatic concepts--a sign of a great preacher. :)
However, the connection between "bipolar" and Christ's nature doesn't work for me. This illustration would teach that though the two conditions (read: natures) exist in the same person, when one is expressed, the other is absent (in terms of expression).
Though it is true that by definition "The word bipolar means having or expressing two contradictory qualities or ideas," and Christ did, in fact, take on two natures that are distinctly different (and I might even argue against the word "contradictory"--in a separate comment) in at least some qualities and ideas, "bipolar" also denotes the idea that a person moves from one extreme to another--hence the inclusion of the term "pole." So an individual with bipolar anything will at one time express/operate at one extreme position, and then at another time express the completely opposite position/frame of mind/etc. The two positions or mind frames (and in this case, natures) do not intermingle. They are not integrated. They are separate, opposite, and solo in expression.
Jesus was an integrated personality. His humanity and divinity resided together, somehow and mysteriously. Even when His divinity "flashed through" His humanity, He was still operating as a human being, not swinging from one extreme to the other. While Jesus ate, drank, slept, cried, and starved, He still had, at His command, divine powers that He chose not to employ unless summoned by God. While living the very human life, He was not far from His divinity; it was somehow, mysteriously, very present, though perhaps not always more fully expressed.
And, of course, the reverse must also be true: While Jesus calmed storms, fed thousands, and stood wrapped in glory atop mountains, He was still a very human being in the presence of his very human disciples. To act in His divinity did not require Him to abdicate His humanity, and vice versa.
For me, the implications that come from using the term "bipolar" with Christ's nature are disturbing. In fact, if pushed further, it could express something along the lines a "coexistence" of docetism's and ebionism's ultimate reality: Jesus was not really human when He acted divinely; and Jesus was not really divine when He was acting in His humanity. Christ was an integration of humanity and divinity, not two natures taking turns.
(And what does *that* mean?!? I wonder if we'll ever know. :)
I'm sure SM did not intend for harpers like me to stretch her metaphors to such distortions, but it is interesting (and for me, sobering) to explore the ramifications of this particular illustration. :)
Salvation is one of the controversies that the church has wrested with since its inception. Basically this is due to the opinion presented by the early church fathers like Pelagius and Augustine. Both Roman Catholic Church and the protestant have not agreed on the common ground of salvation. The Old Testament provides a basis on how God has tried to rescue his people from sin and other suffering and the New Testament put message clearly what is supposed to be done. We can not limit salvation to only freedom from sin but it should be a process that is based in Romans 8:28-30. I think because many have limited it to one area like Sanctification, justification, and glorification, this is where the controversy arises. We should also remember that there is forgiveness of sin which will make us to be reconciled back to God and then have peace. We should also remember that Christ paid a ransom price for us to be saved. Some have said that we have been satisfied by the grace of God but the question is shall we then remain in sin because of this.
Maybe this is reason as to why early church fathers were giving different views that salvation is illumination because we are able to get out darkness. While others saw it as restoration and victory over sin, so as much this is written and debated, salvation remains a process which we will not avoid to attain if we follow the process to the end. We should follow the biblical principle to avoid much controversy.
It appears there is too much confusion regarding the divinity of Jesus Christ. Arius sparked the controversy but Igree with the sentiments that Dr. Hanna has put forward to prove the case about Christ’s divinity in humanity. Yes Christ was born of a woman but we should also understand that a it was the systematic plan of God which we don’t understand as human beings. Indeed Dr. Hanna sets the record clear by stating that Christ is among the Divine persons of the trinity. Actually to him the main theme of the Bible is Christ because he has met the entire requirement described in the bible. No other human being is able to fulfill all those but Christ alone.
We are also aware that whatever the father was doing, Christ and the Holy Spirit were also participating in full swing. That is why God said that they make man in their own image which implies that Christ the same powers as God. There is no day his divinity changed, nor was he created like other creatures. But he is also human but this does not imply that he lost his divinity. He died so that we may have life also. Humanity did not stop the redeeming power of the lost instead it strengthened the relationship with God. Otherwise we have no excuse to remain in sin
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture by Martin Hanna
Chapter 10: Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos
I enjoyed reading Ellen Whites writings concerning the Cosmos. I have not experienced the power of a stormy ocean but there are times when I’ve seen the awesomeness of Gods creation that I could not speak but only stand amazed. I found the quote where Ellen White says the law of God is written in every art of our body to be interesting. If I disregard the law of gravity by jumping off a cliff the consequences can be deadly. I think there has been much scientific evidence for affects that can happen in our bodies if certain laws are not followed. For instance it is accepted that meat eating is correlated to heart disease and also outside toxins can promote cancer. Or the affects of high sugar diet can result in diabetes and nerve problems. This reminds me that God did not create laws because He felt like he should restrict us but laws are naturally part of creation and disregard for the law will not break it or make it disappear but will only result in negative consequences. One other important point within this chapter is on page 121 where a correct understanding will result in harmony. I think our society right now is caught in the worldview that it is nature versus Scripture. When the true reality is that a correct understanding of both will bring both in harmony with each other. Of course with the unique primacy of Scripture we should make sure not to do violence to Scripture in order to make harmony.
Si On Sung's reflection on Theological Turning Point; Chap 4
When I think about the creation of humanity, I wonder why God has created human at the last. Perhaps God wanted everything prepared for man before he exists. But why couldn’t He make the man involve his creation. We know that He often does His job on this earth through human as an instrument to accomplish His purpose. Why couldn’t He use man when He created the world? Perhaps human can be bothersome in the creation process. Humans are so incapable that we could be obstacle in His job. Or humans are so feeble that He didn’t want to be jeopardized. We know that He care human being the most among his creatures. As the New Testament mentions, He loves us more than birds or animals. He could have made the humans first. But I think He wanted to give us present. It didn’t matter whether we were too feeble or incapable. Even if we could have done something, He just wanted to surprise us.
Regards to “what is humanity?” one thing for sure is that we all have choice. And we can accept Jesus Christ as our Savior. And I am sure that God wants to surprise us by bringing us back to heaven.
Si On Sungs' reflection on book: Theological Turning Point; Chap 5
There were disagreements and debates of how humans are saved. The two major different views are Pelagius view and Augustine view. Pelagius says that it is possible not to sin and Augustine says it is impossible to sin. If I am correct, Seventh-day Adventist stands on somewhere between those two views.
I see the problem of sin and salvation in this way. I think human’s life is like a marathon. When God told us not to sin, He is saying, don’t stop; keep running during the race. I think it is possible not to sin. However, our body gets tired. Even though the runner does not express it outwardly, he may feel fatigue and stop running. And we cannot stop from feeling that we feel like stop running as long as we feel tired. Jesus says that thinking in our mind is also sin. I don’t know if I am correct in this matter, but it is impossible not to sin in our mind because as a sinner, those kinds of thoughts just pops up in our mind without any intention (even though we can stop thinking about it when it pops up in our mind). Therefore Jesus came to save us and to eventually restore us from our corrupted body.
Si On Sung's comments on dickson morumbwa's comment
I really appreciate your comments. To understand the concept that Jesus is perfectly human and perfectly divine is hard to grasp. But even if I cannot understand fully, I and grateful that He is both, because as being both, He can save me who has fullfilled and will fulfill everything written in the Bible, and even more.
Romel Charles
Reflection #3
Understanding the Christian World
Ecclesiological Controversy
The Ecclesiological Controversy was one of the major theological interest of the early church. It may seem puzzling that, “the Church” was having a problem understanding, what is the church? This one of those things that puzzles me that the people that the people that comprised the church were having problems understanding themselves. The church having been called out by God to be gathered to God. The Church although being called out it can also imply many other things like a place of worship, prayer and assembly. No matter how you look at it if the early church father did not go through the struggles about what is the church then where would we be today? I mean would we have the understanding that we do have today? How would our understanding of the different images of the church be? While all of these questions are good I am still glad that they had to go through all of the struggle of coming to their own understandings of what they though the church was so that we can compare their beliefs to scripture and decide for ourselves what the church is. Even though people like Cyprian believed that if there was no Bishop then was not a church but today we know that even without a Pastor we are still the church.
I really enjoyed reading the section “How To Read The Book Of The Cosmos” in Dr. Hanna’s book. This section dealt with the relationship of science and the bible.
The dilemma that many scientists face today is how to merge science and the scriptures. Many times it seems as if the bible contradicts science and there can be no correlation. The true problem is that if scientist truly analyzed the bible and science they would have to drop some of their preconceived ideas and acknowledge that there is a God.
I have determined a long time ago that if scriptures seemingly contradict scientific discoveries I would stay with the bible until science catches up. The bible declares “The heavens are telling the glory of God” (Psalms 19:1). I am amazed of how much of the character and power of God is revealed through astronomy, archeology, biology, etc…We are told in Counsels to Parents Teachers and students that, “The whole natural world is designed to be an interpreter of the things of God.” The Psalmist declares that we are “fearfully and wonderfully made.” (Psalms 139:14)
I was impressed with an article I read in Discovery which stated the brain performs at least one quadrillion operations per second, almost a thousand times more that the best supercomputers. As much as we love our Macs or whatever computer you have, man is not capable of making a computer that can out perform the human brain. Many may claim that the bible and science are at odds with one another but we know as Christians that man will always be behind when he compares his ideas with the power of God.
“Searching For Balance”
"Theological Turning Points" What is the Chruch
Growing up in a Seventh-day Adventist home I can remember those exciting summers when we had our evangelistic meetings. When I was younger the meetings usually lasted for about six weeks, unlike the three week meetings we have now. [I am going somewhere with this] The closing meetings would end with a description of what constitutes God’s remnant church.
When it was explained to me as a child I believed all those outside of the Seventh-day Adventist church were apart of Babylon until they had joined our church body. But life’s experiences have taught me that one can still be apart of Babylon while in the Seventh-day Adventist church, and still be apart of the remnant while not apart of the body of Seventh-day Adventist believers. [Be patient with me as I sought through this enigma]
I am concerned that maybe our traditional interpretation of what constitutes God’s true church at times has left us as self-righteous elitist. [I want to in no way generalize because all do not fall into this category.] Augustine’s position on the church grabbed my attention when he “believed that those who outwardly seem to be within the bosom of the church and to enjoy this invisible fellowship of love nay not actually be truly Christian. Thus Augustine could say of the church, many sheep are without, and many wolves are within.”
I guess my search is for a balanced approach in which members truly become a community bound by “its unity of love, which binds members together around the deepest loyalty they know in life, God’ love in Jesus Christ.” I know all will not be perfect until Jesus comes. I can’t even promise I will not preach the traditional remnant church message. But I will keep wrestling with how to present a message that creates an atmosphere of love for all whatever our denominational background.
This effort to define our humanity fascinates me in that each theologian’s effort recognizes the need for God. Whether Pelagius or Augustine and all those in between, our need for God is still present. The question becomes, how much do we need God?
This is one of the ever-present questions I’ve found being asked by my peers. Because we're such independent people, many resist the notion that they need help even from God. They interpret that need as an insult to their ability, their intelligence. They want God to be more of a "Millionaire" lifeline that they'll call upon here and there. Surely they're smart enough and driven enough to work things out for themselves.
Our perceived need for God is intricately tied to our understanding of the very nature of sin. If we don't recognize the extent to which it separates us from God and if we think that needing God too much is an affront to our ego, our independence will get the best of us. We may eventually find ourselves in a Pelagiun camp attempting perfection.
previous comment is based on Theological Turning Points Chap 4
In Defense of Arius (TP, Chpt.2)
With just fewer than 2000 years of church history and doctrine development under our Christian belts, it's easy to balk at the direction Arius took as he sought to understand the nature of Jesus Christ. But before I wave my Sword of the Spirit and take a few swings and make a few thrusts, I want to reflect on what appear to be sincerely intentioned, easy-to-make mistakes.
First, Arius "begins with the premise of God's absolute uniqueness and transcendence" (p.31). Whatever humanity experiences in reality finds its source in Him. All things come from God, the One and Only. A good premise for all of us? I think so. With 1600 years of a single-person God (as it appears to be the belief throughout at least the Old Testament), it's no wonder Arius carried on the tradition and challenged church fathers to remain true to what he believed was the truthful understanding of the person of God.
Second, without the history of grappling with such theological concepts afforded the rest of us, how can we expect that every church father would grasp the broader, contextual meanings and original intents of the Bible in it's original languages, including such words as "beget"? Here we are, SDA's 1700 years later, still fighting over whether Christ's nature was pre-fall or post-fall (and though that concept is less pressing than the nature of Christ in relationship to His Father, it still counts to support my little point). Come on, folks, let's be gracious.
In stating that "the Son must be liable to change and even to sin" (p.31) is also understandable when one considers such statements as that of the writer of Hebrews: "For He was in all points tempted as we are," and other related Scripture.
I do, however, balk a bit at Arius' mistaken interpretation of John 1. Unless one takes into consideration--and harps on-- all on-the-surface ambiguous texts related to the nature of Jesus, it's a bit hard to see how he missed out on Jesus as part of infinity: "He was with God in the beginning...through Him all things were made and without Him, nothing was made that has been made." Even so, I can see how Arius would see this text in the earthly context - the beginning of time as you and I know.
So here I am, a couple millennia down the road. I was born into the Trinitarian doctrine, and though it baffles and stretches my little mind, it hasn't been too difficult to remain true to God as Three persons. Not so for our forerunners, and thanks be to God for their tenacious reach for truth.
And thanks to Arius, who stepped forward, shook things up, and got the church's engines revved for the perilous but very necessary journey to understanding part of the mystery of the nature of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
Matters of Ekklesia (TP Chpt.3)
As Christianity emerged into a full-fledged movement, continued organizational development became inevitable. Although core doctrinal issues that were anchor points for the body of "called out" ones had to be hashed out and heresy addressed, it took a while for the church to get to the point where there were established councils, creeds and canon.
As a result of structure and leadership tiers set in place, it's hard to imagine how the church would continue on as a living, dynamic organism and change agent as Bible writers (and Jesus Himself) portrayed it to be by using such metaphors as "branches of the vine," "salt of the earth," "new creation," "God's building," and, of course, the "body of Christ."
The major concerns of the church fathers were in response to the raised issues relating to discipline, government, and authority. Of course these are crucial elements of church life and they must be addressed. I wonder, however, if this is where "family" and the fellowship of the believers that Jesus and Paul cared about began to wane as the pressing matters of church function and institution and, well, clergy control, took over. Did their views on authority and submission to bishops, etc., pave the way for what we still experience--even in our Protestant liberation--a system of leadership that seems to promote a kind of clergy dependency?
Don't get me wrong...I believe in the importance of leadership and shepherding. But I don't believe in apathetic, sluggish, pew-warming congregations who wait for the word from on high--or, if faced with an unpopular leader, move heaven and earth to be rid of him/her, replacing him/her with one who will carry on the mission without members having to break any kind of a sweat.
I know early Adventism, like the early church, did not start out that way. Yet look at us now--the church of the NAD. I wonder if a revolution of our own will emerge one of these days - when church politics and governance and all those important institutional processes (and I do mean "important") will give way to answering the call of hungry souls looking for a community of living, God-breathing, loving, mission-driven Christ-followers who invest themselves in the heartbeat of the church: relationship and authentically shared devotion to each other and to Jesus. Where signs for practical, community building events such as "Forgiveness Seminars" will draw the desperate who otherwise pass by the "Watch-Out-For-the-Beast!" billboards.
What Is Humanity? (TP, Chapt.4)
The task of a creature seeking to understand itself seems from the onset, daunting! Yet to understand my nature is to give me direction in how to do life, and as we see in Christ's book of the Cosmos, all of creation requires direction from something or Someone.
In church history, there were two general camps: those who taught that I am not ultimately responsible for my sin condition and behaviors, and those who taught that I am.
Without the help of God, humanity is drawn to absolve herself from her misbehaviors and ensuing guilt. It'd be easy, though disastrous and miserable, to surrender to the popular astrological teaching of the day purporting that my environment and I are controlled by heavenly bodies.
Stoicism emphasized that Logos was "implanted" in the natural world, the structure in place; therefore, each human being's direction and outcome were predetermined. Fate. Irenaeus taught that Adam and Eve were not mature enough to choose "the better things intelligently" (p.66).
On the other hand, there were those who saw human responsibility and freedom of choice as crucial. Justin, in countering Stoicism, taught you are a rational being who can choose to do good by your rational powers.
Although Clement believed that humanity was not responsible for Adam's sinful posterity, individuals could and should gain victory over their sinful tendencies and passions. Alongside Clement was Origin, who's creative view on humanity included an intense belief that each person had freedom of choice to follow good or evil.
Although several church fathers developed theologies around the concept of human freedom of choice and responsibility, their teachings usually included some aspect of "salvation by works." This tendency is in part a response to the moral upheaval experienced in society; hedonistic living and lack of accountability left the church in the midst of chaos. Thus, many sought to draw attention to human nature and responsibility, and increased emphases on spiritual disciplines.
The result? Pelagius. He taught the goal of achieving perfection, which he believed was possible.
The response to that? Augustine...who brought the central issue of humanity's captivity to a sinful nature the forefront. Augustine made his case that Adam chose to sin, and all who follow suffer the consequences of what Tertullian termed Original Sin. We do have the freedom to ask Christ to act on our behalf in bringing life and restoration to our otherwise death-bound souls.
In a sense, Augustine's model of understanding the nature of humanity brought aspects of several other models into consideration. Aspects of some of these models are included: Yes, we are helpless. Yes, we are fated to death. But! We have a hope in Christ, who lived the life we cannot live and provides grace to desire and seek restoration. Though helpless, we ARE responsible, accountable, for our choice in asking and allowing Him to bring new life and restoration to our degenerating souls.
The Mind of Christ by Dani Carmona ~ from THE COSMIC CHRIST OF SCRIPTURE
Some years ago, I came across a reality TV show that highlighted people getting caught doing things that were out of character. It seemed that for this episode, there was a church deacon who repeatedly parked in the wrong spot at a non-church site - perhaps work. His vehicle was finally towed. A camera captured his reaction to the person whose job it was to remove his vehicle. The footage showed the deacon violently attacking the tow-truck man who – to no avail – tried to tell the deacon that this was just his job, and he could collect his vehicle at a later time. The tow-truck man recovered from the beating, the deacon was arrested, charged for assault, & I believe did some time in jail. Before being sentenced, however, this reality TV team timed an impromptu interview with the deacon on the same street where the attack took place. The interviewer of camera could be heard asking, “So aren’t you supposed to be a Christian?” Brother Deacon was silent and kept walking avoiding the attention, but the camera crew continued their work. “What was going through your mind when you beat that man up? I understand that you are a well respected member in your church and community. Is this what you are like at church?” When the deacon turned in emotion towards the camera, never missing a beat the interviewer asked, “Are you going to beat me up now?” The question leveled Brother Deacon. It leveled the audience. It looked bad for Christians. What was going through his mind? If his mind was stayed on Jesus, then what was his behavior all about?
I would argue that there was something wrong with that man’s mind – indeed that there is something wrong with humanity’s mind after that catastrophic conversation near the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Well, what exactly was wrong with Brother Deacon? Was it that Brother Deacon had a psychological disorder? This is possible. There is such a psychological condition according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorder, 4th Edition (DSM IX). Perhaps as a child he had an unresolved Conduct Disorder - part of the definition is being physically cruel to people, and often initiating physical fights. Or perhaps he had Antisocial Personality Disorder. Which is a condition characterized by persistent disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood. Deceit and manipulation are central features of this disorder. For this diagnosis to be given, the individual must be at least 18, and must have had some symptoms of Conduct Disorder (i.e., delinquency) before age 15. This disorder is only diagnosed when these behaviors become persistent and very disabling or distressing. Or it could have been Intermittent Explosive Disorder (IED).
More likely, Brother Deacon had anger management issues (towards IED), which means that he looked really good in a suit, greeted people well @ the church door on Sabbath or Sunday morning, but likely backhanded his wife when things did not go his way. So the question is – does this man have enough Christ to inherit the kingdom? According to Galatians 5: 19-21 probably not!
19The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Those are toe-stepping texts. They are very blunt. They don’t seem to give a lot of wiggle-room to explain psychopathology. I have heard Christians saying that they have changed. What has changed? Is it the behavior, the old ways, the old man left in the watery grave of baptism? Many people have chosen to follow Christ thinking that baptism will fix them – but their minds remain the same, they have membership in with the family of God, but they of the same mindset. Perhaps because of my background in psychology / mental health, I believe that unless there is an intervention (confrontation), our minds are not likely to change. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. The brother clearly was not disposed to give the tow-guy a break. His mind reacted – I believe – to past activity. How to address this? Spiritual Intervention / Confrontation. This is how we can be relevant, by accepting the call from the Holy Spirit (in all the wonderful ways He counsels, reminds, rebukes and teaches) the opportunity to teach us to become more like the Mind of Christ. In page 107 of THE COSMIC CHRIST OF SCRIPTURE, the matter of relevance to the cosmos applies to this text - Philippians 2:5 “Let this mind [disposition/ attitude ~ φρονέω phroneō ] - be in you which was in Christ Jesus.” Our minds CAN BE transformed – a big part of that is up to us!
Evangelista Polanco
Comments on Theological Turning Points Today, Chapter 10
I think that the topic of who is God has been the controversy where many of us belief different. For example, the definition of God as three persons, God as only one person, God as Spirit, God as an old person with long white beard, and so on. Since we born, I think we hear these definitions, but when we have a close relationship with the Lord, He let us understand what, and who He is. Maybe you are waiting for my opinion on who is God, but I think that as Seventh day Adventist we all think similar, God as three persons, God Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. I know that not all of us think the same. Our problem has been the interpretation, how we see God. What does it mean three persons? Are they three men? Or is the Father male? Is the Holy Spirit female? The gender of Jesus Christ is the one that we are sure. It is not a controversy to define Jesus gender, but who do you think is God? How do you think He is? One thing I know, I just believe in Him (three persons), I believe in the true Church which has the true of Salvation through our Savior Jesus Christ. I won’t go further on what I read in the Bible. I don’t know how do you think, but I hope to be in heaven, and I think that is the desire of all humanity, but we need to have relationship with the Creator, obeying Him, and live our life accepting the “Sacraments, or Misteriums.” Following the teachings of the Bible, and practicing the gospel, I think is the ‘secret’ or the key of salvation that Jesus is offering to us in order to be in His kingdom where He is the King.
Evangelista Polanco,
Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Christ-Centered?
YES! E.G.W.’s writings are Christ-Centered. I do not want to offend no one, but who do not believe in her writing, and in addition do not think that her writings are Christ-Centered, I think is because they do not read well, or maybe they do not read at all of her writings. She was the messenger of the Lord as she described herself. I belief in her writings, and I understand that God selected her for one reason. Her writings agree with the Scriptures. She believed in Jesus as the Son of God, and specified about the Holy Spirit as divine. Also, she stated the nature of Jesus in his humanity and divinity. I don’t know, but I consider that when we read her writings we try to become more consecrate to the Lord; we just want to follow Jesus and practice his teachings. E.G.W. is the person or better to say: the theologian who best describes Jesus’ personality, identity, and mission. I feel the Holy Spirit talking to me when I am reading her writings. Without her writings the S.D.A Church would be similar to the others denominations. I understand that the Bible is the greatest light and her writings are the lesser light that take us to Scriptures.I love how she describes the divinity and the humanity of Jesus. “Christ’s humanity was united with divinity, and in this strength He would bear all the temptations…and yet Keep His soul untainted by sin. And this power to overcome He would give to every son and daughter of Adam who would accept by faith the righteous attributes of His character.” (The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, 94). What else to say? I think that this declaration of her,answer the question, but if you are doubt yet, ask the Lord for understanding, but it is clear that her writings are Christ-Centered.
The church has undergone challenges and one of the challenges involves the sacrament. I tend to believe that sacramental controversy is a creation of man to create more confusion in the church. One wonders who then is right between the Catholics and the Protestants about the number of sacraments in the church. The Catholics has seven while the Protestants have two that is Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Although it started earlier in church it again surfaces during the reformation but here more stress is on the baptism and the Lord supper. I agree how Luther encourages people to back to the bible to discover the truth and the real meaning of baptism. This actually encourages me that we need to refer contentious issue back to the bible.
The Bible does not contradict itself but gives us the plain truth these basic teachings of the church. The true meaning of baptism involves the burying of sin publically and this is followed later by the Lord’s Supper which will always remind a genuine Christian to get out of the bondage of sin. I think the reformists were right when they referred people back to the bible to discover the truth. The challenge we have nowadays is whether we are leading the people back to the real truth not to the fables of men. Genuine baptism is in our heart although we saw it publically.
THEOLOGICAL TURNING POINTS
The GROWTH ECONOMY of humans: Towards a Development Motif to Perceive, Experience and Accept the Trinity
PART I
Development is inherent in created beings. This is true of spiritual growth and our understanding of God. We are all growing in our understanding of who God is. With the doctrine of God, we all have common ground – none of us know for sure, because we are in a growing economy. Wish I could say the same for other economies. No one has eye witness accounts - neither do we have the copyright to God. So regarding the trinity, because I believe that we are all growing, this seems like the very doctrine where we would need to take Someone’s word on it to get sleep at night. Humans fear what is unknown - this is how some justify fearing (being terrified of) God. Explaining the Trinity to a non-believer can pose a challenge. Perhaps it is because we need predictability. Some claim that God is unpredictable – I disagree. Or perhaps it is because we need assurance, and our over-reliance on our senses to give us assurance. Others have a pragmatic / mathematical issue with the trinity: How can 3 = 1? Well, we need faith. A growing faith….
PART II
The Old Testament affirms that God is one, yet, even here the pattern of three is implied in Elohim (plural) and then in the New Testament, there is the evidence of triadic patterns, of Jesus teaching regarding His Father, the Comforter who would be sent by Him and His Father, while He maintained that He and His Father were one. There was a growing understanding of God from one, to God being in Christ + the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the godhead. As this understanding developed there were differences of opinion. Regarding the Trinity, the early church had its hands full of controversy for the first three centuries. The Nicean Crisis provided some clarity on the various positions of the leaders – Arius believing that they all had different natures or essence & that the Holy Spirit was probably a creature of the Son. Athanasius took the opposing view that all three had the same substance – he also had the strong position regarding the Spirit being divine. I see the developments of Augustine on the Trinity having a significant contribution. He wrote between 399 and 419 on what he considered to be one of the highest and most important aspects of theology: that he accepted the idea of a triune God, distinct in persons yet one in substance. For Augustine there was an absolute unity in the Trinity & all subordination must be eliminated. What a mystery! From God is One to God is Three…. The Bible bears testimony that the Holy Spirit is a person, not an “it” - as I once thought as a child. The Holy Spirit sends, speaks, bears witness, prevents, comforts and appoints. These are all activities of a person, not a smoke, my thoughts on the trinity as a child, were well – not as mature as they are now. Perhaps some day, I will share these….
PART III
OK It’s time to come clean on some of my early thoughts. This - by the way - is my first time sharing this information – so go easy on me! When I was a child, I thought that the Holy Spirit was a man that would protect the house. Although this model of the Holy Spirit is not far off biblically – it is what I envisioned that He looked like. In my five year-old mind, I thought that he wore a long robe, grayish in color, a pillow for his head, and that he would crawl around the house in cheetah-like speed on all fours like a security guard protecting our family and home. These were some of my earliest memories of the Holy Spirit – they were certainly friendly. Well, I had some misconceptions about the Holy Spirit then, as I am certain that I still have some now. As I have matured, so has my understanding about God. I am not through maturing. Neither has my understanding of God. I did have some parts that resonate with Scripture – that God is friendly, that He is our protector and will always be there for us. When I was a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child, but as I became an adult, I continued growing in my understanding of God. So, here is a scenario, after the millennium has passed, sin has been eradicated forever, and another 16,000 years have passed. Having reached 17,000 years with a glorified body, and mind, no sin, in the presence of Jesus, and the angels will I have figured out the Trinity then? Or will the perfect understanding be completed in time for my one billionth birthday? Not a chance – although I will know more, I will still be developing my understanding of the Trinity…. To Be Continued….
Major Thrusts in the "Salvation Doctrine": A Stained-glass Window Illuminating Eternal Life
Having re-read the "Soteriological Controversy" for the second time, I am struck again by how the process of coming into a larger understanding of biblical teaching requires more than one human being. The doctrine of salvation poignantly demonstrates this reality, perhaps more acutely than other doctrines; perhaps because it is so complex and rich and all-encompassing to the very essence of what it means to be human (even the Bible must employ multiple images and separately present various facets of what it means to be saved). And perhaps because it speaks so intimately to the hopes and fears and cries of each human heart in his or her own environment and set of circumstances.
So there are the apostolic fathers, the apologists such as Justin steeped in Greek philosophy and culture, who featured salvation as an experience of illumination - true knowledge, faith, life, and immortality. This thrust arose from their experience within their circumstances and thought construct.
Then there is Irenaeus trumpeting salvation as a restorative process - that upon being saved, we are restored into the pre-fall state our father Adam enjoyed. Tertullian emphasized salvation as "satisfying" God, brushing with the biblical concept of satisfying the eternal law, but smacking to loudly of earned salvation - and the Greek idea of appeasing gods.
The Eastern theologians jumped on the the salvation bandwagon with their thrusts as well: Origen heralded salvation as a victory experience; the overcoming, conquering, of God over death and demons. Here, perhaps, lie the roots of the Adventist expression of the cosmic struggle between Christ and Satan.
Athanasius and other Eastern theologians focused on the effects salvation should have on the sinner-become-saved: we are now partakers of the divine nature (true!) and therefore are some form of God (not true!). (This teaching can tempt toward a pantheistic approach to God, I think.)
All these parts of the picture of salvation (pure color, faulty stains, etc.) came to a head in the drama of the controversy between Augustine and Pelagius, who--again--each bore truth mixed with the stain of error (Augustine's predestination; Pelagius' teaching that we begin the salvation process on our own). And throughout the development of the doctrine of salvation, the concept of man's need to DO SOMETHING in order to get in good standing with God kept finding its way into the picture. Until Luther.
It would be fascinating to research how the environment, circumstances, culture, and individual needs of each major figure wrought their piece of the picture in this doctrine. And each of their contributions, warts, heresies and all, aided in the forming the exquisite masterpiece that will, as Ellen white puts it, be our song and study throughout eternity.
This should bring comfort and motivation to each of us when we doubt the value of our discussions, studies, questions, challenges, and contributions to understanding God and humans and life and eternity - salvation. It all helps to bring more clarity to the picture, which in turn allows the truth to shine through more brilliantly to illumine a picture in this life-giving window of our lives.
Theological Turning Points Chapter 7 & 8: Sacramental Controversy.
A I reflect on the meaning of Baptism and the Lord's Supper in light of the controversies, it seems to me that we are still dealing with some of the questions that were dealt with in the centuries past.
A person's belief about Baptism is very much dependent on their conviction about the nature of man and also the nature of salvation. In the Seventh-day Adventist context we do not believe in the mystical transubstiation of the Lord’s Supper or infant baptism or baptism of the dead etc. As I read the chapter on sacraments I noticed that emphasis was not given to the foot-washing ceremony that is often part of communion services. This reminds me of the question that I have received concerning whether the foot-washing is a crucial part of the Lord’s Supper or if it is just something we like to add for the sake of ceremony. It has been explained to me that the foot-washing ceremony is a re-baptism of sorts and that it links our baptism proper with our commitment at each Lord’s Supper.
For Seventh-day Adventists there is nothing mystical about Baptism or the Lord’s Supper, they are symbols of deeper truths. I wonder if this leads us to approach it with less awe and respect?
As someone who serves with and for young people I recognize also our church’s anxiety in certain contexts about baptizing children or giving them access to the Lord’s Supper. There are those who frown on children and teens being baptized or taking the Lord’s Supper because they are not seen as mature enough. I suspect that some of the hesitation to allow these is because of the infant baptism and open communion that is characteristic of catholic and other protestant denominations.
I do hope that we can re-examine what the sacraments of baptism, the Lord’s Supper (including foot-washing) especially with young people. We don’t want to embrace mysticism but at the same time I think we should always search for the awesome truth behind the symbols that we so often engage in.
I’ll leave the issue of Re-baptism to Miss Simona Mills; I do believe she is our research expert on this:-)
Theological Turning Points: Ch7 Sacramental Controversy; what are the Sacraments?
In Protestant, there are only two sacraments: Baptism and Lord’s supper, where as Roman Catholic has seven sacraments including those two: baptism, confirmation, Holy Eucharist, penance, holy orders, matrimony and extreme unction.
I learned that that the word sacrament was associated with the word mystery. The mystery of God revealed in Jesus Christ. When Jerome translated “mysterion” into Latin, he sometimes used the word “sacramentum.” Then the second-century apologists used “mysterion” to indicate the religious secret rites or cults. The word “sacramentum had the meaning of surrendering oneself to the authority. Therefore baptism is one of sacraments, because it symbolizes the dedication of one’s life.
There are many sacraments, but most of them were appointed by Apostles and only the baptism and the Lord’s Supper are appointed by Jesus, therefore, church leaders such as Alexander of Hales and Thomas Aquinas concluded that those two should be the only true sacraments.
It seems that Catholic started to put the value in the act of sacrament itself. They stressed that “if you do it, then you are saved.” However, the reformers stressed on the signs and the meaning of the sacraments and not on the act itself. It reminded me of the Pharisees in the time of Jesus. They focused on the form and did not see the meaning of it. On the other hand, protestant nowadays stresses too much on the meaning of the words and they tend to disregard on the form. I think there needs to be balanced between those too.
Theological Turning Points: Ch10 Theological Turning Points Today
As time goes by, many questions emerge and many answers are proposed. And from those answers, new questions emerge which leads to new answers. It seems that new era and new generation brings endless opportunities and possibilities for new thoughts. For some issues, we may never be able to answer them until He comes. Even He comes, it may take eternity to understand them. One thing for sure is that we are exposed to more ideas and we are growing in knowledge. Because of new questions, we search for new answers in the Scripture. Today, many have free access to the Bible. They can read whenever they want for themselves. People tend to focus on the Scripture and want to know what the Bible has to say about the issue. On the other hand, some people question about the nature of the Bible, whether it is infallible or not. Just because one question solved doesn’t mean we are all happy, because it brings the next questions, and all those critical issues in Christianity are on going phenomena.
As we look back Christian history, it wasn’t smooth. There was intense arguments, and often involved violence. However, as we try to make more people involved and try to understand each other, Christianity would be spread and enriched.
Respond to Evangelista Polanco
Comments on Theological Turning Points Today, Chapter 10
Thank you for your thoughts. I think we all have different ideas about God. but one thing that is mostly important is we shall continually have personal relationship with Him and that we all go to heaven.
I think we can have different image of God based on our relationship with God, but as you said, when we sincerely seek Him,
He let us understand what, and who He is.
“BY THE POWER INVESTED IN ME” – Simona Mills – November Blog 1
When my older brother and sister were getting married (not to each other of course) by an SDA preacher and a Justice of the Peace (respectively) they stated “…by the power invested in me…” The power they speak of is the ability to marry people in their respective state. But this whole thing about power transfer got me thinking about the Authority Controversy chapter in our textbook.
The sentence on page 98 (first paragraph) raised my eyebrow and sent me plunging into the word of God: “Jesus transferred his authority to his disciples, including the authority to forgive sins…” One of the texts used to support this claim is John 20:23. Jesus had just risen from the dead, ran in to Mary and then went to his father. That same evening he visited the disciples who were cowering from the Jews. He breathed on them and said in verse 22 “… “Receive the Holy Spirit.” Then in verse 23 he says, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” Is that power invested in them to forgive sins? Could this be a proof text for the Catholic Priestley duties in the confessional box? The other texts in Matthew that McKim uses to support the transfer of authority to forgive sins from Jesus to the disciples can be stretched to fit but John seems to be talking about more than the forgiveness of sins. CAN ANYONE PICK UP WHERE I LEAVE OFF?
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE CHRIST… - SIMONA MILLS
It was great to see one of my favorite fore-fathers Tertullian talking about the term sacrament (sacramentum). He saw sacrament as having a connection between conversion from paganism to a new commitment of obedience and service to God in Jesus Christ (McKim pg 117). He saw sacrament as referring to baptism and baptism as an “oath of allegiance”. In fact Tertullian actually referred to the Christian religion itself as a sacrament since it pointed to the divine mystery revealed in the gospel. His line of reasoning plunged me back to the days I was in grade school and had to repeat the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. We did this while placing our right hand over our heart and standing at attention facing the flag. Think about it. Even beyond baptism, if I pledged my allegiance to Christ what would that look like? Do I place my hand on my heart while on my knees repeating the Lord’s Prayer? I remember our teacher being very specific about showing the proper respect to the American Flag. This respect is evident when we go to any sporting event where the national anthem is sung. The entire arena is on their feet, standing almost at attention with their hands over their hearts and facing the flag.
While baptism shows our initial pledge to following Christ, I am interested to know what your thought are on how we daily pledge our allegiance to the Christ of the Universe; the Christ of your life.
The Cosmic Christ Part 4: How to Read the Book of the Cosmos
“GREEN”
Especially in our age people want to know how we can, if we can, reconcile Science with the Bible. Dr Hanna’s chapter argues that although the word “science” is not used in the Bible there is a key relationship between science and scripture. Science is the study of God’s cosmos and thus it should perhaps be more central to some of our scriptural discussions. Some of the recent experiences below show me that this discussion of nature and scripture is relevant today:
Anyone remember the presentation in Seminary Chapel “Was Ellen White Green?” I was quite surprised by the topic and even more interested that there were so many supporting quotes from Mrs. White.
The other day I was browsing books and I noticed that there is a new “Green” Bible. All the pertinent texts about environment etc have been highlighted in green. It is made out of recyclable, biodegradable materials and to top it all there is a foreword from the Archbishop Desmond Tutu which is sure to give the added incentive for “green” activists to buy this Bible.
In my Genesis class we have been talking about the different messages of the book. There is certainly a theology of creation, land and environmental prosperity. As I think about the “green” movement that Andrews University and other organizations are participating in I guess it’s time for us to really do some theological reflection on what role nature plays in Scripture and what the implications are for us today. I believe that this section on God’s Cosmos shows us that Nature is a revelation of God and therefore an area that is worthy of our study and theological reflection.
What is Humanity? The Theological Turning Points begins with OT perspective: human was created in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1:26,28), center of creation (Gen. 2:7-8; 18-23), and summarize from these two points if these two accounts show the dependence of humanity on God. Human are created by God and rely on God for their continuing life and existence. Human are seen in a creaturely relationship with God, on whom they depend, and yet they are distant from God in terms of their lives (Isa 45:11; Job 10:8-12). Humanity is also portrayed as social and corporate in nature—means continuous dependence on God and on other human beings. And sin has restricted all relationships. Dependence and relationship are two words that to me important on at this point. This remind me that to depend on God and maintain good relationship with Him and others. Without dependency and harmonious relationship with God and others, I will lose my status as human, and it would put me not on the right track of life.
Reflection on Salvation Theology is interesting to me. Why, because from the book I read, there are various words to explain it. The words such as: redemption, freedom, reconciliation, justification, satisfaction, illumination, restoration, peace with God, victory, or deification are used to define Salvation. But it seems to me that all the definition is good for the purpose of theological study, but would not as easy to lead reader to understand its spiritual emphasis. I would recommend Bible as the best resource to know everything—some time explanation to the Bible would be more difficult than the Bible itself.
It is mentioned on Chapter 6 of Theological Turning point that “frequently Scripture was the primary point of theological reference, but as the church developed, other sources of authority began to find their places as well.” Hermeneutic—various principles of interpretation had contributed to various ways to different channels of authority. As cited from The Church in Search of Its Self Robert S. Paul says: “The first, as represented by Roman Catholicism, appeals to the church as the living custodian of the gospel and the continuing historical manifestation of Christ’s authority on earth. The second, represented by Protestantism, is sola Scriptura ; it appeals to the Bible, the written record of the gospel, as the basic authority for the church. A third approach has emerged prominently at various stages in church history and is represented by the Quakers as well as the contemporary charismatic movement, among others; it appeals to the Spirit and individual revelation as the ultimate form of authority." I would agree and encourage the tota, sola, and prima Scriptura principle to conform what is the right source to which the church appeals for authority.
With regards the social nature of humanity in the image of divinity, Dr Hanna explains it on page 90-91 that Ellen White agrees with Scripture that God has created humanity in the image of divinity. And quoting several texts from her books to support the idea of “as divinity is social, so is humanity.” “We are dependent upon one another, closely bound together by the ties of human brotherhood”. In the human brotherhood it takes all kinds of talents to make a perfect whole. We are members of one another. “We are woven together in the web of humanity. The evil that befalls any part of the great human brotherhood brings peril to all.” How important for us to have a better understanding on this particular idea, the web of humanity, the need to have a spirit to furnish Christian evangelical endeavor.
Chapter 7 of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture
Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Christ-Centered
When starting to read this chapter, I did not realize that this chapter was to complement the previous. I thought this chapter was going to show how Christ is the theme of Mrs. White’s writings. Although it does, it focuses more specifically on the unity in Divinity and unity in diversity of Christ. Three points are used to show unity between scripture and Mrs. White. They are that Divinity is social in nature, secondly, Christ is human and divine, thirdly, Christ accomplished a divine human connection through his divinity unified with humanity. One part that stood out the most is page 94 where Mrs. White says that the power the Christ had to overcome temptation is available to us now. This I must pray over because this is so powerful. I pray that I can understand this fully and fully implement this truth into my life. A second part that stood out to me is on page 91. I truly believe that we dependent on each other. We must support each other as a community and in truth we need each other. I believe we must strive to create more community within our church because our society is heading in the opposite direction of less community.
Chapter 10 of Theological Turning Points
Theological Turning Points Today
This chapter gave an overview of current theological areas of discussion. One thing that stood out is that the issues of centuries past are still being discussed today. Questions such as who is Jesus, what is the church, and where is authority still play an important part in theological study. One area that stood out is what is the church. I see a shift towards unification, especially with the WCC and the Lutheran-Catholic agreement. Partly I am nervous about a world unification of religion and at the same time I believe it must happen as we understand prophecy and end times. I think meanwhile we must tell other about Christ while there is relative peace still on earth. Another areas that I noted is in the chapter on humanity. From my research project I discovered that the worldwide Christian church is open to a holistic view of humanity as apposed to a separate spiritual entity called the soul. This may be an opportunity to reach others in other Christian groups by sharing our belief in soul being the unity of body and the breath of life. Finally, I noted that creation/evolution issue was not mentioned in the chapter. I believe that this issue is becoming a major turning point for Christianity because is affects everything we believe about Christ, salvation, the authority of scripture.
Comments on Chapter 2, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture.
The Scripture has not only been viewed but acclaimed before the time of the Reformation as the final authority. In discussing this principle, Dr. Hanna did a good job in emphasizing the proper attitude with which seekers of scripture should approach the Bible with. This principle is highlighted by the “Gospel Prophet” when he exclaims, “For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little” (Isa. 28: 10). Therefore, Scripture is the guide in matters of knowledge concerning Christ and the Cosmos. I am convinced that this chapter could have delved much deeper into this concept. It is obvious in the chapter that proper methods for reading God’s word must be used to get a correct understanding the underlying meanings found there in. The point of emphasis is, the Bible is not a story book. The message within the passages should be understood in the total picture of the Scripture because “no Scripture is of any private interpretation” or the prophet’s own exposition (1Peter 1: 20). Thereby, a text should be studied in the totally of Scripture. The chapter underscores the importance of giving the Bible its rightful place in terms of authoritative Word of God.
Comments on Chapter 10, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture: Are Ellen G. white’s writings relevant to the cosmos?
It is a wonderful experience to recognize God in nature. Growing up on a farm and a rural area in Africa helped me to appreciate nature. As a child I used to go in the woods eating different kinds of fruits. And I could imagine how wonderful God is to have made all kinds of flavors, and my mind would just go back to (Gen 1: 12) And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. There were of cause obstacles and dangers among those I remember are the snakes. Since I love plants, fruits, and vegetation as a whole I was not deterred, I killed those which I would and flee when I was over come by fear. Being on the sea when others were seasick, Ellen White says “she enjoyed every minute of it.” “Oh, the wonderful works of God! So much above our comprehension! He, at one Glance, beholds the highest heavens and the midst of the sea.” He is our Redeemer. We may trust Him in the storm as well as in sunshine.” For those who are parents and those planning to be in the future, I would suggest you introduce nature as you tell the love of God to your children early in their lives. They will be able to know “God’s character, thoughts, glory, wisdom, power and the law, as “the whole natural world is designed to be an interpreter of the things of God.” Ellen continues, “the book of nature and the written word do not disagree.”
Comments on chapter in Theological Turning Point: The Growth Economy of humans, Towards a Development Motif to Perceive, Experience and Accept the Trinity
Hierarchical structures have been at center of study within the Christian faith since the early days. Say, since Jesus was here and the disciples were after greatness in the kingdom. As Christianity grew, organizational development became apparently necessary. Although core doctrinal issues that were points of focus had to be addressed, it took a while for the church to get to the point where there were established councils, creeds, canon and work together. Leadership wrangles took center stage, till Jesus said if you want to lead, serve. The major concerns of the church fathers were in response to the raised issues relating to discipline, government, and authority. Of course these are crucial elements of church life and they must be addressed. I ask myself, if this is where it all began as a family of and the fellowship of the believers that Jesus and Paul cared for what went wrong? Did their views on authority and submission to bishops, and others give way to Protestant liberation? Jesus said keep my flock (feed my sheep), it is important to a leader but more important to be a shepherd for Christ. Our church development is inherent and has a role in lives. This is true of spiritual growth and our understanding of God. We are all growing in our understanding of who God is. With the doctrine of God, we all have common ground – none of us know for sure, because we are in a growing economy. Christians or non Christian live in this world and struggle in the same economies, but God has set aside his people.
Comments on chapter 5, Theological Turning Point
We often read how scholars and other readers had disagreements and debates of how humans were (are) saved. Two strong characters I read with divergent views were Pelagius view and Augustine view. Pelagius said that it is possible not to sin but Augustine differed and said it is impossible to sin. Between these two we have the Seventh-day Adventists’ views. The problem of sin and salvation in this way has been the central focus since Adam and Eve. When God told us not to sin, man did the opposite, sinned, hence our turning point was established. We established our own race (running the opposite) and not that which God intended us to run. Jesus established a link and lived a sinless life. If we strictly follow as Jesus lived, I think it is possible not to sin. However, our human nature has a tendency of weakness, body gets tired. Even if we don’t express it outwardly, we may feel fatigue and stop running. Jesus was able to know when he or the disciples were physically tired or mentally. Sin once conceived in the mind becomes fruitful by the physical action. Our minds are corrupt by nature and will only be transformed when Jesus comes.
Comment on chapter 3 of Theological Turning Points By Donald McKim
The author talks of different of the church which Jesus taught and presented. In the New Testament which he wants us to examine and relate to who Jesus Christ was and is. The reflections I get are those of Jesus’ statements which include “the salt of the earth”, “branches of the vine”, etc. The Church is the branch and He is the Vine. He promises "I will build my church". "…Upon this rock I will build my church…," Jesus promised (Matt. 16: 18, see "Upon This Rock" and "Kingdom of Heaven" in Great Truths, accessed from home page). Indeed, Jesus did built his church and kingdom (Acts 5: 11, Col. 1: 13). And I say to thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). The "Church" Jesus was speaking about was not a building but a group of people, all who follow Him, the Universal church.
I am the vine, you are the branches. The one who abides in me while I abide in him produces much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. There are several ways the passage has been presented. There is more such as, “I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing…” I did not get the clear cut point the author was putting across which is different from other sources.
TP Chapter 6
Michaela Lawrence
The authority issue is so important to discuss in part because it makes us think through who or what we've allowed to rule us. And on one hand we're scared (of the Pope or of the power Jesus said would be ours) while on the other hand we're overconfident (that the Bible will make everything crystal clear or that we have power in and of ourselves).
I wish it could all be a bit simpler, that Jesus would just hold all power and that's it. The part of the authority issue I'm currently questioning is that of Scripture. I recognize that it is God-breathed, but what does that mean? Does it mean that I take everything said about God as being God's words about himself? For example, we often use the Psalms when talking about how we connect with God and when describing who God is. However, I wonder if there are Psalms that give a description of God but should only be thought of as one man's take on it, not fuel for our fires.
I'm afraid that the authority we give to Scripture is sometimes distorted because we haven’t taken the time to think through the implications. Take Psalm 125:4 which asks God to do good to those who are good and upright in heart. It’s a petition not a description of how God has acted and yet we’ll take that verse to support our idea that because we’ve done good and are upright in heart, God will do good to us. And then it troubles us when bad things happen to the good and upright.
Authority reminds us to always look right back at the Source no matter who or what else has been given authority. What is God saying?
TP Chapter 9
Michaela Lawrence
Reading about the eschatological controversy has made me more aware of the important connection between the “already” and the “not yet” in terms of how we make sense of the present kingdom and the future kingdom. While it’s nice to think of the future and the possibility of God feedings us “dainty treats,” I think it’s harder to make sense of how the kingdom has already come and what we’re supposed to do with/for it. Like Barth, I think God’s kingdom “escapes all intellectual systematizing,” but I still want to have a better understanding of its present manifestation.
It’s quite easy to do as the papacy did and claim one’s institution as God’s kingdom on earth especially when I believe we have so much truth. However, that would be far from what God desires and would move us further from having a strong Luther-like desire for the coming of the last days. And this is another reason why we must understand the already-not-yet principle—we can’t afford to put too much emphasis on either the present or the future when obviously both are important to the finishing of the work of God.
One of the best ways I’ve found to live in both present and future is to use the gifts God has given us to present the Gospel. That way we are of present good to our communities and we are pointing them toward home.
The Triadic Formula: Reflection on Chapter one from Theologcial Turning Points
Who is God? This was the question the early church fathers attempted to answer. Its a big question! It reminds me of God's discourse with Job. "Where you there when I laid the foundation of the earth?...Have you commanded the morning since the days began and caused the dawn to know its place...Have you entered into the springs of the sea or walked in the recesses of the deep?...Can you send forth lightnings, that they may go and say to you,'Here we are'?"(ESV) Who is God? What a question! Our finite humanity cannot fully comprehend who God is. He in many ways is mystery to us.
And yet, there is much that we do know. McKim points out that there were three agreed upon ideas about God preceeding the Council of Nicaea: "1) God is one and not two or three gods as in pagan religions 2) God is revealed in three ways as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit 3) the Father and the Son are distinct from each other and thus should not be equated so as to erase differences between them." Although, the debates to follow these preceeding agreements were fierce there was some widely accepted level of clarity regarding who God is. Further, the bible writers, particularly the Gospel writers and Paul, utilize different language to express the triadic formula and yet all protray God the Father, God the Son, and Holy Spirit.
Thus, the problem appears not to be one of understanding as much as it is one of communication. There is a level of understanding we can gain from our experience that cannot always be expressed in language. The early church fathers had an understanding of God which is emphasized by the areas of agreement however, they faced challenges when they tried to communicate their understanding of triune monotheism within the context of Greek philosophy. Whoa! You try philosophically explaining how God is one but He has a Son and a Spirit that exist distinctively enough for all to be present at the baptism of Jesus but are united in such a way that they cannot be considered three gods. Philosophers are still struggling today to find language that can accurately protray what we (on some level) can intiutively understand. The problem is communication.
This is analogous to an event within the Seventh-day Adventist Church - the infamous book entitled, Questions on Doctrine. This book was an attempt to relate Seventh-day Adventist beliefs to other Evangelicals. The book produced outrage among some in our church, in large part, because of the way particular beliefs were explained. A conference about this historic book was recently held here at Andrews University in 2007. 50 years after the book was published, this conference demonstrated that much of the core beliefs of the arguing factors differed very little, however, the emphasis in their explanations were quite different. Nevertheless, they all were able to share the same room for three days in love and harmony.
No doubt, the early church fathers were fighting with the same thing. Each of them guarding against certain extremes and speaking to different audiences developed ways of communicating various aspects of a truth they all believed.
In no way does this minimize the depth of trinity or the necessity to struggle to find ways to communicate that depth. However, it does suggest that as we struggle it might be helpful to realize that we are struggling to communicate a mystery we all embrace. Thus, as we struggle let us struggle in a way that allows for the inevitable falters, because in them we might find bits of the truth along the way.
How Can I Be Saved?: Reflection on Chapter 5 the Soteriological Controversy from Theological Turning Points
McKim opens up this chapter with a dozy! He immediate exposes us to all the complexity of Soteriology. He notes how to describe salvation, “involve a number of related theological issues, including the grace of God, the work of Christ, and human ability or inability to respond by faith. Further, the doctrine of salvation or redemption encompasses the atonement…and justification…, as well as sanctification” (p76) and glorification. Just to have some focus Kim focuses on Justification.
While reading this chapter I felt a sense of awe. McKim enumerates seven different ways that the New Testament speaks about salvation. Particularly during this portion, I was struck by the multifaceted power one sacrifice has upon all humanity. Often there is a particular motif each of us emphasize because of our experience or culture. In part that is the beauty of salvation there is an angle from which it can be understood that speaks to every tribe, people, and nation. However, to look at and understand salvation from several of its angles to see a awe-inspiring beauty.
Currently, I am taking Doctrine of the Sanctuary with Roy Gane. In his book, Altar Call, he examines the articles and the offerings presented in the sanctuary as a means to see the beauty of Christ sacrifice and his heavenly ministry foreshadowed. Each angle gives a new insight and fresh perspective the work God is doing throughout earth’s history. And with each new insight comes a deepening of my heart to the God who chooses to involve himself so intricately in the salvation of humanity.
What is even more amazing is that it for the ceaseless ages of eternity we will continue to learn more about God’s rescue plan for humanity. But for now, I will gather from those who have gone before. For the apostolic fathers salvation was illumination, for the Ireneaus it was restoration, for Tertullian it was satisfaction, for Origen it was victory, and for Athanasius it was deification. For me…well, its just amazing!
SPEAKING IN SURROUND SOUND! by Dani Carmona
Here are some of my thoughts in response to Let The Holy Scriptures Speak! - an astute chapter from the Cosmic Christ of Scripture.
“How can the Bible be Holy? Is not the Bible simply a book of parables and mythology, written by men for men? Is not the parable simply a short story, never intended to be taken literally?” This was - in essence - the position of one of my co-workers some years ago – she had big doubts. My co-worker and friend - was very logical. She believed that there was a scientific explanation for everything. Data and hard facts was the key to her worldview. She was deelply impresse, then, with double-blind studies about cancer patients who were prayed over recovering faster and dis better in the long-run (even if slightly) than their comrades who were not prayed for. She simply had no logical response to this. Only silence. We had several casual conversations. It’s clear, atheism has not lost its charm. Although it is becoming quite “metro” to have faith – the group questioning the authenticity of Holy Writ is alive and well. I believe that a host of witnesses in history, archeology, and nature lend strong evidence to the Judeo-Christian claim that the Scriptures are authentic. When taken together, sprinkled, with a little faith, I believe the Scriptures come alive in a Surround-Sound quality. In an eclectic world-view, the post-modern mind has a duty to consider the historical and authenticity argument pertaining to Letting the Scriptures speak.
There is a historical Jesus. Non-believing Jews and Romans wrote about his life, death, and the empty tomb. Those were the non-believing folks! We were many writers that fall into this category! The implications are awe-inspiring! If non-believers were witnesses to the life and miracles of Jesus, then we have a massive situation here in favor of the Gospel. Then of course, there is that fact that textual material meets & passes historical authenticity tests that other writs of antiquity pass – in essence because they have not been tampered with, if we accept secular writs as historical sources, we must do the same with scriptural evidence. Therefore, from a legal position, the evidence is simply too strong to abandon the Scriptures as myth.
Also, regarding the effects of persecution on the converts to Christianity, I believe that under duress a liar would come clean. In other words if the disciples were lying, under persecution, and threat many would come clean about their deception - they did not. Multiples of people remained faithful! So, yes indeed, Let The Scriptures Speak!
The Millennium: Reflections on Chapter 9 of Theological Turning Points
The issues of eschatology center largely around the millennium. Today there are premillennialist, postmillennialist, and amillennialist. Premillennials believe Christ second coming will usher in a thousand year reign of Christ on earth (it is important to note that some believe this is actually a definition of Chiliasm and the Premillennialism is broader, Seventh-day Adventist would fall in that group). Postmillenials believe Christ second coming will be after thousand years of peace, pospertity, and Christian dominance on earth. Amillennials believe that Revelation 20 is speaking symbolically and the thousands years will not be literal but spiritual. And for each of these there are several diversions. These varying views have risen out of over a thousand years of dialogue and debate with little consensus but some fantastical and helpful ideas.
The early church fathers suggested everything from the interpretative views found in the Epistle of Barnabas, which argued the world would last six thousand years mirroring the six days of creation and then there would be a seventh-day (one thousand years) of rest to more New Age views such as that from Origen, which suggested the kingdom of God was an, “apprehending of divine truth and spiritual reality, as the indwelling of the Logos, or as ‘the spiritual doctrine of the ensouled Logos imparted through Jesus Christ’”(pp. 156-157). The development since the church fathers has built largely upon Augustine and has retooled many of the ideas prior to him.
This debate cannot be taken to lightly as it has implications upon the body and soul, salvation, the work of the church, the ministry of Christ, and role of His kingdom. Christ said the kingdom of God is at hand and yet there is still a future element (based upon our Adventist understanding) that is to be fulfilled. These issues also have political implications that cannot be fully discussed here, however, much of United States foreign policy is built upon dispensational postmillennialism that restores Israel.
There is not a final word on this subject. As an Adventist I agree with our position of the millennium – Christ will return and take His children home and we will live in heaven with Him for a thousand years and return back to earth in the New Jerusalem at the end of the thousand years. While I stand with this position this chapter has again opened my eyes to the complexity and importance of the issue. As believers we must continue healthy dialogue not so that we can have the final answer but in order that we might sanctify our minds with the truth we discover along the way.
By the way, did anyone catch this quote: “Some church groups have come into existence solely because of their own eschatological understanding and their time table for specific future events”(p152)…I think he’s talking about us yall! ☺
The Divine and Human Nature of Christ: Reflections on Chapter 6 & 7 from the Cosmic Christ of Scripture
Christ is both human and divine! In chapters 6 and 7 of Dr. Hanna’s book we find this discussion grappled with again. How can Christ be both fully human and fully divine? Or even more importantly how can Christ be fully human and sinless? These and many more have been the basis for much debate and discussion in Christendom. However, these questions seem to misplace our attention on the how. In its fullness it is a great mystery. I believe the key issue is what Christ accomplished because he was both divine and human. Two powerful arguments are made about what Christ accomplished. They are found under the Christ connection “Jesus as Restorer of full human personhood.” In chapter six this concept is supported by biblical references on pages 80-83. In chapter seven this concept is supported by Ellen White quotes on pages 92-95. According to the idea presented in these two sections of the book, Christ in His human body restores human personhood and the church and He makes it possible for humans to be partakers of the divine nature. Here lies the power of the Christian and the Church. What was lost in humanity and subsequently the Church is found again in Christ. However, not only that but we may also, once again, be partakers of Christ divine nature. In other words we may have intimacy with Christ. He is the one who asks of us to deny self, follow him, suffer, endure, and more. However, He is the same one who we may go to, in order that we may accomplish what He has asked. For without His sacrifice, it could not and cannot be accomplished. He restored everything we lost in the Garden of Eden through His divine and human nature during his time here on earth. We can rejoice because we have a Savior who is our brother in our infirmities. “He took our nature and overcame, that we through taking His nature might overcome.” What an awesome God! What a wonderful work He has done! What an awesome life we can live through Him!
A further note should be made, by Christ taking on humanity exampled the unity he desires of his church. Christ took on the fallen nature of humanity and united with divinity that it might be redeemed from death. Christ is our example and thus Paul challenges. Paul says we are to be many members but unified in one body, the body of Christ. Although, among believers there is a diversity, that diversity should come together in unity to witness to the world regarding the redeeming love of our Savior. This is how people will know we are disciples of the Living God because we have love towards one another (John 13:35). Thus, as Christ unified divinity and humanity, let us also do likewise, working towards unity among one another.
Further Musings on Unity: Reflections on Chapter 4 Cosmic Christ of Scripture
After reading Chapter 7 “Are Ellen White’s Writings Christ-Centered?” I am compelled to comment on Chapter 4 “Are Ellen White’s Writings Biblical?” In my discussion of Chapter 7 I focused on the concept of Christ as restorer of the human personhood. Specifically, that he has made us partakers of the divine nature. The bible speaks of this and Ellen White clearly discusses it in her writings. In unity with that thought (and possibly the theme of the whole book) is the following quote found in Chapter 4 on page 50, “The book of nature and the written word do not disagree: each sheds light on the other. Rightly understood they make us acquainted with God and his character by teaching us something of the wise and beneficent laws through which he works.” Therefore, it can also be concluded that Scripture and Nature play a role in restoration. In as much as scripture and nature point to Christ and are valuable because of Christ, there is a certain sense in which they help humanity in our process of restoration. Nature and scriptures help humans comprehend the benefits of the sacrifice of Christ and the requirements of living a righteous life. They are not the Restorer, for Christ alone holds that title; however, they are aids in our restoration. We must not exalt them to a position of the Restorer but Christ points to them and gives them authority. Therefore, when utilized in the proper context they lead us to “adore his name and to have intelligent trust in his word” (p50) and thus, compel us to become acquainted with the divine nature He offers to us.
The Mind of Christ: Reflections on Chapter 9 of the Cosmic Christ of Scripture
“But we have the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2:16). In Chapter 9, “What does the Bible say?” an extremely important component to the entire discussion of God’s three books, and in particular the book of the Cosmos, is exposed. It is the offering God gives to us, which Paul illuminates in His epistle to the Corinthians – “the mind of Christ.” What a powerful gift and one important to rightly understanding the Cosmos. The understanding of the Cosmos has been and is a challenge for humanity, particularly Christians. Over the years many of have chosen to compromise precious theology in order to accommodate for “scientific discoveries” and others have rejected “modern science” altogether after recognizing its limitations. However, under the headings “The Natural and the Spiritual” and “Philosophy: Love of Wisdom” Dr. Hanna suggests that there is way to do science biblically. Science does not need to be abandoned but there needs to be a metamorphosis of the minds of those attempting to understand the cosmos. As Dr. John Baldwin would put it, we need to view the world through “Son-glasses.” This principle of viewing the world and all of human experience with a transformed mind is central for balance theology and a balance life. While there are many things that the devil has distorted and abused in this world, we should not be so quick to discard and discount. There is much that can be learned and theology that can be expanded when we view the world through “Son-glasses!”
THEOLOGICAL TURNING POINTS - About the Authority in the Controversy Old & New Testaments.
The church fathers - Origen , Eusebius - told us that certain parts of the Bible the books from Gen - Malachi were no longer relevant because of the new covenant. The covenant never changed, it was old only in the sense that the phase it described took place before Christ, whereas the same and only covenant continued after Jesus' Resurrection. The TaNaK / Hebrew Scriptures or "OT" are relevant today, I would like to illustrate this with a story. I remember growing up and having time when my oldest sister would baby-sit me and my other sister who was also older than me. Since I was the youngest in the bunch, I would often push the limits of the allowable – which would bring tension to my oldest sister. Of course, I knew this. My parents would leave clear instructions about what kinds of things that could or could not be done, especially when it came to going outside – my favorite thing to do! There was to be no going outside until homework & chores were completed. One time, I found a way of not completing my chores & still going out. My oldest sister did not know- or so I thought, and my other sister was also in on it with me, because she wanted to go outside too – it was such a nice day. But neither of us shared this with oldest sister. We both slipped out of the house without completing much of anything, no homework, no chores – all to run into the fresh air and sunshine pretending not to hear our oldest sister – who was up to the minute on the entire plan. Eventually and unexpectedly one of my parents came home. The parent was updated on the events of the escape. During the interrogation, one of my arguments was that the middle sister – the accomplice-in-crime with me – had given me permission to go, and plus the oldest sister had not really been clear about whether I could go out or not. I was proposing that I had been given authority to engage in the behavior. The answer from my father was – “Yes, but what did I say? Did I say you could go outside?” Many other heated questions from Dad followed that afternoon. The effect of the questions settled in my psyche as the right hand of fellowship settled on my sitting muscles. The hermeneutical reply of Christendom when asked about current OT practices and trends is that "Our older brothers – the church “fathers” - in church history gave us permission" to go outside of the Bible. The response from our Heavenly Father is, “Yes, I hear what you said, but What did I say for you to do?” "I the Lord speak the truth, I declare what is right" Isaiah 45:19. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God." 2 Timothy 3:16"Thy word is true from the beginning." Psalms 119:160. "For he [Apollos] vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ." Acts 18:28
"Thy word is truth." John 17:17.
The One with Ultimate Authority never said to outside of Scripture - all of it.
The NT writers’ understanding of the Scriptures was unanimous, "The scripture cannot be broken." John 10:35.
What did NT Writers Call the OT?
“And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” Luke 24:27. In these words, Jesus identifies with the OT fully explaining and teaching about Him. The NT writers called the OT writings the Scriptures. Jesus also called the OT Scriptures Matthew 21:41-43, Matthew 22:29; Matthew 26:54; Luke 24:27, 45; John 5:39; Acts 17:2; Romans 1:2; 1 Corinthians 15:3; 2 Timothy 3:15; & 2 Peter 3:16.) So then why should anyone think that the messages of the OT are not relevant today & more to the point why do we call them “old”?
This week was another week of blessings in this class for I continue to learn about the way how according to my understanding God has been leading men and women throughout history. While reading and listening to different lectures and debates in class, it called my attention how during the years of the reformation the light about God and the plan of salvation was in progress.
As the professor in class did, I will like to point out that the men a woman used by God during years of reformation were Catholics. They were the men and women that God called to create a reform. However, the question that I ask is, God called these men and women to reform from what? The answer is to reform from the true that they departed from years ago. I strongly believe the early in history the Roman Catholic church was God’s church in the same way how Israel was God’s people, but both of them apostate. In Revelation 12, we see a woman who is dress up in white, this woman represents the church of God that ran to the desert and after the dragon sent a river of water, the earth open and hide the woman. For me, this is the same woman of Revelation 17, who now became Babylon, who is in the desert sited by many water.
In Revelation we don’t see two churches as many will think, there is only one church who at the beginning was pure and then corrupts and later on reforms. Another way to see that is going to Revelation 6 where we find four horses which in reality is one, who a the beginning is white (pure). This horse represents the church that was establish by Jesus and his disciples but little by little changed due to the persecution. But even though the horse changes colors, then in Revelation 19:11 the horse becomes white again, because once again they came back to Jesus and the truth of the Bible. The last way to illustrate my point is with the seven churches, the first church “Sardis” is faithful, pure, a church that suffers a lot for the cause of Jesus, but that later on became corrupt, and it is again in Laodicea the same church, which later on recaptures the truth of the Bible.
Post a Comment